Re: an open question

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hello Joe,

this is touching a subject I have been working on last year. I created some 
kind of proof of concept to export other file formats from lilypond. I can 
export musicXML and Humdrum with some limitations. It is based on an 
infrastructure that exports via format-plugins so it should be possible to 
create one for pd.
If you are interested I can send more informations.

Jan-Peter



Am 24. März 2018 02:08:28 MEZ schrieb Joe Davenport :
>Hello,
>
>When another user inquired about composing without midi playback, i
>found encouragement to ask something from the technical side. Maybe i
>have some healthy curiousity about coding language, which follows:
>
>Is it possible to integrate .ly with other musical coding languages? It
>would be very beneficial to write music that integrates the quick
>engraving of lilpond (other software is too slow for me) with the sound
>fonts and modulation of pure data.
>
>i may have read this being used in rosegarden. however, it took time
>for me to integrate .pd with my soundcard- so i could use some pointers
>or insurance on integrating these two languages!
>
>thank you,
>
>joe
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>___
>lilypond-user mailing list
>lilypond-user@gnu.org
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Tom Cloyd]

" If it isn’t hard, you can probably do better." - Love that. I'd say the
same about writing, of which I do a lot. It's easier than it was, but still
hard, if it's to be really good.

But...let's not tell Rossini that, OK? His work alone disputes the notion,
even if he might not. I don't know of anyone who could write more quickly
than he, although at times Mozart might have been his equal. Interesting
question, and best answered by those who know far morer than I.

t.

~

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons
exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman

~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA LMHC (WA) | t...@tomcloyd.com
Psychotherapist (psychological trauma, dissociative disorders)
Spokane, Washington, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332
TomCloyd.com  | Google+
 | Facebook

~

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Vaughan McAlley 
wrote:

> On 24 March 2018 at 11:25, Flaming Hakama by Elaine <
> ela...@flaminghakama.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Tom Cloyd 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hogwash? Well, not really. Your point about what is possible is fine. I
>>> don't disagree. But my point remains, and my error was in not making it
>>> clear enough. I'll try again.
>>>
>>> It has to do with cognitive load and the concept of "limited attentional
>>> workspace", a key concept in cognitive psychology.
>>>
>>> Re: cognitive load: I'll wager that many of us are not exactly fluent in
>>> Lilypond. I'm certainly not. Using it is fun,
>>>
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure I'd go that far!  It does amazing things, and that can be
>> rewarding.
>>
>>
>>
>>> but definitely requires thought and effort. Notating my developing score
>>> by hand is VERY much less effortful. Thus it imposes much less of a
>>> cognitive load.
>>>
>>> Re: limited attentional workspace: One of the best validated concepts in
>>> cognitive psychology is the idea that we can only keep a limited number of
>>> "things" in our consciousness at any one time. Our attentional workspace is
>>> seriously limited.
>>>
>>> So here's the point, given those two ideas: If one is not fluent in
>>> Lilypond, then it imposes a non-trivial cognitive load on us, reducing the
>>> energy we have to do other effortful things, such as create the music in
>>> our mind without recourse to an instrument. Furthermore, the sheer number
>>> of elements to track in a developing Lilypond program places real demands
>>> on our attentional workspace.
>>>
>>> Thus, I argue, NOT using Lilypond during the most creative part of
>>> composition give us much more cognitive reserve, of both sorts, for
>>> composing, including the part involving working without an instrument to
>>> "hear' the music on.
>>>
>>> I hope I'm making more sense now!
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for clarifying your point.
>>
>> Yes, I agree.  If the tools you are using are not familiar and
>> comfortable, then fiddling with tools will distract you from the important
>> work of composing.
>>
>> And I will readily admit that I much more enjoy writing on paper at a
>> piano than any other way!
>>
>> But once you are familiar enough with the tools, there are fewer reasons
>> to avoid using them for composing.  Beyond that, you actually can gain some
>> benefits by "auditioning" things more robustly when composing directly in
>> notation software, in particular things  you can't play on piano.And of
>> course, you save a little time since you don't have to re-enter some of the
>> material.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> David Elaine Alt
>> 415 . 341 .4954 <(415)%20341-4954>
>> "Confusion is highly underrated"
>> ela...@flaminghakama.com
>> skype: flaming_hakama
>> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>
>> ___
>> lilypond-user mailing list
>> lilypond-user@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>
>>
> Lilypond, a piano, a good inner ear (which I’m lucky to have), or whatever
> the kids are using these days are all just tools. I’d be wrong to say a
> piece of mine is superior to *The Rite of Spring* because Stravinsky
> worked it all out on a piano and I use my inner ear. In this case, the
> destination is more important than the journey. But whatever you use, it’s
> important that you have as much mental capacity as possible available when
> composing, because composing is really hard. If it isn’t hard, you can
> probably do better.
>
> Vaughan
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> 

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Vaughan McAlley]

On 24 March 2018 at 11:25, Flaming Hakama by Elaine <
ela...@flaminghakama.com> wrote:

>
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Tom Cloyd  wrote:
>
>> Hogwash? Well, not really. Your point about what is possible is fine. I
>> don't disagree. But my point remains, and my error was in not making it
>> clear enough. I'll try again.
>>
>> It has to do with cognitive load and the concept of "limited attentional
>> workspace", a key concept in cognitive psychology.
>>
>> Re: cognitive load: I'll wager that many of us are not exactly fluent in
>> Lilypond. I'm certainly not. Using it is fun,
>>
>
>
> I'm not sure I'd go that far!  It does amazing things, and that can be
> rewarding.
>
>
>
>> but definitely requires thought and effort. Notating my developing score
>> by hand is VERY much less effortful. Thus it imposes much less of a
>> cognitive load.
>>
>> Re: limited attentional workspace: One of the best validated concepts in
>> cognitive psychology is the idea that we can only keep a limited number of
>> "things" in our consciousness at any one time. Our attentional workspace is
>> seriously limited.
>>
>> So here's the point, given those two ideas: If one is not fluent in
>> Lilypond, then it imposes a non-trivial cognitive load on us, reducing the
>> energy we have to do other effortful things, such as create the music in
>> our mind without recourse to an instrument. Furthermore, the sheer number
>> of elements to track in a developing Lilypond program places real demands
>> on our attentional workspace.
>>
>> Thus, I argue, NOT using Lilypond during the most creative part of
>> composition give us much more cognitive reserve, of both sorts, for
>> composing, including the part involving working without an instrument to
>> "hear' the music on.
>>
>> I hope I'm making more sense now!
>>
>> Tom
>>
>
>
>
> Thanks for clarifying your point.
>
> Yes, I agree.  If the tools you are using are not familiar and
> comfortable, then fiddling with tools will distract you from the important
> work of composing.
>
> And I will readily admit that I much more enjoy writing on paper at a
> piano than any other way!
>
> But once you are familiar enough with the tools, there are fewer reasons
> to avoid using them for composing.  Beyond that, you actually can gain some
> benefits by "auditioning" things more robustly when composing directly in
> notation software, in particular things  you can't play on piano.And of
> course, you save a little time since you don't have to re-enter some of the
> material.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> David Elaine Alt
> 415 . 341 .4954 <(415)%20341-4954>
> "Confusion is highly underrated"
> ela...@flaminghakama.com
> skype: flaming_hakama
> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
Lilypond, a piano, a good inner ear (which I’m lucky to have), or whatever
the kids are using these days are all just tools. I’d be wrong to say a
piece of mine is superior to *The Rite of Spring* because Stravinsky worked
it all out on a piano and I use my inner ear. In this case, the destination
is more important than the journey. But whatever you use, it’s important
that you have as much mental capacity as possible available when composing,
because composing is really hard. If it isn’t hard, you can probably do
better.

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

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Peter Engelbert]

I developed my inner ear almost entirely as an adult, so I learned it
consciously.

It came first from solfeging everything I came into contact with. That
helped me understand the diatonic tendencies of notes.

Then I studied counterpoint. In doing my exercises, i would do it on paper
first.  When I was finished, I always played one voice while singing the
other. Then I would switch the voices and do it again. I started to build
up a sense for how lines work together, and for what  different vertical
intervals sound like in different contexts.

When I found a teacher, he taught me harmony using the Boulanger method.
Long harmony exercises in four voices that were meant to be played at the
piano. You are given a baseline only and are forbidden to write the other
voices in. Play three voices and sing one. Repeat for all the voices.
Transpose through all possible keys and do the same. When you could do that
with one exercise (which would usually take 2 weeks of steady practice)
then you moved on to the next.

Then the same thing but with modulations.

Doing this provides you with aural standards against which exceptions are
measured. It becomes clear that the tenor line, for one, follows specific
motions from each chord to the next, and practicing it ad nauseum meant
that I had experiential knowledge of what that voice “meant” in that
context. I could look at a bass line in any key and sing the standard tenor
line that would go with the “standard” 4-voice realization.

The logical follow up to this is to play the Bach fugues while singing one
of the voices. Or the chorales. At every step, you are connecting music to
the VOICE first, the BODY second, and the MIND dead last.

At least, that’s how I developed my inner ear. I guarantee that anyone
following a similar method will have similar results.

And I wouldn’t dream of composing anything “into the computer”. It’s there
to check your work if you need it (if you don’t rely on it, it can actually
HELP you develop as you compare the midi to your own internal
representation). You just have to be sure to develop your internal
representation as fully as possible before checking your work.

Hope this provides some useful information,
Peter

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 14:42 Flaming Hakama by Elaine <
ela...@flaminghakama.com> wrote:

>
>>> From: Tom Cloyd 
>> To: Frauke Jurgensen 
>> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:24:48 -0700
>> Subject: Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?
>
>
>> 100% in agreement. Developing that inner ear is immeasurably valuable,
>> but it takes effort, and that effort is made only when there's motivation.
>> Having only oneself to rely on provides the context for that motivation.
>> (HA! Can you guess MY occupation?)
>>
>
>
> I call hogwash.  Developing inner ear has nothing to do with using pencil
> & paper vs using notation software.  A more meaningful distinction is
> whether you are composing by ear or not:
>
> * If you are plucking out every note and chord at the piano, then notating
> the ones you like with pencil & paper (or into notation software), you are
> NOT developing your inner ear.
> * If you come up with all the notes in your head and enter them directly
> into notation software (or on paper), then you are are using your inner ear.
>
>
> I agree that the processes of composition, arranging/orchestration and
> engraving are distinct, and should be approached as such.  And I agree that
> developing your inner ear is crucial.  But you can do all of that with the
> help of notation software, or not.
>
>
> David Elaine Alt
> 415 . 341 .4954   "Confusion is
> highly underrated"
> ela...@flaminghakama.com
> skype: flaming_hakama
> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> ___
> 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

an open question

[Joe Davenport]

Hello,

When another user inquired about composing without midi playback, i found 
encouragement to ask something from the technical side. Maybe i have some 
healthy curiousity about coding language, which follows:

Is it possible to integrate .ly with other musical coding languages? It would 
be very beneficial to write music that integrates the quick engraving of 
lilpond (other software is too slow for me) with the sound fonts and modulation 
of pure data.

i may have read this being used in rosegarden. however, it took time for me to 
integrate .pd with my soundcard- so i could use some pointers or insurance on 
integrating these two languages!

thank you,

joe

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

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Tom Cloyd  wrote:

> Hogwash? Well, not really. Your point about what is possible is fine. I
> don't disagree. But my point remains, and my error was in not making it
> clear enough. I'll try again.
>
> It has to do with cognitive load and the concept of "limited attentional
> workspace", a key concept in cognitive psychology.
>
> Re: cognitive load: I'll wager that many of us are not exactly fluent in
> Lilypond. I'm certainly not. Using it is fun,
>


I'm not sure I'd go that far!  It does amazing things, and that can be
rewarding.



> but definitely requires thought and effort. Notating my developing score
> by hand is VERY much less effortful. Thus it imposes much less of a
> cognitive load.
>
> Re: limited attentional workspace: One of the best validated concepts in
> cognitive psychology is the idea that we can only keep a limited number of
> "things" in our consciousness at any one time. Our attentional workspace is
> seriously limited.
>
> So here's the point, given those two ideas: If one is not fluent in
> Lilypond, then it imposes a non-trivial cognitive load on us, reducing the
> energy we have to do other effortful things, such as create the music in
> our mind without recourse to an instrument. Furthermore, the sheer number
> of elements to track in a developing Lilypond program places real demands
> on our attentional workspace.
>
> Thus, I argue, NOT using Lilypond during the most creative part of
> composition give us much more cognitive reserve, of both sorts, for
> composing, including the part involving working without an instrument to
> "hear' the music on.
>
> I hope I'm making more sense now!
>
> Tom
>



Thanks for clarifying your point.

Yes, I agree.  If the tools you are using are not familiar and comfortable,
then fiddling with tools will distract you from the important work of
composing.

And I will readily admit that I much more enjoy writing on paper at a piano
than any other way!

But once you are familiar enough with the tools, there are fewer reasons to
avoid using them for composing.  Beyond that, you actually can gain some
benefits by "auditioning" things more robustly when composing directly in
notation software, in particular things  you can't play on piano.And of
course, you save a little time since you don't have to re-enter some of the
material.


Thanks,

David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954 <(415)%20341-4954>
"Confusion is highly underrated"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Tom Cloyd]

Hogwash? Well, not really. Your point about what is possible is fine. I
don't disagree. But my point remains, and my error was in not making it
clear enough. I'll try again.

It has to do with cognitive load and the concept of "limited attentional
workspace", a key concept in cognitive psychology.

Re: cognitive load: I'll wager that many of us are not exactly fluent in
Lilypond. I'm certainly not. Using it is fun, but definitely requires
thought and effort. Notating my developing score by hand is VERY much less
effortful. Thus it imposes much less of a cognitive load.

Re: limited attentional workspace: One of the best validated concepts in
cognitive psychology is the idea that we can only keep a limited number of
"things" in our consciousness at any one time. Our attentional workspace is
seriously limited.

So here's the point, given those two ideas: If one is not fluent in
Lilypond, then it imposes a non-trivial cognitive load on us, reducing the
energy we have to do other effortful things, such as create the music in
our mind without recourse to an instrument. Furthermore, the sheer number
of elements to track in a developing Lilypond program places real demands
on our attentional workspace.

Thus, I argue, NOT using Lilypond during the most creative part of
composition give us much more cognitive reserve, of both sorts, for
composing, including the part involving working without an instrument to
"hear' the music on.

I hope I'm making more sense now!

Tom

~

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons
exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman

~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA LMHC (WA) | t...@tomcloyd.com
Psychotherapist (psychological trauma, dissociative disorders)
Spokane, Washington, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332
TomCloyd.com  | Google+
 | Facebook

~

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:41 PM, Flaming Hakama by Elaine <
ela...@flaminghakama.com> wrote:

>
>>> From: Tom Cloyd 
>> To: Frauke Jurgensen 
>> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:24:48 -0700
>> Subject: Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?
>> 100% in agreement. Developing that inner ear is immeasurably valuable,
>> but it takes effort, and that effort is made only when there's motivation.
>> Having only oneself to rely on provides the context for that motivation.
>> (HA! Can you guess MY occupation?)
>>
>
>
> I call hogwash.  Developing inner ear has nothing to do with using pencil
> & paper vs using notation software.  A more meaningful distinction is
> whether you are composing by ear or not:
>
> * If you are plucking out every note and chord at the piano, then notating
> the ones you like with pencil & paper (or into notation software), you are
> NOT developing your inner ear.
> * If you come up with all the notes in your head and enter them directly
> into notation software (or on paper), then you are are using your inner ear.
>
>
> I agree that the processes of composition, arranging/orchestration and
> engraving are distinct, and should be approached as such.  And I agree that
> developing your inner ear is crucial.  But you can do all of that with the
> help of notation software, or not.
>
>
> David Elaine Alt
> 415 . 341 .4954 <(415)%20341-4954>
> "Confusion is highly underrated"
> ela...@flaminghakama.com
> skype: flaming_hakama
> Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
> ___
> 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: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

>> 100% in agreement. Developing that inner ear is immeasurably valuable, but 
>> it takes effort, and that effort is made only when there's motivation. 
>> Having only oneself to rely on provides the context for that motivation. 
>> (HA! Can you guess MY occupation?)
> 
> I call hogwash.  Developing inner ear has nothing to do with using pencil & 
> paper vs using notation software.  A more meaningful distinction is whether 
> you are composing by ear or not:
> 
> * If you are plucking out every note and chord at the piano, then notating 
> the ones you like with pencil & paper (or into notation software), you are 
> NOT developing your inner ear.

Not strictly true: the fundamental piano sound has a very different attack, 
sustain, decay, and release than just about any other instrument, whereas a 
mockup ("using notation software" for that purpose) can be made to sound 
"exactly" like the instrument(s) in question. So at the piano, you *must* 
develop your inner ear in order to get past the piano sound to the sound of the 
actual instrumentation in question.

Granted, one develops one’s inner ear *more* by writing without playback of any 
sort (at the piano or in software), but since you started splitting hairs, I 
thought I’d join in the fun…  :^p

> I agree that the processes of composition, arranging/orchestration and 
> engraving are distinct, and should be approached as such.  And I agree that 
> developing your inner ear is crucial.  But you can do all of that with the 
> help of notation software, or not.

+1

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: Bug? getting the stencil of the stem removes the beam

[Lucas Werkmeister]

Sorry for the even later reply, but this seems to work great as well –
and thanks for updating the snippet already :)

Cheers,
Lucas

On 18.03.2018 19:35, Thomas Morley wrote:
> Hi Lucas,
>
> sorry for the late reply
>
> 2018-03-16 0:50 GMT+01:00 Lucas Werkmeister :
>
>> Perhaps we can submit this as an update for the snippet repository? (I’d be
>> happy to do the paperwork if you’re okay with it.)
>>
>> Not tested beyond the given examples, though.
>>
>> FWIW, it seems to work fine in the larger score where I encountered this
>> issue (though the situation there isn’t really more complicated than in
>> these examples).
> In further testings I observed a disadvantage of the approach via
> Stem.positioning-done:
>
> If a user has different sized note-heads in a chord, the zero-value is
> not a neutral element.
>
> See:
>
> {
>   \once \override Stem.positioning-done = #(positioning-done '(0 0))
>   <
>\tweak style #'slash
>c'
>g'
>   >2
> }
>
> To fix it, I think one would need to reimplement (with hooks to
> customize the behaviour) the note-head/stem-placing-procedures in
> scheme.
> Apart from my lazyness ... it feels like overkill.
>
> Thus I implemented a different code in the lsr-snippet.
> Replacing the stencil-calls (only needed for getting the extents) by
> the grob-extents.
>
> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=861
>
> WYT?
>
> Best,
>  Harm
>
> ___
> 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: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

>
>
>> From: Tom Cloyd 
> To: Frauke Jurgensen 
> Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2018 13:24:48 -0700
> Subject: Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?
> 100% in agreement. Developing that inner ear is immeasurably valuable, but
> it takes effort, and that effort is made only when there's motivation.
> Having only oneself to rely on provides the context for that motivation.
> (HA! Can you guess MY occupation?)
>


I call hogwash.  Developing inner ear has nothing to do with using pencil &
paper vs using notation software.  A more meaningful distinction is whether
you are composing by ear or not:

* If you are plucking out every note and chord at the piano, then notating
the ones you like with pencil & paper (or into notation software), you are
NOT developing your inner ear.
* If you come up with all the notes in your head and enter them directly
into notation software (or on paper), then you are are using your inner ear.


I agree that the processes of composition, arranging/orchestration and
engraving are distinct, and should be approached as such.  And I agree that
developing your inner ear is crucial.  But you can do all of that with the
help of notation software, or not.


David Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954   "Confusion is
highly underrated"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
skype: flaming_hakama
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Tom Cloyd]

100% in agreement. Developing that inner ear is immeasurably valuable, but
it takes effort, and that effort is made only when there's motivation.
Having only oneself to rely on provides the context for that motivation.
(HA! Can you guess MY occupation?)

t.

~

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons
exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman

~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA LMHC (WA) | t...@tomcloyd.com
Psychotherapist (psychological trauma, dissociative disorders)
Spokane, Washington, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332
TomCloyd.com  | Google+
 | Facebook

~

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 1:18 AM, Frauke Jurgensen 
wrote:

> I would agree with those who counsel paper and pencil for the
> compositional process itself. I would also argue that developing the link
> between notation and your inner ear is extremely helpful if you're going to
> use notation, and that software with playback features can be
> counterproductive in getting people to develop that link. I ban my students
> from using notation software in first year, at least, and strongly
> discourage it among more advanced students.
>
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, 07:38 Henning Hraban Ramm, 
> wrote:
>
>> I as a singer/songwriter with limited notational skills also use pen and
>> staff paper for the first draft(s) but then need a tool that lets me hear
>> if I got the rhythm right. (Even if that’s always a matter of
>> interpretation and may change in every verse.)
>> And as a quality aware typesetter and a programmer I just love LilyPond.
>> But if I’m trying several rhythmic variants (syncopes, triplets), because
>> I often don’t know what it is exactly what I hear in my head, it’s a
>> tedious approach to e.g. change several places and maybe voices from
>> syncopation to tuplets and back, or is it a timing change... Some of my
>> songs are quite irregular, but I want proper sheets.
>>
>> Greetlings, Hraban
>> ---
>> fiëé visuëlle
>> Henning Hraban Ramm
>> http://www.fiee.net
>>
>>
>> Am 2018-03-23 um 04:34 schrieb Tom Cloyd :
>>
>> > I have always found that nothing beats plain pencil and sheets of staff
>> paper, until I have the basic piece fairly complete. For me, it's clearly
>> faster to make even a second draft on paper than to move at that point to
>> LP and continue from there. I consider fast "hand writing" on staff paper
>> to be a basic composing skill, long used by those who come before us.
>> >
>> > Working this way, alterations are so much easier, in the initial
>> stages. Later, I find the reverse to be true. I do love getting to the
>> point where it's time to produce an actual engraved score, but revisions
>> certainly do continue after that.
>> >
>> > Tom
>> >
>> > ~
>> >
>> > “Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons
>> exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Is lilypond suitable for big composition projects?

[Shevek]

I have been using Lilypond + Frescobaldi for all my compositions for the last
8 years or so, including jazz, chamber music, and a symphony. The symphony
is currently at 120 pages, and will probably end up around 170 pages.

I certainly don't rely on continuous engraving — for one thing, if I'm doing
an edit that breaks bar checks, I want to finish editing every staff before
I engrave. For the symphony, engraving takes so long even on a fast computer
that I usually only engrave the bookpart for the movement I'm currently
working on.

I don't use MIDI playback hardly at all. If you want to do a proper MIDI
mockup in a DAW, Lilypond does give you nice and clean MIDI output, though.

A lot of my compositional process takes place in pencil on printed out
incomplete drafts.

I use Git for version control and remote backup of my projects.

Saul



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: \offset argument order

[David Kastrup]

Malte Meyn  writes:

> Hi list,
>
> is there a reason for the special order of \offset arguments? I would prefer
>   \offset Beam positions #'(2 . 3)
> or—even better because there would be no confusion with \override—
>   \offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3)
> instead of the current
>   \offset positions #'(2 . 3) Beam

Why is this on the bug list?

At any rate, one could make

\offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) \default

resolve to an override but I don't think that there is a whole lot of
motivation for having this.  I doubt people would use it a lot.

You could likely write

\offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) #'()

at the current point of time.  Which is similarly ugly.  Or

\offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) Bottom

which seems weird.  You get the drift.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Producing scores for the diatonic accordion

[Menu Jacques]

Hello folks,

A friend of mine would like to produce scores with the fingerings for his F 
diatonic accordion.

In the « Score for diatonic accordion » example in the snippets, it is not 
shown how:

AccordionTabTwoCBesDur = {
  % pull 1
  %8 8 8 |
  8 8 8 |
  % push 2
  %4    |
  4    |
  % pull 3
  % 2 r8 }
  2 r8
}

is derived from:

\context Voice = "melodyVoi"
{
  8 8 8 |
  4    |
  2 r8
}

conv2diaton and jEdit are mentioned in the comments, but that is obscure to me.

Thanks if you can help!

JM



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

Re: Tie/Accidental Collision

[Stefano Troncaro]

Hi Simon,

I understand. Let me ask you then, where should this behavior be
documented? Perhaps in the section about modifying shapes
 in
the Notation Reference?
Currently it states:

> Known issues and warnings
>
> It is not possible to modify shapes of ties or slurs by changing the
> control-points property if there are multiple ties or slurs at the same
> musical moment – the \tweak command will also not work in this case.
> However, the tie-configuration property of TieColumn can be overridden to
> set start line and direction as required.
>
Since contrary to the above this is indeed possible (as proved by the
example shared by Harm), could this paragraph be updated instead? I think
we can all agree that the documentation needs to convey accurate
information.

I was going to write a longer message but this has already gone too out of
thread. I don't know where/how this kind of issues are supposed to be
discussed. If you could point me in the right direction I'd be happy to
bring this up in the right place and in the right manner.


2018-03-23 10:27 GMT-03:00 Simon Albrecht :

> On 23.03.2018 02:40, Stefano Troncaro wrote:
>
>> I really think that information should be available in the
>> tie-column-interface section > /Documentation/web/source/Documentation/internals/tie_002dco
>> lumn_002dinterface> of the Internals Reference.
>> The explanation could make explicit that setting positioning-done to #t
>> gives full control of the properties of the Ties to the user.
>>
>
> The IR is auto-generated; the string describing the positioning-done
> property is taken from scm/define-grob-properties and has to describe its
> function in any grob, not just in tie-column.
>
> Best, Simon
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: get current bar number

[Wols Lists]

On 23/03/18 06:21, Jan-Peter Voigt wrote:
> If you are going to write an engraver you can find some informations in
> the archive.

Also look at the rehearsal mark engraver. One of the options is to use
the bar number as the rehearsal mark, so that might give you some ideas.

Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Tie/Accidental Collision

[Simon Albrecht]

On 23.03.2018 02:40, Stefano Troncaro wrote:
I really think that information should be available in the 
tie-column-interface section 
 
of the Internals Reference.
The explanation could make explicit that setting positioning-done to 
#t gives full control of the properties of the Ties to the user.


The IR is auto-generated; the string describing the positioning-done 
property is taken from scm/define-grob-properties and has to describe 
its function in any grob, not just in tie-column.


Best, Simon

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

Re: Add interval to selection - Frescobaldi snippet

[aeoleandust]

Many thanks for the link, both lsr-snippets are quite useful indeed.

Ideally I had a Frescobaldi snippet/script in mind that would actually
change the written Lilypond text/file directly. So one could select some
music and press a hotkey to run a script which writes/replaces the selection
with the interval/chord.
Cheers




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: Problem downloading latest version.

[Robert Blackstone]

Thank you Phil.
It worked.

Best regards,

Robert


On 23 Mar 2018, at 10:14 , Phil Holmes  wrote:

> http://lilypond.org/downloads/binaries/

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

Re: Problem downloading latest version.

[Phil Holmes]

Try http://lilypond.org/downloads/binaries/ 

--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: Robert Blackstone 
  To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Friday, March 23, 2018 9:04 AM
  Subject: Problem downloading latest version.


  Good morning,


  I vainly tried to download and install on my Mac the latest development 
version of LilyPond from http://lilypond.org/development.html.


  The download link: 
http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/darwin-x86/lilypond-2.19.81-1.darwin-x86.tar.bz2


  lead to page that announced: 


  Not Found
  The requested URL 
/lilypond/binaries/darwin-x86/lilypond-2.19.81-1.darwin-x86.tar.bz2 was not 
found on this server.


--

  Apache/2.4.25 (Debian) Server at download.linuxaudio.org Port 80




  I never experienced this before. What can be done about it?


  Thanks in advance for any advice.


  Best regards,
  Robert Blackstone




--


  ___
  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

Problem downloading latest version.

[Robert Blackstone]

Good morning,

I vainly tried to download and install on my Mac the latest development version 
of LilyPond from http://lilypond.org/development.html.

The download link: 
http://download.linuxaudio.org/lilypond/binaries/darwin-x86/lilypond-2.19.81-1.darwin-x86.tar.bz2

lead to page that announced: 

Not Found

The requested URL 
/lilypond/binaries/darwin-x86/lilypond-2.19.81-1.darwin-x86.tar.bz2 was not 
found on this server.

Apache/2.4.25 (Debian) Server at download.linuxaudio.org Port 80


I never experienced this before. What can be done about it?

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Best regards,
Robert Blackstone

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

Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Frauke Jurgensen]

I would agree with those who counsel paper and pencil for the compositional
process itself. I would also argue that developing the link between
notation and your inner ear is extremely helpful if you're going to use
notation, and that software with playback features can be counterproductive
in getting people to develop that link. I ban my students from using
notation software in first year, at least, and strongly discourage it among
more advanced students.

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, 07:38 Henning Hraban Ramm,  wrote:

> I as a singer/songwriter with limited notational skills also use pen and
> staff paper for the first draft(s) but then need a tool that lets me hear
> if I got the rhythm right. (Even if that’s always a matter of
> interpretation and may change in every verse.)
> And as a quality aware typesetter and a programmer I just love LilyPond.
> But if I’m trying several rhythmic variants (syncopes, triplets), because
> I often don’t know what it is exactly what I hear in my head, it’s a
> tedious approach to e.g. change several places and maybe voices from
> syncopation to tuplets and back, or is it a timing change... Some of my
> songs are quite irregular, but I want proper sheets.
>
> Greetlings, Hraban
> ---
> fiëé visuëlle
> Henning Hraban Ramm
> http://www.fiee.net
>
>
> Am 2018-03-23 um 04:34 schrieb Tom Cloyd :
>
> > I have always found that nothing beats plain pencil and sheets of staff
> paper, until I have the basic piece fairly complete. For me, it's clearly
> faster to make even a second draft on paper than to move at that point to
> LP and continue from there. I consider fast "hand writing" on staff paper
> to be a basic composing skill, long used by those who come before us.
> >
> > Working this way, alterations are so much easier, in the initial stages.
> Later, I find the reverse to be true. I do love getting to the point where
> it's time to produce an actual engraved score, but revisions certainly do
> continue after that.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > ~
> >
> > “Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons
> exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman
>
>
>
> ___
> 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: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

I as a singer/songwriter with limited notational skills also use pen and staff 
paper for the first draft(s) but then need a tool that lets me hear if I got 
the rhythm right. (Even if that’s always a matter of interpretation and may 
change in every verse.)
And as a quality aware typesetter and a programmer I just love LilyPond.
But if I’m trying several rhythmic variants (syncopes, triplets), because I 
often don’t know what it is exactly what I hear in my head, it’s a tedious 
approach to e.g. change several places and maybe voices from syncopation to 
tuplets and back, or is it a timing change... Some of my songs are quite 
irregular, but I want proper sheets.

Greetlings, Hraban
---
fiëé visuëlle
Henning Hraban Ramm
http://www.fiee.net


Am 2018-03-23 um 04:34 schrieb Tom Cloyd :

> I have always found that nothing beats plain pencil and sheets of staff 
> paper, until I have the basic piece fairly complete. For me, it's clearly 
> faster to make even a second draft on paper than to move at that point to LP 
> and continue from there. I consider fast "hand writing" on staff paper to be 
> a basic composing skill, long used by those who come before us. 
> 
> Working this way, alterations are so much easier, in the initial stages. 
> Later, I find the reverse to be true. I do love getting to the point where 
> it's time to produce an actual engraved score, but revisions certainly do 
> continue after that. 
> 
> Tom
> 
> ~
> 
> “Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, 
> but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman



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

Re: get current bar number

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Kevin,

yes, you need to get a context object. If you want to use it inside some 
music expression \applyContext is the key:



doSomething =
\applyContext #(lambda (context)
 (display
  (ly:context-property context 'currentBarNumber)
  ))

{ c''4 \doSomething d'' }


If you are going to write an engraver you can find some informations in 
the archive.


HTH
Jan-Peter


Am 23.03.2018 um 01:55 schrieb Kevin Barry:

Hi All,

I would like to be able to get the current bar number context property 
so that I can do something with it (like printing it in markup for example).


I have tried the following scheme function:
(ly:context-property 'Score 'currentBarNumber)
but it errors out, telling me that Score is not a context. Do I need to 
get the context object somehow?


Any help appreciated.

Kevin



___
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