Piano music is not the only place to use a GrandStaff is it? Is not a
full orchestral score written on a Grand Staff? And the full score of
a String Quartet is it not also a Grand Staff?
I am not 100% sure I'm right here either. I thought that GrandStaff
meant more than one staves bound together because they made up a
greater whole.
In Lilypond I thought that PianoStaff was inside the GrandStaff
hierarchy as child of the GrandStaff the way GrandStaff is of \score.
As i say, I'm not sure that I'm exactly correct here, but if I am then
GrandStaff still has uses aside from the far more specific case of
PianoStaff.
Cheers
David
>> I just noticed that the staff contexts of the examples in 1.1.3.5 are
>> PianoStaff. In 1.6 there is only mentioned GrandStaff. Which one is
>> the preferred one to be used? I would mention both in 1.6, but I
>> think we should develop guidelines which context names to use. Maybe
>> the PianoStaff is (at least to others than English native speakers)
>> more understandable? So the context would be called PianoStaff in
>> 1.6.1 but I would also mention that there is a GrandStaff context?
>> So far I have understood that they are both equal. Is this true?
>>
> In version 2.11, the only difference between the two is that
> PianoStaff contains the instrument name engraver. In version 2.10
> and earlier, there were more differences. The PianoStaff then produced
> a fixed distance between the staves, since the cross-staff
> slurs and beams didn't work otherwise. This limitation has been fixed
> in 2.11.
Ok, good to know. So PianoStaff should maybe be the default, so nobody
will be wondering why the instrument name won't show up...
What for is the GrandStaff then?
Till
> /Mats
>
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user