Re: slurs and articulation

[David Kastrup]

Martin Tarenskeen <address@hidden> writes:

> On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Phil Holmes wrote:
>
>>> Try to compile the following example:
>>>
>>> %%%%
>>>
>>> \version "2.19.25"
>>>
>>> \relative {
>>>   d''-.( d-. d-. d-.)
>>>   d-_( d-_ d-_ d-_)
>>>   d--( d-- d-- d--)
>>>   d-^( d-^ d-^ d-^)
>>>   d-+( d-+ d-+ d-+)
>>>   d-!( d-! d-! d-!)
>>>   d->( d-> d-> d->)
>>>   \break
>>>   \override Slur.outside-staff-priority = #500
>>>   d-.( d-. d-. d-.)
>>>   d-_( d-_ d-_ d-_)
>>>   d--( d-- d-- d--)
>>>   d-^( d-^ d-^ d-^)
>>>   d-+( d-+ d-+ d-+)
>>>   d-!( d-! d-! d-!)
>>>   d->( d-> d-> d->)
>>> }
>>>
>>> %%%%

>> I would say so.  you might like to add this to the bottom of your example:
>>
>> \break
>> \override Script.outside-staff-priority = #1000
>
> Yes, that looks strange and bad. But maybe not quite fair to use a
> second override without using \revert to undo the first
> override. That's asking for trouble.

Uh, no it isn't?  For one thing, only the topmost override is ever
consulted.  For another, \override by itself _always_ reverts one
preceding override (if present in the context at question) before
applying its own one.  If you want to have some override only
temporarily active, you need to use \temporary \override in order to
_not_ revert any previously existing override but have it reappear when
you \revert your own override.

> When use a \revert before adding your example, the result looks a
> little less strange.

I should be surprised.

-- 
David Kastrup