Dear Janek,
I've read the discussion You have mentioned but I couldn't find a solution
there, a working command that reduces the discance between the accidentals
and the music.
Could it maybee done with
\override Accidental #'X-extent = #'(x . y)?
2012/9/16 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com
On 19/09/12 17:39, Stefan Thomas wrote:
Dear Janek,
I've read the discussion You have mentioned but I couldn't find a
solution there, a working command that reduces the discance between
the accidentals and the music.
You can use Score.AccidentalPlacement #'right-padding, which has a
default
Davids second solution is even better
{ g'''4 -\tweak #'X-offset #-2.7 \p ( \ e'''4 \! \ d'''4 \!) }
Clearly I need to do my homework on -\tweak which does seem a more intuitive
way forward. If I have a criticism of Lilypond syntax
it is that it is not always intuitive - that is why learning
Does anyone know why the flats appear our of order when the key signature
is F-flat?
F-Flat.ly
Description: Binary data
F-Flat.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
That looks correct to me. Accidentals are placed in the order they are placed
on the stave - so normally it would be Bb, Eb, etc. However, the Bbb is placed
last, replacing the first Bb, so it appears last in the list of accidentals.
--
Phil Holmes
- Original Message -
From:
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, keith Luke wrote:
Does anyone know why the flats appear our of order when the key signature is
F-flat?
Not an answer to your question, but why are the flats to big and don't fit
the staff, making them hard to read ?
--
MT
- Original Message -
From: Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl
To: keith Luke kkll...@gmail.com
Cc: Lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: F-flat Key Signature
On Tue, 18 Sep 2012, keith Luke wrote:
Does anyone know why
2012/9/19 Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net:
- Original Message - From: Martin Tarenskeen
m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl
To: keith Luke kkll...@gmail.com
Cc: Lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2012 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: F-flat Key Signature
On Tue, 18 Sep
At 12:43 on 19 Sep 2012, Thomas Morley wrote:
Image:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fes-dur
Theoretical text (in german):
http://books.google.de/books?id=D6ZZFHIuQ54Cpg=PA68lpg=PA68ots=oEy-27k2LKdq=fes-durhl=de
Interestingly, on the english wikipedia page the B double flat is
notated first, I think
Am 19.09.2012 13:02, schrieb Mark Knoop:
At 12:43 on 19 Sep 2012, Thomas Morley wrote:
Image:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fes-dur
Theoretical text (in german):
http://books.google.de/books?id=D6ZZFHIuQ54Cpg=PA68lpg=PA68ots=oEy-27k2LKdq=fes-durhl=de
Interestingly, on the english wikipedia page
2012/9/19 Nick Payne nick.pa...@internode.on.net:
On 19/09/12 17:39, Stefan Thomas wrote:
Dear Janek,
I've read the discussion You have mentioned but I couldn't find a
solution there, a working command that reduces the discance between
the accidentals and the music.
You can use
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Vaughan McAlley vaug...@mcalley.net.au wrote:
I appreciate the difference between sharps flats more than many
musicians, but even I would introduce an enharmonic change rather than
use a key signature with a double-flat, if only to save time at
On 19 September 2012 21:11, Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de wrote:
So like in a Fifo buffer the first accidentals (f sharp or b flat a.s.o.)
are bumped out - the double accidentals go at the end.
Yes, it seems the order is correct, it just looks strange because I’ve
never seen such a key
Bonjour,
Je n'arrive pas à régler un problème avec des alternatives.
À la mesure %16, ma pause n'est pas prise en compte.
Puis, je souhaiterais avoir après cette pause le symbole de reprise
suivant:
« :|| » et j'obtiens « :||: »
Enfin, à la volta, le symbole de continuation s'arrête à la
Am 19.09.2012 16:21, schrieb David Nalesnik:
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Vaughan McAlley vaug...@mcalley.net.au wrote:
I appreciate the difference between sharps flats more than many
musicians, but even I would introduce an enharmonic change rather than
use a key signature with a
keith Luke kkll...@gmail.com writes:
Does anyone know why the flats appear our of order when the key
signature is F-flat?
I'm really only summarizing what's been said: that it's probably already
correct, that it's probably a bad idea to use it, and that the score is
truly unreadable with the
Hi,
I have to agree with david. I studied music and piano and i never saw a piece
composed with key-signature f-flat. It would be completly unreadable. Any
musician would reject to study a piece with a double-flat in the
key-signature.
It's amazing that lilypond supports such strange things but
Am 19.09.2012 18:26, schrieb michael.str...@boehringer-ingelheim.com:
Hi,
I have to agree with david. I studied music and piano and i never saw a piece
composed with key-signature f-flat. It would be completly unreadable. Any
musician would reject to study a piece with a double-flat in the
At 17:10 on 19 Sep 2012, Urs Liska wrote:
BTW it was also Schumann who stated that Chopin sometimes waited a few
chord progressions too long before writing the enharmonic change.
Even Chopin chose C# minor rather than D-flat minor for the second
section of Op 28 no 15.
Hello Eric,
unfortunately my french is not sufficient. So I probably misread
something. But I want to to try...
Quelqu'un peut-il m'expliquer où j'ai commis une erreur,
Probably it's a good idea to reduce the example, e.g. you could omit the
repriseaudebut since it's never used. I found the
On 19 Sep 2012, at 18:42, Urs Liska wrote:
Just write e-major and the musicans will be thankfull ;-).
But F flat _is_ different from E, especially in its relationship to other,
'normal' keys. F flat has a quite simple relation to G flat that might happen
in real music. So I'm happy that
Peter Gentry peter.gen...@sunscales.co.uk writes:
Davids second solution is even better
{ g'''4 -\tweak #'X-offset #-2.7 \p ( \ e'''4 \! \ d'''4 \!) }
Clearly I need to do my homework on -\tweak which does seem a more
intuitive way forward.
Well, I am working on getting rid of the - in
Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de writes:
But F flat _is_ different from E, especially in its relationship to
other, 'normal' keys. F flat has a quite simple relation to G flat
that might happen in real music. So I'm happy that LilyPond offers to
explicitely write it down instead of refusing to do
A humble suggestion
Please educate me if there is already a way to do this, but it
appears that 'q' as a shorthand for the repetition of the
previous note(s) only works for chords. It would be handy if it
worked for single notes also, specifically in ties.
\time 12/8
\partial 8
aes8
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
A humble suggestion
Please educate me if there is already a way to do this, but it
appears that 'q' as a shorthand for the repetition of the
previous note(s) only works for chords. It would be handy if it
worked for single notes also,
Any idea how you could use this fixed-bars per line engraver in conjunction
w/no indentation on first line of score?
I tried adding
After
\Score
I tried adding:
% don't indent first line
indent = 0.0 \cm
But the first line remains embedded.
Thanks for any advice on this
On 20/09/12 08:43, bthom wrote:
Any idea how you could use this fixed-bars per line engraver in conjunction
w/no indentation on first line of score?
I tried adding
After
\Score
I tried adding:
% don't indent first line
indent = 0.0 \cm
But the first line remains
Hello list,
In the below code, how do I get rid of the a tempo at the end of
first line and the poco rit. at the beginning of the second line?
I couldn't find anything in the docs or the internals, but maybe I'm
not looking hard enough.
%%%
\version 2.16.0
\relative c' {
\override
I just stubbed my toe on something silly, and I don't understand
why it is the way it is.
Why does this work:
\version 2.16.0
\score {
\relative c' {
c4 c c c
\break
\set Staff.explicitClefVisibility = #end-of-line-invisible
\clef bass
c4 c c c
\unset
des is perfectly repeatable by q.
Do we have this in the docs?
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
des is perfectly repeatable by q.
Do we have this in the docs?
I don't think explicitly, but why wouldn't it work?. , by the way, is
not repeatable since q4 would not exactly make a lot of sense.
--
David Kastrup
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
But this doesn't:
\version 2.16.0
\score {
\relative c' {
c4 c c c
\break
\set Staff.explicitClefVisibility = #end-of-line-invisible
\clef bass
\unset Staff.explicitClefVisibility
c4 c c c
\break
}
}
I
des is perfectly repeatable by q.
Do we have this in the docs?
I don't think explicitly, but why wouldn't it work?.
Whether it works is not the question, but rather that people don't
have this in mind while looking for a repetition possibility of a
single note. Even I, being quite well
Hi,
I'm now wondering if there's a way to modify this 4-bars-per-line engraving
function I found at the forum so that it does the following:
1. print a pickup partial measure on the right-hand side of a single line
(not spanning entire line but using, say, the width that would make sense in
34 matches
Mail list logo
