Alberto,
On Saturday, November 21, 2015, Simon Albrecht-2 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n18391...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:
> On 21.11.2015 20:21, Alberto Simões wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 20/11/15 11:30, Alberto Simões wrote:
> >> Hey
> >>
> >> On 20/11/2015 05:49, Abraham Lee wrote:
> >>> That being said, since there appears to be arguments for doing it both
> >>> ways, I'd recommend that you pick one way and be consistent throughout
> >>> the entire work.
> >
> > Can I ask what you like better? [1]
> >
> > Valse 2, measures 3/4 or measures 7/8?
>
> I prefer measures 11/12. Measure 8 should have \oneVoice already, I think.
>
Personally, I like m. 3/4. For me it instantly clarifies what is tied and
what isn't. This is true throughout the entire work. I realize that
containing ties makes parts like Valse 2 m. 33-36 and 38-41 have longer
phrases, so I would at least enclose the tie with the right-side slur. That
seems more true to the phrasing. In m. 45-48, I'd do the same with both
ties, breaking it into two shorter phrases where the tie begins each one.
*NOTE: whichever way you choose to treat the ties/slurs, do it
consistently for the entire work.*
I also agree with Simon that at m. 7 you should already be back to
\oneVoice. That will make the beam group in m. 8 look much better (as well
as the slur). There are other measures that should be done similarly.
There are other times that the two voices have notes of the same duration,
but remain separate voices. This happens multiple times in Valse 2 (m. 7,
21, 23, 31, 55, 57, 71, 73, 81). I see no reason you can't join them
together with \oneVoice even though the original engraving doesn't. I guess
you get to decide on that one.
One other thing I noticed in Valse 2, m. 42-43 - remove staccato from tied
end notes. They just don't make sense. I would guess the one in the source
engraving (m. 42) is a typo as it is omitted in the next measure. Maybe I'm
wrong.
Valse 1 looks great! There's a natural in the LH chord in m. 58 that
shouldn't be there. If so a double check on all accidentals just to be
sauté there aren't others that should or shouldn't be there.
I'd also still consider eliminating the collisions between bar lines and
dynamic text using some kind of whiteout.
Looks like there are more ties and slurs to consider in the Coda section.
That's all for now. Good work! This will be a fine addition to IMSLP.
Best,
Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Gounod-Le-Rendez-Vous-tp183419p183930.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
