Re: Merging Rests in Single Staff with more than one 'voice'

[James Lowe]

Hello,

-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Holmes <address@hidden>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:30:50 +0000
To: James Lowe <address@hidden>, "address@hidden"
<address@hidden>
Subject: Re: Merging Rests in Single Staff with more than one 'voice'

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "James Lowe" <address@hidden>
>To: <address@hidden>
>Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 5:52 PM
>Subject: Merging Rests in Single Staff with more than one 'voice'
>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I don't often use multiple voices in a single staff, so am a bit
>> unfamiliar and am still finding my way.
>>
>> However I cannot easily see how I can take two 'voices' each from a
>>single
>> source such that when they are combined on a single staff the rests that
>> both voices share are only printed once.
>>
>> For example
>>
>>
>> \musicSourceOne = { a4 b c d | R1*4 | a4 r b r2 }
>> \musicSourceTwo = { f4 r f r | R1*4 | f4 f g r2 }
>>
>> << \musicSourceOne // \musicSourceTwo >>
>>
>> Is about as basic as it gets.
>>
>> However in measures two and three both the Multimeasure rest and the r2
>> are printed for each voice.
>>
>> I looked for a merge-rest type function and the LSR but couldn't see an
>> easy way to do this without more complex editing.
>>
>> Did I miss something or am I going to have to make 'skips' in one voice
>> and manually position the r2 so it sits on the correct line 'as if' it
>> were only printed once in the other?
>>
>> Thanks for your help.
>> >
>> James
>
>
>I do this quite a bit, and I always use explicitly instantiated voices,
>and 
>turn voiceOne and voiceTwo on and off (with oneVoice) as needed.  I use
>skips when there is really only one voice.  You can do what others show
>with 
>skips and explicitly placed rests, or you could override the rest/MMR
>rest 
>with something like:
>
>\override MultiMeasureRest #'staff-position = #0
>\override Voice.Rest #'staff-position = #-0.1


It's trickier to do this for what I usually need to do.

I often take two independent systems and combine them if for instance I
have a second brass player sitting next to me. That is if I am on my own I
just have a single system and I'm fine but occasionally the piece has a
nice counterpoint to the melody in some sections and while we could just
play the same melody, it's better for the pieces if we both have
complimentary lines.

Or as is often the case the melody/range is often too complicated to play
for my side-kick (I also play in a 'beginner' windband to help shore-up
the brass and keep them and the 'basses' going - trumpets are loud : ) and
often have the melody).

Having a simple line for the beginners to play as well is good for them to
learn to play in an ensemble and for the tune.

However often this only occurs in small sections of the whole piece (the
Coda for instance, if we need to substitute a missing instrument or if
that run of triplets is too complicated then I can give simpler lines),
and so having two voices in the same system is easier for us both and
especially with less sheets of paper, on the music stand!.

So being able to have a 'merge' like this is really useful for me without
having to explicitly turn on and off the voices each time - sometimes this
means I need to re-write the .ly file.

I'm sure there are other cases and I can understand why (singing for
instance or even piano music where each hand is on the same staff) why
this shouldn't be default behaviour.

James





>