Re: Multi Measure Rests in Cadenzas

[Rupert Marshall-Luck]

Hallo Calvin,

(First time posting here - I hope this works!)

I've found the following (based on https://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=836) 
works well in this sort of situation. The function `cadenzatoMetre` takes two 
music expressions as arguments. The first denotes the rhythmic "frame" within 
which you want the cadenza placed - this can be a rest or a set of pitches: the 
actual content of the expression doesn't matter as it isn't printed by the 
function; it just serves as a reference. The second argument is the cadenza 
itself.

The function calculates a "scaling factor" based on the metrical lengths of the 
two arguments and uses the function `ly:music-compress` to scale the cadenza 
accordingly.


% Example begins
% ===
\version "2.24.1"

cadenzaToMetre =
#(define-music-function (nonCadenzaMusic cadenzaMusic)
  (ly:music? ly:music?)
(let* ((cadenzaLength (ly:music-length cadenzaMusic))
   (nonCadenzaLength (ly:music-length nonCadenzaMusic))
   (factor (ly:moment-div nonCadenzaLength cadenzaLength))
  )
  (ly:music-compress cadenzaMusic factor)
  )
)

% Cadenza
% 
cadenza = { c''1\fermata b'16[ c'' d'' e'' f'' g''] f''4\fermata e''\fermata }

{
  <<
\new Staff {
  e''1
  R1\fermata
  e''1
}

\new Staff{
  c''1
  \cadenzaToMetre r1 \cadenza
  c''1
}
  >>
}

% Example ends
% =

Hope this might help!

Best wishes,

Rupert


> On 31/07/2023 06:19 GMT Valentin Petzel  wrote:
> 
>  
> Hello Calvin,
> 
> MM rests and cadenzas do not play well together. The reason for this is that 
> the MM is placed centered between start and end of measure. But \cadenzaOn is 
> not really made for creating arbitrary length measures. What is does is 
> simply 
> telling Lilypond to stop counting. So when you do
> 
> \cadenzaOn a \bar "|"
> \cadenzaOff a
> 
> this is technically a single measure (where the cadenza part simply happes 
> before even the first moment). So the MM rest will be centered along the 
> whole 
> thing. (So technically this is a case where MM rests and \bar "|" within a 
> measure do not play together).
> 
> Instead of using a cadanza you might want to use \partial to create a measure 
> of arbitrary length.
> 
> Cheers,
> Valentin
> 
> Am Montag, 31. Juli 2023, 04:17:51 CEST schrieb Calvin Ransom:
> > I have a cadenza where Staff A rests while Staff B plays and after the
> > cadenza Staff A comes back in. In the below minimal example, there is an
> > extra rest added above the note when Staff A comes back in. How do I get
> > rid of this rest? If I use r1 instead of R1 I don't have this issue (but I
> > need to use R1 as my cadenzas are longer than a single measure)
> > 
> > % SNIPPET BEGINS %
> > \version "2.24.1"
> > 
> > \new ChoirStaff <<
> >   \new Staff {
> > a1
> > R1
> > a %why is there a rest above this note?
> > a
> >   }
> >   \new Staff  {
> > a1
> > \break
> > \cadenzaOn
> > a
> > \bar "|"
> > \break
> > \cadenzaOff
> > a
> > a
> >   }
> > 
> > 
> > % SNIPPET ENDS %
> > 
> > Calvin Ransom
> > 
> > Sent from my T530

Re: Multi Measure Rests in Cadenzas

[Valentin Petzel]

Hello Calvin,

MM rests and cadenzas do not play well together. The reason for this is that 
the MM is placed centered between start and end of measure. But \cadenzaOn is 
not really made for creating arbitrary length measures. What is does is simply 
telling Lilypond to stop counting. So when you do

\cadenzaOn a \bar "|"
\cadenzaOff a

this is technically a single measure (where the cadenza part simply happes 
before even the first moment). So the MM rest will be centered along the whole 
thing. (So technically this is a case where MM rests and \bar "|" within a 
measure do not play together).

Instead of using a cadanza you might want to use \partial to create a measure 
of arbitrary length.

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Montag, 31. Juli 2023, 04:17:51 CEST schrieb Calvin Ransom:
> I have a cadenza where Staff A rests while Staff B plays and after the
> cadenza Staff A comes back in. In the below minimal example, there is an
> extra rest added above the note when Staff A comes back in. How do I get
> rid of this rest? If I use r1 instead of R1 I don't have this issue (but I
> need to use R1 as my cadenzas are longer than a single measure)
> 
> % SNIPPET BEGINS %
> \version "2.24.1"
> 
> \new ChoirStaff <<
>   \new Staff {
> a1
> R1
> a %why is there a rest above this note?
> a
>   }
>   \new Staff  {
> a1
> \break
> \cadenzaOn
> a
> \bar "|"
> \break
> \cadenzaOff
> a
> a
>   }
> 
> 
> % SNIPPET ENDS %
> 
> Calvin Ransom
> 
> Sent from my T530



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

Multi Measure Rests in Cadenzas

[Calvin Ransom]

I have a cadenza where Staff A rests while Staff B plays and after the cadenza 
Staff A comes back in.
In the below minimal example, there is an extra rest added above the note when 
Staff A comes back in. How do I get rid of this rest? If I use r1 instead of R1 
I don't have this issue (but I need to use R1 as my cadenzas are longer than a 
single measure)

% SNIPPET BEGINS %
\version "2.24.1"

\new ChoirStaff <<
  \new Staff {
a1
R1
a %why is there a rest above this note?
a
  }
  \new Staff  {
a1
\break
\cadenzaOn
a
\bar "|"
\break
\cadenzaOff
a
a
  }
>>

% SNIPPET ENDS %

Calvin Ransom

Sent from my T530

Re: How can I change the width of multi-measure rests in the irregular measure?

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 02/08/2021 à 03:53, takumi ikeda a écrit :

\version "2.19.81"

{
   \compressFullBarRests
   \set Score.restNumberThreshold = #0
   \time 5/4
   R4*5
   \time 4/4
   R1*2

}

{
   \compressFullBarRests
   \set Score.restNumberThreshold = #0
   \override Staff.MultiMeasureRest.space-increment = 10
   \time 5/4
   R4*5
   \time 4/4
   R1*2
}

% Thanks,
% Takumi



Is this what you are looking after?

{
  \compressEmptyMeasures
  \time 4/4
  \once \override MultiMeasureRest.usable-duration-logs = #'(1)
  R1*2
}

Best,
Jean

How can I change the width of multi-measure rests in the irregular measure?

[takumi ikeda]

\version "2.19.81"

{
  \compressFullBarRests
  \set Score.restNumberThreshold = #0
  \time 5/4
  R4*5
  \time 4/4
  R1*2

}

{
  \compressFullBarRests
  \set Score.restNumberThreshold = #0
  \override Staff.MultiMeasureRest.space-increment = 10
  \time 5/4
  R4*5
  \time 4/4
  R1*2
}

% Thanks,
% Takumi

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Hans Åberg]

> On 21 Nov 2020, at 16:14, Kieren MacMillan  
> wrote:
> 
> I don’t think that solves the OP’s problem, as I understand it to be… I think 
> the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole bunch of 4/4+3/4 
> two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them written out.

I think the rule is that multi-measure rests indicate the number of measures 
regardless of their meter. But LilyPond does not seem able to handle that.

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Maximilian Marcoll]

And to make it more challenging, measure numbers should be correct afterwards, 
too...

A tagged measure attached spanner would be a workaround I guess, if there’s an 
easy way to hide (but count) the remaining but unnecessary measures. 

Thanks to you all,

Max

__
http://www.marcoll.de
http://www.stock11.de


> On Nov 21, 2020, at 17:50, Maximilian Marcoll  wrote:
> 
> Precisely! :)
> 
> 
>> On Nov 21, 2020, at 16:16, Kieren MacMillan  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> I think the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole bunch of 
>> 4/4+3/4 two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them written out.
> 

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Maximilian Marcoll]

Precisely! :)


> On Nov 21, 2020, at 16:16, Kieren MacMillan  
> wrote:
> 
> I think the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole bunch of 
> 4/4+3/4 two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them written out.

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

> Compound meter, perhaps?

p.s. Gould explicitly notes that compound meter and strictly alternating meter 
are two distinct things.  :)

Best,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Tim,

> As far as I can tell from looking at the docs, the only way to do this using 
> multi-measure rests will be in 7/4. It will count out the same, assuming the 
> right number of measures is chosen.

Yes… That’s why I suggested a measure-attached "x" spanner. (n.b. Gould doesn’t 
explicitly address this situation, so there’s no “gospel” that I know of.) I 
really can’t think of a more elegant way, but would love to see what others 
come up with!

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Aaron,

> Compound meter, perhaps?

I don’t know whether the OP is willing to use compound meter…?
Let’s wait to hear OP’s response.

Thanks!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Tim McNamara]

> On Nov 21, 2020, at 9:14 AM, Kieren MacMillan  
> wrote:
> 
> I don’t think that solves the OP’s problem, as I understand it to be… I think 
> the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole bunch of 4/4+3/4 
> two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them written out.

As far as I can tell from looking at the docs, the only way to do this using 
multi-measure rests will be in 7/4. It will count out the same, assuming the 
right number of measures is chosen.

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Aaron Hill]

On 2020-11-21 7:14 am, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

Hi Phil,

I don’t think that solves the OP’s problem, as I understand it to be…
I think the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole
bunch of 4/4+3/4 two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them
written out.

Of course, I might be wrong!  =)


Compound meter, perhaps?


\version "2.20.0"

\compressMMRests <<
  \new Staff {
\compoundMeter #'(4 3 4)
\repeat unfold 2
{ a'4 4 b'2 a'4 b'2 }
R4*7*14
  }
  \new Staff {
R4*7*14
\repeat unfold 2
{ b'2 2 a'4 4 4 }
  }






-- Aaron Hill

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Phil,

I don’t think that solves the OP’s problem, as I understand it to be… I think 
the OP wants a compressed visual representation of a whole bunch of 4/4+3/4 
two-measure chunks, without actually seeing them written out.

Of course, I might be wrong!  =)

Best,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Hans Åberg]

> On 20 Nov 2020, at 14:01, Maximilian Marcoll  wrote:
> 
> I’m wondering wether there is a convenient solution for the following 
> situation:
> 
> Imagine an ensemble or orchestra piece has alternating time signatures, for 
> instance repeated 4/4 | 3/4 time signature changes.
> Not multiple 7/4 measures but actually 4/4 | 3/4 | 4/4 | 3/4 and so on.
> 
> If for some instruments these measures only contain rests, could this somehow 
> be expressed with multi-measure rests?

You might rewrite it to 7/4, as there is no difference in musical performance.

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Phil Holmes]

Here's an alternative semi-automatic way (proof of concept):

\new Score {
<<
\new Staff {
  \time 3/4 c''2. \time 4/4 c''1 \time 3/4 c''2.
}

\new Staff {
  \new Voice \with {
    \remove "Rest_engraver"
    \consists "Completion_rest_engraver"
  }
  {R1*10/4}
}
>>
}


On 20/11/2020 15:45, Maximilian Marcoll wrote:

Fantastic! Thank you!
__
http://www.marcoll.de 

subscribe to newsletter 


On 20 Nov 2020, at 15:30, Kieren MacMillan mailto:kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca>> wrote:

Hi Max,


Sure, that would be great. But how would that be possible with the same 
music-content also being used for the full score?


Tags.  =)

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info 
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info 





--
Phil Holmes

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Maximilian Marcoll]

Fantastic! Thank you!
__
http://www.marcoll.de

subscribe to newsletter 
> On 20 Nov 2020, at 15:30, Kieren MacMillan  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Max,
> 
>> Sure, that would be great. But how would that be possible with the same 
>> music-content also being used for the full score?
> 
> Tags.  =)
> 
> Hope that helps!
> Kieren.
> 
> 
> Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
> 
> 

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Maximilian Marcoll]

Hi!

Thank you for your response. 
Sure, that would be great. But how would that be possible with the same 
music-content also being used for the full score?

Cheers,

Max

__
http://www.marcoll.de
http://www.stock11.de


> On Nov 20, 2020, at 15:12, Kieren MacMillan  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Max,
> 
>> If for some instruments these measures only contain rests, could this 
>> somehow be expressed with multi-measure rests? 
> 
> What about a measure of 4/4 and a measure of 3/4 with a spanner over it 
> saying “12x” (or whatever)?
> 
> Hope that helps!
> Kieren.
> 
> 
> Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
> 
> 

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Max,

> Sure, that would be great. But how would that be possible with the same 
> music-content also being used for the full score?

Tags.  =)

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Re: Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Max,

> If for some instruments these measures only contain rests, could this somehow 
> be expressed with multi-measure rests? 

What about a measure of 4/4 and a measure of 3/4 with a spanner over it saying 
“12x” (or whatever)?

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Multi-measure rests with alternating time signatures

[Maximilian Marcoll]

Hi Everyone,

I’m wondering wether there is a convenient solution for the following situation:

Imagine an ensemble or orchestra piece has alternating time signatures, for 
instance repeated 4/4 | 3/4 time signature changes.
Not multiple 7/4 measures but actually 4/4 | 3/4 | 4/4 | 3/4 and so on.

If for some instruments these measures only contain rests, could this somehow 
be expressed with multi-measure rests? 

Otherwise there would be just a lot of full measure rests with alternating time 
signatures, which wouldn’t be very convenient for the individual performer.

Any ideas how to tackle this?

Many thanks in advance,

Cheers,

Max

__
http://www.marcoll.de
http://www.stock11.de

subscribe to newsletter <http://eepurl.com/cKUzLX>

Re: {SPAM 02.0} Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[Aaron Hill]

On 2018-06-15 13:39, David Kastrup wrote:

Karlin High  writes:

On 6/15/2018 2:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

Simple, and almost obvious, once someone has told you the answer!

Oh.  Then we should patent it before someone else does.


The FSF / GNU overlords would then... call in an airstrike or
something?


I think the term is "anathema".


RMS issuing a "presidential bull" would be pretty funny.

-- Aaron Hill

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

Re: {SPAM 02.0} Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On 6/15/2018 2:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Simple, and almost obvious, once someone has told you the answer!
>> Oh.  Then we should patent it before someone else does.
>
> The FSF / GNU overlords would then... call in an airstrike or
> something?

I think the term is "anathema".

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: {SPAM 02.0} Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[Karlin High]

On 6/15/2018 2:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

Simple, and almost obvious, once someone has told you the answer!

Oh.  Then we should patent it before someone else does.


The FSF / GNU overlords would then... call in an airstrike or something?
--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: {SPAM 02.0} Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[David Kastrup]

David Sumbler  writes:

> On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 21:08 +0200, Simon Albrecht wrote:
>> On 15.06.2018 20:11, David Sumbler wrote:
>> > 
>> > I had seen the usable-duration-log variable in the Internals
>> > Reference,
>> > and its default value of '(-3 -2 -1 0) .  But I have no idea what
>> > these
>> > values represent.  Can you enlighten me?
>> They are the negative logarithms (base 2) of the usable durations.
>> -3 
>> means \maxima, 0 means 1, and 3 would mean 8, if you’d like to have
>> the 
>> full-bar rest in 2/16 time displayed as a quaver rest.
>> 
>> Best, Simon
>
> Simple, and almost obvious, once someone has told you the answer!

Oh.  Then we should patent it before someone else does.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: {SPAM 02.0} Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[David Sumbler]

On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 21:08 +0200, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> On 15.06.2018 20:11, David Sumbler wrote:
> > 
> > I had seen the usable-duration-log variable in the Internals
> > Reference,
> > and its default value of '(-3 -2 -1 0) .  But I have no idea what
> > these
> > values represent.  Can you enlighten me?
> They are the negative logarithms (base 2) of the usable durations.
> -3 
> means \maxima, 0 means 1, and 3 would mean 8, if you’d like to have
> the 
> full-bar rest in 2/16 time displayed as a quaver rest.
> 
> Best, Simon

Simple, and almost obvious, once someone has told you the answer!
 Thanks again.

David

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

Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[Simon Albrecht]

On 15.06.2018 20:11, David Sumbler wrote:

I had seen the usable-duration-log variable in the Internals Reference,
and its default value of '(-3 -2 -1 0) .  But I have no idea what these
values represent.  Can you enlighten me?


They are the negative logarithms (base 2) of the usable durations. -3 
means \maxima, 0 means 1, and 3 would mean 8, if you’d like to have the 
full-bar rest in 2/16 time displayed as a quaver rest.


Best, Simon

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

Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[David Sumbler]

On Fri, 2018-06-15 at 19:36 +0200, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> On 15.06.2018 19:08, David Sumbler wrote:
> > 
> > In a piece which is in 21/8 time (7 dotted crotchets) I find that
> > LilyPond sets whole-bar rests as breve rests.  I should like them
> > to
> > appear as semibreve rests, as they would if the bars were shorter.
> > 
> > I have tried modifying the stencil using the method shown in
> > NR5.5.3.
> >   But as it stands this is not successful, because the rest symbol
> > is
> > now attached to the preceding barline instead of appearing in the
> > middle of the bar.
> > 
> > How can I get semibreve rest symbols in the correct position,
> > rather
> > than breve rests?
> \version "2.19.80"
> 
> {
>    \time 21/8
>    R8*21
>    \override MultiMeasureRest.usable-duration-logs = #'(0)
>    R
> }

Thank you very much for that.

I had seen the usable-duration-log variable in the Internals Reference,
and its default value of '(-3 -2 -1 0) .  But I have no idea what these
values represent.  Can you enlighten me?

David


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

Re: Form of multi-measure-rests

[Simon Albrecht]

On 15.06.2018 19:08, David Sumbler wrote:

In a piece which is in 21/8 time (7 dotted crotchets) I find that
LilyPond sets whole-bar rests as breve rests.  I should like them to
appear as semibreve rests, as they would if the bars were shorter.

I have tried modifying the stencil using the method shown in NR5.5.3.
  But as it stands this is not successful, because the rest symbol is
now attached to the preceding barline instead of appearing in the
middle of the bar.

How can I get semibreve rest symbols in the correct position, rather
than breve rests?


\version "2.19.80"

{
  \time 21/8
  R8*21
  \override MultiMeasureRest.usable-duration-logs = #'(0)
  R
}

Best, Simon

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

Form of multi-measure-rests

[David Sumbler]

In a piece which is in 21/8 time (7 dotted crotchets) I find that
LilyPond sets whole-bar rests as breve rests.  I should like them to
appear as semibreve rests, as they would if the bars were shorter.

I have tried modifying the stencil using the method shown in NR5.5.3.
 But as it stands this is not successful, because the rest symbol is
now attached to the preceding barline instead of appearing in the
middle of the bar.

How can I get semibreve rest symbols in the correct position, rather
than breve rests?

David



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

Re: barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Andrew,

>> It's not the bar number check that breaks the MM rest, it's the separation 
>> of s1. * 17 into pieces of 9 and 8 measures that does.
> Okay, that makes sense, if a bit unexpected.

There are several threads in the archive where some people try to explain why 
it’s expected (or at least unsolvable).

> The solution is to keep it the way it is until that job is done, and fix it 
> at the end.

Or try \mergeSkips?


Hope this helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


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

Re: barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?

[Andrew Bromage]

On 13/7/17 4:57 pm, Robert Schmaus wrote:

It's not the bar number check that breaks the MM rest, it's the separation of 
s1. * 17 into pieces of 9 and 8 measures that does.

Okay, that makes sense, if a bit unexpected.

Why don't you insert the check at bar 18 and keep use s1. * 17 - that should be 
ok also.

Obviously this is a cut-down example. The context is that the engraving
that this is cribbed from splits the timeline into phrases I can work out
where to put rehearsal marks.

The solution is to keep it the way it is until that job is done, and fix it
at the end.

Andrew Bromage

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

Re: barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?

[Robert Schmaus]

Hi Andrew,

It's not the bar number check that breaks the MM rest, it's the separation of 
s1. * 17 into pieces of 9 and 8 measures that does. 

Why don't you insert the check at bar 18 and keep use s1. * 17 - that should be 
ok also. 

Best, Robert

> On 13 Jul 2017, at 02:20, Andrew Bromage <degue...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> G'day.
> 
> Is there a reason why \barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?
> Or is this a bug?
> 
> Thanks,
> Andrew Bromage
> 
> % Example follows
> 
> \version "2.19.60"
> 
> Timeline = {
>\time 3/2
> 
>s1. * 9 \barNumberCheck #10
>s1. * 8 \bar "|."
> }
> 
> ViolinOne =  \relative c'' { R1. * 15 | r1 g2 | c1. }
> 
> \score {
>\new Staff
><<
>\Timeline
>\context Voice = "Violin 1" {
>\compressFullBarRests
>\clef treble \ViolinOne
>}
>>>
> 
>\layout { \context { \Staff \compressFullBarRests } }
> }
> 
> 
> ___
> 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

barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?

[Andrew Bromage]

G'day.

Is there a reason why \barNumberCheck breaks multi-measure rests?
Or is this a bug?

Thanks,
Andrew Bromage

% Example follows

\version "2.19.60"

Timeline = {
\time 3/2

s1. * 9 \barNumberCheck #10
s1. * 8 \bar "|."
}

ViolinOne =  \relative c'' { R1. * 15 | r1 g2 | c1. }

\score {
\new Staff
<<
\Timeline
\context Voice = "Violin 1" {
\compressFullBarRests
\clef treble \ViolinOne
}
>>

\layout { \context { \Staff \compressFullBarRests } }
}


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

Re: Doing some strange stuff with multi-measure rests

[caagr98]

Yeah, that seems to work, thanks!

I'd prefer if it didn't reduce the left margin, but there's no point in 
being picky. I guess it can be fixed by tweaking the X-offset and the 
scaling factor. I'm considering experimenting with modifying the stencil 
expression itself, though.


Getting the drum roll to be normal-sized is easy - just don't make it a 
grace.


As for the text inside the MMR, I think one possible way would be to 
make MMRNumber.text contain both the fermata and a whiteouted text.


On 05/05/17 14:59, Jan-Peter Voigt wrote:

Hi,

here are some hints, how might tweak the output:

   \new RhythmicStaff {
 b'1 | \afterGrace { % we place the drum-roll on a grace position
   % override the stencil for the MultiMeasure stencil
   \once \override MultiMeasureRest.stencil = #(lambda (grob) (let 
((stil (ly:multi-measure-rest::print grob)))


(ly:stencil-scale stil .5 1)))
   \mmrferm R1*2
 } { % shift the drum-roll right
 \once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #1 b'2:32\< } | b'1\!
   }

The drum roll is small, because its a grace - I don't know how to do it, 
but it should be easy to solve.


HTH
Jan-Peter


Am 05.05.2017 um 10:24 schrieb caag...@gmail.com:

Basically, I want to show a rest with indeterminate length for all
parts, except the drumset, which is to make undefined creepy noises, and
the cymbal, which should do a drumroll-crescendo (not sure if there's
any fancy name for that) before the rest of the parts resume playing.

I've attached an image of what I have so far, and one of what I want
(which obviously is photoshopped).

Is this possible to do? (Or is there some better way to show it that I
haven't thought of?)


(Mostly) minimal example of what I have:
```
\version "2.19.59"

mmrferm =
  \once \override MultiMeasureRestNumber.text =
\markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.ufermata" }

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
\compressFullBarRests
\override MultiMeasureRest.expand-limit = #1
  }
}

<<
  \new Staff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new DrumStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new RhythmicStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*3/2 b'2:32\< | b'1\! }



```
(In the real score I create a 'MultiMeasureRestEvent explicitly to avoid
the barcheck.)


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




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


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

Re: Doing some strange stuff with multi-measure rests

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi,

here are some hints, how might tweak the output:

  \new RhythmicStaff {
b'1 | \afterGrace { % we place the drum-roll on a grace position
  % override the stencil for the MultiMeasure stencil
  \once \override MultiMeasureRest.stencil = #(lambda (grob) (let 
((stil (ly:multi-measure-rest::print grob)))


(ly:stencil-scale stil .5 1)))
  \mmrferm R1*2
} { % shift the drum-roll right
\once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #1 b'2:32\< } | b'1\!
  }

The drum roll is small, because its a grace - I don't know how to do it, 
but it should be easy to solve.


HTH
Jan-Peter


Am 05.05.2017 um 10:24 schrieb caag...@gmail.com:

Basically, I want to show a rest with indeterminate length for all
parts, except the drumset, which is to make undefined creepy noises, and
the cymbal, which should do a drumroll-crescendo (not sure if there's
any fancy name for that) before the rest of the parts resume playing.

I've attached an image of what I have so far, and one of what I want
(which obviously is photoshopped).

Is this possible to do? (Or is there some better way to show it that I
haven't thought of?)


(Mostly) minimal example of what I have:
```
\version "2.19.59"

mmrferm =
  \once \override MultiMeasureRestNumber.text =
\markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.ufermata" }

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
\compressFullBarRests
\override MultiMeasureRest.expand-limit = #1
  }
}

<<
  \new Staff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new DrumStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new RhythmicStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*3/2 b'2:32\< | b'1\! }



```
(In the real score I create a 'MultiMeasureRestEvent explicitly to avoid
the barcheck.)


___
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

Doing some strange stuff with multi-measure rests

[caagr98]

Basically, I want to show a rest with indeterminate length for all 
parts, except the drumset, which is to make undefined creepy noises, and 
the cymbal, which should do a drumroll-crescendo (not sure if there's 
any fancy name for that) before the rest of the parts resume playing.


I've attached an image of what I have so far, and one of what I want 
(which obviously is photoshopped).


Is this possible to do? (Or is there some better way to show it that I 
haven't thought of?)



(Mostly) minimal example of what I have:
```
\version "2.19.59"

mmrferm =
  \once \override MultiMeasureRestNumber.text =
\markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.ufermata" }

\layout {
  \context {
\Score
\compressFullBarRests
\override MultiMeasureRest.expand-limit = #1
  }
}

<<
  \new Staff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new DrumStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*2 | b'1 }
  \new RhythmicStaff { b'1 | \mmrferm R1*3/2 b'2:32\< | b'1\! }
>>
```
(In the real score I create a 'MultiMeasureRestEvent explicitly to avoid 
the barcheck.)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

On Tue 26 Apr 2016 at 01:21:00 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote:
> > But I see you've now acknowledged (indirectly) that LP can set
> > multiple marks at the same point after stating that it can't.
> > Are there other things that LP can be persuaded to do itself that you
> > have closed your mind to?
> > 
> Except I *haven't* closed my mind. That's you putting words into my
> mouth.

The exact words were "The problem really is, all I want to do is stick
multiple marks on a barline (which doesn't work, lily doesn't do
multiple \mark's :-(," on Sat, 23 Apr 2016 11:25:05 +0100.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

> sort of feedback loop is probably a nightmare! In fact, coding it AT
> ALL seems to be a nightmare with the current state of lilypond. You
> need some way of allocating a minumum width to a random fragment of
> music (like above - I need those 8 bars to take a minumum width, but
> while the current part is all rests, another part may be all notes,
> so I can't even say "make this rest that wide" because next time
> round it might not be a rest!
> 
> And apologies if I am grumpy about this topic, but as I said earlier
> in the thread, it seems that every time I work around one problem, a
> different one replaces it - that's why the original post just asked
> "any pointers?".
> 
> I always used to deal with the multiple markups problem by doing
> "s4\markup s2.", except that this time round I noticed the problem
> with it breaking up multi-measure-rests. So I (re)found the trick of
> "<>\markup", except that moved the markup to the left and
> exacerbated the collision problem.
> 
> Now I've been given the trick of "\markup "   text" " (ie leading
> spaces) but that seems temperamental - with pretty much identical
> code I have two markups where, in the first instance, the rehearsal
> mark has fallen through the blank space to rest on the stave, as
> required. But the second instance - near as dammit identical as far
> as I can see - the rehearsal mark has only fallen to the horizontal
> centre line of the markup, despite there being nothing underneath it
> preventing it falling to the stave.

There's an implied ordering of outside-staff objects which is detailed
under "Vertical collision avoidance". The rules look quite complex.
Have you read and understood them? Once again, you complain about what
LP does but present no code yourself. (I'm not posting any more
examples in this thread.)

I've had problems in this area which I've eventually (had) solved, and
I keep pointers to my code so I can find and copy it easily.

> It's just so  frustrating :-(

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 27/04/2016 01:04, Carl Sorensen wrote:

On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley" <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> wrote:


2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk>:

On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote:

(I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish
[...])


The problem here is the thread has drifted quite a lot. Sorry, David, my 
previous email was a bit sarky, for which I apologise, but as I said in 
my original email, this is my eternal bugbear, and you touched a nerve 
... Incidentally, I didn't notice this earlier, but the house style I'm 
copying DOES put the tempo above the tune name ... :-)

Copy "House Style", maybe?
And the whole point of this entire thread has been about
SAVING VERTICAL SPACE - it's just plain butt-ugly for markup to stack
vertically when a slight shift sideways could save lines - plus there's
the high price I put on page turns that could be saved by reclaiming
that wasted space.



Anyway, you seem to want multiple texts applied to a the same BarLine.
These texts shouldn't be stacked vertically but horizontally, right?

I think that the desired functionality is to allow markups to be loosely
tied to notes, so that if possible, they can shift horizontally some
amount instead of shifting vertically to avoid collisions.


Yup. Because actually, a lot of markup doesn't actually belong to a 
*note*. It belongs to a *phrase*. Which leads to the desire that, not 
only should markup shift right or left to avoid a collision, it should 
be able to push *music* out of the way. For example, I have a bit of 
code similar to the following ...


R1 | \mark \default \tempo "Scherzando" R1*8 | \mark \default

At present, the scherzando sits above both rehearsal marks. And if I had 
another tempo at the second mark, I'd have colliding tempi which doesn't 
make musical sense :-) If only the scherzando could say "I apply to the 
next 8 bars. The 9th bar must come after I end".


That is, there could potentially be a shift in both X and Y to avoid
collisions, and the shift with the least badness is the one that is chosen
-- perhaps it's one line up in Y and two lines left in X, or something
similar.

If we had some facility for doing such a movement, then it would be
relatively straightforward to assign penalties for taking up more vertical
space, along with penalties for moving horizontally away from the desired
home point.  And we'd choose the layout with the lowest penalty.

But right now, as far as I know, we have no such facility.  I believe that
right now, we horizontally space the music elements to avoid collisions,
and then we vertically shift the outside-staff grobs to avoid collisions,
and then we space the skylined staves to achieve the desired spacing.  And
there's nothing in this algorithm that lets us simultaneously vertically
AND horizontally shift the outside-staff grobs.

Such a feature would be cool to add.  But it's not trivial in any sense of
the word, given the current LilyPond spacing architecture, as I understand
it.


That's what I understood, too. Because the outside-staff grobs need to 
make the music elements wider if appropriate, and coding that sort of 
feedback loop is probably a nightmare! In fact, coding it AT ALL seems 
to be a nightmare with the current state of lilypond. You need some way 
of allocating a minumum width to a random fragment of music (like above 
- I need those 8 bars to take a minumum width, but while the current 
part is all rests, another part may be all notes, so I can't even say 
"make this rest that wide" because next time round it might not be a rest!


And apologies if I am grumpy about this topic, but as I said earlier in 
the thread, it seems that every time I work around one problem, a 
different one replaces it - that's why the original post just asked "any 
pointers?".


I always used to deal with the multiple markups problem by doing 
"s4\markup s2.", except that this time round I noticed the problem with 
it breaking up multi-measure-rests. So I (re)found the trick of 
"<>\markup", except that moved the markup to the left and exacerbated 
the collision problem.


Now I've been given the trick of "\markup "   text" " (ie leading 
spaces) but that seems temperamental - with pretty much identical code I 
have two markups where, in the first instance, the rehearsal mark has 
fallen through the blank space to rest on the stave, as required. But 
the second instance - near as dammit identical as far as I can see - the 
rehearsal mark has only fallen to the horizontal centre line of the 
markup, despite there being nothing underneath it preventing it falling 
to the stave.


It's just so  frustrating :-(

Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Carl Sorensen]

On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley"  wrote:

>2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists :
>> On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote:
>>> (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish
>>> [...])
>>>
>> Copy "House Style", maybe?
>> And the whole point of this entire thread has been about
>> SAVING VERTICAL SPACE - it's just plain butt-ugly for markup to stack
>> vertically when a slight shift sideways could save lines - plus there's
>> the high price I put on page turns that could be saved by reclaiming
>> that wasted space.
>
>
>
>Anyway, you seem to want multiple texts applied to a the same BarLine.
>These texts shouldn't be stacked vertically but horizontally, right?

I think that the desired functionality is to allow markups to be loosely
tied to notes, so that if possible, they can shift horizontally some
amount instead of shifting vertically to avoid collisions.

That is, there could potentially be a shift in both X and Y to avoid
collisions, and the shift with the least badness is the one that is chosen
-- perhaps it's one line up in Y and two lines left in X, or something
similar.

If we had some facility for doing such a movement, then it would be
relatively straightforward to assign penalties for taking up more vertical
space, along with penalties for moving horizontally away from the desired
home point.  And we'd choose the layout with the lowest penalty.

But right now, as far as I know, we have no such facility.  I believe that
right now, we horizontally space the music elements to avoid collisions,
and then we vertically shift the outside-staff grobs to avoid collisions,
and then we space the skylined staves to achieve the desired spacing.  And
there's nothing in this algorithm that lets us simultaneously vertically
AND horizontally shift the outside-staff grobs.

Such a feature would be cool to add.  But it's not trivial in any sense of
the word, given the current LilyPond spacing architecture, as I understand
it.

Carl


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Thomas Morley]

2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists :
> On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote:
>> (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish
>> [...])
>>
> Copy "House Style", maybe?
> And the whole point of this entire thread has been about
> SAVING VERTICAL SPACE - it's just plain butt-ugly for markup to stack
> vertically when a slight shift sideways could save lines - plus there's
> the high price I put on page turns that could be saved by reclaiming
> that wasted space.

Pretty late to the party.

Though, I've to agree with David W.
At least for several mails with lines over lines of text it was _not_
clear to me what you want and I'm not sure I understand now.
As a non-native speaker I always think it may be due to language issues.
Though, the amount of code-lines is remarkable low in the whole thread...
And sometimes images indeed help, even if put together with some
graphic-program.

Anyway, you seem to want multiple texts applied to a the same BarLine.
These texts shouldn't be stacked vertically but horizontally, right?

In LSR and elsewhere some methods for multiple RehearsalMarks are
known, stacking vertically.

Should be possible to adapt it.

How should this texts be aligned over the BarLine?
More general, how should it look?

Maybe you told already, then I missed it.


Cheers,
  Harm

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Wols Lists]

On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote:
> On Sun 24 Apr 2016 at 19:18:01 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
>> On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote:

>>
>> Ah - does that mean the rehearsal mark would happily overwrite the
>> blank space at the start of the other markup string?
> 
> Typically, yes.

Ah good ...
> 
>> But as for "why would I want to do that" - to serve as an example
>> maybe. Let's change it then. Get rid of the tempo. The title would
>> still collide with the rehearsal mark, and it would still take three
>> lines - I wouldn't save a line. But shift the title a couple of mill
>> to the right, and it would drop down and save us a line. SAVING
>> VERTICAL SPACE is the point.
>>>

>>
>> Most people? Most people probably give up and go back to Sibelius,
>> or Finale, or whatever. My day job was programming, and I haven't
>> managed to get to grips with Scheme (it was FORTRAN/C, so Scheme is
>> a bit of a culture shock :-) because time to concentrate and learn
>> is a luxury :-(
> 
> Fair enough. I was making the point that LP sometimes looks like a
> programming language but isn't actually one.
> 
> But it never ceases to amaze me how, if you post a reasonably
> well-defined problem here, someone often posts a scheme solution.
> But you have to factorise your problem into chunks that people
> will feel inclined to tackle.

Well, I would like to tackle them myself. But, as I said, time to
concentrate is a luxury (I'm a carer, and dealing with someone with
memory problems can be very difficult :-(
> 
>>> Why not push the rehearsal mark left if you want loads of text to the right?
>>> I don't get the bit about notes in a MMR. Isn't that a contradiction?
>>
>> Not really. My modus operandi is
>>
>> voiceStaff = ...
>> voiceInstrument1 = ...
>> voiceInstrument2 = ...
>>
>> \score {
>>   <<
>> voiceStaff
>> voiceInstrument1
>>   >>
>> }
>> \score {
>>   <<
>> voiceStaff
>> voiceInstrument2
>>   >>
>> }
>>
>> The problem is that the contents of voiceInstrumentx has a *major*
>> influence on the way the contents of voiceStaff is displayed :-(
>> Instrument1 may have an MMR, Instrument2 may have notes, they affect
>> the bar spacing in different ways, and I may get markup collisions
>> in one part, and no collisions in the other. Basically, lily is
>> setting the notes, and then fitting the markup over the notes. There
>> are occasions when you want to set the markup and then fit the notes
>> under it.
> 
> Without wishing to imply that I could code it, that's why you might
> have fragments of markup suitable for notes, and others for MMRs,
> and then select between them to assemble each part.

In other words, put loads of \tags or instrument-specific stuff in
voiceStaff, which is supposed to be instrument-independent :-(
> 
> Why would you "go back to" Sibelius? Would that automate this?
> Even if you had to assemble the fragments manually for each part,
> that would be simpler, I'd have thought. You may or may not end up
> with a part like one of mine:
> texttenorsA = \lyricmode {
>   \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Tteetuka 
> \Tteetuka
>   \barNumberCheck #17
>   \Tteetuka \Tteetuka \Ttravi \Ttravs \Ttravs \Ttravr \Ttravs \Ttravs
>   \Ttravz
>   \barNumberCheck #27
>   \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka \Tzumpaka 
> \Tzumpaka \Tzumpakaz
>   Oo __ _ _
>   \barNumberCheck #35
>   \Tvumtb \Ttravs
> }
> where I'm selecting from a menu of lyrics fragments.
> 
?

And let's say the piece is SSAATTBB, could you combine that single
lyrics part with two different tenor melody parts, to give two different
part-sheets? Because THAT is the problem I would like to solve.

>>>
>>>
>> And you've given me a wonderful example of what I want :-) Let's say
>> a new tune starts at B, so I put a tune name there. You can't play
>> two tunes at once, can you? But you've got two tune names stacked
>> one above the other ... (Yes I know you can play two tunes at once,
>> but it's not normal :-) And you could get stacking tempi the same
>> way...
> 
> If the names of the tunes are so important (which is pretty
> unusual for a part), then why not place them underneath (like "halt!"
> in my example) so they don't interfere with the tempos.

Because I don't give a monkeys about interfering with tempi? Because I
*DO* give a massive monkeys about wasting vertical space, and moving the
tune-name underneath gains me nothing?

> If the names of the tunes are long, you're already going to have to
> deal with how they mesh with your linebreaks (which is tricky
> because you usually don't know where the latter will fall).
> 
> You could shrink the names of the tunes. You could print them in a
> heap at the foot of the page. You could leave them out of the parts,
> as is conventional. You could decide on your priorities.
> 
>> At the end of the day, the basic problem is that lily, by default,
>> stacks markup upwards. There is no way to tell it that markup should
>> 

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

On Sun 24 Apr 2016 at 19:18:01 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote:
> >On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> >>On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote:
> >>>On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> >>>>On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> >>>>>David K wrote:
> >>>>>>>Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
> >>>>>>>is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
> >>>>>>>That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.
> >>>>>I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens 
> >>>>>in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use 
> >>>>>multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.
> >>>>Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the
> >>>>score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and
> >>>>"voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg
> >>>>notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...
> >>>>
> >>>>In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with
> >>>>a two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I
> >>>>don't want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in
> >>>>the part.
> >>>>
> >>>>So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it
> >>>>uses "s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case
> >>>>is absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part,
> >>>>and because while some players in our section can read both, we have
> >>>>some players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is
> >>>>a regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and
> >>>>bass.
> >>>I haven't followed all that. Is this the sort of thing you want?
> >>>
> >>Pretty much. In your example it's exactly okay - the "poco allegretto"
> >>is to the right of the rehearsal mark, so the four marks take three
> >>lines to display. (Note I tend to use box-barnumber, so my rehearsal
> >>marks can get quite wide :-)
> >>
> >>Now, imagine the "poco allegretto" and "This is the army mr jones" were
> >>the other way round - the "This" would collide with the rehearsal mark,
> >>and it would take four lines.
> >I'm not quite sure why you'd do that. The tempo is part of the
> >music. The tune titles that you want to include are not. But you can
> >add spaces to the beginnings of strings to avoid collisions.
> 
> Ah - does that mean the rehearsal mark would happily overwrite the
> blank space at the start of the other markup string?

Typically, yes.

> But as for "why would I want to do that" - to serve as an example
> maybe. Let's change it then. Get rid of the tempo. The title would
> still collide with the rehearsal mark, and it would still take three
> lines - I wouldn't save a line. But shift the title a couple of mill
> to the right, and it would drop down and save us a line. SAVING
> VERTICAL SPACE is the point.
> >
> >>I want some semi-automatic way so I can push the other markup to the
> >>right of the rehearsal mark and make sure I only use three lines. Oh -
> >>and if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
> >>multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
> >>some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
> >>width as the markup so that then looks awful :-(
> >A lot in there. Your OP didn't have automation specified. Most people
> >drop into scheme for that, don't they?
> 
> Most people? Most people probably give up and go back to Sibelius,
> or Finale, or whatever. My day job was programming, and I haven't
> managed to get to grips with Scheme (it was FORTRAN/C, so Scheme is
> a bit of a culture shock :-) because time to concentrate and learn
> is a luxury :-(

Fair enough. I was making the point that LP sometimes looks like a
programming language but isn't actually one.

But it never ceases to amaze me how, if you post a reasonably
well-defined problem here, someone often posts a scheme solution.
But you have to factorise your problem into chunks that people
will feel inclined to tackle.

> >Why not push the rehearsal mark left if you want loads of te

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote:

On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:

On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote:

On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

David K wrote:

Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.

I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens in the 
part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use multiple \tag 
constructs just to handle this issue.

Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the
score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and
"voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg
notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...

In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with
a two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I
don't want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in
the part.

So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it
uses "s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case
is absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part,
and because while some players in our section can read both, we have
some players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is
a regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and
bass.

I haven't followed all that. Is this the sort of thing you want?


Pretty much. In your example it's exactly okay - the "poco allegretto"
is to the right of the rehearsal mark, so the four marks take three
lines to display. (Note I tend to use box-barnumber, so my rehearsal
marks can get quite wide :-)

Now, imagine the "poco allegretto" and "This is the army mr jones" were
the other way round - the "This" would collide with the rehearsal mark,
and it would take four lines.

I'm not quite sure why you'd do that. The tempo is part of the
music. The tune titles that you want to include are not. But you can
add spaces to the beginnings of strings to avoid collisions.


Ah - does that mean the rehearsal mark would happily overwrite the blank 
space at the start of the other markup string?


But as for "why would I want to do that" - to serve as an example maybe. 
Let's change it then. Get rid of the tempo. The title would still 
collide with the rehearsal mark, and it would still take three lines - I 
wouldn't save a line. But shift the title a couple of mill to the right, 
and it would drop down and save us a line. SAVING VERTICAL SPACE is the 
point.



I want some semi-automatic way so I can push the other markup to the
right of the rehearsal mark and make sure I only use three lines. Oh -
and if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
width as the markup so that then looks awful :-(

A lot in there. Your OP didn't have automation specified. Most people
drop into scheme for that, don't they?


Most people? Most people probably give up and go back to Sibelius, or 
Finale, or whatever. My day job was programming, and I haven't managed 
to get to grips with Scheme (it was FORTRAN/C, so Scheme is a bit of a 
culture shock :-) because time to concentrate and learn is a luxury :-(



Why not push the rehearsal mark left if you want loads of text to the right?
I don't get the bit about notes in a MMR. Isn't that a contradiction?


Not really. My modus operandi is

voiceStaff = ...
voiceInstrument1 = ...
voiceInstrument2 = ...

\score {
  <<
voiceStaff
voiceInstrument1
  >>
}
\score {
  <<
voiceStaff
voiceInstrument2
  >>
}

The problem is that the contents of voiceInstrumentx has a *major* 
influence on the way the contents of voiceStaff is displayed :-( 
Instrument1 may have an MMR, Instrument2 may have notes, they affect the 
bar spacing in different ways, and I may get markup collisions in one 
part, and no collisions in the other. Basically, lily is setting the 
notes, and then fitting the markup over the notes. There are occasions 
when you want to set the markup and then fit the notes under it.





The problem really is, all I want to do is stick multiple marks on a
barline (which doesn't work, lily doesn't do multiple \mark's :-(, and I
want to be able to move those markups to the right so they don't collide
with the rehearsal mark. \tempo *partly* solves my problem.

Well, that's a relief. BTW you can have multiple marks. My example had
one \tempo and the rest were marks.


The trouble
is, all the tweaks I've come up with (like for example "s1 s1*11") all
have side effects that don't matter in certain cases, and matte

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote:
> > On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> >> On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> >>> David K wrote:
> >>>>> Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
> >>>>> is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
> >>>>> That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.
> >>> I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens 
> >>> in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use 
> >>> multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.
> >> Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the
> >> score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and
> >> "voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg
> >> notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...
> >>
> >> In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with
> >> a two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I
> >> don't want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in
> >> the part.
> >>
> >> So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it
> >> uses "s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case
> >> is absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part,
> >> and because while some players in our section can read both, we have
> >> some players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is
> >> a regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and
> >> bass.
> > 
> > I haven't followed all that. Is this the sort of thing you want?
> > 
> Pretty much. In your example it's exactly okay - the "poco allegretto"
> is to the right of the rehearsal mark, so the four marks take three
> lines to display. (Note I tend to use box-barnumber, so my rehearsal
> marks can get quite wide :-)
> 
> Now, imagine the "poco allegretto" and "This is the army mr jones" were
> the other way round - the "This" would collide with the rehearsal mark,
> and it would take four lines.

I'm not quite sure why you'd do that. The tempo is part of the
music. The tune titles that you want to include are not. But you can
add spaces to the beginnings of strings to avoid collisions.

> I want some semi-automatic way so I can push the other markup to the
> right of the rehearsal mark and make sure I only use three lines. Oh -
> and if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
> multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
> some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
> width as the markup so that then looks awful :-(

A lot in there. Your OP didn't have automation specified. Most people
drop into scheme for that, don't they?
Why not push the rehearsal mark left if you want loads of text to the right?
I don't get the bit about notes in a MMR. Isn't that a contradiction?

> The problem really is, all I want to do is stick multiple marks on a
> barline (which doesn't work, lily doesn't do multiple \mark's :-(, and I
> want to be able to move those markups to the right so they don't collide
> with the rehearsal mark. \tempo *partly* solves my problem.

Well, that's a relief. BTW you can have multiple marks. My example had
one \tempo and the rest were marks.

> The trouble
> is, all the tweaks I've come up with (like for example "s1 s1*11") all
> have side effects that don't matter in certain cases, and matter
> enormously in others.

I haven't yet seen an example of what you want, not anything that
you've produced in the dim and distant past that you barely remember.

> As Kieren said, this stuff is generic across all parts, so he and I want
> to store it in a generic variable that then gets merged with the notes.
> But there doesn't appear to be a syntax that isn't crucially dependent
> on the notes being merged, other than filling the generic variable with
> a whole bunch of special-case formatting tags, which totally misses the
> point of having a generic variable :-( (plus I haven't used tags yet,
> another learning curve ...)

Again, isn't that why people use scheme. Then you can see if a given
moment has a note or not, and choose your markup appropriately.
LP never looks very automatic to me. It doesn't even have an "if"
construction to make a decision.

Anyway, I made mr jones into a nonsensical "\tempo". The rehearsal
letter now appears above it of course. I stuck a note in before the
MMR for some reason though nothing is anchored to it; everything but
mr jones is a \mark. I'm just doodling—not sure why I bothered.

Cheers,
David.


markswap.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 23/04/2016 12:23, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

Hi Wol,


if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
width as the markup so that then looks awful

\textLengthOff

?

Hope this helps,
Kieren.


BRILLIANT (but not the way you intended :-)

As far as I can tell, \textLengthOff is the default, but I looked it up 
in the manual, and found out how to attach a markup to a zero-length 
note! Just attach it to an empty chord!


So instead of doing "s4\markup s2. s1*7", I can simply do "<>\markup 
s1*8", and that stops my multi-measure-rests mucking up. (I think I'd 
found that before ages ago, but forgotten it ...)


I'll need to play a bit more, but that's another niggle fixed ... :-)

Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Wol,

> if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
> multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
> some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
> width as the markup so that then looks awful

\textLengthOff

?

Hope this helps,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

[Wols Lists]

On 23/04/16 01:52, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi David,
> 
>> It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a 
>> multi-measure rest.
>> Who does this, and what does it mean, musically?
>> In this example, you are actually placing a fermata on a single bar of rest.
>> In which case, this works fine:
>> { \compressFullBarRests f1->\fermata R1*3 r1\fermata }
> 
> Except r1\fermata and R1\fermataMarkup look and behave differently.
> And the difference gets even more obvious when you have a measure not in 4/4.
> =)
> 
And my mind is still stuck in the old days when neither of those worked,
but

\bar "||" \fermata

did :-) I think a load of my old code still has \markup #script.ufermata
or whatever it was all over the place trying to get them above notes ...

Cheers,
Wol


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Wols Lists]

On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote:
> On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
>> On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
>>> David K wrote:
>>>>> Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
>>>>> is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
>>>>> That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.
>>> I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens in 
>>> the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use multiple 
>>> \tag constructs just to handle this issue.
>> Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the
>> score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and
>> "voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg
>> notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...
>>
>> In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with
>> a two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I
>> don't want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in
>> the part.
>>
>> So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it
>> uses "s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case
>> is absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part,
>> and because while some players in our section can read both, we have
>> some players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is
>> a regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and
>> bass.
> 
> I haven't followed all that. Is this the sort of thing you want?
> 
Pretty much. In your example it's exactly okay - the "poco allegretto"
is to the right of the rehearsal mark, so the four marks take three
lines to display. (Note I tend to use box-barnumber, so my rehearsal
marks can get quite wide :-)

Now, imagine the "poco allegretto" and "This is the army mr jones" were
the other way round - the "This" would collide with the rehearsal mark,
and it would take four lines.

I want some semi-automatic way so I can push the other markup to the
right of the rehearsal mark and make sure I only use three lines. Oh -
and if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with
multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has
some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same
width as the markup so that then looks awful :-(

The problem really is, all I want to do is stick multiple marks on a
barline (which doesn't work, lily doesn't do multiple \mark's :-(, and I
want to be able to move those markups to the right so they don't collide
with the rehearsal mark. \tempo *partly* solves my problem. The trouble
is, all the tweaks I've come up with (like for example "s1 s1*11") all
have side effects that don't matter in certain cases, and matter
enormously in others.

As Kieren said, this stuff is generic across all parts, so he and I want
to store it in a generic variable that then gets merged with the notes.
But there doesn't appear to be a syntax that isn't crucially dependent
on the notes being merged, other than filling the generic variable with
a whole bunch of special-case formatting tags, which totally misses the
point of having a generic variable :-( (plus I haven't used tags yet,
another learning curve ...)

Cheers,
Wol


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

[Simon Albrecht]

On 23.04.2016 02:06, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:
It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a 
multi-measure rest.

Who does this, and what does it mean, musically?


You must be kidding. While calling R1 a MultiMeasureRest may be slightly 
confusing in LilyPond terminology, honestly it’s not so difficult to 
grasp. And of course it’s totally standard notation to use R, not r, for 
full-bar rests.


Regards, Simon

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

> It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a 
> multi-measure rest.
> Who does this, and what does it mean, musically?
> In this example, you are actually placing a fermata on a single bar of rest.
> In which case, this works fine:
> { \compressFullBarRests f1->\fermata R1*3 r1\fermata }

Except r1\fermata and R1\fermataMarkup look and behave differently.
And the difference gets even more obvious when you have a measure not in 4/4.
=)

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

> Try the following ...
>
> f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata
>
> The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints
> "programming error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't
> print.


It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a
multi-measure rest.
Who does this, and what does it mean, musically?

In this example, you are actually placing a fermata on a single bar of rest.
In which case, this works fine:

{ \compressFullBarRests f1->\fermata R1*3 r1\fermata }


As such, \fermataMarkup seems like a solution in search of a problem.

Unless I'm missing the reason why you would consider a single bar of rest
to be multiple bars of rest.


I think I must be missing more of the subtlety of this issue.

Since it hasn't been mentioned yet in this thread, you can also place text
at the start of a multi-measure rest using the empty chord structure:

{ \compressFullBarRests f1->\fermata R1*3 <>^\markup{ "hold me" } R1 }




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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> >David K wrote:
> >>>Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
> >>>is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
> >>>That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.
> >I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens in 
> >the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use multiple 
> >\tag constructs just to handle this issue.
> Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the
> score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and
> "voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg
> notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...
> 
> In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with
> a two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I
> don't want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in
> the part.
> 
> So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it
> uses "s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case
> is absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part,
> and because while some players in our section can read both, we have
> some players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is
> a regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and
> bass.

I haven't followed all that. Is this the sort of thing you want?

Cheers,
David.


marks.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 22/04/2016 16:55, David Kastrup wrote:

>The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints "programming
>error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't print. So
>that's another bug tracked down in my piece,

That's_explicitly_  what \fermataMarkup is for.  If people consulted the
manual before reporting known quirks...


Oops - I *used* to know the manuals very well - I proofread them from 
cover to cover back in Graham's day ...


I know a lot has changed since then - as I said \fermata didn't even 
work on notes back then - but there's a lot that's changed since then. 
Having a comprehensive out-of-date knowledge can bite you ... and I 
don't use lily enough to keep up with the changes.


That said, this *is* the user list, and sometimes RTFM is a good answer. 
Although I hate it when they don't tell you where in the FM to R. 
(That's not the case here, though, I ought to be able to find it very 
easily :-) Often it's not knowing WHAT to look for that's the problem, 
as in here I thought I knew about fermata ...




We'd probably have less inclination to address the quirks eventually.
As David Wright said, it seems MMRs are just one big quirk (as I'm 
finding out with this piece), so that's probably a big job to address :-(


Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Noeck]

Hi,

> f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata

You can use \fermataMarkup

{ R1\fermataMarkup }

I know it looks more like a workaround than something one would expect,
but it works.

Cheers,
Joram

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Wright]

On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 16:24:06 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote:
> >>I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens
> >>>in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use
> >>>multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.
> >Me too.  I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I was the only
> >one concerned about this.  Essentially why is alignment different for
> >multi-measure rests than notes.
> And other things too? Try the following ...
> 
> f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata
> 
> The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints
> "programming error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't
> print. So that's another bug tracked down in my piece, but - from a
> musician's pov - it doesn't make sense that the first example on a
> note should work fine, and the second on a rest produces an error.
> (It never used to work on notes at all, iirc, only as a mark on
> barlines, so maybe I should be grateful for small mercies :-)
> 
> It's easy enough to fix - something like "\markup #symbol.fermata" -
> I'll have to look up the syntax - but it's just frustrating that
> it's not consistent.

That's because whole-bar and multimeasure rests are themselves not
consistent with music notation in general. They have the "wrong"
duration and the "wrong" alignment (placement). They're a convenience
for musicians (especially instrumentalists; singers often hate them)
and a pain for engraving programs.

AIUI I can anchor things horizontally to either barlines or to
notes/rests/spacers. Unfortunately once a whole-bar rest has
jumped to the middle of a bar, it's no longer a useful anchor
for most purposes.

I haven't tried to set your OP's snippet. It might be an idea to post
a sketch of what you want. Possibly you'll improve your chances of
suggestions.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Kastrup]

Anthonys Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> writes:

> On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote:
>>> I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens
>>> >in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use
>>> >multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.
>> Me too.  I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I was the only
>> one concerned about this.  Essentially why is alignment different for
>> multi-measure rests than notes.
> And other things too? Try the following ...
>
> f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata
>
> The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints "programming
> error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't print. So
> that's another bug tracked down in my piece,

That's _explicitly_ what \fermataMarkup is for.  If people consulted the
manual before reporting known quirks...

We'd probably have less inclination to address the quirks eventually.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote:

I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens
>in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use
>multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.

Me too.  I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I was the only
one concerned about this.  Essentially why is alignment different for
multi-measure rests than notes.

And other things too? Try the following ...

f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata

The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints "programming 
error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't print. So that's 
another bug tracked down in my piece, but - from a musician's pov - it 
doesn't make sense that the first example on a note should work fine, 
and the second on a rest produces an error. (It never used to work on 
notes at all, iirc, only as a mark on barlines, so maybe I should be 
grateful for small mercies :-)


It's easy enough to fix - something like "\markup #symbol.fermata" - 
I'll have to look up the syntax - but it's just frustrating that it's 
not consistent.


Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

Wol: Scan through the thread starting 
at  and 
see if anything there helps.

Good luck,
Kieren.
Just scanned it - unfortunately I'm using \markup on an s, rather than 
\mark, for my tune name (because I've already got two colliding marks, 
rehearsal and tempo), so that thread saying "compress MMRs when they 
don't contain blah blah" will fail because I've got a markup in there :-(


If I had some mark I could stick the tune name in that wouldn't collide 
with and be suppressed by the rehearsal mark, then maybe it would work. 
But without writing some new kind of mark (is there one already 
available? it might have been added at some point?) I don't know what 
else to do - using markup seemed the best option. And I don't fancy 
trying to write a new mark, I've dug into this on a couple of occasions 
and got out of my depth rather quickly.


Losing an MMR isn't really a problem, it just looks a little bit odd :-( 
and I come across plenty of music that (imho) has weird MMR settings 
anyway. Usually because they've compressed the end of one phrase into 
the start of another - I really don't like it when a single MMR spans 
several incomplete musical phrases.


Oh well. I'll carry on fiddling :-) But it is frustrating when all I 
want to do is move a bit of text a smidgeon to one side, and I just can 
NOT work out how to do it without all sorts of other unintended side 
effects ...


Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

David K wrote:

>Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
>is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
>That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.

I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens in the 
part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use multiple \tag 
constructs just to handle this issue.
Exactly... I write my music with "voiceStaff" to contain all the 
score-level stuff eg tempi, tune names, rehearsal marks etc, and 
"voiceInstrument" to contain the stuff that varies by instrument, eg 
notes, dynamics, anything else like that ...


In the case example, the phrase is eight bars long, commencing with a 
two-bar rest. For another instrument, it won't have a rest. And I don't 
want the output to change dramatically depending on what's in the part.


So of course, because voiceStaff is not meant to contain notes, it uses 
"s" all the time. And I very rarely produce scores, this case is 
absolutely typical for me in that we only have a bass-clef part, and 
because while some players in our section can read both, we have some 
players who can only read bass or treble clef so transposing is a 
regular requirement. So I'll have three parts to do, 1st, 2nd and bass.


And because text seems to centre on the "s" (or something like that), as 
you say, its appearance is affected greatly by what happens to be in the 
part :-( I just want markups to be able to shunt stuff out of the way 
*sideways*. Bearing in mind the parts I'm setting, often the cost of a 
page turn is unacceptable, so to lose a huge amount of space because a 
markup increases staff spacing (or wastes horizontal space pushing music 
aside) is a nightmare. A march part, for example, has to cram an entire 
piece onto a piece of A5 paper (half-letter size, for Americans). And 
no, you can't just turn over ...



Wol: Scan through the thread starting 
at  and 
see if anything there helps.

Thanks, I'll investigate.

Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Paul Scott]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:31:17AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Wol,
> 
> > My usual bugbear ... :-(
> > I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, 
> > […]
> 
> Yeah… this causes me no end of grief, too.
> It probably represents a good 10% of my score/part tweaking time.
> 
> David K wrote:
> > Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
> > is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
> > That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.
> 
> I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens
> in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use
> multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue.

Me too.  I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I was the only
one concerned about this.  Essentially why is alignment different for
multi-measure rests than notes.

Paul


> 
> Wol: Scan through the thread starting at
> <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2013-10/msg00517.html>
> and see if anything there helps.
> 
> Good luck,
> Kieren.
> 
> 
> Kieren MacMillan, composer
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Wol,

> My usual bugbear ... :-(
> I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, […]

Yeah… this causes me no end of grief, too.
It probably represents a good 10% of my score/part tweaking time.

David K wrote:
> Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
> is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?
> That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.

I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens in the 
part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use multiple \tag 
constructs just to handle this issue.

Wol: Scan through the thread starting at 
 and see 
if anything there helps.

Good luck,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


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

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[David Kastrup]

Anthonys Lists  writes:

> My usual bugbear ... :-(
>
> I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo
> mark, and a tune name all wanting to be over the same barline (this is
> an arrangement, where there are several tunes and each is identified
> where it occurs).
>
> So I have something along the lines of
>
> <<
> { s1 | \mark \default \tempo "poco allegretto" s1^\markup "This is the
> army mr jones" s1*7 }
> { c1 | R1*2 }
>>>
>
> However, the two "s1"s are causing the R1*2 to print as two separate
> bars :-( I'm also getting
>
> warning: MultiMeasureRestText has empty extent and non-empty stencil.
>
> in the log, which I guess is related. Any ideas how to get the rest to
> print as a multi-measure rest? The problem, from my pov, is that the
> first, markup, line is meant to be shared across multiple parts, so if
> I do s1*8^\markup, the text is centred over the 8-bar phrase or some
> other wrongness,

Hm?  How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there
is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel?

That sounds like a problem that cannot occur.

> The other problem I have, is is there any way I can shunt markup left
> or right (both tempo and text)? I've been using extra-spacing-width,
> which works a treat sometimes, and is dreadful elsewhere. It's been
> fine for rehearsal marks, but when I use it on tempo and text, it's
> been shoving the music out of the way, which then looks awful. I just
> want to push the text slightly to the right to avoid colliding with
> the rehearsal mark (and I have tried extra-spacing-width leaving one
> or other argument at its default +-infinity, and again it seems to
> work sometimes and be a nightmare elsewhere ...) All the horizontal
> adjustment stuff I've seen seems to be for in-staff objects like
> lines, noteheads, accidentals ... will they work on markups?

Some will.  It's probably easiest fiddling with self-alignment-X if that
is heeded, making one more or less right-aligned and the other left.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

[Anthonys Lists]

My usual bugbear ... :-(

I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo 
mark, and a tune name all wanting to be over the same barline (this is 
an arrangement, where there are several tunes and each is identified 
where it occurs).


So I have something along the lines of

<<
{ s1 | \mark \default \tempo "poco allegretto" s1^\markup "This is the 
army mr jones" s1*7 }

{ c1 | R1*2 }
>>

However, the two "s1"s are causing the R1*2 to print as two separate 
bars :-( I'm also getting


warning: MultiMeasureRestText has empty extent and non-empty stencil.

in the log, which I guess is related. Any ideas how to get the rest to 
print as a multi-measure rest? The problem, from my pov, is that the 
first, markup, line is meant to be shared across multiple parts, so if I 
do s1*8^\markup, the text is centred over the 8-bar phrase or some other 
wrongness, although that fixes the multi-measure-rest problem.


The other problem I have, is is there any way I can shunt markup left or 
right (both tempo and text)? I've been using extra-spacing-width, which 
works a treat sometimes, and is dreadful elsewhere. It's been fine for 
rehearsal marks, but when I use it on tempo and text, it's been shoving 
the music out of the way, which then looks awful. I just want to push 
the text slightly to the right to avoid colliding with the rehearsal 
mark (and I have tried extra-spacing-width leaving one or other argument 
at its default +-infinity, and again it seems to work sometimes and be a 
nightmare elsewhere ...) All the horizontal adjustment stuff I've seen 
seems to be for in-staff objects like lines, noteheads, accidentals ... 
will they work on markups?


Pointers greatly appreciated ...

Cheers,
Wol

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

Re: custom multi-measure rests

[Marc Hohl]

Am 24.03.2016 um 10:45 schrieb Andrew Bernard:

Hi David,

It’s LSR 753 I think you are after.


D'oh – I searched the LSR for "multi measure rest" but did not find that 
one ;-)


Marc


Andrew



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




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

Re: custom multi-measure rests

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi David,

It’s LSR 753 I think you are after.

Andrew


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

Re: custom multi-measure rests

[Marc Hohl]

Am 24.03.2016 um 02:47 schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine:


I'd like to figure out how to execute something found in some Jazz
charts for drums.
It is a compact way to indicate "play time for X measures" in a single
measure.



I think this has been discussed (and solved) already, see

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2011-03/msg00025.html

and follow the thread for a solution.

HTH,

Marc



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

custom multi-measure rests

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

I'd like to figure out how to execute something found in some Jazz charts
for drums.
It is a compact way to indicate "play time for X measures" in a single
measure.

Here are two examples from the googlesphere:

The measure marked as "Play 7"
http://www.quickgigcharts.com/wp-content/uploads/edd/2015/09/Feeling-Good-Feature-image.jpg

The measure marked as "Play 7 (time)"
http://www.mikejamesjazz.com/media/writing_items/drums/mellotone_drums.gif


Those demonstrate the concept, but not the execution I would prefer.
The way I'd like it to look is more like:

| ( 7 ) |

This is overall similar to a multi-measure rest, but with the following
differences:
  o The number should be in the middle of the staff, rather than over the
staff.
  o The number should be surrounded by large parenthesis
  o The lines on either side of the parenthesis should be thick but
squiggly (or even just a bunch of tildes.)

Is it possible to define such a new style for displaying multi-measure
rests?
It doesn't have to be exactly the style--I'd settle for the diagonal line
in the first example.

The main point is, I'd like some other format for multi-measure rest that
is distinct from the usual ones.  I can add text to clarify the
interpretation to the performer.

The other requirement is that I'd also like to use them in
combination--some charts will have both actual multi-measure rests as well
as blocks of "time" represented by this new format of multi-measure rest.

I'd appreciate hearing any thoughts on whether this is possible.


Thanks,

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[David Kastrup]

David Wright  writes:

> Quoting Gilberto Agostinho (gilbertohasn...@gmail.com):
>> Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
>> > On 14.10.2015 20:41, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:
>> >> \version "2.17.95"
>> > 
>> > Just out of interest: what makes you still use that particular version?
>> 
>> I don't, I actually use 2.19.15. The thing is I have several little
>> templates that I use when creating functions and I ended up copying the
>> version of when that template was created.
>
> That reminds me. I too put \version in my sources and each of my .ily
> files ready for conversion at some time in the future. When a 2.18.2
> source is run on older (or, indeed, newer) versions, does LP behave
> any differently as a consequence of the \version read as the file is
> being processed? (ie, beyond mentioning version numbers in the text of
> any error messages generated.)

In LilyPond itself, \version is only used for the version check, nothing
else.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[David Wright]

Quoting Gilberto Agostinho (gilbertohasn...@gmail.com):
> Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
> > On 14.10.2015 20:41, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:
> >> \version "2.17.95"
> > 
> > Just out of interest: what makes you still use that particular version?
> 
> I don't, I actually use 2.19.15. The thing is I have several little
> templates that I use when creating functions and I ended up copying the
> version of when that template was created.

That reminds me. I too put \version in my sources and each of my .ily
files ready for conversion at some time in the future. When a 2.18.2
source is run on older (or, indeed, newer) versions, does LP behave
any differently as a consequence of the \version read as the file is
being processed? (ie, beyond mentioning version numbers in the text of
any error messages generated.)

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: "Gilberto Agostinho" <gilbertohasn...@gmail.com>

To: <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests



Hi Simon,


Simon Albrecht-2 wrote

So if you like you may raise a bug report, always following the steps on
http://lilypond.org/bug-reports.html; – but now using the 
temporary

issue tracker at http://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/;.


I did a report as usual, by sending a detailed e-mail to
bug-lilyp...@gnu.org together with a tiny example. But this time I got no
reply, so is there some modification to the procedure? You mentioned a
temporary issue tracker, but I never used any tracker to report bugs, I
always thought that users should report only by the mailing list. Can you
confirm to me if I am doing something wrong? Thanks a lot!

Cheers,
Gilberto



You did the correct thing.  Simon may be referring to the request to check 
to see whether the bug already exists.


--
Phil Holmes 



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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hi Simon,


Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
> So if you like you may raise a bug report, always following the steps on 
> http://lilypond.org/bug-reports.html; – but now using the temporary 
> issue tracker at http://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/;.

I did a report as usual, by sending a detailed e-mail to
bug-lilyp...@gnu.org together with a tiny example. But this time I got no
reply, so is there some modification to the procedure? You mentioned a
temporary issue tracker, but I never used any tracker to report bugs, I
always thought that users should report only by the mailing list. Can you
confirm to me if I am doing something wrong? Thanks a lot!

Cheers,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372p182426.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: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hi Phil,


Phil Holmes-2 wrote
> You did the correct thing.  Simon may be referring to the request to check 
> to see whether the bug already exists.

Great to hear that, thanks for the reply!

Cheers,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372p182428.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: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Something just crossed my mind and this works out well: by using \repeat
unfold N R1 we can solve this problem, as it creates N individual R1's
instead of enlarging a single one. For the lazy ones (like me), defining a
function \RN makes life even easier:

\version "2.17.95" 

RN = #(define-music-function 
(parser location N) 
(integer?) 
#{ 
  \repeat unfold $N R1 
#}
) 

{
  \RN 10
}



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372p182375.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

partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hello LilyPonders,

When changing the type of \partcombine (for instance, using
\partcombineApart in the middle of the score) when one of the parts has
multi-measure rests I get some strange results:

<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n182372/39.png> 
code:  partbug.ly
<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n182372/partbug.ly>  

Is this a bug or am I wrongly using \partcombine?

Cheers,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372.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: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

David Wright wrote
> I think you're making the assumption that R1*4 is just a textual
> shorthand for R1 R1 R1 R1 but it isn't. R1*4 is a single "chunk".

Oh, I see. So the chunk already happened before the different \partcombine
option is selected. Well, this makes combining parts slightly more annoying
in cases like the one I posted above since one has to manually find the
point to break the chunk of R1, but I do understand it isn't a bug.

Thanks for your reply and take care,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372p182374.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: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[David Wright]

Quoting Gilberto Agostinho (gilbertohasn...@gmail.com):

> When changing the type of \partcombine (for instance, using
> \partcombineApart in the middle of the score) when one of the parts has
> multi-measure rests I get some strange results:
> 
> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n182372/39.png> 
> code:  partbug.ly
> <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n182372/partbug.ly>  
> 
> Is this a bug or am I wrongly using \partcombine?

I think you're making the assumption that R1*4 is just a textual
shorthand for R1 R1 R1 R1 but it isn't. R1*4 is a single "chunk".
Take a very careful look at the section "Scaling Durations" in the
Notation manual, particularly b16*4.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Simon Albrecht]

On 14.10.2015 20:41, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:

\version "2.17.95"


Just out of interest: what makes you still use that particular version?

Regards, Simon

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Simon Albrecht]

On 14.10.2015 20:41, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:

Something just crossed my mind and this works out well: by using \repeat
unfold N R1 we can solve this problem,


This is not a full solution: if you try \compressFullBarRests, you’ll 
notice different behaviour (some wrote a music function to deal with 
this though).
I’d say that the partcombiner should be able to deal with this. It’s 
inappropriate to change the input code of either of the voices to make 
up for deficiencies of the partcombiner – at least if you should need to 
print both separately, and that’s part of the point in using \partcombine.
So if you like you may raise a bug report, always following the steps on 
 – but now using the temporary 
issue tracker at .


Yours, Simon

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

Re: partcombine and multi-measure rests

[Gilberto Agostinho]

Hi Simon,


Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
> This is not a full solution: if you try \compressFullBarRests, you’ll 
> notice different behaviour (some wrote a music function to deal with 
> this though).

You are right, I haven't spotted this shortcoming.


Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
> I’d say that the partcombiner should be able to deal with this. 
> [...] 
> So if you like you may raise a bug report

Sounds good, I will do that right away!


Simon Albrecht-2 wrote
> On 14.10.2015 20:41, Gilberto Agostinho wrote:
>> \version "2.17.95"
> 
> Just out of interest: what makes you still use that particular version?

I don't, I actually use 2.19.15. The thing is I have several little
templates that I use when creating functions and I ended up copying the
version of when that template was created.

Cheers,
Gilberto



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/partcombine-and-multi-measure-rests-tp182372p182378.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: question about multi measure rests from a blind user

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Daniel,

Place the \compressFullBarRests command ahead of the music itself :


\score {
  \new Staff {
\compressFullBarRests
c1*2
R1*32
d1*3
R1*3
e1*3
  }
  \layout { }
}


JM

 Le 17 juin 2015 à 06:33, Daniel Contreras daniel.c.9...@gmail.com a écrit :
 
 Hello David and Trever, 
 Pardon me if I miss spelled your name. So… what exactly does 
 \compressFullBarRests do? Here is what I tried to do: 
 \score { 
 \new Staff { 
 … music …. \compressFullBarRests R1*32 … more music } 
 \layout { } 
 } 
 
 Is there anything that I am missing to accomplish the engraving of a multi 
 measure rest with a “32 above it? 
 On Jun 16, 2015, at 5:14 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
 
 
 David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, June 16, 2015 8:24 AM
 
 \compressFullBarRests is probably named a bit confusingly: LilyPond
 merely refrains from uncompressing the rests then, but it does not
 actively compress them.
 
 It is poorly named, but for a different reason.  \compressFullBarRests
 merely sets 'skipBars to #t, which causes bar lines and bars to be 
 suppressed for any rest or note which extends over several bars.  See
 
 https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3687
 
 There is a music function \compressMMRests available from
 Release 2.19.20 and later whose action is strictly limited 
 to multi-measure rests.  It is likely \compressFullBarRests 
 will be deprecated at some time, or more likely renamed to 
 better indicate its true action.
 
 Trevor
 
 
 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


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

Re: question about multi measure rests from a blind user

[Daniel Contreras]

Hello David and Trever, 
Pardon me if I miss spelled your name. So… what exactly does 
\compressFullBarRests do? Here is what I tried to do: 
\score { 
\new Staff { 
… music …. \compressFullBarRests R1*32 … more music } 
\layout { } 
} 

Is there anything that I am missing to accomplish the engraving of a multi 
measure rest with a “32 above it? 
On Jun 16, 2015, at 5:14 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:

 
 David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, June 16, 2015 8:24 AM
 
 \compressFullBarRests is probably named a bit confusingly: LilyPond
 merely refrains from uncompressing the rests then, but it does not
 actively compress them.
 
 It is poorly named, but for a different reason.  \compressFullBarRests
 merely sets 'skipBars to #t, which causes bar lines and bars to be 
 suppressed for any rest or note which extends over several bars.  See
 
 https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3687
 
 There is a music function \compressMMRests available from
 Release 2.19.20 and later whose action is strictly limited 
 to multi-measure rests.  It is likely \compressFullBarRests 
 will be deprecated at some time, or more likely renamed to 
 better indicate its true action.
 
 Trevor


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

question about multi measure rests from a blind user

[Daniel Contreras]

Hello all, 
I was just curious as to what the difference is between the commands 
\compressFullBarRests and \set Score.skipBars = ##t ? 
I arranged some salsa charts that were performed over the weekend, My friend 
who played trumpet mentioned that I had a rest that was 32 bars long. He told 
me that the rests were not written in compressed form. What I had in my LY file 
was something like …. 
\score { \compressFullBarRests 
 music…. 
 } 
 Am I missing something else? Thanks for any help. 

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

Re: question about multi measure rests from a blind user

[David Kastrup]

Daniel Contreras daniel.c.9...@gmail.com writes:

 I was just curious as to what the difference is between the commands
 \compressFullBarRests and \set Score.skipBars = ##t ?

skipBars prints nothing and gives no indication about what was left.

 I arranged some salsa charts that were performed over the weekend, My
 friend who played trumpet mentioned that I had a rest that was 32 bars
 long. He told me that the rests were not written in compressed
 form.

Only full bar rests are compressed.  Full bar rests are printed in the
middle of the bar (rather than at its beginning) and look like
semi-breve rests (duration 1) for most meters (exceptions are meters
like 2/1 or 4/2).  Compressed rests show various forms, with the largest
ones being a large vertically centered horizontal bar with the number of
measures above.

Full-bar rests are entered with a capital R.  For full-bar rests to be
compressed, they have to be entered as a _single_ rest, like R2.*16 for
16 measures of rest in a 3/4 meter.  That makes it possible to have,
say, 16 measures of rest followed by 3 by writing something like

R1*16 R1*3

and have them compressed in logical sections.  But it means you have to
compress your rests manually.

\compressFullBarRests is probably named a bit confusingly: LilyPond
merely refrains from uncompressing the rests then, but it does not
actively compress them.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: question about multi measure rests from a blind user

[Trevor Daniels]

David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, June 16, 2015 8:24 AM

 \compressFullBarRests is probably named a bit confusingly: LilyPond
 merely refrains from uncompressing the rests then, but it does not
 actively compress them.

It is poorly named, but for a different reason.  \compressFullBarRests
merely sets 'skipBars to #t, which causes bar lines and bars to be 
suppressed for any rest or note which extends over several bars.  See

https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3687

There is a music function \compressMMRests available from
Release 2.19.20 and later whose action is strictly limited 
to multi-measure rests.  It is likely \compressFullBarRests 
will be deprecated at some time, or more likely renamed to 
better indicate its true action.

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

Hiding multi-measure rests in multi-voice polyphony

[Mike Solomon]

Hey all,

If I have four voices on a staff, is there a way to tell LilyPond to hide a 
multi-measure rest if there are notes in the measure and to only ever print one 
at a time?  Kinda like \partcombine but for more than two voices.

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

Re: Hiding multi-measure rests in multi-voice polyphony

[Thomas Morley]

2013/7/20 Mike Solomon m...@mikesolomon.org:
 Hey all,

 If I have four voices on a staff, is there a way to tell LilyPond to hide a 
 multi-measure rest if there are notes in the measure and to only ever print 
 one at a time?  Kinda like \partcombine but for more than two voices.

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

Hi Mike,

perhaps you could modify
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=868


Cheers,
  Harm

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

multi measure rests

[Sarah k Alawami]

I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to memorize how to 
do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll have 
4 doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this for one 
measure

R4. R4. R4. R4. |
for example?

Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.

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

Re: multi measure rests

[bobr...@centrum.is]

- Original Message -
From: Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com
To: lilly pond discuss discuss lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2013 4:13:44 PM
Subject: multi measure rests

I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to memorize how to 
do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll have 
4 doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this for one 
measure

R4. R4. R4. R4. |
for example?

Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.

Take care.

For one measure rest in 12/8:

R1.

Several measures rest in 12/8, for example, 8 measures:

R1.*8

-David

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

Re: multi measure rests

[Noeck]

Am 03.05.2013 18:13, schrieb Sarah k Alawami:
 I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to memorize how 
 to do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll 
 have 4 doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this for 
 one measure
 
 R4. R4. R4. R4. |
 for example?

Hi Sarah,

multimeasure rests have a duration of the full measure (4/4 = 1  in a
4/4 measure for example). So in your 12/8 measure you can only have one
single 12/8 full measure rest in it:

R1*12/8  or R1.

If you want to have 4 dotted quarter rests you have to use the lower
case rests because they do not fill the measure:

r4. r4. r4. r4. |

If you want to repeat them:
\repeat unfold 5 { r4. r4. r4. r4. }

Cheers,
Joram

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

Re: multi measure rests

[Sarah k Alawami]

Ok. I see there a dotted hole note, but  a dotted whole note or in this case 
whole rest is only 8 eithgh notes if I counted correctly which my coffee 
deprived brain probably did not lol!  I get the feeling that i'm making this 
harder then it really is.  lol!

Take care all and thanks.
On May 3, 2013, at 9:23 AM, bobr...@centrum.is wrote:

 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com
 To: lilly pond discuss discuss lilypond-user@gnu.org
 Sent: Friday, May 3, 2013 4:13:44 PM
 Subject: multi measure rests
 
 I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to memorize how 
 to do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll 
 have 4 doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this for 
 one measure
 
 R4. R4. R4. R4. |
 for example?
 
 Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.
 
 Take care.
 
 For one measure rest in 12/8:
 
 R1.
 
 Several measures rest in 12/8, for example, 8 measures:
 
 R1.*8
 
 -David


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

Re: multi measure rests

[Noeck]

Am 03.05.2013 18:44, schrieb Sarah k Alawami:
 Ok. I see there a dotted hole note, but  a dotted whole note or in this case 
 whole rest is only 8 eithgh notes if I counted correctly which my coffee 
 deprived brain probably did not lol!  I get the feeling that i'm making this 
 harder then it really is.  lol!

A dotted whole note is 1 + 1/2 note = 4/4 + 2/4 = 8/8 + 4/8 = 12/8

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

Re: multi measure rests

[Urs Liska]

A MultiMeasureRest for one measure always _looks_ like a whole note rest, no 
matter how long its real duration is.
Maybe it's this what you mix up?

Best
Urs



Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com schrieb:

Ok. I see there a dotted hole note, but  a dotted whole note or in this
case whole rest is only 8 eithgh notes if I counted correctly which my
coffee deprived brain probably did not lol!  I get the feeling that i'm
making this harder then it really is.  lol!

Take care all and thanks.
On May 3, 2013, at 9:23 AM, bobr...@centrum.is wrote:

 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com
 To: lilly pond discuss discuss lilypond-user@gnu.org
 Sent: Friday, May 3, 2013 4:13:44 PM
 Subject: multi measure rests
 
 I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to
memorize how to do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol!
I'm in 12/8 so I'll have 4 doted quarter notes so would the multi
measure rest look like this for one measure
 
 R4. R4. R4. R4. |
 for example?
 
 Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.
 
 Take care.
 
 For one measure rest in 12/8:
 
 R1.
 
 Several measures rest in 12/8, for example, 8 measures:
 
 R1.*8
 
 -David


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

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

Re: multi measure rests

[Wim van Dommelen]

I remember and use it this way:

R length times so many

so: R1*3 is three times the length of one whole note. Always calculate  
the total length you need and that it gets there.


I tried simply this: Assume you want 4/4 followed by 3/4 and three  
full measures rest in each:


{
\time 4/4
c''1
R1*3
\time 3/4
c''2.
R1*3
}

what you get is: one whole c'', 3 whole measures rest, time change,  
one dotted half note c'', FOUR(!) measures rest


This is because 3 times a whole note rest equals 3 times 4 quarters =  
12 quarters, which is four time a full measure of three quarters.


To get three rest measures in the 3/4 time you need:

{
\time 4/4
c''1
R1*3
\time 3/4
c''2.
R2.*3
}

I can get exactly the same by specifying R4*9, which is also 9 quarters.

Setting \compressFullBarRests in this doesn't make a difference. So  
the statement this is no matter its real duration is not correct  
i.m.h.o., it IS the real duration you need tp specify.


Regards,
Wim.




On 3 May 2013, at 18:58 , Urs Liska wrote:

A MultiMeasureRest for one measure always _looks_ like a whole note  
rest, no matter how long its real duration is.

Maybe it's this what you mix up?

Best
Urs



Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com schrieb:
Ok. I see there a dotted hole note, but  a dotted whole note or in  
this case whole rest is only 8 eithgh notes if I counted correctly  
which my coffee deprived brain probably did not lol!  I get the  
feeling that i'm making this harder then it really is.  lol!


Take care all and thanks.
On May 3, 2013, at 9:23 AM, bobr...@centrum.is wrote:



- Original Message -
From: Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com
To: lilly pond discuss discuss lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Friday, May 3, 2013 4:13:44 PM
Subject: multi measure rests

I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to  
memorize how to do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me  
lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll have 4
doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this  
for one measure


R4. R4. R4. R4. |
for example?

Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.

Take care.

For one measure rest in 12/8:

R1.

Several measures rest in 12/8, for example, 8 measures:

R1.*8

-David



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

--
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail  
gesendet.

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


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

Re: multi measure rests

[Sarah k Alawami]

Possibally. Like I said I'm so new to lily pound   and I'm trying to read the 
docs as best I could but sometimes the explanations are just a tad unclear. 
lol! and I'm trying to do my final assignment from a transcription in braille 
gone wrong. lol!

Take care.
On May 3, 2013, at 9:58 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote:

 A MultiMeasureRest for one measure always _looks_ like a whole note rest, no 
 matter how long its real duration is.
 Maybe it's this what you mix up?
 
 Best
 Urs
 
 
 
 Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com schrieb:
 Ok. I see there a dotted hole note, but  a dotted whole note or in this case 
 whole rest is only 8 eithgh notes if I counted correctly which my coffee 
 deprived brain probably did not lol!  I get the feeling that i'm making this 
 harder then it really is.  lol!
 
 Take care all and thanks.
 On May 3, 2013, at 9:23 AM, bobr...@centrum.is wrote:
 
 
 
 - Original Message -
 From: Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com
 To: lilly pond discuss discuss lilypond-user@gnu.org
 Sent: Friday, May 3, 2013 4:13:44 PM
 Subject: multi measure rests
 
 I read the docs on how to do this but is there an easier way to memorize how 
 to do this? the fractions confuse the heck out of me lol! I'm in 12/8 so I'll 
 have 4
 doted quarter notes so would the multi measure rest look like this for one 
 measure
 
 R4. R4. R4. R4. |
 for example?
 
 Thanks all. and sorry for all of the questions.
 
 Take care.
 
 For one measure rest in 12/8:
 
 R1.
 
 Several measures rest in 12/8, for example, 8 measures:
 
 R1.*8
 
 -David
 
 
 
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
 
 -- 
 Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

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

Re: multi measure rests

[Noeck]

Hi,

I also have a question for you: You seem to use braille music output
from LilyPond. Is that builtin in LilyPond? Could you (or anyone) point
me to some documentation how to use that? I would like to try it.

Cheers,
Joram

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

Re: Re: multi measure rests

[Evan Driscoll]

On 05/03/2013 03:11 PM, Wim van Dommelen wrote:
 I remember and use it this way:
 
 R length times so many
 
 so: R1*3 is three times the length of one whole note. Always calculate
 the total length you need and that it gets there.

FWIW, the general form of what I do is

  R1*time signature*number of measures

So instead of typing R2.*3 for a three-measure rest in 3/4 time, I
would spell that as R1*3/4*3. Instead of a full measure of rest in
12/8 being written as R1., I would write it as R1*12/8.

I'll leave out the *time signature part for 4/4 time, but everything
else gets written out even if there is a more succinct way of expressing
it. I'll usually leave out the *number of measures bit if there's only
one. But the point is I always start with R1 and then scale as necessary.

BTW, I make no claim that this is particularly good practice or that
you'll like it; I'm not an experienced Lilypond user by any means. (I
got into this habit as I'm very very slowly working on typesetting the
parts to Mars, which of course is in 5/4 time. I'm not sure if there
even is another way to mark a full-measure of rest in 5/4 time without
using a scaling.) I just bring it up to show my own view and also to
point out that you can use * to scale the length of a measure in
addition to specifying multiple measures. (Really they're both doing the
same thing, but I think of them as being for different reasons.)

Evan



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

Re: multi measure rests

[Sarah k Alawami]

Actually I'm not. The university brailled my piano transcript Im working off 
of. It would be nice though if maybe a musk student could learn lily pond and 
output it in to braille so all of my stuff could be done in house. using music 
vml or some such thing.

Take care.
On May 3, 2013, at 2:30 PM, Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de wrote:

 Hi,
 
 I also have a question for you: You seem to use braille music output
 from LilyPond. Is that builtin in LilyPond? Could you (or anyone) point
 me to some documentation how to use that? I would like to try it.
 
 Cheers,
 Joram
 
 ___
 lilypond-user mailing list
 lilypond-user@gnu.org
 https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


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

Re: Multi measure rests vertical positioning

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Werner,

 I must solve everything for R manually while r works fine.
 Any ideas to solve that?

Can you write a callback function to determine the position of the r and apply 
it to the R?

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