On 28/05/16 19:03, Marc Hohl wrote:
> Am 28.05.2016 um 19:47 schrieb Gianmaria Lari:
>> The expressive marks must be attached to a note. I was wondering if it
>> exists any void/invisible note that it is possible to use to avoid
>> this constraint, something like: "voidelement" \p
>
> That's
On Saturday, May 28, 2016, Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> What's the difference using or not using the \\? I tried but I didn't
> see any difference.
> g.
In this case, nothing noticeable, but it really is different because using
\\ creates completely new voice. So,
Am 28.05.2016 um 19:47 schrieb Gianmaria Lari:
The expressive marks must be attached to a note. I was wondering if it
exists any void/invisible note that it is possible to use to avoid
this constraint, something like: "voidelement" \p
That's exactly what I used as an example in you other
Am 28.05.2016 um 19:47 schrieb Gianmaria Lari:
> The expressive marks must be attached to a note. I was wondering if it
> exists any void/invisible note that it is possible to use to avoid
> this constraint, something like: "voidelement" \p
Do you have a concrete example of what you want to
On Saturday, May 28, 2016, Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> The expressive marks must be attached to a note. I was wondering if it
> exists any void/invisible note that it is possible to use to avoid
> this constraint, something like: "voidelement" \p
>
Uh, spacer rests? s\p
Or
The expressive marks must be attached to a note. I was wondering if it
exists any void/invisible note that it is possible to use to avoid
this constraint, something like: "voidelement" \p
Thank you, g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
What's the difference using or not using the \\? I tried but I didn't
see any difference.
g.
On 27 May 2016 at 22:52, Jacques Menu Muzhic wrote:
> In the line of using a master to hold all dynamic information, I’d prefer:
>
> <<
> \repeat unfold 3 { a'-4 g'-3 e'-2 c''-5