Am 25. Dezember 2014 03:23:01 MEZ, schrieb Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden>:
Hello all!
I’m about to dive in to [re]engraving a choral piece.
Like many choral works, it regularly alternates between “choral unison” (which can effectively be displayed using a single staff), homophonic sections (which require two staves), and polyphonic stuff (which require more than two staves, usually four). For example, the first verse of my piece requires a minimum of
A) 1 staff for mm 1-8
B) 2 staves for mm 9-12
C) 4 staves for mm 13-16
D) 1 staff for mm 18-19
There are at least two obvious ways to code this, with the intention of optimizing the code:
1. Write the soprano (melody) part out in full, quote it in the other four chorus parts during sections A and D (i.e., for the “unisons”), and use \showStaff (\showLyrics, resp.) and \letStaffVanish (\letLyricsVanish, resp.) to help Lilypond make appropriate layout decisions.
2. Write everything in one
\DivisibleStaff, splitting out the parts as necessary.
What is the consensus (if there is one) about the best practice?
It seems to me that #1 is better — but that may simply be because I don’t know the \DivisibleStaff mechanism that well.
(I always use the current unstable/development version, in case that makes a difference to the answer.)
Thanks,
Kieren.
_______________________
Kieren MacMillan, composer
www: <http://www.kierenmacmillan.info>
email: address@hidden
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user