Re: Place text next to rehearsal mark, or with left edge over barline if there is none

[David Wright]

On Sun 09 Jul 2017 at 20:28:56 (+0200), Simon Albrecht wrote:
> On 09.07.2017 20:01, Wols Lists wrote:
> >On 09/07/17 18:38, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> >>On 09.07.2017 18:24, address@hidden wrote:
> >>>As you can see on the screenshot, both texts are misaligned.
> >>That’s your opinion.
> >See below. The result can EASILY be unplayable music ...
> What an exaggeration.
> >>>The first one, a \tempo, is placed *under* the rehearsal mark instead
> >>>of next to it.
> >>Well, both are placed exactly according to standard conventions: the
> >>center of the RehearsalMark aligned to the bar line, and the left edge
> >>of the MetronomeMark aligned to the note at the same moment. And since
> >>the former has a higher outside-staff-priority (see
> >><http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/learning/outside_002dstaff-objects>)
> >>it is further away from the staff.
> >The problem with this is firstly, it's horribly ugly and no real (i.e. a
> >person) engraver would ever do this if he took any pride in his work,
> >
> >and secondly and far more importantly for me, it makes playing the music
> >hard-to-impossible. What's the point of having sheet music if it's
> >unplayable?
> 
> And why exactly would the effect be so disastrous? Because it gets a
> little more difficult to get good page turns?

We've been here before, just over a year ago. Wols/Anthonys sets
band parts, where you expect there to be _no_ page turns; the music
might be in a plastic bag if it's raining. So it's a niche use of
the term "unplayable".

> >A real engraver who wanted to stick to those conventions would
> >presumably shift the note to the right so it cleared the rehearsal mark
> >and let the metronome mark drop down.
> 
> A real engraver would probably have shifted everything just a little
> so it fell in place looking like he had done nothing extraordinary
> at all. There are many things to be desired in LilyPond whose
> implementation would require algorithms much more sophisticated than
> those we have now. And until a crew of such genius to do that comes
> about, we have to live with making manual adjustments. That’s the
> point I was trying to make. It’s not like this could be fixed by
> changing a few settings.

Cheers,
David.