Quoting Johan Vromans (jvrom...@squirrel.nl): > On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:41:21 +0100 > Anthonys Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> wrote: > > > Anyways, I think we've all missed the OPs problem. As he phrased it, I > > understand he wants > > > > {fixed part 1} {alternative 1} {alternative 2} {fixed part 2} repeat > > I'm not familiar with a clean notation for the above.
Nor me. It would usually help if the OP could post an example of what they wanted, either published or cobbled together. > For the normal repeat, with alternative endings, this would be > > |: fixed part 1 |1 alterrnative 1 :|2 alternative 2 | > > Would this be understood by the average musician? > > |: fixed part 1 |1 alterrnative 1 |2 alternative 2 | fixed part 2 :| Understood? Well "my" attached "partial solution" (which I've completed only by using inkscape) would be understood in such a small piece. If it ran over several pages, then perhaps not. But even then, it couldn't be misunderstood upon reflection, because all its elements are used in a completely conventional manner. The only unusual thing is seeing no :| at the end of closed volta brackets (because you don't go back at that point). Liked? Don't know. What do people think? Useful? Well, it's funny how a piece immediately pops up that could benefit from such a construction. I'm looking at a copy of "When rooks fly homeward" by Arthur Baynon. It's a piece with two verses of 9 bars each, where the music for each verse is identical apart from the fifth bar whose rhythm is 8 4 8 4 4 and then 4 8 8 4 4. If I were asked to produce a copy on two staves for an accompanist (something I have often done), it would be an ideal candidate for this construction, though I certainly would not use half-bars. (But as it is, it's simple enough for most choirs to sight-read with no accompaniment, but for one soprano typo in that 84844 bar.) Cheers, David.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user