[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: In octaves
From: |
Valentin Villenave |
Subject: |
Re: In octaves |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:47:26 +0200 |
2008/4/25 Jay Anderson <address@hidden>:
> To make it work in a relative section always use 0 for the octave up
> and -2 for the octave down. I don't really know how to make it work
> both inside and outside of a relative section easily. This is my first
> dip into some of lilypond's internals and I don't totally understand
> how relative sections work here. If anyone knows how to fix that I'd
> be very grateful because I have a few other similar functions where I
> just assume one way or the other. The best solution I have for now is
> to define one function for inside a relative block and one for
> outside.
Most people use \relative, so I think this is more important to make
it work inside \relative.
> One thing I'd like to do instead is something like this:
>
> octaves = #(chord-template #{<c c'>#}) (or maybe #(chord-template 8) I
> don't know which would be preferable.)
Oh yes! The second one looks particularly well.
> Then you could easily define others:
>
> thirds = #(chord-template #{<c e>#}) (or #(chord-template 3))
> octaves-down = #(chord-template #{<c c,>#}) (or #(chord-template -8))
> oneFourSix = #(chord-template #{<c f a>#}) (or possibly #(chord-template 4
> 6))
That would be great; I hope you'll manage to come up with something...
Cheers,
Valentin
- In octaves, Jay Anderson, 2008/04/13
- Re: In octaves, Wilbert Berendsen, 2008/04/14
- Re: In octaves, Valentin Villenave, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves, Jonathan Kulp, 2008/04/24
- Message not available
- Re: In octaves, Valentin Villenave, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves, Jonathan Kulp, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves, Valentin Villenave, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves, Jonathan Kulp, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves, Jay Anderson, 2008/04/24
- Re: In octaves,
Valentin Villenave <=
- Re: In octaves, Jonathan Kulp, 2008/04/27
- Re: In octaves, Jay Anderson, 2008/04/28
- Re: In octaves, Jay Anderson, 2008/04/28
- Re: In octaves, Jonathan Kulp, 2008/04/28