Re: Reminder accidentals with octaviation

[Urs Liska]

Am 20.11.2013 12:58, schrieb David Kastrup:
> pls <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On 20.11.2013, at 12:25, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > > a chord is repeated an octave higher, which is indicated by an \ottava.
> > > Does the repeated chord need accidentals or not?
> > >
> > > Are there rules for this? Do you have any opinions?
> > Gould's gut feeling says you should "repeat an accidental if sounding
> > at a different octave, even when the same pitch is used with an octave
> > sign".
> Huh.  That appeals more to my mathematician's gut than my musician's.

Same with me.
When looking at my example as a pianist it is _perfectly_ clear what is 
meant.
But looking at it as an editor/engraver, I'm insecure and think "hey, 
they _are_ different notes."

I'll be pondering this a little more, waiting for maybe more opinions.
At least I'm quite sure adding the accidental won't cause serious 
formatting hiccups, even at that second-to-last-minute stage ...

Urs