On 2019-01-04 9:12 am, N. Andrew Walsh wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 1:45 PM Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com>
wrote:
A dot is missing.
That's because the two dots are of the two aes2. are joined into one
single dot. Which is hidden by \hideNotes.
Cheers,
Harm
holy moly, this way of notating is so wrong I had no idea what was
actually
going on. So, what's happening here is that the aes and the ees both
start
on the first beat? They're simultaneous, but offset horizontally and
with
their stems pointing opposite from normal?
I believe this is a 3/4 measure where each note begins on subsequent
beats and is sustained for the remaining beats. That is, it is a slowly
arpeggiated chord.
You could probably write it...
{ <aes,~>4 <aes,~ ees~> <aes, ees, bes> }
...to better show the progressive building of the chord with the
drawback that it is visually more dense with all of the extra notes and
ties. I think the original engraver wanted a way to save ink.
Yeesh, that is terrible.This is why it's important to follow good
notation
practice: I was so confused by this bad typesetting that I thought the
bar
was 6/4 time, and now my day is ruined.
Unless someone is doing academic work where it is critical for the
typesetting to precisely match that of a reference work, all new
typesetting ideally should follow the current wisdom of notation. There
is little reason to continue to propagate archaic and non-standard
practices, especially if they are more likely to cause confusion.
Go to the pub and have a beer. Hopefully the rest of your day can be
salvaged.
-- Aaron Hill
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
