Re: Is this reasonable/playable (guitar)?

[Marc Hohl]

Am 08.03.2014 10:42, schrieb David Kastrup:
> Marc Hohl <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Am 08.03.2014 09:32, schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > 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.
> >
> > You may insert a barré indicator for the tenth fret or a bracket for
> > f, a and d to indicate that these three notes have to be fretted with
> > the index finger.
>
> Pffft.  Is this for real?  What a nuisance to get this looking
> half-civil...
>
>
>
>
> > On the other side: you use tablature as well, so the information is
> > there, even without explicit string numbers.
>
> I don't think that's the way combined staves are supposed to work: the
> tab is supposed to get the missing info "offline" via glancing at the
> staff, but the staff is supposed to be self-contained for score
> sightreaders.  We have a \tabFullNotation or similar for making a
> TabStaff contain everything, but that's assumed standard for a Staff.

Probably.
> > And even without tablature staff it is implicitly given through the
> > ties – there is no other possibility to play the piece and let the
> > notes sustain as given in the score.
>
> Sure, but puzzle games and backtracking are not sightreader-friendly.

I am accustomed to work through a guitar piece where some
spurious fingerings give you a faint idea where the notes are supposed
to be located on the fretboard.
This is probably due to the plate-engraved scores where every number
and every sign were quite time-consuming.

But that does not mean that I like puzzle games and backtracing while
playing music, so you're right on this one.

> I've seen barring indications in some scores of mine that basically use
> a half-bracket, reaching down from the X (position indicator) above the
> staff and ending in a hook just below the lowest note to be barred.  So
> they are more like vertical spanners than horizontal ones (horizontally,
> they are dissolved by another position indicator or by becoming
> obviously irrelevant).  Does not seem obvious how to crank out something
> like that using LilyPond.

Yes, that's what I had in mind when I describend my "bracket" solution.
There's something on the LSR for those half-brackets but no genuine
Lilypondish solution.

> Still I think I consider this position indicator better than, say, three
> string indicators.  And using both seems like overkill.

Of course.

Marc