On Fri, 2009-12-11 at 09:20 +0000, Philip Potter wrote: > 2009/12/11 Jay Anderson <horndud...@gmail.com>: > > I've done triple-stops like this in the past: > > << c4 <g' e'>2.\fermata >> > > > > I'd prefer to do the triple-stop something more like this to avoid warnings: > > <\tweak #'duration-log #2 \tweak #'dot-count #0 c g' e'>2.\fermata | > > > > Unfortunately I can't make the dot disappear easily (the dot-count > > thing I was trying doesn't work). I could probably write a function to > > remove the dot for this case (which might not be a bad idea: > > \tripleStop <c g' e'>2.\fermata), but if there's a simple tweak to get > > rid of the dot I'd be interested to know. Does this fall under the > > recent \tweak nested properties changes? Thanks. > > Is this notation something you've seen other music producers use? It > sounds like you want a chord with a crotchet at the bottom and two > fermata'd minims at the top; and you want to ignore the warning about > the lower crotchet not being the same length as the minims. I'm not > convinced that this is the best way to do what you want, but I'm not a > string player so I'm not familiar with string music conventions.
This kind of thing is perfectly normal notation, as an explicit instruction to arpeggiate a chord in a certain way - off-hand, examples I can think of are in the last movement of Tchaik 5, and various points in the Stravinsky violin concerto. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
