> -----Original Message----- > From: Han-Wen Nienhuys [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 10:05 AM > To: Graham Percival > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: GPD: official shortest note in lilypond > > > For unbeamed notes, we have to draw the line somewhere, and > it's at 64th right now. If someone can show a reasonable use > for 128th we > *might* consider it, but my initial reaction is that you > should reconsider your use of notation >
I don't have an axe to grind here, as I've never used anything smaller than a 32nd in music I've worked with. I did notice, however, when I looked at the Plaine and Easie format specification, <http://www.iaml.info/files/plaine_easie_code.pdf> I noticed that P&E supports up to a 128th note, I also noticed that there is no "name" for a 128th note; a 64th is a hemidemisemiquaver. The lack of a name for a 128th note would indicate that a 64th is a reasonable smallest note. The presence of a 128th note in P&E syntax might indicate that a 128th note is a reasonable smallest note. The P&E format also clearly shows that the glyphs for flags are not simply stacked to get smaller notes. Carl Sorensen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
