Thanks very much. I don't understand all of that just yet but this is
great advice. I just finished reading Fundamental Concepts.
J.
On 5/21/19 19:08, Aaron Hill wrote:
> On 2019-05-21 8:48 pm, John Helly wrote:
>> Mahalo. Definite maybe. I found a reference to using multiple voices in
>> the
On 2019-05-21 8:48 pm, John Helly wrote:
Mahalo. Definite maybe. I found a reference to using multiple voices
in
the learning manual that might be a more general solution but don't
understand it yet.
One thing multiple voices would let you do is separate the melody
between the verse and
Mahalo. Definite maybe. I found a reference to using multiple voices in
the learning manual that might be a more general solution but don't
understand it yet.
J.
On 5/21/19 15:46, Karlin High wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 8:07 PM John Helly wrote:
>> I have a multi-verse guitar lead sheet
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 8:07 PM John Helly wrote:
>
> I have a multi-verse guitar lead sheet working but cannot figure out how to
> add a chorus. I’m struggling to find an example with a chorus and wonder if
> anyone can point me in the right direction, pls?
>
> The structure I have is shown
Aloha.
I just discovered LP and am very excited about it after struggling with
Sibelius.
I have a multi-verse guitar lead sheet working but cannot figure out how
to add a chorus. I’m struggling to find an example with a chorus and
wonder if anyone can point me in the right direction, pls?
The
Am Do., 16. Mai 2019 um 13:25 Uhr schrieb Alexander Kobel :
>
> Hi David, hi Mike, hi all,
>
> I sometimes (still use Lilypond, and when I do, I typically use) your
> wonderful snippet for snapping "close" syllables into a single token.
>
> (For those who don't know this contribution: it's meant
Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 22:46 Uhr schrieb Leo Correia de Verdier
:
>
> A quite minimal could look like:
>
> \version "2.19.82"
>
> \score {
> << \new Staff {e'2.}
> \new Staff {g'4. f'4}
> \new Staff {a'1} >>
>
> \layout {
> \context {
> \Voice
> \remove
A quite minimal could look like:
\version "2.19.82"
\score {
<< \new Staff {e'2.}
\new Staff {g'4. f'4}
\new Staff {a'1} >>
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
\remove "Note_heads_engraver"
\consists "Completion_heads_engraver"
completionUnit =
Thomas,
> Main thing here is
> \stopStaff
Ok, so \noStaff seems to fix my problem without the need for anything
else. I'll need to test it a lot more but perhaps that will get me
through until/unless this problem gets solved within Lilypond. Thanks
for that! I search and search the
Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 18:03 Uhr schrieb David Bellows :
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> Thanks for jumping in!
Well, without Urs' minimal I wouldn't have. Thanks Urs!
> > At least in the minimal one can workaround with inserting \noBeam:
>
> It works in some cases but not when that last pitch it tied to
>
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for jumping in!
> At least in the minimal one can workaround with inserting \noBeam:
It works in some cases but not when that last pitch it tied to
previous notes (see attached pdf). When they are not tied this works
well. In my use-case, I have Lilypond break notes up
Michael Gerdau writes:
>> Why would you use \\ for creating separate voices here?
>
> Lack of a better way to solve the problem :)
> (read: my ignorance)
>
>> At any rate, that sounds like you want \after
>>
>> after =
>> #(define-music-function (delay ev main) (ly:duration? ly:music?
> Why would you use \\ for creating separate voices here?
Lack of a better way to solve the problem :)
(read: my ignorance)
> At any rate, that sounds like you want \after
>
> after =
> #(define-music-function (delay ev main) (ly:duration? ly:music? ly:music?)
>#{ \context Bottom << {
On 21.05.19 15:37, Michael Gerdau wrote:
I'm probably having some subtlety wrong. The following code creates the
attached image.
%%%
\version "2.21.0"
{ << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
{ << { \oneVoice R1 } \\ { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
%%%
The lower akkolade is what I
I'm probably having some subtlety wrong. The following code creates the
attached image.
%%%
\version "2.21.0"
{ << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
{ << { \oneVoice R1 } \\ { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
%%%
The lower akkolade is what I want this to look like while the upper
> > The use case is this
> >
> > %%%
> > \version "2.21.0"
> > { R1*3/4 s4^\markup "some markup" |}
> > %%%
> >
> > Of course I could achieve that by
> > %%%
> > \version "2.21.0"
> > { << { \oneVoice R1 } \\ { s2. s4^\markup "some markup" |} >> }
> > %%%
> > but
Michael Gerdau writes:
>> > the following MWE triggers a barcheck failure. Is that intended or a bug?
>> > And if it is intended I'd like to understand the rationale.
>> >
>> > %
>> > \version "2.21.0"
>> > { R1*3/4 s4 | }
>> > %
>>
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> that’s
Hi Michael,
The use case is this
%%%
\version "2.21.0"
{ R1*3/4 s4^\markup "some markup" |}
%%%
Of course I could achieve that by
%%%
\version "2.21.0"
{ << { \oneVoice R1 } \\ { s2. s4^\markup "some markup" |} >> }
%%%
but that seems ugly and at least to me
> what about
>
> \new Voice { << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
>
> ? The \new Voice should not even be necessary in a typical score, with
> blocks like
>
> \score {
><<
> \new Staff <<
>% clef, time, etc.
>\new Voice \thisIsWhereMyMusicComesFrom
> >>
>>>
>
Hi Michael,
what about
\new Voice { << R1 { s2. s4^"some markup" } >> }
? The \new Voice should not even be necessary in a typical score, with
blocks like
\score {
<<
\new Staff <<
% clef, time, etc.
\new Voice \thisIsWhereMyMusicComesFrom
>>
>>
}
(It's only because
> > the following MWE triggers a barcheck failure. Is that intended or a bug?
> > And if it is intended I'd like to understand the rationale.
> >
> > %
> > \version "2.21.0"
> > { R1*3/4 s4 | }
> > %
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> that’s intended: R is used for full/multi-measure
Moreover, if you're working on you favorite Pi tribute choral in 3/14
time (granted, unusual), you'd be out of luck without fractions:
{ \time 3/14 R1*15/14 }
;-)
On 21.05.19 13:16, Malte Meyn wrote:
Am 21.05.19 um 13:08 schrieb J Martin Rushton:
The notation reference for 2.18.2 doesn't
Am 21.05.19 um 13:08 schrieb J Martin Rushton:
The notation reference for 2.18.2 doesn't seem to mention using
fractions with multi-measure rests. Using just {R1*3/4} generates
programming errors and no rest is output.
The fraction is not the problem:
{ \time 3/4 R1*3/4 }
This works
Hi Michael,
TL;DR: It's intended.
As the name implies, "FULL measure rests" are supposed to span full
measures. In particular, they are always rendered as if they do, so your
input should be virtually indistinguishable from R1. And it's also
indistinguishable from R1. in 3/2 time, or R1*2 in
The notation reference for 2.18.2 doesn't seem to mention using
fractions with multi-measure rests. Using just {R1*3/4} generates
programming errors and no rest is output.
On 21/05/2019 11:51, Michael Gerdau wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> the following MWE triggers a barcheck failure. Is that intended
Am 21.05.19 um 12:51 schrieb Michael Gerdau:
the following MWE triggers a barcheck failure. Is that intended or a bug?
And if it is intended I'd like to understand the rationale.
%
\version "2.21.0"
{ R1*3/4 s4 | }
%
Hi Michael,
that’s intended: R is used for
Hi list,
the following MWE triggers a barcheck failure. Is that intended or a bug?
And if it is intended I'd like to understand the rationale.
%
\version "2.21.0"
{ R1*3/4 s4 | }
%
Kind regards,
Michael
--
Michael Gerdau email: m...@qata.de
GPG-keys available on request
Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 11:27 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska :
>
>
>
> Am 21. Mai 2019 10:49:01 MESZ schrieb Thomas Morley
> :
> >Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 02:32 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley
> >:
> >>
> >> Am So., 19. Mai 2019 um 20:32 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska
> >:
> >>
> >> > The staves that continue to be
Am 21. Mai 2019 10:49:01 MESZ schrieb Thomas Morley :
>Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 02:32 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley
>:
>>
>> Am So., 19. Mai 2019 um 20:32 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska
>:
>>
>> > The staves that continue to be printed appear to only happen when
>the
>> > last note in that staff is an actual
Am Di., 21. Mai 2019 um 02:32 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley
:
>
> Am So., 19. Mai 2019 um 20:32 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska :
>
> > The staves that continue to be printed appear to only happen when the
> > last note in that staff is an actual printed note. If it's a rest or a
> > space then the extra staves
> > 2.) How to resolve this programming error...?
No idea...
> > 3.) Just ignore it?
...but when I get these I simply ignore them. After all the score(s) compile
fine otherwise and from looking at them I don't see problems.
> > For what it's worth, your example also compiles without error in
31 matches
Mail list logo
