W dniu 20 lutego 2011 01:50:15 UTC+1 użytkownik James Lowe <james.l...@datacore.com> napisał: > Hello, > > From: Janek Warchoł <lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com> >> >>2011/2/19 Phil Holmes <m...@philholmes.net>: >>> Just to back up my "either is OK" comment, here's a little bit from >>> Chappell's version of the Gondoliers. Personally I think this is lazy, >>> but >>> it's how they've done it. >> >>Your example puzzles me, as i see no reason to mix two kinds of notation >>here... > > Don't string players have to put up with this kind of thing all the time? > > They just add the notation 'div'/'non-div' or 'unison'. > > Why not for vocal?
I don't know how to explain this... I mean, there is only one melody throughout that measure, no structural changes. In my opinion it should either have all notes double-stemmed, or all notes single-stemmed. Maybe the attachment will explain what i mean. W dniu 20 lutego 2011 02:15:51 UTC+1 użytkownik Colin Campbell <colinpkcampb...@gmail.com> napisał: > > As a choral singer, the "explicit" image says sopranos and altos sharing a > staff; the "problem" implies a single voice splitting, probably temporarily, > into e.g. Sop 1 and Sop 2. Generally i agree; if the rhythyms are identical i'd notate it like that. But if soprano splits temporarily into S1 and S2 which have different rhythyms, explicit polyphonic notation is necessary. cheers, Janek
ambiguities.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
