tie over clef change
Locked
123
123
 
|
Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like a slur in this case. Werner |
Liszt-Liebestraum.jpg (74K) |
|
On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE > edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties > over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... > > I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like > a slur in this case. That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable alternative. What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) — Dan |
|
|
In reply to this post by Werner LEMBERG
Le 26/09/2020 à 14:55, Werner LEMBERG a écrit : > Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE > edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties > over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... > > I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like > a slur in this case. > > > Werner For reference, this is https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/302 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> >> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE >> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties >> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... >> >> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like >> a slur in this case. > > That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable alternative. > > What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a slur. — Dan |
|
|
In reply to this post by Werner LEMBERG
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 14:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE > edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties > over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... > > I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like > a slur in this case. A tie indicates that it is a note whose (time) value (normally) otherwise cannot be expressed in the notational system, thus having the same pitch, whereas a slur indicates an articulation of notes of different pitch, that they should be played together. What do you think it is in your example? :-) |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE >>> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties >>> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... >>> >>> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like >>> a slur in this case. >> >> That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable alternative. >> >> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) > > I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a slur. The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
On 2020-09-26 9:04 am, Dan Eble wrote:
>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old >>> UE >>> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties >>> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... >>> >>> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie >>> like >>> a slur in this case. >> >> That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable >> alternative. >> >> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it >> connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes >> at different staff positions? (or something else?) > > I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie > grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a slur. An idea: Could Tie gain a new Boolean property that controls whether to slope a Tie or keep it horizontal when the end points do not share the same Y position? That would give the user an easy way to have both options. A more complex idea: This new property could be a number-pair? that provides even more control over the Y position of the ends. Each number is an index value (e.g. LEFT, CENTER, RIGHT). If the value is LEFT, then it is the left note's Y position that is used; RIGHT maps to the right note's Y position; and CENTER is the average of the two values. (Technically, any index value could be used to interpolate the Y positions.) Simple horizontal ties that stick to the left note would use #'(-1 . -1), and #'(1 . 1) would hug the right note. #'(-1 . 1) would slope the Tie like a Slur. -- Aaron Hill |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hans Åberg-2
On Sep 26, 2020, at 12:34, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) >> >> I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a slur. > > The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. I see. Then that's a different case from Werner's example where the pitch is really the same. So the question is unanswered. — Dan |
|
|
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:50, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Sep 26, 2020, at 12:34, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) >>> >>> I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a slur. >> >> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. > > I see. Then that's a different case from Werner's example where the pitch is really the same. So the question is unanswered. I think the question is answered from the musical point of view: Werner's example is a tie since it is the same pitch, the same note with longer value. In your example, the pitches are formally different, and the difference is a comma in the Pythagorean tone system, so it must be a slur. I can think of special cases: Perhaps the tie and the slur are rendered slightly differently, say of different thickness, so in Werner's example it should be a tie in style. Somebody might want to indicate an E12 enharmonic equivalence, as in your example, even though it is not so in the staff notation system, and then it should be a tie in style. One could also slur a series of equal pitched notes and put staccato dots (like a-.) on them (as for the flute). Then it means that the notes should played as close to legato as possible but still can be perceived as separate. |
|
|
On Sep 26, 2020, at 13:11, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:50, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> On Sep 26, 2020, at 12:34, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) > > I think the question is answered from the musical point of view: Werner's example is a tie since it is the same pitch, the same note with longer value. In your example, the pitches are formally different, and the difference is a comma in the Pythagorean tone system, so it must be a slur. This sounds like an answer to a question I didn't ask. I don't doubt that the arc in Werner's example is semantically a tie. What I am wondering is what kind of LilyPond grob should represent the arc, and I'm thinking that it should be a Slur because of its shape, not a Tie because of its purpose. — Dan |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hans Åberg-2
>>> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation >>> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this >>> is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. I disagree. For all practical purposes in standard classical music, enharmonic equivalents *do* sound the same. What you are referring to IMHO is a special case that might be controlled by a flag. > I can think of special cases: Perhaps the tie and the slur are > rendered slightly differently, say of different thickness, so in > Werner's example it should be a tie in style. Somebody might want > to indicate an E12 enharmonic equivalence, as in your example, even > though it is not so in the staff notation system, and then it should > be a tie in style. As mentioned above: This might be controlled by a flag. Or maybe a special “E12_tie_slur” engraver can handle this. Werner |
|
|
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 19:56, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>>> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation >>>> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this >>>> is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. > > I disagree. For all practical purposes in standard classical music, > enharmonic equivalents *do* sound the same. What you are referring to > IMHO is a special case that might be controlled by a flag. They do not, and the string section, that primarily stands for the pitch reference, trains to slide the pitch appropriately: In the video below, time 10:43, Brett mentions that the E (on the D string) against the open G, the sixth, is a bit lower than against the open A; the pure fourth. This is the syntonic comma 81/80, the difference between the Just Intonation major third 5/4, and the higher Pythagorean major third. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dW9t7Nrin_c&t=643 This is for adjusting towards Just Intonation, but it is necessary for enharmonic equivalents too, as the Pythagorean comma is the microtonal amount they use in Turkish music. A melody line will not sound right if not adjusted. >> I can think of special cases: Perhaps the tie and the slur are >> rendered slightly differently, say of different thickness, so in >> Werner's example it should be a tie in style. Somebody might want >> to indicate an E12 enharmonic equivalence, as in your example, even >> though it is not so in the staff notation system, and then it should >> be a tie in style. > > As mentioned above: This might be controlled by a flag. Or maybe a > special “E12_tie_slur” engraver can handle this. You probably think of how to handle it internally, because syntactically one might just write a tie between enharmonic equivalents. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 19:36, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Sep 26, 2020, at 13:11, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:50, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 12:34, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) > ... >> >> I think the question is answered from the musical point of view: Werner's example is a tie since it is the same pitch, the same note with longer value. In your example, the pitches are formally different, and the difference is a comma in the Pythagorean tone system, so it must be a slur. > > This sounds like an answer to a question I didn't ask. I don't doubt that the arc in Werner's example is semantically a tie. What I am wondering is what kind of LilyPond grob should represent the arc, and I'm thinking that it should be a Slur because of its shape, not a Tie because of its purpose. I think that slurs and ties may be rendered equally because of the legacy of drawing them by hand. But suppose they are different, then it should also have a tie look. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hans Åberg-2
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 19:30, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation > >>>> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this > >>>> is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. > > > > I disagree. For all practical purposes in standard classical music, > > enharmonic equivalents *do* sound the same. What you are referring to > > IMHO is a special case that might be controlled by a flag. > > They do not, and the string section, that primarily stands for the pitch > reference, trains to slide the pitch appropriately: In some contexts a notated D sharp and E flat are the same pitch (e.g. equally tempered piano music) and in some they are not (as you pointed out). Since this is a discussion about ties, where the note is the same by definition, we can assume we are dealing with the same pitch. The question isn't whether it's a tie or a slur, but how LilyPond should render a tie when the two notes are not aligned (i.e. the user has entered a "~" indicating that it's a tie). I agree with Gould that ties across clef changes should be avoided (I personally wouldn't even do it in the Liszt example posted), but I think LilyPond needs to handle it. I think it's quite acceptable to detect this situation and switch to using a slur (but I haven't looked at the code). Kevin |
|
|
> On 26 Sep 2020, at 20:58, Kevin Barry <[hidden email]> wrote: > > On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 at 19:30, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation >>>>>> system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this >>>>>> is slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. >>> >>> I disagree. For all practical purposes in standard classical music, >>> enharmonic equivalents *do* sound the same. What you are referring to >>> IMHO is a special case that might be controlled by a flag. >> >> They do not, and the string section, that primarily stands for the pitch >> reference, trains to slide the pitch appropriately: > > In some contexts a notated D sharp and E flat are the same pitch (e.g. > equally tempered piano music) and in some they are not (as you pointed > out). Since this is a discussion about ties, where the note is the > same by definition, we can assume we are dealing with the same pitch. The staff notation pitches are different in the case of an enharmonic tie, as in Dan's example d♯ to e♭. You might want to have a tie here to make the enharmonic change explicit. —That is perhaps what you meant, but I find it confusing saying that d♯ to e♭ are the same pitch, because in the case of staff notation, they are not, even though in some music, they can be played the same. > The question isn't whether it's a tie or a slur, but how LilyPond > should render a tie when the two notes are not aligned (i.e. the user > has entered a "~" indicating that it's a tie). Say the ties are rendered as usual, but the slurs are dotted lines, and the phrase marks are square brackets. How do you want the output to be then? > I agree with Gould that ties across clef changes should be avoided (I > personally wouldn't even do it in the Liszt example posted), but I > think LilyPond needs to handle it. I think it's quite acceptable to > detect this situation and switch to using a slur (but I haven't looked > at the code). So if one makes them radically different, substituting ties and slurs for each other in the output would not work. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
Le 26/09/2020 à 15:41, Dan Eble a écrit : > On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE >> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties >> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... >> >> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like >> a slur in this case. > That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable alternative. > > What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) If this were ever implemented, I would expect a Tie.The ~ sign builds a strong mental connectionwith Tie objects. The different staff positions are the result ofthe work of the typesetting engine. In my opinion, the type of agrob should only depend on the input. Note that having a Slur wouldactually break user code in cases where the Tie is at the end ofsystem and thus perfectly correct. Consider: { \override Tie.color = #red c'1~ \clef bass \break c'1 } Also, we advocate separation of layout and content. It's better in my eyes not to silently change the grob type if a clef change is removed. That being said, I don't think we should have this as a default, notably because of the ugly output when the tie is between chords. As an option, why not. I'm not sure Joe user would look into the Internals in this case though. I would just change it to a slur… Regards, Jean |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
That can't be a tie because the second note would not have the
accidental, in general. Gould is not always right in my view. Andrew On 26/09/2020 11:41 pm, Dan Eble wrote: > > What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) > — > Dan > > |
|
|
Le 27/09/2020 à 05:24, Andrew Bernard a écrit :
> That can't be a tie because the second note would not have the > accidental, in general. What do you mean? Currently { cis'1~ cis' } produces a Tie object. Best, Jean |
|
|
In reply to this post by Hans Åberg-2
Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> writes:
>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 08:55, Werner LEMBERG <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Despite Gould's “incorrect” verdict, here is an example from an old UE >>>> edition of Liszt's “Liebestraum No. 1”, which demonstrates that ties >>>> over clef changes *do* happen and make sense sometimes... >>>> >>>> I still think that LilyPond should support that, handling the tie like >>>> a slur in this case. >>> >>> That's a very good example. It's hard to imagine any reasonable alternative. >>> >>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it >>> connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects >>> notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) >> >> I'll answer my own question. A tie from d♯ to e♭ generates a Tie >> grob, so for consistency, this should be a Tie that looks like a >> slur. > > The notes d♯ to e♭ have different pitches in the staff notation > system, which cannot express E12 enharmonic equivalents, so this is > slur. So it should be a slur that looks like slur. We are talking about a piano here. It has no different keys for d♯ and e♭ and only a single manual. A slur even across the same pitch will be executed with a separate keypress as opposed to a tie. I seem to remember that even in Bach's B minor mass (where E12 was not yet a thing) there is an enharmonic tie (or at least tonal repetition?) in the transition from "Confiteor" to "Et expecto". I mean, that transition is a tonal center nightmare anyway. I'd have to consult my score to pick out the details. -- David Kastrup |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dan Eble
Dan Eble <[hidden email]> writes:
> On Sep 26, 2020, at 13:11, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:50, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 12:34, Hans Åberg <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 26 Sep 2020, at 18:04, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Sep 26, 2020, at 09:41, Dan Eble <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> What kind of grob would an editor expect here? a Tie because it >>>>>> connects notes of the same pitch, or a Slur because it connects >>>>>> notes at different staff positions? (or something else?) > ... >> >> I think the question is answered from the musical point of view: >> Werner's example is a tie since it is the same pitch, the same note >> with longer value. In your example, the pitches are formally >> different, and the difference is a comma in the Pythagorean tone >> system, so it must be a slur. > > This sounds like an answer to a question I didn't ask. I don't doubt > that the arc in Werner's example is semantically a tie. What I am > wondering is what kind of LilyPond grob should represent the arc, and > I'm thinking that it should be a Slur because of its shape, not a Tie > because of its purpose. Slur/Tie have graphical function, not musical function like stream events. So it's more a question of practicality than philosophy what to use here, and it could even be something else like EnharmonicTie with both slur-interface and tie-interface. Tie endpoints tend to be different from slur endpoints since they connect noteheads more than note columns (in-chord slurs are not really a good reference since they currently suck with regard to their positioning). -- David Kastrup |
«
Return to Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |