[Solved] Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-12-08 Thread Alexander Kobel 

On 2016-12-06 22:45, Alexander Kobel wrote:

Dear all,

I'd like to lift the thread "\accidentalStyle for common choir notation"
from June-July out of the grave. Unfortunately, I don't have it in my
inbox anymore, so I need to refer to the horribly url'ed archive

http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/accidentalStyle-for-common-choir-notation-td191797.html#a192980

In particular, I'd like to gain new insight why Abraham's idea did not
work out (also, not for me over here).

Summary: I want to use the piano accidental style in a ChoirStaff, but
it doesn't work.
[...]


Hi everybody,

I found both the culprit and the workaround.
The problem compared to GrandStaff is that ChoirStaff does not keep 
track of the list of accidentals that occured within the last bars. More 
precisely, localKeySignature (or, from v.19.8, localAlterations) is not 
a known context property therein.

Fortunately, the fix is simple: add an initialization to an empty list as in
  \layout { \context { \ChoirStaff localAlterations = #'() } }
and it will be populated and used automagically. After that, Abraham's 
conversion of the piano and piano-cautionary or a definition as follows 
(slightly different for tracking of different voices on the same staff) 
works like a charm, without modifications of any Lily internals:


accidental-styles.choral =
  #`(#f
 (Voice ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
  Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1)
,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ChoirStaff ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
 ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
 ()
 ChoirStaff)
accidental-styles.choral-cautionary =
  #`(#f
 (Voice ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
  Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
 (Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ChoirStaff ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
 ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
 ChoirStaff)

... \new ChoirStaff << \accidentalStyle choral ... >>>


I could see no other (negative) side effect of adding localAlterations 
to ChoirStaff. I will try to do a regtest with that change over the 
weekend; if it does no harm, I will propose a one-line patch to include 
it per default, so that hopefully ChoirStaff accidental styles will not 
need this additional workaround in the future.



Best,
Alexander

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

[Resurrection] \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-12-06 Thread Alexander Kobel 

Dear all,

I'd like to lift the thread "\accidentalStyle for common choir notation" 
from June-July out of the grave. Unfortunately, I don't have it in my 
inbox anymore, so I need to refer to the horribly url'ed archive


http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/accidentalStyle-for-common-choir-notation-td191797.html#a192980
In particular, I'd like to gain new insight why Abraham's idea did not 
work out (also, not for me over here).


Summary: I want to use the piano accidental style in a ChoirStaff, but 
it doesn't work.


My contribution to the rationale (and I'm surprised that this hasn't 
been mentioned in the earlier discussion): Pieces might be pure a 
cappella, but conductors need to lead rehearsals every once in a while, 
and the might want to use the piano for that. And they're elected to 
lead, not to read:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zQ55S-DJsM
And there no. 3 of 5 possible options is not always correct... ;-)


Any hints?


Cheers,
Alexander

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-07-22 Thread tisimst 
On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 3:14 AM, David Kastrup [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n192707...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> David Wright <[hidden email]
> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node=192707=0>> writes:
>
> > On Thu 14 Jul 2016 at 19:07:41 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> >> Sorry, guys, for being so rude. But can we talk about LP-features
> >> instead of arguing about best-practice-typesetting? That would be
> >> nice :)
> >> To me, this discussion is somewhat obsolete. A good program should
> >> leave the decision to the user. And that's where LP is failing at
> >> the moment, cause user cannot choose the option very many - not to
> >> say: the very most - engravers of choir scores opted for.
> >
> > I apologise for fighting your corner.
> >
> >> \accidentalStyle piano works in GrandStaff, but is needed in
> >> ChoirStaff. So can somebody please be so kind to invest her energy,
> >> time and skills into this problem instead of wasting her capacities
> >> in a discussion about a question which is at least in part a matter
> >> of personal taste? I tried to manipulate the scm/music-functions.scm
> >> but, since I do not understand it, without success.
> >
> > I don't know whether my contribution could persuade Phil that
> > reputable publishers print what he, as a singer, might find
> > confusing. However, as a LP Main Developer and a member of the
> > Bug Squad, he might be the sort of person to be able to make
> > such a that change if he was won over.
>
> \accidentalStyle is not about figuring out what the best way of
> typesetting things are, but about specifying one way to do it.
>
> So the threshold for a feature is more like "are people going to have a
> reason for wanting it" rather than "is it the best way to typeset this".
>
> Of course, we will save ourselves a lot of discussions if "are people
> going to have a reason for wanting it" does not imply "we need to
> provide an implementation for exactly what they are going to want" but
> if it is reasonably easy to make LilyPond do what you want without your
> particular use case needing to be coded into LilyPond in some manner.
>

Late to the conversation, but watched everything from afar.

So, I went into the file scm/music-functions.scm as well and basically
copied the alist entry for piano:

;; Stone's suggestions for accidentals on grand staff.
;; Accidentals are canceled across the staves
;; in the same grand staff as well
(piano #f
   (Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1)
  GrandStaff
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
   ()
   GrandStaff)

and I figured that adding another entry like the following would make it
possible:

;; Similar to the piano style, accidentals are canceled
;; across the staves in the same choir staff as well
(choral #f
   (Staff ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1)
  ChoirStaff
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'any-octave 0)
  ,(make-accidental-rule 'same-octave 1))
   ()
   ChoirStaff)

But that didn't change anything when I tried

\accidentalStyle choral

or

\accidentalStyle ChoirStaff.choral

or any other combination. What am I missing?

--
Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/accidentalStyle-for-common-choir-notation-tp191797p192980.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-07-15 Thread David Kastrup 
David Wright  writes:

> On Thu 14 Jul 2016 at 19:07:41 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
>> Sorry, guys, for being so rude. But can we talk about LP-features
>> instead of arguing about best-practice-typesetting? That would be
>> nice :)
>> To me, this discussion is somewhat obsolete. A good program should
>> leave the decision to the user. And that's where LP is failing at
>> the moment, cause user cannot choose the option very many - not to
>> say: the very most - engravers of choir scores opted for.
>
> I apologise for fighting your corner.
>
>> \accidentalStyle piano works in GrandStaff, but is needed in
>> ChoirStaff. So can somebody please be so kind to invest her energy,
>> time and skills into this problem instead of wasting her capacities
>> in a discussion about a question which is at least in part a matter
>> of personal taste? I tried to manipulate the scm/music-functions.scm
>> but, since I do not understand it, without success.
>
> I don't know whether my contribution could persuade Phil that
> reputable publishers print what he, as a singer, might find
> confusing. However, as a LP Main Developer and a member of the
> Bug Squad, he might be the sort of person to be able to make
> such a that change if he was won over.

\accidentalStyle is not about figuring out what the best way of
typesetting things are, but about specifying one way to do it.

So the threshold for a feature is more like "are people going to have a
reason for wanting it" rather than "is it the best way to typeset this".

Of course, we will save ourselves a lot of discussions if "are people
going to have a reason for wanting it" does not imply "we need to
provide an implementation for exactly what they are going to want" but
if it is reasonably easy to make LilyPond do what you want without your
particular use case needing to be coded into LilyPond in some manner.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-07-14 Thread David Wright 
On Thu 14 Jul 2016 at 19:07:41 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> Sorry, guys, for being so rude. But can we talk about LP-features instead of 
> arguing about best-practice-typesetting? That would be nice :)
> To me, this discussion is somewhat obsolete. A good program should leave the 
> decision to the user. And that's where LP is failing at the moment, cause 
> user cannot choose the option very many - not to say: the very most - 
> engravers of choir scores opted for.

I apologise for fighting your corner.

> \accidentalStyle piano works in GrandStaff, but is needed in ChoirStaff. So 
> can somebody please be so kind to invest her energy, time and skills into 
> this problem instead of wasting her capacities in a discussion about a 
> question which is at least in part a matter of personal taste? I tried to 
> manipulate the scm/music-functions.scm but, since I do not understand it, 
> without success.

I don't know whether my contribution could persuade Phil that
reputable publishers print what he, as a singer, might find
confusing. However, as a LP Main Developer and a member of the
Bug Squad, he might be the sort of person to be able to make
such a that change if he was won over.

> Thank you ever so much for your help,

If you mean for the workaround, HTH, thanks.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-07-14 Thread Jonathan Scholbach 
Sorry, guys, for being so rude. But can we talk about LP-features instead of 
arguing about best-practice-typesetting? That would be nice :)
To me, this discussion is somewhat obsolete. A good program should leave the 
decision to the user. And that's where LP is failing at the moment, cause user 
cannot choose the option very many - not to say: the very most - engravers of 
choir scores opted for.
\accidentalStyle piano works in GrandStaff, but is needed in ChoirStaff. So can 
somebody please be so kind to invest her energy, time and skills into this 
problem instead of wasting her capacities in a discussion about a question 
which is at least in part a matter of personal taste? I tried to manipulate the 
scm/music-functions.scm but, since I do not understand it, without success.

Thank you ever so much for your help,

Jonathan

Am 14. Juli 2016 18:34:36 MESZ, schrieb David Wright 
<lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk>:
>On Wed 22 Jun 2016 at 11:30:30 (+0100), Phil Holmes wrote:
>> - Original Message - From: "David Wright"
>> <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk>
>> To: "Jonathan Scholbach" <j.scholb...@posteo.de>
>> Cc: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net>; <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 5:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation
>> 
>> 
>> >On Tue 21 Jun 2016 at 14:53:08 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
>> >>At your other point: Well, I agree that the usage of the desired
>> >>\accidentalStyle can be a matter of discussion. But it is a very
>common
>> >>practice. And there are good arguments for using it (choirsingers
>often
>> >>orientate - consciously or unconsciously - on the harmonies they
>are
>> >>hearing in the other voices.). Anyway, my question was not about
>best
>> >>practice of typesetting but about the realisation of a certain
>feature
>> >>in LilyPond. I would be grateful, if we stuck to this original
>question.
>> >
>> >Sure, I understand (y)our problem; I call it "selling a dummy" (as
>> >in rugger).
>> 
>> Not at all.  The question referred to voices and the illustration
>> showed staves.  I was checking what the OP was really seeking.
>> 
>> >>Phil Holmes wrote:
>> >>What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a
>previous
>> >>sharp in a different /voice/, but in a different /staff/.  As a
>> >>long-time singer myself, I'd find that terribly confusing.  If the
>2
>> >>voices are on the same staff, I could understand it.
>> >
>> >It seems odd that this should confuse people because it's standard
>> >fare in LP's piano music, under "Automatic accidentals" in the
>> >Notation Manual. As the effect is acoustic, the staff is immaterial;
>> >you might be singing from your own staff or even your own partbook.
>> 
>> Again, not at all.  Piano players must read more than one staff at a
>> time, and therefore an accidental on one staff might be felt to
>> affect pitches on other staves.  Singers (like orchestral players)
>> have no need to see the music of the other voices (and, indeed a few
>> hundred years ago, never did). They certainly have no need to follow
>> accidentals in other voices in case they affect what they sing.
>> Good singers just sing the note they're given. Imagine having a
>> fiddle part with an accidental cancellation shown because the
>> bassoon had been playing a sharp in the previous bar.
>
>I find it very dismissive of you to write 'not at all' twice above.
>Simon has already commented on the fact that different singers find
>their pitches in different ways, even when they are 'good' singers,
>whatever that means. (I think here we mean good readers rather than
>their particular singing ability.)
>
>But I've just been given a copy of Vocal Selections from "West Side
>Story" and I notice there are many instances of added accidentals
>(both parenthesised and not) in both the piano and the vocal parts.
>Some of these are obviously what I termed acoustical: otherwise why
>print B natural accidentals in a song in C major when the singer has
>yet to sing a B of any persuasion, and even after he *has* sung
>B naturals.
>
>So I think the engravers wisely decided to ignore your pronouncements.
>
>Cheers,
>David.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-07-14 Thread David Wright 
On Wed 22 Jun 2016 at 11:30:30 (+0100), Phil Holmes wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "David Wright"
> <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk>
> To: "Jonathan Scholbach" <j.scholb...@posteo.de>
> Cc: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net>; <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 5:45 PM
> Subject: Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation
> 
> 
> >On Tue 21 Jun 2016 at 14:53:08 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> >>At your other point: Well, I agree that the usage of the desired
> >>\accidentalStyle can be a matter of discussion. But it is a very common
> >>practice. And there are good arguments for using it (choirsingers often
> >>orientate - consciously or unconsciously - on the harmonies they are
> >>hearing in the other voices.). Anyway, my question was not about best
> >>practice of typesetting but about the realisation of a certain feature
> >>in LilyPond. I would be grateful, if we stuck to this original question.
> >
> >Sure, I understand (y)our problem; I call it "selling a dummy" (as
> >in rugger).
> 
> Not at all.  The question referred to voices and the illustration
> showed staves.  I was checking what the OP was really seeking.
> 
> >>Phil Holmes wrote:
> >>What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a previous
> >>sharp in a different /voice/, but in a different /staff/.  As a
> >>long-time singer myself, I'd find that terribly confusing.  If the 2
> >>voices are on the same staff, I could understand it.
> >
> >It seems odd that this should confuse people because it's standard
> >fare in LP's piano music, under "Automatic accidentals" in the
> >Notation Manual. As the effect is acoustic, the staff is immaterial;
> >you might be singing from your own staff or even your own partbook.
> 
> Again, not at all.  Piano players must read more than one staff at a
> time, and therefore an accidental on one staff might be felt to
> affect pitches on other staves.  Singers (like orchestral players)
> have no need to see the music of the other voices (and, indeed a few
> hundred years ago, never did). They certainly have no need to follow
> accidentals in other voices in case they affect what they sing.
> Good singers just sing the note they're given. Imagine having a
> fiddle part with an accidental cancellation shown because the
> bassoon had been playing a sharp in the previous bar.

I find it very dismissive of you to write 'not at all' twice above.
Simon has already commented on the fact that different singers find
their pitches in different ways, even when they are 'good' singers,
whatever that means. (I think here we mean good readers rather than
their particular singing ability.)

But I've just been given a copy of Vocal Selections from "West Side
Story" and I notice there are many instances of added accidentals
(both parenthesised and not) in both the piano and the vocal parts.
Some of these are obviously what I termed acoustical: otherwise why
print B natural accidentals in a song in C major when the singer has
yet to sing a B of any persuasion, and even after he *has* sung
B naturals.

So I think the engravers wisely decided to ignore your pronouncements.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-22 Thread Simon Albrecht 

On 22.06.2016 12:30, Phil Holmes wrote:
Again, not at all.  Piano players must read more than one staff at a 
time, and therefore an accidental on one staff might be felt to affect 
pitches on other staves.  Singers (like orchestral players) have no 
need to see the music of the other voices (and, indeed a few hundred 
years ago, never did). They certainly have no need to follow 
accidentals in other voices in case they affect what they sing.  Good 
singers just sing the note they're given. Imagine having a fiddle part 
with an accidental cancellation shown because the bassoon had been 
playing a sharp in the previous bar. 


There are different ways of choral singing; one with whom I’ve had lots 
of contact during the last years actually requires every singer to have 
an overview of the score, to know what his harmonic function is and to 
determine intonation from that. Also, singing cannot be compared to 
playing an instrument in the way one finds pitches: you always need to 
refer to that which you heard before (except if you have perfect pitch 
and are _really_ well-trained), and finding pitches is much closer to 
intuition than on an instrument.

So there’s reason behind Jonathan’s idea.

Best, Simon

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-22 Thread Phil Holmes 
- Original Message - 
From: "David Wright" <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk>

To: "Jonathan Scholbach" <j.scholb...@posteo.de>
Cc: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net>; <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation



On Tue 21 Jun 2016 at 14:53:08 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:

At your other point: Well, I agree that the usage of the desired
\accidentalStyle can be a matter of discussion. But it is a very common
practice. And there are good arguments for using it (choirsingers often
orientate - consciously or unconsciously - on the harmonies they are
hearing in the other voices.). Anyway, my question was not about best
practice of typesetting but about the realisation of a certain feature
in LilyPond. I would be grateful, if we stuck to this original question.


Sure, I understand (y)our problem; I call it "selling a dummy" (as in 
rugger).


Not at all.  The question referred to voices and the illustration showed 
staves.  I was checking what the OP was really seeking.



Phil Holmes wrote:
What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a previous
sharp in a different /voice/, but in a different /staff/.  As a
long-time singer myself, I'd find that terribly confusing.  If the 2
voices are on the same staff, I could understand it.


It seems odd that this should confuse people because it's standard
fare in LP's piano music, under "Automatic accidentals" in the
Notation Manual. As the effect is acoustic, the staff is immaterial;
you might be singing from your own staff or even your own partbook.


Again, not at all.  Piano players must read more than one staff at a time, 
and therefore an accidental on one staff might be felt to affect pitches on 
other staves.  Singers (like orchestral players) have no need to see the 
music of the other voices (and, indeed a few hundred years ago, never did). 
They certainly have no need to follow accidentals in other voices in case 
they affect what they sing.  Good singers just sing the note they're given. 
Imagine having a fiddle part with an accidental cancellation shown because 
the bassoon had been playing a sharp in the previous bar.


--
Phil Holmes 



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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-21 Thread Simon Albrecht 

On 21.06.2016 13:31, Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
Can someone please help me? I grubbed myself through the manuals and 
was still unable to find a way to write my own /\accidentalStyle/


There is no actual documentation for creating custom accidental styles. 
I made a little dent into the high threshold for adding them, but you 
still need to look into the source code (scm/music-functions.scm) to see 
how to create them. In case you’re up to that, have a look at 
.


Best, Simon

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-21 Thread David Wright 
On Tue 21 Jun 2016 at 14:53:08 (+0200), Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> At your other point: Well, I agree that the usage of the desired
> \accidentalStyle can be a matter of discussion. But it is a very common
> practice. And there are good arguments for using it (choirsingers often
> orientate - consciously or unconsciously - on the harmonies they are
> hearing in the other voices.). Anyway, my question was not about best
> practice of typesetting but about the realisation of a certain feature
> in LilyPond. I would be grateful, if we stuck to this original question.

Sure, I understand (y)our problem; I call it "selling a dummy" (as in rugger).

> Phil Holmes wrote:
> What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a previous
> sharp in a different /voice/, but in a different /staff/.  As a
> long-time singer myself, I'd find that terribly confusing.  If the 2
> voices are on the same staff, I could understand it.

It seems odd that this should confuse people because it's standard
fare in LP's piano music, under "Automatic accidentals" in the
Notation Manual. As the effect is acoustic, the staff is immaterial;
you might be singing from your own staff or even your own partbook.

Unfortunately piano accidentals only work with non-ChoirStaff, so my
workaround is to use GrandStaff:

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
\override SystemStartBar.collapse-height = #1
  }
  \context {
\GrandStaff
systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBracket
\override SystemStartBracket.collapse-height = #1
\remove Span_bar_engraver
\accepts Lyrics
  }
}
accident = { \accidentalStyle piano-cautionary } % put in voices in Staff

(...though you'll want to delete -cautionary. The collapse stuff
fixes the problem of a single staff losing its choral decoration.)
So you end up with:

\score {
  \new GrandStaff <<
\new Staff <<
  \set Staff.instrumentName = "Soprano"
  \new Voice = "upper" { \accident \soprano }
>>
\new Staff <<
  \set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto"
  \new Voice = "lower" { \accident \alto }
>>
  >>
}

> On 21.06.2016 13:31, Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> > Can someone please help me? I grubbed myself through the manuals and
> > was still unable to find a way to write my own /\accidentalStyle/

Perhaps someone may know how to hack scm/music-functions.scm (I assume
that's the file) to make \accidentalStyle piano/piano-cautionary work
in any Staff group.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-21 Thread Jonathan Scholbach 
Phil, you are right, it's about different /Staffs. /Thank you for
clarifying.
 
At your other point: Well, I agree that the usage of the desired
\accidentalStyle can be a matter of discussion. But it is a very common
practice. And there are good arguments for using it (choirsingers often
orientate - consciously or unconsciously - on the harmonies they are
hearing in the other voices.). Anyway, my question was not about best
practice of typesetting but about the realisation of a certain feature
in LilyPond. I would be grateful, if we stuck to this original question.


Phil Holmes wrote:

What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a previous
sharp in a different /voice/, but in a different /staff/.  As a
long-time singer myself, I'd find that terribly confusing.  If the 2
voices are on the same staff, I could understand it.

--
Phil Holmes


On 21.06.2016 13:31, Jonathan Scholbach wrote:
> Hi Ponders!
>
> I would like to know how I can create my own /\accidentalStyle/
> "Normally" notes of a certain voice are "naturalized" (written with a
> natural), when the same note had occured with an accident in the same
> bar (this is /\accidentalStyle default/ in LilyPond). A different
> style additonally naturalizes notes, when the same note had occured
> with an accident in the antecedent bar of this certain voice. (this is
> /\accidentalStyle modern /in LilyPond)
>
> I would like to create an \accidentalStyle which is very common in
> setting choir-music:
> It shall naturalize accidentals that had taken place in the antecedent
> bar of any /Voice/ in the same /\StaffGroup/ (or/\ChoirStaff/, wich
> makes no big difference, I guess),
>
> A tiny example demonstrating what I want is written below. In bar No.
> 2 the c of the Soprano is naturalized - due to /\accidentalStyle
> normal/. I want to behave the Alto voice in bar No. 4 analogously -
> i.e. as printed in the example, but without the need to write c! in
> the input of the alto voice.
>
> Can someone please help me? I grubbed myself through the manuals and
> was still unable to find a way to write my own /\accidentalStyle/
>
> Thank you!
>
> Jonathan
>
> \version "2.19.22"
>
> soprano = \relative c'' {
>  cis1
>  c
>  cis
>  e
> }
>
> alto = \relative c'' {
>   e1
>   e
>   e
>   c!
> }
>
> \score {
>   \new StaffGroup <<
> \new Staff <<
>   \accidentalStyle modern
>   \set Staff.instrumentName = "Soprano"
>   \new Voice = "upper" { \soprano }
> >>
> \new Staff <<
>   \accidentalStyle modern
>   \set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto"
>   \new Voice = "lower" { \alto }
> >>
>   >>
> }

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

Re: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-21 Thread Phil Holmes 
What you're asking for is not adding a natural when there's a previous sharp in 
a different voice, but in a different staff.  As a long-time singer myself, I'd 
find that terribly confusing.  If the 2 voices are on the same staff, I could 
understand it.

--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: Jonathan Scholbach 
  To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2016 12:31 PM
  Subject: \accidentalStyle for common choir notation


  Hi Ponders!

  I would like to know how I can create my own \accidentalStyle
  "Normally" notes of a certain voice are "naturalized" (written with a 
natural), when the same note had occured with an accident in the same bar (this 
is \accidentalStyle default in LilyPond). A different style additonally 
naturalizes notes, when the same note had occured with an accident in the 
antecedent bar of this certain voice. (this is \accidentalStyle modern in 
LilyPond)

  I would like to create an \accidentalStyle which is very common in setting 
choir-music:
  It shall naturalize accidentals that had taken place in the antecedent bar of 
any Voice in the same \StaffGroup (or \ChoirStaff, wich makes no big 
difference, I guess),

  A tiny example demonstrating what I want is written below. In bar No. 2 the c 
of the Soprano is naturalized - due to \accidentalStyle normal. I want to 
behave the Alto voice in bar No. 4 analogously - i.e. as printed in the 
example, but without the need to write c! in the input of the alto voice.

  Can someone please help me? I grubbed myself through the manuals and was 
still unable to find a way to write my own \accidentalStyle

  Thank you!

  Jonathan

  \version "2.19.22"

  soprano = \relative c'' {
   cis1
   c
   cis
   e
  }

  alto = \relative c'' {
e1
e
e
c!
  }

  \score {
\new StaffGroup <<
  \new Staff << 
\accidentalStyle modern
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Soprano"
\new Voice = "upper" { \soprano }
  >>
  \new Staff << 
\accidentalStyle modern
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto"
\new Voice = "lower" { \alto }
  >>
>>
  }



--


  ___
  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

\accidentalStyle for common choir notation

2016-06-21 Thread Jonathan Scholbach 
Hi Ponders!

I would like to know how I can create my own /\accidentalStyle/
"Normally" notes of a certain voice are "naturalized" (written with a
natural), when the same note had occured with an accident in the same
bar (this is /\accidentalStyle default/ in LilyPond). A different style
additonally naturalizes notes, when the same note had occured with an
accident in the antecedent bar of this certain voice. (this is
/\accidentalStyle modern /in LilyPond)

I would like to create an \accidentalStyle which is very common in
setting choir-music:
It shall naturalize accidentals that had taken place in the antecedent
bar of any /Voice/ in the same /\StaffGroup/ (or/\ChoirStaff/, wich
makes no big difference, I guess),

A tiny example demonstrating what I want is written below. In bar No. 2
the c of the Soprano is naturalized - due to /\accidentalStyle normal/.
I want to behave the Alto voice in bar No. 4 analogously - i.e. as
printed in the example, but without the need to write c! in the input of
the alto voice.

Can someone please help me? I grubbed myself through the manuals and was
still unable to find a way to write my own /\accidentalStyle/

Thank you!

Jonathan

\version "2.19.22"

soprano = \relative c'' {
 cis1
 c
 cis
 e
}

alto = \relative c'' {
  e1
  e
  e
  c!
}

\score {
  \new StaffGroup <<
\new Staff <<
  \accidentalStyle modern
  \set Staff.instrumentName = "Soprano"
  \new Voice = "upper" { \soprano }
>>
\new Staff <<
  \accidentalStyle modern
  \set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto"
  \new Voice = "lower" { \alto }
>>
  >>
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user