Re: automatically adds
On Wed 27 Dec 2023 at 18:06:05 (+0100), Tobias Lawrenz wrote: > > how can I turn off the automatically adds from notation elements, like the > time signature? > Because I want to make the whole score by myself without automatically adds. What functionality of LilyPond are you interested in retaining? In other words, why not use a drafting program, like Inkscape, or Adobe Illustrator? Cheers, David.
Re: automatically adds
...and slightly shorter, you can write "\omit Score.TimeSignature" instead
of the override.
--
Knute Snortum
On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 1:01 PM billhunker wrote:
> In the layout block.
>
> \layout {
> \override Score.TimeSignature.stencil = ##f
> }
>
> You can add things to this list.
>
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
>
>
> Original message
> From: Tobias Lawrenz
> Date: 12/27/23 11:10 AM (GMT-06:00)
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: automatically adds
>
> Hello Community,
>
> how can I turn off the automatically adds from notation elements, like
> the time signature?
>
> Because I want to make the whole score by myself without automatically
> adds.
>
> Happy greetings,
> Tobias
>
>
RE: automatically adds
In the layout block. \layout { \override Score.TimeSignature.stencil = ##f}You
can add things to this list. Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Original message From: Tobias Lawrenz
Date: 12/27/23 11:10 AM (GMT-06:00) To:
lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: automatically adds Hello Community,how can I
turn off the automatically adds from notation elements, like the time
signature?Because I want to make the whole score by myself without
automatically adds.Happy greetings,Tobias
automatically adds
Hello Community, how can I turn off the automatically adds from notation elements, like the time signature? Because I want to make the whole score by myself without automatically adds. Happy greetings, Tobias
Re: Aligning offset quintuplets and triplets
Lukas-Fabian Moser, This is wonderful! Thanks for taking the time to do this. The mathematics of the "cheat" is complex to me, but it works well. -- Knute Snortum On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 4:18 AM Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: > Hi Knute, hi Mark, > > here's an example of what I mean. The "cheating" system should create what > the original engraving suggests, even if it's wrong mathematically. I > didn't check the difference in MIDI; of course the "conductor" part > (consisting of eigths throughout) shows a significant difference. > > Of course I took advantage of the fact that the original engraving stops > bothering with tuplet brackets/numbers starting from the second bar; it > should be possible to get them back, but this will involve some further > tweaking in the "cheating" version. > > Lukas > Am 27.12.23 um 09:17 schrieb Lukas-Fabian Moser: > > Hi Mark, > Am 27.12.23 um 01:54 schrieb Mark Stephen Mrotek: > > Knute, > > In the original the first beat of the second measure is three against 2. > The 5 against 3 does not start until the second beat. > > Unfortunately, that can't be true, as with this interpretation, the > measure is over-full. Rather, the groups of quintuplets/triplets continue, > with a beaming not in sync with the measure's beat structure. > > This also implies that the original engraving isn't mathematically correct > (as the beginnings of the bems groups look as if they're aligned). > Situations like that are hard to approximate with LilyPond, as Lily has a > strict binary notion of two notes being simultaneous or not. One can try > cheating a bit by engraving the measure according to its visual apperance > (3-vs-2 in the first beat, exact 4-vs-1 in the last quaver of the measure), > but then it will be necessary to compress whatever will be in the measure > to the duration of one whole note, and it's not certain what LilyPond's > spacing algorithm will make of it. > > Sorry for describing the situation verbally; I'll try to cook up an > example as soon as I have time (later today). > > Lukas > >
Re: Hold a note the length of a cadenza
On 26/12/2023 20:21, John Burt wrote:
Dear list,
While one part is singing a cadenza another part is holding a long
note. I know how to make a rest or a skip the length of a cadenza bu
not how to make a held note the length of the cadenza.
thanks
John Burt
Something like this should do it. The first argument of the the function
note-of-length is a whole note (c''1) with the pitch you need, which is
scaled to last the same time as the music (\cadenza) in the second argument,
\version "2.24.0"
note-of-length = #(define-music-function (note music) (ly:music? ly:music?)
(ly:music-compress note (ly:music-length music)))
cadenza = { g'4 a'4 b'4 c''4 d''4 e''4 f''4 }
{
\cadenzaOn
<<
{ \cadenza g''4 }
{ \note-of-length c''1 \cadenza g'4 }
>>
\cadenzaOff
}
--
Timothy Lanfear, Bristol, UK.
Re: Aligning offset quintuplets and triplets
Hi Knute, hi Mark,
here's an example of what I mean. The "cheating" system should create
what the original engraving suggests, even if it's wrong mathematically.
I didn't check the difference in MIDI; of course the "conductor" part
(consisting of eigths throughout) shows a significant difference.
Of course I took advantage of the fact that the original engraving stops
bothering with tuplet brackets/numbers starting from the second bar; it
should be possible to get them back, but this will involve some further
tweaking in the "cheating" version.
Lukas
Am 27.12.23 um 09:17 schrieb Lukas-Fabian Moser:
Hi Mark,
Am 27.12.23 um 01:54 schrieb Mark Stephen Mrotek:
Knute,
In the original the first beat of the second measure is three against
2. The 5 against 3 does not start until the second beat.
Unfortunately, that can't be true, as with this interpretation, the
measure is over-full. Rather, the groups of quintuplets/triplets
continue, with a beaming not in sync with the measure's beat structure.
This also implies that the original engraving isn't mathematically
correct (as the beginnings of the bems groups look as if they're
aligned). Situations like that are hard to approximate with LilyPond,
as Lily has a strict binary notion of two notes being simultaneous or
not. One can try cheating a bit by engraving the measure according to
its visual apperance (3-vs-2 in the first beat, exact 4-vs-1 in the
last quaver of the measure), but then it will be necessary to compress
whatever will be in the measure to the duration of one whole note, and
it's not certain what LilyPond's spacing algorithm will make of it.
Sorry for describing the situation verbally; I'll try to cook up an
example as soon as I have time (later today).
Lukas
\version "2.24.3"
\paper {
#(set-paper-size "a4landscape")
}
%{
% a useful function:
showLength =
#(define-music-function (mus) (ly:music?)
(pretty-print (ly:music-length mus))
mus)
% of course, one can also write a function calculating
% the correct value for scaleDurations automatically
%}
rightHand = \relative {
r2 \tuplet 5/4 4 {
r8. e'16[ e e e e] e[ e |
\repeat unfold 2 {
e e e] e[ e e e e] e[ e e e e] e[ e e e e] e32[ e e e |
}
}
e]
}
leftHand = \relative {
\clef bass
r2 \tuplet 3/2 4 {
r8 r c'[ c c] c[ |
\repeat unfold 2 {
c c] c[ c c] c[ c c] c[ c c] c[ |
}
}
c]
}
rightHandCheat = \relative {
r2 \tuplet 5/4 4 { r8. e'16[ e e e e] e[ e | }
\repeat unfold 2
{
\scaleDurations 8/9
{
e16*4/3 e e] e16*4/5[ e e e e] e[ e e e e] e[ e e e e] e32[ e e e
|
}
}
e]
}
leftHandCheat = \relative {
\clef bass
r2 \tuplet 3/2 4 { r8 r c'[ c c] c[ | }
\repeat unfold 2 {
\scaleDurations 8/9
{
c8 c] c8*2/3[ c c] c[ c c] c[ c c] c8[ |
}
}
c]
}
<<
\new PianoStaff \with { instrumentName = "honest" }
<<
\new Staff \rightHand
\new Staff \leftHand
>>
\new RhythmicStaff \with {
instrumentName = "conductor"
\omit Stem
\omit Beam
}
{
s1
\repeat unfold 16 { 8 }
}
\new PianoStaff \with { instrumentName = "cheating" }
<<
\new Staff \rightHandCheat
\new Staff \leftHandCheat
>>
>>
\new PianoStaff \with {
instrumentName = \markup\center-column{cheating only "(spacing check)" }
}
<<
\new Staff \rightHandCheat
\new Staff \leftHandCheat
>>
Re: horizontal spacing issue with `keyCancellation`
Some days ago I wrote:
> Consider this snippet.
>
> ```tex
> cancellationFirst =
> \override Score.BreakAlignment.break-align-orders =
> #(grob-transformer 'break-align-orders
> (lambda (grob orig)
>(let ((vec (vector-copy orig))
> (middle '(key-cancellation
>staff-bar
>key-signature)))
> (vector-set! vec 1 middle)
> vec)))
>
> music = { \key ces \major ces'1 \bar "||"
> \key cis \major cis'1 }
>
> { <>^\markup "default"
> \music }
>
> { <>^\markup "cancellationFirst"
> \cancellationFirst
> \music }
> ```
>
> As can be seen in the image, flipping the order of the bar line and
> the key cancellation changes the horizontal spacing between the
> `NoteHead` and `NonMusicalPaperColumn` grobs in a bad way. Why does
> this happen, and how can I avoid this?
>
> The third line shows the same without a bar line, where the spacing
> is just fine.
Any takers? If nobody knows the reason, how can I debug this most
easily to find the culprit?
Werner
Re: Aligning offset quintuplets and triplets
Hi Mark, Am 27.12.23 um 01:54 schrieb Mark Stephen Mrotek: Knute, In the original the first beat of the second measure is three against 2. The 5 against 3 does not start until the second beat. Unfortunately, that can't be true, as with this interpretation, the measure is over-full. Rather, the groups of quintuplets/triplets continue, with a beaming not in sync with the measure's beat structure. This also implies that the original engraving isn't mathematically correct (as the beginnings of the bems groups look as if they're aligned). Situations like that are hard to approximate with LilyPond, as Lily has a strict binary notion of two notes being simultaneous or not. One can try cheating a bit by engraving the measure according to its visual apperance (3-vs-2 in the first beat, exact 4-vs-1 in the last quaver of the measure), but then it will be necessary to compress whatever will be in the measure to the duration of one whole note, and it's not certain what LilyPond's spacing algorithm will make of it. Sorry for describing the situation verbally; I'll try to cook up an example as soon as I have time (later today). Lukas
