On Fri 15 Dec 2017 at 10:02:19 (+0000), Wols Lists wrote: > On 15/12/17 06:20, Saul Tobin wrote: > > Relative mode makes perfect sense if you're entering music that cares > > mainly about the relationship between notes within a phrase (i.e. most > > music). IMO absolute mode might be easier from the perspective of the > > software, but it's not how most musicians think, and that's > > important. Maybe the documentation could do a better job explaining the > > semantics of relative mode and when to use \resetRelativeOctave? > > > > I take exception to the idea that relative mode ought to be deprecated. > > I've been using exclusively relative mode to compose for almost ten > > years, and I think it's great. > > I think Han-Wen actually wrote \resetRelativeOctave for me :-) > > But if you don't understand relative then it will mess you up. > > Does anybody (not me :-) want to write a little update for the docu that > will make both relative mode and \resetRelativeOctave (hopefully) clear? > > It originated when I was (iirc) transcribing Chattanooga Choo-Choo, and > there's a repeated phrase, so I thought I'd define it as a variable. > OOOPPSS! The starting and ending notes are a fifth or more apart, and > the phrase repeats with nothing else in-between. The resulting staircase > was spectacular! > > If somebody would care to take that as hint for putting an example in > the docu, that's fine by me! :-)
Just use \relative early. Cheers, David.
mover = { c' c' d' e' f' g' a' a' }
stayer = \relative { c' c d e f g a a }
mresult = \relative { \mover\mover\mover\mover }
sresult = \relative { \stayer\stayer\stayer\stayer }
\mresult
\sresult
wot-u-dun.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
