Re: Tremolos between two whole notes
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: 2012/2/4 Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com: Maybe the last time this was discussed was in a thread with Janek and his new tremolo styles? I don't recall discussions about whole note tremolo related to the tremolo style i was working on. As for the said tremolo style, i'd like to finish that indeed, but i have lots of other stuff flying around, and also i'm heavily demotivated because of recent Patchy rewrite failure :( 2012/2/4 Brent Annable brentanna...@gmail.com: I suppose, since the issue is already known and I'm not a programmer, I just need to wait then? You can pay David Kastrup to fix it; chances that just waiting will be enough to have it fixed are close to 0. If i were you i'd find some other people who want this and pay David together. Probably it would be more effective to find some people for paying David to finish the work Janek got stuck on (which, after all, is supposed to replace work that LilyPond users can't be bothered with doing manually), and thus free Janek to think about what it would take for him to tackle this issue rather than working on less pleasant things. sorry for being grumpy, After enough work on LilyPond, this will change. Not the grumpy part, but the sorry one. All the best -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Burden and Volta with Coventry Carol
Hi This should help: http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/notation/techniques-specific-to-lyrics#lyrics-and-repeats Trevor - Original Message - From: dadadharma @dslextreme.com dadadha...@dslextreme.com To: lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 6:22 AM Subject: Burden and Volta with Coventry Carol Hi Folks, I'm getting Christmas carols ready for December 2012. In this case, the Coventry Carol. I don't know how to arrange for 2 blocks of lyrics: a burden (a front-loaded chorus), followed by three stanzas. I explain my problem here, with .ly and .pdf files. http://www.hosorembo.com/Lily/JF.html#Coventry A .gif model is here (with slightly different interpretation of accidentals). http://www.8notes.com/christmas/xmas/images/s7272b.gif (Probably the 1591 MS that everyone works from didn't clearly mark accidentals.) If I use volta for the stanza section, how do I get the stanzas to print only inside the volta? I borrowed a \context Voice = sopverse [SopranoVerse] from another LilyPond file (version 2.6.3); even so, the stanzas start at the beginning, rather than at the \context point. The burden over-writes the first stanza Two simultaneous lyric events, junking this one Maybe there's a simple line of instructions I need to add. Maybe I need to completely rethink the way I structure my files. Thanks in advance, David Olson Culver City, California ___ 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: Tremolos between two whole notes
2012/2/4 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: I don't recall discussions about whole note tremolo related to the tremolo style i was working on. OK, I was not sure. And at that moment I was not courageous enough to 'dig' into the archive to find the relevant thread. Now I did. And I found this discussion I remembered a bit. It was indeed more recent that the report of 2007, since this discussion occurred in February 2011 (so exactly one year ago). The subject was titled Cleanup beam scoring code (yeah, so a bit difficult to find it by searching with the keyword tremolo!). Basically Werner, Reinhold and Han-Wen agreed that slanted beam tremolo should be the default behaviour for whole notes. And Reinhold said that According to Gardner Read (p. 236-237) and Kurt Stone (p. 150-151), the beams of whole-note tremolos are slanted like with shorter durations with stems, but the beams are placed centered between the whole notes (i.e. not where an imaginary stem would end!). The only situation where an imaginary stem is used to determine the position/slant of the beams is in cross-staff tremolos. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-02/msg00029.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-02/msg00032.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-02/msg00034.html I'm adding this comment on issue #1176 . sorry for being grumpy, At least you are not whining. :D Cheers, Xavier -- Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Experimental Web-based Lilypond Editor
ming tsang wrote: pThis works fine in firefox 10.0/p pI am looking forward to the future feature as mention in your email./p pCan you also include midi output?/p ul liGood for singing practice/li li/li /ul pSee it at: http://lily.sytes.net http://lily.sytes.net /p -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Experimental-Web-based-Lilypond-Editor-tp33242123p33262271.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: Experimental Web-based Lilypond Editor
On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 06:05:10 + James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Hello ? On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Jonathan Kulp jonlancek...@gmail.comwrote: Completely Awesome! I'm going to show this to my students. They'll find this much easier than trying to deal with a separate editor, opening pdf reader, etc. Thanks for sharing! Frescobaldi? James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user By what definition is Frescobaldi not a separate editor? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tremolos between two whole notes
As far as getting the look you want, you need to use a combination of
Beam #'gap, Beam #'positions, Beam #'extra-offset, and NoteHead
#'stem-attachment. I've gotten very nice results with those
overrides. It's a pain, but it's worth avoiding the horrible default.
Hope that helps,
Neil
On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Brent Annable brentanna...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello everyone,
I have a question, and perhaps a suggestion. I just typeset the following
tremolo between two whole notes:
\score {
\relative c'' {
\repeat tremolo 16 { gis32 b }
}
}
and was quite disappointed by the fact that Lilypond places the tremolo
beams horizontally and above the notes in question. I much prefer the look
of the first tremolo in this image:
http://media.wiley.com/assets/25/94/0-7645-5105-1_1309.jpg
with the beams tilted and occupying the space in-between the whole notes. I
read through the manual and searched for some snippets, but couldn't find
any reference to this tremolo style at all. Is there any relatively simple
way of achieving this look that I'm missing? And if not, could a tremolo
style option perhaps be added for those who prefer them this way?
Brent.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
Neil Thornock, D.M.
No Stopping, Standing, or Parking:
http://neilthornock.net/mp3s/nostopping.mp3
Assistant Professor of Music
Composition/Theory
Brigham Young University
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Experimental Web-based Lilypond Editor
Hello, On 4 Feb 2012, at 12:42, Nils l...@nilsgey.de wrote: On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 06:05:10 + James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Hello ? On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Jonathan Kulp jonlancek...@gmail.comwrote: Completely Awesome! I'm going to show this to my students. They'll find this much easier than trying to deal with a separate editor, opening pdf reader, etc. Thanks for sharing! Frescobaldi? James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user By what definition is Frescobaldi not a separate editor? Get as pedantic as you like, but Frescobaldi is a Big window with editor on the left, PDF output on the right. This Browser based solution is a big window with an editor on the left and PDF output on the right. Apart from the OS you run on. There is no difference. Frescobaldi has a heap more useful features though for serious use than this experimental website - that's not to disparage what is done here, it's a nice piece of work. The Implication that Mr Kulp made was basically not having to keep opening a PDF separately from the editor. In Linux and MacOs when LilyPad worked for me, you never would need to do that, the PDF would update automatically, windows never did. So it was a big window on the left where I edited and the PDF on the right where the music appeared. I just pressed ctrl-c or whatever it was instead of click a 'preview' button. Same difference. Average user doesn't care. So if I were going to recommend LP editor or composition and the users had windows I'd go for FB everytime. Try the latest version 2.2 I think, Wilbert has done a cracking job for windows users. You still need an editor to errr edit the LP file and a PDF viewer to view it. James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
verifying \chordmode neglects point-and-click (fixed)
Some kind of error with chordmode was fixed. Can somebody check this works? http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1022 - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: verifying \chordmode neglects point-and-click (fixed)
- Original Message - From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2012 4:01 PM Subject: verifying \chordmode neglects point-and-click (fixed) Some kind of error with chordmode was fixed. Can somebody check this works? http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1022 - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Don't forget to include the bugs newsgroup - not all bug squad members watch user. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Experimental Web-based Lilypond Editor
On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 15:52:27 + James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, On 4 Feb 2012, at 12:42, Nils l...@nilsgey.de wrote: On Sat, 4 Feb 2012 06:05:10 + James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Hello ? On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Jonathan Kulp jonlancek...@gmail.comwrote: Completely Awesome! I'm going to show this to my students. They'll find this much easier than trying to deal with a separate editor, opening pdf reader, etc. Thanks for sharing! Frescobaldi? James ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user By what definition is Frescobaldi not a separate editor? Get as pedantic as you like, but Frescobaldi is a Big window with editor on the left, PDF output on the right. This Browser based solution is a big window with an editor on the left and PDF output on the right. Apart from the OS you run on. There is no difference. Frescobaldi has a heap more useful features though for serious use than this experimental website - that's not to disparage what is done here, it's a nice piece of work. The Implication that Mr Kulp made was basically not having to keep opening a PDF separately from the editor. In Linux and MacOs when LilyPad worked for me, you never would need to do that, the PDF would update automatically, windows never did. So it was a big window on the left where I edited and the PDF on the right where the music appeared. I just pressed ctrl-c or whatever it was instead of click a 'preview' button. Same difference. Average user doesn't care. So if I were going to recommend LP editor or composition and the users had windows I'd go for FB everytime. Try the latest version 2.2 I think, Wilbert has done a cracking job for windows users. You still need an editor to errr edit the LP file and a PDF viewer to view it. James This was not against Frescobaldi, I like it. My question was real, it is a seperate editor. Seperate from the web point of view means that your own computer does the computation. Especially Lilypond runs on your own computer. The web editor is different because it runs remote lilypond and you only interact with the frontend. This is meant by not seperate. In fact it would be more accurate to say that you don't want to run a seperate lilypond and a seperate pdf viewer. The text-area is the center of view and so it cannot be seperate per definitionem. Nils ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roadblock MacOSX 10.4 for release of LilyPond 2.16
On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, James Worlton wrote: On my PPC 10.4 machine Lily 2.15.26 was the last one that ran (the GUI) without problems. I am not near my machine now, and so I can't test if 2.15.27 will run from the command line. I'll test that tonight. So, I'm a bit late with the results of this test. But I can say that the most recent dev. version, 2.15.28, DOES compile and provide output if you run Lily from the command line. It appears the problem is solely related to the GUI. Mac OS X 10.4 Dual 2.7 GHz PPC G5 James Worlton ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Experimental Web-based Lilypond Editor
On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 9:52 AM, James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Frescobaldi has a heap more useful features though for serious use than this experimental website - that's not to disparage what is done here, it's a nice piece of work. The Implication that Mr Kulp made was basically not having to keep opening a PDF separately from the editor. Frescobaldi looks nice (although the pdf preview didn't work for me), I didn't mean to say anything against it. What I like about the web app is that one needn't install anything. I personally use vim and a shell script of my own for previewing. I wouldn't use either Frescobaldi or the web app for myself, I just meant the web app is great to give super-quick intro without having to install anything. Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://jonathankulp.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roadblock MacOSX 10.4 for release of LilyPond 2.16
James Worlton jworl...@gmail.com writes: On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, James Worlton wrote: On my PPC 10.4 machine Lily 2.15.26 was the last one that ran (the GUI) without problems. I am not near my machine now, and so I can't test if 2.15.27 will run from the command line. I'll test that tonight. So, I'm a bit late with the results of this test. But I can say that the most recent dev. version, 2.15.28, DOES compile and provide output if you run Lily from the command line. It appears the problem is solely related to the GUI. Mac OS X 10.4 Dual 2.7 GHz PPC G5 I have an hour of developer time from Graham left that I earned with a job I did for him. He estimates that the preexisting work and analysis should make this suffice for him getting the MacOSX changes required into GUB. For the sake of getting a stable release out soon, I am willing to make that issue go away. However, it will also go away by declaring MacOSX PPC an unsupported platform. I don't see any rationale why I should ask Graham to do the work just out of his heart's goodness. And if the MacOSX PPC community does not consider this task worth the 70€ for which I would let my remaining Graham hour go (and it is definitely a steal), there is no point in anybody investing the work for a platform nobody is interested spending any resources on. I would also guess that a _willing_ MacOSX developer could learn the ropes in a few hours. Which would be a more reliable course in the long run since obviously this problem is not necessarily the last ever. Just for the record: I already invested my other Graham hour into a release-critical task that is not particularly interesting to me. And I am sick to death about users pontificating why I (or Graham or whoever else) should consider it my holy duty to make them happy at any price to myself. So here is your chance at showing that there is enough interest in maintaining PPC compatibility to give it a reasonable shot of happening (and be realistic: even a Graham hour is not more than a good shot at it: if you are really serious, learn the ropes and invest the time it takes to get this right). -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roadblock MacOSX 10.4 for release of LilyPond 2.16
On Feb 4, 2012, at 5:07 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: James Worlton jworl...@gmail.com writes: On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, James Worlton wrote: On my PPC 10.4 machine Lily 2.15.26 was the last one that ran (the GUI) without problems. I am not near my machine now, and so I can't test if 2.15.27 will run from the command line. I'll test that tonight. So, I'm a bit late with the results of this test. But I can say that the most recent dev. version, 2.15.28, DOES compile and provide output if you run Lily from the command line. It appears the problem is solely related to the GUI. Mac OS X 10.4 Dual 2.7 GHz PPC G5 I have an hour of developer time from Graham left that I earned with a job I did for him. He estimates that the preexisting work and analysis should make this suffice for him getting the MacOSX changes required into GUB. For the sake of getting a stable release out soon, I am willing to make that issue go away. However, it will also go away by declaring MacOSX PPC an unsupported platform. I don't see any rationale why I should ask Graham to do the work just out of his heart's goodness. And if the MacOSX PPC community does not consider this task worth the 70€ for which I would let my remaining Graham hour go (and it is definitely a steal), there is no point in anybody investing the work for a platform nobody is interested spending any resources on. I would also guess that a _willing_ MacOSX developer could learn the ropes in a few hours. Which would be a more reliable course in the long run since obviously this problem is not necessarily the last ever. Just for the record: I already invested my other Graham hour into a release-critical task that is not particularly interesting to me. And I am sick to death about users pontificating why I (or Graham or whoever else) should consider it my holy duty to make them happy at any price to myself. So here is your chance at showing that there is enough interest in maintaining PPC compatibility to give it a reasonable shot of happening (and be realistic: even a Graham hour is not more than a good shot at it: if you are really serious, learn the ropes and invest the time it takes to get this right). -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user David, et. al., This is the first I've seen that PPC is to be totally abandoned. I'm running the the development version on my PowerBook G4, OS 10.5.8, with no problems. What will change to take that functionality away? I would truly like to be able to dig into the code, and many years ago I would have offered to help. I once taught programming. However, the learning curve would be precipitously steep, and I'm afraid somewhat Sisyphean! Regards, Stan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roadblock MacOSX 10.4 for release of LilyPond 2.16
On Feb 4, 2012, at 5:07 PM, David Kastrup wrote: James Worlton jworl...@gmail.com writes: On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, James Worlton wrote: On my PPC 10.4 machine Lily 2.15.26 was the last one that ran (the GUI) without problems. I am not near my machine now, and so I can't test if 2.15.27 will run from the command line. I'll test that tonight. So, I'm a bit late with the results of this test. But I can say that the most recent dev. version, 2.15.28, DOES compile and provide output if you run Lily from the command line. It appears the problem is solely related to the GUI. Mac OS X 10.4 Dual 2.7 GHz PPC G5 I have an hour of developer time from Graham left that I earned with a job I did for him. He estimates that the preexisting work and analysis should make this suffice for him getting the MacOSX changes required into GUB. For the sake of getting a stable release out soon, I am willing to make that issue go away. However, it will also go away by declaring MacOSX PPC an unsupported platform. I don't see any rationale why I should ask Graham to do the work just out of his heart's goodness. And if the MacOSX PPC community does not consider this task worth the 70€ for which I would let my remaining Graham hour go (and it is definitely a steal), there is no point in anybody investing the work for a platform nobody is interested spending any resources on. I would also guess that a _willing_ MacOSX developer could learn the ropes in a few hours. Which would be a more reliable course in the long run since obviously this problem is not necessarily the last ever. Just for the record: I already invested my other Graham hour into a release-critical task that is not particularly interesting to me. And I am sick to death about users pontificating why I (or Graham or whoever else) should consider it my holy duty to make them happy at any price to myself. So here is your chance at showing that there is enough interest in maintaining PPC compatibility to give it a reasonable shot of happening (and be realistic: even a Graham hour is not more than a good shot at it: if you are really serious, learn the ropes and invest the time it takes to get this right). I don't use the PPC platform for Lilypond any more but I am willing to kick in some cash if that will help make it possible to maintain usability on older Macs. I know absolutely nothing about computer programming, so I can't do the work. It'd be a lot faster for me to pay for someone else's time than to learn the skills to do it myself. I'll pledge US $25 if that will help. Any other donors willing to pony up? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Roadblock MacOSX 10.4 for release of LilyPond 2.16
Stan Sanderson stans...@gmail.com writes: On Feb 4, 2012, at 5:07 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: James Worlton jworl...@gmail.com writes: On Feb 3, 2012, at 10:30 AM, James Worlton wrote: On my PPC 10.4 machine Lily 2.15.26 was the last one that ran (the GUI) without problems. I am not near my machine now, and so I can't test if 2.15.27 will run from the command line. I'll test that tonight. So, I'm a bit late with the results of this test. But I can say that the most recent dev. version, 2.15.28, DOES compile and provide output if you run Lily from the command line. It appears the problem is solely related to the GUI. Mac OS X 10.4 Dual 2.7 GHz PPC G5 I have an hour of developer time from Graham left that I earned with a job I did for him. He estimates that the preexisting work and analysis should make this suffice for him getting the MacOSX changes required into GUB. For the sake of getting a stable release out soon, I am willing to make that issue go away. However, it will also go away by declaring MacOSX PPC an unsupported platform. I don't see any rationale why I should ask Graham to do the work just out of his heart's goodness. And if the MacOSX PPC community does not consider this task worth the 70€ for which I would let my remaining Graham hour go (and it is definitely a steal), there is no point in anybody investing the work for a platform nobody is interested spending any resources on. This is the first I've seen that PPC is to be totally abandoned. I'm running the the development version on my PowerBook G4, OS 10.5.8, with no problems. What will change to take that functionality away? I have no idea as I am not a MacOSX user. URL:code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2271 has the details (concerns the GUI it seems). If the _current_ version works for you, there is no reason to suspect it to stop doing so. Nobody is breaking things on purpose. But nobody is going to fix things on purpose either, if nobody cares about them. I would truly like to be able to dig into the code, and many years ago I would have offered to help. I once taught programming. However, the learning curve would be precipitously steep, and I'm afraid somewhat Sisyphean! Which is why somebody else should do it out of the goodness of their heart. At some point of time the goodness gets spread a bit thin, and you have to expect spotty coverage. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Spacing issue with ledger lines and custom Marks context
Hello,
I posted a thread a week or two ago about the spacing issue with
MetronomeMarks and multimeasure rests. The upshot of that thread was that I
started using a custom context to display all my MetronomeMarks and
RehearsalMarks. It works great, except that whenever there are ledger lines,
the marks still affect the horizontal spacing of the notes. What I'd like to
happen is that the notes above the staff bump the MarkLine context to a
greater vertical distance from the staff, keeping the horizontal spacing
intact. Any ideas on how to accomplish that?
\version 2.14.2
\language english
\paper {
ragged-right = ##t
}
foo = \relative c''' {
\tempo For example
c4 d e f |
g f e d |
\mark \default
c e g f |
e2 c2 | \break
\tempo blah blah blah
R1*2 |
\mark \default
R1*2 | \break
\resetRelativeOctave c'''
\tempo For example
c4 d, e f |
g f e d |
\mark blah
e e g f |
e2 c2 |
}
\score {
\new MarkLine \foo
\new Staff { \compressFullBarRests \foo }
\layout {
\context {
\name MarkLine
\type Engraver_group
\consists Output_property_engraver
\consists Axis_group_engraver
\consists Mark_engraver
\consists Metronome_mark_engraver
% If you comment the following two lines, the notes space correctly
% The marks then don't space correctly over the multimeasure rests,
however
\override RehearsalMark #'extra-spacing-width = #'(0 . 0)
\override MetronomeMark #'extra-spacing-width = #'(0 . 0)
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-2 . 2 )
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-staff-spacing = #'((basic-distance
. 1)
(minimum-distance . 1)
(padding . 1)
(stretchability
. 3))
}
\context {
\Score
\override MultiMeasureRest #'expand-limit = #1
\remove Mark_engraver
\remove Metronome_mark_engraver
\accepts MarkLine
}
}
}
As I remarked in the comment, the extra-spacing-width is what causes the
horizontal spacing problem. As you can see from the third system in the
example, though, the extra-spacing-width works fine with the horizontal
spacing as long as the notes are low enough in the staff. Two ledger lines
above the staff seems to be the limit for MetronomeMarks before the note
spacing is affected; the top space of the staff seems to be the limit for
RehearsalMarks before note spacing is affected.
I'd really appreciate any suggestions on how to solve this issue.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Spacing-issue-with-ledger-lines-and-custom-Marks-context-tp33265399p33265399.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: Beam Collides with Clef Number
Hello,
On 5 February 2012 01:17, Jay Anderson horndud...@gmail.com wrote:
\version 2.15.28
\score
{
\new Staff \relative c''
{
\clef treble
c8^[
\clef bass^8
e,]
}
}
I'm pretty sure this is an OctavateEight created with the clef. Is
there a way to tell the beam to avoid it without code changes?
See:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/notation/displaying-pitches#clef
First snippets lower down the page
'Tweaking clef properties'
Also opened
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2284
--
--
James
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
