Re: funny construction

[Abraham Lee]

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 11:22 AM, David Wright <address@hidden> wrote:

On Mon 18 Jul 2016 at 08:23:21 (-0700), tisimst wrote:
> BGM & David,
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 8:35 AM, David Wright [via Lilypond]
> > If the material is sufficiently heterogeneous, it can
> > make sense to concatenate multiple scores.
> >
>
> True, but I'm pretty sure multiple \score blocks aren't needed here, but
> rather make the notes/lyrics sequential.

You're quite right. But the way my mailboxes are arranged,
I was prejudiced by possible aversion to skips
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-06/msg00343.html
and need for extra annotations
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-06/msg00380.html
and thought we'd already come up with a solution like yours:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-06/msg00350.html
...or, rather, its predecessors. I get very confused about
whether to take account of previous context or treat every
thread as a fresh start.

I thought the main problem was the accidental inclusion of the << >>.

Yes, it appears it might just be a accidental mis-use of outer << >> in this case instead of { } since it's obvious that the three sections were meant to be sequential and not simultaneous. 

 

I found the correct usage of << >> and the way it interacts with \\
to be one of the harder things to get my head around when I was
first learning LP. But that's an aside.

FWIW, in case anyone cares to know how I do things, when it comes to using \\ with << >>, I only use them in less complex, non-lyric-associated voices and even then it's only when I need something temporarily and there aren't ties/slurs/phrasing slurs/other spanners that I want to attach something to. In almost every other case, I explicitly use instantiate voices, like

<<

  { \voiceOne ... }

  \new Voice { \voiceTwo ... }

>>

so I know exactly where the voices start and stop. It almost always makes things clearer and easier to debug.

Best,

Abraham