David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > What is the resulting pitch of > > \relative c' { ces, } ? > > Quick, without thinking? What is the resulting pitch of > > \relative f { fes, } ? > > Quick, without thinking? What is the proposed resulting pitch of > > \relative { fes, } ? > > Now there is not even an opportunity for thinking. Yes, f is special, > but telling people to translate \relative { x } first into \relative f > { x } and then figuring out its meaning is putting the cart before the > horse. > > The whole point of the choice \relative f is not that f is such a > pretty pitch, but rather the invariant we get, namely that the first > pitch after \relative (whether it is only a reference pitch or part of > the music) is absolute.
By the way: that is the reason I don't propose (I actually did at one time, though) using \relative f everywhere without changing \relative in any manner. f is a distraction. Why wouldn't you want to write \relative fis { cis ... instead when in a\major ? f is not even in the scale. Yes, both are the same, but I don't want to even think about it, and the easiest way not to think about it is not writing it. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user