[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: tie over clef change
From: |
Hans Åberg |
Subject: |
Re: tie over clef change |
Date: |
Sat, 26 Sep 2020 21:14:38 +0200 |
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 20:58, Kevin Barry <barrykp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 19:30, Hans Åberg <haberg-1@telia.com> wrote:
>>>>>> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation
>>>>>> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this
>>>>>> is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur.
>>>
>>> I disagree. For all practical purposes in standard classical music,
>>> enharmonic equivalents *do* sound the same. What you are referring to
>>> IMHO is a special case that might be controlled by a flag.
>>
>> They do not, and the string section, that primarily stands for the pitch
>> reference, trains to slide the pitch appropriately:
>
> In some contexts a notated D sharp and E flat are the same pitch (e.g.
> equally tempered piano music) and in some they are not (as you pointed
> out). Since this is a discussion about ties, where the note is the
> same by definition, we can assume we are dealing with the same pitch.
The staff notation pitches are different in the case of an enharmonic tie, as
in Dan's example d♯ to e♭. You might want to have a tie here to make the
enharmonic change explicit. —That is perhaps what you meant, but I find it
confusing saying that d♯ to e♭ are the same pitch, because in the case of staff
notation, they are not, even though in some music, they can be played the same.
> The question isn't whether it's a tie or a slur, but how LilyPond
> should render a tie when the two notes are not aligned (i.e. the user
> has entered a "~" indicating that it's a tie).
Say the ties are rendered as usual, but the slurs are dotted lines, and the
phrase marks are square brackets. How do you want the output to be then?
> I agree with Gould that ties across clef changes should be avoided (I
> personally wouldn't even do it in the Liszt example posted), but I
> think LilyPond needs to handle it. I think it's quite acceptable to
> detect this situation and switch to using a slur (but I haven't looked
> at the code).
So if one makes them radically different, substituting ties and slurs for each
other in the output would not work.
- Re: tie over clef change, (continued)
- Re: tie over clef change, Dan Eble, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, Dan Eble, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Jean Abou Samra, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Werner LEMBERG, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change, Kevin Barry, 2020/09/26
- Re: tie over clef change,
Hans Åberg <=
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Lukas-Fabian Moser, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, Benkő Pál, 2020/09/28
- Re: tie over clef change, Lukas-Fabian Moser, 2020/09/28
- Re: tie over clef change, Hans Åberg, 2020/09/27
- Re: tie over clef change, David Kastrup, 2020/09/27