Re: Bug in ties over barlines

[Xavier Scheuer]

On 23 January 2011 23:09, Joseph Haig <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
> it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
> of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
> following code:
>
>  {
>    \time 4/4
>    aes'1( a')
>    aes'~ aes'
>    aes'( aes')
>  }
>
> I believe that the first and third ties are displayed incorrectly.

Nope.
LilyPond is right!
First and third ties are not ties, they are slurs.  Hence you use '( )'
instead of '~'.


> Specifically, the first tie should have a natural in front of the
> second note,

Nope.
Usual rules specify that an accidental is only valid within _one_
(the current) measure[1].  The second a') (in the second measure) is not
in the same measure, so no need to print the natural.
However it is common practice to add a reminder accidental or a
cautionary accidental (i.e., an accidental within parentheses) in the
second measure.

Hence it is important to make the distinction between a tie and a slur.
Slurs have no rhythmic meaning, contrary to ties.
There is a big warning about this in the notation reference manual.

BTW if you replace your slur by a tie you would get a warning and the
tie would not be printed!


> and the third tie should not have a flat in front of the
> second note.

That would be true if you used a tie, not a slur (like in your second,
real, tie).


> The second and third ties should be identical, except for
> the type of tie used, while the first one should be different. Am I
> correct?

Hope that helps.

Cheers,
Xavier

-- 
Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden>