Hi Mark,
It looks like there is a solution to the problem
Glad it worked!
perhaps people in the past just didn't understand the questions of
the people asking properly . . .
Perhaps... that's why I kept trying to clarify what question you were
really asking, so that I could answer the question you were really
asking! =)
Graham: may I suggest one thing that might help the docs? In 6.3
(especially .4, Explicitly instantiating voices), maybe if the notes
in each Voice context were independently (i.e., differently)
coloured, the examples (and thus the constructs and internal Lilypond
mechanisms) would be even more clear immediately?
For an example, see the attached snippet.
Best regards,
Kieren.
_______________
\version "2.11.30"
\markup \wordwrap { At first it may be difficult to understand why
the three C notes are not tied in the following example: }
\score
{
\new Staff \relative c''
{
c ~ << { c ~ } \\ { a } >> c
}
}
\markup \wordwrap { By colouring the main Voice red, the problem
becomes clear: }
\score
{
\new Staff \relative c''
{
\override Voice.NoteHead #'color = #red
c ~ << { c ~ } \\ { a } >> c
}
}
\markup \wordwrap
{
Within the \typewriter {"<< \\\ >>"} polyphony section, two
completely new Voice contexts, independent from the main Voice, have
been constructed automatically by Lilypond. There are several ways to
compensate for this instantiation, but the easiest is simply to avoid
the \typewriter { "\\\ " } construct entirely — within the "<< >>"
construct, any notes before an explicit \typewriter { "\\new Voice" }
command will belong to the main Voice context (i.e., the one
“outside” the polyphony):
}
\score
{
\new Staff \relative c''
{
\override Voice.NoteHead #'color = #red
c ~ << { c ~ } \new Voice { a } >> c
}
}
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
