Re: Increase vertical spacing between systems
Hello dear fellow users, Am 04.07.2014 08:47, schrieb Pierre Perol-Schneider: system-system-spacing #'basic-distance = #19 is probably what you're looking for. It was! Thanks alot. padding also works. Am 04.07.2014 08:50, schrieb Martin Tarenskeen: v2.12 is quite old. Vertical spacing syntax has been drastically reworked since then. Am 04.07.2014 08:55, schrieb James: Please upgrade to the latest stable and you will have much better control (and documentation) over spacing. Now what I didn't notice, was the outdating of documentation, while my lilyponds are of version 2.14.2 (Linux) and 2.16.0 (Windows). Thank you and best wishes Hartmut -- Hartmut Leister hartmut.leis...@gmail.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
latest version breaks some functions
Hey all - I upgraded from 2.14 to 2.18 and this function which had used to work
fine now throws an error
metMod = #(define-music-function (parser location valueI valueII) (string?
string?)
#{
\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'outside-staff-priority = #1000
\mark \markup {
\concat {
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueI #1
=
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueII #1
}
}
#}
)
the error is somthing like GUILE expects input type string instead of input
type unassigned at #$valueI in line below
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueI #1
any idea what's broken??
thanks in advance - cheers Michael
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [openlilylib] Discuss restructuring
Am 05.07.2014 05:30, schrieb Paul Morris: Uns Liska wrote I can see the point and I'm ready to accept that approach. There is one issue, however, that I'd like to discuss before making any decision. \include file-name.ily opens the door wide for name conflicts. The more the names are speaking the more they will be likely to exist in other places too. Particularly as much of the stuff we have (and will have) is of quite similar characteristic as all the other files inside LilyPond which can be included directly. So I would suggest inserting a kind of namespace through the following: - don't name the root directory library but oll This is a good prefix as it is characteristic _and_ short - let the user add the actual root directory instead of the oll subdirectory to the include path - let the files be included with \include oll/file-name.ily Good point, and I think that's a good solution to it as well. The only drawback I see is that adding the root directory means you lose some of the separation between the files that are to be included and those that are not. Do you think it would be worth doing something like this to keep it? root/library/oll/filename.ily Users would add the library directory (limits access to just includable files), and it only contains the oll directory (provides namespace). Just an idea, not sure if the extra directory is worth it or not. Haha, that is *exactly* what I thought too yesterday. Go to https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/tree/reorganization and have a look at the library and usage-examples folders. They are a first sketch :-) The rest of what you wrote all sounds fine to me. Thanks. I think we will have to reconsider our metadata section and then do the transfer in that reorganization branch. I strongly suggest to excusively do that using pull requests, even among the members with push access. One more thing I would suggest to implement is some more standardization for the examples files. These should have formalized headers that are created by pulling in the fields from the definitions file. This should be quite easy to implement: Create one file with the redefinition of \booktitlemarkup and place this somewhere outside the user-accessible files. Then each examples file can simply include this with a relative path and there you go. (- This implies that our metadata considerations take this into account too) Best Urs Cheers, -Paul ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: latest version breaks some functions
2014-07-05 0:30 GMT+02:00 michael webster semiqua...@mac.com:
Hey all - I upgraded from 2.14 to 2.18 and this function which had used to
work fine now throws an error
metMod = #(define-music-function (parser location valueI valueII) (string?
string?)
#{
\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'outside-staff-priority = #1000
\mark \markup {
\concat {
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueI #1
=
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueII #1
}
}
#}
)
the error is somthing like GUILE expects input type string instead of
input type unassigned at #$valueI in line below
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #$valueI #1
any idea what's broken??
thanks in advance - cheers Michael
you should use \version 2.14.0 and run convert-ly on it
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: latest version breaks some functions
Hi,
2014-07-05 0:30 GMT+02:00 michael webster semiqua...@mac.com:
I upgraded from 2.14 to 2.18 and this function which had used to work fine
now throws an error
Try :
\version 2.18.2
metMod = #(define-music-function (parser location valueI valueII) (string?
string?)
#{
\tweak outside-staff-priority #1000
% optional:
%\tweak self-alignment-X #LEFT
\mark \markup {
\concat {
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #valueI #1
=
\smaller \general-align #Y #DOWN \note #valueII #1
}
}
#})
{
\metMod 16. 8
c'1
}
Pierre
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [SPAM] Re: [openlilylib] Discuss restructuring
Am 05.07.2014 10:31, schrieb Urs Liska: Thanks. I think we will have to reconsider our metadata section and then do the transfer in that reorganization branch. I strongly suggest to excusively do that using pull requests, even among the members with push access. One more thing I would suggest to implement is some more standardization for the examples files. These should have formalized headers that are created by pulling in the fields from the definitions file. This should be quite easy to implement: Create one file with the redefinition of \booktitlemarkup and place this somewhere outside the user-accessible files. Then each examples file can simply include this with a relative path and there you go. (- This implies that our metadata considerations take this into account too) I have updated the Wiki page https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/wiki and added a note about the reorganization process in the README.md on the restructuring branch. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Messiah version for the sake of updating
Hello. This is mainly for Monsieur N. Sceaux. I have been trying to compile nenuvar/Haendel/Oratorio/Messiah and the standard way via 'make' does not work for me with lilypond 2.19.9. First of all, I'd like to update the code to a more recent version, but my question is, what version is Messiah's code at? I can say Haendel/Opera/GiulioCesare is in \version 2.11.57 for example, but did not find any version statement in Messiah. If you were going to compile all of nenuvar/ , where would you start from? Thanks! -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
Sorry but I'm tiry after looking at all the choices I had, and so I'm a bit lost: in a line e1 ~ | e2 r2 | I want on e1 mi (as text), and on e2 bien. It's surely a humble question but I hadn'found the way to solve it an now I' tired. May you please help? Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Humble-question-text-at-the-second-note-in-a-ligature-tp164021.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
e1 ~ | e2 r2 | I want on e1 mi (as text), and on e2 bien. Are you sure that you want to write e1 ~ | e2 and not e1( | e2) ? I.e. a tie or a slur? I.e. is this one note e that lasts 6 beats or is it two that last 4 and 2 beats? As you two syllables, it looks to me as if these are two notes and a slur would help you to do what you want. Cheers, Joram ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
:-( didn't work - I'm sure it should be a simple thing, but after a lot of work on the score I'm going out of my head ... It's one note that lasts 4 + 2 beats, the word Mi is on its own place, but bien isn't on the 2 beats note Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Humble-question-text-at-the-second-note-in-a-ligature-tp164021p164024.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Messiah version for the sake of updating
2014-07-05 16:49 GMT+02:00 Nicolas Sceaux nicolas.sce...@free.fr: Le 5 juil. 2014 à 16:09, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com a écrit : Hello. This is mainly for Monsieur N. Sceaux. I have been trying to compile nenuvar/Haendel/Oratorio/Messiah and the standard way via 'make' does not work for me with lilypond 2.19.9. First of all, I'd like to update the code to a more recent version, but my question is, what version is Messiah's code at? I can say Haendel/Opera/GiulioCesare is in \version 2.11.57 for example, but did not find any version statement in Messiah. If you were going to compile all of nenuvar/ , where would you start from? I’m just updating the Messiah right now, so if you wait for a couple of days you’ll just have to type: make Haendel/Oratorio/Messiah This is great news. As for versions: if you look at http://nicolas.sceaux.free.fr/index.php/2012/02/29/32 and select from there the desired piece, you’ll see the lilypond version. Nicolas Thank you! -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
Am 05.07.2014 16:52, schrieb Son_V:
:-( didn't work - I'm sure it should be a simple thing, but after a lot of
work on the score I'm going out of my head ...
It's one note that lasts 4 + 2 beats, the word Mi is on its own place, but
bien isn't on the 2 beats note
Thanks.
I was too quick. With both, the tie and the slur, these notes are one
entity for Lilypond concerning lyrics. A phrasing slur works however:
\version 2.18.2
{ e1\( | e2\) r2 }
\addlyrics { Mi -- bien }
Please provide such complete minimal examples the next time, that
increases the chances that people answer and can help properly.
http://www.lilypond.org/tiny-examples.html
A similar question has been answered yesterday:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2014-07/msg00060.html
Does that help?
Joram
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
2014-07-05 16:32 GMT+02:00 Son_V vincenzo.a...@gmail.com:
e1 ~ | e2 r2 |
I want on e1 mi (as text), and on e2 bien.
You say text :
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/writing-text
\version 2.18.2
\relative c'' {
e1~^Mi e2^Bien r
}
It's surely a humble question but I hadn'found the way to solve it an now I'
tired. May you please help? Thanks.
If you mean lyrics :
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/vocal-music
\version 2.18.2
\new Voice = melody
\relative c''{
\set melismaBusyProperties = #'()
e1~ e4 r
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody {
Mi bien
}
HTH,
Pierre
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature
- Original Message - From: Son_V vincenzo.a...@gmail.com To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 3:52 PM Subject: Re: Humble question, text at the second note in a ligature :-( didn't work - I'm sure it should be a simple thing, but after a lot of work on the score I'm going out of my head ... It's one note that lasts 4 + 2 beats, the word Mi is on its own place, but bien isn't on the 2 beats note Thanks. Well, that makes no sense at all. You can't sing two syllables to a single note. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: legato lyrics
Martin Tarenskeen wrote
On Fri, 4 Jul 2014, Phil Holmes wrote:
- Original Message - From: Martin Tarenskeen
lt;
m.tarenskeen@
gt;
To: lilypond-user mailinglist lt;
lilypond-user@
gt;
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2014 9:59 AM
Subject: legato lyrics
Hi,
In the following example, why are the lyrics correct in the first bars,
but are failing when I add a legato slur ??
\version 2.19.8
mymelody = \relative c' {
c4 c4 g'4 g4 |
a4 a4 g2 |
\break
c,4( c4 g'4 g4 |
a4 a4 g2) \bar |.
}
mylyrics = \lyricmode { Twin- kle twin- kle lit- tle star }
\score {
\new Staff
\context Voice = mymelody { \mymelody }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto mymelody { \mylyrics \mylyrics }
\layout {}
}
Because this is how singers expect melisma to be expressed: please see
melisma in the NR. The simplest option (if you really want to confuse
your
singers) is to use a phrasing slur.
I see. Thank you.
--
MT
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
I second what Phil said. However, here's a reasonable solution that I think
you were looking for. There are two issues with your snippet that you'll
want to know about for future scores:
1. How you write multi-syllable lyrics. Instead of Twin- kle when you want
to add a hyphen, LilyPond can add a nicely centered one by adding a double
hyphen between the two syllables, like Twin -- kle. Notice a space on both
sides of the double hyphen.
2. If you really want to have that slur (it is appropriate at times), then
you can make LilyPond ignore what Phil was talking about by putting \set
melismaBusyProperties = #'() in the body of the notes, prior to the legato
section.
To sum up, here's the updated score with the two suggestions I mentioned
(highlighted):
\version 2.18.2
mymelody = \relative c' {
c4 c4 g'4 g4 |
a4 a4 g2 |
\break
/*\set melismaBusyProperties = #'()*/
c,4( c4 g'4 g4 |
a4 a4 g2) \bar |.
}
mylyrics = \lyricmode { Twin /*--*/ kle twin /*--*/ kle lit /*--*/ tle star
}
\score {
\new Staff
\context Voice = mymelody { \mymelody }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto mymelody { \mylyrics \mylyrics }
\layout {}
}
which results in the following:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n164029/legato-lyrics-solution.png
Hope that helps!
-Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/legato-lyrics-tp163970p164029.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Messiah version for the sake of updating
Le 5 juil. 2014 à 16:09, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com a écrit : Hello. This is mainly for Monsieur N. Sceaux. I have been trying to compile nenuvar/Haendel/Oratorio/Messiah and the standard way via 'make' does not work for me with lilypond 2.19.9. First of all, I'd like to update the code to a more recent version, but my question is, what version is Messiah's code at? I can say Haendel/Opera/GiulioCesare is in \version 2.11.57 for example, but did not find any version statement in Messiah. If you were going to compile all of nenuvar/ , where would you start from? I’m just updating the Messiah right now, so if you wait for a couple of days you’ll just have to type: make Haendel/Oratorio/Messiah As for versions: if you look at http://nicolas.sceaux.free.fr/index.php/2012/02/29/32 and select from there the desired piece, you’ll see the lilypond version. Nicolas ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: legato lyrics
- Original Message - From: tisimst tisi...@gmail.com To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 4:27 PM Subject: Re: legato lyrics 2. If you really want to have that slur (it is appropriate at times), I would say that there is almost no situation where a slur is appropriate to indicate legato to a singer. Its almost universal meaning is to show melisma, as I said. If it's not for this purpose, it's for phrasing/breathing and a phrasing slur would be appropriate. Singers sing legato when it is indicated with the word legato. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [SPAM] Re: [openlilylib] Discuss restructuring
Uns Liska wrote I have updated the Wiki page https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/wiki and added a note about the reorganization process in the README.md on the restructuring branch. It's looking good to me. From the wiki page: Probably it's a good idea to assign a primary tag (= category) to each snippet and an arbitrary number of secondary tags (like alternative index entries). The new directories you first suggested might be a good place to start for such primary tags (if there is to be such a primary tag). Here they are: instruments layout lyrics markup meta (naming?) git-commands lilypond-version-predicates notation period stylesheets tweaks There was some good feedback on these from earlier in the thread. If there are to be directories for stylesheets, templates, and custom-music-fonts, then shouldn't they all go under oll to get the namespace benefit? Users may want to use these directory names for their own templates, stylesheets, etc. that aren't part of oll. Seems like custom-music-fonts could be shortened to music-fonts. Cheers, -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/openlilylib-Discuss-restructuring-tp163922p164033.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [openlilylib] Discuss restructuring
Am 05.07.2014 18:22, schrieb Paul Morris: Uns Liska wrote I have updated the Wiki page https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/wiki and added a note about the reorganization process in the README.md on the restructuring branch. It's looking good to me. From the wiki page: Probably it's a good idea to assign a primary tag (= category) to each snippet and an arbitrary number of secondary tags (like alternative index entries). The new directories you first suggested might be a good place to start for such primary tags (if there is to be such a primary tag). Yes, that's what I thought too. Here they are: instruments layout lyrics markup meta (naming?) git-commands lilypond-version-predicates notation period stylesheets tweaks There was some good feedback on these from earlier in the thread. Some of them are good, some of them less so, I think. Maybe we could start going through the existing snippets and consider possible tags for each of them. This will make a pool of suggestions where we can filter out from. One question I still have is: Should the tags be flat too, i.e. single independent tags, or could there also be a hierarchy (which would then be reflected in the documentation)? For example I could imagine tagging a snippet markup-headers or notation-rhythm-polymetrics It would also make sense to use the same structure as in the Notation Reference. Hm? If there are to be directories for stylesheets, templates, and custom-music-fonts, then shouldn't they all go under oll to get the namespace benefit? Users may want to use these directory names for their own templates, stylesheets, etc. that aren't part of oll. Seems like custom-music-fonts could be shortened to music-fonts. I had partially done that already, but only on the Wiki, not in the README. I've now updated both (this duplication isn't intended to be persistent...). Urs Cheers, -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/openlilylib-Discuss-restructuring-tp163922p164033.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ 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
Problem ordering staves
I'm trying to do a score where one group of instruments splits and plays
different music for a while. I guess that this might be an instance of
ostia, but I am required to place the new music on two staves in their own
staff group. What I came up with is the following:
\version 2.18.2
A = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #A
\repeat unfold 4 { c d e f }
\break
\new ChoirStaff {
\set ChoirStaff.systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBrace
\set ChoirStaff.shortInstrumentName = #A
\new Staff { \repeat unfold 4 { c d e f } }
\new Staff { \repeat unfold 4 { f e d c } }
}
}
T = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #T
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = #T
\repeat unfold 8 { b b b b }
}
\score {
\new ChoirStaff
\new Staff { \A }
\new Staff { \T }
\layout {\context { \Staff \RemoveEmptyStaves} }
}
This works almost perfectly. The only problem is that the order of the staves
after the break is reversed from what I want, i.e., in the first system the A
staff is above the T staff, but in the second system, the T staff is above the
group of A staves. I am attaching a png of the above example.
I can see that somehow the new ChoirStaff is independent of the A staff, which
is why I am using the command \RemoveEmptyStafes; without it an empty staff
occupies the position above the T staff.
How can I get the ChoirStaff staves to appear above the T staff in the second
system?
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Cautionary \natural
The composer would like me to place a cautionary natural symbol on several notes. He specifies a /parenthesized/ natural. Can anyone help me find a way to do this? Charlie ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Cautionary \natural
{ c? }
On 5. Juli 2014 21:06:52 MESZ, Charles Marshall marsh...@potsdam.edu wrote:
The composer would like me to place a cautionary natural symbol on
several notes. He specifies a /parenthesized/ natural. Can anyone
help
me find a way to do this?
Charlie
___
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: Cautionary \natural
{ c? }
On 5. Juli 2014 21:06:52 MESZ, Charles Marshall marsh...@potsdam.edu wrote:
The composer would like me to place a cautionary natural symbol on
several notes. He specifies a /parenthesized/ natural. Can anyone
help
me find a way to do this?
Charlie
___
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: legato lyrics
On Sat, 5 Jul 2014, Phil Holmes wrote: - Original Message - From: tisimst tisi...@gmail.com To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2014 4:27 PM Subject: Re: legato lyrics 2. If you really want to have that slur (it is appropriate at times), I would say that there is almost no situation where a slur is appropriate to indicate legato to a singer. Its almost universal meaning is to show melisma, as I said. If it's not for this purpose, it's for phrasing/breathing and a phrasing slur would be appropriate. Thank you all. I learnt a few things again. Most important being the difference between a legato and a phrasing slur. In the real score I am working on (the Twinkle thing was just a tiny example) I needed both. In the Twinkle example a phrasing slur (or no slur at all) would be the correct choice. -- MT ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem ordering staves
Patrick or Cynthia Karl-2 wrote
I'm trying to do a score where one group of instruments splits and plays
different music for a while. I guess that this might be an instance of
ostia, but I am required to place the new music on two staves in their
own staff group. What I came up with is the following:
\version 2.18.2
A = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #A
\repeat unfold 4 { c d e f }
\break
\new ChoirStaff {
\set ChoirStaff.systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBrace
\set ChoirStaff.shortInstrumentName = #A
\new Staff { \repeat unfold 4 { c d e f } }
\new Staff { \repeat unfold 4 { f e d c } }
}
}
T = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #T
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = #T
\repeat unfold 8 { b b b b }
}
\score {
\new ChoirStaff
\new Staff { \A }
\new Staff { \T }
\layout {\context { \Staff \RemoveEmptyStaves} }
}
This works almost perfectly. The only problem is that the order of the
staves after the break is reversed from what I want, i.e., in the first
system the A staff is above the T staff, but in the second system, the T
staff is above the group of A staves. I am attaching a png of the above
example.
I can see that somehow the new ChoirStaff is independent of the A staff,
which is why I am using the command \RemoveEmptyStafes; without it an
empty staff occupies the position above the T staff.
How can I get the ChoirStaff staves to appear above the T staff in the
second system?
Here's how I would do it, which seems to work very well when I have had to
do something like this:
\version 2.18.2
A = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #A
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = #A
\repeat unfold 4 { c4 d e f }
\break
\repeat unfold 4 { s1 }
\break
\repeat unfold 4 { c4 d e f }
}
Aa = \relative b' {
\repeat unfold 4 { s1 }
\repeat unfold 4 { c4 d e f }
\repeat unfold 4 { s1 }
}
Ab = \relative b' {
\repeat unfold 4 { s1 }
\repeat unfold 4 { f4 e d c }
\repeat unfold 4 { s1 }
}
T = \relative b' {
\set Staff.instrumentName = #T
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = #T
\repeat unfold 12 { b4 b b b }
}
\score {
\new ChoirStaff
\new Staff { \A }
\new ChoirStaff {
\set ChoirStaff.systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBrace
\set ChoirStaff.shortInstrumentName = #A
\new Staff \Aa
\new Staff \Ab
}
\new Staff { \T }
\layout {
\context {
\Staff
\RemoveEmptyStaves
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'remove-first = ##t % required for this
solution
}
}
}
which gives:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n164051/temporary-staff-split-solution.png
Look that over and see if that philosophy works for you.
Regards,
Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Problem-ordering-staves-tp164044p164051.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
