Include file handling in lilypond-book

[Karljurgen Feuerherm]

Hello,

Putting together an exercise book using XeLaTeX and the lilypond environment. 
Everything works relatively well until I try to use an include file with 
variable definitions.

MWE:

% !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
% !TEX TS-program = LilyPond-Book
% !LILYPOND tex = xelatex
\documentclass{memoir}

% \newcommand{\Ggrace}{\grace { g''32 }}
\begin{document}
\begin{lilypond}
{
  \include "lilypond-variables.ly"
  \time 2/4
  \grace { g''32 } g'4  \Ggrace a'4  \Ggrace b'4  \Ggrace c''4
  \Ggrace d''4 \Ggrace e''4 \Ggrace f''4 g''4
  a''2 g''4 f''4 \Ggrace e''4
  \Ggrace d''4 \Ggrace c''4 \Ggrace b'4  \Ggrace a'4
  \Ggrace g'4
  \bar "||"
}
\end{lilypond}
\end{document}

LILYPOND-VARIABLES.LY:

Ggrace = {  \grace { g''32 }  }

The in-line g grace note is typeset just fine. The variable references, 
however, either choke, or (if I trash files after choking) are not expanded 
upon typesetting.

(I had originally tried to do this with a *tex include file with \newcommands, 
but that did not work either.)

The code below works fine in Frescobaldi:

\include "lilypond-variables.ly"
{
 \time 2/4
  \grace { g''32 } g'4  \Ggrace a'4  \Ggrace b'4  \Ggrace c''4
  \Ggrace d''4 \Ggrace e''4 \Ggrace f''4 g''4
  a''2 g''4 f''4 \Ggrace e''4
  \Ggrace d''4 \Ggrace c''4 \Ggrace b'4  \Ggrace a'4
  \Ggrace g'4
  \bar "||"
}

So I’m assuming there’s a trick to the placement/invocation of the include file 
which I’m not privy to…? Using macOS Sierra 10.12.5 (16F73) and TL 2016; 
LilyPond-Book engine 2.0.4 (2014/03/23).

Thanks!
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to make this postscript spanner to work with L bound-details?

[Thomas Morley]

Hi Dimitris,

2017-07-10 23:50 GMT+02:00 dtsmarin :
> vibratospanner.ly
> 

Looks like you edited Marks file he posted here
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2013-04/msg00793.html
or is it a later version?

Anyway, both versions are not perfect in determing begin/end of broken
spanner-parts.

>
> I want to be able to lengthen/shorten this spanner so that I can avoid
> potential collisions. The left padding works perfectly  but the end of the
> spanner doesn't respond to any kind of padding.

Really?
If I apply
\override TrillSpanner.bound-details.left.padding = 15
to the example, the spanners are shortened to the _right_. Wouldn't
call it perfect ...

I think, one needs to explore why the begin/end of broken
spanner-parts are off sometimes, before one could think of
implementing another shorten/lengthen-feature.

Too late for me today, though. Maybe the upcoming days ...

Cheers,
  Harm

P.S.
gmail always puts your mails in my spam-folder 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Fwd: re: removing staff and clef w/o removing bar lines and brackets

[Malte Meyn]

Am 11.07.2017 um 18:11 schrieb Reilly Farrell:

Hi All,



I'm creating some sight-singing examples for a class and would like to
start with some examples with no staff,no clef,no key signature, though
keeping bar lines and system brackets (for duet examples) (Solfege
syllables are provided as lyrics.)


How about this?

\version "2.18.2"

\new ChoirStaff <<
  \new Staff \relative {
c'4 d e f g1
  }
  \addlyrics {
do re mi fa so
  }
  \new Staff \relative {
g'2 c~
c b
  }
  \addlyrics {
so do ti
  }
>>

\layout {
  \context {
\Staff
\omit Clef
\omit StaffSymbol
\omit TimeSignature
\omit LedgerLineSpanner
  }
}

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Fwd: re: removing staff and clef w/o removing bar lines and brackets

[Reilly Farrell]

Hi All,



I'm creating some sight-singing examples for a class and would like to
start with some examples with no staff,no clef,no key signature, though
keeping bar lines and system brackets (for duet examples) (Solfege
syllables are provided as lyrics.)



Currently I am doing something like this: (though this makes bar lines
disappear and I want to keep bar lines)



melody = { c4 d e2 }

solfege = \lyricmode { do re mi ...}

\score {

<<

% beginning of critical code

\new Staff \with {   \remove "Staff_symbol_engraver" }

{ \override Staff.Clef #'stencil = ##f

%end of critical code

\melody

}

\addlyrics \solfege

>>

\midi{}

\layout{}

}



Are there ways to make the staff disappear and keep barlines and system
braces?



Thanks much
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

OLL/snippets renaming (Re: Broken (?) snippets in openlilylib/snippets)

[Urs Liska]

Hi all,

by now I've fixed a number of the below issues and created a few items
on the issue tracker for the remaining ones.

Right now I'm wrapping things up a little bit, and part of this is an
urge to restructure the repository somewhat. In the beginning of the
repository there was no proper strategy for a directory structure,
basically whenever someone didn't immediately know where to put a new
snippet they decided to create a new directory ;-)

I would like to rename some directories and move some snippets. In
particular the "notation-snippets" and the "input-shorthands" seem
somewhat blurred to me. And, with the nicer syntax of \loadModule I
would prefer shorter and less redundant names.

  \loadModule snippets.lyrics.align-on-vowels

is more convenient and expressive than

  \loadModule snippets.notation-snippets.align-lyrics-on-vowels

etc.

The question is:

How many people are actually using the snippets repository, and how much
inconvenience would that be for these people. I *can* take some care
about "deprecating" and redirecting includes, but doing this generally
would actually make the whole thing totally convoluted. So actually I'd
prefer a clean cut and starting over with a new and cleaner structure.

Opinions? Objections?

Urs


Am 06.07.2017 um 18:17 schrieb Urs Liska:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm wrapping up a number of things in openLilyLib, and I came across
> snippets where the example files don't compile (with LilyPond 2.19.60).
> Please go through this list and if you feel responsible for the snippet
> please have a look:
>
> * notation-snippets/align-lyrics-on-vowels
>   (warning: ignored infinite X-offset)
> * notation-snippets/alternating-time-signatures
>   (well, that's me, I'll keep it as a reference)
> * notation-snippets/blackmensural-notation
> * notation-snippets.lyric-syllable-magnetic-snap
> * notation-snippets.metric-mod
> * notation-snippets.scale-vertical-spacing
> * notation-snippets/shaping-bezier-curves/slur-attachments-example.ly
>
> * editorial-tools/git-commands
>   (me again)
> * input-shorthands/easy-octaves
> * specific-solutions/xelatex-markup-list
> * templates/predefined-instruments
>
> * notation-snippets.scaling-stencils
>   Is this a snippet or an example?
>
> * is input-shorthands/sizeContext still necessary or has this been
> included in Lilypond in the meantime?
>
>
> Maybe this isn't all that has to be done, I also realized that this
> repository is very inconsistent in style and quality. However, I want
> the snippets repository to become a member of the openLilyLib package
> family, which means that - in addition to the existing style of
> including the "definitions.ily" files of a directory the stuff can be
> loaded as "modules".
>
> Currently this relies on snippets on the "make-modules" branch and
> oll-core on the "config" branch, but I intend to merge both in the next
> days.
>
> This will result in input code like for example
>
> \include "oll-core/package.ily"
> \loadPackage page-layout
> \loadPackage \with {
>   modules = arrows.frames
> }
> analysis
> \loadModule snippets.notation-snippets.compound-slurs
> \loadModules snippets
> #'((notation-snippets compound-slurs)
> (input-shorthands easy-custom-dynamics))
>
> An overview of this mechanism can be found on
> https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core/wiki
>
> Going through most of the directory structure made me realize that I
> would really like to move and rename many modules. For example
> "easy-custom-dynamics" should not be accessible through
> snippets.input-shorthands.easy-custom-dynamics
> but through
> snippets.notation.custom-dynamics
> Also there are many verbose directory names that should be shortened:
> snippets.notation-snippets => snippets.notation etc.
>
> The problem is that such a reorganization and renaming would of course
> break lots of existing files ...
>
> Best for now
> Urs
>

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Place text next to rehearsal mark, or with left edge over barline if there is none

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Wol,

> You keep on going on about "the moment" in the music, and I know what
> you mean - you mean the point *on the paper* where the note is printed.

According to 99% of Western musical notation, that's the point at which the 
note begins.

> To me, "the moment" "obviously" :-) means the moment in time the note is
> played, which to me is represented by the barline, not the position of the 
> note! :-)

But not every note has a barline associated with the same moment [in time]… 
How/where do you play those notes? Do all notes in a measure get played at 
exactly the same time, right where the [leading] barline is?

> how often do you get them playing a crotchet as a semi-quaver!

From my experience, that's restricted to the band world. In the string world, 
it's often the opposite: players play notes longer than their written duration.

> I've seen music - not much admittedly - that actually writes crotchets
> as tied to a semi-quaver or something on the next beat in order to say
> "this one-beat note is one beat, not a fraction of a beat!"

The only composers I know of who did that as a rule are late 19th Century and 
early 20th Century British composers (my experience in that area being mostly 
choral). I must admit, it's quite confusing when you first encounter that 
notation!

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Place text next to rehearsal mark, or with left edge over barline if there is none

[Wols Lists]

On 10/07/17 21:18, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
>> a tempo mark always belongs *after* a rehearsal mark if they collide
> In my opinion, a tempo mark belongs exactly over the moment it affects, and 
> all other marks need to move (horizontally, vertically, or both) around it.
> 
It struck me, actually, after my last email, that the OP's example is
pretty much a perfect example of how different people see music differently.

You keep on going on about "the moment" in the music, and I know what
you mean - you mean the point *on the paper* where the note is printed.
Which moves all over the place such that if you actually played the
notes according to the "distance" they cover on the page you'd have a
horrifying rubato effect :-)

To me, "the moment" "obviously" :-) means the moment in time the note is
played, which to me is represented by the barline, not the position of
the note! :-)

(One of the things that sometimes gets me, playing music, is just how
hard it is to get musicians to play the note that is written - how often
do you get them playing a crotchet as a semi-quaver! To the extent that
I've seen music - not much admittedly - that actually writes crotchets
as tied to a semi-quaver or something on the next beat in order to say
"this one-beat note is one beat, not a fraction of a beat!" :-)

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user