Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: I am very surprised that so many of the LilyPond users are composers! I was quite sure that Lily is mostly suited for engravers and editors. Well, what would you call it if you are practicing musician using Lilypond for putting down your own arrangements and work scores? It's like saying I am very surprised that so many word processor users are writers rather than editors and publishers. What else but writing would you be using the program for, even though you may not make a professional living from it? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
2011/8/24 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: I am very surprised that so many of the LilyPond users are composers! I was quite sure that Lily is mostly suited for engravers and editors. Well, what would you call it if you are practicing musician using Lilypond for putting down your own arrangements and work scores? It's like saying I am very surprised that so many word processor users are writers rather than editors and publishers. What else but writing would you be using the program for, even though you may not make a professional living from it? Well, my assumption was pretty stupid :) cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On 24/08/2011 08:00, Urs Liska wrote: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html It is meant for intermediate beginners who want to go for some more complex tasks and are as confused with LilyPond as I was not long ago. I'd give it a version number of 0.8. So any constructive feedback is welcome. Comments that arent' interesting for the public (linguistic details for example) please privately, LilyPond related comments on the list. I hope it helps someone Best Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hi Urs, Very nice article. What's the license? Can I translate it to Chinese? Best regards, Ben Luo ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 08:33:11AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: I am very surprised that so many of the LilyPond users are composers! I was quite sure that Lily is mostly suited for engravers and editors. Well, what would you call it if you are practicing musician using Lilypond for putting down your own arrangements and work scores? There's no guarantee that people are doing their own arrangements, though. Somebody engraving an urtext Beethoven piano sonata for Mutopia wouldn't be a composer. It's like saying I am very surprised that so many word processor users are writers rather than editors and publishers. What else but writing would you be using the program for, even though you may not make a professional living from it? I am very surprised that so many typewriter operators (in the 1930s or 50s) are writers rather than secretaries ? There's a difference between using a tool and using a tool creatively. According to old movie and stuff [1], there used to be a whole occupation called wherein people (generally females) would collect text verbally and then produce a type-written version. [1] this was far earlier than my time, but we probably have some people on this list who remember those good old days. Remember when a calculator meant a human being? :) Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 08:41, schrieb Ben Luo: On 24/08/2011 08:00, Urs Liska wrote: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html ... Hi Urs, Hi Ben, Very nice article. Thanks What's the license? Interesting question. I thought about this a little bit, but didn't find an answer. * I don't want anybody to modify the text, but I gladly incorporate useful enhancements, giving the respective credits. * I don't want anybody to redistribute it in any form without explicit consent. * I don't mind if anybody uses or modifies the source, - That's what such tutorials are meant for but I don't want the sources redistributed either * An underlying problem is that the music used for the tutorial as under full copyright. I obtained the rights to use this example in my tutorial for use on my web site, but any further use is explicitely prohibited. Maybe I'd be better off using music in the public domain from the start. But a great deal of the music I come across is still under copyright. If anybody of those who re more familiar with these licensing questions could give me a hint, I'd be glad. Can I translate it to Chinese? Yes, that would be nice. A few remarks about it: * Please wait for the finished version: o I have a few things on my ToDo list, the main issue being adding many more references to the LilyPond documentation. o I want to wait if there is any that I can incorporate as improvements * What would be the intended use? If you plan to make this publicly available (which I assume, otherwise you wouldn't have to ask me, I think) - propably on a web site - I should ask the copyright owner (Universal Edition) first. Probably they will give their consent (without expecting royalties) Of course I'd expect a link to the original version. * Please contact me again before you start to do anything, because I can then provide you with material to make it easier to work with (text in OpenOffice/Word/PDF format, images, listings). Best wishes Urs Best regards, Ben Luo ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 07:40:50PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote: Very nicely done, indeed, Urs! Thanks for putting this together. Graham, would this be something to be linked from LM? The normal thing to would be to add a link to the wiki. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On Aug 24, 2011, at 2:00 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
Hello list,
I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at
http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html
It is meant for intermediate beginners who want to go for some more complex
tasks and are as confused with LilyPond as I was not long ago.
I'd give it a version number of 0.8.
So any constructive feedback is welcome.
Comments that arent' interesting for the public (linguistic details for
example) please privately, LilyPond related comments on the list.
I hope it helps someone
Best
Urs
Gorgeous!
How about:
tweakNine = {
% Avoid collisions with the accent mark
\override Script #'avoid-slur = #'outside
\override Script #'slur-padding = #'0.1
}
unTweakNine = {
\revert Script #'avoid-slur
\revert Script #'slur-padding
}
And then
rightThree = \relative f'' {
\voiceTwo
\showStaffSwitch
\tweakFive
\tweakEight
\tweakNine
f2\ff-\( c4.- b8- | % measure 1
\unTweakNine
\change Staff = left
\voiceOne
f2.- g4- | % measure 2
as, des fes as-\)\arpeggio \oneVoice r4 \voiceOne r2
}___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond's SVG output
Hello, 2011/8/18 Sandor Spruit a.g.l.spr...@uu.nl Hello, I recently had an informal discussion with some collegues on the use of SVG, in general. They are in music research, I am a developer working on a completely unrelated topic - so please forgive me my ignorance w.r.t. music-related terminology. We discussed the possibilities to use music scores on web pages, and they immediately referred to Lilypond because of its quality output. While browsing this list's archives, and other on-line discussions for that matter, two questions came up: - In what version, exactly, did Lilypond drop the use of groups (svg:g) in its output? I read a debate on this issue, where the key argument against groups was the trouble people have in editing grouped SVG elements in Inkscape. I can, however, imagine all sorts of situations in which group elements could be very useful - from a developer's point of view at least. This leads to the second question: - For what purpose are people putting music up on the web; what's the typical use case? Just publishing it for others to read? Hyperlinking to it, from it? Annotations? Keeping bits and pieces of music for later reference? Learning? Studying? Comparing versions? I may, at some point, be in the position to do some work on this. But I'm hesitant to dive in at the deep end - meaning Lilypond tens of thousands of lines of code ... A bit of guidance might help though :) cheers, Sandor Spruit Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University __**_ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/**listinfo/lilypond-userhttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user I can not answer your questions, but maybe developers list is better place to ask... forwarding. Marek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 08:33:11AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: I am very surprised that so many of the LilyPond users are composers! I was quite sure that Lily is mostly suited for engravers and editors. Well, what would you call it if you are practicing musician using Lilypond for putting down your own arrangements and work scores? There's no guarantee that people are doing their own arrangements, though. Somebody engraving an urtext Beethoven piano sonata for Mutopia wouldn't be a composer. Granted. It's like saying I am very surprised that so many word processor users are writers rather than editors and publishers. What else but writing would you be using the program for, even though you may not make a professional living from it? I am very surprised that so many typewriter operators (in the 1930s or 50s) are writers rather than secretaries ? There's a difference between using a tool and using a tool creatively. I should be surprised if most secretaries work by dictation only. According to old movie and stuff [1], there used to be a whole occupation called wherein people (generally females) would collect text verbally and then produce a type-written version. Typists, sure. But that's different from being a secretary. Hospital doctors still commonly use dictation devices over here. [1] this was far earlier than my time, but we probably have some people on this list who remember those good old days. Remember when a calculator meant a human being? :) Stanisław Lem comes to mind. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On 24/08/2011 15:16, Urs Liska wrote: Am 24.08.2011 08:41, schrieb Ben Luo: On 24/08/2011 08:00, Urs Liska wrote: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html ... Hi Urs, Hi Ben, Very nice article. Thanks What's the license? Interesting question. I thought about this a little bit, but didn't find an answer. * I don't want anybody to modify the text, but I gladly incorporate useful enhancements, giving the respective credits. * I don't want anybody to redistribute it in any form without explicit consent. * I don't mind if anybody uses or modifies the source, - That's what such tutorials are meant for but I don't want the sources redistributed either * An underlying problem is that the music used for the tutorial as under full copyright. I obtained the rights to use this example in my tutorial for use on my web site, but any further use is explicitely prohibited. Maybe I'd be better off using music in the public domain from the start. But a great deal of the music I come across is still under copyright. If anybody of those who re more familiar with these licensing questions could give me a hint, I'd be glad. Can I translate it to Chinese? Yes, that would be nice. A few remarks about it: * Please wait for the finished version: o I have a few things on my ToDo list, the main issue being adding many more references to the LilyPond documentation. o I want to wait if there is any that I can incorporate as improvements * What would be the intended use? If you plan to make this publicly available (which I assume, otherwise you wouldn't have to ask me, I think) - propably on a web site - I should ask the copyright owner (Universal Edition) first. Probably they will give their consent (without expecting royalties) Of course I'd expect a link to the original version. My purpose is just wanting to promote lilypond in Chinese. If possible, I prefer to just send the translated version to you, and you add this version in your website. I just post the link in my twitter/blog. I think it's the easiest way for license concern. * * Please contact me again before you start to do anything, because I can then provide you with material to make it easier to work with (text in OpenOffice/Word/PDF format, images, listings). I really appreciate it. Best wishes Urs Best regards, Ben Luo ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 09:50, schrieb Ben Luo: On 24/08/2011 15:16, Urs Liska wrote: Am 24.08.2011 08:41, schrieb Ben Luo: On 24/08/2011 08:00, Urs Liska wrote: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html ... Hi Urs, Hi Ben, Very nice article. Thanks What's the license? Interesting question. I thought about this a little bit, but didn't find an answer. * I don't want anybody to modify the text, but I gladly incorporate useful enhancements, giving the respective credits. * I don't want anybody to redistribute it in any form without explicit consent. * I don't mind if anybody uses or modifies the source, - That's what such tutorials are meant for but I don't want the sources redistributed either * An underlying problem is that the music used for the tutorial as under full copyright. I obtained the rights to use this example in my tutorial for use on my web site, but any further use is explicitely prohibited. Maybe I'd be better off using music in the public domain from the start. But a great deal of the music I come across is still under copyright. If anybody of those who re more familiar with these licensing questions could give me a hint, I'd be glad. Can I translate it to Chinese? Yes, that would be nice. A few remarks about it: * Please wait for the finished version: o I have a few things on my ToDo list, the main issue being adding many more references to the LilyPond documentation. o I want to wait if there is any that I can incorporate as improvements * What would be the intended use? If you plan to make this publicly available (which I assume, otherwise you wouldn't have to ask me, I think) - propably on a web site - I should ask the copyright owner (Universal Edition) first. Probably they will give their consent (without expecting royalties) Of course I'd expect a link to the original version. My purpose is just wanting to promote lilypond in Chinese. If possible, I prefer to just send the translated version to you, and you add this version in your website. I just post the link in my twitter/blog. I think it's the easiest way for license concern. OK. But as my web site is a single language one, and there is no automatic way to enter the tutorial texts I can only think of hosting a pdf version of the tutorial (which will also work well). I will find the suitable page to place the link - as I also intend to provide my own version as a pdf once it's finished. * * Please contact me again before you start to do anything, because I can then provide you with material to make it easier to work with (text in OpenOffice/Word/PDF format, images, listings). I really appreciate it. When I'm ready I'll send you the material. But as I'm going on holiday in a few days this will take some time ... Best Urs Best wishes Urs Best regards, Ben Luo ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 2011-08-24 um 02:00 schrieb Urs Liska: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html Hi Urs, that’s what I should have read before starting your Fried scores ;-) Thank you! Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 10:05, schrieb Henning Hraban Ramm: Am 2011-08-24 um 02:00 schrieb Urs Liska: Hello list, I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html Hi Urs, that’s what I should have read before starting your Fried scores ;-) Thank you! Thank you. That's the best thing I could hope to read :-) Maybe this project somewhat influenced the idea of writing this tutorial. You noticed the tiny anonymous reference to that? ;-) If I had written this before maybe I had done Fried myself right from the start. But no, I just didn't have any time then. Best Urs Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Ben Luo ben...@gmail.com writes: What's the license? Interesting question. I thought about this a little bit, but didn't find an answer. * I don't want anybody to modify the text, but I gladly incorporate useful enhancements, giving the respective credits. * I don't want anybody to redistribute it in any form without explicit consent. All rights reserved. If you are putting it on a website, this implies permission to view it (and the source downloaded in the process), but nothing else. * I don't mind if anybody uses or modifies the source, - That's what such tutorials are meant for but I don't want the sources redistributed either You can't stop that anyway: that's covered by fair use once people obtained a legitimate copy. * An underlying problem is that the music used for the tutorial as under full copyright. I obtained the rights to use this example in my tutorial for use on my web site, but any further use is explicitely prohibited. Maybe I'd be better off using music in the public domain from the start. I won't bother looking at material licensed in that manner, anyway. So depending on your prospective target audience, that might be a reasonable move. However, your other stated goals include not allowing any reuse, either, so it is pretty much irrelevant. But using freely available examples, you at least would retain the option to change your mind. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
2011/8/24 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 07:40:50PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote: Very nicely done, indeed, Urs! Thanks for putting this together. Graham, would this be something to be linked from LM? The normal thing to would be to add a link to the wiki. Which is down at the moment, if i'm not mistaken? Frankly, i think that it would be too hidden on the wiki (i have an impression that our wiki is not very alive). Maybe we should create a links section on the website. cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: 2011/8/24 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 07:40:50PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote: Very nicely done, indeed, Urs! Thanks for putting this together. Graham, would this be something to be linked from LM? The normal thing to would be to add a link to the wiki. Which is down at the moment, if i'm not mistaken? Frankly, i think that it would be too hidden on the wiki (i have an impression that our wiki is not very alive). Maybe we should create a links section on the website. I'd like to point to URL:http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration from the guidelines for maintainers of GNU projects. A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation for free software. The need for free documentation to come with free software is now a major focus of the GNU project; to show that we are serious about the need for free documentation, we must not contradict our position by recommending use of documentation that isn’t free. I would be disappointed if we considered a situation where material that is of essential help to Lilypond users (to the degree where it would make good sense to reference it) is not freely available and redistributable satisfying enough that we gave encouragement and support to it on our web site. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 10:42, schrieb David Kastrup: Janek Warchołjanek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: 2011/8/24 Graham Percivalgra...@percival-music.ca: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 07:40:50PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote: Very nicely done, indeed, Urs! Thanks for putting this together. Graham, would this be something to be linked from LM? The normal thing to would be to add a link to the wiki. Which is down at the moment, if i'm not mistaken? Frankly, i think that it would be too hidden on the wiki (i have an impression that our wiki is not very alive). Maybe we should create a links section on the website. I'd like to point to URL:http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration from the guidelines for maintainers of GNU projects. A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation for free software. The need for free documentation to come with free software is now a major focus of the GNU project; to show that we are serious about the need for free documentation, we must not contradict our position by recommending use of documentation that isn’t free. I would be disappointed if we considered a situation where material that is of essential help to Lilypond users (to the degree where it would make good sense to reference it) is not freely available and redistributable satisfying enough that we gave encouragement and support to it on our web site. I would wholeheartedly second this, as I'm also not really satisfied with the copyright status of my text. You shouldn't link to it for now. Maybe I will think of updating the tutorial with public domain music (as most of the contents of the tutorial are completely independent of the actual music) - if I find the time. Then we can talk about making the whole thing free. OTOH I don't think there is any problem with the mere existence of non-free documentation. And one of my intentions was to provide online material that probably will be exposed to search engines and opens an additional path to find LilyPond resources. Best Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 2011-08-24 um 10:11 schrieb Urs Liska: that’s what I should have read before starting your Fried scores ;-) Thank you! Thank you. That's the best thing I could hope to read :-) Maybe this project somewhat influenced the idea of writing this tutorial. You noticed the tiny anonymous reference to that? ;-) All of them! ;-) If I had written this before maybe I had done Fried myself right from the start. But no, I just didn't have any time then. I learned a lot. Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de writes: OTOH I don't think there is any problem with the mere existence of non-free documentation. Correct. The actual problem is the non-existence of free documentation, and creating references to non-free documentation is a disincentive to changing that. I am glad that you see this similarly, since rebasing your work on free material might be less work than rewriting it from scratch. And one of my intentions was to provide online material that probably will be exposed to search engines and opens an additional path to find LilyPond resources. Note that this direction is of course open to you already. I would just be unhappy about having Lilypond sites point back to non-free material. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 11:19, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liskali...@ursliska.de writes: OTOH I don't think there is any problem with the mere existence of non-free documentation. Correct. The actual problem is the non-existence of free documentation, and creating references to non-free documentation is a disincentive to changing that. I am glad that you see this similarly, since rebasing your work on free material might be less work than rewriting it from scratch. It will definitely be far less work. The most complicated issue will be to find a suitable (i.e. most compatible) example. Just want also to state that my copyright concerns aren't at all about some intellectual property of mine. I'm happy to share all my experience this way, there are rather formal issues I'm not really clear about yet ... And one of my intentions was to provide online material that probably will be exposed to search engines and opens an additional path to find LilyPond resources. Note that this direction is of course open to you already. I would just be unhappy about having Lilypond sites point back to non-free material. Of course that's already been opened by making the page available through the menu of my web site. One imporant resource on the web are tutorials like this, giving simple solutions or thorough explanations on any given topic. My impression is that there isn't that much available for LilyPond as I would have liked when starting to learn. So this was one major motivation to actually start writing this down. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am Wednesday, 24. August 2011, 02:00:16 schrieb Urs Liska:
Hello list,
I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at
http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html
[..]
Really nice.
Comments that arent' interesting for the public (linguistic details for
example) please privately, LilyPond related comments on the list.
1) You know that you can give dynamics their own directions? So you can simply
write (in rightOne):
bes bes'4^\(
instead of
\dynamicUp
bes bes'4\( ...
\dynamicNeutral
2) Resetting the tie direction to the default in rightOne is much simpler than
you thought. In particular, \voiceOne simply sets (i.e. does the same as
\override) the 'direction property of several grobs, including Tie.
So, to get the oneVoice-behaviour, all you have to do is to revert the Tie's
'direction property to the default:
tweakSix = {
% Simulate \oneVoice style ties
\once \revert Tie #'direction
}
a a'4 b b' \tweakSix cis cis'~ q d d'
Note that now the \tweakSix has to be placed right before the tie's start,
which is what one would intuitively expect.
3) You manually use \oneVoice ... \voiceOne to get proper rest merging.
LilyPond can do that automatically:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=336
I thought that this function has been included into LilyPond, but I can't find
it anywhere...
Ah, it's been started, but never finished:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1228
4) Thanks for tellung us about the tupletSpannerDuration... I wasn't aware of
that and always copied dozens of } \times 2/3 { strings when I wrote some
string ensemble works... This makes life way easier! Amazing, even after years
of using and developing LilyPond, you can learn something new anyday!
Cheers,
Reinhold
--
--
Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
* Financial Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
* http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
* LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am Wednesday, 24. August 2011, 10:42:23 schrieb David Kastrup: I'd like to point to URL:http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophic al-Consideration from the guidelines for maintainers of GNU projects. A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation for free software. I consider this tutorial additional material, not core documentation, so I don't see this as an issue... Cheers, Reinhold -- -- Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/ * Financial Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@kainhofer.com writes: Am Wednesday, 24. August 2011, 10:42:23 schrieb David Kastrup: I'd like to point to URL:http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophic al-Consideration from the guidelines for maintainers of GNU projects. A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free documentation for free software. I consider this tutorial additional material, not core documentation, so I don't see this as an issue... I don't see the difference really. If it is useful or desirable for working with Lilypond, it would appear to me that it is useful or desirable as a basis for writing further material, or for adapting it to future versions of Lilypond, or for printing out and passing to a friend, or for using as a basis for one's own websites. Being able to do all that is an important part of what it means for Lilypond to be free software. Stopping short of that goal is not a crime, but it is a difference that we should be thinking twice about. Sort of like a vegetarian magazine taking ads for a meat-and-potatoes dish producer. Even if the rationale is those people would not be eating potatoes at all if it weren't for that product. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
2011/8/24 Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@kainhofer.com:
2) Resetting the tie direction to the default in rightOne is much simpler than
you thought. In particular, \voiceOne simply sets (i.e. does the same as
\override) the 'direction property of several grobs, including Tie.
So, to get the oneVoice-behaviour, all you have to do is to revert the Tie's
'direction property to the default:
tweakSix = {
% Simulate \oneVoice style ties
\once \revert Tie #'direction
}
a a'4 b b' \tweakSix cis cis'~ q d d'
Note that now the \tweakSix has to be placed right before the tie's start,
which is what one would intuitively expect.
Another way is to write ties inside the chord and set lower tie's direction.
\relative c'' { \voiceOne a a'4 b b' cis_~ cis'~ q d d' }
I think it's the best way of doing this because:
- it is more structurally correct than tie-configuration (won't break
when music is transposed, and you don't have to care for correct upper
tie positioning)
- it is shorter than reverting tie direction.
4) Thanks for tellung us about the tupletSpannerDuration... I wasn't aware of
that and always copied dozens of } \times 2/3 { strings when I wrote some
string ensemble works... This makes life way easier!
Somehow i don't like this solution...
I wrote a small scheme function that could be used when the triplets
are simple (i.e. consisting of three notes). surprisingly, it even
supports chords, dynamics and articulations!
tri =
#(define-music-function
(parser location noteI noteII noteIII)
(ly:music? ly:music? ly:music?)
#{
\times 2/3 {
$noteI
$noteII
$noteIII
}
#})
\relative c'' {
\key e \major
\time 3/16
r16 r \tri a cis32 ( b a
|
\tri fis- dis cis \tri a fis dis \tri cis\f dis fis
|
\tri a- cis dis \tri fis \ a cis \tri dis fis b\f )
}
Feel free to add it to LSR and anywhere you'd like.
cheers,
Janek
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
[1] this was far earlier than my time, but we probably have some people on this list who remember those good old days. Remember when a calculator meant a human being? :) Yeah! Or when video simply was a latin word ... But just for the sake of completeness, I have also asked a major music publishing company, Schott Music (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schott_Music) about this whole subject of electronic scores and here's what *they* answered (I'm translating ... full german statement below for all who can read german): Basically, we can handle all music file formats that can be converted to either Finale or Sibelius, which are the main programs we work with. Those two programs have proved to be most suited for achieving our engraving style. It has become standard over the last few years that publishers and composers deliver their finished scores to us, which doesn't preclude post-editing in our house. For those cases too, we will ask you for Finale- or Sibelius-readable files since those are easiest to handle. It isn't, however a knock-out criterion - in certain cases, we will do in-house engravings of handwritten. I wonder if it was possible to come to an arrangement with such a major player to produce style files (Schott.ly) that will actually meet their publishing standard (without the need for post-editing) - in text publishing, there are companies/magazines who offer such LaTeX style files. That would certainly be a push for LilyPond! Best, Robert Grundsätzlich können wir mit allen Notendaten arbeiten, die sich entweder nach Finale oder Sibelius konvertieren oder umwandeln lassen. Das sind die beiden Haupt-Programme mit denen wir heute arbeiten. Sie haben sich im Laufe der Jahre etabliert und bewährt und passen am besten zu den Anforderungen unseres Stichbildes. Es ist in den letzten Jahren zum Standard geworden, dass Herausgeber oder Autoren die Notendateien ihrer Werke für den Notensatz fertig bei uns abliefern (was eine Nachbearbeitung hier im Hause nicht ausschließt). In diesen Fällen bitten wir entsprechend auch um Daten für Finale und Sibelius, da diese am einfachsten zu verarbeiten sind. Ausschlusskriterium für die Annahme eines Werkes ist dies jedoch nicht, vereinzelt wird auch noch nach handschriftlichen Manuskripten direkt hier im Hause gesetzt. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Il giorno mer, 24/08/2011 alle 06.23 +0200, Christ van Willegen ha scritto: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 03:26, Jonathan Kulp jonlancek...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Michael Ellis michael.f.el...@gmail.com wrote: Count me in for US$100 toward the project. Not sure how much programming I offered a $100 bounty a couple of years ago on this idea and it still stands. Count me in for €200. Me, too, would like to see Lilypond's usage expanded! ... and count me in for €50. I think that the new bounties should be added as a comment in issue 665: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=665 I'll do it right now. Cheers, Federico ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Hi Robert, I wonder if it was possible to come to an arrangement with such a major player to produce style files (Schott.ly) that will actually meet their publishing standard (without the need for post-editing) Of course that's possible — in fact, I've got a choral octavo stylesheet that is essentially indistinguishable from its model, the Schirmer mid-20th-Century choral scores (e.g., Barber Reincarnations). All one has to do is take a current Schott score and reproduce it exactly in Lilypond. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Scribit Christ van Willegen dies 24/08/2011 hora 06:23: I offered a $100 bounty a couple of years ago on this idea and it still stands. Count me in for €200. Me, too, would like to see Lilypond's usage expanded! If memory serves, so far we have US$200, C$100 and €200. If I were to work alone on this bounty, that would allow me to allocate approximately 20hrs, which should clearly be enough to write a nice XML exporting in some schema mimicking Lilypond's representation, and probably also the XSLT transformation to MusicXML (I'm not sure how much time figuring it and then debugging it will take, it has been ages since I played with XSLT). Quickly, Pierre -- pie...@nothos.net OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On 11-08-24 03:26 AM, Urs Liska wrote: Am 24.08.2011 11:19, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liskali...@ursliska.de writes: OTOH I don't think there is any problem with the mere existence of non-free documentation. Correct. The actual problem is the non-existence of free documentation, and creating references to non-free documentation is a disincentive to changing that. I am glad that you see this similarly, since rebasing your work on free material might be less work than rewriting it from scratch. It will definitely be far less work. The most complicated issue will be to find a suitable (i.e. most compatible) example. Just want also to state that my copyright concerns aren't at all about some intellectual property of mine. I'm happy to share all my experience this way, there are rather formal issues I'm not really clear about yet ... If there's any way I can help, Urs, with the rebasing, light editing of the text for flow and grammar, or any other task, please let me know. Your approach to the next steps level of LilyPond is delightful, and I'd love to be part of making it widely available. Cheers, Colin -- The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter. -- Mark Twain ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Hi Kieren, yes, technically possible - no doubt! I meant if it was possible to convince a (possibly major) publisher to accept and offer on their website a lilypond style file, so that from then on, also lilypond code would be officially accepted by them. I guess that would require disclosure of their style requirements (if such a thing exists in the form of a set of rules) on the publisher's side, and some state of stability between Lilypond releases (or, alternatively, such a style file would be valid for, say, the 2.14.x releases only). Maybe I shouldn't wonder so much but ask them first, and even include a cloned Schott score (which I would have to produce first ... or does anyone happen to have? ... ). I doubt I'll be able to produce a proper style file though - I'm too new at lilypond engraving, I have never myself dived into creating some tricky functions in a forest of brackets, and such. I'd love to work on it (and learn lots in the process) but someone with more experience would ceratinly need to be the mastermind. Cheers, Robert On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 08:58 -0400, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Robert, I wonder if it was possible to come to an arrangement with such a major player to produce style files (Schott.ly) that will actually meet their publishing standard (without the need for post-editing) Of course that's possible — in fact, I've got a choral octavo stylesheet that is essentially indistinguishable from its model, the Schirmer mid-20th-Century choral scores (e.g., Barber Reincarnations). All one has to do is take a current Schott score and reproduce it exactly in Lilypond. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
open source
Hello, This probably isn't really the right place to post this, but I know people here know the answer to my query. I've put together a web-site for learning Fux-style species counterpoint. Although some of the music examples were drawn in the dark days before I discovered Lilypond, most of them were done with it.My question is about Open Source: I'd like to see the counterpoint applets (Java) developed further but I haven't got time to do it, so I figured Open Source might be the right idea. Therefore I'd be grateful for any advice about the best way to go about that (for example, best sites to get info?). The site is at http://homepage.eircom.net/~gerfmcc Thanks for any help, Gerard ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 10:42:23AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: 2011/8/24 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca: The normal thing to would be to add a link to the wiki. Which is down at the moment, if i'm not mistaken? Could be. If so, this just demonstrates that the lilypond community isn't particularly concerned about having a wiki. Frankly, i think that it would be too hidden on the wiki (i have an impression that our wiki is not very alive). That's more evidence that we're not particularly concerned with a wiki. I'd like to point to URL:http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration from the guidelines for maintainers of GNU projects. Yes. That's why I was suggesting the wiki instead. :) Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Extra white space for Chordnames
I would like to increase the amount of whitespace between the chordnames and
the staff below them, but am having no success. I have tried some variation
of all of the following with no results.
\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'( 4 . 4) (with
negative and positive values)
\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'Y-extent = #'( 10 . -10)
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #DOWN (also tried up)
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing #'padding = #20
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing =
#'((basic-distance . 10))
\score{
\new ChordNames {
% \override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing =
#'((basic-distance . 10))
\chordmode { c2 f c f }
}
\new Staff {
%%\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'( 4 . 4)
%%\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'Y-extent = #'( 10 . -10)
% \override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #DOWN
% \override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing #'padding =
#20
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing =
#'((basic-distance . 10))
\relative c'{ c4 d f a c4 d f a}
}
}
What the heck is the magic command to add some space? Am I putting in the
wrong place?
Daniel
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Extra white space for Chordnames
Daniel-426 wrote:
I would like to increase the amount of whitespace between the chordnames
and
the staff below them, but am having no success. I have tried some
variation
of all of the following with no results.
What the heck is the magic command to add some space? Am I putting in the
wrong place?
probably - it should be in the \chordnames' set/overrides of properties:
\score{
\new ChordNames \with {
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-relatedstaff-spacing = #'(
(basic-distance . 10)
(minimum-distance . 10)
(padding . 10)
)
}
\chordmode { c2 f c f }
\new Staff
\relative c'{ c4 d f a c4 d f a}
}
it works also in a general \layout { \context { \ChordNames … }} block
Eluze
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Extra-white-space-for-Chordnames-tp32328161p32328610.html
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Pierre THIERRY writes:
[cc lilypond-devel]
If memory serves, so far we have US$200, C$100 and €200. If I were to
work alone on this bounty, that would allow me to allocate
approximately 20hrs, which should clearly be enough to write a nice
XML exporting in some schema mimicking Lilypond's representation, and
probably also the XSLT transformation to MusicXML (I'm not sure how
much time figuring it and then debugging it will take, it has been
ages since I played with XSLT).
To fix this bug, what we need is a very clear bug report to know when we
can close it. Actually, we require that for all bugs, so #665 should
never have been entered into the bug database like this.
What I would like to see attached to #665 is at least one .ly with
corresponding .xml with bonusses attached.
Possibly it's best to delay #665 and split it up into several different
issues (and attached bounties), each with it's own .ly -- and starting
with a most simple one.
It's only about an hour of work (see below) to convert a simple and
prepared .ly score to musicxml, see below.
Jan
From 8dd82d867fcf9b7b9a554016de02109ab6486a0c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:46:34 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] [MusicXML]: Hello world xslt stylesheet for MusicXML output.
---
xml/GNUmakefile |2 ++
xml/test-1.xml | 28
xml/to-xml.html | 17 +
xml/xml.ly | 16
xml/xml.xml | 38 ++
5 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 xml/GNUmakefile
create mode 100644 xml/test-1.xml
create mode 100644 xml/to-xml.html
create mode 100644 xml/xml.ly
create mode 100644 xml/xml.xml
diff --git a/xml/GNUmakefile b/xml/GNUmakefile
new file mode 100644
index 000..83d803c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/GNUmakefile
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+test:
+ xsltproc to-xml.html test-1.xml
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/xml/test-1.xml b/xml/test-1.xml
new file mode 100644
index 000..3c33cc8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/test-1.xml
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
+music
+NoteEvent
+pitch
+ octave=1
+ notename=0
+ alteration=0
+/pitch
+duration
+ log=2
+ dots=0
+ numer=1
+ denom=1
+/duration
+/NoteEvent
+NoteEvent
+pitch
+ octave=2
+ notename=1
+ alteration=0
+/pitch
+duration
+ log=2
+ dots=0
+ numer=1
+ denom=1
+/duration
+/NoteEvent
+/music
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/xml/to-xml.html b/xml/to-xml.html
new file mode 100644
index 000..f1da85a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/to-xml.html
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1?
+xsl:stylesheet version=1.0 xmlns:xsl=http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform;
+
+ xsl:template match=/
+xml
+ score-partwise
+ xsl:for-each select=music
+ xsl:for-each select=NoteEvent
+ pitchxsl:value-of select=pitch/
+ octavexsl:value-of select=pitch//octave
+ /pitch
+ /xsl:for-each
+ /xsl:for-each
+ /score-partwise
+/xml
+ /xsl:template
+/xsl:stylesheet
diff --git a/xml/xml.ly b/xml/xml.ly
new file mode 100644
index 000..2ade547
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/xml.ly
@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+\version 2.14.0
+
+testMusic = { c''4 \\ g'4 }
+
+#(use-modules (scm to-xml))
+
+#(ly:progress \nXML:\n\n~A\n (call-with-output-string (lambda (p) (music-to-xml testMusic p
+
+
+\header {
+ texidoc =
+ The input representation is generic, and may be translated to XML.
+}
+
+
+{ \testMusic }
diff --git a/xml/xml.xml b/xml/xml.xml
new file mode 100644
index 000..12ca68a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/xml/xml.xml
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+music
+ type=score
+SequentialMusic
+SimultaneousMusic
+EventChord
+NoteEvent
+pitch
+ octave=1
+ notename=0
+ alteration=0
+/pitch
+duration
+ log=2
+ dots=0
+ numer=1
+ denom=1
+/duration
+/NoteEvent
+/EventChord
+VoiceSeparator
+/VoiceSeparator
+EventChord
+NoteEvent
+pitch
+ octave=0
+ notename=4
+ alteration=0
+/pitch
+duration
+ log=2
+ dots=0
+ numer=1
+ denom=1
+/duration
+/NoteEvent
+/EventChord
+/SimultaneousMusic
+/SequentialMusic/music
--
1.7.4.1
From ec8bf2adb089f4c1c38462afc1e8ec3fb0e33a60 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 15:58:33 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] [MusicXML]: use apply-templates.
---
xml/to-xml.html | 35 ---
1 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xml/to-xml.html b/xml/to-xml.html
index f1da85a..3768641 100644
--- a/xml/to-xml.html
+++ b/xml/to-xml.html
@@ -4,14 +4,35 @@
xsl:template match=/
xml
score-partwise
- xsl:for-each select=music
- xsl:for-each select=NoteEvent
- pitchxsl:value-of select=pitch/
- octavexsl:value-of select=pitch//octave
- /pitch
- /xsl:for-each
- /xsl:for-each
+ xsl:apply-templates/
/score-partwise
/xml
/xsl:template
+
+
+ xsl:template match=EventChord
+xsl:apply-templates/
+ /xsl:template
+
+ xsl:template match=NoteEvent
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org wrote: Pierre THIERRY writes: [cc lilypond-devel] If memory serves, so far we have US$200, C$100 and €200. If I were to work alone on this bounty, that would allow me to allocate approximately 20hrs, which should clearly be enough to write a nice XML exporting in some schema mimicking Lilypond's representation, and probably also the XSLT transformation to MusicXML (I'm not sure how much time figuring it and then debugging it will take, it has been ages since I played with XSLT). To fix this bug, what we need is a very clear bug report to know when we can close it. Actually, we require that for all bugs, so #665 should never have been entered into the bug database like this. What I would like to see attached to #665 is at least one .ly with corresponding .xml with bonusses attached. Possibly it's best to delay #665 and split it up into several different issues (and attached bounties), each with it's own .ly -- and starting with a most simple one. It's only about an hour of work (see below) to convert a simple and prepared .ly score to musicxml, see below. Jan That sounds encouraging. So how far away are we from being able to handle a more realistic score, say a string quartet or a 4-part choral score with with lyrics and piano reduction? Cheers, Mike ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Am Wednesday, 24. August 2011, 23:33:02 schrieb Michael Ellis: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:14 PM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org wrote: It's only about an hour of work (see below) to convert a simple and prepared .ly score to musicxml, see below. That sounds encouraging. So how far away are we from being able to handle a more realistic score, say a string quartet or a 4-part choral score with with lyrics and piano reduction? I don't think it's that easy, in particular if you want to get output that you can send to a publisher without being thrown out of the office... Jan, you can take a look at the ~100 MusicXML files in input/regression/musicxml/ and at the corresponding output of musicxml2ly. The current approach is to modify the source file to add a \convertToMusicXML (or some similarly named function) to the music expression that you want to convert. However, I see several problems with this approach, which I might discuss separately. In short, the only way to make it extendable for the future (so that one day we can also export the layout) is to handle (MusicXML) export similar to MIDI generation, namely via translators that collect all events and all settings as they appear in the score. Cheers, Reinhold -- -- Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/ * Financial Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Dear Robert, The translation doesnt match totally. (In my own words, to point out what is important in this text, after 20 years in Germany as church musician): Es ist in den letzten Jahren zum Standard geworden, dass Herausgeber oder Autoren die Notendateien ihrer Werke für den Notensatz fertig bei uns abliefern (was eine Nachbearbeitung hier im Hause nicht ausschließt). Composers send us usually a data ready-to-print. If necessary and only in this case, we prefer Finale and Sibelius, for we are used to. In diesen Fällen bitten wir entsprechend auch um Daten für Finale und Sibelius, da diese am einfachsten zu verarbeiten sind. Ausschlusskriterium für die Annahme eines Werkes ist dies jedoch nicht, vereinzelt wird auch noch nach handschriftlichen Manuskripten direkt hier im Hause gesetzt. Bt, there is no reason to exclude for publication a work in another format, included manuscripts will be considered. So I think the best would be a Schott style-sheet for lily, send your music to schott as pdf and underline, you will make the changes they want, if needed. Best greetings Francois ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Hi all, In short, the only way to make it extendable for the future (so that one day we can also export the layout) is to handle (MusicXML) export similar to MIDI generation, namely via translators that collect all events and all settings as they appear in the score. +1. KMac. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Dear Francois, I'm sorry to tell you that I'm convinced that Robert's translation - although not completely literally correct - does very well match what Schott wanted to express: Am 25.08.2011 00:29, schrieb Francois Planiol: Dear Robert, The translation doesnt match totally. (In my own words, to point out what is important in this text, after 20 years in Germany as church musician): Es ist in den letzten Jahren zum Standard geworden, dass Herausgeber oder Autoren die Notendateien ihrer Werke für den Notensatz fertig bei uns abliefern (was eine Nachbearbeitung hier im Hause nicht ausschließt). Composers send us usually a data ready-to-print. If necessary and only in this case, we prefer Finale and Sibelius, for we are used to. In diesen Fällen bitten wir entsprechend auch um Daten für Finale und Sibelius, da diese am einfachsten zu verarbeiten sind. Ausschlusskriterium für die Annahme eines Werkes ist dies jedoch nicht, vereinzelt wird auch noch nach handschriftlichen Manuskripten direkt hier im Hause gesetzt. Bt, there is no reason to exclude for publication a work in another format, included manuscripts will be considered. What they say is: 1. They publish their scores with Finale or Sibelius because they are the most suitable for their engraving style. 2. In recent years it has become a de facto standard that editors or composers provide their scores as music files, which are ready-to-print or may need in-house polishing by their own engravers. 3. In these cases (this means the now regular case that the editor provides a file) they also want Finale or Sibelius files because they are the easiest to process (meaning they have a tested work-flow with them). 4. They leave it open to accept works for publication that aren't prepared this way, because they can in rare cases engrave from manuscripts in the house. Practically this means: If an author or editor can't prepare the files they may decide to spend money for an engraver preparing a Finale score. In exactly this context they would accept a LilyPond score equally as a manuscript score: They would enter it from scratch in Finale Best Urs So I think the best would be a Schott style-sheet for lily, send your music to schott as pdf and underline, you will make the changes they want, if needed. Best greetings Francois ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 11:49, schrieb Reinhold Kainhofer:
Am Wednesday, 24. August 2011, 02:00:16 schrieb Urs Liska:
Hello list,
I have just put a new tutorial online. You can read it at
http://www.ursliska.de/73.0.html
[..]
Really nice.
Comments that arent' interesting for the public (linguistic details for
example) please privately, LilyPond related comments on the list.
1) You know that you can give dynamics their own directions? So you can simply
write (in rightOne):
bes bes'4^\(
instead of
\dynamicUp
bes bes'4\( ...
\dynamicNeutral
Oops. Of course I know that. But didn't I write something like forest
for the trees?
2) Resetting the tie direction to the default in rightOne is much simpler than
you thought. In particular, \voiceOne simply sets (i.e. does the same as
\override) the 'direction property of several grobs, including Tie.
So, to get the oneVoice-behaviour, all you have to do is to revert the Tie's
'direction property to the default:
tweakSix = {
% Simulate \oneVoice style ties
\once \revert Tie #'direction
}
a a'4b b' \tweakSixcis cis'~ qd d'
Note that now the \tweakSix has to be placed right before the tie's start,
which is what one would intuitively expect.
No, I wasn't aware of this.
Your solution is definitely better than mine. But I even like Janek's
version more for this.
3) You manually use \oneVoice ... \voiceOne to get proper rest merging.
LilyPond can do that automatically:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=336
I thought that this function has been included into LilyPond, but I can't find
it anywhere...
Ah, it's been started, but never finished:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1228
Well, I dont merge the rests but skip them in one voice.
I'll look into this.
4) Thanks for tellung us about the tupletSpannerDuration... I wasn't aware of
that and always copied dozens of } \times 2/3 { strings when I wrote some
string ensemble works... This makes life way easier! Amazing, even after years
of using and developing LilyPond, you can learn something new anyday!
OK, this makes my embarrassment over 1) smaller ;-)
@all who commented on the coding:
I will collect this sort of feedback and will deal with it when I've
come home from vacation.
Some of the suggestions will replace my coding, some I will comment in
the text and for some I will reference to the respective email comments
(pointing even more to the community aspect).
Cheers,
Reinhold
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond tutorial
Am 24.08.2011 15:15, schrieb Colin Campbell: On 11-08-24 03:26 AM, Urs Liska wrote: Am 24.08.2011 11:19, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liskali...@ursliska.de writes: OTOH I don't think there is any problem with the mere existence of non-free documentation. Correct. The actual problem is the non-existence of free documentation, and creating references to non-free documentation is a disincentive to changing that. I am glad that you see this similarly, since rebasing your work on free material might be less work than rewriting it from scratch. It will definitely be far less work. The most complicated issue will be to find a suitable (i.e. most compatible) example. Just want also to state that my copyright concerns aren't at all about some intellectual property of mine. I'm happy to share all my experience this way, there are rather formal issues I'm not really clear about yet ... If there's any way I can help, Urs, with the rebasing, light editing of the text for flow and grammar, or any other task, please let me know. Your approach to the next steps level of LilyPond is delightful, and I'd love to be part of making it widely available. Cheers, Colin Thanks, Colin. What will definitely be useful (at least) is some polishing of my English. I will come back to you when some sort of final version is around and send you the material as a text document. Best Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi all, In short, the only way to make it extendable for the future (so that one day we can also export the layout) is to handle (MusicXML) export similar to MIDI generation, namely via translators that collect all events and all settings as they appear in the score. +1. KMac. This makes sense. A standalone converter would, essentially, have to duplicate Lily's internal logic. Why write the same code twice? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
On 8/24/11 5:31 PM, Michael Ellis michael.f.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi all, In short, the only way to make it extendable for the future (so that one day we can also export the layout) is to handle (MusicXML) export similar to MIDI generation, namely via translators that collect all events and all settings as they appear in the score. +1. KMac. This makes sense. A standalone converter would, essentially, have to duplicate Lily's internal logic. Why write the same code twice? Hence the importance of Jan's original comment. We need to clarify what is wanted. Do you want 1) XML that captures only the music (and could be imported into some other program which will make the layout decisions)? 2) XML that captures both the music and the layout (and could therefore be printed by some as-yet-unknown MusicXML printer)? 3) Some other XML that I haven't thought of? My sense is that item 1) is relatively inexpensive (as Jan has discussed), but that item 2) is relatively expensive (I think it's more than 100 expert hours, but that's just a wild stab). For me, item 1) is what we ought to be aiming at, at least initially. It seems strange to use Finale to print a layout defined by LilyPond. If you want to use a LilyPond layout and tweak a few things graphically, you should be using the svg output, IMO, and editing the svg. I think that holding out for 2) will probably delay completion of 1). But having a well-defined enhancement request will at least allow a developer to make a decision as to what they wish to attempt. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Am 25.08.2011 01:48, schrieb Carl Sorensen: On 8/24/11 5:31 PM, Michael Ellismichael.f.el...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi all, In short, the only way to make it extendable for the future (so that one day we can also export the layout) is to handle (MusicXML) export similar to MIDI generation, namely via translators that collect all events and all settings as they appear in the score. +1. KMac. This makes sense. A standalone converter would, essentially, have to duplicate Lily's internal logic. Why write the same code twice? Hence the importance of Jan's original comment. We need to clarify what is wanted. Do you want 1) XML that captures only the music (and could be imported into some other program which will make the layout decisions)? 2) XML that captures both the music and the layout (and could therefore be printed by some as-yet-unknown MusicXML printer)? 3) Some other XML that I haven't thought of? My sense is that item 1) is relatively inexpensive (as Jan has discussed), but that item 2) is relatively expensive (I think it's more than 100 expert hours, but that's just a wild stab). For me, item 1) is what we ought to be aiming at, at least initially. It seems strange to use Finale to print a layout defined by LilyPond. If you want to use a LilyPond layout and tweak a few things graphically, you should be using the svg output, IMO, and editing the svg. I think that holding out for 2) will probably delay completion of 1). But having a well-defined enhancement request will at least allow a developer to make a decision as to what they wish to attempt. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user From what was discussed recently and in earlier discussions, I would really second your arguments. Providing option 1) would allow this bidirectional openness we are talking about. This will give * ... potential LilyPond users the trust that they can get their work back into the software they are used to (a similar effect that NTFS support under Linux had) * ... LilyPond users that for some reason or another are obliged to provide files for other software the possibility to do so. It may however be useful to discuss how a given approach to 1) would affect the implementation of 2) I think 1) should be done in a manner that can be further developped to a solution of 2) (As I know way too little about (Music)XML and practically nothing about LilyPond's internals, I can't actively participate in these necessary discussions.) Best Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Hi Carl, Do you want 1) XML that captures only the music (and could be imported into some other program which will make the layout decisions)? No: this is trivial to obtain from #2 or #3, via XSLT. 2) XML that captures both the music and the layout (and could therefore be printed by some as-yet-unknown MusicXML printer)? Yes: since Lilypond already generates this entire set of data, why not include it in the output? My sense is that item 1) is relatively inexpensive (as Jan has discussed), but that item 2) is relatively expensive (I think it's more than 100 expert hours, but that's just a wild stab). Maybe true… but that's what we should be going for, IMO. For me, item 1) is what we ought to be aiming at, at least initially. My question is this: In what format is the final, typeset music stream such that extracting the music information only would be massively easier than extracting the music and layout information? It seems strange to use Finale to print a layout defined by LilyPond. If you want to use a LilyPond layout and tweak a few things graphically, you should be using the svg output, IMO, and editing the svg. I think there are many things in the cracks that don't come through with just the music, but would be critical for translation to another program — for example, the cross-staff information that started this thread is clearly layout related, and not just music-specific. I think that holding out for 2) will probably delay completion of 1). Possibly… If we're talking about 10 hours for #1 (truly well done) and 500 hours for #2, then of course we should do that. If we're talking about 100 hours for #1, and 250 hours for #2 where the first 100 hours must be redone (assuming, for argument's sake, the two are radically different in execution), then I would say no. But having a well-defined enhancement request will at least allow a developer to make a decision as to what they wish to attempt. +1. Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
Urs: I think 1) should be done in a manner that can be further developped to a solution of 2). Yes — exactly. Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
On 8/24/11 6:00 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Carl, My question is this: In what format is the final, typeset music stream such that extracting the music information only would be massively easier than extracting the music and layout information? I don't believe there *is* a final, typeset music stream. There is an input .ly code stream, which is converted to a stream-event stream. The stream-event stream generates a set of grobs. The grobs generate stencils. The stencils are printed on the page. IIUC, grobs have information about their cause, but stencils do not. And there is not a one-to-one correspondence between stencils and music events. For example, a chord made of three dotted quarter notes will generate three note-head stencils, one stem stencil, and one dots stencil. But as I read it, the XML would require three note objects, each having its own dot attribute. And the only layout information for the dot is whether the dot should be above or below the staff line. Perhaps it's possible to merge these two distinct views. But I think that Reinhold is exactly right, and that the only way to do it extensibly is with XML performers that will take stream events and convert them to XML. But how do we synchronize the performers and the engravers (which are setting things up to make the layout decisions)? That's the part I don't see right now. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MusicXML exporter (was Re: Lilypond lobbying?)
David, No: this is trivial to obtain from #2 or #3, via XSLT. You are using trivial like a mathematician, strictly interchangeable with doable. Actually, I was using trivial in two ways: 1. As a mathematician (yes, I've had several papers published in peer-reviewed journals), I was — as you noted — using it as a synonym for doable. 2. As a professional XSLT programmer (yes, some of my income comes from writing stylesheets), I was using it in the sense of extracting a strict subset of a XML tree is quite easy. Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
I'm confused. Please forgive a terribly naive question -- *If* my LilyPond output PDF were to match what Schott wants to see (in other words, a correct Schott-targeted style-sheet would not have changed it), then would Schott print my original PDF *as-is*? Thanks, Pete Urs Liska wrote: Dear Francois, I'm sorry to tell you that I'm convinced that Robert's translation - although not completely literally correct - does very well match what Schott wanted to express: Am 25.08.2011 00:29, schrieb Francois Planiol: Dear Robert, The translation doesnt match totally. (In my own words, to point out what is important in this text, after 20 years in Germany as church musician): Es ist in den letzten Jahren zum Standard geworden, dass Herausgeber oder Autoren die Notendateien ihrer Werke für den Notensatz fertig bei uns abliefern (was eine Nachbearbeitung hier im Hause nicht ausschließt). Composers send us usually a data ready-to-print. If necessary and only in this case, we prefer Finale and Sibelius, for we are used to. In diesen Fällen bitten wir entsprechend auch um Daten für Finale und Sibelius, da diese am einfachsten zu verarbeiten sind. Ausschlusskriterium für die Annahme eines Werkes ist dies jedoch nicht, vereinzelt wird auch noch nach handschriftlichen Manuskripten direkt hier im Hause gesetzt. Bt, there is no reason to exclude for publication a work in another format, included manuscripts will be considered. What they say is: 1. They publish their scores with Finale or Sibelius because they are the most suitable for their engraving style. 2. In recent years it has become a de facto standard that editors or composers provide their scores as music files, which are ready-to-print or may need in-house polishing by their own engravers. 3. In these cases (this means the now regular case that the editor provides a file) they also want Finale or Sibelius files because they are the easiest to process (meaning they have a tested work-flow with them). 4. They leave it open to accept works for publication that aren't prepared this way, because they can in rare cases engrave from manuscripts in the house. Practically this means: If an author or editor can't prepare the files they may decide to spend money for an engraver preparing a Finale score. In exactly this context they would accept a LilyPond score equally as a manuscript score: They would enter it from scratch in Finale Best Urs So I think the best would be a Schott style-sheet for lily, send your music to schott as pdf and underline, you will make the changes they want, if needed. Best greetings Francois ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
Am 25.08.2011 02:30, schrieb PMA: I'm confused. Please forgive a terribly naive question -- *If* my LilyPond output PDF were to match what Schott wants to see (in other words, a correct Schott-targeted style-sheet would not have changed it), then would Schott print my original PDF *as-is*? Thanks, Pete As I'm not Schott I can of course not definitely answer this question. But as a native German speaker/reader, and having had a similar issue with a publishing house I'd bet: no, they wouldn't. The publisher will want (and probably has) to have the possibility to edit your score - be it for more fine tuning or for corrections in a second edition. And for this they will only accept the programs they are accustomed to, that have been tested to work the way they are used to. HTH Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
On 08/24/2011 08:30 PM, PMA wrote: I'm confused. Please forgive a terribly naive question -- *If* my LilyPond output PDF were to match what Schott wants to see (in other words, a correct Schott-targeted style-sheet would not have changed it), then would Schott print my original PDF *as-is*? I can’t speak for the music publishing industry, but having worked in textual publishing: *if* your LilyPond PDF were exactly according to house standards, they would probably publish it, but the odds of you, the composer or arranger, producing a PDF exactly according to house standards are infinitesimal. And even if *you* could do it, the amount of effort it would take the house to evaluate your competence to do so is more than it would take for them to do it themselves. In their shoes, I would rather take your PDF and reënter it from scratch in my tool of choice. ~Chris -- Chris Maden, text nerd URL: http://crism.maden.org/ Those who learn from history are doomed to become cynics. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond lobbying?
2011/8/24 Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de: I doubt I'll be able to produce a proper style file though - I'm too new at lilypond engraving, I have never myself dived into creating some tricky functions in a forest of brackets, and such. I'd love to work on it (and learn lots in the process) but someone with more experience would ceratinly need to be the mastermind. I'd be interested in preparing those and persuading publishers to accept LilyPond, but i'm afraid it will be premature thing to do before GLISS and some more changes concerning slurs, dynamics, ties and beams. :( (in other words: i think that Lily output, while quite nice out-of-the-box, still has noticeable shortcomings: bringing it to publication quality usually requires *lots* of small tweaks, not quite feasible to do. I can discuss this on examples if you'd like.) cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
