Re: How to engrave this (screenshot attached) 12/8 time (looks like an arpeggio with ties)
Thank you! On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 10:12 PM Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > > > How to engrave this (screenshot attached) 12/8 time (looks like an > > arpeggio with ties) > > Exactly. Look up the Notation Reference Index under 'arpeggio and > ties'... > > > Werner
Re: How to engrave this (screenshot attached) 12/8 time (looks like an arpeggio with ties)
> How to engrave this (screenshot attached) 12/8 time (looks like an > arpeggio with ties) Exactly. Look up the Notation Reference Index under 'arpeggio and ties'... Werner
Different MIDI Velocity settings for different instruments?
Hello, I made a LilyPond score for piano and 2 flutes. When I examined the MIDI file, I discovered that all the Note On commands in the piano part had the Velocity parameter set to 90 while in both flute parts it was set constant at 62. May I know why different Velocity values are being used when I did not specify any requirement of that kind in my source ".ly" file? Thank you. Petr
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
PS To be precise. Bring it back to D minor and then octave down. Van: Eef Weenink Verzonden: vrijdag 16 september 2022 22:05 Aan: Lukas-Fabian Moser CC: Lilypond-User Mailing List Onderwerp: Re: function to recognise voice crossings? PS: The double bass is in solo tuning (major second above normal) so the score for the double bass is written a major second down) so you hear the correct pitches. Purcell (original) is in D minor (1 flat) and the double bass score has 3 flats (C minor) PS2, in fact to do the real check, I have to also transpose the double score 1 octave down, because the double bass is written 1 octave higher then sounding. regards, Eef Op 16 sep. 2022, om 21:47 heeft Lukas-Fabian Moser mailto:l...@gmx.de>> het volgende geschreven: Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 21:22 schrieb Eef Weenink: Great, it does exactly what I need, see image. (red noteheads are the lowest in score)! So on this spot I have to lower the bassline in the left hand of piano. I'm glad it helps! But there's something strange, as the f-e cadenza in the melody doesn't really fit the f major cadenza in the piano. I looked up Purcell's original (thanks for including the text, otherwise I wouldn't have recognized it): The final note of the melody line should coincide (up to octave) with the final note of the piano left hand. So it seems something's wrong in your score (unless you have some quite unusual clefs, but then again, the red markings seem to indicate that melody and piano left hand are both written in bass clef). Could you maybe post your full score so I could take a look? Lukas
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
PS: The double bass is in solo tuning (major second above normal) so the score for the double bass is written a major second down) so you hear the correct pitches. Purcell (original) is in D minor (1 flat) and the double bass score has 3 flats (C minor) PS2, in fact to do the real check, I have to also transpose the double score 1 octave down, because the double bass is written 1 octave higher then sounding. regards, Eef Op 16 sep. 2022, om 21:47 heeft Lukas-Fabian Moser mailto:l...@gmx.de>> het volgende geschreven: Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 21:22 schrieb Eef Weenink: Great, it does exactly what I need, see image. (red noteheads are the lowest in score)! So on this spot I have to lower the bassline in the left hand of piano. I'm glad it helps! But there's something strange, as the f-e cadenza in the melody doesn't really fit the f major cadenza in the piano. I looked up Purcell's original (thanks for including the text, otherwise I wouldn't have recognized it): The final note of the melody line should coincide (up to octave) with the final note of the piano left hand. So it seems something's wrong in your score (unless you have some quite unusual clefs, but then again, the red markings seem to indicate that melody and piano left hand are both written in bass clef). Could you maybe post your full score so I could take a look? Lukas
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 21:22 schrieb Eef Weenink: Great, it does exactly what I need, see image. (red noteheads are the lowest in score)! So on this spot I have to lower the bassline in the left hand of piano. I'm glad it helps! But there's something strange, as the f-e cadenza in the melody doesn't really fit the f major cadenza in the piano. I looked up Purcell's original (thanks for including the text, otherwise I wouldn't have recognized it): The final note of the melody line should coincide (up to octave) with the final note of the piano left hand. So it seems something's wrong in your score (unless you have some quite unusual clefs, but then again, the red markings seem to indicate that melody and piano left hand are both written in bass clef). Could you maybe post your full score so I could take a look? Lukas
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
Great, it does exactly what I need, see image. (red noteheads are the lowest in score)! So on this spot I have to lower the bassline in the left hand of piano. [cid:29D04ECB-8577-4403-99DE-D62C6AC64E40] Op 16 sep. 2022, om 18:55 heeft Lukas-Fabian Moser mailto:l...@gmx.de>> het volgende geschreven: Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 13:53 schrieb Eef Weenink: I write mostly arrangements where I bring a melody voice down to the double bass (my instrument :-)) Double bass is written an octave higher then sounding, so a lot of times, the score lookes OK, but in fact there are voice crossings between lefthand of piano and the double bass (what gives unwanted/unpleasant voice crossings. To check this, I transpose the double bass voice down an octave and manually check the boths voices. Wonder if there is a function in lilypond to do this fastly. Like the coloured noteheads when checking a voice against the ambitus of an instrument. This reminds me of a function I wrote last year to automatically colourise the lowest sounding pitch in a score. (In my case, this was for harmonic analysis of canons.) See attached. Maybe this could be used or at least adapted? Lukashttp://lowest-notes.ly>>
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
I will check this. Thanks Met vriendelijke groet, Eef H.E. Weenink MBA Op 16 sep. 2022 om 18:56 heeft Lukas-Fabian Moser het volgende geschreven: Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 13:53 schrieb Eef Weenink: I write mostly arrangements where I bring a melody voice down to the double bass (my instrument :-)) Double bass is written an octave higher then sounding, so a lot of times, the score lookes OK, but in fact there are voice crossings between lefthand of piano and the double bass (what gives unwanted/unpleasant voice crossings. To check this, I transpose the double bass voice down an octave and manually check the boths voices. Wonder if there is a function in lilypond to do this fastly. Like the coloured noteheads when checking a voice against the ambitus of an instrument. This reminds me of a function I wrote last year to automatically colourise the lowest sounding pitch in a score. (In my case, this was for harmonic analysis of canons.) See attached. Maybe this could be used or at least adapted? Lukas lowest-notes.ly Description: lowest-notes.ly
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
This is not the question. It is about voice crossing bassline (left hand piano) and melodyline (double bass). That gives inversions, mostly not wanted. So these need to be identified. Met vriendelijke groet, Eef H.E. Weenink MBA > Op 16 sep. 2022 om 18:25 heeft Wols Lists het > volgende geschreven: > > Or just use the "correct" clef :-) > > The trombone is written a ninth higher than sounding, so I transpose it down > a second (to deal with the B-flat-ness) and then use the treble_8 clef to > print it correctly. > > That way, all your notes are correct, both as regards lily's internal pitch, > and as they appear on the page.
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
Hi Eef, Am 16.09.22 um 13:53 schrieb Eef Weenink: I write mostly arrangements where I bring a melody voice down to the double bass (my instrument :-)) Double bass is written an octave higher then sounding, so a lot of times, the score lookes OK, but in fact there are voice crossings between lefthand of piano and the double bass (what gives unwanted/unpleasant voice crossings. To check this, I transpose the double bass voice down an octave and manually check the boths voices. Wonder if there is a function in lilypond to do this fastly. Like the coloured noteheads when checking a voice against the ambitus of an instrument. This reminds me of a function I wrote last year to automatically colourise the lowest sounding pitch in a score. (In my case, this was for harmonic analysis of canons.) See attached. Maybe this could be used or at least adapted? Lukas\version "2.23" % Bass_highlighter_engraver = #(set-object-property! 'bass-notehead-callback 'backend-type? procedure?) #(set-object-property! 'bass-notehead-callback 'backend-doc "Function to be called on grob if it is a bass notehead") #(define (is-lower-bound? el lst less?) ; returns #t if no element of lst is less? than el. (if (pair? lst) (if (less? (car lst) el) #f (is-lower-bound? el (cdr lst) less?)) #t)) Bass_highlighter_engraver = #(lambda (context) (define (is-over? note moment) (not (ly:moment q q q } >>
Re: function to recognise voice crossings?
On 16/09/2022 12:53, Eef Weenink wrote: To check this, I transpose the double bass voice down an octave and manually check the boths voices. Wonder if there is a function in lilypond to do this fastly. Like the coloured noteheads when checking a voice against the ambitus of an instrument. Or just use the "correct" clef :-) The trombone is written a ninth higher than sounding, so I transpose it down a second (to deal with the B-flat-ness) and then use the treble_8 clef to print it correctly. That way, all your notes are correct, both as regards lily's internal pitch, and as they appear on the page. Cheers, Wol
Re: How to enlarge the entire Lilypond output (pdf)
On Fri 16 Sep 2022 at 08:02:35 (-0700), Knute Snortum wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 11:29 PM Eef Weenink wrote: > > > > I use the crop function to minimize the white around the music. > > If you want, you can do this inside LilyPond in a paper block: > > top-margin = 5\mm > bottom-margin = 6\mm > left-margin = 10\mm > right-margin = 10\mm Like altering set-global-staff-size, moving the margins can change the layout of the music, in ways that may or may not be satisfactory. At the very least, you have to check with each alteration made. If you're preparing scores for two modes of display, like Eff, it may be worth considering an external program to crop the pages of the score, like pdfcrop. The margins for a printed copy are often constrained by the physically printable area of an individual printer, whereas screens can display to the very edge. But generating both from the same LP output ensures that all the musicians will see exactly the same layout, page turns, etc. Cheers, David.
Re: How to enlarge the entire Lilypond output (pdf)
Hi
I have several devices to show the music on. Rather than try to adjust the
size, I measure the visible area on the screen and tell LilyPond to use
that as its paper size. I have a 27" screen, so for that, I set the paper
size to half the width and get my PDF viewer to show two pages at once. On
screens I see little point in margins so I use and include file "Output for
BENQ" which says:
\paper {
paper-height = 324 \mm paper-width = 295\mm
top-margin = 1 bottom-margin = 1 left-margin = 5 right-margin = 5
}
and then at the end of the .ly file I have:
music = {
\new PianoStaff \with {
...
} }
"A4book" =\book {
\include "Output for A4.ily"
\bookOutputName "Grieg - (A4) Wedding day at Troldhaugen (Lyric piece
53)"
\score {
\music
\layout { #(layout-set-staff-size 16) }
%\midi { \tempo 4=80 }
}
}
tabletBook = \book {
\include "Output for Tablet.ily"
\bookOutputName "Grieg - (tablet) Wedding day at Troldhaugen (Lyric
piece 53)"
\score {
\music
\layout { #(layout-set-staff-size 16) }
}
}
PCBook = \book {
\include "Output for BenQ.ily"
\bookOutputName "Grieg - (PC) Wedding day at Troldhaugen (Lyric piece
53)"
\score {
\music
\layout { #(layout-set-staff-size 16) }
}
}
%\"A4book"
\PCBook
I am pleasantly surprised by how seldom I need to insert \tag's in the
music to control the manual pagebreaks to get repeats to show at nice
locations.
Hope this helps
Paul McKay
On Fri, 16 Sept 2022 at 16:02, Knute Snortum wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 11:29 PM Eef Weenink
> wrote:
> >
> > I use the crop function to minimize the white around the music.
>
> If you want, you can do this inside LilyPond in a paper block:
>
> top-margin = 5\mm
> bottom-margin = 6\mm
> left-margin = 10\mm
> right-margin = 10\mm
>
> --
> Knute Snortum
>
>
Re: How to enlarge the entire Lilypond output (pdf)
On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 11:29 PM Eef Weenink wrote: > > I use the crop function to minimize the white around the music. If you want, you can do this inside LilyPond in a paper block: top-margin = 5\mm bottom-margin = 6\mm left-margin = 10\mm right-margin = 10\mm -- Knute Snortum
Re: LilyPond compared
Yes, that's how I understood the original FB message.Verzonden vanaf mijn Huawei mobiele telefoon Oorspronkelijk bericht Onderwerp: Re: LilyPond comparedVan: Andrew Bernard Aan: lilypond-user@gnu.orgCc: So maybe I misunderstand the point of this. Perhaps it is rather that it is specifically a comparison of unmodified out of the box engraving, and not supposed to be a competition level grand final play off showing the maximum capabilities of each program. Is that what the OP on FB is trying to show?Andrew
Re: is this a slashed grace?
Hello Ken,
I have a workaround for this problem, namely to create an oblique line
and move it onto the beam. I did not use \acciaccatura but rather
smaller notes because I wanted to control the spacing of the notes.
See the attached slashedacciaccworkaround.pdf and .ly.
I hope this may be of use.
Archer
On 16/09/2022 06:07, David Wright wrote:
Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
I asked this question regarding a different piece that I was engraving. It
looks like the slashed grace as shown in the Lilypond documentation is not the
same as what I have engraved (there is no slash).
Now another piece has come up with the same question.
Maybe these aren't slashed grace notes? Maybe (as usual) I'm doing
something wrong?
My input, my engraving and the origin I'm reading from are attached.
Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
Are you referring to the ornaments is measures 3, 11, and 25?
Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
That's correct.
https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.22/Documentation/notation/special-rhythmic-concerns
Scroll down to:
Known issues and warnings
A multi-note beamed acciaccatura is printed without a slash,
and looks exactly the same as a multi-note beamed appoggiatura.
Cheers,
David.
slashedacciaccworkaround.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
%slashedacciaccworkaround.ly
\version "2.22.1"
% WORKAROUND FOR A SLASHED ACCIACCATURA
% Uses (mostly) 7/4 virtual bars (invisible bar lines in the ly file)
\score {
\new PianoStaff
<<
\new Staff = "up" \with {
\remove "Time_signature_engraver"
\override TupletBracket.bracket-visibility = ##t
\clef treble
midiInstrument = #"acoustic grand"
}
{
% Bar 9 (7/4) - big problem with 'keep-alive' -- see LH part
1\p s8
% 7-note Change staff passage
\override NoteHead.font-size = #-3
\once \override Beam.positions = #'(-4.0 . -4.0)
\once \override TextScript.extra-offset = #'(-0.5 . -2.5)
\stemDown fis''!8_\markup{\dynamic f \italic{secco}}[
\change Staff = "down" \stemUp c''8
\change Staff = "up" \stemDown e''
\change Staff = "down" \stemUp f'
\change Staff = "up" \stemDown b''
\change Staff = "down" \stemUp a'
\change Staff = "up" \stemDown g''] ~ g''4 \bar ""
% Bar 10
\revert NoteHead.font-size
\stemNeutral
}
%LOWER STAFF
\new Staff = "down" \with {
\remove "Time_signature_engraver"
\override TupletBracket.bracket-visibility = ##t
}
{
\set Staff.pedalSustainStyle = #'mixed
% Bar 9 (2/4 + s8 + 5/4)
<< { g'1 \once \override TextScript.extra-offset = #'(2.5 . 4.0) s8^\markup{\draw-line #'(-2.5 . 4.0)}}
\\
{des'8\sustainOn_( bes4 des'8 ~ des'8[ bes] ~ bes4_) s8\sustainOff}
>>
s2. s8 r4
\bar ""
}
>>
}
function to recognise voice crossings?
Hello all, I write mostly arrangements where I bring a melody voice down to the double bass (my instrument :-)) Double bass is written an octave higher then sounding, so a lot of times, the score lookes OK, but in fact there are voice crossings between lefthand of piano and the double bass (what gives unwanted/unpleasant voice crossings. To check this, I transpose the double bass voice down an octave and manually check the boths voices. Wonder if there is a function in lilypond to do this fastly. Like the coloured noteheads when checking a voice against the ambitus of an instrument. Regards, Eef
Re: LilyPond compared
So maybe I misunderstand the point of this. Perhaps it is rather that it is specifically a comparison of unmodified out of the box engraving, and not supposed to be a competition level grand final play off showing the maximum capabilities of each program. Is that what the OP on FB is trying to show? Andrew
Re: LilyPond compared
>> Attached is an image from the Urtext edition of Schumann's >> 'Humoreske', typeset around 2009. > > This image would seem to show that Henle's accidentals have diverged > quite a lot from LP's. In this Schumann example the sharp's > vertical lines are considerably longer and the glyph is narrower, > and the slope of the natural beams is also quite a lot steeper. Yes. LilyPond is not a clone of Henle. I was wondering, too, whether it makes sense to make the sharp glyph narrower by default. There are always situations with insufficient horizontal space... Werner
Re: LilyPond compared
As for the supposed objectivity of 'out of the box with no tweaking', only casual users would do no setting adjustments in any of these programs - the whole point is they are all very flexible. I disagree with that claim. I'm typesetting new pieces for practical choir use almost on a weekly basis and I simply do not have the time to do setting adjustments unless it is very obviously broken. It is fine that Dorico (and AFAIK Finale as well) provide a vast amount of tweaking possibilities to adjust spacing and other things. For my every day use it is important how much or rather how little tweaking effort I have to invest to get a fairly decent job done. In that department Lilypond trounces the competition. Kind regards, Michael -- Michael Gerdau email: m...@qata.de GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver
Re: LilyPond compared
The person who set this cannot even get the E flats all having flats. Comparisons such as this are odious, for a start because Dorico uses SmuFL fonts and apart from Bravura there are now about 20 SMuFL fonts available, all quite different in terms of accidental shape and such details, so what is being compared here? You can't comment on Dorico accidentals because of this. Also, as a heavy Dorico user myself, Dorico supports a lot of tweaking options for accidentals and accidental ordering, for example: Stacking order of accidentals in chords in a single voice: Reflect left-right order of notes, or Ignore left-right order of notes. Accidental spacing can be very fine tuned as well. Dorico is very option driven, and can be customised to reflect the users style to a high degree. I do not agree that Dorico 'gets so much wrong'. What does it get wrong here? Lilypond does a fine job which is why I have used it for years, but I not agree that it is clearly superior compared to the state of development of Dorico. I think they are on a par. As for the supposed objectivity of 'out of the box with no tweaking', only casual users would do no setting adjustments in any of these programs - the whole point is they are all very flexible. Andrew
Re: LilyPond compared
At 07:50 on 16 Sep 2022, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > Attached is an image from the Urtext edition of Schumann's > 'Humoreske', typeset around 2009. This image would seem to show that Henle's accidentals have diverged quite a lot from LP's. In this Schumann example the sharp's vertical lines are considerably longer and the glyph is narrower, and the slope of the natural beams is also quite a lot steeper. -- Mark Knoop
Re: LilyPond compared
At 09:05 on 16 Sep 2022, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > The comparison also shows something that looks a bit ugly (according > to some people, and I tend to agree): the design of the natural sign. > Are there more people here who think the hole in the middle of the > natural sign is too large and doesn't fit nicely on/between the > stafflines? Is there room for improvement here? Let's discuss. I agree that LilyPond wins this contest easily. (I was quite surprised that Dorico gets so much wrong here, particularly the order of accidentals in the last beat...) Whilst in this particular context (one bar, in quite high zoom, with lots of naturals) you could say that the naturals stand out. But it's important to consider them in more normal contexts before rushing to judgement. I always appreciate the clarity of Emmentaler's accidentals when reading (and I sightread a *lot* of music set using other fonts). Each accidental is clearly distinct and has it's own character - one almost doesn't need to read them at all - unlike many other fonts where naturals can look very similar to sharps at smaller sizes (particularly Sibelius). -- Mark Knoop
Re: How to enlarge the entire Lilypond output (pdf)
I recognize the issue. My working method: 1. In lilypond I go for the best options, like staffsize, number of systems per page, number of pages, etcetera. 2. On the iPad I have Forscore for practicing music. To get the best view on about 2-3 feet distance, I use the crop function to minimize the white around the music. 3. If needed I export this pdf for printing on paper A4 or A3 sized. Best results in not too much time. Met vriendelijke groet, Eef H.E. Weenink MBA > Op 16 sep. 2022 om 02:59 heeft David Wright het > volgende geschreven: > > On Thu 15 Sep 2022 at 16:50:30 (-0700), Kenneth Wolcott wrote: >> >> Perhaps I'm not searching the Lilypond documentation wisely, but I do not >> see a way to enlarge the entire Lilypond output in scale (staff, notes, >> text, everything). > > Everything? including the paper? > >> Perhaps I have to modify the pdf itself? If so, does that decrease the >> clarity/precision of the presentation? > > Yes, if you want to make the music larger on each page, with > fewer measures/line and lines/page, and using more pages. > > #(set-global-staff-size 20.0) is the default. Increase or > decrease accordingly. > >> I'd like to control this globally, and, preferably, externally. > > Oh, scratch the previous paragraph. Just find a viewer that's > able to increase and decrease the magnification. (Don't they all?) > >> My wife is trying to use the Lilypond pdf that I generate on her iPad and >> sometimes she tries to resize (enlarge) it and that fails. > > That suggests that it's not obvious how you should be controlling > your viewer. Tyically, you'd put your fingers on the screen and > slide them apart to expand the display, or you'd select > magnification factors from a menu (or, as I do, have predefined > keystrokes, 0–9, z, h, w, that set preferred magnifications, > 100–2000%, fit to page, height, or width). > > So it depends on which you and your wife want. > > Cheers, > David. >
