Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[David Wright]

On Sat 15 Apr 2017 at 23:12:36 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 15/04/17 21:55, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> > Hi Wol,
> > 
> >> > most of the music I see from the turn of last century does NOT.
> 
> > Does not repeat the key signature? Fascinating! What field/genre are you 
> > working in?
> 
> Mostly published by either Boosey, or Hawkes. They merged about 1920 ... :-)
> 
> I think pretty much any pre-war (that is, WWI) music written for band,
> either Brass Band, or Brass and Reed. You get the key signature on the
> first system, and at the trio (where it changes). It's a pain, because
> it is the norm to have it on every system so when you get music like
> this you can't quickly check. Mind you, seeing as it's played on the
> march, you're concentrating on so much else that you tend just to feel
> the key, to some extent.

Quite understandable though. No page turns, so every inch of real
estate is precious. You lose the clef too.

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/diglib/media/loc.natlib.ihas.100010358/parts/p0001/0001.tif/2734

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Wols Lists]

On 15/04/17 21:55, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Wol,
> 
>> > most of the music I see from the turn of last century does NOT.

> Does not repeat the key signature? Fascinating! What field/genre are you 
> working in?

Mostly published by either Boosey, or Hawkes. They merged about 1920 ... :-)

I think pretty much any pre-war (that is, WWI) music written for band,
either Brass Band, or Brass and Reed. You get the key signature on the
first system, and at the trio (where it changes). It's a pain, because
it is the norm to have it on every system so when you get music like
this you can't quickly check. Mind you, seeing as it's played on the
march, you're concentrating on so much else that you tend just to feel
the key, to some extent.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Wol,

> most of the music I see from the turn of last century does NOT.

Does not repeat the key signature? Fascinating! What field/genre are you 
working in?

I studied, and now work in the classical (both “old” and “new”), jazz 
(instrumental and vocal/choral), and musical theatre worlds, and I would 
estimate that more than 99.5% of the scores I’ve ever come across in my entire 
life repeat the key signature on every system. (The ones I can remember that 
didn’t were a few hand-written jazz charts, and two hand-written musical 
theatre scores — even most of the hand-written jazz and MT scores I’ve ever 
seen repeat the key signature!)

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Anthony Youngman]

On 15/04/17 15:55, Malte Meyn wrote:

May I ask how much sheet music you have seen so far? All (!) classical
sheet music repeats key signature at every line. And many editions of
pop/jazz/… do that also.


And most of the music I see from the turn of last century does NOT. 
However, imho, it makes it quite difficult to read, so one of the 
reasons for me re-doing the music is to put those key signatures in. 
(Along with changing the clef, or transposition, or taking an almost 
illegible copy and fixing it :-)


Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: flip clef at end of line only

[Marc Hohl]

Am 15.04.2017 um 18:02 schrieb Malte Meyn:



Am 15.04.2017 um 17:32 schrieb Marc Hohl:

Hi list,

I am working on a little piece that's played as written;
after that, the musician has to turn the page upside down and play the
resulting notes.

I managed to get the clef displayed at the beginning and the end of each
line, and I can flip the clef ;-)

Unfortunately, overriding the Clef.stencil at the end of the line
changes the apperance for the clef in the next line, too.


You need before-line-breaking here so you can use the function
ly:item-break-dir:


\override Clef.before-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob)
   (if (equal? (ly:item-break-dir grob) LEFT)
   (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
 (lambda (grobb)
   (grob-interpret-markup grobb
 #{ \markup \translate #'(0 . 2) \flip \musicglyph
#"clefs.G" #})


Thanks a lot! Just for clarification: after-line-breaking seems to work 
here, too – is there a special reason to use before-line-breaking?




I added the translate in the markup to bring the clef to the correct
vertical position.


Yep – I removed it for MWE reasons :)

Cheers,

Marc


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: flip clef at end of line only

[Marc Hohl]

Am 15.04.2017 um 18:11 schrieb Son_V:



Hi list,



I am working on a little piece that's played as written;
after that, the musician has to turn the page upside down and play the
resulting notes.


I'm sorry, I'm just adding noise, but the thing you're working on seems
interesting for me.
I remember that JS Bach made some work of this kind, some palindromes too.


There is Mozarts "Der Spiegel", where two players play simultaneously, 
one reads the sheet in the right way, the other one upside down.


I can point you to a work (nothing to do with music) by Gustave Veerbek:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ytAqPVXoRDM/UIXIEydfLKI/HwA/tnbOsi1iI4o/s1600/UD%2BI.bmp


Wow, that's interesting!


Have an happy Easter.


Happy Easter to you, too!

Cheers,

Marc




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/flip-clef-at-end-of-line-only-tp202312p202314.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Simon Albrecht]

Am 15.04.2017 um 16:14 schrieb Son_V:

to have every beat numbered could help when in a
choir the Maestro calls to sing from a given beat.


The vast majority of scores available have bar numbers at the start of 
each system. So if you don’t want the trouble of writing bar numbers in 
each and every score on every single bar by hand, you have to learn 
counting them.
If you are used to have every bar numbered, then you won’t learn 
counting them at a glance. If you just practice getting along with the 
convention used practically everywhere, you’ll be able to get really 
fast at counting bars at a glance, presuming you invest a minimum of 
time and concentration. I always prefer the latter strategy – don’t dumb 
it down, get clever instead!


Best, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Custom parenthesize ignoring Staves?

[kmg]

Hey, I'm working on re-typing some educational notes and I'm wondering if
maybe someone had this problem and also came up with some Scheme to deal
with this.

http://i.imgur.com/T7z8Ty7.png - this is the source;

http://i.imgur.com/IGocUKW.png - this is what I came up with (nevermind
wrong notes)

So, I'm basically using #parch scheme which I luckily found on german
Lilypond forums (sadly seems to be down now).. scheme for it is the
following:

parch =  #(define-music-function (parser location gap) (number?)
#{
   \once \override Arpeggio.stencil = #(lambda (grob)
 (ly:stencil-add
   (ly:arpeggio::brew-chord-slur grob)
   (ly:stencil-translate-axis
 (ly:stencil-rotate (ly:arpeggio::brew-chord-slur grob) 180 0 0)
 gap X)))
   \once \override Arpeggio.X-extent = #(lambda (grob)
 (ly:stencil-extent (ly:arpeggio::brew-chord-slur grob) X))
   \once \override Arpeggio.positions = #(lambda (grob)
 (interval-widen (ly:arpeggio::calc-positions grob) 1.5))
   $(make-music 'EventChord 'elements (list (make-music 'ArpeggioEvent)))
#})

// usage: \parch #

which I kinda made work by doing the chord on d# note with greater range,
but with the upper note hidden, so the parenthese is not too small.
However, if I make the chord with super low note, staff will stretch and
it's not working.

I've been thinking, would there be an easy way to do this? I already use
handy Scheme for Box markup (http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=953). I
think it's superior in the sense that you can place it basically anywhere
and offset it like you want it. So there are no problems with having to do
some gimmicks to make it work.

Thought that chords will be trickier, but it seems that using harmony
scheme from Repository and doing \center-column in \figuremode with markups
does the job nicely.

I sometimes wonder if it should be that tricky (I mean, having to learn
Scheme to do some things).. but then, I wonder if such thing would be
doable at all in other notation programs. .

Anyway, thanks for your input guys and.. Happy Easter!


Pozdrawiam,
Krzysztof Gutowski
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[David Sumbler]

On Sat, 2017-04-15 at 07:14 -0700, Son_V wrote:
> I understand (maybe), but to have every beat numbered could help when
> in a
> choir the Maestro calls to sing from a given beat.
> That's the reason why I want them to be visible.
> 
> Sorry to be such an humble learner.

This reminds me of an old joke:

In rehearsal, the conductor stops the orchestra and says "Let's try it
again from bar 5."  At the back of the viola section (I told you it was
a joke) a tentative hand goes up and a voice calls out "Please,
Maestro, these parts haven't got bar numbers."

Seriously, would anyone need to have every beat numbered?  Surely
anybody can find the nth beat in a bar (unless you are using some truly
unorthodox time signature like 29/4).

David

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: flip clef at end of line only

[Son_V]

> Hi list,

> I am working on a little piece that's played as written;
> after that, the musician has to turn the page upside down and play the
> resulting notes.

I'm sorry, I'm just adding noise, but the thing you're working on seems
interesting for me.
I remember that JS Bach made some work of this kind, some palindromes too.

I can point you to a work (nothing to do with music) by Gustave Veerbek:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ytAqPVXoRDM/UIXIEydfLKI/HwA/tnbOsi1iI4o/s1600/UD%2BI.bmp

Have an happy Easter.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/flip-clef-at-end-of-line-only-tp202312p202314.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: flip clef at end of line only

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 17:32 schrieb Marc Hohl:
> Hi list,
> 
> I am working on a little piece that's played as written;
> after that, the musician has to turn the page upside down and play the
> resulting notes.
> 
> I managed to get the clef displayed at the beginning and the end of each
> line, and I can flip the clef ;-)
> 
> Unfortunately, overriding the Clef.stencil at the end of the line
> changes the apperance for the clef in the next line, too.

You need before-line-breaking here so you can use the function
ly:item-break-dir:


\override Clef.before-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob)
   (if (equal? (ly:item-break-dir grob) LEFT)
   (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
 (lambda (grobb)
   (grob-interpret-markup grobb
 #{ \markup \translate #'(0 . 2) \flip \musicglyph
#"clefs.G" #})

I added the translate in the markup to bring the clef to the correct
vertical position.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

flip clef at end of line only

[Marc Hohl]

Hi list,

I am working on a little piece that's played as written;
after that, the musician has to turn the page upside down and play the
resulting notes.

I managed to get the clef displayed at the beginning and the end of each 
line, and I can flip the clef ;-)


Unfortunately, overriding the Clef.stencil at the end of the line 
changes the apperance for the clef in the next line, too.


---

\version "2.19.0"

#(define-markup-command (flip layout props arg)
(markup?)
   (interpret-markup layout props
 (markup #:concat (#:null #:scale (cons -1 -1) #:line (arg)

global = {
  \repeat unfold 4 {
s1 * 4 |
\once\override Staff.BarLine.allow-span-bar = ##t
\once\override Staff.Clef.stencil = #(lambda (grob)
  (grob-interpret-markup grob #{ \markup\flip\musicglyph 
#"clefs.G" #}))

\break
}
}

melody = {
  \repeat unfold 16 { c'4 4 4 4 }
}

\layout {
  \context {
\Staff
explicitKeySignatureVisibility = ##(#t #f #t)
explicitClefVisibility = ##(#t #f #t)

\override Clef.break-visibility = ##(#t #f #t)
\override KeySignature.break-visibility = ##(#t #f #t)
  }
}

\score {
  \new Staff << \global \melody >>
}

---


Is there an easy way to detect whether the clef is actually at the end 
of a line, so that I can write (in pseudo-code)


if (at-end-of-line)
   rotate the clef
else
   print the clef
fi

Thanks in advance,


Marc
\version "2.19.0"

#(define-markup-command (flip layout props arg)
(markup?) 
   (interpret-markup layout props
 (markup #:concat (#:null #:scale (cons -1 -1) #:line (arg)

global = {
  \repeat unfold 4 { 
s1 * 4 |
\once\override Staff.BarLine.allow-span-bar = ##t
\once\override Staff.Clef.stencil = #(lambda (grob) 
  (grob-interpret-markup grob #{ \markup\flip\musicglyph #"clefs.G" #}))
\break
}
}

melody = { 
  \repeat unfold 16 { c'4 4 4 4 }
}

\layout {
  \context {
\Staff
explicitKeySignatureVisibility = ##(#t #f #t)
explicitClefVisibility = ##(#t #f #t)

\override Clef.break-visibility = ##(#t #f #t)
\override KeySignature.break-visibility = ##(#t #f #t)
  }
}

\score {
  \new Staff << \global \melody >>
}
  


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Happy Easter to everyone

[Son_V]

Wouldn't try to write a minimum example now! :-)

As in object! :-)

And thanks for the patience.




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Happy-Easter-to-everyone-tp202311.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Son_V]

[...]
>But yes, it’s self-explaining this time.

Thank's God! :-)

>> On my scores, the key signature appears on every beginning of a staff.

>Not only on yours.

>> I wonder if it's right or if it SHOULD be avoided. In the latter case,
>> what
>> should I do?

> May I ask how much sheet music you have seen so far? All (!) classical
> sheet music repeats key signature at every line. And many editions 
[...]

Yes, all the sheet music I saw had the key signatures repeated. But I was
unsure; that was a question that wonders me. 

> Generally you can be sure that at such basic
> questions (and many/most advanced questions also) LilyPond’s default
> behaviour is correct.
[...]

You're right.

Thanks again.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Key-signatures-repeated-on-every-staff-tp202308p202310.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 16:41 schrieb Son_V:
> I dare to try a minimal example! :-)
> But I hope it's self-explaining.

\version "2.18.2"

{
\key d \major
R1*20
}

That’s not too hard ;)

But yes, it’s self-explaining this time.

> On my scores, the key signature appears on every beginning of a staff.

Not only on yours.

> I wonder if it's right or if it SHOULD be avoided. In the latter case, what
> should I do?

May I ask how much sheet music you have seen so far? All (!) classical
sheet music repeats key signature at every line. And many editions of
pop/jazz/… do that also. Generally you can be sure that at such basic
questions (and many/most advanced questions also) LilyPond’s default
behaviour is correct. In cases where there are several possibilities,
LilyPond follows rules for classical music from the 19th century.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Key signatures repeated on every staff

[Son_V]

I dare to try a minimal example! :-)
But I hope it's self-explaining.

On my scores, the key signature appears on every beginning of a staff.

I wonder if it's right or if it SHOULD be avoided. In the latter case, what
should I do?

Thanks.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Key-signatures-repeated-on-every-staff-tp202308.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Son_V]

I understand (maybe), but to have every beat numbered could help when in a
choir the Maestro calls to sing from a given beat.
That's the reason why I want them to be visible.

Sorry to be such an humble learner.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294p202307.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Minimal examples (was: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...)

[Son_V]

Thanks for your kind lesson. I hope I will make a good use of this (bu I'm
unsure of).
Thnx again



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294p202306.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: What are the units for \hspace?

[Richard Shann]

On Sat, 2017-04-15 at 13:04 +0200, Thomas Morley wrote:
> 2017-04-15 10:35 GMT+02:00 Richard Shann :
> > Is it documented anywhere what the units used in the markup command
> > \hspace are?
> 
> The general doc is at NR 5.4.3 Distances and measurements

ah, I see - the headings on the left only extend to the first two
levels, so

5.4 Useful concepts and properties

is where I needed to look. The overall heading here is

5. Changing defaults

which is not so accurate - the unit of measurement is relevant here even
if you are not trying alter a default. 
Finally I see

"Scaled distances are always specified in units of the staff-space"

so perhaps an improvement to the entry I found would be:

\hspace amount (number)
 Create an invisible object taking up horizontal space amount (scaled 
distance).

then perhaps I would have searched the index for scaled distance.


> 
> >
> > the documentation is:
> >
> > \hspace amount (number)
> >
> > Create an invisible object taking up horizontal space amount.
> >
> >
> > The "amount" appears to be smaller than the width of the "m", but larger
> > than a staff-space...
> >
> > Richard
> 
> 
> It's exactly staff-space. See also the terminal-output of:

Thanks for this, I was having trouble estimating how much the vertical
space between staff lines would look like if it were horizontal. I
should have thought to try changing the staff-spacing to see if it
scaled.
This raises a new topic - people arranging e.g. verses in columns at the
end might want to specify a distance in mm, is there a way to do that?

Richard


> 
> #(define-markup-command (demo layout props) ()
> (let ((stil (interpret-markup layout props #{ \markup \hspace #1 #} )))
> (format #t
> "\n++\n
> staff-space is:   ~a\n
> length of \\markup \\hspace \\#1 is: ~a
> \n++
> "
> (assoc-get 'staff-space (ly:module->alist (ly:output-def-scope layout)))
> (interval-length (ly:stencil-extent stil X)))
> 
>  stil))
> 
> 
> \markup \demo
> 
> 
> Cheers,
>   Harm



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 15:47 schrieb Son_V:
>> \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #end-of-line-invisible 
> 
> Thanks! That was successful.
> 
> But I'm still in doubt of what should be the correct way.

There is no single correct way. In classical music traditionally you
have bar numbers only at the beginning of each line; that’s why
#begin-of-line-visible is LilyPond’s default. Film scores often have bar
numbers at every measure. IIRC the don’t set a number on the last bar
line. So this would be #end-of-line-invisible.

Some publishers set bar numbers every now and then (f. e. every 5 or 10
measures in classical music or at significant places every 4 to 20
measures in film scores) but modern editions of classical music don’t do
that any more (at least, I haven’t seen such an edition yet).

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Son_V]

> \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #end-of-line-invisible 

Thanks! That was successful.

But I'm still in doubt of what should be the correct way.

Is it right to show the last number in the staff, or is it not?
IMHO I prefer not to leave the last number visible (and I am going to change
all my scores for the little choir where i sing in this way). But, I repeat,
what is the correct way?

Thanks.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294p202303.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 15:40 schrieb Son_V:
>> And a solution
> 
> Sorry but I wasn't able to find it, surely, my fault. I tried some of your
> code without success. I'm using version "2.18.2" on Linux.

Maybe try all code, not some code ;)

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Minimal examples (was: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...)

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 14:30 schrieb Son_V:
> I'm not able to make a truly "minimum example", that's what I could do:

I’ll show you how this can be simplified.

> \version "2.18.2"
> \header {
>   }
You don’t need an empty \header, \paper, \layout, … block.
> PartPOneVoiceOne =  \relative a' {
>   \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
>   \clef "treble" \key c \major \numericTimeSignature\time 4/4 a1 | % 2
Clef, key, time signature style don’t have anything to do with your
problem. Omit them.
>   a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 | % 3 
Try less notes, and if you want multiple lines of music with little
input, try R1*20 or \repeat unfold 20 a1 or something like that. Apart
from that your comments are neither bar nor line numbers so why are they
there?
>   b1 | % 4
>   c1 \bar "|."
You don’t need that bar line.
> }
> \score {
You don’t need a score block if there is only one score in your lilypond
file.
>   <<
You don’t need these outermost << >> because there is only one Staff.
> \new Staff <<
>   \set Staff.instrumentName = "Piano"
>   \set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "Pno."
Instrument names have nothing to do with your problem.
>   \context Staff <<
> \context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceOne" { \PartPOneVoiceOne }
You are already in a Staff context, why state that explicitely again?
And why name your Voice if you don’t have \change commands or \lyricsto
or something similar?
>   >>
> >>
>   >>
These << >> aren’t necessary if there are no things happening in
parallel (multiple voices, staves, …).
>   \layout {}
You don’t need that unless you have some content in this \layout block
or an additional \midi block.
>   }

This gives the following almost-minimal example:

%%% BEGIN
\version "2.18.2"

PartPOneVoiceOne =  \relative a' {
  \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
  R1*20
}

\new Staff \PartPOneVoiceOne
%%% END

Why almost minimal? Because you don’t need the \new Staff (a staff
created anyway) and your example is so small that you don’t need a
variable definition and usage. Oh, and of course without notes you don’t
need \relative. So here comes a truly minimal working example:

%%% BEGIN
\version "2.18.2"

{
  \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
  R1*20
}
%%% END

Why not omit the version number making this even smaller? Because nobody
has to ask which version you use then :)

Of course it’s not a problem to have a small example that’s not truly
minimal. But your example had 22 lines, mine has 6 (if you count empty
lines) and in so few lines you don’t first have to find out which lines
are relevant for the problem and which are not.

HTH
Malte

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Son_V]

> And a solution

Sorry but I wasn't able to find it, surely, my fault. I tried some of your
code without success. I'm using version "2.18.2" on Linux.





--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294p202300.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 13:54 schrieb Son_V:
> Hi all, Lilypond (using \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t
> #t #t) ) writes at the end of a score, the number of the next beam, that is
> written at the beginning of the subsequent score; and it writes at the end
> of the last score the number that should be at the beginning of an
> inexistent next score.
> Now I don't have at hand "Beyond bars", so I can't say if it's a correct
> behaviour or not. But it seems strange to me IMHO.

It’s strange indeed, but it’s also exactly what you asked for by setting
break-visibility to #'#(#t #t #t) or it’s shortcut #all-visible.

Try
  \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #'#(#f #t #t)
or the shortcut
  \override Score.BarNumber.break-visibility = #end-of-line-invisible
instead.

And concerning Kieren’s comment about patches: This is not LilyPond’s
mistake. And if you turn off the very last bar number even if bar
numbers are set to #all-visible that would be very confusing.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi,

> I'm not able to make a truly "minimum example", that's what I could do:

I showed you a much smaller example.
And a solution.

Kieren.



Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Son_V]

I'm not able to make a truly "minimum example", that's what I could do:

\version "2.18.2"
\header {
  }
PartPOneVoiceOne =  \relative a' {
  \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
  \clef "treble" \key c \major \numericTimeSignature\time 4/4 a1 | % 2
  a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 a1 | % 3 
  b1 | % 4
  c1 \bar "|."
}
\score {
  <<
\new Staff <<
  \set Staff.instrumentName = "Piano"
  \set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "Pno."
  \context Staff <<
\context Voice = "PartPOneVoiceOne" { \PartPOneVoiceOne }
  >>
>>
  >>
  \layout {}
  }

I would like to know if the "9" at the end of the first bar, and expecially
the "17" at the end of the last bar, are correct or not. I don't have
"Beyond Bars" at hand. But these numbers seems IMHO to me useless.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294p202297.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi,

Please include tiny compilable examples with your questions.

> Lilypond (using \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t
> #t #t) ) writes at the end of a score, the number of the next beam, that is
> written at the beginning of the subsequent score; and it writes at the end
> of the last score the number that should be at the beginning of an
> inexistent next score.

e.g.

\version "2.19.43"

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
\override BarNumber.break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
  }
}

{ c'1 1 \bar "|.” }

> I don't have at hand "Beyond bars", so I can't say if it's a correct
> behaviour or not. But it seems strange to me IMHO.

It does seem a little strange…

> If not, how to correct this behavior?

Well, I’m not sure it’s worth anyone writing a patch, when it’s a fringe case 
(most scores don’t have measure numbers every measure), and easy to turn off:

{ c'1 1 \once \omit Score.BarNumber \bar "|." }

Hope this helps,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [Spam] Re: Multiple instruments in score and parts

[David Sumbler]

On Sat, 2017-04-15 at 12:34 +0200, Rutger Hofman wrote:
> On 04/13/2017 03:37 PM, David Sumbler wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 09:19 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi David,
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > At the moment I cannot really see how to deal with this sort of
> > > > problem, other than having completely separate input for the
> > > > score
> > > > and
> > > > the part at these points, controlled by tags.  But is there a
> > > > better
> > > > way - one which requires less duplication of material in the
> > > > input?
> > > > 
> > > > Any suggestions or pointers to help with this will be
> > > > gratefully
> > > > received!
> > > If you search for ‘divisi’ on the list — and sort in reverse
> > > chronological order (which really should be the default!) —
> > > you’ll
> > > find many related threads, containing lots of hints and tips on
> > > how
> > > to attack this problem (e.g.,  > > lily
> > > pond-user/2016-08/msg00256.html>).
> > > 
> > > Hope this helps,
> > > Kieren.
> > It does - I simply hadn't thought of searching for "divisi"!  Even
> > after a cursory glance at some of the stuff that that search comes
> > up
> > with, I can see that this is going to be very helpful.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > David
> Yes, this can be accomplished with the divisi engraver (or whatever
> it 
> is called), but I would recommend to use this only in the full
> score, 
> and keep all variants of e.g. Violin I in one part, including 
> first/second half, solo parts etc. From what I have seen, that is 
> customary in professional editions. I have seen a Messiaen Violin I
> part 
> where the divisi is in (uh... what was it... ) 8 or 10 or so solo
> parts, 
> and all were in the same physical Violin I 'part'.
> 
> For winds, this is a different matter. A separate part for each 
> instrument is usual, although sometimes the parts for e.g. the two 
> flutes are combined into one 'part'. I have seen that mostly in
> French 
> editions, FWIW.
> 
> Rutger

I agree with what you say - in the Messiaen example you mention, I
would expect the 8 or 10 divisi Violin 1 lines to be in one physical
part, but probably on 4 or 5 lines - perhaps even 8 or 10.

As an ex-flautist, I would say that the custom of having, say, Flutes 1
and 2 in the same physical part is very useful, so long as each player
has a separate copy of the part.  For flutes, in particular, having 2
players trying to read off the same copy is completely unacceptable
because of the sideways length of the instrument.

In the ballet company for which I mostly worked in the last couple of
decades, I encouraged our arrangers/copyists/typesetters to do the
flute, clarinet, horn etc. parts in this way.  My principle reason for
doing this was that if there is a "dep" (deputy) player owing to
illness or any other reason, they are far less likely to get lost
during a performance if they can see their partner's line of music
above or below their own.  It gives them confidence, resulting in the
likelihood of a better performance than if they are sight-reading a
part with no external references.

David

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Last number on a score; but this is the first in the next one...

[Son_V]

Hi all, Lilypond (using \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t
#t #t) ) writes at the end of a score, the number of the next beam, that is
written at the beginning of the subsequent score; and it writes at the end
of the last score the number that should be at the beginning of an
inexistent next score.
Now I don't have at hand "Beyond bars", so I can't say if it's a correct
behaviour or not. But it seems strange to me IMHO.
Am I wrong? If not, how to correct this behavior? 
Thanks.



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Last-number-on-a-score-but-this-is-the-first-in-the-next-one-tp202294.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multiple instruments in score and parts

[David Sumbler]

On Fri, 2017-04-14 at 17:40 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
> > 
> > That thread is now 8 months old, and I wondered what has happened
> > since.
> Unfortunately, not as much as one would hope…
> 
> > 
> > Is some of it yet incorporated into the development version of
> > LilyPond?
> I’d have to look more closely, but my intuition is “yes”.
> 
> > 
> > Is it likely to be included in the eventual LilyPond 2.20?
> I would think so.
> 
> > 
> > What I really want to know is whether it would be worth my while
> > waiting a little longer before embarking on projects where these
> > techniques will be useful (and risking brain damage in the
> > attempt!) -
> > there is no actual hurry in my case.
> My very next engraving project is the one which inspired many of
> these threads — and subsequent feature requests and codebase
> improvements — in 2012 (e.g., http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilyp
> ond-user/2012-12/msg00425.html), and even before.
> 
> If you can wait, I’m going to use that project — a small choral work
> with lots of shared and divisi parts — as a test of the existing
> functionality, an inspiration for some new code and/or feature
> requests, and ultimately a very detailed tutorial on the subject.
> 
> Best,
> Kieren.

At the risk of being thought parasitic, I feel that this is the most
sensible course of (in-)action for me.  I'll hold off doing the piece I
intended to do and set something more straightforward in the mean time.
 My understanding of the workings and usage of LilyPond is vastly
inferior to yours (hence the number of my requests for help on this
list), so I would prefer to wait until things are a little more settled
and documented.  Your "very detailed tutorial" on this new
functionality sounds the very thing that some of us could do with.

None of the pieces I set have any urgency: they are my own
compositions, written between the 1960s and 1990s.  (I have not done
any composing in the last 20 years.)  The project to set these pieces
in LilyPond is simply one of several projects I dreamt up to occupy me
during my retirement, now that I have no day-to-day involvement with
the professional musical world.

If I never reach the end of the project, I'm sure that posterity won't
give a fig!  (And even if it did, the original manuscripts are still in
the drawer.)

David

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: What are the units for \hspace?

[Thomas Morley]

Hi Andrew,

2017-04-15 13:14 GMT+02:00 Andrew Bernard :
> Hi All,
>
> It would be great if the documentation could actually state that.

We have
LM 4.3.3 Length and thickness of objects
and
NR 5.4.3 Distances and measurements

Also, I did a quick glance over the available markup-commands, seems
to confirm whats said in the docs.

Not enough?

> The
> average user is not going to be able to cook up that code to probe the size.

Well, the code was meant as sort of proof, checking whether the docs
are outdated.

> I am great believer in reference manuals being terse (e.g. UNIX man pages),
> but they lilypond ones tend to err on the side of being too terse
> altogether.
>
> Andrew
>

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: What are the units for \hspace?

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi All,

It would be great if the documentation could actually state that. The
average user is not going to be able to cook up that code to probe the size.

I am great believer in reference manuals being terse (e.g. UNIX man pages),
but they lilypond ones tend to err on the side of being too terse
altogether.

Andrew
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: What are the units for \hspace?

[Thomas Morley]

2017-04-15 10:35 GMT+02:00 Richard Shann :
> Is it documented anywhere what the units used in the markup command
> \hspace are?

The general doc is at NR 5.4.3 Distances and measurements

>
> the documentation is:
>
> \hspace amount (number)
>
> Create an invisible object taking up horizontal space amount.
>
>
> The "amount" appears to be smaller than the width of the "m", but larger
> than a staff-space...
>
> Richard


It's exactly staff-space. See also the terminal-output of:

#(define-markup-command (demo layout props) ()
(let ((stil (interpret-markup layout props #{ \markup \hspace #1 #} )))
(format #t
"\n++\n
staff-space is:   ~a\n
length of \\markup \\hspace \\#1 is: ~a
\n++
"
(assoc-get 'staff-space (ly:module->alist (ly:output-def-scope layout)))
(interval-length (ly:stencil-extent stil X)))

 stil))


\markup \demo


Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [Spam] Re: Multiple instruments in score and parts

[Rutger Hofman]

On 04/13/2017 03:37 PM, David Sumbler wrote:

On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 09:19 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

Hi David,



At the moment I cannot really see how to deal with this sort of
problem, other than having completely separate input for the score
and
the part at these points, controlled by tags.  But is there a
better
way - one which requires less duplication of material in the input?

Any suggestions or pointers to help with this will be gratefully
received!

If you search for ‘divisi’ on the list — and sort in reverse
chronological order (which really should be the default!) — you’ll
find many related threads, containing lots of hints and tips on how
to attack this problem (e.g., ).

Hope this helps,
Kieren.


It does - I simply hadn't thought of searching for "divisi"!  Even
after a cursory glance at some of the stuff that that search comes up
with, I can see that this is going to be very helpful.

Thanks

David


Yes, this can be accomplished with the divisi engraver (or whatever it 
is called), but I would recommend to use this only in the full score, 
and keep all variants of e.g. Violin I in one part, including 
first/second half, solo parts etc. From what I have seen, that is 
customary in professional editions. I have seen a Messiaen Violin I part 
where the divisi is in (uh... what was it... ) 8 or 10 or so solo parts, 
and all were in the same physical Violin I 'part'.


For winds, this is a different matter. A separate part for each 
instrument is usual, although sometimes the parts for e.g. the two 
flutes are combined into one 'part'. I have seen that mostly in French 
editions, FWIW.


Rutger


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

What are the units for \hspace?

[Richard Shann]

Is it documented anywhere what the units used in the markup command
\hspace are?

the documentation is:

\hspace amount (number)

Create an invisible object taking up horizontal space amount.


The "amount" appears to be smaller than the width of the "m", but larger
than a staff-space...

Richard



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: lilypond errors on a guitar minor sixth chord

[Thomas Morley]

2017-04-15 2:36 GMT+02:00 Stan Mulder :
> Thomas,
>
> Got it. I used your first solution with the addendum. If at some point in
> the future I need more chords, I will construct a more extensive file for
> guitar chords. I did construct a fingering file for plectrum banjo a while
> back. It's got 25 chords for each of 12 keys, but I don't have any
> inversions.
>
> Thanks for the clarification on the reply-all. I wasn't sure what to do. Is
> there some place on the web were I can see other discussions?
>
> Stan
>
> On 04/14/2017 06:25 AM, Thomas Morley wrote:
>>
>> 2017-04-14 5:18 GMT+02:00 Stan Mulder :
>>>
>>>
>>> (1)
>>> Define it yourself, search the NR for 'storePredefinedDiagram'. Leading
>>> to:
>>>
>>> \version "2.19.56"
>>>
>>> \language "english"
>>>
>>> \storePredefinedDiagram #default-fret-table \chordmode {e-flat:m6}
>>>  #guitar-tuning
>>>  #"x;x;1-1-(;3-3;1-1-);3-3;"
>>>
>>> \include "predefined-guitar-fretboards.ly"
>>>
>>> \new FretBoards \chordmode { e-flat:m6 }
>>>
>>>
>> %% That should rather be:
>>  #"x;x;1-1-(;3-3;1-1-);3-4;"
>
>

Aaargh, this fret-diagram shows a major-chord.
I shouldn't post anything being overtired ...

Try:

\language "english"

\storePredefinedDiagram #default-fret-table \chordmode {e-flat:m6}
#guitar-tuning
#"x;x;1-1-(;3-3;1-1-);2-2;"

\include "predefined-guitar-fretboards.ly"

<<
\new FretBoards \chordmode { e-flat:m6 }
\new Staff \chordmode { e-flat:m6 }
>>

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: "natural width" of a measure

[Urs Liska]

Am 14. April 2017 16:04:31 MESZ schrieb David Nalesnik 
:
>On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 13.04.2017 um 16:48 schrieb David Nalesnik:
>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Urs Liska 
>wrote:

 Am 11.04.2017 um 21:04 schrieb tisimst:



 On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <[hidden
>email]>
 wrote:
>
>
> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
>>> So, is there any moment in the compilation process where the
>natural,
>>> unstretched length of a measure can be calculated? It doesn't
>have to
>>> be
>>> an easily-read property and can involve calculation, but
>actually the x
>>> position of the barlines would be an easy target - *if* there's
>this
>>> magic moment in the compilation pipeline ;-)
>> Maybe you could experiment with the ly:one-line-breaking?
> I don't think so (only, of course, to investigate how much can be
>done
> on the internal level).
> Basically what I'm after is a ly:cheap-line-breaking mode that
>doesn't
> care at all about overall appearance or good page turns but
>instead
> simply places as many measures in a line as fit naturally. If then
>a
> line break changes and I know the natural width of the measures I
>can
> determine before compilation how many measures will fit on the
>*next*
> system.
>>> But given clefs, key signatures, cautionaries, doesn't this mean
>that
>>> you need to know the width of any measure as the first measure of
>the
>>> line, as the last measure on a line, at a median position?
>>
>> Ah yes, this is true. But I guess we could do with some estimates
>here
>> (see below).
>>
>>>
>>> I'm not clear on the need to know how many measures will fit on
>>> subsequent lines before compilation.  Is it so that you can compile
>by
>>> system?
>>>
>>> (Just trying to get a handle on your goals so I can help better.)
>>
>> Yes, you're right. I'm not going to tackle this right now, but I have
>to
>> think about it for writing some plans.
>> I'm thinking about a "music entry mode" where I don't care at all
>about
>> "good" line and page breaking, so music can just be engraved like
>Word
>> "justifies" paragraphs - just fill the line and then go to the next.
>
>Doesn't ly:minimal-breaking already do this?  It might try out
>different line configurations -- I'm not entirely sure -- but looks
>pretty stripped down.

I'll have a look into that, but it's of course only half of the equation.

>
>>
>> Given that the music is available in a measure-by-measure state and
>> given that it is available in a parsed state from a LilyPond server
>> (both of which I hope to achieve one day) this would mean that I can
>> simply recompile the "current" system as long as the changed don't
>> require a change in line breaking. Only then I'd have to recompile
>the
>> next system as well, and then the next if the changed lines requires
>> this. I could do this sequentially, so the score would also update
>> incrementally without having to wait for the full compilation. But if
>I
>> knew the natural width of each existing measure I could perform the
>> calculations up front and decide which system should contain which
>> measures. In that case one could even have the systems be engraved in
>> parallel.
>> If any of these subsequent system fails because the measures don't
>fit
>> on it (BTW some help could be available by LilyPond's ability to
>squeeze
>> the system a bit) the parallel engraving could be stopped and
>restarted
>> in the incremental fashion.
>
>OK, I understand.  This would be a great selling point..
>
>Possibly related: have you considered the page/scroll view option from
>*ahem* Finale?  (In scroll view, of course, all music is on a single
>line, whereas page view presents pages roughly as they will be
>engraved.)

That was the first I used as notation interface, back with Finale 2001.
That would be an option as well, with just one system in the window. For a main 
interface I think thus provides too little context to know where you are. But 
what I *did* think about is a kind of instant preview widget jusg showing, say, 
the current "cursor" +/- one measure.

>
>About "natural measure widths": I'm still poking around, hoping that
>you wouldn't need to run a copy of various structures through the
>page/line breaking algorithms.
>
>>
>> Urs
>>
>> PS: Still, I haven't found the opportunity to install the latest
>version
>> to test your suggestions.
>>
>
>Oh, I just added the latest bell-and-whistle assuming that you're
>always at the forefront! 

As I'm currently starving on an OS without Guile 1 I can't run self-compiled 
Lilys. And with the binary releases I've never been that quick to update.

Urs


> You can get the extents in other ways:
>
>Replace
>
> (lambda (c) (ly:paper-column::break-align-width c 

Re: lilypond errors on a guitar minor sixth chord

[Malte Meyn]

Am 15.04.2017 um 02:36 schrieb Stan Mulder:
> Thanks for the clarification on the reply-all. I wasn't sure what to do.
> Is there some place on the web were I can see other discussions?

There are several archives, f. e.

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/ (this is the mailing
lists’ own archive on gnu.org)
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/
http://www.mail-archive.com/lilypond-user@gnu.org/

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user