lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Invisible glissando, best fix?


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Re: Invisible glissando, best fix?
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 23:36:59 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

On 07.11.2015 11:54, Richard Shann wrote:
In some circumstances LilyPond leaves a glissando invisible:

\version "2.19.25"

  {
    d'' 4\glissando  cis'' 4  c''   b' }

I looked up the issues list and found this:

  { \override Glissando #'minimum-length = #5
    \override Glissando #'springs-and-rods = #ly:spanner::set-spacing-rods
    d'' 4\glissando  cis'' 4  c''   b' }

but before I did that I just used a command available in Denemo thus:
{ d'' 4\glissando \once \override NoteColumn.X-offset = #2
     cis'' 4  c''   b' }

These achieve similar effects for this tiny example, I wonder if someone
could give me some insights into the merits or demerits of these
approaches?

The first one is clearly preferable. Firstly, it’s more semantically appropriate, because it better matches the reason you need a tweak. And LilyPond much tends to reward staying with semantically correct solutions. Such also in this case: The second version won’t work at all if there is another voice with the same notes in the same staff(1), and in other cases it will break vertical alignment of voices, which you’ll likely not want.

HTH, Simon

(1) E.g.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\version "2.19.28"
<<
  {
    d''4\glissando \once\override NoteColumn.X-offset = #2 cis''4 c'' b'
  }
%%%% change the following to ‘\new Staff’ in order to test another situation
  \\
  {
    d''4 cis'' c'' b'
  }
>>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(note the changed code formatting; IMO this is more compliant to existent guidelines as well as to general usage (as far as there is such a thing in the LilyPond community) and easier to read.)



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]