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
