Vocal scores with extra staves

G'day. I'm trying to typeset a work where one of the outputs is a vocal score. One of the pieces involves the chorus singing in unison and then in parts. This is a cut-down version of my current attempt. There are two problems here: First, the new staff isn't where I expect it to be; I'd like

Re: "alt" notation for chords

Am 26.02.2017 um 16:32 schrieb Rob Torop: I realize that this would pose a problem for midi generation since (I think) such a chord is non-deterministic. That is, the person comping has a choice between (sharp 5, sharp 9), (sharp 5, flat 9), and two others. I know I could just pick on and

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 16:04, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > I've said it clearly enough times already, but I'll say it again: I think > there should be a feature to print what was typed, in the visual format of > chord names, without interpreting it as music. No more or less. And this > is proposed as

Re: 13th chord?

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Wols Lists wrote: > The OP complained that when he asked for "C13" he got "C 9 13". Sounds > to me like now, if he asks for "C13" that's what he'll get, but if he > asks for "C13 (A13)" he's going to get "C 9 13 (A 9 13)". That's almost > worse!!! What do you mean by "now"?

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 14:47, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Wols Lists wrote: >>> I don't know what that refers to. Are you confusing me with someone else? >>> >> "I imagine it would make sense for most of its code to derive from the >> code currently used for lyrics, but that fact

"alt" notation for chords

I found some old threads where people were talking about supporting a modifier for chords so that g:7alt would be rendered as in this example: [image: Inline image 2] I realize that this would pose a problem for midi generation since (I think) such a chord is non-deterministic. That is, the

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 14:05, Thomas Morley wrote: > 2017-02-26 14:34 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : >> >> >> On 26/02/17 11:32, Thomas Morley wrote: >>> >>> 2017-02-26 12:12 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : > I wrote some code which I submitted to lilypond

Re: 13th chord?

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Wols Lists wrote: > > I don't know what that refers to. Are you confusing me with someone else? > > > "I imagine it would make sense for most of its code to derive from the > code currently used for lyrics, but that fact would preferably NOT be > visible to users." The

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 14:21, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Anthony Youngman wrote: >> Replying to myself - remember, you said the user shouldn't notice any >> difference. With my code, if you want to change the capo key, it's a > > I don't know what that refers to. Are you

Re: 13th chord?

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Anthony Youngman wrote: > Replying to myself - remember, you said the user shouldn't notice any > difference. With my code, if you want to change the capo key, it's a I don't know what that refers to. Are you confusing me with someone else? -- Matthew Skala

Re: Making the Dedication field align left

On 26/02/17 00:38, Simon Albrecht wrote: Am 26.02.2017 um 00:47 schrieb Wols Lists: I've stuck that definition in its own .ily file, and I just %include that file at the start of my \paper definition. I think it would be slightly cleaner to write an entire \paper{} block in the .ily file

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 13:55, Anthony Youngman wrote: On 26/02/17 13:38, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Anthony Youngman wrote: EXCEPT. This is *exactly* the scenario in which you will want my chord transposition code, and that doesn't make sense in a lyrics scenario. Then they

Re: 13th chord?

2017-02-26 14:34 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : > > > On 26/02/17 11:32, Thomas Morley wrote: >> >> 2017-02-26 12:12 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : >>> I wrote some code which I submitted to lilypond to handle guitar capos. >> Do we have a

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 13:38, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Anthony Youngman wrote: EXCEPT. This is *exactly* the scenario in which you will want my chord transposition code, and that doesn't make sense in a lyrics scenario. Then they can use the existing code. In which case,

Re: 13th chord?

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Anthony Youngman wrote: > EXCEPT. > > This is *exactly* the scenario in which you will want my chord transposition > code, and that doesn't make sense in a lyrics scenario. Then they can use the existing code. -- Matthew Skala msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 11:32, Thomas Morley wrote: 2017-02-26 12:12 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : On 26/02/17 10:52, Thomas Morley wrote: If the chordNameFunction (ignatzek-chord-names) does not do what we want, we should improve it, but not drop a plethora of

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 12:24, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Thomas Morley wrote: If the chordNameFunction (ignatzek-chord-names) does not do what we want, we should improve it, but not drop a plethora of lily-functionality. I'm not proposing to "drop a plethora of

Re: [ANN] LilyQuick 0.9beta - fast accurate Lilypond MIDI note entry for Linux

On 25 February 2017 at 20:45, Johan Vromans wrote: > > On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 10:33:11 +1100, Vaughan McAlley > wrote: > > > Maybe your keyboard is interpreting F8 as something else rather than > > the function key proper. > > It seems that lq isn't

Re: 13th chord?

On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, Thomas Morley wrote: > If the chordNameFunction (ignatzek-chord-names) does not do what we > want, we should improve it, but not drop a plethora of > lily-functionality. I'm not proposing to "drop a plethora of lily-functionality" but only to provide something that will be

Re: 13th chord?

2017-02-26 12:12 GMT+01:00 Anthony Youngman : > On 26/02/17 10:52, Thomas Morley wrote: >> If the chordNameFunction (ignatzek-chord-names) does not do what we >> want, we should improve it, but not drop a plethora of >> lily-functionality. >> >> And yes,

Re: 13th chord?

On 26/02/17 10:52, Thomas Morley wrote: 2017-02-26 2:16 GMT+01:00 : On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: To me it would seem that the default mode of operation should be for them to have matched rules where feasible, in order to have least element of surprise.

Re: 13th chord?

2017-02-26 2:16 GMT+01:00 : > On Sun, 26 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: >> To me it would seem that the default mode of operation should be for >> them to have matched rules where feasible, in order to have least >> element of surprise. > > I agree, but A. it may not be

Re: Fermata above and below bar line generates warnings

2017-02-26 2:15 GMT+01:00 Knute Snortum : > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 2:07 PM, Thomas Morley > wrote: >> >> 2017-02-25 22:42 GMT+01:00 Knute Snortum : >> > The following code produces the correct output of fermatas above and >> >