On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 09:47:53AM -0800, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2008 at 11:26:16PM +1100, Cameron Horsburgh wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:49:10PM -0800, Graham Percival wrote:
> > > ... I really don't understand this question. If you already know
> > > how to transpose from C to Bb, why on earth do you need to ask how
> > > to transpose from C to G ?!
> >
> > He wants it diatonic, so it's not that easy. \transpose c' g {a b c}
> > would produce {e fis g} instead of {e f g}.
>
> > Even then, the extra \relative makes things get very messy:
>
> Then omit it.
>
> melody = {a b c d e f g}
>
> { \melody \\ { \transpose c' g \melody }}
>
Hmm... I can see that this works. Having read the documentation so
slavishly I assumed it would be needed. From the Known Issues in 1.1.2:
"The relative conversion will not affect \transpose, \chordmode or
\relative sections in its argument. To use relative mode within
transposed music, an additional \relative must be placed inside
\transpose."
This isn't absolute (PNI) then?
--
Cameron Horsburgh
Blog: http://spiritcry.wordpress.com/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
