2017-09-21 18:43 GMT-04:00 David Wright <[email protected]>: > Say I'm setting a typical Anglican (Episcopal) hymn in four parts on > two staves with the words in between them. The voice parts will have > passing notes etc. at different times, each of which necessitates a > left-alignment of that syllable and an appropriate lyric extender. > > Before NullVoice came along, the lyrics would be full of \vs \va \vt > and \vb (shorthand for \set associatedVoice = "vsoprano" etc) and there > would be a separate context for the lyric position in the system > (because the lower parts' notes appear after the lyrics). > > Now all I do is duplicate the most moving part as a NullVoice, then > subdivide its non-moving notes to correspond with any part(s) moving > at that point. Setting the lyrics to the NullVoice now does everything > automatically, with the odd exception. (For example, the moving part > might have a note displaced by the neighbouring voice being only a > (semi-)tone away.)
>> For example, I'm pretty sure the \hideNotes technique won't work for >> adding lyrics to a \partcombine part which I use extensively. > I've hardly used \partcombine > I loathe doing > I've read here that certain things are fragile. Yes, partcombine can be quite the hassle. But I'm sure things will get better over time. >> So am-I correct to assume the notes are still there? > I'm just rationalising from what I've observed, but it would appear > that \hideNotes is the one that just blanks the stencils, so the notes > are still there, the lyrics have to lie under them, and so the measure > gets expanded appropriately. Yes, I understand. >> I suppose that the lyrics has no "timed" stuff to align to. > My observations (again without knowing what the code actually does) > suggest that because no X-space is required to set anything¹, the > positions of the timing "anchors" produced by NullVoice have a > zero-point near to the beginning of the line. If you set (and then > hide) something, a rest or a note, then a collision with the clef > and signatures has to be avoided, so the zero-point of time gets > pushed rightwards to a position after them. So if I understood correctly, we could infer that it is aligned with the basis of all alignment which is (is it?) the start of the line but with *no* offset as LilyPond hasn't added any. -- Pierre-Luc Gauthier _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
