Re: Is this reasonable/playable (guitar)?

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Marc Hohl <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Am 06.03.2014 18:00, schrieb David Kastrup:
>>> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> So I'm now down to
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> and that's probably long enough I should spend on this distraction.
>>
>> What about
>>
>>       << { r8 a' d e f\3 a\2 | <f\3 a\2 d\1>2\arpeggio } \\
>>       { d,2.~ | d2 } >> r4
>>
>> for the final bars? The position change from the first to the tenth
>> fret remains the same but starts earlier and gives a nice line to
>> the topmost note of the final arpeggiated chord.
>>
>> Ok, just a nitpick ...
>
> Now that I was allowed to make a noise again, I checked that version.
> The basic idea is good.  However, the arpeggio becomes redundant: there
> is no need to strike the notes again.  If one did so, one better would
> restrike the bass note as well, but I think it's better just keeping
> them all on sustain without further notice.
>
> Definitely an improvement.  I'll just have to cast this into code.

Not that hard.  Except that with

      << { \set tieWaitForNote = ##t
           r8 a' d e f\3~ a\2~ | <f a d>2 } \\
         { d,2.~ | d2 }
      >> r4

the string indication on the first f is not really a mere matter of
style any more.  So I probably should print it in the score.  Which is a
nuisance as I suppressed the numbers staff-wide so far.

-- 
David Kastrup