New Articulate script available for better midi output
Hi Folks,
There's a new version of the `articulate' script available at
http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate
Changes are:
-- fix bad synchronisation after breathing, explicit line
break and fingering events
-- add staccatissimo
-- fix duration of trillspanners
Thanks to all the people who gave feedback/bugreports/patches (there
were three people who sent staccatissimo patches!)
For those who don't know yet, `articulate' is a bunch of scheme code
that rewrites lily input to make it sound right in the midi output;
basically shortening notes to mark out phrase and slur ends, staccato
and staccatissimo, and realising trills, turns and some tempo
markings.
You use it by:
\include articulate.ly
\score {
\unfoldRepeats \articulate put your music here
\midi{}
}
(or there's a convenience script called `lilywrap' in the tarball that
makes exactly these additions to a lilypond file and invokes lilypond
for you).
Peter C
The direct download link is
http://www.nicta.com.au/__data/assets/file/0009/21888/articulate-1.3.tar.gz
--
Dr Peter Chubb peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia
All things shall perish from under the sky/Music alone shall live, never to die
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
On 3 Jun 2009, at 00:16, Peter Chubb wrote: Hans (Isn't there a timing problem at the second triplet?) There is --- it's to do the gruppetto at the end of the trill, that seems to interfere with the first note of the triplet in the MIDI output. It's not something I can fix with articulate. OK. Hans If it is possible to do it, it might be great to be able to do Hans the timing on per note and note-group basis - for interpretation Hans and also generating feedback on what values to choose. Not sure what you mean here --- can you elaborate? One guy on rec.music.theory, in his composition (another program), started to notate strangely even with unusual time signature, in order to get it sound better in the MIDI. So one should be able such things without having to change the typeset output - much of the finer details of music interpretation aren't notated, but are still very important for the sound. Hans Also, the typesetting program has a cool feature where notes Hans written with equal time can be swinged. - Some guys on the Hans Usenet newsgroup rec.music.theory found this feature great for Hans experimenting with. actually, LilyPond can't do this yet. I wish it could. I see you have cc the developer list. Basically what is needed is to have to timings - for typesetting and sound output. The latter should follow the former by default, but should be tweaked as necessary. ...I'd also like to do something about trills and turns with alterations, and do a better calculation for trill duration. Hans One problem with those is that in LilyPond code one does not Hans write them in the diatonic note system, as the other notes, but Hans only graphically. Indeed. The same is true for most of the other marks that `articulate' deals with. Unfortunately there are no standard ways of marking that there's a `flat' symbol above the ornament symbol and a `natural' below; there are several ways depending on context. In the input, it suffices the notation is transposable: either the note name or the interval. Normally, the ornaments should change scale degrees. So a chromatic trill on C should normally be on Db, and not on C# - this is of importance in other tuning systems than E12 (12 equal temperament). Also this has to do with the innards of LilyPond. But it may be hard to fix trills without it. Hans ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
Peter == Peter Chubb lily.u...@chubb.wattle.id.au writes: Peter Hi, Peter I've put up a page on how to get more realistic sounding MIDI Peter output from current LilyPond, along with the scripts and scheme Peter code used, at http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate And I've now fixed the permissions on the download link there. Sorry for the bother before. -- Dr Peter Chubb peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia Kernel Engineering Group (KEG): Where Systems Brew. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
Dear Peter: And I've now fixed the permissions on the download link there. Sorry for the bother before. Thank you very much, but I still can't access the here link. The web can't find the page, even though I registered. How to get the file? Haipeng ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
On 2 Jun 2009, at 01:29, Peter Chubb wrote: I've put up a page on how to get more realistic sounding MIDI output from current LilyPond, along with the scripts and scheme code used, at http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate (Isn't there a timing problem at the second triplet?) If it is possible to do it, it might be great to be able to do the timing on per note and note-group basis - for interpretation and also generating feedback on what values to choose. Also, the typesetting program has a cool feature where notes written with equal time can be swinged. - Some guys on the Usenet newsgroup rec.music.theory found this feature great for experimenting with. ...I'd also like to do something about trills and turns with alterations, and do a better calculation for trill duration. One problem with those is that in LilyPond code one does not write them in the diatonic note system, as the other notes, but only graphically. Hans ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
Hans == Hans Aberg hab...@math.su.se writes: Hans On 2 Jun 2009, at 01:29, Peter Chubb wrote: I've put up a page on how to get more realistic sounding MIDI output from current LilyPond, along with the scripts and scheme code used, at http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate Hans (Isn't there a timing problem at the second triplet?) There is --- it's to do the gruppetto at the end of the trill, that seems to interfere with the first note of the triplet in the MIDI output. It's not something I can fix with articulate. Hans If it is possible to do it, it might be great to be able to do Hans the timing on per note and note-group basis - for interpretation Hans and also generating feedback on what values to choose. Not sure what you mean here --- can you elaborate? Hans Also, the typesetting program has a cool feature where notes Hans written with equal time can be swinged. - Some guys on the Hans Usenet newsgroup rec.music.theory found this feature great for Hans experimenting with. actually, LilyPond can't do this yet. I wish it could. ...I'd also like to do something about trills and turns with alterations, and do a better calculation for trill duration. Hans One problem with those is that in LilyPond code one does not Hans write them in the diatonic note system, as the other notes, but Hans only graphically. Indeed. The same is true for most of the other marks that `articulate' deals with. Unfortunately there are no standard ways of marking that there's a `flat' symbol above the ornament symbol and a `natural' below; there are several ways depending on context. -- Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
hhpmusic == hhpmusic hhpmu...@163.com writes: And I've now fixed the permissions on the download link there. Sorry for the bother before. hhpmusic Thank you very much, but I still can't access the here hhpmusic link. The web can't find the page, even though I hhpmusic registered. How to get the file? Try shift-reload , you're probably still getting a cached version of the page. Peter C -- Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Better MIDI
Hi, I've put up a page on how to get more realistic sounding MIDI output from current LilyPond, along with the scripts and scheme code used, at http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate It has before-and-after MIDI samples to listen to, and a full description of what the script does and how to use it. Is there any way that the scheme code can be distributed with LilyPond? It's fairly useful now, but could do with going over by some real experts for improvement. In particular I'd like to get rid of the double pass over all the notes (first to find out what to do then to do it), and the hacked up communication between the two passes. I'd also like to do something about trills and turns with alterations, and do a better calculation for trill duration. -- Dr Peter Chubb peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia Kernel Engineering Group (KEG): Where Systems Brew. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better MIDI
On 6/1/09 5:29 PM, Peter Chubb lily.u...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote: Hi, I've put up a page on how to get more realistic sounding MIDI output from current LilyPond, along with the scripts and scheme code used, at http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate Peter, I haven't had a chance to look at your code, since I don't have a login to your server, and it wasn't attached to your email to the list. The improved MIDI sounded good to me. I'd like to get it into the distribution. As a first step, it could be included in an optional add-in. The way to make it work is probably to first split your scheme and lilypond code. I'd recommend that you put your scheme code in a new file that could be placed in the scm/ directory, perhaps something like articulation.scm. And then you'll have your lilypond syntax stuff in articulation.ly file that can be placed in the ly/ directory and included in a lilypond file. Then, you can post your articulation.scm and articulation.ly files on the lilypond-devel list, where it will be reviewed by the experts. It has before-and-after MIDI samples to listen to, and a full description of what the script does and how to use it. Is there any way that the scheme code can be distributed with LilyPond? It's fairly useful now, but could do with going over by some real experts for improvement. In particular I'd like to get rid of the double pass over all the notes (first to find out what to do then to do it), and the hacked up communication between the two passes. I'd also like to do something about trills and turns with alterations, and do a better calculation for trill duration. Sounds great. The best way to get a review is to post code on -devel. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi!
Peter Chubb wrote Thursday, August 07, 2008 10:37 PM
Trevor Hi Peter
Trevor Just tried your articulate.ly. Looks really promising! A
Trevor couple of early comments. It may be obvious, but \articulate
Trevor should only be used in a \score block with just \midi {} - it
Trevor mucks up the printed output if used with \layout { }. And
Trevor dynamics in the midi score block must be applied to all voices
Trevor to be effective.
Peter Yes, it does muck up the printed code.
Peter I'm not sure about the dynamics issue. There are lots of pieces I
Peter have where the dynamics for each voice are independent --- so for
Peter example, the voice is marked `sempre forte' while the piano part is
Peter `decrescendo' then `pp' in Bizet's Toreador's song.
Oh, I know what you mean now. It's a `feature' of Lilypond's midi
output: volume control is done with global control events that set the
master volume, instead of using velocity (at the start of each note)
and aftertouch (during each note). Thus midi volume is global,
instead of per-voice.
No, it's not quite that bad. It's true it does not use velocity
and aftertouch, but the volume of the 16 channels, which are
allocated one per staff, are varied independently according to
the dynamics associated with the voices on that staff.
There is also a basic equaliser to control the relative volumes
of some of the midi instruments which can be adjusted.
What I meant in my previous note was this:
A single line of dynamics often applies to more than one staff in
the printed output but this will affect only one midi channel.
So the dynamics must be included in every staff, even if they are
the same, within the score block which controls the midi output.
I should add the caveat that this understaning is based on a little
experimentation and a bit of code browsing, carried out before
writing the midi sections in the 2.11 Notation Reference. Some
of it may contain inaccuracies. If you, or any one else, spots
any errors in this (section 3.5 MIDI output) please let me know
so I can fix the manual.
Peter C
Trevor
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi!
Hi Peter
Just tried your articulate.ly. Looks really promising! A couple of early
comments. It may be obvious, but \articulate should only be used in a
\score block with just \midi {} - it mucks up the printed output if used
with \layout { }. And dynamics in the midi score block must be applied to
all voices to be effective.
Should we consider including articulate.ly in the official releases?
Trevor
ps I like your clear well-commented code!
- Original Message -
From: Peter Chubb [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Glenn Downey [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Diana Nguyen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dorothy Kennedy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2008 4:38 AM
Subject: Better Midi!
Hi Folks,
I now have permission to release the articulation code
to improve MIDI output for lilypond. I've attached it as a
tar.bz2 file here. The code is copyright 2008 NICTA (my employer),
but released under GPL version 2.
The simple way to use it is to use the lilywrap script in the tarball:
$ lilywrap inputfile.ly
$ timidity inputfile.midi
Long version of how to use it:
\include articulate.ly
Insert \unfoldRepeats \articulate into the appropriate places.
Short Example:
\include articulate.ly
\score {
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
\context Staff {
\set Staff.midiInstrument=clarinet
\relative c' {
\time 4/4 \tempo 4=100
c4-. c4( d e |
f\trill) g\turn a b |
c1--
}
}
\midi {}
}
What it does:
* Any note not under a slur or phrasing mark, and not marked with an
explicit articulation, is shortened by ac:normalFactor (default
7/8)
* Any note marked staccato is shortened by ac:staccatoFactor (default
1/2)
* Any note marked tenuto gets its full value.
* Appogiaturas are made to take half the value of the note following,
without taking dots into account (so in \appoggiatura c8 d2. the c
will take the time of a crotchet)
* Trills and turns are expanded. The algorithm tries to choose notes
within the time of the current tempo that lead to each twiddle
being around 1/8 seconds; this can be adjusted with the
ac:maxTwiddleTime variable.
* rall, poco rall and a tempo are observed. It'd be fairly trivial
to make accel. and stringendo work too.
There's a TODO list a mile long; unfortunately I'm no longer being
paid to work on this, but I'm happy to coordinate the attempts of
others to work on it. Also, my scheme coding is appallingly bad (this
is the first serious work I've done in scheme) so there're probably
major improvements that can be made.
--
Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT
gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT
Australia
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi!
Trevor == Trevor Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Trevor Hi Peter
Trevor Just tried your articulate.ly. Looks really promising! A
Trevor couple of early comments. It may be obvious, but \articulate
Trevor should only be used in a \score block with just \midi {} - it
Trevor mucks up the printed output if used with \layout { }. And
Trevor dynamics in the midi score block must be applied to all voices
Trevor to be effective.
Peter Yes, it does muck up the printed code.
Peter I'm not sure about the dynamics issue. There are lots of pieces I
Peter have where the dynamics for each voice are independent --- so for
Peter example, the voice is marked `sempre forte' while the piano part is
Peter `decrescendo' then `pp' in Bizet's Toreador's song.
Oh, I know what you mean now. It's a `feature' of Lilypond's midi
output: volume control is done with global control events that set the
master volume, instead of using velocity (at the start of each note)
and aftertouch (during each note). Thus midi volume is global,
instead of per-voice.
Peter C
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Better Midi!
Hi Folks,
I now have permission to release the articulation code
to improve MIDI output for lilypond. I've attached it as a
tar.bz2 file here. The code is copyright 2008 NICTA (my employer),
but released under GPL version 2.
The simple way to use it is to use the lilywrap script in the tarball:
$ lilywrap inputfile.ly
$ timidity inputfile.midi
Long version of how to use it:
\include articulate.ly
Insert \unfoldRepeats \articulate into the appropriate places.
Short Example:
\include articulate.ly
\score {
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
\context Staff {
\set Staff.midiInstrument=clarinet
\relative c' {
\time 4/4 \tempo 4=100
c4-. c4( d e |
f\trill) g\turn a b |
c1--
}
}
\midi {}
}
What it does:
* Any note not under a slur or phrasing mark, and not marked with an
explicit articulation, is shortened by ac:normalFactor (default
7/8)
* Any note marked staccato is shortened by ac:staccatoFactor (default
1/2)
* Any note marked tenuto gets its full value.
* Appogiaturas are made to take half the value of the note following,
without taking dots into account (so in \appoggiatura c8 d2. the c
will take the time of a crotchet)
* Trills and turns are expanded. The algorithm tries to choose notes
within the time of the current tempo that lead to each twiddle
being around 1/8 seconds; this can be adjusted with the
ac:maxTwiddleTime variable.
* rall, poco rall and a tempo are observed. It'd be fairly trivial
to make accel. and stringendo work too.
There's a TODO list a mile long; unfortunately I'm no longer being
paid to work on this, but I'm happy to coordinate the attempts of
others to work on it. Also, my scheme coding is appallingly bad (this
is the first serious work I've done in scheme) so there're probably
major improvements that can be made.
articulate.tar.bz2
Description: Binary data
--
Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone? - dynamics
El Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:30:07 +1100 Peter Chubb [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: The artemis orchestra competition has specified Lilypond as its input format since the subject of better midi on lilypond has surfaced, i'd like to take the opportunity to express a wish|request|suggestion that, being a newbie, never dared to bring up before. i think that it's far less ambitious than much of what peter is proposing. my suggestion|request is this: would it be possible that dynamic markings were mapped to velocities, and not to volume? i think having midi output at all in lilypond is a big bonus as it is, i'd be more than happy if this improvement were possible. best, lj ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone? - dynamics
I faced the same problem four or five years ago, and I ended up writing a perl script that converted the volume changes into velocities in the midi file. If necessary, I can dig up and try to find it in my archives... Darius. luis jure wrote: El Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:30:07 +1100 Peter Chubb [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: The artemis orchestra competition has specified Lilypond as its input format since the subject of better midi on lilypond has surfaced, i'd like to take the opportunity to express a wish|request|suggestion that, being a newbie, never dared to bring up before. i think that it's far less ambitious than much of what peter is proposing. my suggestion|request is this: would it be possible that dynamic markings were mapped to velocities, and not to volume? i think having midi output at all in lilypond is a big bonus as it is, i'd be more than happy if this improvement were possible. best, lj ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
Am 2008-03-11 um 03:10 schrieb Graham Percival: Well, I thought the original poster was offering to improve lilypond's midi export. So this _would_ work on any lilypond file... after a certain version number. :) Besides robotics I'm very much interested in enhanced MIDI output, but can't do that myself. Perhaps we can find an able programmer if we can collect some funding? I'd be in with 50-100 Euros. (That's not much, but I need these features only for my hobby projects.) As far as I understand the core devs' capacities are exceeded? Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Better Midi, anyone?
Hi folks, The artemis orchestra competition has specified Lilypond as its input format (see https://www.artemisia-association.org/artemis_orchestra ) for robotic instruments. We're trying to put together an entry (our robotic violinist was entered last year, with some success; (http://www.nicta.com.au/news/previous_releases3/2007_media_releases/syo_violinist_performs_with_award-winning_robofiddler ) Anyway, to the point. We want to use MIDI as an intermediate language for controlling the robot, but Lilypond's midi output ignores most of the input. For example, articulation (staccato, tenuto, accents and slurs), dynamics (I can't work out how to get a smooth crescendo on a single note), and ornaments (trills, mordents, turns etc., are not expanded). Before I start working on any of this, is anyone else doing anything in the area? Most of it may be doable by scheme scripts inserted into the source file before calling Lilypond. Harder stuff is interpreting the purely textual annotations. For example, `poco rall', `molto rit.', `a tempo', 'Tempo I', 'estinto', 'sotto voce', or (some of my favourites, from a piece by Messaien) `perdu', or `comme oiseaux'. It'd be possible to translate some of these into metronome markings or \ or similar; others, I have no idea about. Non-notated repeats are also going to be hard (`dal segno al coda', `dal segno al fine') -- Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 12:30:07 +1100
Peter Chubb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before I start working on any of this, is anyone else doing anything
in the area? Most of it may be doable by scheme scripts inserted into
the source file before calling Lilypond.
No, nobody is working on MIDI output. We welcome contributions to
this.
Harder stuff is interpreting the purely textual annotations. For
example, `poco rall', `molto rit.', `a tempo', 'Tempo I', 'estinto',
'sotto voce', or (some of my favourites, from a piece by Messaien)
`perdu', or `comme oiseaux'.
It'd be possible to translate some of these into metronome markings or
\ or similar; others, I have no idea about.
Non-notated repeats are also going to be hard (`dal segno al coda',
`dal segno al fine')
The above points are possibly with a macro: instead of simply
moltorit = \markup{ \italics molto rit }
create something like
moltorit = ... scheme that prints out molto rit, and tweaks
whatever options you want for your new midi code...
I'm not certain that it's worth going to quite this much trouble
-- adding articulations will likely take a few weeks. But it's
definitely *possible* to do this kind of thing with lilypond
input.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
Graham Percival skrev:
moltorit = ... scheme that prints out molto rit, and tweaks
whatever options you want for your new midi code...
That won't work.
If I read the rules of the artemis context correctly, the solution must
work for any lilypond file.
I assume that the organizers are using some sort of simplified
lilypond-structure to represent music, so that e.g. rall. always will
be entered the same way - e.g. with -rall. and not \markup{\italics
rall.}.
Probably there is also some way of identifying different voices, etc.
But the rules do not really specify any of this, afaics.
I really do not understand why they choose full-blown .ly as the format
for this competition.
-Rune
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
Graham == Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Graham The above points are possibly with a macro: instead of simply
Graham moltorit = \markup{ \italics molto rit }
The point is that for the Artemis competition we have to start with
unmodified Lilypond input. So we have to recognise, say
c'^rit. or c'^rall etc., and convert to \tempo 4=60 or
whatever.
I think I can do that.
The hard dynamics one is that at present to notate a smooth
crescendo/decrescendo on a single note you have to do something like:
{ c'1 } \\
{s16\pp \ s4. \! s16 \ff \s16 \ s4. \! s16 \pp }
because there's no appropriate language construct.
That creates a new voice, and attaches the dynamics to it instead
of to the note. To produce good midi output, you need to change this
to something like,
{ c16 \pp \ ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 \! ~ c16 \ff ~ c16 \
~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 \! ~ c16 \pp }
and even that doesn't give as smooth a transition as one would like.
Any ideas?
--
Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 03:07:17 +0100 Rune Zedeler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Graham Percival skrev: moltorit = ... scheme that prints out molto rit, and tweaks whatever options you want for your new midi code... That won't work. If I read the rules of the artemis context correctly, the solution must work for any lilypond file. Well, I thought the original poster was offering to improve lilypond's midi export. So this _would_ work on any lilypond file... after a certain version number. :) Note that I haven't read the rules, so I may be way off here. And they probably specify a version (or they should, at least). Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
On Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:08:05 +1100
Peter Chubb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Graham == Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Graham The above points are possibly with a macro: instead of simply
Graham moltorit = \markup{ \italics molto rit }
The point is that for the Artemis competition we have to start with
unmodified Lilypond input. So we have to recognise, say
c'^rit. or c'^rall etc., and convert to \tempo 4=60 or
whatever.
Oh. Ooooh. Yikes. Including all English / Italian / French /
German / etc variations of slow down?!
Hmm. I was thinking of something completely different here. I
agree with Rune; I don't know why they chose lilypond for this
contest -- or at the very least, why they didn't specify a subset
of normal lilypond code.
Sorry, I can't help with this.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: mainly been intended for proof reading scores while you enter the music. The main hackers of LilyPond have never had the ambition to be able to produce hight quality MIDI output. Historically, that's been true. However, we found that there is some interest in better MIDI output. Getting the MIDI backend to quality level of the notation backend is a task I'd happily pursue, if sufficient funds are raised. I already have a pledge for EUR 750, but that is not enough. My rough estimate is that I could do it for EUR 3500. So, if you are interested in getting a better MIDI backend with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in and Donate money to support this effort. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)
Hi list, Han-Wen, with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in and Donate money to support this effort. I'll chip in, and let you know in a private mail how much... I have type-set scores for my choir with Lilypond, using the Midi output to generate CDs and MP3s so ppl can study at home, when they don't play an instrument themselves. Having an easy way to generate different mixes for the different voices would be a nice option to have (+6dB sopranos, -6dB the other voices, so that the sopranos can hear their voice 'over' the other voices). Cheers! Christ van Willegen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)
On Thursday 03 February 2005 07:51 am, Christ van Willegen wrote: Hi list, Han-Wen, with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in and Donate money to support this effort. I'll chip in, and let you know in a private mail how much... I have type-set scores for my choir with Lilypond, using the Midi output to generate CDs and MP3s so ppl can study at home, when they don't play an instrument themselves. Having an easy way to generate different mixes for the different voices would be a nice option to have (+6dB sopranos, -6dB the other voices, so that the sopranos can hear their voice 'over' the other voices). Try midi2mg, which comes with midge, and do it with midge. It is GNU. A bit of integration would be very welcome. daveA -- The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the instrument consist in Dynamic Guitar Technique. I promise miracles. Get it at: http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html daveA David Raleigh Arnold dra..at..openguitar.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
