lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Implementation of \tuplet allow both incorrect and correct musical e


From: Peter Bjuhr
Subject: Re: Implementation of \tuplet allow both incorrect and correct musical expressions
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:40:54 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0



On 2015-03-26 10:53, Simon Albrecht wrote:
The essay
on writing readable tuplets was quite interesting.

From the context I assume you're referring to my post about tuplets on the LilyPond blog: http://lilypondblog.org/2014/09/how-to-write-readable-tuplets/. I'm really glad you found it interesting!


The documentation mentions nothing about the intricacies of using tuplets---why isn't there a link to this article from the section 2.1.7 of the Learning Manual where tuplets are first discussed?

Even before I read the essay I had some second thoughts that \tuplet 7/4 { c16 ... }  might be clearer to the player  if annotated as \tuplet 7/8 { c32 ... } since 7 is closer to 8 than to 4 (i.e., I anticipated the "Nearness Rule").

I also found  that certain arpeggios  which appeared in a bassoon composition of mine ( I just downloaded LilyPond about 10 days ago, knowing nothing about it before, and learned enough of the basics to engrave that composition) 

Welcome as a LilyPond user!

[The arpeggios] seem easier to read if the notes are nominal 16ths rather than following the "Mathematical Rule:"

{ c,,8( \tuplet 5/2 { g'16 c ef g c ) } }

{ df8( \tuplet 7/2 { f16 bf  df f  bf  df f~) } }

So definitely there is a need for flexibility in using tuplets.

My main point in the text is that the flexibility of LilyPond has to be used with care not to make the tuplets unnecessarily obscure.

Your example above seems strange to me. Compare this:

{ c,,8( \tuplet 5/2 { g'16 c ef g c ) } c8 d2 s8 }

{ df8( \tuplet 7/2 { f16 bf  df f  bf  df f~) } f8 d2 s8 }

with this:

{ c,,8( \tuplet 5/4 { g'16 c ef g c ) } c8 d2 }

{ df8( \tuplet 7/4 { f16 bf  df f  bf  df f~) } f8 d2 }

When placing five (5) and seven (7) 16ths over two (2) 16ths it seems to me that you end up with an excessive 8th compared to what one expects from reading the notation.



I am definitely impressed with LilyPond's capabilities and the input language (I was a heavy user of LaTeX in my life before retirement, so I am a fan of WYSIWYM tools).

Sincerely,
Ralph D. Jeffords

P.S. A bit about myself:  I was a Research Computer Scientist before I retired, but I'm also a bassoonist and even play the piano a bit (my mother was a piano teacher).


Best
Peter

reply via email to

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