Re: Changing voice order...

On 03.11.2016 21:42, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote: THE VERTICAL ORDER OF NOTES ON THE PAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ORDER OF THE VOICES WITHIN THE << // // // >> CONSTRUCT, OR WHAT THE VOICE NAMES ARE CALLED Do you agree with that? You should, since it is true. I have to second David

Re: Changing voice order...

David, Am 04.11.2016 um 00:45 schrieb Flaming Hakama by Elaine: > due to the confusion between the intention of > vertical-order-in-the-staff and what the << // // // >> construct > actually does (there is no relationship), Actually I *do* think you are misunderstanding some things here, and I

Re: Changing voice order...

> >> > THE VERTICAL ORDER OF NOTES ON THE PAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE > ORDER > >> OF > >> > THE VOICES WITHIN THE << // // // >> CONSTRUCT, OR WHAT THE VOICE > NAMES > >> ARE > >> > CALLED > >> > > >> > Do you agree with that? You should, since it is true. > >> > >> No, I don't agree with

Re: Changing voice order...

Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 2:35 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: >> >> > I'm not sure if this is a language problem, or an attitude problem. >> > Because it seems like

Re: Changing voice order...

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 2:35 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > > > I'm not sure if this is a language problem, or an attitude problem. > > Because it seems like you are coming to the opposite interpretation of > what > > I say,

Re: Changing voice order...

Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > I'm not sure if this is a language problem, or an attitude problem. > Because it seems like you are coming to the opposite interpretation of what > I say, despite me being very detailed in my explanation. > > > Let's start with the

Re: Changing voice order...

I'm not sure if this is a language problem, or an attitude problem. Because it seems like you are coming to the opposite interpretation of what I say, despite me being very detailed in my explanation. Let's start with the main point: THE VERTICAL ORDER OF NOTES ON THE PAGE HAS NOTHING TO DO

Re: Changing voice order...

Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > On Nov 3, 2016 12:55 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote: >> >> Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: >> >> > I wanted to jump in here because in this discussion, a lot of people > have >> > said or implied

Re: Changing voice order...

On Nov 3, 2016 12:55 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote: > > Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > > > I wanted to jump in here because in this discussion, a lot of people have > > said or implied things like (paraphrasing) "top to bottom in << // // // >> > > should

Re: Changing voice order...

Flaming Hakama by Elaine writes: > I wanted to jump in here because in this discussion, a lot of people have > said or implied things like (paraphrasing) "top to bottom in << // // // >> > should correspond top to bottom in the score", and suggesting naming >

Re: Changing voice order...

row into the mix, ... > By the way (and I believe there may have been some discussion about this previously, but I'm too lazy to look it up right now), why do we use \oneVoice instead of \voiceNeutral like we do with \tieNeutral, \tupletNeutral, etc. "\oneVoice" certainly stands out a littl

Re: Changing voice order...

cit voicing and how they should stack, but it does make it a little easier to create any number of explicit directional voices. I guess I'm too used to the current way of stacking. Pardon the noise if this doesn't contribute constructively to the discussion. It was just a thought I had yesterday that

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-03 16:32, David Wright wrote: On Tue 01 Nov 2016 at 15:36:56 (-), Phil Holmes wrote: I'm concerned by this. I don't believe I have ever used more than 2 voices in choral music: typically the sops/tenors get voice one, and the alto/basses get voice two. If any of these is

Re: Changing voice order...

On Tue 01 Nov 2016 at 15:36:56 (-), Phil Holmes wrote: > - Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> > To: "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> > Cc: <lilypond-user@gnu.org> > Sent: Tuesday, November 01

Re: Changing voice order...

On Tue 01 Nov 2016 at 21:18:31 (+0100), David Kastrup wrote: > David Wright writes: > > > ¹ why not \voiceTop \voiceUp \voiceDown \voiceBottom ? Well, you could > > end up with \voiceUp having stems pointing down, > > Uh no? \voiceUp will always have stems pointing

Re: Changing voice order...

Werner LEMBERG writes: >> So >> \voiceOne \voiceTwo \voiceThree \voiceFour >> becomes >> \voiceUp \voiceDown \voiceUpTwo \voiceDownTwo > > I would make \voiceUp and \voiceDown be the same as \voiceUpOne and > \voiceUpTwo, respectively, so that we can write > > \voiceUpOne

Re: Changing voice order...

> So > \voiceOne \voiceTwo \voiceThree \voiceFour > becomes > \voiceUp \voiceDown \voiceUpTwo \voiceDownTwo I would make \voiceUp and \voiceDown be the same as \voiceUpOne and \voiceUpTwo, respectively, so that we can write \voiceUpOne \voiceDownOne \voiceUpTwo \voiceDownTwo Werner

Re: Changing voice order...

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi David (et al.), > >> Personally, I'd prefer a different number assignment: >> >> \implicitVoices 1,-1 >> \implicitVoices 1,2,-1 >> \implicitVoices 1,2,-2,-1 >> \implicitVoices 1,2,3,-2,-1 >> >> Stem direction is recognizable from the sign

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi David (et al.), > Personally, I'd prefer a different number assignment: > > \implicitVoices 1,-1 > \implicitVoices 1,2,-1 > \implicitVoices 1,2,-2,-1 > \implicitVoices 1,2,3,-2,-1 > > Stem direction is recognizable from the sign (0 would be \oneVoice), and > apart from the sign, increasing

Re: Changing voice order...

Werner LEMBERG writes: >> I was thrilled and excited by your proposal. Having had some >> leisure time this afternoon (although without net-access) I played >> around with it. I've taken it as a local command, though. >> >> The result is a wrapper around simultaneous music, with

Re: Changing voice order...

> I was thrilled and excited by your proposal. Having had some > leisure time this afternoon (although without net-access) I played > around with it. I've taken it as a local command, though. > > The result is a wrapper around simultaneous music, with and without > "\\". You can input

Re: Changing voice order...

much more logical and because it's a wrapper we > would warrant backward compatibility, no need to change anything > else... > > Opinions? > Thanks, Harm! That is seriously cool. Now to do some real-world tests to understand the implications... I really need to get better at Scheme p

Re: Changing voice order...

2016-11-02 13:04 GMT+01:00 Werner LEMBERG : >>> \voiceOrder { 1, 3, 5, 7, 6, 4, 2 } >>> << c'''2 \\ g'' \\ e'' \\ c'' \\ g' \\ e' \\ c' >> >> >> More like \voices 1,3,5,7,6,4,2 << ... >> if we want to keep in >> current syntax. This is assuming a one-shot command taking the <<

Re: Changing voice order...

o the details myself and implement it myself. Who knows... Best, Abraham -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Changing-voice-order-tp195757p196004.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___ lilypo

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-02 14:56, Noeck wrote: Am 02.11.2016 um 14:48 schrieb David Kastrup: >This particular one is... horrific. In most of the cases the author should just have used chords instead of voices. My guess that the intention was to stay as close to Bach's manuscripts as possible. I have used

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 02.11.2016 um 15:03 schrieb David Kastrup: > I have no issue with following the Urtext (assuming that this is what > the author did). Ah ok, that's possible. The copy I found does have chords in those places. ___ lilypond-user mailing list

Re: Changing voice order...

Noeck writes: > Am 02.11.2016 um 14:48 schrieb David Kastrup: >> This particular one is... horrific. > > In most of the cases the author should just have used chords instead of > voices. I have no issue with following the Urtext (assuming that this is what the author did).

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 02.11.2016 um 14:48 schrieb David Kastrup: > This particular one is... horrific. In most of the cases the author should just have used chords instead of voices. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: Changing voice order...

Noeck writes: > A bit more of Mutopia statistics: > > 4157 .ly files on Mutopia don't use << \\ >> > 1130 .ly files on Mutopia do > 307 of the latter have only one \\, so the can't be affected by a change > The other 823 possible could be affected but most of them use only

Re: Changing voice order...

A bit more of Mutopia statistics: 4157 .ly files on Mutopia don't use << \\ >> 1130 .ly files on Mutopia do 307 of the latter have only one \\, so the can't be affected by a change The other 823 possible could be affected but most of them use only two voices in one construct but several such

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > According to comment #10 on > https://code.google.com/archive/p/lilypond/issues/4097 my example > needs a \lyricsto Staff = "sop" instead of just \lyricsto "sop". > (Though I don't quite get the explanation since the latter works for > Voice

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-02 12:43, David Kastrup wrote: David Kastrup writes: Alexander Kobel writes: On 2016-11-02 12:01, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: [...] Ugh. Maybe it's just \addlyrics then? Or wait: Uh, what?!?

Re: Changing voice order...

>> \voiceOrder { 1, 3, 5, 7, 6, 4, 2 } >> << c'''2 \\ g'' \\ e'' \\ c'' \\ g' \\ e' \\ c' >> > > More like \voices 1,3,5,7,6,4,2 << ... >> if we want to keep in > current syntax. This is assuming a one-shot command taking the << > >> construct as its last argument. Hmm, my original idea was

Re: Changing voice order...

David Kastrup writes: > Alexander Kobel writes: > >> On 2016-11-02 12:01, David Kastrup wrote: >>> Alexander Kobel writes: [...] >>> Ugh. Maybe it's just \addlyrics then? Or wait: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Uh, what?!? >>> >>> lilypond

Re: Changing voice order...

"Phil Holmes" writes: > That's three voices, not four. > > Also - I was specifying vocal settings because a lot of the early > discussion centred about how it's difficult to use the << \\ >> syntax > with vocal scores, which generally are spoken about as being SATB and >

Re: Changing voice order...

mes Cc: David Kastrup ; Trevor Daniels ; Lilypond-User Mailing List Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 12:30 AM Subject: Re: Changing voice order... Hi Phil, Who uses four voices on one stave in vocal setting? Why would this functionality be limited to vocal setting? Here is a scr

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > On 2016-11-02 12:01, David Kastrup wrote: >> Alexander Kobel writes: >>>[...] >> Ugh. Maybe it's just \addlyrics then? Or wait: >> >> >> >> >> Uh, what?!? >> >> lilypond /tmp/alex.ly >> GNU LilyPond 2.19.50 >> Processing

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-02 12:01, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: [...] Ugh. Maybe it's just \addlyrics then? Or wait: Uh, what?!? lilypond /tmp/alex.ly GNU LilyPond 2.19.50 Processing `/tmp/alex.ly'

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > On 2016-11-02 11:35, David Kastrup wrote: >> Alexander Kobel writes: >> >>> On 2016-11-02 11:20, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: > I mostly set vocal music - typically clean SATB

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-02 11:35, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: On 2016-11-02 11:20, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: I mostly set vocal music - typically clean SATB with exactly four voices on either two or four staves, but sometimes

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > On 2016-11-02 11:20, David Kastrup wrote: >> Alexander Kobel writes: >> >>> I mostly set vocal music - typically clean SATB with exactly four >>> voices on either two or four staves, but sometimes a voice splits to >>> two or

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-11-02 11:20, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: I mostly set vocal music - typically clean SATB with exactly four voices on either two or four staves, but sometimes a voice splits to two or three in between. In that case, I'll almost always have a

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > I mostly set vocal music - typically clean SATB with exactly four > voices on either two or four staves, but sometimes a voice splits to > two or three in between. In that case, I'll almost always have a > four-staves situation. This screams for <<

Re: Changing voice order...

Werner LEMBERG writes: >> To make it more visible I coded a small snippet annotating some info >> to NoteHeads in >> << .. \\ .. \\ ... ... ... >>-constructs. >> >> Output attached. > > Thanks! > > What about a two-step process: You first set up the order of the > voices, then you

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-10-28 14:52, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: [...] Basically you need to only fix those voices not obeying the standard scheme (usually just one) and the rest will work out. So I don't really think that a special syntax is needed. True. But isn't the

Re: Changing voice order...

"Trevor Daniels" writes: > David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, November 01, 2016 4:11 PM > >> I want to rename the \voiceXXX constructs >> as well. The old ones will be available still but no longer promoted >> and/or documented prominently, instead using something like

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 01.11.2016 um 16:36 schrieb Phil Holmes: > I don't use concert-ly 'cos I find it a pain on Windows. It's very easy with Frescobaldi, if you don't like the command line: Tools > Update with convert-ly ___ lilypond-user mailing list

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 01.11.2016 um 15:42 schrieb David Kastrup: > How about we check out Mutopia? It is my guess that a considerable > number of the uses of << \\ \\ \\ >> construct with three or more voices > are wrong. In the Mutopia files there are 15873 double backslashes `\\`: grep -roh "" ftp

Re: Changing voice order...

> To make it more visible I coded a small snippet annotating some info > to NoteHeads in > << .. \\ .. \\ ... ... ... >>-constructs. > > Output attached. Thanks! What about a two-step process: You first set up the order of the voices, then you input from top to bottom. Example: % current

Re: Changing voice order...

On 11/01/2016 09:50 PM, Paul wrote: so I'm not sure how or even whether this kind of thing can be done in user space (at least not with existing functions like map-some-music). Well, here's a start on something, but still not sure how to pull it off fully: \version "2.19.49" split =

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi Kieren, On 11/01/2016 08:32 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: I'm not sure how to write a function that accepts an arbitrary number of music expressions. Couldn’t the function “look forward” the number of entries in the udududud list? I don't think that can work, because the function has to be

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi Urs, > I'm not sure how to write a function that accepts an arbitrary > number of music expressions. Couldn’t the function “look forward” the number of entries in the udududud list? > that seems to call for a "list of music expressions”, > but I'm not sure to what extent that would make the

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi Phil, > Who uses four voices on one stave in vocal setting? Why would this functionality be limited to vocal setting? Here is a screenshot of a three-voice section in my Chaconne for unaccompanied violin: There are many uses for multiple [musical] voices that don’t involve "vocal

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 01.11.2016 um 23:40 schrieb Kieren MacMillan: > Hi all, > >> [pseudocode:] >> \splitUD { topmusic \with UP } { bottommusic \with DOWN } >> \splitUUD { topmusic \with UP } { middlemusic \with UP } { bottommusic >> \with DOWN } >> \splitUDD { topmusic \with UP } { middlemusic \with DOWN

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi all, > [pseudocode:] > \splitUD { topmusic \with UP } { bottommusic \with DOWN } > \splitUUD { topmusic \with UP } { middlemusic \with UP } { bottommusic > \with DOWN } > \splitUDD { topmusic \with UP } { middlemusic \with DOWN } { bottommusic > \with DOWN } > etc. If I was better

Re: Changing voice order...

David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, November 01, 2016 4:11 PM > I want to rename the \voiceXXX constructs > as well. The old ones will be available still but no longer promoted > and/or documented prominently, instead using something like \voiceUp, > \voiceDown, \inner \voiceUp, \inner \VoiceDown ...

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi all, A fascinating thread, for a number of reasons… Regardless of how the individual functions are ultimately named, might I recommend we add a *lot* of syntactic sugar? I have custom functions called “splitX” (workhorses in my code), which remove the need for me to remember how to code

Re: Changing voice order...

2016-10-28 1:46 GMT+02:00 Thomas Morley : > 2016-10-27 13:40 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup : >> >> This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> >> >> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: >> >> 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...

Re: Changing voice order...

David Wright writes: > >> Now the Voice contexts are still going to be assigned sequentially as >> "1"/"2", "1"/"2"/"3", "1"/"2"/"3"/"4" (nothing else makes sense really). >> So in order not to cause confusion by having "1"/"2"/"3"/"4" correspond >> to

Re: Changing voice order...

co.uk> > > Cc: <lilypond-user@gnu.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 2:42 PM > > Subject: Re: Changing voice order... > > > >> There are by now two components to my proposal: fading out \voiceOne > >> ... \voiceFour since

Re: Changing voice order...

David Kastrup writes: > "Br. Samuel Springuel" writes: > >> I'd default the flag to the old behavior while the new one is being >> worked on and then default it to the new behavior once a stable state >> has been reached. > > I don't see that "the new one"

Re: Changing voice order...

"Br. Samuel Springuel" writes: > I'm not a heavy user, so take my thoughts with whatever grain of salt > you want, but this is how I would naively expect these constructs to > work: > > << \\ \\ \\ >> > The voices would be entered in order from top to bottom. In this way

Re: Changing voice order...

"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: > - Original Message - > From: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> > To: "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> > Cc: <lilypond-user@gnu.org> > Sent: T

Re: Changing voice order...

- Original Message - From: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> To: "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> Cc: <lilypond-user@gnu.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2016 2:42 PM Subject: Re: Changing voice order... There are by now two component

Re: Changing voice order...

I'm not a heavy user, so take my thoughts with whatever grain of salt you want, but this is how I would naively expect these constructs to work: << \\ \\ \\ >> The voices would be entered in order from top to bottom. In this way the physical structure of the code would resemble the structure

Re: Changing voice order...

"Trevor Daniels" writes: > Simon Albrecht wrote Tuesday, November 01, 2016 10:42 AM > >>On 27.10.2016 13:40, David Kastrup wrote: >>> This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> >>> >>> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: >>> >>> 1/2, 1/2/3,

Re: Changing voice order...

Simon Albrecht wrote Tuesday, November 01, 2016 10:42 AM >On 27.10.2016 13:40, David Kastrup wrote: >> This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> >> >> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: >> >> 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ... >> >> while the documentation

Re: Changing voice order...

Now I’ve read up the whole thread, I might add some clarification on my thoughts. On 01.11.2016 11:42, Simon Albrecht wrote: The current mechanism at least provides consistency between the \voiceOne, \voiceTwo… command names and the order in << \\ \\ >>. And I don’t see how strict top-down

Re: Changing voice order...

On 27.10.2016 13:40, David Kastrup wrote: This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ... while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to bottom, assignments should be

Re: Changing voice order...

Dan Eble writes: > On Oct 28, 2016, at 05:01 , David Kastrup wrote: >> >> Well, there is still the question of what 1/2/3 should _mean_. >> Currently they are connected with \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, >> \voiceThree... and the meaning of those is "topmost", "lowest",

Re: Changing voice order...

On Oct 28, 2016, at 05:01 , David Kastrup wrote: > > Well, there is still the question of what 1/2/3 should _mean_. > Currently they are connected with \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, > \voiceThree... and the meaning of those is "topmost", "lowest", "below > topmost" ... > > I find this

Re: Changing voice order...

On Oct 28, 2016, at 03:51 , David Kastrup wrote: > At any rate, does that mean that you are fine with > > << \sopranoI \\ \alto \\ \sopranoII >> > > and > > << \sopranoI \\ \altoII \\ \sopranoII \\ \altoI >> > > because that is what we currently have? Until I read this thread,

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 28/10/16 um 11:01 schrieb David Kastrup: Robert Schmaus writes: Hi everyone, I've never used implicit voice assignment and I doubt I will start with it now. But since there's no real need for the ordering of voices _in the code_ to match the vertical arrangement

Re: Changing voice order...

in \voiceOne so there's no extra work when there's nothing in the other voice (s). Urs > >-- >Abraham > > > > >-- >View this message in context: >http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Changing-voice-

Re: Changing voice order...

.n5.nabble.com/Changing-voice-order-tp195757p195827.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: Changing voice order...

On 2016-10-28 14:52, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: What about \voiceUp and \voiceDown? Where the former are counted from top to bottom, and the latter from bottom to top? I prefer it if a LilyPond source is readable without explanations. That makes it

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > What about \voiceUp and \voiceDown? Where the former are > counted from top to bottom, and the latter from bottom to top? I prefer it if a LilyPond source is readable without explanations. That makes it much easier to learn by example and feel

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi all, > On 10/27/2016 4:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it should >> have been from the start. > > DAYMAKER! Agreed. I love this. =) As for the voice order, I think if possible it should be "top-down”. I’m mulling over the

Re: Changing voice order...

On 10/27/2016 4:38 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it should > have been from the start. DAYMAKER! I'm watching this voice-order discussion closely. I have no position on how LilyPond should work with this. I've been using it for less

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-10-28 12:31, David Kastrup wrote: Alexander Kobel writes: On 2016-10-27 23:38, David Kastrup wrote: The majority tends to be silent. Minority report out of the silent majority: I got used to the status quo, which is totally natural once you internalized the

Re: Changing voice order...

Alexander Kobel writes: > On 2016-10-27 23:38, David Kastrup wrote: >> The majority tends to be silent. > > Minority report out of the silent majority: > I got used to the status quo, which is totally natural once you > internalized the meaning of \voice. Well, walking on

Re: Changing voice order...

"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: > David, > > If " Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging > commands" would that not be the fault of those who do not read the > manual? Well, I write the manual more than I read it. Nevertheless I prefer it if reading

Re: Changing voice order...

Robert Schmaus writes: > Hi everyone, > > I've never used implicit voice assignment and I doubt I will start with it > now. > > But since there's no real need for the ordering of voices _in the > code_ to match the vertical arrangement of the _engraved_ notes (and >

Re: Changing voice order...

Dan Eble writes: > On Oct 27, 2016, at 09:54 , David Kastrup wrote: >> >> << \context Voice = "1" \with \voiceThree ... >> \context Voice = "2" \with \voiceOne ... >> \context Voice = "3" \with \voiceTwo ... >> \context Voice = "4" \with \voiceFour ... > >

Re: Changing voice order...

On 2016-10-27 23:38, David Kastrup wrote: The majority tends to be silent. Minority report out of the silent majority: I got used to the status quo, which is totally natural once you internalized the meaning of \voice. Hardly use it, though, but that's a different story. I agree with you

Re: Changing voice order...

Hi everyone, I've never used implicit voice assignment and I doubt I will start with it now. But since there's no real need for the ordering of voices _in the code_ to match the vertical arrangement of the _engraved_ notes (and isn't that also, what Lilypond is all about? You specify the

Re: Changing voice order...

> > I respect your right to disagree. > > Yet,1, 2, 3 stem up, 2, 4, 6 stem down? Not, as they say, rocket > > science. > > Actually 1, 3, 5 stem up. > > So not rocket science, but tricky to remember :-) Which kind of prooves the point I was trying to make :-) Kind regards, Michael --

Re: Changing voice order...

On 28 October 2016 at 11:25, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > > Michael, > > I respect your right to disagree. > Yet,1, 2, 3 stem up, 2, 4, 6 stem down? Not, as they say, rocket science. > > Mark > Actually 1, 3, 5 stem up. So not rocket science, but tricky to remember :-)

RE: Changing voice order...

onm...@ca.rr.com>; 'David Kastrup' <d...@gnu.org> Subject: Re: Changing voice order... > If " Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging > commands" would that not be the fault of those who do not read the manual? I disagree. The problem is not s

Re: Changing voice order...

> If " Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging > commands" would that not be the fault of those who do not read the manual? I disagree. The problem is not so much in reading the manual and doing it right but in remembering things after not having used them for some time.

Re: Changing voice order...

2016-10-27 13:40 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup : > > This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> > > If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: > > 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ... > > while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to >

Re: Changing voice order...

On Oct 27, 2016, at 09:54 , David Kastrup wrote: > > << \context Voice = "1" \with \voiceThree ... > \context Voice = "2" \with \voiceOne ... > \context Voice = "3" \with \voiceTwo ... > \context Voice = "4" \with \voiceFour ... I’m not sure whether this thread has

RE: Changing voice order...

Original Message- From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 3:13 PM To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: Changing voice order... "Mark Stephen Mrotek" <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> writes:

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 27. Oktober 2016 15:16:01 GMT-07:00, schrieb Noeck : > > >Am 27.10.2016 um 23:38 schrieb David Kastrup: >> I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it >should have been from the start. > >:) > > >One more voice from someone who was part of the

Re: Changing voice order...

Am 27.10.2016 um 23:38 schrieb David Kastrup: > I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it should have > been from the start. :) One more voice from someone who was part of the silent majority: I do not use the << · \\ · >> construct, only explicit \voiceOne etc. so I

Re: Changing voice order...

"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: > David, > > "If it ain't broke" Well, in this case, I consider it broken. Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging commands and of << ... \\ ... \\ . >>. While I probably don't count as a frequent enough user,

RE: Changing voice order...

David, "If it ain't broke" Mark -Original Message- From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 2:39 PM To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: Changing voice order... "Mark Ste

Re: Changing voice order...

"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: > David, > > Yes, in that order - usually only three voice. > This usually in "chord" that have a moving internal voice. > Lilypond, as you stated, adjust the note columns and stem suitably. > The only constant is change. The manual has been

RE: Changing voice order...

tions. Let the majority rule. Mark -Original Message- From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:52 AM To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: Changing voice order... "Mark Stephen Mrotek" <

RE: Changing voice order...

Subject: Changing voice order... This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order: 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ... while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to bottom, assignments should be

  1   2   >