Re: Subbeaming and first measure grace notes
On 24 Jul 2014, at 00:47, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> When I move the "\grace {g16 fs}" to before "\tuplet 3/2" the beaming is
> correct.
Doesn’t work for me.
On 24 Jul 2014, at 00:51, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> Corrected myself. Look at
> \grace {g16 fs} \tuplet 3/2 {e8 [ fs16 } g16 a16 ] b8 b |
> For the first measure.
This is a fix in both variations of placing the grace notes. The reason for
putting them inside the triplet is quite subtle: I want them to be possible to
expand to 1/32 notes, and having them outside makes the first tuplet 1/8 note
too short. It looks better though having them outside.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: Subbeaming and first measure grace notes
Hans,
When I move the "\grace {g16 fs}" to before "\tuplet 3/2" the beaming is
correct.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
Hans Aberg
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 3:33 PM
To: LilyPond Users
Subject: Subbeaming and first measure grace notes
Is this a bug in the example below? The grace notes inhibit the called for
subbeaming in the first measure; its OK in the following measure, and also
when adding \partial. One can take away the triplet and replace with 1/16
notes.
\version "2.19.10"
\language "english"
music = \new Staff {
\key e \minor
\tempo 4 = 84
\time 2/4
\set subdivideBeams = ##t
\set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1/8)
\set beatStructure = #'(2 2)
\relative e' {
\tuplet 3/2 {\grace {g16 fs} e8 fs16} g16 a16 b8 b |
\tuplet 3/2 {\grace {g16 a} b8 c16} a16 c16 b8-. g8 |
}
}
\score {
\music
\layout {}
}
___
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
Subbeaming and first measure grace notes
Is this a bug in the example below? The grace notes inhibit the called for
subbeaming in the first measure; its OK in the following measure, and also when
adding \partial. One can take away the triplet and replace with 1/16 notes.
\version "2.19.10"
\language "english"
music = \new Staff {
\key e \minor
\tempo 4 = 84
\time 2/4
\set subdivideBeams = ##t
\set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1/8)
\set beatStructure = #'(2 2)
\relative e' {
\tuplet 3/2 {\grace {g16 fs} e8 fs16} g16 a16 b8 b |
\tuplet 3/2 {\grace {g16 a} b8 c16} a16 c16 b8-. g8 |
}
}
\score {
\music
\layout {}
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Pseudo-handwritten font
Am 23.07.2014 23:08, schrieb tisimst: BTW, I've tried contacting Torsten again to see if he has a licensing preference for LilyJAZZ and LilyJAZZText (OFL, GPL, or whatever). Waiting to hear back now, though based on others' comments, he may be out of reach since last year. Yes, that seems to be true. I have also tried to get in touch with him, using phone book searches etc. but had no success. The question is basically how to interpret the first message accompanying the initial version of the font. It clearly expresses the intention of making the font available under a free license. But it _can_ be read as being targeted at some point in the future (-> when the work is ready to be published). Personally I am quite sure that this is not the case and that the use of the future tense is rather a characteristic of a German speaker's ambiguous translation. Best Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
Hi, 2014-07-23 18:07 GMT+02:00 Brian Barker : > At 13:46 23/07/2014 +0200, Karol Majewski wrote: >> >> And how to divide this: >> >> c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 >> >> or >> >> c4 c8 c4. c4 > > > Elaine Gould says (on pp.166-7) "Note-values sustained across a beat or > half-beat must expose the beat structure of the bar", "Only very > straightforward rhythms may be written across the beat or half-bar", and "In > 4/4 it is the third (not the fourth) beat that should be exposed". She gives > as an example: > c8 c4.~ c8 c4 c8 > and says "and not" > c8 c2 c4 c8 > > So she'd certainly pick your first option. I second that. Not earlier than on last Monday i was heavily confused by the notation similar to the second one (i.e. without explicit 3rd beat). I believe that something like that makes sight-reading much harder, unless someone is an expert in this kind of music. best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
2014-07-23 22:56 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup : > Ugh. > > We have shortcuts \chords, \lyrics, \figures, \drums. They are > documented sparingly if at all. > > Check the output of > > git grep '\\\(chords\|lyrics\|figures\|drums\)\b' > > for the number of occurences which are definitely significant though not > large. When used erroneously, they may lead to material unexpectedly > ending up in unnamed contexts. > > I think that \lyrics is the most likely candidate for trouble here. > Maybe we should obsolete it and save some other people 6 hours. +1! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Aw: Re: Pseudo-handwritten font
Keith OHara wrote > Torsten Hämmerle > > web.de> writes: > >> I've attached a zip file containing the current (albeit unfinished) >> versions of the LilyJAZZ music and LilyJAZZ Text font plus the >> corresponding LilyJAZZ.ily include. > >> The main obstacle is the rigid way Lilypond handles its (her, his?) >> internal music font. > > One effect of those difficulties is that the function that builds the > jazz-font key-signature needs to change with version 2.17.1 and later. > > I had expanded the options for how to print the key signature in that > versions, so we need to adapt 'jazz-keysig' to the new interface. > Changing a few lines to Thorsten's code as below works for me. > > > > #(define (jazz-keysig grob) > "stencil: jazz key signature (including cancellation)" > (let* ((altlist (ly:grob-property grob 'alteration-alist)) > (c0pos (ly:grob-property grob 'c0-position)) > (keysig-stencil '())) > (for-each (lambda (alt) > (let* ((alteration (if (grob::has-interface grob > 'key-cancellation- > interface) 0 (cdr alt))) > (glyphname (assoc-get alteration jazz-alteration-glyph-name-alist > "")) > (padding (cond >((< alteration 0) 0.25) ; any kind of flat >((= alteration 0) 0.05) ; natural >((< alteration 1) 0.1) ; sharp (less than double sharp) >(else -0.4))); double sharp > (ypos (key-signature-interface::alteration-positions alt c0pos > grob)) > (acc-stencil (fold (lambda (y s) > (ly:stencil-add > (grob-interpret-markup grob > (markup #:raise (/ y 2) #:jazzglyph > glyphname)) > s)) > empty-stencil > ypos))) > (set! keysig-stencil (ly:stencil-combine-at-edge acc-stencil X > RIGHT keysig-stencil padding altlist) > keysig-stencil)) > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user All, I realize that this thread is kind of old now, and a lot of work has gone into making LilyJAZZ work using some fun and fancy Scheme code, but it would appear that the once practical use of "\jazzOn", etc. should be abandoned in favor of the work I've done at making LilyJAZZ a fully compatible font? Just thinking out loud... BTW, I've tried contacting Torsten again to see if he has a licensing preference for LilyJAZZ and LilyJAZZText (OFL, GPL, or whatever). Waiting to hear back now, though based on others' comments, he may be out of reach since last year. Regards, Abraham P.S. Way to go Torsten! LilyJAZZ is awesome! Can't wait to get your work out in the LilyPond mainstream! Should be soon :) so stay tuned! -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Pseudo-handwritten-font-tp142117p164830.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: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
Larry Kent writes:
> Thanks for the replies, David Kastrup, Thomas Morley, David Nalesnik. The
> problem is fixed, and if you care to read how, keep reading; otherwise,
> thanks again and have a nice day.
>
> While trying to figure out how to create a "tiny example" that would
> duplicate my problem, which I was sure had to be happening because of the
> complicated layout, score block, incipit and choir staff markup etc etc, I
> found the problem, and it was very simple.
>
> When I was preparing this score with version 2.18 (from an original file
> that was in version 1.4), I had left the bass lyrics block with
> *textobassus=\lyrics{*
> rather than *textobassus=\lyricmode{*
>
> This was close enough that it compiled all right, and Frescobaldi did not
> flag it as an error, but it was enough to create the two little problems I
> mentioned originallyboth are fixed now.
>
> And it took me less than 6 hrs.
Ugh.
We have shortcuts \chords, \lyrics, \figures, \drums. They are
documented sparingly if at all.
Check the output of
git grep '\\\(chords\|lyrics\|figures\|drums\)\b'
for the number of occurences which are definitely significant though not
large. When used erroneously, they may lead to material unexpectedly
ending up in unnamed contexts.
I think that \lyrics is the most likely candidate for trouble here.
Maybe we should obsolete it and save some other people 6 hours.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
Thanks for the replies, David Kastrup, Thomas Morley, David Nalesnik. The
problem is fixed, and if you care to read how, keep reading; otherwise,
thanks again and have a nice day.
While trying to figure out how to create a "tiny example" that would
duplicate my problem, which I was sure had to be happening because of the
complicated layout, score block, incipit and choir staff markup etc etc, I
found the problem, and it was very simple.
When I was preparing this score with version 2.18 (from an original file
that was in version 1.4), I had left the bass lyrics block with
*textobassus=\lyrics{*
rather than *textobassus=\lyricmode{*
This was close enough that it compiled all right, and Frescobaldi did not
flag it as an error, but it was enough to create the two little problems I
mentioned originallyboth are fixed now.
And it took me less than 6 hrs.
Thanks again.
LK
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Thomas Morley
wrote:
> 2014-07-23 20:05 GMT+02:00 Larry Kent :
>
> > Any thoughts on this, anyone?
>
> http://www.lilypond.org/website/tiny-examples.html
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: When a singer speaks rather than sings.
And both do exactly what I was looking for. Thank you Mr. Kastrup and Mr.
Liska!
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:15 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> ivan.k.kuznet...@gmail.com writes:
>
> > In a vocal part I am notating, while the singer mostly
> > sings notated pitches, there are a few parts
> > where the singer will speak text in notated
> > rhythm.
> >
> > When this is done is scores that I have seen,
> > sometimes it is done with just stems, flags and
> > beams (but no note heads) such as in
> > the Charles Ives song "Charlie Rutlage".
> > I have also seen it just written with
> > the note heads as "x"s on a stave (such as
> > with a percussion score). How does
> > one go about implementing either method
> > in lilypond? I do prefer the latter, though.
>
> Here are two variants for 2.19.0 (with earlier versions, you'll need to
> repeat the pitch before each duration in the rhythmic section):
>
> \version "2.19.0"
> \new Voice { \xNote { c'' 4 4. 8 8 8 1 } }
> \new Voice \relative { c''4 d e f
>\temporary\override NoteHead.style = #'slash
>b, 4 4. 8 8 8 1
>\revert NoteHead.style
>a1
> }
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: When a singer speaks rather than sings.
ivan.k.kuznet...@gmail.com writes:
> In a vocal part I am notating, while the singer mostly
> sings notated pitches, there are a few parts
> where the singer will speak text in notated
> rhythm.
>
> When this is done is scores that I have seen,
> sometimes it is done with just stems, flags and
> beams (but no note heads) such as in
> the Charles Ives song "Charlie Rutlage".
> I have also seen it just written with
> the note heads as "x"s on a stave (such as
> with a percussion score). How does
> one go about implementing either method
> in lilypond? I do prefer the latter, though.
Here are two variants for 2.19.0 (with earlier versions, you'll need to
repeat the pitch before each duration in the rhythmic section):
\version "2.19.0"
\new Voice { \xNote { c'' 4 4. 8 8 8 1 } }
\new Voice \relative { c''4 d e f
\temporary\override NoteHead.style = #'slash
b, 4 4. 8 8 8 1
\revert NoteHead.style
a1
}
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: 19.10 install
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 09:36:26PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote: > Can it be you have a path setting pointing to some hidden 2.19.8 install? Apparently on June 16 (I have been using Lily for many years) a complete install was made in my home directory. It took a bit of work for lilypond not to keep trying to find that one. All is well now! Thank you, Paul > > What does lilypond -v give you when you invoke the executable explicitly? > > On 23. Juli 2014 21:32:36 MESZ, Paul Scott wrote: > >I have installed the GNU/Linux 64-bit 19.10 version several times > >(after uninstall-lilypond). > > > >Each time lilypond -v gives me GNU LilyPond 2.19.8 > >and running it on files with > >\version "2.19.10" > >gives: > >error: program too old: 2.19.8 (file requires: 2.19.10) > > > >TIA for any ideas? > > > >Paul Scott > > > > > > > > > >___ > >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: When a singer speaks rather than sings.
Am 23.07.2014 22:03, schrieb ivan.k.kuznet...@gmail.com: In a vocal part I am notating, while the singer mostly sings notated pitches, there are a few parts where the singer will speak text in notated rhythm. When this is done is scores that I have seen, sometimes it is done with just stems, flags and beams (but no note heads) such as in the Charles Ives song "Charlie Rutlage". I have also seen it just written with the note heads as "x"s on a stave (such as with a percussion score). How does one go about implementing either method in lilypond? I do prefer the latter, though. Thank you for your help. For the first you can simply remove the noteheads with \omit NoteHead (this will take effect in the voice immediately after you've written it). To revert back to normal singing write \undo \omit NoteHead. For your desired appearance use \override NoteHead.style = #'cross as described in http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/note-heads.html HTH Urs ___ 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 on Ancient Debian?
Il 23/lug/2014 21:04 "PMA" ha scritto: > > Hi List. > > My Debian version is Squeeze (oldstable), > with default LilyPond at version 2.12.3-7. > Debian testing, despite the name, is very stable and it has 2.18. If you want to keep the oldstable you can add testing repository and then pin the lilypond version. > Has any of you successfully upgraded LP > to version 2.18.0-1 on that system? > Or you can install the package provided by lilypond.org. It should contain all the dependencies needed to run lilypond. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
When a singer speaks rather than sings.
In a vocal part I am notating, while the singer mostly sings notated pitches, there are a few parts where the singer will speak text in notated rhythm. When this is done is scores that I have seen, sometimes it is done with just stems, flags and beams (but no note heads) such as in the Charles Ives song "Charlie Rutlage". I have also seen it just written with the note heads as "x"s on a stave (such as with a percussion score). How does one go about implementing either method in lilypond? I do prefer the latter, though. Thank you for your help. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: something's wrong with \unset Score.proportionalNotationDuration
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:01 PM, tisimst wrote: > Karol, > > I've seen this kind of thing happen in other cases (but I can't remember a > single one at the moment). The issue is that you must \unset the > proportionalNotationDuration one note PRIOR to when it is to actually take > effect. Like this: > > ... > > Not sure why this is the case, but I think there's a technical reason that > it must be this way (I wish I could remember other cases where this > applies... Any else remember other cases where this happens?). > \set associatedVoice http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/stanzas#Switching-to-an-alternative-melody ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: music-to-markup
Am 23.07.2014 18:52, schrieb David Kastrup:
Urs Liska writes:
is it possible to take a music expression and print out its literal
input?
Sort of.
In other words: Could I write a function "\example" that takes a music
expression as an argument and that first outputs the input code as
text and then as a score?
So that
\example {
\relative c' {
c8 d e
}
}
Well, if you write
example =
#(make-scheme-function (parser location music) (ly:music)
...
then (ly:input-both-locations location)
will return
-- Function: ly:input-both-locations sip
Return input location in SIP as ‘(file-name first-line first-column
last-line last-column)’.
So you'll be able to take the input location information and read the
corresponding source from the file.
So you mean I should parse this (example result):
(/tmp/frescobaldi-4Orug3/tmp8Y5V5X/document.ly 8 0 16 1)
open the file (separately) from Scheme and read the given range?
You're right, that looks somewhat awkward but whould give me a start.
Thanks
Urs
It is sort of annoying that LilyPond does not offer something already
doing that since it _does_ have the information available (as you can
see when it produces error messages).
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: 19.10 install
Or: which -a lilypond Then you can check the -v of each binary Il 23/lug/2014 21:36 "Urs Liska" ha scritto: > Can it be you have a path setting pointing to some hidden 2.19.8 install? > > What does lilypond -v give you when you invoke the executable explicitly? > > On 23. Juli 2014 21:32:36 MESZ, Paul Scott wrote: >> >> I have installed the GNU/Linux 64-bit 19.10 version several times >> (after uninstall-lilypond). >> >> Each time lilypond -v gives me GNU LilyPond 2.19.8 >> and running it on files with >> \version "2.19.10" >> gives: >> error: program too old: 2.19.8 (file requires: 2.19.10) >> >> TIA for any ideas? >> >> Paul Scott >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> 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: 19.10 install
Can it be you have a path setting pointing to some hidden 2.19.8 install? What does lilypond -v give you when you invoke the executable explicitly? On 23. Juli 2014 21:32:36 MESZ, Paul Scott wrote: >I have installed the GNU/Linux 64-bit 19.10 version several times >(after uninstall-lilypond). > >Each time lilypond -v gives me GNU LilyPond 2.19.8 >and running it on files with >\version "2.19.10" >gives: >error: program too old: 2.19.8 (file requires: 2.19.10) > >TIA for any ideas? > >Paul Scott > > > > >___ >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
19.10 install
I have installed the GNU/Linux 64-bit 19.10 version several times (after uninstall-lilypond). Each time lilypond -v gives me GNU LilyPond 2.19.8 and running it on files with \version "2.19.10" gives: error: program too old: 2.19.8 (file requires: 2.19.10) TIA for any ideas? Paul Scott ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Vibrato using textspanner - stopping before a bar-line
I've been using the textspanner to indicate vibrato on notes. This works on
the whole quite well, usually a bit better if I use a hidden grace note to stop
the textspan when finishing the vibrato. However, it doesn't quite work as I'd
hoped for notes at the end of a bar. I would like the vibrato sign (the wavy
line) to stop before the bar not continue on to the next bar. (This is even
more so when the vibrato is at the end of a line.)
The following example shows the issue:
\version "2.18.2"
startVib = -\single\override TextSpanner.style = #'trill
-\single\override TextSpanner.minimum-length = #10
-\single\override TextSpanner.springs-and-rods = #ly:spanner::set-spacing-rods
-\startTextSpan
\score {
<<
\new Staff { \clef "treble"
\relative c' {
c \startVib c \stopTextSpan c c |
c \startVib \hideNotes \grace c \stopTextSpan \unHideNotes c c
c \startVib \hideNotes \grace c \stopTextSpan \unHideNotes |
c c c c |
}
}
>>
}
Any advice?
Martyn
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond on Ancient Debian?
PMA-2 wrote > Hi List. > > My Debian version is Squeeze (oldstable), > with default LilyPond at version 2.12.3-7. > > Has any of you successfully upgraded LP > to version 2.18.0-1 on that system? > > Thanks, > Pete > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Is Squeeze really that "ancient"? Yikes! Well I run the newest unstable LilyPond on Debian (many flavors, some older) without issue, so I think you should be good. Unless I'm missing something... - composer | sound designer LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/New-LilyPond-on-Ancient-Debian-tp164813p164814.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
New LilyPond on Ancient Debian?
Hi List. My Debian version is Squeeze (oldstable), with default LilyPond at version 2.12.3-7. Has any of you successfully upgraded LP to version 2.18.0-1 on that system? Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: music-to-markup
Urs Liska writes:
> is it possible to take a music expression and print out its literal
> input?
Sort of.
> In other words: Could I write a function "\example" that takes a music
> expression as an argument and that first outputs the input code as
> text and then as a score?
>
> So that
>
> \example {
> \relative c' {
> c8 d e
> }
> }
Well, if you write
example =
#(make-scheme-function (parser location music) (ly:music)
...
then (ly:input-both-locations location)
will return
-- Function: ly:input-both-locations sip
Return input location in SIP as ‘(file-name first-line first-column
last-line last-column)’.
So you'll be able to take the input location information and read the
corresponding source from the file.
It is sort of annoying that LilyPond does not offer something already
doing that since it _does_ have the information available (as you can
see when it produces error messages).
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
Larry Kent writes: > Interesting quirk that popped up this morning, and I wonder if anyone else > has come across anything similar. > > I'm working on an "a cappella" choral score, and the lyrics are > misbehaving - but only in the bass part. Here's what is happening: > > 1. Lyric extenders do not appear in the bass part, although they do show > up as expected in every other part. Just to make sure I was not mis-typing > or something, I copied and pasted the same text etc from the alto part, but > no luck. > > 2. The second problem is not connected to extenders, but is also limited > only to the bass part (same score as above). Throughout the score, in the > bass part, the final syllable of a hyphenated word is left-aligned rather > than centered, as it should be - and as it is in all of the other parts > throughout. > > > A couple of details that might help anyone who wants to offer theories or > advice: > > 1. I'm not using any slurs, and not asking anything to happen > automatically with the lyrics. > > 2. I'm running LilyPond 2.18 and 2.16 (with the same results), Windows 8.1 > and I use Frescobaldi 2.0.16 to edit and compile the score. I also ran it > directly in LilyPond 2.18, all with the same results. > > Any thoughts on this, anyone? I seem to remember you need a properly associated voice for lyrics to show extenders. So you probably broke the association in some manner. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
2014-07-23 20:05 GMT+02:00 Larry Kent : > Any thoughts on this, anyone? http://www.lilypond.org/website/tiny-examples.html ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
Hi Larry, On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:05 PM, Larry Kent wrote: > > Any thoughts on this, anyone? > > I think that this will be impossible to address without a minimal compiling example showing your problem. See http://lilypond.org/tiny-examples.html --David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Mystery quirk in lyrics - only in the bass part
Interesting quirk that popped up this morning, and I wonder if anyone else has come across anything similar. I'm working on an "a cappella" choral score, and the lyrics are misbehaving - but only in the bass part. Here's what is happening: 1. Lyric extenders do not appear in the bass part, although they do show up as expected in every other part. Just to make sure I was not mis-typing or something, I copied and pasted the same text etc from the alto part, but no luck. 2. The second problem is not connected to extenders, but is also limited only to the bass part (same score as above). Throughout the score, in the bass part, the final syllable of a hyphenated word is left-aligned rather than centered, as it should be - and as it is in all of the other parts throughout. A couple of details that might help anyone who wants to offer theories or advice: 1. I'm not using any slurs, and not asking anything to happen automatically with the lyrics. 2. I'm running LilyPond 2.18 and 2.16 (with the same results), Windows 8.1 and I use Frescobaldi 2.0.16 to edit and compile the score. I also ran it directly in LilyPond 2.18, all with the same results. Any thoughts on this, anyone? Thanks in advance. Larry Kent Tampa, Florida ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: music-to-markup
On 23/07/14 17:04, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi all,
is it possible to take a music expression and print out its literal
input?
In other words: Could I write a function "\example" that takes a music
expression as an argument and that first outputs the input code as
text and then as a score?
So that
\example {
\relative c' {
c8 d e
}
}
would turn out the same as writing
\markup \typewriter \column {
"\\relative c' {"
" c8 d e"
"}"
}
\score {
\relative c' {
c8 d e f
}
}
This would be cool for writing LilyPond usage examples where you can
print the input and get the result from it. Unfortunately I don't have
a clue whether or how this can be achieved.
Isn't this what lilypond-book does already?
When for example you create an
@lilypond[verbatim,relative=1]
...
@end lilypond
It outputs the real output but also with the verbatim gives you the
'code' as well which we use in the docs.
Now that doesn't mean that it translates straight to a SCM function (to
make youre \example function) but if you look in the source in
$LILYPOND_GIT/python/ all the various book* py files I think would give
you clues.
Regards
James
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
At 13:46 23/07/2014 +0200, Karol Majewski wrote: And how to divide this: c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 or c4 c8 c4. c4 Elaine Gould says (on pp.166-7) "Note-values sustained across a beat or half-beat must expose the beat structure of the bar", "Only very straightforward rhythms may be written across the beat or half-bar", and "In 4/4 it is the third (not the fourth) beat that should be exposed". She gives as an example: c8 c4.~ c8 c4 c8 and says "and not" c8 c2 c4 c8 So she'd certainly pick your first option. I trust this helps. Brian Barker ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
music-to-markup
Hi all,
is it possible to take a music expression and print out its literal input?
In other words: Could I write a function "\example" that takes a music
expression as an argument and that first outputs the input code as text
and then as a score?
So that
\example {
\relative c' {
c8 d e
}
}
would turn out the same as writing
\markup \typewriter \column {
"\\relative c' {"
" c8 d e"
"}"
}
\score {
\relative c' {
c8 d e f
}
}
This would be cool for writing LilyPond usage examples where you can
print the input and get the result from it. Unfortunately I don't have a
clue whether or how this can be achieved.
Thanks for any hints
Urs
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
On Jul 23, 2014, at 6:25 PM, Phil Holmes wrote: > - Original Message - From: Mike Solomon > >> I’ve never seen a hemiola in 4/4 - the most frequent use of it I’ve seen is >> in 3/8 in Händel’s music. > > Something of a cheat, but check out Sea Fever, by John Ireland - the > penultimate bar in each verse? > ’tis cheating - I vote for taking away one point from John Ireland for violating the “Thou shalt not write a 12/8 piece in 4/4 unless said 12/8 piece is consistently swung and you are using the two eighths equals triplet quarter triplet 8th” commandment. Cheers, MS ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > I’ve never seen a hemiola in 4/4 - the most frequent use of it I’ve seen is > in 3/8 in Händel’s music. I've seen a few in the Piano part of 'Oh Holy Night', which is in 12/8ths time. Christ van Willegen -- 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:19 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> "Karol Majewski" writes: >>> Thanks David, but you answered an old question :) My current question is related to: c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 vs c4 c8 c4. c4 >>> >>> Jazzers would pick #1, Baroque composers #2. >>> >> >> I don’t recall seeing c4 c8 c4. c4 in any scores - I’d be curious to >> see who would use that and why. The only use case I can think of off >> the cuff is a compound 3/8 + 5/8 time signature. Otherwise, I think >> my brain would glitch if I didn’t see the beginning of the 2nd beat in >> common time, irrespective of the style. > > Baroque and Renaissance stuff often does not even heed the bar line > regarding note lengths, and, as opposed to modern music, putting > excessive metric stresses to off-beat notes ruins the subtleties. This is true. In the example you sent at rehearsal B, the feel is 3/4 alternating with 6/8. This is a common convention in Renaissance dance music. As a result, the measure at B has a 3 feel and is written as such whereas the second measure has a 6/8 feel and has a dotted quarter. What I was talking about in the previous e-mail was common time - I can’t think of a piece I’ve seen that uses the convention Karol was talking about. > A > device quite often employed (and partly restricted to some voices) is > that of the hemiola. Often with Bach it is not readily apparent in the > notation, but it emerges when you use the normal word stresses on > syllables. I’ve never seen a hemiola in 4/4 - the most frequent use of it I’ve seen is in 3/8 in Händel’s music. > > Here are fragments from Dowland's "The Earl of Essex his Galliard" (and > yes, getting this flowing nicely was a bit of a challenge for me even > though I only had to play the violin). The point here is not that you > can claim "one measure is this way, another is that, and those are > actually a hemiola". The whole fun is with the ambiguity. Using more > ties than absolutely necessary distracts from that by overemphasizing > the beats. I completely agree - that is one of the interesting aspects of this music. My response was purely based on the 4/4 time in the question, but you’re right that pieces in 3 often play on rhythmic ambiguity. Cheers, MS___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
Mike Solomon writes: > On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:19 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> "Karol Majewski" writes: >> >>> Thanks David, but you answered an old question :) >>> >>> My current question is related to: >>> >>> >>> c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 >>> >>> vs >>> >>> c4 c8 c4. c4 >> >> Jazzers would pick #1, Baroque composers #2. >> > > I don’t recall seeing c4 c8 c4. c4 in any scores - I’d be curious to > see who would use that and why. The only use case I can think of off > the cuff is a compound 3/8 + 5/8 time signature. Otherwise, I think > my brain would glitch if I didn’t see the beginning of the 2nd beat in > common time, irrespective of the style. Baroque and Renaissance stuff often does not even heed the bar line regarding note lengths, and, as opposed to modern music, putting excessive metric stresses to off-beat notes ruins the subtleties. A device quite often employed (and partly restricted to some voices) is that of the hemiola. Often with Bach it is not readily apparent in the notation, but it emerges when you use the normal word stresses on syllables. Here are fragments from Dowland's "The Earl of Essex his Galliard" (and yes, getting this flowing nicely was a bit of a challenge for me even though I only had to play the violin). The point here is not that you can claim "one measure is this way, another is that, and those are actually a hemiola". The whole fun is with the ambiguity. Using more ties than absolutely necessary distracts from that by overemphasizing the beats. I think you'll find similar things with Bach's St John's and St Matthews Passions IIRC. And of course, Renaissance is full of it. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
On Jul 23, 2014, at 3:19 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > "Karol Majewski" writes: > >> Thanks David, but you answered an old question :) >> >> My current question is related to: >> >> >> c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 >> >> vs >> >> c4 c8 c4. c4 > > Jazzers would pick #1, Baroque composers #2. > I don’t recall seeing c4 c8 c4. c4 in any scores - I’d be curious to see who would use that and why. The only use case I can think of off the cuff is a compound 3/8 + 5/8 time signature. Otherwise, I think my brain would glitch if I didn’t see the beginning of the 2nd beat in common time, irrespective of the style. Cheers, MS ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
"Karol Majewski" writes: > Thanks David, but you answered an old question :) > > My current question is related to: > > > c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 > > vs > > c4 c8 c4. c4 Jazzers would pick #1, Baroque composers #2. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
Thanks David, but you answered an old question :) My current question is related to: c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 vs c4 c8 c4. c4 --Karol ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
"Karol Majewski" writes:
> Hi,
>
> I have question that is not related directly to lilypond. It refers to
> notation rules. How to divide a long note that starts at first
> half-beat in 4/4:
>
> r8 c8 ~ c2.
Probably does not start at a good time for that. If you tie together a
short and significantly longer note, you basically do it if the "real"
rhythm would be the long note and the short note just gives it an early
start. Now without more context (like vocals, what went on before,
other voices), it is not clear at all that we have this kind of
situation. Could be, but it's sort of improbable with just this
snippet: it's more likely that the weight is on the third rather than
the second quarter in 4/4.
> or
>
> r8 c4. ~ c2
I'd probably use that in most situations. It has been suggested to
write r8 c~4~2 here, but I find that excessive (Jazz/Swing notation
tends to be annoyingly explicit in using ties in order not to have notes
start on anything but a beat compatible with their length).
Of course, you can also theoretically write r8 c2.. but indeed the
double-dotted notes tend to come either on the beat or at least are
preceded with the complementing on-beat short note.
But one could do this in, say, an arpeggiated situation with
<< { r4. c'8~2 } \\
{ r4 b2. } \\
{ r8 g2.. } \\
{ e1 }
>>
In this case one does not want to substructure the notes more than
necessary: the rhythmic structure is given by the rests and the chord is
basically rhythmically rigid apart from the onsets.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: something's wrong with \unset Score.proportionalNotationDuration
Aha, thanks for explanation. Anyway, this behavior of Lily is confusing. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation rule question
And how to divide this: c4 c8 c8~ c4 c4 or c4 c8 c4. c4 Again - couldn't find such rhythmic structure in my collection of hand engraved scores. --Karol ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
