Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: The current behavior is bad, because it mixes two different things: melismas themselves and how they are represented. If i use either slurs or manual beams for melismas, i'm hardcoding some redundant (or at least partially redundant) information into my source file. For example, if i specify melismas using either slurs or manual beaming, i cannot easily make an automatic keyboard reduction using previously entered vocal variables, or change melisma representation to other style. What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for it, or something different (or nothing at all). For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur equals melisma. It is also very convenient to type. We are talking about modern-style vocal music. But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of that music in other contexts. Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names for commands and you can always define your shorter commands. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com wrote: 2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for it, or something different (or nothing at all). For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur equals melisma. Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes. But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of that music in other contexts. Glad that we agree here. Also, one all-purpose melisma command would be simpler to understand for users. Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names for commands and you can always define your shorter commands. well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized. But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut, similarly to -\staccato and -. thanks, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized. But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut, similarly to -\staccato and -. Totally agreed. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Le 22/03/2012 20:20, Jean-Charles Malahieude disait :
Le 22/03/2012 20:08, David Kastrup disait :
Jean-Charles Malahieudelily...@orange.fr writes:
The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even
build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming
is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*.
Beaming is prefix?
just tried :
mbY = { \autoBeamOn \melisma } % melisma beaming = Yes
mbN = { \melismaEnd \autoBeamOff } % melisma beaming = No
\score {
\new Staff
\set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
\new Voice = melody \relative c' {
\time 3/4
f4 g8 \mbY f e f\mbN
\autoBeamOn e8( d \autoBeamOff e2)
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody {
One -- two -- three __ }
}
oops! too fast
I mean in fact that it would be more useful to have \melisma behave like
\autoBeamOn: there will now will happen a melisma
Cheers,
Jean-Charles
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Jean-Charles Malahieude lily...@orange.fr wrote: Le 22/03/2012 13:00, Janek Warchoł disait : On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila wrote: Melismas are indicated in the score by slurs, so slur equals melisma. Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes. I then use a phrasing slur: a4\( \melisma b8 c\) \melismaEnd I did that, too. But sooner or later you'll stumble upon a piece where both portamento slur and phrasing slur happen simultaneously. Sure, there are workarounds - but what we need is a semantically correct solution, not a workaround. Using logical and structurally correct solutions is one of the most important advantages of LilyPond. On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:08 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Jean-Charles Malahieude lily...@orange.fr writes: The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*. Beaming is prefix? manual beaming is of course postfix, but what we need here is \autoBeamOn/Off, and that isn't a postevent. (we need autobeaming, because in long melismas notes aren't beamed all together. In long melismas notes are beamed almost like they would be done using autobeaming). cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
