Menu
▾
▴
1 Attachments
#649 Let accidentals on tied notes across a break be valid for subsequent notes
Accepted
nobody
None
Ugly
2017-11-16
2008-07-16
Anonymous
No
Originally created by: *anonymous
Originally created by: n.putt...@gmail.com
An accidental on a broken tied note should be valid for the length of the bar after the break.
In this example, the second cis in bar 2 shouldn't have an accidental.
\version "2.11.53" \paper { ragged-right = ##t indent = 0 } \relative c' { cis1 ~ \break cis2 cis }
Originally posted by: hanw...@gmail.com
I think lily is correct here. Can you cite a reference?
Status: Invalid
Originally posted by: n.putt...@gmail.com
Here are a few examples:
I have several more, if you're interested. :)
A quick check found two exceptions:
A modern engraving (Eulenburg) of Stravinsky's Symphony in C, which doesn't bother printing cautionary accidentals across breaks; and a Peters edition of Debussy's Préludes which exhibits the same behaviour as lily, except the accidentals on the tied notes are parenthesized.
Last edit: Simon Albrecht 2015-09-27
Originally posted by: hanw...@gmail.com
I might be going crazy here, but I remember reading that this shouldn't happen when there is no linebreak. (Jan, can you check the literature?)
The difficulty is that we don't know whether there is a linebreak we generate the accidentals.
Cc: jan.nieuwenhuizen
Last edit: Simon Albrecht 2015-09-27
Originally posted by: risva...@gmail.com
If I understood Gardner Read's book right he says that an accidental shouldn't affect
a note after a tie if the tie crosses a bar line. However, he suggests using e.g. a
parenthesized natural sign to remind the player of the changed pitch. [1]
If that is assumed correct then there should be an accidental before the second cis
in the 2nd measure.
-Risto
[1] Music Notation (The Elements of Notation - Accidentals and Key Signatures, pages
130-131)
Originally posted by: n.putt...@gmail.com
Risto:
I agree with you if we're talking about unbroken ties; it was whilst fixing issue 418
(so that lily agrees with Read, apart from the use of parentheses) that I noticed the
behaviour across line breaks.
But this is a separate issue, since there is usually a reminder accidental for a tied
and altered note after a line or page break.
Related
Issues:
#418Originally posted by: jameseli...@googlemail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Verified
Originally posted by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
Let's re-open this as a feature request: add a property that lets the people in the "other" camp have what they want.
Summary: Let accidentals on tied notes across a break not be valid for subsequent notes
Labels: -Type-Defect Type-Enhancement
Status: Accepted
Originally posted by: n.putt...@gmail.com
Erm, you've turned the request on its head. :)
We want the accidental on the tied note to be valid for the length of the bar after the break (or longer, depending on the accidental style) unless hide-tied-accidental-after-break is set.
Summary: Let accidentals on tied notes across a break be valid for subsequent notes
Originally posted by: simon.al...@mail.de
I just encountered this behavior in a score I work on and immediately found it contradicting common sense, so I try and restart discussion. To me, it just seems superfluous to have two accidentals in the bar after the break. Of course, a workaround is very simple, still I would find it desirable to improve current behavior to delete the second accidental on its own. Only it seems to be difficult to do, or so I interpret comment #4. I cannot judge whether there is a convenient possibility to implement this: is there any?
I've just hit this very issue... Simon, what exactly is your 'easy workaround'? Is it a global one? Maybe it makes sense to document it until it gets fixed. Or do we already have a snippet for that?
I meant manually omitting the accidental – which works fine but is not at all resistant to layout changes.