[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: repeated time signatures
From: |
Urs Liska |
Subject: |
Re: repeated time signatures |
Date: |
Tue, 07 May 2013 13:02:22 +0200 |
Hi David,
unfortunately your engraver does _not_ work as expected (and as I had
stated):
Obviously the 'previous' time signature may also be the one in a
'previous' staff at the same musical moment. So when using the engraver
the time signature is only printed in the top-most staff :-(
I guess one can update the condition so that is true if the time
signature of 'elem' is equal to the time signature of 'prev' _and_ if
their musical moments differ.
But unfortunately I don't have any clue on how to achieve that :-(
Any help (new version or even better: hint) would be very welcome
Urs
Am Montag, den 29.04.2013, 09:15 -0500 schrieb David Nalesnik:
> Hi Urs,
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:
> The NR (1.2.3 "Displaying Rhythms") states that time
> signatures "are printed at the beginning of a piece and
> whenever the time signature changes."
>
> But if I write
>
> music = {
> \time 3/4
> R2.*4
> \time 3/4
> R2.
> }
>
> the time signature is printed a second time although it
> doesn't change (to my understanding)
>
> a) Is this intended behaviour? And if yes, shouldn't it be
> documented?
>
>
> I would think that you should need to tell LilyPond to force the
> unusual situation of a redundant time signature as it's not typical
> practice. It shouldn't be possible to do something unusual like this
> through oversight.
>
> b) How can I achieve that the time signature is only printed
> if it is actually different from the one currently in use?
>
>
> This question came up here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg72613.html
>
>
> Hopefully the engraver (see second version) still works!
>
>
> c) How can I achieve the same (only displaying if really
> changed) for key signatures and clefs?
>
>
> Possibly that engraver can be adapted. (I can't try now as my job is
> calling).
>
>
> Best,
> David
- Re: repeated time signatures,
Urs Liska <=