On 9 November 2017 at 11:04, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Gianmaria Lari <gianmarial...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Thank you David & Mark! > > > > Mark's solutions looks simpler. Any disadvantages using it comparing to > > David'one? > > It doesn't do what you asked for, namely setting the tempo in relation > to the _current_ tempo rather than some fixed tempo. >
:) > That makes it simpler because it does not need to reference the current > tempo. If its operation better suits your purposes, that's fine. > However, you shouldn't be mixing both approaches since Mark's solution > _rounds_ the tempo (and \tempo will only accept integers, so using > \tempo basically requires this), so the resulting tempo is nothing you > should use as a reference for further changes. > > In particular, you can alternatively multiply and divide > tempoWholesPerMinute by #e1.1 (an "exact" number) and arrive at the > original value. Thank you David for the explanation. I understood the difference and now I know when to use your or Mark's one. Best regards, g.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
