On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 07:45:41PM +0200, Nicolas Sceaux wrote: > > Le 20 sept. 2012 à 19:21, Graham Percival a écrit : > > >> A single note name is not that much longer to type than q. If it is > >> really important to you, place the single note in a chord: > >> <des> is perfectly repeatable by q. > > > > What would we lose if every note was automatically a (single-note) > > chord? > > That behavior is intended, so that you can write: > > c <e g c'> g q c q g q > > And the idea, if you wanted to repeat the previous single note, is > to enclose it between < >. > q repeats the last chord, not the last note. That's why it's named > chord repetition symbol.
I thought the behaviour was intended to simplify things like <c e g>4 q q q I'm particularly asking about making every note into a chord because that would make David's favorite <> construct a *lot* more consistent. At the moment, we have no note at a time unit: <> single note at a time unit: c'4 multiple notes at a time unit: <c e g>4 If c'4 was actually a shortcut for <c'>4, then we could have a consistent notion that every time unit in every voice is a chord; that chord may contain 0, 1, or many notes. - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
