Hey thanks. I'm thinking of using the thing in the manual that says << { \voiceOne ... } \new Voice { \voiceTwo ... } >> \oneVoice
but this goes back and forth all the time through out this 1 to 2 minute piece. so in this case would the double back slash work? and if so how do you get back to the unison voice with that approach? I get the feeling it has something to do with those left and right brackets but am drawing a blank. Will they know hopefully that you do a divisi? he wants us to write in the text divisi and unison or unis or tutti so I'm kind of in a bind here as to what to do I understand the left braces are part of the big picture but then after that it gets a bit confusing. and I suck at math. lol! I"ll keep playing with this and see if I can creature something at least readable. lol! On Mar 2, 2013, at 8:47 AM, Hwaen Ch'uqi <hwaench...@gmail.com> wrote: > Greetings David, > Indeed, your point is well stated, demonstrated, and taken. I > merely include the possibility for the sake of completeness; I myself > find the latter option quite useful, as I then do not have to remind > myself that 'c' actually refers to the pitch an octave below the > fairly common reference point of middle c. Regardless, I would imagine > that someone wishing to use a \relative block has already familiarized > himself with the rules that govern the coding of intervals. > Hwaen Ch'uqi > > > On 3/2/13, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> "Hwaen Ch'uqi" <hwaench...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Greetings Sarah, >>> First, to base your music around middle c, you want to use >>> >>> c' >>> >>> However, you might also try leaving out the c indicator altogether, so >>> that it would look like >>> >>> \relative { MUSIC } >>> >>> In past versions, this had the same effect, and, though I believe that >>> was meant to be deprecated, I am pretty sure it still works in the >>> latest stable version. >> >> Why would you recommend using a deprecated non-documented way of >> entering music which is non-explicit in its behavior? >> >> \relative { f } -> f' >> \relative { g } -> g >> >> That makes only sense in relation to c', so why not write it explicitly? >> >> -- >> David Kastrup >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lilypond-user mailing list >> lilypond-user@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >> > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user