Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Tue 26 Apr 2016 at 01:21:00 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote: > On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: > > But I see you've now acknowledged (indirectly) that LP can set > > multiple marks at the same point after stating that it can't. > > Are there other things that LP can be persuaded to do itself

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Thu 28 Apr 2016 at 13:56:03 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > On 27/04/2016 01:04, Carl Sorensen wrote: > >On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley" wrote: > > > >>2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists : > >>>On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: >

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 27/04/2016 01:04, Carl Sorensen wrote: On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley" wrote: 2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists : On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish [...]) The problem

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley" wrote: >2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists : >> On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: >>> (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish >>> [...]) >>> >> Copy "House Style", maybe? >> And the whole

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists : > On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: >> (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish >> [...]) >> > Copy "House Style", maybe? > And the whole point of this entire thread has been about > SAVING VERTICAL SPACE - it's just

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: > On Sun 24 Apr 2016 at 19:18:01 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: >> On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote: >> >> Ah - does that mean the rehearsal mark would happily overwrite the >> blank space at the start of the other markup string? > > Typically, yes.

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Sun 24 Apr 2016 at 19:18:01 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote: > >On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote: > >>On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote: > >>>On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > On 22/04/2016

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote: On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote: On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote: On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: David K wrote: Hm? How could you even have a

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote: > On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > >> On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > >>> David K wrote: > > Hm? How could you even have a compressed

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 23/04/2016 12:23, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same width as the markup so that then looks

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

Hi Wol, > if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with > multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has > some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same > width as the markup so that then looks awful \textLengthOff ? Hope this

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

On 23/04/16 01:52, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi David, > >> It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a >> multi-measure rest. >> Who does this, and what does it mean, musically? >> In this example, you are actually placing a fermata on a single bar of rest. >> In

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote: > On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: >> On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: >>> David K wrote: > Hm? How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there > is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

On 23.04.2016 02:06, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote: It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a multi-measure rest. Who does this, and what does it mean, musically? You must be kidding. While calling R1 a MultiMeasureRest may be slightly confusing in LilyPond

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

Hi David, > It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a > multi-measure rest. > Who does this, and what does it mean, musically? > In this example, you are actually placing a fermata on a single bar of rest. > In which case, this works fine: > { \compressFullBarRests

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions

> Try the following ... > > f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata > > The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints > "programming error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't > print. It strikes me as conceptually problematic to try to put a fermata on a multi-measure rest. Who does

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > >David K wrote: > >>>Hm? How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there > >>>is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel? > >>>That sounds like a problem that

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 16:55, David Kastrup wrote: >The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints "programming >error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't print. So >that's another bug tracked down in my piece, That's_explicitly_ what \fermataMarkup is for. If people consulted

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

Hi, > f1->\fermata R1*3 R1\fermata You can use \fermataMarkup { R1\fermataMarkup } I know it looks more like a workaround than something one would expect, but it works. Cheers, Joram ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 16:24:06 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: > On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote: > >>I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens > >>>in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use > >>>multiple \tag constructs just to

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

Anthonys Lists writes: > On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote: >>> I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens >>> >in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use >>> >multiple \tag constructs just to handle this

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote: I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens >in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use >multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue. Me too. I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Wol: Scan through the thread starting at and see if anything there helps. Good luck, Kieren. Just scanned it - unfortunately I'm using \markup on an s, rather than \mark, for

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: David K wrote: >Hm? How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there >is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel? >That sounds like a problem that cannot occur. I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 09:31:17AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Wol, > > > My usual bugbear ... :-( > > I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, > > […] > > Yeah… this causes me no end of grief, too. > It probably represents a good 10% of my score/part

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

Hi Wol, > My usual bugbear ... :-( > I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, […] Yeah… this causes me no end of grief, too. It probably represents a good 10% of my score/part tweaking time. David K wrote: > Hm? How could you even have a compressed

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

Anthonys Lists writes: > My usual bugbear ... :-( > > I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo > mark, and a tune name all wanting to be over the same barline (this is > an arrangement, where there are several tunes and each is identified >

Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

My usual bugbear ... :-( I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, and a tune name all wanting to be over the same barline (this is an arrangement, where there are several tunes and each is identified where it occurs). So I have something along the lines of