Re: Unresolvable rest collision?

[Urs Liska]

Am 23. Dezember 2014 11:41:38 MEZ, schrieb Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Ted Lemon" <address@hidden>
>To: "Kieren MacMillan" <address@hidden>
>Cc: "Lilypond-User Mailing List" <address@hidden>
>Sent: Monday, December 22, 2014 2:37 PM
>Subject: Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
>
>
>> On Dec 22, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Kieren MacMillan 
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> \new Voice = "bass-a" { \voiceOne \relative c \vba }
>>> \new Voice = "bass-b" { \voiceTwo \relative c \vbb }
>>> \new Voice = "bass-c" { \voiceThree \relative c \vbc }
>>
>> Thanks, that fixed it.   The placement of the rests isn't exactly
>what I 
>> want when I let Lilypond do it automatically, although now with the 
>> explicit voice markings it's at least sensible.   I am a bit puzzled
>that 
>> even with explicit marking, I don't actually have that much control
>over 
>> where the head of the rest lands.   I want the bottom rest head to be
>at 
>> e, and the top at e', but when I specify that, they wind up at f and
>f' 
>> respectively, and changing for example to d and d' doesn't change the
>
>> position of the rest.
>>
>> (Obviously not a problem that really needs to be solved, but I found
>it 
>> curious that one could specify the note on which a rest would land,
>but 
>> that that specification would be treated so loosely.)
>
>
>According to typesetting rules (see Behind Bars by Elaine Gould, for 
>example) rests should remain consistently placed with respect to staff 
>lines.  This means that when they are moved, they should be moved in 2
>pitch 
>increments, not one.
>

So regarding the OP's question: 
LilyPond behaves "correctly" here,but you can force the behaviour you want by 
overriding the vertical offset of the rest if you think zhat's a good idea.

Urs 

>--
>Phil Holmes 
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>lilypond-user mailing list
>address@hidden
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user