Am Montag, den 21. Mai 2012 um 15:58:14 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen:
> Question is: is neo-modern used and appreciated as it works right now > and do we indeed need a "contemporary" style, or should neo-modern > behave like Orm describes? I would opt for that. The only situation, I know of, where accidentals aren't repeated on direct repetition, are in situations with lots of fast repetitions, like in saltando actions for strings, but in those situations often the noteheads except for the first one are omitted as well to save space. And I've also seen the repetition of accidentals in those cases just to make it perfectly clear. The example for neo-modern in the documentation actually is an excellent example for a situation where the musician has to ask about the second fis because it's not obvious if the accidental has been accidentally forgotten and whether it's an f or a fis. -- Orm _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
