Re: Getting ridd of annoying changelation key sign
Please always include a small example that illustrates your problem. It takes extra time to try to figure out exactly what your problem is and what aspects are relevant. I hope you agree that in normal situations where you have a key change to C major, you need a key cancellation sign, even if you don't use it for other key changes. This motivates why setting printKeyCancellation = ##f doesn't (and shouldn't) work in this specific case. However, you can still remove it from the output by making it transparent: \once \override Staff.KeyCancellation #'transparent = ##t \key C \major /Mats anders stenberg wrote: Hi! Have bee'n working on some edits on renaisance music lately and did run in to trouble. I do use the modell in documentation on transcription of mensural music. I'm getting i to trouble when incipit and piece are in different keys. When transposing from f major (one flat) to g major (one sharp) as in the template, no problems. But when incipit has one flat and piece has non ( eg. downward transposition of a fourth) I get this annoying changelation sign after the cleff which I can't get rid of no way, no how. Neighter the \set Staff.printKeyCancellation = ##f command used i the template nor setting KeySignature propriety to transparent (Which works when transposing to any other key but c major) does work. This is starting to annoy me becaus that extra natural sign feels realy weeaird. Could sombody help me outh with this. Anders Stenberg ps. I have one other problem but on wich I did find a working if not an elegant solution. Some historical prints have a time signature wich consists of a mensural sign followed by a numeral. Fidling around with things i did find out that \cadenzaOn ... \once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'mensural \time 3/4 s8 \once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'single-digit \time 3/2 ... produces a look alike on what I need. If sombody have a more elegant solution I would be thankfull the one abow is somewath clumsy in apearance. D.s ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Getting ridd of annoying changelation key sign
anders stenberg wrote:
...
ps. I have one other problem but on wich I did find a working if not
an elegant solution. Some historical prints have a time signature
wich consists of a mensural sign followed by a numeral. Fidling around
with things i did find out that
\cadenzaOn
...
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'mensural
\time 3/4
s8
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'single-digit
\time 3/2
...
produces a look alike on what I need. If sombody have a more elegant
solution I would be thankfull the one abow is somewath clumsy in
apearance.
In the section on Polymetric notation, you can find information on how to
customize the time signature. Maybe you can use something like
\version 2.10.0
mensuralIII =\markup {
\musicglyph #timesig.neomensural34 \vcenter \number 3
}
{
...
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = #ly:text-interface::print
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'text = #mensuralIII
\time 3/2
...
}
/Mats
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
Nick Bailey wrote: My understanding was that the f dots are the vestiges of the two lines in the letter F... is that not the case? Hence the C clef and G clef wouldn't have them AFAIK, the dots are usefull when the music is handwritten: it is sometime difficult to read the exact position of the clef, or the writer may have made an error and correct it that way. But this is IMHO not usefull in printed music. -- Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: # or not before a value
Thanks Matt ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Tutorial
If I enter
{
c d e f g a b
}
as per instructions, part 2.1 of the tutorial, the result does not
look at all like the tutorial says it should.
The page numbers in the tutorial and those in the preview toolbar do
not correspond: I have to type and enter 21 to get to page 12.
Manuel
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
What does AFAIK stand for? Certainly, the dots make practical, besides systematical and didactical, sense in handwriting music; this in itself is a good reason to transfer their use to typeset music, which should reflect the way it is written by hand. Also, that music theory is at the same time pedagogy is an old and good concept. Manuel Am 29/11/2006 um 09:52 schrieb Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan: Nick Bailey wrote: My understanding was that the f dots are the vestiges of the two lines in the letter F... is that not the case? Hence the C clef and G clef wouldn't have them AFAIK, the dots are usefull when the music is handwritten: it is sometime difficult to read the exact position of the clef, or the writer may have made an error and correct it that way. But this is IMHO not usefull in printed music. -- Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan ___ 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: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
As far as I know, it stands for as far as I know. Regarding the typesetting practice, I often view handwriting as more or less clumsy attempts to imitate what is done in well typeset printed music, not the other way around. /Mats Manuel wrote: What does AFAIK stand for? Certainly, the dots make practical, besides systematical and didactical, sense in handwriting music; this in itself is a good reason to transfer their use to typeset music, which should reflect the way it is written by hand. Also, that music theory is at the same time pedagogy is an old and good concept. Manuel Am 29/11/2006 um 09:52 schrieb Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan: Nick Bailey wrote: My understanding was that the f dots are the vestiges of the two lines in the letter F... is that not the case? Hence the C clef and G clef wouldn't have them AFAIK, the dots are usefull when the music is handwritten: it is sometime difficult to read the exact position of the clef, or the writer may have made an error and correct it that way. But this is IMHO not usefull in printed music. --Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan ___ 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 -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
As a matter of fact, I've always written every C and F clef with two dots, and it is indeed very useful (since there are many C clefs, and two F clefs, but only one G clef in modern music). AFAIK : As Far As I Know IMHO : In My Humble Opinion (maye this should be integrated in lilypond docs ... :) Valentin. 2006/11/29, Manuel [EMAIL PROTECTED]: What does AFAIK stand for? Certainly, the dots make practical, besides systematical and didactical, sense in handwriting music; this in itself is a good reason to transfer their use to typeset music, which should reflect the way it is written by hand. Also, that music theory is at the same time pedagogy is an old and good concept. Manuel Am 29/11/2006 um 09:52 schrieb Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan: Nick Bailey wrote: My understanding was that the f dots are the vestiges of the two lines in the letter F... is that not the case? Hence the C clef and G clef wouldn't have them AFAIK, the dots are usefull when the music is handwritten: it is sometime difficult to read the exact position of the clef, or the writer may have made an error and correct it that way. But this is IMHO not usefull in printed music. -- Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan ___ 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 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
Am 29/11/2006 um 10:54 schrieb Mats Bengtsson: As far as I know, it stands for as far as I know. Regarding the typesetting practice, I often view handwriting as more or less clumsy attempts to imitate what is done in well typeset printed music, not the other way around. /Mats I take a different view on this matter. I think that painting was the first way of writing, letters being a later development. The first attempts to typesetting music were clumsy indeed, but even now, when typeset music is quite good, no printed score can equal the beauty of, say, Bach's handwriting. In the same way that instruments imitate, and should imitate, the cantabile of the human voice, a printed score should, I believe, approach as much as possible the expressive aesthetic of the handwritten music: you will agree with the concept of typeset signs - clefs, staves, etc. - being made as beautiful as possible. Manuel Manuel wrote: What does AFAIK stand for? Certainly, the dots make practical, besides systematical and didactical, sense in handwriting music; this in itself is a good reason to transfer their use to typeset music, which should reflect the way it is written by hand. Also, that music theory is at the same time pedagogy is an old and good concept. Manuel Am 29/11/2006 um 09:52 schrieb Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan: Nick Bailey wrote: My understanding was that the f dots are the vestiges of the two lines in the letter F... is that not the case? Hence the C clef and G clef wouldn't have them AFAIK, the dots are usefull when the music is handwritten: it is sometime difficult to read the exact position of the clef, or the writer may have made an error and correct it that way. But this is IMHO not usefull in printed music. --Christophe Dang Ngoc Chan ___ 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 -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Page breaker question: obeying explicit \breaks
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], =?UTF-8?Q?Trevor_Ba=C4=8Da?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes It just seems like, if ever there were global information in musical score, that that global information would include line- and page-breaking information. As it is, line- and page-breaking information *must* now embed within musical input, which just seems odd: after all, the breaking information certainly doesn't belong to one voice or one staff or one staff group; if anything, maybe the breaking information belongs to a single score ... almost makes me think that explicit breaking information belongs in the \with block of the score. Has anyone else ever had that feeling? Very good idea ... The stuff I do is pretty much all setting parts. But I'd also like to combine those parts into scores. And, while I don't know how the new page breaking handles it, I have come across plenty of parts that have a page turn in the middle of a phrase ... (and often a rest close by!!!). So you need to break different parts in different places. If your score then applies all of those breaks ... Yep - I think it's a very good idea moving explicit breaks out of the voice context. Question is, can it be done easily? And if so, how? Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Page breaker question: obeying explicit \breaks
On 11/29/06, Anthony W. Youngman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The stuff I do is pretty much all setting parts. But I'd also like to
combine those parts into scores. And, while I don't know how the new
page breaking handles it, I have come across plenty of parts that have a
page turn in the middle of a phrase ... (and often a rest close by!!!).
So you need to break different parts in different places. If your score
then applies all of those breaks ...
Yep - I think it's a very good idea moving explicit breaks out of the
voice context. Question is, can it be done easily? And if so, how?
The way I do it is to have (in i-violin1.ly)
violinIFirstMov = {music}
violinIFirstMovBreaks = {s1*whatever \break s1*somethingElse \break}
Then in violin1.ly
\score {
\violinIFirstMov \violinIFirstMovBreaks
}
other movements
In score.ly, I just leave out all the xxxBreaks variables (I have never had
the need for explicit breaks in a score, but if you do, you can always add
another variable for that). Alternatively you could try using \tag, but that
still requires you to make the music messy with manual breaking information.
The manual counting of the spacer rests is a bit tedious, but apart from
that it works well. (If you use the new page-turn-page-breaking algorithm in
the parts, it cuts down hugely on the number of manual breaks you need).
Joe
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Music for the Martians?
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Arjan Bos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes When trying to be helpful and create a patch, I noticed that the development switched from CVS to GIT. Why? Now I have to find out what git is, how it works and how to get it. First try Fink as that's the semi-default package manager on Darwin. It cannot connect to cvs to update itself. The error message tells me to try again later. Mmph, only later it still doesn't work. Turns out I have to run an update script that is almost guaranteed not to work and which should be babysitted for several hours. Hate. Maybe because GIT is a lot less work for main developers? With CVS, HanWen has to keep a master tree, and every time he updates, everyone else has to throw away their development tree, take a copy of his master, and merge all their changes back in. With GIT, when that happens, the other developers simply say merge all HanWen's changes into my tree - there is NO master tree. Makes life so much easier as the number of developers starts rising. Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Page breaker question: obeying explicit \breaks
Either use a separate identifier like
\mypagebreaks = {\skip 4*20 \pageBreak ...}
or use the \tag feature.
Note also that the page breaking algorithm in version 2.10 is much more
clever
than in previous versions, so it should automatically try to place page
breaks
when there is a long rest.
/Mats
Anthony W. Youngman wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
=?UTF-8?Q?Trevor_Ba=C4=8Da?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
It just seems like, if ever there were global information in musical
score, that that global information would include line- and
page-breaking information. As it is, line- and page-breaking
information *must* now embed within musical input, which just seems
odd: after all, the breaking information certainly doesn't belong to
one voice or one staff or one staff group; if anything, maybe the
breaking information belongs to a single score ... almost makes me
think that explicit breaking information belongs in the \with block of
the score.
Has anyone else ever had that feeling?
Very good idea ...
The stuff I do is pretty much all setting parts. But I'd also like to
combine those parts into scores. And, while I don't know how the new
page breaking handles it, I have come across plenty of parts that have
a page turn in the middle of a phrase ... (and often a rest close
by!!!). So you need to break different parts in different places. If
your score then applies all of those breaks ...
Yep - I think it's a very good idea moving explicit breaks out of the
voice context. Question is, can it be done easily? And if so, how?
Cheers,
Wol
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Page breaker question: obeying explicit \breaks
On 11/29/06, Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Note also that the page breaking algorithm in version 2.10 is much more clever than in previous versions, so it should automatically try to place page breaks when there is a long rest. Actually this feature needs to be enabled manually (as there are many situations where this feature isn't needed and then it leads to worse spacing). The page-breaking section in the 2.10 manual has more details. Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tutorial
As it's indicated a few lines below, you should add \relative{...}, i.e.
\relative{c d e f g a b c }
to get the desired octave.
/Mats
Manuel wrote:
If I enter
{
c d e f g a b
}
as per instructions, part 2.1 of the tutorial, the result does not
look at all like the tutorial says it should.
The page numbers in the tutorial and those in the preview toolbar do
not correspond: I have to type and enter 21 to get to page 12.
Manuel
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
Manuel libros at limay.de writes: I take a different view on this matter. I think that painting was the first way of writing, letters being a later development. The first attempts to typesetting music were clumsy indeed, but even now, when typeset music is quite good, no printed score can equal the beauty of, say, Bach's handwriting. That may be true for Bach. Allow me to introduce Grieg as a counter-example. Many of his manuscripts are available here: http://www.bergen.folkebibl.no/grieg-samlingen/grieg-samlingen_komposisjoner.html While his music is certainly excellent, I would not like Lilypond to imitate his handwriting in any way. Cheers, -- Arvid ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Page breaker question: obeying explicit \breaks
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mats Bengtsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Either use a separate identifier like
\mypagebreaks = {\skip 4*20 \pageBreak ...}
or use the \tag feature.
Note also that the page breaking algorithm in version 2.10 is much more
clever
than in previous versions, so it should automatically try to place page
breaks
when there is a long rest.
I was aware of the tags feature - but that can get messy if the same
voice can be printed four or five different ways ...
Hadn't thought of the \mypagebreaks trick - nice :-)
Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
custom keys and song repeats
Hi, I've been dealing with Lilypond for a couple of days and I loved it, perfect output and 100% control on the music.. I've questions that I could not find a solution in help documentations; - Can I customize the key? In Turkish Classical Music there are various keys and I cannot create them in lilypond (please see the key in http://www.neyzen.com/images/notalar/hicaz_ailesi/hicazzirgule/tel_tel_taradim_zulfunu.gif ) - I could not find the repeat sign for segno. You can see the sign at http://www.davemyers.com/amcc/dsign.GIF - How can I disable the lines numbers Grateful if you can comment on these.. Thanks, Korcan K. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Slurs in multiple voices
Hello,
I have the following code:
{
r4 fas si res4 si res fas4) |
r4 fas si res4 res' fas si |
} \\%% End upper voice
{
si,,2.( | res2. |
}%% End lower voice
I would like to connect the slur starting in the lower voice with the last
chord in the upper voice. I got an error. Please, help! :)
thanks,
Cris
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Getting ridd of annoying changelation key sign
anders == anders stenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: anders I'm getting i to trouble when incipit and piece are in anders different keys. I got into enough trouble with enough things on incipits that I gave up on having them be part of the piece and set them separately. Then I use lilypond-book to include the incipit before the piece. This not only avoids the kind of problem you're having, but also avoids a large part of the pain of converting a large project to a new version of lilypond, since the incipit features tend to change a lot more than the features involved in printing the piece. There's an example of how I do the incipits and lilypond-book at http://serpent.laymusic.org/~newlily/music/dowland/awake/thirddown/allparts.zip -- Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ ) (617) 661-8097 fax: (501) 641-5011 233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scheme question on strict substitution
On 11/29/06, Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, this doesn't work.
What does work is
\version 2.10.0
fraction = #(define-music-function (parser location music) (ly:music?)
#{
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text $music
#})
This is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks, as usual, Mats.
\relative c'{
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
}
However, what is the reason to use \tweak at all? Why not simply do
an ordinary \once \override:
\version 2.10.0
fraction = \override TupletNumber #'text =
#tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
\relative c'{
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
}
Ah, because we apparently need \tweak in the (rather specific) case of
nested tuplets whose TupletNumbers carry different 'text values.
Here's a snippet from the 2.9 NEWS file that shows both fraction text
and denominator text working together happily in a nested tuplet:
%
% ly snippet:
%
\new Staff {
\time 5/4
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
%\once \override TupletNumber #'text = #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
\times 5/3 {
%\once \override TupletNumber #'text =
#tuplet-number::calc-denominator-text
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-denominator-text
\times 2/3 {
c'8[ c'8 c'8]
}
\times 2/3 {
c'8[ c'8 c'8]
}
\times 2/3 {
c'8[ c'8 c'8]
}
}
}
%
% end ly snippet
%
Note, however, that if we swap the comments around and change the
\tweaks to \overrides, that the example won't work -- both sets of
TupletNumbers will have denominator text only, thus ignoring the
fraction text for the outer tuplet.
I guess I've never really had a good grasp on how \tweak works; can
anybody explain why the example above doesn't work with \overrides but
does work with \tweaks?
Section 9.3.5 Objects connected to the input says In some cases, it
is possible to take a short-cut for tuning graphical objects. For
objects that result directly from a piece of the input, you can use
the \tweak function But I've never really understood what this
means. What does it mean for an objected to be connected to the
input? Are all objects connected to input? Objects only come about
from input, right?
Instead, of understanding connectedness to input as being behind
\tweak, I've instead mentally adopted the idea that \tweak is
necessary (instead of \override) when you want to separately modify
the attributes of two or more objects that instantiate at the *same
musical moment*. 9.5.3 gives the example of \tweaking noteheads in a
chord, and the noteheads in a chord certainly instantiate at the same
musical moment. Likewise for the nested tuplets in the example here:
the nested tuplets instantiate at the same musical moment, so that
seems to trigger the need for \tweak instead of \override.
Is the understanding I've worked out for myself correct, ie, that we
use \tweak when we want to modify objects that instantiate at the same
musical moment? And, if so, maybe the idea of sameness of musical
moment can replace the idea of connectedness to input in 9.3.5.
--
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Opinions on tuplet number formatting defaults?
Hi,
There are some rules about the interpretation of tuplet numbers that
Lily doesn't seem to know about yet.
Consider how players interpret these lone numbers inside a tuplet bracket:
3 interprets as 3:2
5 interprets as 5:4
6 interprets as 6:4
7 interprets as 7:4 (though there was confusion about the one in the
50s and 60s)
9 interprets as 9:8
10 interprets as 10:8
11 interprets as 11:8
12 interprets as 12:8
13 interprets as 13:8
14 interprets as 14:8
15 interprets as 15:8 (and likewise some confusion about this one)
17 interprets as 17:16
etc.
The general rule is that a lone number n in brackets interprets as an
abbreviation for the ratio n:d, with d equal to the greatest integer
power of 2 less than n.
(The confusion in the 50s and 60s about 7 and 15 possibly standing for
7:8 and 15:16 instead of 7:4 and 15:8 shows that there was, for a
couple of decades, a competing rule on the interpretation of lone
tuplet numbers. The competing rule was something like n interprets as
n:d, with d equal to the integer power of 2 *closest to* n. This
eventually got scrapped because the closest to version of the rule
has real problems with the interpretation of 6 -- should it stand for
6:4 or 6:8 given that 6 is equally close to both 4 and 8?)
All sorts of other ratios as possible -- like 3:4 or 3:5 -- but if d
is not an integer power of 2, then the ratio needs to be fully written
out as n:d rather than simply abbreviating as n.
So what does this mean for Lily's tuplet numbers? It means that Lily
might ought to format nonbinary tuplets (to coin a kinda ugly term
... meaning those tuplets in which d is not an integer power of 2) by
default as fractions instead of lone numbers. For example:
\times 5/3 { c'8 c'8 c'8 }
should by default render as 5:3. In today's Lily, that tuplet number
renders simply as 5, which is incorrect because players will interpret
a lone 5 as abbreviating 5:4, as in the table above.
Anyone else see the sense in changing Lily's default formatting of
TupletNumber text? Or much ado about nothing?
(The point hardly matters for music of the common practice since the
common practice tuplets are almost always triplets. Primary benefit
would be for contemporary music.)
[One arcane sidenote: in music of the common practice written in
ternary meter, the interpretation of lone tuplet numbers changes. In
6/8 time, for example, four eighth notes bracketted together under a
lone 4 will interpret as 4:3. But the point almost never arises in
contemporary music. Anything with lot of 7:5 flying around is probably
not going to be interpreted as being in ternary meter.]
--
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Lilytool - using crescendo/descrescendo tags crashes with beanshelll error
Apologies to the list if there's a separate place for reporting Lilypond Tool for JEdit Errors, but . . . Hi Bert, I selected a small area of music e.g. a4 b cs d and then used the Lilypond | Tags | Crescendo menu option in Jedit. This then crashes with a beanshell alert box stating] Parse error at line 1, column 48. Encountered : ! lots of Java traceback. Unfortunately I can't insert the full traceback here. Please e-mail if you need it and I'll send it to you. Cheers, Ian Hulin -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Lilytool---using-crescendo-descrescendo-tags-crashes-with-beanshelll-error-tf2726703.html#a7604345 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tutorial
I'm having some difficulty with the Metronome_Mark_engraver. I've successfully hidden it, but the notes are spaced around it so there's some odd spacing. I'm wondering it's possible to remove the metronome mark altogether. The code is here: http://homepage.mac.com/jamesebailey/Musik/hodie/Hodie.txt I can just remove the metronome mark and generate a midi file separately, I was just wondering. Thanks ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tutorial
James E. Bailey jamesebailey at mac.com writes:
I'm having some difficulty with the Metronome_Mark_engraver. I've successfully
hidden it, but the notes
are spaced around it so there's some odd spacing. I'm wondering it's possible
to remove the metronome mark altogether.
Sure! In the \layout block, paste the following:
\context {
\Score
\remove Metronome_mark_engraver
}
--
Arvid
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Articulations
Hey, all.
I was just trying to typeset some articulations and ran into a problem.
The music I'm working on has notes with both an accent and staccato dot above
but there's not a single '-' character to mark this with. I tried this...
{ fis--. }
and
{ fis-.- }
Both are accepted syntactically, but cause LilyPond to die. There's nothing in
the docs that says whether this ought to work or not so I'm not sure if it's a
bug or nor.
Btw, this is LP v2.10.0-2 on WinXP.
Thanks for any help!
Stephen
2006-11-29, 11:33:18
The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be
privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying
of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to
this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
On 11/29/06, Arvid Grøtting [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Manuel libros at limay.de writes: I take a different view on this matter. I think that painting was the first way of writing, letters being a later development. The first attempts to typesetting music were clumsy indeed, but even now, when typeset music is quite good, no printed score can equal the beauty of, say, Bach's handwriting. That may be true for Bach. Allow me to introduce Grieg as a counter-example. Many of his manuscripts are available here: http://www.bergen.folkebibl.no/grieg-samlingen/grieg-samlingen_komposisjoner.html Wow. Those are hideous. -- Trevor Bača [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: custom keys and song repeats
On 11/29/06, Korcan Kayrak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I've been dealing with Lilypond for a couple of days and I loved it, perfect
output and 100% control on the music..
Welcome :-)
I've questions that I could not find a solution in help documentations;
Can I customize the key? In Turkish Classical Music there are various keys
and I cannot create them in lilypond (please see the key in
http://www.neyzen.com/images/notalar/hicaz_ailesi/hicazzirgule/tel_tel_taradim_zulfunu.gif
)
I could not find the repeat sign for segno. You can see the sign at
http://www.davemyers.com/amcc/dsign.GIF
How can I disable the lines numbers
The Bar_number_engraver creates bar numbers. The Bar_number_engraver
lives in the Score context. To remove bar numbers you can either
remove the Bar_number_engraver from the Score context, or you can
render all bar numbers transparent in the Score context.
\new Score \with {
\remove Bar_number_engraver
} {
\new Staff {
MUSIC
}
}
or
\new Score \with {
\override BarNumber #'transparent = ##t
} {
\new Staff {
MUSIC
}
}
Section 8.2.4 Bar numbers might also be helpful:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.10/Documentation/user/lilypond/Bar-numbers.html#Bar-numbers
--
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Opinions on tuplet number formatting defaults?
Trevor Bača escreveu: Anyone else see the sense in changing Lily's default formatting of TupletNumber text? Or much ado about nothing? sounds like a good idea, and not too difficult either. Patches are welcome. http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen LilyPond Software Design -- Code for Music Notation http://www.lilypond-design.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilytool - using crescendo/descrescendo tags crashes with beanshelll error
LilyPondTool bugs are better placed at http://www.sf.net/projects/lily4jedit, to let me track them. Anyway, thanks for the report. Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
accordion symb.
I'am trying to place a accordion symbol higher on the staff.
When I use a raise command on the first symbol it goes up. fine.
Now when I raise the dot it all comes down on the same level as before!
I tryed using { } different places for the raise command but no sucses.
Can anyone help me out on this one.
Bellow is a piese of the code.
regards Marcel.
accBasson =
^\markup
\combine
\musicglyph #accordion.accDiscant
\raise #0.5 \musicglyph #accordion.accDot
\score
{
\relative c''
{
\time 4/4
\key c \major
\clef treble
c d \accBasson e f
}
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Numbering exercises; overriding defaults; points for clefs.
Am 29/11/2006 um 12:46 schrieb Arvid Grøtting: Manuel libros at limay.de writes: I take a different view on this matter. I think that painting was the first way of writing, letters being a later development. The first attempts to typesetting music were clumsy indeed, but even now, when typeset music is quite good, no printed score can equal the beauty of, say, Bach's handwriting. That may be true for Bach. Allow me to introduce Grieg as a counter-example. Many of his manuscripts are available here: http://www.bergen.folkebibl.no/grieg-samlingen/grieg- samlingen_komposisjoner.html While his music is certainly excellent, I would not like Lilypond to imitate his handwriting in any way. Cheers, -- Arvid Well, look at the title and first page of this Grieg: http://www.bergen.folkebibl.no/cgi-bin/websok-grieg (and thanks for the very interesting link to Grieg's music). His word writing is very beautiful. His music writing has a terrific rhythm, is very armonious, and manages in an impossible-but-real way to express the interpretation of the piece. To be sure, no typesetting whatsoever should or could try to imitate it, for it follows no predeterminated, abstract-general rule. Nevertheless, that was not, of course, my point. No, do not imitate ugly things, nor the hardly legible handwriting of certain manuscripts of Telemann or Vivaldi... but do look at nature and beauty as your teacher of reality. Manuel ___ 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: Tutorial
If I open a new, blank page and enter
\relative{c d e f g a b c }
the result is not what the tutorial says it would be, for it has a
time signature and measure bars, which doesn't bother me, of course,
but which are not there in the tutorial as the desired result.
Manuel
Am 29/11/2006 um 12:44 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:
As it's indicated a few lines below, you should add \relative{...},
i.e.
\relative{c d e f g a b c }
to get the desired octave.
/Mats
Manuel wrote:
If I enter
{
c d e f g a b
}
as per instructions, part 2.1 of the tutorial, the result does not
look at all like the tutorial says it should.
The page numbers in the tutorial and those in the preview toolbar
do not correspond: I have to type and enter 21 to get to page 12.
Manuel
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: accordion symb.
Hi Marcel! You don't write, what lily version you use... but have a look at the definitions to be found here: http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=194 Using them you should be able to raise them as a whole... (I prefer the extra-offset by the way...) Kind regards, Thies Albrecht -- Ein Herz für Kinder - Ihre Spende hilft! Aktion: www.deutschlandsegelt.de Unser Dankeschön: Ihr Name auf dem Segel der 1. deutschen America's Cup-Yacht! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: which language for programming
Am 2006-11-28 um 08:56 schrieb Jean-marc LEGRAND: Statistically, I'll try Python and Scheme : these are the two most pointed out in your numerous replies ! And I have noticed that it is a good way to acquire programming good habits. So Santa Claus will have to find a good book on that ! Another vote for Python. I also used (or am still using) Perl, PHP, PostScript, TeX, Slang, AppleScript, Shell, ASP/VB.NET, Basic, Pascal, but couldn't wrap my mind around Scheme yet and don't think I need to learn C or Java ;-) I'd recommend O'Reilly books (nearly all of them). But maybe they're not that good for beginners. - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/lpython2/ Some interesting links: - Learning to program: http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/alan.gauld/ - Python Tutorial: http://docs.python.org/tut/tut.html - Dive Into Python: http://diveintopython.org/toc/index.html - RUR-PLE (very unusal approach...) http://rur-ple.sourceforge.net/ - How to think like a computer scientist: http://www.ibiblio.org/obp/ thinkCSpy/ Some more Python hints: - a nice Python editor/IDE is SPE (pythonide.stani.be); you can also use Eclipse with PyDev - if you think of creating GUIs, forget Tkinter, but head over to wxPython (wxpython.org) and dabo (dabodev.com) - if you need extensive networking or client/server stuff, take a deep breath and use twisted (twistedmatrix.com) - MIDI: http://www.mxm.dk/products/public/pythonmidi - MusicXML: http://dkc.jhu.edu/~mdboom/pyScore/ Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ http://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Multiple sections in ChoirStaff
Geoff Horton wrote: When I need to make a score like that, I use the undocumented but still working \alignAboveContext command; it seems a little less confusing to me. Is this command slated to disappear, or does it need to be in the manual (I just checked and it still isn't there)? It's on the list of things that I think should be in the manual, but nobody has written docs for them. I'm not going to do it because I'm still dealing with bug reports from up to four months ago. Cameron, do you still have that list? Sorry, I keep on losing it. Could you post the URL? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: PhrasingSlur-Slur conflict
Sean Reed wrote:
I'm getting extremely huge phrasing slurs now and again when the first
note of the phrase is also a short normal slur within the phrasing slur.
\version 2.11.0
{
r16.[ f'32-. f'8-.] r4 c''32(\([ f') r8 f'32 f'] r8.[ a'16(] |
f'8)[ r8] r8[ a'32 a'\) r16] r16.[ c''32(\( f'8)] r8[ f'16 f'\)] |
}
This looks like a bug. Could you create an easier-to-understand example
that displays the same behavior? (ie try to create an example using
simple rhythms and only a few different notes)
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: Articulations
What I was getting was the standard Windows program died dialog that allows
you to Send or Don't send an error report. However, I just tried it again
and now it's working. I'll keep an eye on it to see if it crops up again.
I just love it when an OS gets temperamental. Would that I could use Gentoo on
this box...
Stephen
-Original Message-
From: Graham Percival [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wed 11/29/2006 8:11 PM
To: Kress, Stephen
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Articulations
Kress, Stephen wrote:
{ fis--. }
{ fis-.- }
Both are accepted syntactically, but cause LilyPond to die.
There are both perfectly acceptable and work without fail on OSX. Are
there any other error messages? What do you mean by to die ?
Cheers,
- Graham
2006-11-29, 23:15:28
The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be
privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying
of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to
this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scheme question on strict substitution
Hello,
Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
No, this doesn't work.
OK, but I have a question. It is common to write such things as
push = \once \override NoteColumn #'extra-X-extent = #'(0 . 2)
and then later to use \push before a note in the music.
However the above definition of fraction doesn't yield a valid
\fraction macro call, as you pointed out.
Is there any clear criterion for knowing in advance whether a given
expression for a macro definition will actually work?
What I get out of your function definition of fraction (below) is that
\fraction is intrinsically a function that has to be followed by a music
argument. But even though
\once \override NoteColumn #'extra-X-extent = #'(0 . 2)
would have to be followed by a note to make any sense, that doesn't
seem to make it a function-with-one-argument. I accept the fact that
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
*is* a function-with-one-argument, but in general how is one supposed to
know whether a given expression is just a state-creator or it's a
function-with-one-or-more-arguments?
-- Tom
**
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
No, this doesn't work.
What does work is
\version 2.10.0
fraction = #(define-music-function (parser location music) (ly:music?)
#{
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text $music
#})
\relative c'{
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
}
However, what is the reason to use \tweak at all? Why not simply do
an ordinary \once \override:
\version 2.10.0
fraction = \override TupletNumber #'text =
#tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
\relative c'{
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
}
/Mats
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
and then later in the music to write
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
Does LilyPond swallow that?
-- Tom
-
Trevor Baca wrote:
Hi,
I frequently write
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
before tuplets, like this:
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
What's the best way to abbreviate to something like this?
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
I've tried this music function ...
fraction = #(define-music-function (parser location) ()
#{
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
#})
... but get this parse error:
Parsing...
string:3:9: error: syntax error, unexpected '}'
}361.ly:5:0: error: errors found, ignoring music expression
Any suggestions for a good abbreviation?
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: accordion symb.
Thies Albrecht ta_lily at gmx.de writes: Hi Marcel! You don't write, what lily version you use... but have a look at the definitions to be found here: http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=194 Using them you should be able to raise them as a whole... (I prefer the extra-offset by the way...) Kind regards, Thies Albrecht Hallo, The version I use is 2.10.0 on SuSe linux 10/0. I tryed raising the symbols in de definitions part. But then I can raise the cirkel --I can raise the dot. But If I want the dot in the cirkel meaning that the amount of extra vertical movement of both symbols is equal , the whole thing is baxk to the original position. If I use extra-offset I get unknown grub. This was uused in the score part. Can you give me a example on how you do it? regards Marcel. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scheme question on strict substitution
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Does it work just to define this macro at the top level fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text No, this doesn't work. OK, but I have a question. It is common to write such things as push = \once \override NoteColumn #'extra-X-extent = #'(0 . 2) and then later to use \push before a note in the music. However the above definition of fraction doesn't yield a valid \fraction macro call, as you pointed out. Is there any clear criterion for knowing in advance whether a given expression for a macro definition will actually work? The syntax of \tweak is \tweak symbol value music_expression where music_expression is the music expression you want the tweak to apply to. You can only define a macro for a complete syntactical expression (I know that this is a somewhat vague definition), whereas you tried to define a macro for only half of it. It may help your understanding to know that \tweak itself is implemented as a music function taking 3 arguments. What I get out of your function definition of fraction (below) is that \fraction is intrinsically a function that has to be followed by a music argument. But even though \once \override NoteColumn #'extra-X-extent = #'(0 . 2) would have to be followed by a note to make any sense, that doesn't seem to make it a function-with-one-argument. I accept the fact that \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text *is* a function-with-one-argument, but in general how is one supposed to know whether a given expression is just a state-creator or it's a function-with-one-or-more-arguments? The only strict definition of the input syntax is the source code of the parser lily/parser.yy in the source code tree. Also, more and more features of the syntax are implemented as music functions instead of being hard coded into the parser, so it's not entirely easy to figure out, apart from using trial and error. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Multiple sections in ChoirStaff
Graham, I clearly remember putting together a modified version (actually two versions) of the SATB example, using alignAboveContext and sending it to you during the summer. However, now I cannot find any traces of it, neither in the mailing list archives, nor in my outbox. Do you remember if you ever received it and do you have a copy left. Otherwise I will have to do it again. /Mats Graham Percival wrote: Geoff Horton wrote: When I need to make a score like that, I use the undocumented but still working \alignAboveContext command; it seems a little less confusing to me. Is this command slated to disappear, or does it need to be in the manual (I just checked and it still isn't there)? It's on the list of things that I think should be in the manual, but nobody has written docs for them. I'm not going to do it because I'm still dealing with bug reports from up to four months ago. Cameron, do you still have that list? Sorry, I keep on losing it. Could you post the URL? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
