Great, I think I understand. Thank you very much.
-Tom
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 12:48 PM Lukas-Fabian Moser <l...@gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Tom,
>
> Am 03.12.21 um 16:02 schrieb 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.
>
> Yes, that's basically correct (I'm just not sure if the sentence "its
> name is nothing" is technically correct, but anyway it's what the
> situation amounts to).
>
> If you do \new Staff, then the music you enter is still in a "Voice"
> context that is created implicitly. We could create it explicitly and
> also give it a name:
>
> \new Staff \new Voice = main {
>
> % bla
>
> }
>
> and then use \voices main,2 << \\ >> for multi-voice music where the
> first voice is a continuation of the "main" voice (and hence can be tied
> to notes outside of << \\ >>).
>
> But notice what Akikazu wrote: If we use \voices with non-number id's,
> LilyPond does not do the \voiceOne / \voiceOne automatically that's
> responsible for stem directions, shifting etc. So we have to add them
> manually, which I forgot to do in my example, unfortunately.
>
> Best
> Lukas
>
>
