Beat markers in the chords section

[Mike Dean]

Hi group:
I'm wondering if there is a way to put beat markers in the chords section
as in the following:
[image: image.png]
The snippet follows:


harmonies =  \chordmode { d4:m | d2.:m | d:m | c2. | c | c |
c | d:m | d2:m c4 | d2.:m | d:m | d:m | d:m
d:m | d:m | c | c | c | c |
d:m | d:m | d:m d:m d:m \bar ":|." }

melody = \relative c' {
  \key d \minor
  \time 3/4
  \partial 4
  d4 d a' a a2 a8 a g4 g e  c2. R2.
  r4 r8 g' g g a4 a a a f g a8 d~ d2 R2. R r4 r f8 f
  d4 d a a8 a4. a4 g c, c8 c c4c2 R2. r4 r c8 c
  d4 f a g e c d d2~ d2.~ d4 r \bar ":|."
}
\score {
<<
\new ChordNames {
\set chordChanges = ##t
\harmonies
}
\new Voice = "one" { \melody }
>>
}


Mike Dean

Re: irrational meters

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Silvain Dupertuis 
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2023 19:20:35 +0100
> Subject: Re: irrational meters
>
> To make things clear, a *fraction* is a mathematical expression which is
> a *specific representation* of a number (or of a formal expression),
> comprising a numerator, a denominator, and one kind of division sign (which
> can be written in different ways, as there are different ways to write the
> operator).
>
> A *ratio* of two numbers is a number resulting from the division of those
> two. It can therefore very naturally expressed as a fraction.
>
> So I have no problem considering a musical metric as a fraction!
>
> It is better not to confuse a *fraction* (as an expression) and it's
> *value* (as a *number*) ­­— a number cannot have a numerator or a
> denominator!
>
> But whenever we write a fraction in a mathematical expression, it is the
> *value* which is implied, not the fraction itself.
>
> So we do confuse them very commonly, like we commonly confuse a word and
> it's meaning in common language (and we survive quite well with this
> confusion).
>
> In case we need to avoid these confusions, one can use quotation marks...
> It can be useful or essential when teaching mathematics or when working in
> mathematical logic or in linguistics.
>
> Hope this clarify the matter.
>
> Silvain
>
>
>
> Le 18.01.23 à 18:51, Shane Brandes a écrit :
>
> Because terminology amuses me here. Years ago, I learned that time
> signatures were decidedly not fractions but ratios from a one Richard
> Hoffman. But even before that I learned ratios consisted of antecedents and
> consequents, which also seems to overlap musical structural terminology in
> a weird way making that also fairly useless as a nomenclature.
>
> Shane
>
>
> --
> Silvain Dupertuis
>

Thanks, that was a wonderful discourse.

It made me wonder about the caution to not mix up the fractional
representation with the number it evaluates to.

Made me wonder, what does the value represent?

I guess it is obvious once you think about it, but it represents the number
of whole notes in the bar.

So, 4/4, 2/2, 1/1, and 8/8 all have a value of 1 and represent a whole note
in total duration.

Also makes me wonder:  do we have a word for time signatures that have
duration other than a whole note?

In this sense, evaluating the duration of non-dyadic signatures is just as
transparent as those that are not a whole note in duration.

For example, understanding the length of 3/4 is straightforward, and
evaluating the length of 6/8 and 4/6 are about the same, since you have to
reduce the fraction to 3/4 or 2/3.

However, from a philosophical perspective, I have a difficult time thinking
of the time signature itself as a fraction.  I feel like it is rather the
combination of a multiplier and a fraction.

The bottom number tells you what note gets the beat, which we represent as
fractions of a whole note, with an implied numerator of 1.  Then the top
number tells you how many beats are in the bar.

Combining a multiplier with a fraction of course yields another fraction.

But the meaning of the resulting fraction is not as obvious, or I guess is
not typically directly musically relevant.  So musically, I don't think we
tend to think of time signatures as fractions.

In fact, even the fractional part of this, which is baked into the concept
of which note type gets the beat, I would argue, is not typically
experienced as a fraction.  In fact, it seems like what time signatures are
doing is more integer-ization of a fraction:  it says that this thing that
was previously defined as a fraction, that thing should now be considered 1
unit beat.  (Ignoring compound time conventions).

So, I guess I come to the conclusion that the only reason we think of the
time signature as a fraction is because we define our note values as
fractions of a whole note.


Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954   "*Confusion is
highly underrated*"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist ~ Educator
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: Tie in markup (lyrics)

[Fernando Gil]

You may try:

\markup \concat {
   \tied-lyric "he~yo"
}

El mié, 18 ene 2023 a las 17:50, David Kastrup () escribió:

> Stephan Schöll  writes:
>
> > Hi everybody
> >
> > I have stanzas 2..n put as markup below the score. In one stanza there
> > are two syllables on one note. In lyricmode I'd write the ~, but this
> > doesn't work in regular markup. Is there a way to add that kind of text
> > syllable tie to markup as well? Or should I simply look for some
> > tie-like unicode character?
> >
> > \version "2.24.0"
> > \relative c' {
> >   c d e f
> > }
> > \addlyrics {
> >   he~yo he -- yo hey
> > }
> > \markup {
> >   "he~yo"
> > }
>
> Try
>
> \markup \concat {
>h \undertie "e y" o
> }
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>

Re: irrational meters

[David Zelinsky]

Silvain Dupertuis  writes:

> It is better not to confuse a /fraction/ (as an expression) and it's
> /value/ (as a /number/) ­­— a number cannot have a numerator or a
> denominator!

Well, a *rational* number does have a well-defined denominator: Because
of unique factorization of the integers, there is a unique
representation of a rational number as n/d where n and d are integers
with no common factor and d is positive.  Now if we wanted to think
about time signatures N/D where N and D are elements of, say the
integers with the square root of -5 adjoined, that's another matter.
Any takers, you composers out there?  :)

-David

Re: Tie in markup (lyrics)

[David Kastrup]

Stephan Schöll  writes:

> Hi everybody
>
> I have stanzas 2..n put as markup below the score. In one stanza there
> are two syllables on one note. In lyricmode I'd write the ~, but this
> doesn't work in regular markup. Is there a way to add that kind of text
> syllable tie to markup as well? Or should I simply look for some
> tie-like unicode character?
>
> \version "2.24.0"
> \relative c' {
>   c d e f
> }
> \addlyrics {
>   he~yo he -- yo hey
> }
> \markup {
>   "he~yo"
> }

Try

\markup \concat {
   h \undertie "e y" o
}

-- 
David Kastrup

Tie in markup (lyrics)

[Stephan Schöll]

Hi everybody

I have stanzas 2..n put as markup below the score. In one stanza there
are two syllables on one note. In lyricmode I'd write the ~, but this
doesn't work in regular markup. Is there a way to add that kind of text
syllable tie to markup as well? Or should I simply look for some
tie-like unicode character?

\version "2.24.0"
\relative c' {
  c d e f
}
\addlyrics {
  he~yo he -- yo hey
}
\markup {
  "he~yo"
}


TIA Stephan

Re: irrational meters

[Silvain Dupertuis]

To make things clear, a /fraction/ is a mathematical expression which is a /specific 
representation/ of a number (or of a formal expression), comprising a numerator, a 
denominator, and one kind of division sign (which can be written in different ways, as 
there are different ways to write the operator).


A /ratio/ of two numbers is a number resulting from the division of those two. It can 
therefore very naturally expressed as a fraction.


So I have no problem considering a musical metric as a fraction!

It is better not to confuse a /fraction/ (as an expression) and it's /value/ (as a 
/number/) ­­— a number cannot have a numerator or a denominator!


But whenever we write a fraction in a mathematical expression, it is the /value/ which is 
implied, not the fraction itself.


So we do confuse them very commonly, like we commonly confuse a word and it's meaning in 
common language (and we survive quite well with this confusion).


In case we need to avoid these confusions, one can use quotation marks... It can be useful 
or essential when teaching mathematics or when working in mathematical logic or in 
linguistics.


Hope this clarify the matter.

Silvain




Le 18.01.23 à 18:51, Shane Brandes a écrit :
Because terminology amuses me here. Years ago, I learned that time signatures were 
decidedly not fractions but ratios from a one Richard Hoffman. But even before that I 
learned ratios consisted of antecedents and consequents, which also seems to overlap 
musical structural terminology in a weird way making that also fairly useless as a 
nomenclature.


Shane



--
Silvain Dupertuis
Route de Lausanne 335
1293 Bellevue (Switzerland)
tél. +41-(0)22-774.20.67
portable +41-(0)79-604.87.52
web: silvain-dupertuis.org 

Re: irrational meters

[Shane Brandes]

Because terminology amuses me here. Years ago, I learned that time
signatures were decidedly not fractions but ratios from a one Richard
Hoffman. But even before that I learned ratios consisted of antecedents and
consequents, which also seems to overlap musical structural terminology in
a weird way making that also fairly useless as a nomenclature.

Shane

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 9:38 AM David Wright 
wrote:

> On Wed 18 Jan 2023 at 08:22:19 (+), Mark Knoop wrote:
> > At 16:46 on 17 Jan 2023, "H. S. Teoh" via LilyPond user discussion wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 07:08:41PM -0500, David Zelinsky wrote:
> > >> Kieren MacMillan  writes:
> > >>>
> >  I wonder about the term “irrational” meter. Should not we say
> >  “irregular” ??  as in mathematics, an irrational number is a number
> >  which cannot be represented as a fraction...
> > >>>
> > >>> As both a published composer *and* a published number theorist, I
> > >>> wholeheartedly concur with your intuition — I’ve been pushing for
> > >>> decades against “irrational” as a descriptor for time signatures
> > >>> [except where it actually applies, of course, as in π/4].
> > >>>
> > >>> “Irregular” is better… but ultimately I prefer “non-dyadic” to
> > >>> describe any time signature where the bottom number (a.k.a.
> > >>> “denominator”, a label I also avoid) is not an integer power of 2.
> > > [...]
> > >> As another professional number theorist and musician (though not a
> > >> composer), I also find this use of "irrational" to mean "non-dyadic"
> > >> very grating.  But I once said as much on the Music Engraving Tips
> > >> facebook group, and got summarily shot down as ignorant and elitist.
> > >> The argument, such as it was, held that this is about *music*, not
> > >> *mathematics*, so there's no reason to adopt mathematicians' quirky
> > >> terminology.  This left me rather speechless, so I gave up.  However,
> > >> if I ever have reason to discuss this type of meter, will always call
> > >> it "non-dyadic".
> > > [...]
> >
> > > This is off-topic, but it would be interesting if somebody composed a
> > > piece with an actually irrational meter, like π/4 or 3/π.  Only thing
> > > is, it would be impossible for human performers to play correctly,
> since
> > > there isn't any way to count the beats correctly (counting beats
> implies
> > > a rational fraction, since by definition it's impossible to count up to
> > > an irrational ratio by counting finite parts).
> >
> > Perhaps one should define "correctly" before assuming impossibility. By
> > any definition of correctly which makes sense in this context (i.e.
> > precise rhythmic execution), it is arguably equally impossible to play
> > music in a *dyadic* meter correctly.
>
> I understood TSH's "correctly" to mean "precisely", and I would say
> that by convention, one is not expected to play music in a dyadic
> meter with precision. For example, most people are familiar with the
> Viennese Waltz and its anticipated second beat, or the ebb and flow of
> most solo piano music, and so on.
>
> OTOH specifying a (mathematically) irrational meter implies a
> precision that I would agree is virtually impossible to perform
> without artificial aids like computer synthesis.
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>

Re: Spontini-Editor 1.20 released

[Knute Snortum]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:47 PM Paolo Prete  wrote:
>
> There is an executable for Linux too.
> Download it here:
>
> Spontini-Editor-1.20_alfa-linux_x86_64.tar.gz

Ah, that's better!

--
Knute Snortum

Re: Removing (or not) empty staves

[Ralph Palmer]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:42 PM Xavier Scheuer  wrote:

> On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 at 04:12, Ralph Palmer 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi -
> >
> > Thanks for all your work, for helping users, and for LilyPond itself.
> I've been using LilyPond and Frescobaldi for a long time, mostly on
> Linux/Ubuntu.
> >
> > I'm currently running LilyPond 2.24.0 and Frescobaldi 3.2 on
> Linux/Ubuntu.
> >
> > I'm trying to transcribe the viola parts for Saint-Saens' Le Deluge for
> my personal use, but trying to keep it close to the original. My problem is
> that there are 8 lines of score with single staves, and then multiple lines
> with Solo and Tutti staves. The first line with two staves has all rests in
> the Solo staff. I can get LilyPond to go single staff for the opening, but
> I can't get it to do that and keep the first (all rests) line of the Solo
> part. I'm attaching a photo of the original score where it switches from
> single staff to two staves per system, as well as two .ly files and their
> PDFs from my attempts to reproduce the original. It's not a make or break
> problem, but I would like to know what I might be doing wrong or what I
> might do differently. I'm using \Staff \RemoveEmptyStaves in \context.
>
> Hello,
>
> In that case I would use a Keep_alive_together_engraver and different
> VerticalAxisGroup remove-layer values and setting/unsetting
> Staff.keepAliveInterfaces where desired.
> There is a small example with Violins I & II and separate staves V I and V
> II in the documentation.
> NR 1.6.2 Modifying single staves > Hiding staves
>
> https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.24/Documentation/notation/modifying-single-staves#hiding-staves
>
> Otherwise if you want to keep your \RemoveEmptyStaves solution you can
> cheat and include a transparent note at the beginning of the Andantino
> Solo.
>
> Cheers,
> Xavier
>
> --
> Xavier Scheuer 
>
>
Thanks, Xavier - I'll take a closer look at the Documentation link and see
what I can do.

All the best,

Ralph
__
Ralph Palmer
Seattle
USA
(he, him, his)
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com

Re: Title font changed?

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 14/01/2023 à 10:30, Bart Kummel a écrit :

Hi Jean,

Thanks for your reply. Very insightful! I wonder why Google didn’t 
come up with a link to this issue…


Anyway, it looks like the solution will be merged into Homebrew’s main 
soon. I might be able to just wait for it. I’ll keep an eye on the issue.





Should be fixed now. Can you confirm that it works after upgrading the 
lilypond formula?


Best,
Jean



OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: irrational meters

[David Wright]

On Wed 18 Jan 2023 at 08:22:19 (+), Mark Knoop wrote:
> At 16:46 on 17 Jan 2023, "H. S. Teoh" via LilyPond user discussion wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 07:08:41PM -0500, David Zelinsky wrote:
> >> Kieren MacMillan  writes:
> >>>
>  I wonder about the term “irrational” meter. Should not we say
>  “irregular” ??  as in mathematics, an irrational number is a number
>  which cannot be represented as a fraction...
> >>>
> >>> As both a published composer *and* a published number theorist, I
> >>> wholeheartedly concur with your intuition — I’ve been pushing for
> >>> decades against “irrational” as a descriptor for time signatures
> >>> [except where it actually applies, of course, as in π/4].
> >>>
> >>> “Irregular” is better… but ultimately I prefer “non-dyadic” to
> >>> describe any time signature where the bottom number (a.k.a.
> >>> “denominator”, a label I also avoid) is not an integer power of 2.
> > [...]
> >> As another professional number theorist and musician (though not a
> >> composer), I also find this use of "irrational" to mean "non-dyadic"
> >> very grating.  But I once said as much on the Music Engraving Tips
> >> facebook group, and got summarily shot down as ignorant and elitist.
> >> The argument, such as it was, held that this is about *music*, not
> >> *mathematics*, so there's no reason to adopt mathematicians' quirky
> >> terminology.  This left me rather speechless, so I gave up.  However,
> >> if I ever have reason to discuss this type of meter, will always call
> >> it "non-dyadic".
> > [...]
> 
> > This is off-topic, but it would be interesting if somebody composed a
> > piece with an actually irrational meter, like π/4 or 3/π.  Only thing
> > is, it would be impossible for human performers to play correctly, since
> > there isn't any way to count the beats correctly (counting beats implies
> > a rational fraction, since by definition it's impossible to count up to
> > an irrational ratio by counting finite parts).
> 
> Perhaps one should define "correctly" before assuming impossibility. By
> any definition of correctly which makes sense in this context (i.e.
> precise rhythmic execution), it is arguably equally impossible to play
> music in a *dyadic* meter correctly.

I understood TSH's "correctly" to mean "precisely", and I would say
that by convention, one is not expected to play music in a dyadic
meter with precision. For example, most people are familiar with the
Viennese Waltz and its anticipated second beat, or the ebb and flow of
most solo piano music, and so on.

OTOH specifying a (mathematically) irrational meter implies a
precision that I would agree is virtually impossible to perform
without artificial aids like computer synthesis.

Cheers,
David.

Re: irrational meters

[Hans Åberg]

> On 18 Jan 2023, at 01:46, H. S. Teoh via LilyPond user discussion 
>  wrote:
> 
> … it would be interesting if somebody composed a
> piece with an actually irrational meter, like π/4 or 3/π.  

I gave an example [1] where the numerator is an irrational number, 8+2√5.

If one wants to typeset them in LilyPond, one can apply continued fraction 
convergents to a suitable degree of accuracy.

> Only thing
> is, it would be impossible for human performers to play correctly, since
> there isn't any way to count the beats correctly (counting beats implies
> a rational fraction, since by definition it's impossible to count up to
> an irrational ratio by counting finite parts).

The example [1] is based on a popular Macedonian meter 12=3+2+2+3+2 [2], which 
in performance has heavy metric time bends [3].

A musical motivation writing such a meter might be to make performers to avoid 
trying to play an exact 3+2+2+3+2.


1. https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2014-06/msg00237.htm
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leventikos
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYR_pvRWO_g

Re: irrational meters

[David Kastrup]

Valentin Petzel  writes:

> Hi Karim,
>
> 2) does not work as #'(ly:make-moment 16/25) is a symbol rather than

It isn't a symbol but a list consisting of the elements ly:make-moment
(a symbol) and the rational number 16/25 .

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: irrational meters

[Valentin Petzel]

Hi Karim,

2) does not work as #'(ly:make-moment 16/25) is a symbol rather than 
#(ly:make-moment 
16/25). Also (2) still needs \scaleDurations 4/5, unless you do

\time 4/5
\set Timing.measureLength = #(ly:make-moment 4/4)

The idea behind the part

https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.24/Documentation/snippets/rhythms#rhythms-changing-time-signatures-inside-a-polymetric-section-using-_005cscaledurations[1]

in the documention is to change TimeSignature while having a scaled Duration, 
so you 
want to have an e.g. 4/4 time sig, but the Staff should be scaled by 4/5, so 
you want the 
measure length of a 4/5 timesig, thus you do 4/4 and manualy tell Lilypond that 
you 
actually want a length of 4/5.

If you want to use something like 4/5 this is not of relevance to you. As I 
said you could 
change measure length to 4/4 and notate everything as if it were 4/4 though.

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Dienstag, 17. Jänner 2023, 12:16:43 CET schrieb Karim Haddad:
> Hi,
> 
> I am wondering which is the best way to write irrational meters (with tempo
> modulations)
> 
> 1)
> %

> \version "2.24.0"
> \score {
> {
> 
> \clef "G"
> 
> \scaleDurations 4/5 {
> \time 4/5
> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = #'(4 . 5)
> \mark \markup {\left-column {{\line { \smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN 
> \note {4} #1 " = 60 "}} \tiny "1"}} c'4
> c'4
> c'4
> c'4
> 
> }
> \once \set Staff.whichBar = "|"
> }
> 
> 
> \layout {
> 
> \context {\Score
>  %measureBarType=#""
>   }
> 
> }
> }
> %

> 
> or
> 
> 2)
> 
> %

> \version "2.24.0"
> \score {
> {
> \clef "G"
> 
> \time 4/5
> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = #'(4 . 5)
> \set Timing.measureLength = #'(ly:make-moment 16/25)
> \mark \markup {\left-column {{\line { \smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN 
> \note {4} #1 " = 60 "}} \tiny "1"}} c'4
> c'4
> c'4
> c'4
> 
> \once \set Staff.whichBar = "|"
> }
> 
> \layout {
> 
> \context {\Score
>  measureBarType=#""
> }
> 
> }
> }
> %

> 
> 
> Now the first solution outputs:
> 
> Processing `irr1.ly'
> Parsing...
> Interpreting music...
> irr1.ly:13:1: warning: strange time signature found: 4/5
> 
> \time 4/5
> Preprocessing graphical objects...
> 
> 
> Which looks good to me as a warning
> 

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Unexpected warning message

[Valentin Petzel]

Hello Paul,

this error occurs because the TrillPitchAccidental grob does not specify an 
outside-slur property, so it warns and defaults to 'ignore.

To get rid of the warning specify a suitable value. Accidental uses 'inside, 
if you do not want to change behaviour choose 'ignore. Here is a demo of how 
this can affect the score:

{
  \override TrillPitchAccidental.avoid-slur = #'ignore
  d'( \pitchedTrill cis'8[\startTrillSpan gis d'])\stopTrillSpan
}
{ 
  \override TrillPitchAccidental.avoid-slur = #'outside
  d'( \pitchedTrill cis'8[\startTrillSpan gis d'])\stopTrillSpan
}
{
  \override TrillPitchAccidental.avoid-slur = #'ignore
  d'( \pitchedTrill cis'8[\startTrillSpan eis g])\stopTrillSpan
}
{
  \override TrillPitchAccidental.avoid-slur = #'inside
  d'( \pitchedTrill cis'8[\startTrillSpan eis g])\stopTrillSpan
}

Note that in your case this does not matter, as the Accidental is recognized 
to happen at the same time as the Slur, but in fact the Slur ends at that time 
and with the TrillNoteHead being shifted to the right there is in fact no 
collision between Slur and Accidental.

The only issue this warning may cause you is an unresolved collision between a 
Slur and an TrillPitchAccidental.

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Mittwoch, 18. Jänner 2023, 13:10:23 CET schrieb Paul Hodges:
> The code below produces exactly the output that I expect. (It is extracted
> from a very complex bit of notation - trust me that things like the way the
> grace notes are written have a good reason in context.)
> 
> 
> My concern is that as well as producing the expected output, it also
> generates a warning message:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C:/Users/PAUL~1.CAS/AppData/Local/Temp/frescobaldi-hq45qbn3/tmp6a3tkp_s/docu
> ment.ly:8:12: warning: Ignoring grob for slur: TrillPitchAccidental.
>  avoid-slur not set? cs8[)\fp
>\startTrillSpan ds
> 
> 
> What does this even mean, and is there any way to resolve it?
> 
> 
> Paul
> 
> 
> %
> 
> 
> 
> \version "2.24.0"
> 
> 
> \language english
> 
> 
> \relative e'' {
>   \magnifyMusic 0.67 { \stemUp e!8*1/16[\ff^( fs e] }
>   \stemDown \pitchedTrill
>   cs8[)\fp \startTrillSpan ds
>   s4 
>   \parenthesize cs8\<
>   \hideNotes \set stemRightBeamCount=1 cs8*1/16]\f \stopTrillSpan
> }
> 
> 
> 



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Unexpected warning message

[Paul Hodges]

The code below produces exactly the output that I expect. (It is extracted from 
a very complex bit of notation - trust me that things like the way the grace 
notes are written have a good reason in context.)


My concern is that as well as producing the expected output, it also generates 
a warning message:




C:/Users/PAUL~1.CAS/AppData/Local/Temp/frescobaldi-hq45qbn3/tmp6a3tkp_s/document.ly:8:12:
warning: Ignoring grob for slur: TrillPitchAccidental.  avoid-slur not set?
  cs8[)\fp
               \startTrillSpan ds


What does this even mean, and is there any way to resolve it?


Paul


%



\version "2.24.0"


\language english


\relative e'' {
  \magnifyMusic 0.67 { \stemUp e!8*1/16[\ff^( fs e] }
  \stemDown \pitchedTrill
  cs8[)\fp \startTrillSpan ds
  s4 
  \parenthesize cs8\<
  \hideNotes \set stemRightBeamCount=1 cs8*1/16]\f \stopTrillSpan
}

Re: Completion_heads_engraver for line-ends only?

[Thomas Morley]

Am Di., 17. Jan. 2023 um 18:32 Uhr schrieb Graham King
:
>
> I'm preparing an edition of de Wert's motet "Ascendente Jesu in naviculam" 
> which has an extended stretto section with dotted rhythms across barlines.  
> For this, Harm's Mensurstriche example in the Learning Manual produces a 
> mostly beautiful result.

As a sidenote.
I'm not the author of said snippet. It comes from LSR
https://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=582
Though, as LSR editor I noticed the a programming error with 2.23,
thus I edited the comment on top of the code.
Meanwhile LSR runs 2.24.0 and the programming error is gone for this
snippet. Thus I removed the comment inside LSR.
The modified snippet will be available with next lsr-import.

Though, in general the mentioned issue is still present:
https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/4084

Cheers,
  Harm

Re: irrational meters

[Aaron Hill]

On 2023-01-18 1:23 am, Paul Hodges wrote:
As for alternatives, I suppose dyadic will do; but irregular is 
certainly wrong - there is no reason for an irrational tempo to be 
irregular, in fact, anything that can be expressed as a time signature 
is being given a regular definition.


Church hymnary already uses the term "irregular meter" to describe hymns 
that have no consistent metrical structure.  ("Peculiar meter" is also 
used.)  Though to be clear, there one is talking about the poetry and 
verse as opposed to musical structures such as measures.  However, as 
there is a practical connection between texts and tunes, it might be 
best to avoid confusion with overloaded terms that span the topics.



-- Aaron Hill

Re: irrational meters

[Leo Correia de Verdier]

If the warnings bother you you could use a function to suppress them, like:

irrtime = #(define-music-function (frac) (pair?) 
 #{ #(ly:expect-warning "strange time signature found") 
\time #frac #} )

\score { 
  \relative c' {
\irrtime 4/5
\tuplet 5/4 1 {
  c4 d e f |
  g a2 g4 | 
  f2 g |
  e4 f e d |
  c1 | }
}}

Or  something more elegantly coded…

And everyone else: Can we talk about breve? It is nowadays usually one of the 
longest durations. I think we should change its name!  (or possibly keep on 
topic)

Best wishes
/Leo

> 17 jan. 2023 kl. 16:13 skrev Karim Haddad :
> 
> Thank you a lot Leo for your advice.
> I'll hence stick with solution #1 which looks preferable.
> 
> @all
> Now about "irrational meter" (or "irrational" rhythms), well this 
> denomination is from the fifties. I am aware that mathematically this is not 
> correct since it is a fraction.However, "irregular" is somehow more vague and 
> doesn't relate to anything in particular. Thanks to Hans' link that shows 
> that it is a somehow a common terminology in music practice. 
> 
> Best to all of you, and thank you for all your comments.
> 
> Karim
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 01:30:49PM +0100, Leo Correia de Verdier wrote:
>> Hi Karim!
>> 
>> Your first example seems to work to me (I don’t do irrational meters 
>> everyday, so there might be something I’m missing. I would probably write 
>> the tuplets explicitly rather than use \scaleDurations). 
>> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction is superfluous, the time signature already 
>> does that.
>> 
>> I’m not sure what you’re aiming at with the second example. One source of 
>> error is that you have quoted ly:make-moment, and it wants its arguments as 
>> elements of a list, not as a fraction, so: 
>> #(ly:make-moment 16 25)
>> , not
>> #'(ly:make-moment 16/25)
>> But it is still not the right amount of notes in the bar.
>> 
>> HTH
>> /Leo
>> 
>>> 17 jan. 2023 kl. 12:16 skrev Karim Haddad :
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am wondering which is the best way to write irrational meters (with tempo 
>>> modulations)
>>> 
>>> 1)
>>> %
>>> \version "2.24.0"
>>> \score {
>>> {
>>> 
>>> \clef "G"
>>> 
>>> \scaleDurations 4/5 {
>>> \time 4/5
>>> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = #'(4 . 5)
>>> \mark \markup {\left-column {{\line { \smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN  
>>> \note {4} #1 " = 60 "}} \tiny "1"}}
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> |
>>> }
>>> \once \set Staff.whichBar = "|"
>>> }
>>> 
>>> 
>>> \layout {
>>> 
>>> \context {\Score
>>>%measureBarType=#""
>>> }
>>> 
>>> }
>>> }
>>> %
>>> 
>>> or
>>> 
>>> 2)
>>> 
>>> %
>>> \version "2.24.0"
>>> \score {
>>> {
>>> \clef "G"
>>> 
>>> \time 4/5
>>> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = #'(4 . 5)
>>> \set Timing.measureLength = #'(ly:make-moment 16/25)
>>> \mark \markup {\left-column {{\line { \smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN  
>>> \note {4} #1 " = 60 "}} \tiny "1"}}
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> c'4
>>> |
>>> \once \set Staff.whichBar = "|"
>>> }
>>> 
>>> \layout {
>>> 
>>> \context {\Score
>>>measureBarType=#""
>>>   }
>>> 
>>> }
>>> }
>>> %
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Now the first solution outputs:
>>> 
>>> Processing `irr1.ly'
>>> Parsing...
>>> Interpreting music...
>>> irr1.ly:13:1: warning: strange time signature found: 4/5
>>> 
>>> \time 4/5
>>> Preprocessing graphical objects...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Which looks good to me as a warning
>>> 
>>> However, the second solution gives:
>>> 
>>> Processing `irr2.ly'
>>> Parsing...
>>> Interpreting music...
>>> warning: type check for `measureLength' failed; value `(ly:make-moment 
>>> 16/25)' must be of type `moment'
>>> irr2.ly:12:1: warning: strange time signature found: 4/5
>>> 
>>> \time 4/5
>>> irr2.ly:20:1: warning: barcheck failed at: 1/5
>>> 
>>> |
>>> Preprocessing graphical objects...
>>> 
>>> 
>>> And if we comment measureBarType=#"" we will have a strange bar at the end.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Best Regards
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Karim Haddad
>>> 
>>> Music Representations Team, IRCAM
>>> Research and development manager.
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Karim Haddad
> 
> Music Representations Team, IRCAM
> Research and development manager.
> 

Re: irrational meters

[Paul Hodges]

From:   Mark Knoop  
 To:   H. S. Teoh  
 Cc:
 Sent:   18/01/2023 8:22 
 Subject:   Re: irrational meters 

Perhaps one should define "correctly" before assuming impossibility. By 
any definition of correctly which makes sense in this context (i.e. 
precise rhythmic execution), it is arguably equally impossible to play 
music in a *dyadic* meter correctly. 
 
 
Agreed.  In any case the impossibility assumes that a numeric tempo has been 
assigned using a rational note-value as base.  Also, it's only really an issue 
if the numerator of the signature is irrational, not the denominator.


As for alternatives, I suppose dyadic will do; but irregular is certainly wrong 
- there is no reason for an irrational tempo to be irregular, in fact, anything 
that can be expressed as a time signature is being given a regular definition.


Finally, if we're appealing to ancient meanings and etymology, consider the use 
of irrational in Greek and Latin prosody to mean the use of quantities which 
are not correctly part of the metre - I think that would transfer nicely to the 
musical use.


Anyway, I'm more exercised by people who talk about their weight when they mean 
their mass!


Paul

Re: irrational meters

[Mark Knoop]

At 16:46 on 17 Jan 2023, "H. S. Teoh" via LilyPond user discussion wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 07:08:41PM -0500, David Zelinsky wrote:
>> Kieren MacMillan  writes:
>>
>>> Hi Silvain,
>>>
 I wonder about the term “irrational” meter. Should not we say
 “irregular” ??  as in mathematics, an irrational number is a number
 which cannot be represented as a fraction...
>>>
>>> As both a published composer *and* a published number theorist, I
>>> wholeheartedly concur with your intuition — I’ve been pushing for
>>> decades against “irrational” as a descriptor for time signatures
>>> [except where it actually applies, of course, as in π/4].
>>>
>>> “Irregular” is better… but ultimately I prefer “non-dyadic” to
>>> describe any time signature where the bottom number (a.k.a.
>>> “denominator”, a label I also avoid) is not an integer power of 2.
> [...]
>> As another professional number theorist and musician (though not a
>> composer), I also find this use of "irrational" to mean "non-dyadic"
>> very grating.  But I once said as much on the Music Engraving Tips
>> facebook group, and got summarily shot down as ignorant and elitist.
>> The argument, such as it was, held that this is about *music*, not
>> *mathematics*, so there's no reason to adopt mathematicians' quirky
>> terminology.  This left me rather speechless, so I gave up.  However,
>> if I ever have reason to discuss this type of meter, will always call
>> it "non-dyadic".
> [...]

> This is off-topic, but it would be interesting if somebody composed a
> piece with an actually irrational meter, like π/4 or 3/π.  Only thing
> is, it would be impossible for human performers to play correctly, since
> there isn't any way to count the beats correctly (counting beats implies
> a rational fraction, since by definition it's impossible to count up to
> an irrational ratio by counting finite parts).

Perhaps one should define "correctly" before assuming impossibility. By
any definition of correctly which makes sense in this context (i.e.
precise rhythmic execution), it is arguably equally impossible to play
music in a *dyadic* meter correctly.

--
Mark Knoop