lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Changing voice order...


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Changing voice order...
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:31:16 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Kobel <address@hidden> writes:

> On 2016-10-27 23:38, David Kastrup wrote:
>> The majority tends to be silent.
>
> Minority report out of the silent majority:
> I got used to the status quo, which is totally natural once you
> internalized the meaning of \voice<Digit>.

Well, walking on your hands is totally natural once you internalized
being upside down.  The problem I have is that all of the the <Digit>s
in \voice<Digit> stop making sense as soon as _one_ <Digit> moves past
Two.

> I agree with you that these names are semantically suboptimal. On the
> other hand, I find something like \inner \VoiceUp etc. slightly too
> verbose; I'll get used to it, but I can't say I'm too fond of it.

Better proposals welcome.  My first idea was \voiceUpUp but that does
not work since additional voices are inner voices.  And \voiceUpDown and
\voiceUpDownDown would again be rather confusing.  So the idea with
\inner as a modifier.  Replacing \inner \inner with \innermost suffers
from the problem that the innermost level might be either further out or
in.

>> I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it should
>> have been from the start.
>
> If that's the goal: I again agree with you that top-to-bottom makes
> the most sense IMHO; but either the << ... \\ ... \\ ... >> just
> assigns names, not styles, or you should also think about some
> syntactic sugar to specify the boundary between "up" and "down"
> voices. Something like
>   <<
>     topmost \\ 2nd from top
>     \\\ % note the three backslashes
>     topmost stem-down \\ middle stem-down \\ bottom stem-down
>   >>
> which would translate to << 1 \\ 3 \\ 6 \\ 4 \\ 2 >>...

So does

<< topmost \\ 2nd from top
   \\ { \inner \inner \voiceDown topmost stem-down }
   \\ middle stem-down \\ bottom stem-down
>>

Basically you need to only fix those voices not obeying the standard
scheme (usually just one) and the rest will work out.  So I don't really
think that a special syntax is needed.

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

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