On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Joel C. Salomon [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]> wrote:
![Inline image 2]()
Neighbors,
I’m trying to replicate the chord slurs in the attached image. This
shows the closest two versions I’ve managed (image also attached):
\version "2.19.54"
\language "english"
\score {
\relative c' {
\time 3/4
<cs\=1( e!\=2( g\=3^( as\=4^(>2
<d\=1) g\=2)\=3) b\=4)>4
<cs\=1( e!\=2( g\=4^( as\=3^(>2
<d\=1) g\=2)\=3) b\=4)>4
}
\layout {}
}
The first has the right notes slurred together, but looks bad; the
second looks less bad, but still isn’t right. Can anyone suggest another
tweak I might try here?
A couple of thoughts for you (sorry, I'm using absolute pitch in all my examples below). From top to bottom in the original score, here's what I see:
1. as' ( b' )
2. g' ~ g'
3. e!' ( g' )
4. cs' ( d' )
Personally, I think this is overkill with the slurs since you really only need one from one chord to the next, two max (is this for piano?). Now that I'm looking at it a little closer, I wonder what the purpose of the slur in e'! ( g' ) is supposed to mean in the first place... You can't play it AND the tie at the same time, unless it's indicating a finger exchange or something like that. So, here's what I'd recommend:
1. If you MUST replicate the original, re-map the curves to include the tie, then adjust shapes as necessary (I think the tie is all you may need to adjust--maybe flip its direction to DOWN?):
<cs'\=1_( e'!\=2_( g'^~ as'\=3^(>2 <d'\=1) g'\=2) b'\=3)>4
2. Re-notate the progression with two voices, and combine the tied g' into a single note, like so:
<< { g'2. } \\ { <cs' e'! as'>2 ( <d' g' b'>4 ) } >>
OR
<< { <cs' e'! as'>2 ( <d' g' b'>4 ) } \\ { g'2. } >>
depending on which order appears better to you.
3. If the tie is superfluous, then
<cs' e'! g' as'>2 ( <d' g' b'>4 )
4. If the second g' is really supposed to be sustained, then I'd do #2 and omit the g' from the second slurred chord:
<< { g'2. } \\ { <cs' e'! as'>2 ( <d' b'>4 } >>
If I had to choose one, I'd go with #3 or #4.
HTH,
Abraham