> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: antlists <antli...@youngman.org.uk>
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 20:21:32 +0100
> Subject: Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent
> On 18/05/2020 17:33, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> > We (well… modulo me LOL) don’t get this worked up about how \relative
> makes cut-and-paste a nightmare. Why start now?;)
>
> Those of us who only use \relative (just me?) don't have any problems
> with cut-n-paste. Or is it just that my workflow is more likely to use
> "\repeat unfold"?
>
> I've got no problem with \keyed, but there is a fly in the ointment here
> ... \keyed a \minor { a b c d e f g a g f e d c b a }
>
> Now is that a g-natural or g-sharp? Likewise the f.
>
> Cheers,
> Wol
>
>
The problems with \relative come when you copy *only the notes* from within
a \relative expression and paste them into another, and omit the context .
Use of \relative is always fine if you realize that you need to explicitly
define it every time you break it up.
So, if you have 16 measures to reuse, you structure it:
beforeReused = \relative c' { ...}
toReuse = \relative c'' { ... }
afterReuse = \relative c'{ ... }
mySong = {
\beforeReused
\toReuse
\afterReuse
\toReuse
}
And, if you decide to also put raw notes in mySong = \relative c' { }, the
other sections you put in will NOT affect the octave of the notes in
mySong. I would still advise against that. But at least it reduces
problems that come from pasting in only notes, which includes both those
notes being in the wrong octave, and messing up the octaves of material
following the notes you paste in.
Likewise for non-sequential music, such music with endings. That is, in
lazy use of \relative, the octave at the beginning of a 2nd ending will not
come from what precedes it musically (the section in \repeat), but by what
comes before it on the page, which is the 1st ending. Again, you just need
to use \relative as necessary:
\repeat volta 2 { ... }
\alternative {
\relative { ... }
\relative { ... }
}
On the other matter, that this thread is actually about, the only "problem"
with the \keyed suggestion by Kieren, is that you have to define names for
the accidentals.
The case of minor keys is simply one illustration of this.
If G# is in your key signature, and you are using "g" to represent G#, then
how do you represent G natural? gn? Sure, there could be some syntax for
it.
Personally, I don't see the benefit. With more complicated and transposing
music, remembering when I need to say gs vs g or g vs gn would become
annoying quickly.
Cheers,
Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954 "*Confusion is
highly underrated*"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist ~ Educator
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
