Hello,
On 8 October 2012 14:19, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
> On 10/08/2012 01:29 PM, James wrote:
>>
>> I have the good fortune to play with
>> semi-professionals and also teachers who when I queried said [I
>> paraphrase], well sure I guess you could technically call them that,
>> but 'no on
On 10/08/2012 01:29 PM, James wrote:
I have the good fortune to play with
semi-professionals and also teachers who when I queried said [I
paraphrase], well sure I guess you could technically call them that,
but 'no one really does' and besides when do you stop calling them
their numerically accur
James writes:
> I have no problem with having more commands in that while 'musos'
> might have their terms, I have the good fortune to play with
> semi-professionals and also teachers who when I queried said [I
> paraphrase], well sure I guess you could technically call them that,
> but 'no one r
Ian,
On 6 October 2012 16:40, Ian Hulin wrote:
> On 05/10/12 08:10, James wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
>>> This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
>>>
>>> There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
>>> curren
Ian Hulin writes:
> On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Ian Hulin writes:
>>
>>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
>>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
>>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
>>> invert it a
On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
> Ian Hulin writes:
>
>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
>> invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} becau
On 05/10/12 08:10, James wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
>> This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
>>
>> There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
>> current \times command.
>>
>> 1. \tuplet n/m {}
>> % does what
Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes:
> On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
>> It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
>> as \tuplet 5/4 {}
>
> Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ?
Yes. 5/4 is an item that the parser is readily able to recog
On 10/05/2012 09:31 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
as \tuplet 5/4 {}
Is there any reason why you couldn't write \tuplet 5:4 {} ... ? Keeps exact
match between musical and Lilypond syntax and avoids the potential mental block
of having
On 2012-10-05 09:10, James wrote:
Hello,
On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {}
% does what \times does, but no
Ian Hulin writes:
> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
> invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} because that reflects better the
> "three notes in th
Ian Hulin hulin.org.uk> writes:
> Questions:
> 1. Should the new \tuplet [...]
> \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} because that reflects better the
> "three notes in the time of two" definition of a triplet.
It is easier to keep the order straight if you write a 5:4 tuplet
as \tuplet 5/4 {}
We have to inve
Hello James, Ian and list,
On 05.10.2012 09:10, James wrote:
Hello,
On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
current \times command.
1. \tuplet n/m {}
% d
Hello,
On 5 October 2012 00:19, Ian Hulin wrote:
> This is a proposal to move the triplet/tuplet discussion forward.
>
> There will be new commands to supplement (or eventually replace) the
> current \times command.
>
> 1. \tuplet n/m {}
> % does what \times does, but not so easily confused with
14 matches
Mail list logo
