> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 21:00:58 +0100
> From: Dirk Lattermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Wed, Nov 03, 1999 at 10:33:54AM +0100, Werner Icking wrote:
> >
> > I don't know exactly where I read why the 2nd sharp should be there
> > (Chaplik?), [...]
Chaplik give three examples on page 49 [I use #g instead of flat-e]:
a) | #g2 ~ | g ~ | g
Only one # on the first tied note because there are no other notes in
the following bars
b) ... | #g2 ~ | g ~ | next line: | #g ~ | g |
# is repeated on a new line. Chaplik says that some editors do it
this way, others omit the 2nd #
c) .... | ... #g2 ~ | g4 e #g | ...
[...]
> > > > An example can be found in Bach's Ouvertüre No. 3 (Suite Nr. 3)
> > > > first movement, violin I, bar 59-60
> > > >
> > > > e16 d c d e d c b a8 f+ b- #d ~ | d f a- #d~d f b- d | ...
> > > > ^^^ ^^^
> > > This looks like theres a sharp at the end of the first bar
> > > because it's the first d-sharp in it (not knowing the music
> > > well, assuming it's D-major).
> >
> > You are right. But my examples should mainly demonstrate the
> > usage of the sharp in the 2nd bar which you would omit.
> >
> Beware, no!! This was what my suggestion and patch was all about!
> I *wanted* this extra sharp which was not there!
Sorry for misunderstanding you.
So the only open point seems to be whether an accidental which is
already used in a bar should be repeated at the end of a bar, if
there is the already "accidented" note again tied into the next
bar.
Chaplik doesn't tell anything about that. I've learned it that way
reasoning, that the accidental is required for the 2nd tied note
but has to be written in front of the 1st tied note because of the
tie. I'll continue doing it that way and I hope that it's at least
possible if I'll use Lilypond some day ;-)
I hope to find the time soon to find printed examples for that usage.
-- Werner
