Hi Alberto,
If what you want is to have the paper output folded and the midi output
unfolded, then you can use separate score blocks within the one file for
each purpose.
For example use something like:
\score { \notes
\context ChoirStaff = All <<
\Soprano
\Alto
\Tenor
\Bass
>>
\paper {
textheight = 22.0\cm
interscoreline = 12.0\mm
interscorelinefill = 1
}
}
\score { \notes \apply #unfold-repeats <<
\Soprano
\Alto
\Tenor
\Bass
>>
\midi { \tempo 4=72 }
}
Warren Stickney
Wellington,
New Zealand
Replying to your:
> In the other hand, to unfold them makes the paper output to be unfolded
> too :(
>
> But, as it is at the moment, I think lilypond can only win having midi
> output :)
>
> Alb
>
> On Thu, 2004-01-15 at 16:54, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> > One main reason not to include the repetitions by default is that
> > the MIDI generation in LilyPond is mainly intended for "proof reading"
> > a score. The ambition has never been to make a fullfledged sequencer
> > with professional MIDI output.
> >
> > /Mats
> >
> > Alberto Manuel Brandão Simões wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > I found
> > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.0/input/test/out-www/lily-429032051.ly,
> > > the example for unfolding repeats, and it works (great!)
> > >
> > > My question is: if we write repetitions on the music (and if the
> > > composer wrote them) it means we want to repeat them. Why to add a new
> > > command to unfold them? Wouldn't it be better to oposite? (a flag if
you
> > > do not want to unfold at all?)
> > >
> > > Just my five cents.
> > > Alberto
_______________________________________________
Lilypond-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
