> On Jan 26, 2015, at 6:08 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine
> <ela...@flaminghakama.com> wrote:
>
> Patrick,
>
> Thanks for your explanation and advice.
>
> The only question I have is in terms of what you consider to be the
> appropriate fix, which amounts to adding grace note rests to every other
> part.
>
> In this case, it is not much of an issue since this is just a trio piece.
> But if I were working on a larger orchestration, this seems like kind of a
> lot of work, modifying every other part, rather than just modifying the one
> part that has the grace notes.
>
> I am wondering if I am missing something about the character of the problem
> and the solution that makes you recommend the grace note rest approach,
> rather than tweaking the order of the grace notes and rehearsal mark in the
> part that actually has them?
Did you not notice what happened to the key signature in my third example? Not
pretty. Why it doesn’t happen in your “fixed” example I don’t know. What I am
recommending is simply what the Notation Manual recommends:
"This can be remedied by inserting grace skips of the corresponding
durations in the other staves.”
I think that your solution will not always fix the problem satisfactorily.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> From: Cynthia Karl <pck...@mac.com <mailto:pck...@mac.com>>
> Subject: Re: Rehearsal marks and grace notes at the beginning of bars
>
> > From: Flaming Hakama by Elaine <ela...@flaminghakama.com
> > <mailto:ela...@flaminghakama.com>>
> > To: lilypond-user@gnu.org <mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> > Subject: Rehearsal marks and grace notes at the beginning of bars
> >
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I ran into a problem today when I had an instrument with grace notes.
> > It made rehearsal marks between different instruments not line up, printing
> > duplicate rehearsal marks.
> >
> > The fix was to put the grace notes before the rehearsal mark.
> >
> > I was just wondering if this was expected behavior.
>
> See v.2.19.15 Notation Manual, Section 1.2.6, "Special rhythmic concerns",
> subsection "Grace notes", subsubsection "Known issues and warnings": Grace
> note synchronization can also lead to surprises. You just ran into a
> surprise.
>
> LilyPond has problems when (I think) it gets into negative time on one staff
> and not on a concurrent one. Grace notes apparently lead to negative time
> after bar lines. The following snippet is equivalent to yours with all the
> stuff irrelevant to your issue removed, and shows the four possible cases:
>
> \version "2.19.5"
>
> violinOK = \relative c'' {
> \mark\default \grace e16 e4 r r2
> }
>
> violinBroken = \relative c'' {
> \grace e16 \mark\default e4 r r2
> }
>
> clarinetBroken = \relative c' {
> \mark\default R1
> }
>
> clarinetFixed = \relative c' {
> \mark\default \grace s16 R1
> }
>
> global = { \key g\major }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff { \global \clarinetBroken }
> \new Staff { \global \violinOK }
> >>
> }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff { \global \clarinetFixed }
> \new Staff { \global \violinOK }
> >>
> }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff { \global \clarinetBroken }
> \new Staff { \global \violinBroken }
> >>
> }
>
> \score {
> <<
> \new Staff { \global \clarinetFixed }
> \new Staff { \global \violinBroken }
> >>
> }
>
> In my viewpoint, the original violin part wasn't broken, so it didn't need
> fixing. The clarinet part needed the fixing. So what you call violinBroken
> I call violinOK, your clarinet is my clarinetBroken, my clarinetFixed, which
> you don't have, follows the cited warnings, and your violinFixed is my
> violinBroken.
>
> HTH.
>
>
>
>
>
> David Elaine Alt
> 415 . 341 .4954 "Confusion is
> highly underrated"
> ela...@flaminghakama.com <mailto:ela...@flaminghakama.com>
> self-immolation.info <http://self-immolation.info/>
> skype: flaming_hakama
> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
