Re: scale notehead X and Y independently
Thanks Robin. This does exactly what I need. I will use this to optically tweak
note heads before trying to patch the fonts again. Lets me optically align the
mi and do.
On 17 Mar 2011, at 2:06 AM, Robin Bannister wrote:
Tim Sheasby wrote:
how do I apply it to a specific note in a \set shapeNoteStyles context
Well, I'm not sure what you're aiming for, but try this:
miNarrow = #(lambda (grob)(if (eqv? (ly:grob-property grob 'style)
'miMirror)
(ly:stencil-scale (ly:note-head::print grob) 0.5 1.5)
(ly:note-head::print grob)))
\relative c' {
\override NoteHead #'stencil = #miNarrow
\aikenHeads
c e4
c e4
}
Cheers, Robin
miNarrow.png
Tim Sheasby
t...@sheafpublishing.co.za
inline: Sheaf logo small.jpg
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
Carl thank you for the input! Unfortunately I get an error that I
don't know how to do anything with. Below is my input and output.
If you or anyone can help this would be a nice help to me. Thanks!
Adam
@@@
\version 2.12.3
#(define sequence-number 0)
#(define-markup-command (score-sequence layout props sequence-number)
(number?)
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup #:circle (number-string sequence-number
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
(-- output --)
GNU LilyPond 2.12.3
Processing `Roman_numeral_count.ly'
Parsing...Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: In procedure number-string in
expression (number-string sequence-number):
Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: Wrong type argument in position 1: I
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
On Thu 17 Mar 2011, 09:13 Adam Good wrote:
Carl thank you for the input! Unfortunately I get an error that I
don't know how to do anything with. Below is my input and output.
If you or anyone can help this would be a nice help to me. Thanks!
Adam
@@@
\version 2.12.3
#(define sequence-number 0)
#(define-markup-command (score-sequence layout props sequence-number)
(number?)
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup #:circle (number-string sequence-number
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
(-- output --)
GNU LilyPond 2.12.3
Processing `Roman_numeral_count.ly'
Parsing...Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: In procedure number-string in
expression (number-string sequence-number):
Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: Wrong type argument in position 1: I
fancy-format feeds I instead of 1 (II instead of 2 etc) to
\score-sequence; since it's what you need (i believe) --- just remove
number-string conversion:
%-8---
#(define sequence-number 0)
% I've renamed sequence-number to sequence-string
% inside score-sequence definition,
% since it's not a number so far:
#(define-markup-command (score-sequence layout props sequence-string)
(string?)
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup #:circle sequence-string)))
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
%-8---
--
Dmytro O. Redchuk
Bug Squad
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
Completely awesome. Thank you guys so much for your help. Long live
Lilyponders!!
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Dmytro O. Redchuk
brownian@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu 17 Mar 2011, 09:13 Adam Good wrote:
Carl thank you for the input! Unfortunately I get an error that I
don't know how to do anything with. Below is my input and output.
If you or anyone can help this would be a nice help to me. Thanks!
Adam
@@@
\version 2.12.3
#(define sequence-number 0)
#(define-markup-command (score-sequence layout props sequence-number)
(number?)
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup #:circle (number-string sequence-number
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
(-- output --)
GNU LilyPond 2.12.3
Processing `Roman_numeral_count.ly'
Parsing...Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: In procedure number-string in
expression (number-string sequence-number):
Roman_numeral_count.ly:8:21: Wrong type argument in position 1: I
fancy-format feeds I instead of 1 (II instead of 2 etc) to
\score-sequence; since it's what you need (i believe) --- just remove
number-string conversion:
%-8---
#(define sequence-number 0)
% I've renamed sequence-number to sequence-string
% inside score-sequence definition,
% since it's not a number so far:
#(define-markup-command (score-sequence layout props sequence-string)
(string?)
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup #:circle sequence-string)))
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
#(set! sequence-number (1+ sequence-number))
\markup { \score-sequence #(fancy-format #f ~@r sequence-number) }
%-8---
--
Dmytro O. Redchuk
Bug Squad
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond v2.13.54
It looks like the LilyPond installation is no longer adding the path to the executable to the Windows PATH. I have installed .54 and don't have it on my path. For me that's actually good - my PATH variable overflowed and I lost all the ones I wanted. However, for people who rely on the command line, it'll mean LP won't run. Can someone check whether this has been changed in the Windows install? -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: MING TSANG To: Federico Bruni Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2011 2:04 AM Subject: Re: lilypond v2.13.54 I uninstall v2.13.53 and re-install v2.13.54 in order to re-created the error message. I enclosed 2 .png files. One png is from jedit run and the other is a cmd run. Hope you can read them. -- From: Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com To: MING TSANG tsan...@rogers.com Cc: Stan Sanderson physinfo...@ameritech.net; lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Wed, March 16, 2011 7:25:28 PM Subject: Re: lilypond v2.13.54 Il giorno mer, 16/03/2011 alle 15.19 -0700, MING TSANG ha scritto: What happened to v2.13.54? installation say it is successfully installed; but when I ran lilypond, it said lilypond is not recognized internal or external batch file. Post the output of the command otherwise I think that nobody will be able to help you. -- ___ 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
looking for a way to print inverval from 2 notes
Hello all,
i'm working on the different modal structure from a score and i woud
like to print the half or full ton from one not to the next one!
\version "2.12.3"
\include "italiano.ly"
\header { }
TimeKey = { \key do \minor \time 12/8}
_One_= \relative mi' {
\clef treble
\override Score.BarLine #'stencil = ##f
\override Stem #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f
sib4 dob reb mib fab solb
}
\score {
\new Staff {
\new voice = "Violon" { \One}
}
\layout {}
}
\startGroup and \stopGroup could be a solution but how to write
bellow in the middle of the bracket the interval "1/2T" or "1T"
Thanks for your help all
regard
chris
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
invoking stdin: a use case?
Hi LilyPonders, in Usage 1.2: When invoked with a filename that has no extension, the ‘.ly’ extension is tried first. To read input from stdin, use a dash (-) for file. I wonder what's the use of stdin. Can you show a use case? I'm translating the Usage manual so I want to be sure that I've understood it correctly. I guess that the dash **replaces** the file, so the command is: lilypond - BTW, I think that in the following sentence: When ‘filename.ly’ is processed it will produce ‘filename.ps’ and ‘filename.pdf’ as output. ‘filename.ps’ should be removed (or at least you should say that .ps file will be converted to .pdf and then deleted), otherwise new users might wonder where the .ps file has gone. Cheers, Federico ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: invoking stdin: a use case?
On Thu 17 Mar 2011, 12:19 Federico Bruni wrote: Hi LilyPonders, Hi! in Usage 1.2: When invoked with a filename that has no extension, the ‘.ly’ extension is tried first. To read input from stdin, use a dash (-) for file. I wonder what's the use of stdin. Can you show a use case? I'm translating the Usage manual so I want to be sure that I've understood it correctly. I guess that the dash **replaces** the file, so the command is: lilypond - cat test.ly | lilypond -o TEST - for instance. You'll get TEST.pdf here. Without -o TEST it produces -.pdf actually. Probably, i would like it do make stdin.pdf really, by the way. Don't know whether it's better .) BTW, I think that in the following sentence: When ‘filename.ly’ is processed it will produce ‘filename.ps’ and ‘filename.pdf’ as output. ‘filename.ps’ should be removed (or at least you should say that .ps file will be converted to .pdf and then deleted), otherwise new users might wonder where the .ps file has gone. -- Dmytro O. Redchuk Bug Squad ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: invoking stdin: a use case?
cat test.ly | lilypond -o TEST - for instance. You'll get TEST.pdf here. Ok, thanks! I had seen this before (when importing GPG keys, for example), but apparently I hadn't got the role of - :-) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: looking for a way to print inverval from 2 notes
On Mar 17, 2011, at 5:55 AM, christophe 1710 wrote:
Hello all,
i'm working on the different modal structure from a score and i woud like to
print the half or full ton from one not to the next one!
\version 2.12.3
\include italiano.ly
\header { }
TimeKey = { \key do \minor \time 12/8}
One= \relative mi' {
\clef treble
\override Score.BarLine #'stencil = ##f
\override Stem #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f
sib4 dob reb mib fab solb
}
\score {
\new Staff {
\new voice = Violon { \One}
}
\layout {}
}
\startGroup and \stopGroup could be a solution but how to write bellow in the
middle of the bracket the interval 1/2T or 1T
Thanks for your help all
regard
chris
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Analysis brackets currently do not allow for text. You can do it, though, with
a hack.
\layout {
\context {
\Voice \consists Horizontal_bracket_engraver
}}
#(define (foo txt height padding)
(lambda (grob)
(let* ((x-len (interval-length (ly:stencil-extent
(ly:horizontal-bracket::print grob) X)))
(dir (ly:grob-property grob 'direction))
(text (grob-interpret-markup grob txt))
(text-x (interval-length (ly:stencil-extent text X)))
(text-y (interval-length (ly:stencil-extent text Y
(ly:stencil-add
(ly:stencil-translate text (cons (- (/ x-len 2) (/ text-x 2)) (* dir (+
(+ padding height) text-y
(ly:stencil-add
(make-line-stencil 0.1 0 0 (/ x-len 2) dir)
(make-line-stencil 0.1 (/ x-len 2) dir x-len 0))
\relative c'' {
\once \override HorizontalBracket #'stencil = #(foo T 1 0.2)
c2\startGroup d\stopGroup
\once \override HorizontalBracket #'stencil = #(foo 1/2T 1 0.2)
d2\startGroup ees\stopGroup
}
Cheers,
MS___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \score block as variable/function
On 15 March 2011 00:01, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
You want a markup identifier, so all you need to do is put \markup
before \score:
scoreOne = \markup \score {
c'1
\layout {} % required!
}
\markup {
\column {
\scoreOne
}
}
Thanks Neil!
This works great.
But actually I'd prefer to use the \score block in a command that
would take only the notes as argument. ;p
Your solution does not work for a \score block within a music function.
%% does not work
scoreTwo = #(define-music-function (parser location foo)
(ly:music?)
#{
\markup \score {
$foo
\layout {}
}
#}
)
\markup {
\column {
\scoreTwo d'1
}
}
Ideas?
Many thanks!
Cheers,
Xavier
--
Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 04:16:35PM -0400, Shane Brandes wrote: I suppose since I have spent so much of my life attempting to master keyboard instruments and having watch so many students progress in their own studies that it seems to me that one cold never hope to replicate a human at an instrument. You underestimate the power of the Dark Side (aka machine learning). I can't give a good argument, other than download marsyas and weka, and try doing some audio classification. Look at academic projects over the past 10 years. Look at the amazing amount of progress we've made. Machine learning is *incredibly* powerful. There are all sorts of odd philosophical ramifications of trying and already certain deficits are occurring especially in the film industry on account of such efforts. The philosophical ramification is this: who *deserves* to create good music? A) only people who are healthy and atheletic (in terms of fine muscle control), have spent 10,000 hours practicing, and still practice for 2 hours a day. B) only people who have spent 1,000 hours practicing, but do not practice daily any more, and might not be healthy. C) only people who have spent 100 hours learning their instrument, and might not have any physical ability at all. D) only people who have spent 10 hours learning, and might not have any physical ability at all. E) everybody. I believe that the answer is E. Everybody deserves to create good music. Consider this: Stephen Hawking has advanced ALS. It is physically impossible for him to lift a violin or press piano keys. So does he not deserve to create violin music? I think he does. Now, at the moment, Vivi doesn't create good music, and probably requires about 10 hours of learning. I mean, you have to write a lilypond file (that could be between 1 and 5 hours, for simple music at least), and then if you know nothing about violin, you'd need to experiment a bit with slurs and articulations to hear how they sound. But she's only 4 months old, and I'd put her in a competition against 4-month-old human players any day. As a tool and a method of rationalizing musical praxis it is certainly useful and convenient, but where will the limits be? Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? One of my favorite examples is that of vibrato. It never would have occurred to me that it is possible or even relevant to piano until it was demonstrated to me, but yet at the same time it can be achieved simply by the action of your fingers upon the keys after they have been struck. The difference in tone is of course not terribly obvious but yet it can yield a completely different character to the chords thus being treated. There are certainly other examples, but that is the one that I find least likely to ever be replicated. - can we measure this post-stike finger action? I mean, can we build devices which digitize those actions? (yes) - can we describe the actions of a string with mathematics? (yes) - can we describe the actions of a piano key - level - hammer - felt - string, with mathematics? (yes-ish; I've only seen two academic papers about the effect of different types of felt on the piano hammers, so a bit more research might be needed here) Other than the slight quibble in the last point, it's done. We can replicate this electronically. I completely agree with David's description of this as an obscure physical phenomena -- just think of Wendy Carlos' switched-on Bach. Is that expressive? If so, then clearly you don't need a real piano to create expressive keyboard music! But if piano vibrato _was_ necessary for creating expressive music, then we could certainly synthesize that, too. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? Sure many times, nowadays, the rendition of a computer playing is quite good but who cares? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. What's the end goal of such system? Can you describe in what is that helpful? Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? Yes very good question. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Suppress NoteNames output on ties ?
Is it possible to tell the NoteNames engraver to print the name for
only the first note of a sequence of tied notes?
mymusic = { c'4 c' ~ c'2 }
\score {
\new Voice \mymusic
\context NoteNames \mymusic
}
Thanks,
Mike
attachment: notenamestied.png___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: Now, at the moment, Vivi doesn't create good music, and probably requires about 10 hours of learning. I mean, you have to write a lilypond file (that could be between 1 and 5 hours, for simple music at least), and then if you know nothing about violin, you'd need to experiment a bit with slurs and articulations to hear how they sound. But she's only 4 months old, and I'd put her in a competition against 4-month-old human players any day. 4-month-old meaning 4 months of training. And after that amount of training, the competitions are for the fun of the players and the pride of the parents (and nobody else actually bothers). Vivi won't be having fun, and the other parents won't at least find her adorable. One of the reasons I used to sing in mixed choirs is that you get the best place for listening to the music, and the best access to music. I have participated in quite more choir concerts than I have been listening to. Vivi will provide you with the joy and pride of a parent, not of a performer. And it will not feel that joy itself. It will be equally happy to play, and not to play. I don't understand why it is an issue whether it plays better or worse than humans, like I don't understand why it is an issue whether a computer can be made to play better or worse than a human. Or a car can be made to run faster than a human. The whole point is that a computer, left to its own devices, would never think of playing the violin or chess. It would sit in a corner and rust. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hello all, At first, I wasn't really interested in this thread… however, it's now gotten quite interesting. This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? [...] Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? This, I believe, cuts to the central problem of our time, at least with respect to classical or concert music: What is the correct (i.e., relevant and necessary) role of live music performance, and how should it be presented? In other words, why do we always use the word listen, when -- at least in live performance -- we are almost necessarily WATCHING music being played? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. 1. I don't believe that emotions are the one thing that make us human. But that's fodder for another thread… :) 2. I believe that one day fairly soon computers -- in forms robotic and otherwise -- will be able to generate (i.e., play) music which is either *actually* as emotionally rich as human performers, or at the very least the difference will be indistinguishable for the majority of audience members. But I also believe that it will be a great while longer before *watching* a robot (or audio speaker) will be as compelling as watching a human performer. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. I hate to break the news, but we're already at that point -- as evidenced by this thread. =) Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Marc Mouries m...@mouries.net writes: This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? Sure many times, nowadays, the rendition of a computer playing is quite good but who cares? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. Uh, you never heard of the concept of an actor or play, I suppose? Emotions don't need to exist at the sender's side in order to be conveyed to a receiver. And anyway, for most of the music I hear, I am more interested in the emotions of the composer rather than the performer. There is hardly something more aggravating than a romanticizing performer distracting from good Bach, for example. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
At 10:15 on 17 Mar 2011, Marc Mouries wrote: This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? I don't really see the difference between a computer in this instance and an instrument. Any instrument, other than the voice, is a degree or more removed from the musician playing (==programming) it. The question could be, and perhaps was when the harpsichord was invented, asked: who wants to listen to music played by a machine? And if your argument is that the musical decisions are not taken in real-time by the performer/programmer, then what of recordings? They convey the emotions of the performer at the time the recording was made. Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? Yes very good question. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. Of course physical knowledge of the instrument and experience affects performance and interpretation of music, but is that always necessarily a good thing? Is it not, at the very least, an interesting idea to see how an interpretation might develop with _different_ technical obstacles? Vivi's player doesn't have to worry about nailing that shift up to fis and so can think about it's musical placement without the constraints that are necessitated by that physical problem. -- Mark Knoop ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On 3/17/2011 10:57 AM, David Kastrup wrote: Marc Mouriesm...@mouries.net writes: This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? Sure many times, nowadays, the rendition of a computer playing is quite good but who cares? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. Uh, you never heard of the concept of an actor or play, I suppose? Emotions don't need to exist at the sender's side in order to be conveyed to a receiver. yep but it's much easier to believe a person acting or playing than a robot. If i see a robot or computer playing and it's nice, you will think nice programming but i don't think it can bring tears or joy. And anyway, for most of the music I hear, I am more interested in the emotions of the composer rather than the performer. There is hardly something more aggravating than a romanticizing performer distracting from good Bach, for example. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:15:46AM -0400, Marc Mouries wrote: This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? The thousands of people who listen to music created with Vocaloid? I listen -- for pleasure, not for academia -- to music created by computers almost exclusively. That doesn't mean that I think that everybody should! I mean, I don't think that David would argue that everybody has a moral obligation to enjoy accordian music. I don't think that Trevor would argue that everybody has a moral obligation to enjoy Gilbert and Sullivan musicals. I'm trying to give people more tools for musical creativity. The number of people who like music produced with this tool is just as relevant as the number of people who like music performed with a trumpet or bagpipe. I think the world is big enough to include people who play trombone or bass drum, even though I personally dislike those instruments. Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. should be? Hmm. Art conveys emotions, and thus sheet music should be engraved by a human. Fiction conveys emotions, and thus all novels should be hand-written by a human. Is LilyPond a good thing? It lets composers produce high-quality output -- but with a computer. Does the sheet music lose anything from automatic algorithmic placement of noteheads? I don't think so... in fact, I'd argue that LilyPond produces better output than 99% of humans could create on their own. Same thing with computer-performed music, although of course right now the better than 99% of humans is something like Vivi produces violin music that is better than 1% of humans. I'm not claiming that Vivi is the end of the road, nor am I suggesting that anybody throw away their violin CDs! As for *good* computer-performed music... it's not my favorite Miku work, but can you honestly say that you feel no emotion when watching this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Dqb6uJ8WY (maybe you _can_ say that you feel nothing, but I can't -- the way her voice catches on certain notes seems heartbreaking to me) I mean, I get a *totally* different feeling from that work than I get from this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3YOqUbhOQc But the audio in both works was computer-generated. Now, you might accuse me of cheating by giving links to vidoes (rather than just audio), but I still pick up a different emotion from each work even without the video. What's the end goal of such system? Can you describe in what is that helpful? It's helpful because it gives content creators (being a generic term for composers and performers) another tool to create music. I don't have a string quartet at my disposal. I have friends who play string instuments, but I can't have them instantly perform a composition that I'm working on at 2am. And if I wanted to record my friends and release the audio under a permissive license, I'd need to warn them, get their permission, and then they might want to practice their parts more (if it's going to be available to everybody over the internet), etc. Guess why I don't have audio recordings of my compositions on my website? Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? It depends. What do you *want* to listen to? Go listen to that! Nobody's going to legislate that humans are not allowed to play, record, and listen to themselves! Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? Yes very good question. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. Then I guess you don't want to look at the roadmap. :) Win the Chopin competition by 2050! http://renconmusic.org/about.htm It comes down to this: - new tool for composers. - if you can notice a difference, and prefer human recordings, then go listen to human recordings. - if you can't notice a difference [say, 10 or 20 years from now], then why complain? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:02:59AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: But I also believe that it will be a great while longer before *watching* a robot (or audio speaker) will be as compelling as watching a human performer. BS. Watching musical robots is *incredibly* interesting, and way way way more interesting than a human! ... hmm, maybe I've been more affected from working in a Department of Electrical Engineering than I thought. :) Cheers, - Graham (seriously! I mean, you can wonder how much power it uses, and whether they use wired or wireless transmission, or how many degrees of freedom each of the joints offers, or... ok, I'll shut up now. :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: [...] One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. I hate to break the news, but we're already at that point -- as evidenced by this thread. =) You are confusing teaching, training, and programming. Computers are programmed, and some programs may require training to deliver proper results. Teaching, however, _conveys_ meaning. You don't teach an encyclopedia or an expert system, even though you may use them as a tool for teaching. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Removing accidentals from a voice
- Original Message - From: James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com To: 'Phil Holmes' em...@philholmes.net Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 4:37 PM Subject: RE: Removing accidentals from a voice Hello, )-Original Message- )From: lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org )[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On )Behalf Of Phil Holmes )Sent: 15 March 2011 16:10 )To: Kieren MacMillan )Cc: LilyPond User Group )Subject: Re: Removing accidentals from a voice ) ) )in case that's of use to anyone else. ) It might be of use to Mr. L. S. Repository. James == http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1id=758 -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hi David, Excellent rebuttal! The whole point is that a computer, left to its own devices, would never think of playing the violin or chess. It would sit in a corner and rust. With all due respect, I don't even think that's the point -- for at some future date, there will undoubtedly be a computer which, left to its own devices, *would* think of playing the violin or chess rather than sitting in a corner and rusting. Rather, I think the point is: Why would the mere existence of such a computer stop any human from wanting to continue making music (or playing chess) at his or her highest possible level? To reuse your [excellent] analogy: Just because cars are faster than humans doesn't mean we should stop trying to run our fastest. Best, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hi, On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:02:59 -0400 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hello all, At first, I wasn't really interested in this thread… however, it's now gotten quite interesting. Same here ... This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? [...] Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? This, I believe, cuts to the central problem of our time, at least with respect to classical or concert music: What is the correct (i.e., relevant and necessary) role of live music performance, and how should it be presented? In other words, why do we always use the word listen, when -- at least in live performance -- we are almost necessarily WATCHING music being played? exactly. Going to a concert to watch a loud speaker simply won't fly -- at least not with me. Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. 1. I don't believe that emotions are the one thing that make us human. But that's fodder for another thread… :) 2. I believe that one day fairly soon computers -- in forms robotic and otherwise -- will be able to generate (i.e., play) music which is either *actually* as emotionally rich as human performers, or at the very least the difference will be indistinguishable for the majority of audience members. But I also believe that it will be a great while longer before *watching* a robot (or audio speaker) will be as compelling as watching a human performer. This day has more-or-less arrived. Whether we like it or not, most of the music we hear in our daily lives, e.g., radio spots, commercials, tv-shows and ever-increasingly, major motion pictures are filled with music generated by computers, albeit mostly through samples generated by humans, but nevertheless, they are rendered by a computer. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. I hate to break the news, but we're already at that point -- as evidenced by this thread. =) One thing a robot, or any type of computer generated music will never replace is the simple gratification of actually playing -- from a players perspective. Some may think having a bunch of people getting together and pulling out their robots for a musical social hour fun, but I don't and won't for the foreseeable future. This isn't because I don't think it wouldn't sound nice -- it would, and to be honest with my rusty skills (and usually too much wine before the music making begins) it would probably sound better, but for me, physically making music with other humans is an extremely powerful feeling. ... but that's me. As evidenced by computer gaming, the notion of social interaction with a computer has long since been upon us. I understand also from a composer/arranger/orchestrator perspective that computers are an invaluable aspect of my every-day life. I couldn't conceive of mastering all the instruments I write for besides understanding fundamental technique, ranges and articulations (at the least). But we should always understand that these are tools. As someone else in this thread mentioned, without humans, the computer (or robot) would rust in the corner. David -- What is full of redundancy or formula is predictably boring. What is free of all structure or discipline is randomly boring. In between lies art. -- David Siu ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
hello )-Original Message- )From: lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org )[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On )Behalf Of David Kastrup )Sent: 17 March 2011 14:57 )To: lilypond-user@gnu.org )Subject: Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music ) )Marc Mouries m...@mouries.net writes: ) ) )There is hardly something more aggravating than a romanticizing )performer distracting from good Bach, for example. ) Humming Pianists? but anyway... +1 and actually David's link to that chap playing the Bandoneón was rather ridiculous (for me) to 'watch' even if the music was very well played - I had to stop watching and just listen to the music his twitching was so distracting. However...there is (was) something rather compelling watching the (very young) Royal Academy Soloists play Shostakovich's Op110a recently. Sat in the front row I had a great view of the players struggling/fighting/enjoying/anticipating/worrying along with the interplay between the principle violin player and the rest of the strings, there was much twitching and jostling and body movement (they were standing while playing) the music while not incidental, was just a (very large) part of the whole. I know the piece very well, I've heard it played 'more accomplishedly (?)' both on recorded music and live, but this was probably one of the most enjoyable performance I have seen of it that I doubt a set of Speakers or 'robotic' performers on stage would give quite the same experience. James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Thu 17 Mar 2011, 15:31 Graham Percival wrote: As for *good* computer-performed music... it's not my favorite Miku work, but can you honestly say that you feel no emotion when watching this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Dqb6uJ8WY (maybe you _can_ say that you feel nothing, but I can't -- the way her voice catches on certain notes seems heartbreaking to me) Because it's actually a sketch? We can see a line or two --- and feel something special about that (different feelings for different people sometimes). It's good. ps. I choose really good music to feel something special usually. But really good music is a different thing for differnet people, too. In short -- 42 (Answer to the Ultimate Question ...), exactly. -- Dmytro O. Redchuk Bug Squad ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Marc Mouries m...@mouries.net writes: On 3/17/2011 10:57 AM, David Kastrup wrote: Marc Mouriesm...@mouries.net writes: This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? Sure many times, nowadays, the rendition of a computer playing is quite good but who cares? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. Uh, you never heard of the concept of an actor or play, I suppose? Emotions don't need to exist at the sender's side in order to be conveyed to a receiver. yep but it's much easier to believe a person acting or playing than a robot. Huh? You believe actors are for _real_? If i see a robot or computer playing and it's nice, you will think nice programming but i don't think it can bring tears or joy. Because it does not act? That's sort of ridiculous. Compare, say, the Bach solo partitas played by Jascha Heifetz and Gideon Kremer and try looking at their acting. Kremer plays brutal and expressive, Heifetz rather nonchalantly and straightforwardly. Kremer sounds like he is really working hard at butchering Bach. Heifetz lets the music run. Much less distracting, and leaves much more of a chance to let _Bach_ move you to tears. That Bach that died so many centuries ago and left us only unfeeling black dots on paper. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
Another tree to bark up and on a similar note, how to set roman
numerals in Score.markFormatter as rehearsal marks via \mark \default
...
\version 2.12.3
\relative c' {
\set Score.markFormatter = #(fancy-format #f ~@r. 1)
\mark \default
a b c d
\mark \default
a b c d
}
gives:
warning: type check for `markFormatter' failed; value `I.' must be
of type `procedure'
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On 3/17/2011 11:31 AM, Graham Percival wrote: Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. should be? Hmm. Art conveys emotions, and thus sheet music should be engraved by a human. You are mixing unrelated things. The analogy is about getting emotion from listening or watching the artifact produced. While i find electronic engraving useful, people find ancient manual engraving much nicer. Fiction conveys emotions, and thus all novels should be hand-written by a human. Is LilyPond a good thing? It lets composers produce high-quality output -- but with a computer. Does the sheet music lose anything from automatic algorithmic placement of noteheads? I don't think so... in fact, I'd argue that LilyPond produces better output than 99% of humans could create on their own. Same thing with computer-performed music, although of course right now the better than 99% of humans is something like Vivi produces violin music that is better than 1% of humans. I'm not claiming that Vivi is the end of the road, nor am I suggesting that anybody throw away their violin CDs! As for *good* computer-performed music... it's not my favorite Miku work, but can you honestly say that you feel no emotion when watching this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Dqb6uJ8WY (maybe you _can_ say that you feel nothing, but I can't -- the way her voice catches on certain notes seems heartbreaking to me) i just don't like this piece and it's out of tune. One vocaloid generated song I enjoy is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm2IQ0y2J0Q but I much prefer this human version here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN4cLlIKnoA I mean, I get a *totally* different feeling from that work than I get from this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3YOqUbhOQc But the audio in both works was computer-generated. Now, you might accuse me of cheating by giving links to vidoes (rather than just audio), but I still pick up a different emotion from each work even without the video. What's the end goal of such system? Can you describe in what is that helpful? It's helpful because it gives content creators (being a generic term for composers and performers) another tool to create music. I don't have a string quartet at my disposal. I have friends who play string instuments, but I can't have them instantly perform a composition that I'm working on at 2am. And if I wanted to record my friends and release the audio under a permissive license, I'd need to warn them, get their permission, and then they might want to practice their parts more (if it's going to be available to everybody over the internet), etc. Guess why I don't have audio recordings of my compositions on my website? There is a college kid here who is playing in a quartet and started to include his own composition in their recital. You could certainly do the same, create your own quartet and play your own composition. Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? It depends. What do you *want* to listen to? Go listen to that! Nobody's going to legislate that humans are not allowed to play, record, and listen to themselves! Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? Yes very good question. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. Then I guess you don't want to look at the roadmap. :) Win the Chopin competition by 2050! http://renconmusic.org/about.htm oh i know we will get there and i can appreciate the technological achievement and if that will help people to play the piano the better. It comes down to this: - new tool for composers. - if you can notice a difference, and prefer human recordings, then go listen to human recordings. - if you can't notice a difference [say, 10 or 20 years from now], then why complain? I complain because it's more than a matter of taste. The impact is bigger than what it seems. It's like people always want to get the lowest price and 10 years later, the manufacture and their job is sent overseas so they can get the lowest price but now they don't have a job to buy anything. In the past you could hire musicians more easily and more frequently. Today people throw a party and they will play mp3 they copied from somebody else and later will wonder why they can't get a career in music. Anyway, all tastes are in nature and we won't agree. So peace, enjoy the music you like and let's come back to making lilypond work. -Marc ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
David Santamauro david.santama...@gmail.com writes: One thing a robot, or any type of computer generated music will never replace is the simple gratification of actually playing -- from a players perspective. What a ridiculous criterion. One thing you or any type of human generated music (sorry for equating you with music, I am just following your sentence structure) will never replace is the simple gratification of actually playing -- from my perspective. So what? Either I am interested in the listener's perspective, and of course I can perfectly well develop that while listening to music produced by arbitrary means, or in the player's perspective, and then I have to play. If my humanity status is different from that of the player, obviously I am not playing myself. If it is the same, it still does not in any way replace my playing itself. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
On 3/17/11 9:37 AM, Adam Good adamg...@adamgood.com wrote:
Another tree to bark up and on a similar note, how to set roman
numerals in Score.markFormatter as rehearsal marks via \mark \default
...
\version 2.12.3
\relative c' {
\set Score.markFormatter = #(fancy-format #f ~@r. 1)
\mark \default
a b c d
\mark \default
a b c d
}
gives:
warning: type check for `markFormatter' failed; value `I.' must be
of type `procedure'
Right -- markFormatter needs to be a procedure, so you define it as a
lambda procedure:
\set Score.markFormatter = #(lambda (mark) (fancy-format #f ~@r. mark))
Haven't tested, but this is the general idea.
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:08:53AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi David, The whole point is that a computer, left to its own devices, would never think of playing the violin or chess. It would sit in a corner and rust. With all due respect, I don't even think that's the point -- for at some future date, there will undoubtedly be a computer which, left to its own devices, *would* think of playing the violin or chess rather than sitting in a corner and rusting. Actually, I doubt that. What I expect is that at some future date (say, 100 years), if you have told your computer to entertain you, it will decide to create a virtual string quartet, performing new music composed in the style of Dvorak. Whereas for me, it might create a virtual jpop singer with invisible backup band (a la Miku videos), and for my best friend in high school, it might create a virtual quake CXI game where he plays against other people over the 'net. The basic point is: I can't imagine a computer just deciding to start playing, but I can totally imagine a computer deciding that you would like it to start playing. The computer may or may not be correct, but I'd guess that if it wasn't at least 99% correct, most people would turn off the automatically select entertainment option. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Quoting Marc Mouries (m...@mouries.net): This is intellectually interesting but the question is not who deserves to create good music? but rather who wants to listen to music made by someone that does not practice? and who wants to listen to music played by a computer? Sure many times, nowadays, the rendition of a computer playing is quite good but who cares? Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. What's the end goal of such system? Can you describe in what is that helpful? Are we one day going to only listen to robots playing music? Where *will* the limits be, or where *should* the limits be? Yes very good question. One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of learning to play themselves. I slightly disagree. I see art in computer programs aswell as in playing an instrument. It's just another medium. Both are creative processes. Mind, I'm not talking about having the computer play the music, but about teaching the computer how to do it. And, where's the difference between staring computer-playback of a score and putting a CD into the CD player? Both are non-creative steps (except for choosing the music). And the latter we do all day (or it's done for us in the radio, shops, TV, ...) I can understand the loathing a computer trying to reproduce something perceive as so typically human. I can also understand feeling betrayed if computers do something you spent hours and hours on. I can even more understand musicians hating to be replaced by computers. But isn't that what is happening already? Isn't that a very old development, which always had its good and its bad sides? From the first day music has been written down, this has been a two-edged blade. It made thinking about music easier, allowing for more complex composition. But it made the art of composition less important -- now you could become a famous musician without ever creating a single piece of music yourself. All you had to do is gain a skill at reproduction. Then music recording became possible, so there was no need any more for a musician to play at your dancing lesson or your party. The possibility to record and re-play has greatly improved the quality of music reproduction, allowing for self-correction and for more comparision with other musicians. But it took away work from all the not-so-great artists. Ever asked people to sing where others can hear them? Only very few will dare do so any more. Now (and ever since computers became availlable) computers come into the story, gaining (very very slowly) their place in music creation and reproduction. It's just another step on a path that has begun some centuries ago. It will have its good sides as well as its bad sides, I am quite sure of that. And about the point of emotions -- I think you are wrong if you think you convey emotions with your music. You may have emotions and try to express them while playing music. At least that's what I do when playing music. But those emotions have nothing to do with the emotions of those listening to your music! The emotions of your listeners are not created by your music, they stem from the listener! Your music may be the catalyst, but the emotion is purely the listener's. Just an example. I remember me singing a very sad German song, filled with grief and full of symbols of death, as the start of a story I was telling. I started telling it, then was interrupted. A week later I met with the same people, and was about to resume this story. And I heard one of the listeners tell another: Oh, do not fear for the heroes of the story. I still remember her song. It was so filled with tranquility and unswerving faith, nothing untoward could happen after that. Yes, music is full of emotion. At least for me. But although the composer and performer will have a view what they want to express, the listener's emotions still are purely his. And thus I am sure I can develop emotions when listening to a computer composition too. On the other hand I know the value of psychology. I will enjoy live music, even if I do not much like its style, much more than even the most perfect and beloved music playback. But for that reaction, live recordings have the same effect as studio recordings, and as computer generated music. I do not feel much life in them. So as to the question, who wants to listen to computer played music, I could as well ask who would want to listen to CD playback. For me the background noise in shops -- often called music -- does not have much life, so I do not expect any difference were it replaced by computer played music. Same for the background sounds in most movies. I would pity the musicians who loose their jobs, congratulate the programmers who gain jobs, and most probably not mind the difference, as long as both the musicians and the programmers deserve the word
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:08:53AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi David, The whole point is that a computer, left to its own devices, would never think of playing the violin or chess. It would sit in a corner and rust. With all due respect, I don't even think that's the point -- for at some future date, there will undoubtedly be a computer which, left to its own devices, *would* think of playing the violin or chess rather than sitting in a corner and rusting. Actually, I doubt that. What I expect is that at some future date (say, 100 years), if you have told your computer to entertain you, it will decide to create a virtual string quartet, performing new music composed in the style of Dvorak. Whereas for me, it might create a virtual jpop singer with invisible backup band (a la Miku videos), and for my best friend in high school, it might create a virtual quake CXI game where he plays against other people over the 'net. For me it will shut itself off. It is pretty good at that already. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 12:38:48PM -0400, Marc Mouries wrote: On 3/17/2011 11:31 AM, Graham Percival wrote: Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and thus should be played by human. should be? Hmm. Art conveys emotions, and thus sheet music should be engraved by a human. You are mixing unrelated things. The analogy is about getting emotion from listening or watching the artifact produced. While i find electronic engraving useful, people find ancient manual engraving much nicer. But you're not arguing that I should not be allowed to use computer engraving if I want to. i just don't like this piece and it's out of tune. One vocaloid generated song I enjoy is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cm2IQ0y2J0Q ick. I consider that to be one of the worst meme videos that people did with Miku. What about a ballad? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cAnspI1C0o Guess why I don't have audio recordings of my compositions on my website? There is a college kid here who is playing in a quartet and started to include his own composition in their recital. You could certainly do the same, create your own quartet and play your own composition. Sure! Each time I move to a new continent (3 times in the past 3 years, and probably a 4th coming up in 18 months), I can make new highly-skilled string-playing friends, become sufficiently friendly so that I can ask them to practice for a few hours and then spend a few hours making recordings. And whenever I want to add a different instrument, I can become friends with another performer, again becoming sufficiently good friends that I can ask them to do about 10 hours of work for no pay. Oh yeah, and since these recordings would be open-source, they of course would get no royalties or anything like that. That's a lot of friendship to impose. Alternatively, I could pay people. Let's see... for my cello trios, I'd need one cellist (with at least 15 years of experience) to practice for about 4 hours, and two more cellists to practice for 2 hours. Then add in a 2-hour recording session. That's... hmm, what's the going rate for cellists with 15-20 years of classical experience? Let's call it CDN $100 ? And renting a recording studio for 2 hours, and a sound technician... I honestly have no idea. $1000? that's probably too low, but whatever. So I'm now looking at CND $2000 to create a recording of one 5-minute piece. Oh, but I probably need to pay the musicians extra to be happy with the no royalties thing. As a composer, I could write one of those every week... but at those prices, I think I'd only write one every year. OR, I could just give the .ly file to Vivi version 9.4, and produce a decent-sounding .wav file in 60 seconds. For free. And (legally) make the result open-source as well. That sounds like a clear win to me. I complain because it's more than a matter of taste. The impact is bigger than what it seems. Yes, but I think the impact of making it easier and better for music *composers* will outweigh any inconvience for music *performers*. Is Vocaloid ruining the market for jpop singers? Maybe... but in exchange, it's created a market for thousands of people to create music where it was previously impossible. I mean, in theory I could learn oboe or piano -- but unless I have a sex change operation and massive throat reconstruction surgery, there's no way that I could ever sing like Miku Hatsune. There's a huge amount of human creativity involved in Vocaloid, Miku Miku Dance, and the like. I think the good of that *far* outweighs any (alleged) harm that Vocaloid is doing to professional pop music in Japan. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Graham, BS. Watching musical robots is *incredibly* interesting, and way way way more interesting than a human! (seriously! I mean, you can wonder how much power it uses, and whether they use wired or wireless transmission, or how many degrees of freedom each of the joints offers, or... Thank you for proving my point. ;) Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
scores in columns - vertical alignment
Hi all,
how can I get the staff-lines vertically aligned?
\version 2.13.40
\layout { line-width = 6.2\cm ragged-right = ##f }
\markup \fill-line {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff { c''' }
\layout { }
}
}
\column{
\score {
\new Staff { a }
\layout { }
}
}
}
Marek
--
Marek Klein
http://gregoriana.sk
attachment: align.preview.png___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hi David, You are confusing teaching, training, and programming. No: they are simply three different levels/aspects/stages/manifestations of the same basic task. You don't teach an encyclopedia or an expert system You don't train or program an encyclopedia either -- the closest you can come is to program a computer application to access/manipulate/display data from an encyclopedia. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hi Graham, With all due respect, I don't even think that's the point -- for at some future date, there will undoubtedly be a computer which, left to its own devices, *would* think of playing the violin or chess rather than sitting in a corner and rusting. Actually, I doubt that. Wow, write this down: Kieren MacMillan has a more optimistic view of our technological possibilities. ;) What I expect is that Sure, all that is inevitable -- I just happen to believe we'll eventually get farther than that. I can't imagine a computer just deciding to start playing I can... and I think Kurzweil would agree with me. :) Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Hi David, This day has more-or-less arrived. Whether we like it or not, most of the music we hear in our daily lives, e.g., radio spots, commercials, tv-shows and ever-increasingly, major motion pictures are filled with music generated by computers, albeit mostly through samples generated by humans, but nevertheless, they are rendered by a computer. I think that's somewhat different than what I was discussing: I'm talking about WATCHING computers (or robots) PLAY music, not listening to music that was played/generated/rendered [to any degree] by computers. Case in point: my friend Roger created and programmed McBlare, a robotic bagpipe player (see http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~music/mcblare/). Am I intellectually fascinated by Roger's work? Absolutely. Is it stimulating and exciting to watch McBlare play music? Absolutely. Would I rather watch a human (e.g., my dad) play the bagpipes? Absolutely. Will there come a day in my lifetime when I would honestly -- emotionally -- prefer to watch a robot play an instrument rather than a human? I don't believe so. [But I *do* believe there is a chance that such a day will come eventually.] One thing a robot, or any type of computer generated music will never replace is the simple gratification of actually playing I would go one step further: I constantly -- and happily -- use computers/robots/programs to do certain things [almost always faster, and quite often better] than I can, in part so that I am free to spend more time and energy doing certain other things [which may or may not be things computers to do faster or better than I]. To wit: I use a boiling-water dispenser, in part so that I am free to spend more time drinking and enjoying my tea; I use email for 99% of my correspondence, in part so that I am free to spend more time using a pen and stationery to write meaningful long-hand letters to my close friends; and I engrave my music with Lilypond, in part so that I am free to spend more time at the piano with a pencil and manuscript paper rather than being forced to have a computer compose for me. Other people make other choices, obviously. I just think it's unfortunate if you stop doing something you love simply because there's a computer or robot or program that does it better or faster than you do. ... but that's me. As evidenced by computer gaming, the notion of social interaction with a computer has long since been upon us. +1 Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: scores in columns - vertical alignment
Marek Klein wrote:
Hi all,
how can I get the staff-lines vertically aligned?
\version 2.13.40
\layout { line-width = 6.2\cm ragged-right = ##f }
\markup \fill-line {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff { c''' }
\layout { }
}
}
\column{
\score {
\new Staff { a }
\layout { }
}
}
}
you could add
- one more container column
- a whitened markup with sufficient padding to a note in both staves:
\version 2.13.54
\paper {
line-width = 6.2\cm
ragged-right = ##f
}
\markup
\fill-line {
\column {
\line {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff { \once \override TextScript #'padding = #9 c'''
^\markup \with-color #white x }
\layout { }
}}
\left-column{
\score {
\new Staff { \once \override TextScript #'padding = #9 a ^\markup
\with-color #white x }
\layout { }
}}
\null
}}}
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/scores-in-columns---vertical-alignment-tp31175074p31175869.html
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: scores in columns - vertical alignment
Marek Klein wrote:
how can I get the staff-lines vertically aligned?
Here's another padding hack:
\layout { line-width = 6.2\cm ragged-right = ##f }
centeredVAG = \with { \override VerticalAxisGroup #'Y-extent = #'(-8 . 8) }
\markup \fill-line \vcenter {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ c''' }
\layout { }
}
}
\column{
\score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ a }
\layout { }
}
}
}
Cheers,
Robin
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
I, for one, welcome our new computer overlords. -- Ken Jennings :-, Mike ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: scores in columns - vertical alignment
From the LilyPond essay I learned that LilyPond deliberately *avoids* lining up
the staff lines vertically to make the music look more like a hand engraved
manuscript . . .
On 17 Mar 2011, at 10:28 PM, Robin Bannister wrote:
Marek Klein wrote:
how can I get the staff-lines vertically aligned?
Here's another padding hack:
\layout { line-width = 6.2\cm ragged-right = ##f }
centeredVAG = \with { \override VerticalAxisGroup #'Y-extent = #'(-8 . 8) }
\markup \fill-line \vcenter {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ c''' }
\layout { }
}
}
\column{ \score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ a }
\layout { }
}
}
}
Cheers, Robin
___
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: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
I, for one, welcome our new computer overlords. -- Ken Jennings =) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: scores in columns - vertical alignment
Thank you all! Marek http://gregoriana.sk ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Graham == Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: It comes down to this: - new tool for composers. It's also a tool for music teachers. And I'd argue that that is as important if not more so.Human students do an awful lot of interpretation of what they're told. Robots can't. So you have to be explicit about more of your assumptions when teachign a robot to play. Our robotic clarinet was designed so that we could understand what was going on in the mouthpiece, the fingers, the vocal cavity, and the interaction of all those with the reed, so that we could reproduce not only beautiful music (which we managed I think) but also beginners' mistakes. When we can say what makes a particular combination of lip pressure, tonguing and fingering `squeak' in that annoying way that beginner (and some semi-pro) clarinettists have, we can work out how to teach them not to. 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
Re: scores in columns - vertical alignment
Robin Bannister wrote:
Marek Klein wrote:
how can I get the staff-lines vertically aligned?
Here's another padding hack:
\layout { line-width = 6.2\cm ragged-right = ##f }
centeredVAG = \with { \override VerticalAxisGroup #'Y-extent = #'(-8 .
8) }
\markup \fill-line \vcenter {
\column{
\score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ c''' }
\layout { }
}
}
\column{
\score {
\new Staff \with { \centeredVAG }
{ a }
\layout { }
}
}
}
very elegant - with this you don't have to spoil your \score!
Eluze
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/scores-in-columns---vertical-alignment-tp31175074p31176764.html
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: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Graham, I think the impact of making it easier and better for music *composers* will outweigh any inconvience for music *performers*. [...] it's created a market for thousands of people to create music where it was previously impossible. Unfortunately, lower barrier of entry almost always means more crap to sift through. Remember the flood of horrible design that the Mac unleashed on the world? It persists to this day. =) Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
New version of articulate available
Version 1.5 of the Articulate scripts is now available from
http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate/
This version adds support for mordents --- thanks to Patrick Karl who
reported the issue.
The next big thing I'd like Lilypond to do is to handle dynamics in
MIDI better. The problem is things like:
\version 2.13.55
\score {
\relative c' {
\set Staff.midiInstrument = clarinet
\tempo 8=44
\cadenzaOn
fis'8\ppp \ ~ fis2. ~ fis8 \!\ \bar |
}
}
(from Messiaen's `Abime des Oiseaux', bar 13) -- a smooth crescendo
over almost the full range of the instrument. Lily renders it in
three steps. And the original is more like:
\score {
\relative c' {
\set Staff.midiInstrument = clarinet
\tempo 8=44
\cadenzaOn
fis'1 \\
{ s8\ppp \ ~ s2. ~ s8 \!\ }
\bar |
}
\layout{}
\midi{}
}
but that renders really badly.
--
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: Roman numerals in my number sequence
Right -- markFormatter needs to be a procedure, so you define it as a lambda procedure: \set Score.markFormatter = #(lambda (mark) (fancy-format #f ~@r. mark)) Haven't tested, but this is the general idea. This lambda procedure needs 2 arguments. With : \set Score.markFormatter = #(lambda (mark context) (fancy-format #f ~@r. mark)) It works. Just a comment : If you use format instead of fancy-format it works too. fancy-format doen't seem to be part of guile, so only a function added by Lilypond. I found it in output-svg.scm defined as follow : (define fancy-format format) So it is exactly the same ! What the advantage to use fancy-format vs format ? Gilles ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New version of articulate available
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Peter Chubb wrote: (from Messiaen's `Abime des Oiseaux', bar 13) -- a smooth crescendo over almost the full range of the instrument. I love that piece ! Which is remarkable, since I hate most clarinet music with a few exceptions including Mozart's Clarinet Concerto and this Messiaen piece. :-) -- Martin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New version of articulate available
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, Peter Chubb wrote: (from Messiaen's `Abime des Oiseaux', bar 13) -- a smooth crescendo over almost the full range of the instrument. Martin I love that piece ! Which is remarkable, since I hate most Martin clarinet music with a few exceptions including Mozart's Martin Clarinet Concerto and this Messiaen piece. :-) Hmm. You should try listening to some of Carl Maria von Weber's clarinet music. My personal favourite is his op 33, `Variationen über ein Thema aus Silvana' Hmm? I am afraid it was exactly the music of C.M. von Weber that started my aversion against clarinet music. When I was studying piano at the conservatory von Weber was played often by Clarinet players. They loved it, but all those fast and high notes and scales were only getting on my nerves. That single long crescendo note Messiaen wrote impressed me much more! But let's stay on-topic: Keep up the good work with your articulate script. Any chance articulate will be an integrated, built-in functionality in Lilypond in the future ? -- Martin___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New version of articulate available
On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 01:56:05AM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: But let's stay on-topic: Keep up the good work with your articulate script. Any chance articulate will be an integrated, built-in functionality in Lilypond in the future ? I estimate it would take about 5 hours from a Frog. I've been estimating this for the past few years, but nobody's even attempted to tackle it yet. So, I guess not much chance. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New version of articulate available
2011/3/17 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca: I estimate it would take about 5 hours from a Frog. I've been estimating this for the past few years, but nobody's even attempted to tackle it yet. It is a feature that already works... would be nice to have! :-) Are there any downside? increased rendering time? anyknown bugs? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New version of articulate available
On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:20:38PM -0300, Bernardo Barros wrote: 2011/3/17 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca: I estimate it would take about 5 hours from a Frog. I've been estimating this for the past few years, but nobody's even attempted to tackle it yet. It is a feature that already works... would be nice to have! :-) Patches appreciated. Are there any downside? increased rendering time? anyknown bugs? No known downsides by me, at least. Theoretically I suppose it would be slightly slower rendering time, but certainly not humanly-noticeably slower. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
On 3/17/11 5:04 PM, Gilles THIBAULT gilles.thiba...@free.fr wrote: fancy-format doen't seem to be part of guile, so only a function added by Lilypond. I found it in output-svg.scm defined as follow : (define fancy-format format) So it is exactly the same ! What the advantage to use fancy-format vs format ? Most of the scheme modules in lilypond use a simpler version of format because it's faster and smaller. I'm not sure what's happening with output-svg. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roman numerals in my number sequence
On 3/17/11 5:04 PM, Gilles THIBAULT gilles.thiba...@free.fr wrote:
Just a comment :
If you use format instead of fancy-format it works too.
fancy-format doen't seem to be part of guile, so only a function added by
Lilypond. I found it in output-svg.scm defined as follow :
(define fancy-format format)
So it is exactly the same !
Look at the whole code:
(define fancy-format format)
(define format ergonomic-simple-format)
fancy-format becomes the name for the ice-9 format function.
format becomes the name for ergonomic-simple-format.
Look at scm/lily.scm:
(define-public fancy-format
format)
(define-public (ergonomic-simple-format dest . rest)
Like ice-9's @code{format}, but without the memory consumption.
(if (string? dest)
(apply simple-format (cons #f (cons dest rest)))
(apply simple-format (cons dest rest
(define format
ergonomic-simple-format)
So you can see that format is redefined to be simple-format.
HTH,
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
