Re: tie from multiple voice?

[Tom Sgouros]

Thanks, but I'm not sure I completely understand. What you're saying is that if you don't define a voice immediately, you still get one, but its name is nothing ("")? So in my multi-voice segment I can explicitly reference the voice-with-no-name as you are showing with the \voices construct? That makes sense, if that's correct.

Thank you,

 -Tom

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:17 AM Lukas-Fabian Moser <lfm@gmx.de> wrote:

Hi Tom,

> This does not work:   << { d1~ } \\ {g1} >> | d1 |   No tie appears
> and I don't see anything like an error or warning that I can do
> anything with. I can rewrite to have an empty second voice in that
> second measure, but maybe it's feasible to do it some other way?

If the un-named implicit voice already exists (i.e. if you're not right
at the beginning of a piece, or if you did an explicit \new Voice { ...
}), then you can do:

\version "2.22"

\new Staff {
   a'1
   \voices "",2 <<
     d''1~ \\
     { g'2 g' }
   >>
   d''1
}

With "\voices" you can define the names of the voices used by the <<  \\
 >> construct.

Lukas