Sorry, please ignore. Wrong mailing list, my fault.
Andrew
On Mon, 20 May 2019 at 11:35, Andrew Bernard
wrote:
> get index hpschd96
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
get index hpschd96
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
%\version "2.19"\language "english"global = { \key a \major
\numericTimeSignature \time 3/4 \partial 4
% Draw a circle round the following bar number(s) \override
Score.BarNumber.stencil = #(make-stencil-circler 0.1 0.25
ly:text-interface::print) }
right = \fixed c' { \global
NullVoice! I've never used that. Thank you, Gregory. I need to do this
often.
Be content; it is your birthright.
Peter
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Hi there :
There's some way to represent "graduated harmony" on LilyPond ?
Am using "figurated bass" to set chord inversions:
%% Code###
\version "2.18.2"
\language "english"\header {
title = "Graduated Harmony"
composer = "GWB70"
}global = {
\key e \minor
\time 4/4
\tempo 4=100
}
Chords
Hey Mark,
> You are asking a computer (Lilypond) to look good when "one never knows
> what's going to happen."
> IMHO, the two are mutually exclusive.
One of the big reasons I chose Lilypond for this project is how good a
job it does at making things look good by default without human
Hey Kieren,
> If the algorithm uses a random number generator to determine which output to
> give, “one never knows what’s going to happen”, but it would still be easy
> for Lilypond to make the result "look good".
Yep, that's it exactly. I do spend a lot of time generating a lot of
different
Kieren,
Thank you for the correction.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Kieren MacMillan [mailto:kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2019 2:50 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek
Cc: David Bellows ; Lilypond-User Mailing List
Subject: Re: Unconventional score and unwanted stray
Hi Mark,
> You are asking a computer (Lilypond) to look good when "one never knows
> what's going to happen."
> IMHO, the two are mutually exclusive.
Doesn’t that depends ultimately upon the precise algorithms (and thus output)
involved? I mean, I could code an algorithm that outputs either
Dave,
You are asking a computer (Lilypond) to look good when "one never knows what's
going to happen."
IMHO, the two are mutually exclusive.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: David Bellows [mailto:davebell...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2019 1:23 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek
Cc:
On 18.05.19 18:58, Gianmaria Lari wrote:
In the past I used some snippet I found on LSR giving the possibility
to write multiple rehearsal marks, but I was wondering if there is a
simpler way. Isn't this something happen frequently and so should be
easy to do?
The reason there is an LSR
Am 19.05.19 um 22:27 schrieb David Bellows:
Hey Urs,
I too find this surprising. I suggest you ask on lilypond-user whether this is
a bug or intended behaviour. If it is intended (due to some engraving
convention for example) it might be made configurable.
I first posted this to
Hey Mark,
This music is generated algorithmically and there are a lot of options
for the user to choose from, so one never knows what's going to
happen. I need for Lilypond to do its usual thing and look perfect
without any additional user interaction.
For example, I left out of these examples
Hey Urs,
> I too find this surprising. I suggest you ask on lilypond-user whether this
> is a bug or intended behaviour. If it is intended (due to some engraving
> convention for example) it might be made configurable.
I first posted this to lilypond-user. I don't know if I need to repost
with
On 19/05/19 02:08, Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Why not just use markup for 'fine'? Position it as you wiil.
Because it doesn't make sense to use markup? It's a lot easier to
position something, if it's attached to its reference object. Otherwise
a minor change to the score will mess things up nicely!
Am 19.05.19 um 17:56 schrieb David Bellows:
Hey Aaron,
Before I respond to the rest of your email, I think it's worth going
over something I didn't emphasize enough in my first email. I've
attached a new pdf with instrument labels this time to make it easier
to follow.
The staves that
Hi Ming,
I can’t reproduce the error with your example on Ubuntu 16.04.
Best, Simon
On 19.05.19 19:51, MING TSANG wrote:
Hi Simon,
Thank you for the info. I finally find the first time the programming
error appears.
I now have a minimal lily code demonstrate the error.
Ming
%%%
\version
On 5/19/2019 1:51 PM, MING TSANG wrote:
Hi Simon,
Thank you for the info. I finally find the first time the programming
error appears.
I now have a minimal lily code demonstrate the error.
Ming
%%%
\version "2.19.83"
\language "english"
global = {
\key a \major
\numericTimeSignature
Hi Simon,
Thank you for the info. I finally find the first time the programming error
appears.I now have a minimal lily code demonstrate the error.
Ming %%%\version "2.19.83"\language "english"global = { \key a \major
\numericTimeSignature \time 3/4 \partial 4
% Draw a circle round the
David,
My experience is transcribing 18th and 19th century piano scores.
I do get "run-off" staves.
This is usually the result of incorrect mensuration of a note or notes.
You piece still has some sort of vertical simultaneity.
Perhaps you could start with a temporary time signature, just to
Hi Karim,
> My workaround was to put at each end of a part where this occurs, this
That does work! Thank you very much for this!
If you can search my emails to the list today about the issue, I
include more information about when this issue occurs in my scores.
The only staves that continue to
Hey Andrew,
I did receive your other email. I guess the one emailed directly to me
got through. I haven't had time to go through everything you wrote yet
but I would be interested in seeing that part of the Lilypond file.
I'm hoping my problem doesn't require a complex solution since all I'm
Hey Aaron,
Before I respond to the rest of your email, I think it's worth going
over something I didn't emphasize enough in my first email. I've
attached a new pdf with instrument labels this time to make it easier
to follow.
The staves that continue to be printed appear to only happen when the
Hi David,
Interesting, I emailed the following to the list but for the first time
ever it was rejected by the list moderator (person or software?) for being
too large, yet it is not. Anyway, I mention here Karim Haddid's help for
me, and sure enough, he has also posted. I'll copy the text ere,
Dear David,
Lately I had a similar issue with a multi-tempi and multi-metered ensemble
score.
However the strayed clefs and staves where not on all instruments. I suspect it
does have to do with internal timing lilypond calculations.
My workaround was to put at each end of a part where this
Hi Ming,
it’s very likely impossible to say without seeing your source file, and
as always: try to narrow it down yourself. What changes did you make to
the document before the error first appeared? Just go through the usual
‘minimal example’ process (tedious as it may be), and if that
On 2019-05-18 10:46 pm, David Bellows wrote:
Maybe use bar checks?
Given that a lot of the music isn't generated to fit any particular
time signature (ie, the bar lines are often there just to break things
up to ease reading), I would get tons of bar check errors. Plus,
keeping track of when
27 matches
Mail list logo
