Sorry - I pressed "Send" too soon on my previous message, which contains some nonsense. Here is a more sensible version.
The piece I am setting has 4 bars of somewhat unorthodox notation. My best attempt at reproducing this is: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% \version "2.19.48" lv = \laissezVibrer lvUp = \once \override LaissezVibrerTie.direction = #UP \new PianoStaff << \new Staff = "RH" \relative { \time 2/4 \stemUp \tieUp b'8 ~ <\tweak RepeatTie.stencil ##f b fis d>4.\rt | b8 ~ <b ais! g>4.\rt | } \new Staff = "LH" \relative { \clef "bass" \time 2/4 << { s8 <b fis d>4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv fis\lv d\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b\lv \lvUp fis\lv d } b4. } >> << { s8 <b'= ais! g>4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv ais\lv g\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b,\lv \lvUp ais\lv g } b,4. }>> } > > > > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% I am attaching a pdf of the output, but I'm not sure whether it will make it through to the list. The intention of the notation is clear, I think, but there are 2 things wrong with this output. 1) There should not be a RepeatTie on the top note of the right-hand chords, nor should there be a LaissezVibrerTie on the first note of the bar. 2) In the second bar chord, the RepeatTie on the A# of the left hand chord is too close to the RepeatTie on the G. The best solution here would be for the tie on the G to be inverted. 3) Also in the second bar the RepeatTie on the right hand A# needs to curve downwards to match the LaissezVibrerTie on the earlier A#. The would look a bit strange, but probably not as strange as inverting the LVTie. I have experimented with the material at http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=714 I can certainly solve any problems with the LVTies using this snippet, but my attempts to adapt it to produce something similar for RepeatTies have not been successful. Another approach would, of course, be to tie each note of the sextuplet directly to the note in the following chord. I have not tried this because I don't know how it can be done. Also I think that it might look over-cluttered, and that the original notation is perhaps better. Can anyone offer pointers or a solution? David
test.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user