Am 21.12.2017 um 23:19 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Easier to just use
>
> \new GrandStaff << ... >>
>
> The only difference is the Keep_alive_together_engraver if I remember
> correctly.
Yes, this works great. I never realized what actually is the difference
between the combined Staff types, except
Simon Albrecht writes:
> \new PianoStaff \with { \remove Keep_alive_together_engraver } <<
> \new Staff {}
> \new Staff \with { \RemoveAllEmptyStaves } {}
>>>
Easier to just use
\new GrandStaff << ... >>
The only difference is the Keep_alive_together_engraver if I remember
correctly.
--
On 21.12.2017 22:45, Robert Schmaus wrote:
Not sure if I understand you correctly, but is this what you're
looking for?
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/writing-rests#full-measure-rests
No, that’s not what the question was about. Helge is working on a harp
part, and he wa
Not sure if I understand you correctly, but is this what you're looking for?
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/writing-rests#full-measure-rests
> On 21 Dec 2017, at 19:20, Helge Kruse wrote:
>
> I have a score for an orchestra instrument (harp). The harp starts after tens
I have a score for an orchestra instrument (harp). The harp starts after
tens of measures. There are several meter changes. Therfore a simple
multi-measure-rest is inappropriate. Instead I would like to write all
measures and meter changes, so that the harpist can follow the music and
get the r
