lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)


From: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 10:41:58 +0000 (GMT)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Werner LEMBERG" <address@hidden>
To: address@hidden
Cc: address@hidden
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:53:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)


> I would like to echo Simon's concern as well.  Furthermore, I don't
> see why:
> 
> R1*2 R1*2
> 
> ...producing two multimeasure rests of two measures duration is
> troublesome.

It is a fundamental problem of separating contents from layout.  In
many cases it is of great importance to structure the input logically
for the full score.  However, if you just have a part, this logic is
completely uninteresting if the instrument doesn't play.  Thus it
would be good to be able to better control the conversion of full
rests to multi-measure rests.


    Werner

I see this issue as a bit analogous to the note name issue.  If you want an Eb 
printed in the key of Bb you have to specify it with its alteration.  Likewise, 
when I pass 'R1*2 R1*2' to LilyPond I expect, and I get, a pair of two-measure 
rests.  I have to partly disagree with your remark about the resting 
instruments having no interest in the structure/logic during rests.  It 
depends.  If it's a 'tacet bis ende' situation I couldn't agree more.  If it's 
a long series of rests with key changes, rehearsal numbers, etc. I don't need 
too much detail.  There are occasions, however, when understanding the content 
is precisely what is needed during a rest so that your next entrance is clear 
to you.  I'm another orchestral bass trombonist so rests make up the lion's 
share of what I do at work.

I think one of the things that bothers me about this thread is that I don't 
understand why, if you want a four measure rest you would write 2+2.  For the 
vast majority of cases, if there are 48 bars between two rehearsal marks I'm 
happy to see |=48=| between them. So, why write anything but R1*48 in the part 
in question?  If there *is* a reason then the input can be something different, 
say R1*32 R1*16 to produce |=32=| |=16=|.

-David



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]