Re: ScholarLy and polymetric music? (bar numbering, \RemoveEmptyStaffContext)

[Graham King]

On Wed, 2015-11-11 at 09:18 +0100, Urs Liska wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Am 11.11.2015 um 01:32 schrieb Graham King:
> 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 22:50 +0100, Urs Liska wrote: 
> > 
> > > Am 10.11.2015 um 18:06 schrieb Graham King:
> > > > On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 10:09 +0100, Urs Liska wrote:



> > > >> I'm not so sure that it will be possible to implement a solution that
> > > >> really works automatically and is at the same time sufficiently
> > > >> general. But you'd be in any case to create a manual solution, if
> > > >> that's a viable approach given your material (that is: how many of
> > > >> these annotations do you expect, will the numbering be stable or will
> > > >> you have to expect any changes after the fact?)
> > > 
> > > > Very happy to intervene manually in bar numbering.  The remainder of
> > > > this thread is opening my eyes to the difficulty of automating that.
> > > 
> > > Just to avoid misunderstandings: What I am thinking about is an approach
> > > where you add a custom property passing a barnumber manually to the
> > > annotation. I don't think we'll be able to manually modify LilyPond's
> > > idea of barnumbers.
> > 
> > Thanks for the clarification.  I don't think it's a problem so long
> > as two aspects of the workflow are covered:
> > 1: during the preparation of the score, we'll need to be able to
> > capture the issues and display them somehow, and relate each issue
> > to its place in the score.  This does not need barnumbers as we
> > still have source code (and maybe an IDE).  Almost certainly not a
> > problem.  
> 
> 
> The annotations do have their connection to the originating objects,
> regardless of being able to determine a proper musical position. The
> messages printed to the console are linked to the input position, so
> clicking on a message will move the cursor to the annotation, and the
> objects are colored in the score so you have the same navigation
> available through point-and-click.
> 
> If you want to have something readable available I would suggest the
> following:
> (temporarily) move the \annotationProcessor from the Score to another
> context. Choose the one that you consider the "master" context (as per
> Kieren's concept). Then the annotations *should* (not tested yet) get
> the master context's barnumber and a partial measure starting from
> that context's last barline.
> 
> 
> > 2: Bar numbers need to crystallise only at the publication stage. 
> > 
> > > >> We would surely be able to taylor a solution using either a custom
> > > >> annotation type or a custom annotation property.
> > 
> > Now I get it.  The human being at the keyboard tells ScholarLy the
> > bar number.  I'm happy with that.  I might add a git hook to flash
> > at me a message: "Now go back and adjust the bar numbers in the
> > annotations!" :-)  Seriously: It will very rarely be an issue.
> 
> 
> Well, actually I would then do that as one single step towards the end
> of the edition process, when you're sufficiently sure that neither the
> music nor your bar numbering scheme will change anymore.
> It is a compromise, but so far I don't see a solution that could be
> completely automated (due to the conceptual difficulties, not the
> implementation).
> 
> 
> > > >>
> > > >> As a start you could try out and tell us what LilyPond/ScholarLY do by
> > > >> default if used in polymetric scores. I *assume* that LilyPond
> > > >> maintains individual bar numberings for each context
> > > 
> > > > Yes, that appears to be the case.
> > > 
> > > >> and that ScholarLY will just use the "local" barnumbers, without even
> > > >> knowing there's an issue. But it would be nice if you could verify 
> > > >> that.
> > > 
> > > > Scholarly gives the message: "Sorry, rhythmic position could not be
> > > > determined."
> > > 
> > > OK, I see why this happens 



> > > annotate "installs" itself in the Score context, and in polymetric
> > > scores the timing-translator has to be removed from that context.
> > > 
> > > So to approach the issue one would have to remove \annotationProcessor
> > > from the Score context and "consist" it in another context.
> > > 
> > > I don't know what would happen if it would be added to more than one
> > > context (I can't really imagine it would work).
> > > What would probably work *in principle* is adding that to the context
> > > Kieren would take as the "master" context.
> > 
> > This passeth my understanding.  
> 
> 
> Mine too :-) That's why I would like you to simply try it out ...
> 
> Best
> Urs
> 
> 
> > I'll play with contexts in the morning.  Thanks again. 
> > 
> > > I assume (can't test currently) that any annotation would then get the
> > > barnumber of the master context and the partial measure calculated from
> > > there. Of course this wouldn't give very useful results but it would be
> > > interesting to check out anyway ...
> > > 
> > > Good luck
> > > Urs
> > > 
> > > > I hope I'm making a valid test: Had a bit of trouble integrating
> > > > 

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi David,
>
>> But if you have to close the group anyway with a brace, where is the
>> point in not just doing a music function doing
>> 
>> { \temporary $xxx ... \undo $xxx }
>
> Wouldn’t one have to create a separate music function for each possible tweak?
> If not, then there is, as you say, no point.

ranged =
#(define-music-function (overrides music) (ly:music? ly:music?)
   #{ \temporary $overrides #music \undo $overrides #})

\ranged \override xxx.xxx = ... { c d e f }

\ranged { \override ...
  \override ...
}
{
  c d e f
}

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

misleading message and exit code when "program too old"

[Johannes Waldmann]

Hi. I am getting this:

Parsing...
error: program too old: 2.18.2 (file requires: 2.19.0)

but apparently it's not an error,
since the processing continues,
and the pdf file is produced.

but still, my Makefile is confused
because the exit code is 1 (not 0)

I can turn off exit code checking in the Makefile
but that's a drastic measure (I'll miss all other
errors as well).

- J.W.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Scholarly footnotes

[Urs Liska]

Am 10.11.2015 um 17:39 schrieb Urs Liska:
>
>
> Am 10.11.2015 um 17:08 schrieb Graham King:
>> ...  long snip ...
>>
>> I confess I'm a bit daunted by the LaTeX learning curve, and it is
>> possible that I'm not uniquely inadequate in that respect.  So a
>> Lilypond-only solution would be ideal for me, and would save others
>> the prospect of learning yet-another-language.  
>
> OK, on the long run I will want to have both, but actually it doesn't
> matter where to start ...
>
>> I'm brainstorming a bit here, but if, for example, ScholarLy could
>> make its annotations available as a Scheme array for metadata and
>> markup, the lilypond user could access that array in a \markup block
>> after the end of the music.  Layout could then be left to the user,
>> selecting just the desired elements of data.
>>
>> The array might look something like:
>> (((author . "A.N.Other")
>>   (bar . 2)
>>   (beat . 1)
>>   (text . "\markup { \note #"4" #1 } added")
>>   ...)
>> ((author . "F.Bloggs")
>>   (bar . 5)
>>   ...)
>> ...))
>
> I haven't looked in the code right now, but I'm pretty sure there *is*
> such a Scheme tree structure at some point. The question is if that is
> available at the moment we'd need it.
> While parsing the input annotations are built and added to an array,
> and when parsing is finished they are processed, i.e. sorted,
> (optionally) filtered and exported. I'm not sure if a reasonable
> representation is already available when regular markup is used and
> interpreted.
>
> One thing should definitely be possible: Writing that structure out to
> a temporary file and read that in at a later moment. Maybe this would
> allow to use the data only in another bookpart? But that's something
> to be discussed with those people who know more about the process of
> collecting elements of a book.
>

Now I've looked into it *to some extent*, and it seems my assumption was
quite appropriate.

'annotate' works in two steps and has two separate engravers:
\annotationCollector is (automatically) consisted to all the staff-like
contexts. Whenever it comes across an annotation in the input it appends
an object to a global 'annotations' list.

Later \annotationProcessor (which is consisted to the Score context)
iterates over this list, applies filtering and sorting, and exports it
to the desired targets.

It is possible to access the annotations list/array from within
\annotationProcessor, and it is easy to create a command (like e.g.
\printReport) that switches of a certain processing.

But when I try to access the 'annotations' object from LilyPond input
(be it from a toplevel command before or after the score or whenever, or
from within the music) this object seems to be empty.

So I assume that it's only possible to access the information from
within the engraver and not from the user code.

This leaves two options, and I would like to get an opinion which of
these is/are possible:

a)
have that \annotationProcessor produce some markup in the current score,
presumably (starting) on a new page at the end of the score or have it
create a new bookpart consisting of such markup

b)
write out the data to a temporary file (clearly possible) for another
command. This would have to read in the data and produce the necessary
markup. Would it be possible to place such a command in a new bookpart,
i.e. have an engraver in one bookpart write out something to disk and
sos me other function in a later bookpart read that in again?

c)
as a last resort LilyPond could write the data to a temporary file and a
second command could process that data from within *another* file that
would have to be compiled separately.
This would of course be quite hacky but still avoid having to use a
second tool (LaTeX).

I'd be grateful for any opinions/suggestions/solutions.

Urs

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: ScholarLy and polymetric music? (bar numbering, \RemoveEmptyStaffContext)

[Urs Liska]

Am 11.11.2015 um 11:14 schrieb Graham King:
> 
 annotate "installs" itself in the Score context, and in polymetric
 scores the timing-translator has to be removed from that context.

 So to approach the issue one would have to remove \annotationProcessor
 from the Score context and "consist" it in another context.

 I don't know what would happen if it would be added to more than one
 context (I can't really imagine it would work).
 What would probably work *in principle* is adding that to the context
 Kieren would take as the "master" context.
>>> This passeth my understanding. 
>>
>> Mine too :-) That's why I would like you to simply try it out ...
>>
>> Best
>> Urs
>>
>>> I'll play with contexts in the morning.  Thanks again.
 I assume (can't test currently) that any annotation would then get the
 barnumber of the master context and the partial measure calculated from
 there. Of course this wouldn't give very useful results but it would be
 interesting to check out anyway ...

 Good luck
 Urs

 > I hope I'm making a valid test: Had a bit of trouble integrating
 > ScholarLy with a short test score, so I just plugged the \include
 > statements and a \criticalRemark stanza into the
 > Isaac_Confessoribus_Prosa2.ly (which is full of polyrhythms).
 Will pick
 > up again late tonight or tomorrow, to check that \scaleDurations
 is not
 > messing things up. Must dash now.
 >>
 >> Urs
 >
> OK, I think I have a reasonable test case (attached).  Toggling the
> block comment at lines 66 & 79 shows the effect of moving
> \annotationProcessor between the Score and Staff contexts.
> Alas, in Staff context, it still gives "Sorry, rhythmic position could
> not be determined."

OK, I looked into it a little bit (this actually *is* a good test case),
and I think we're in a kind of dead end. At least I don't see a way out
or any use investigating further without a very clear idea what we
eventually want to achieve. Sorry.

The "error" message is produced when formatting an annotation for
export, and actually is a workaround for a situation that would
otherwise crash annotate: The "rhythmic-location" that is present in the
annotation pretends to be (0 0/0). From my source comments this seems to
be a "workaround for a problem that sometimes the paperColumn gets lost
along the way" - and I must say that I'm completely at a loss here. And
as we don't really know what we're after I don't think it makes sense to
really dive into this.

Except if David Nalesnik (who has written major parts of this) would
take on the challenge. If you do, David, I'll give you the pointers
where the stuff is sitting.

Best
Urs
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Kieren, et.al.,

David came up with a nice solution :)
To get such a function with the edition-engraver, we will have to 
integrate some other piece. The proposed solution works horizontal in 
time, while the edition-engraver is triggered "vertically" in time. So 
there has to be an event, which triggers the revert/undo.

This might be entered with an offset in time - a duration/moment.

Hm, one task on my TODO-list ...

Again I can only say, I am able hope to work on it soon!

For now,
cheers,
Jan-Peter

Am 11.11.2015 um 15:52 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:

Hi David,

As always, a wonderful solution. Thank you!

%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS
\version "2.19.30"

ranged =
#(define-music-function (overrides music) (ly:music? ly:music?)
   #{ \temporary $overrides #music \undo $overrides #})

{
   c d e f
   \ranged \override NoteHead.color = #red { c d e f }
   c d e f
}
%%%  SNIPPET ENDS

Now [Jan-Peter? Urs? David?]…
Can this be modified/reimagined so that it can be applied via the 
edition-engraver?

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

As always, a wonderful solution. Thank you!

%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS
\version "2.19.30"

ranged =
#(define-music-function (overrides music) (ly:music? ly:music?)
  #{ \temporary $overrides #music \undo $overrides #})

{
  c d e f
  \ranged \override NoteHead.color = #red { c d e f }
  c d e f
}
%%%  SNIPPET ENDS

Now [Jan-Peter? Urs? David?]…
Can this be modified/reimagined so that it can be applied via the 
edition-engraver?

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Johan,

> I'd hate the counting of measures…

Me, too… but…?

>  { \local LyricText.extra-offset = #’(0 . -1) … }

Ah! Even better.

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Johan Vromans]

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:42:58 +0100
David Kastrup  wrote:

> But if you have to close the group anyway with a brace, where is the
> point in not just doing a music function doing
> 
> { \temporary $xxx ... \undo $xxx }

I do not see how to cope with the $xxx. Could you give an example
imlememtation of \local using this method?

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Alberto Simões]

Dear list,

Again, I am both pleased to announce the transcription of the Gounod 
Suite of Valses, "Le Rendez Vous" [1] and asking for any correction you 
might suggest.


There is a couple of details you will find different from the original 
that are my own decision. But they should be clear.


I will upload the PDF to IMSLP during the weekend.

Thank you all for your precious help, without which I wouldn't be able 
to accomplish this task (both for Lilypond itself, as for feedback and 
random help).


Best,
Alberto

[1] https://github.com/ambs/music/tree/master/Gounod/LeRendezVous

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

> But if you have to close the group anyway with a brace, where is the
> point in not just doing a music function doing
> 
> { \temporary $xxx ... \undo $xxx }

Wouldn’t one have to create a separate music function for each possible tweak?
If not, then there is, as you say, no point.

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: misleading message and exit code when "program too old"

[Malte Meyn]

Am 11.11.2015 um 14:19 schrieb Johannes Waldmann:

Hi. I am getting this:

Parsing...
error: program too old: 2.18.2 (file requires: 2.19.0)

but apparently it's not an error,
Yes, it is because the file states to need version 2.19.0 and you cannot 
be sure that 2.18.2 will be sufficient.

since the processing continues,
and the pdf file is produced.

It might run without any other errors because you don’t use new 
functions or syntax from 2.19.0. But the output of 2.19 is different in 
some cases (f. e. the whiteouts and multi-measure rests) so it makes 
sense to report the different versions.


If you’re okay with the changes 2.19.0 makes, why not change the 
\version statement? (And why 2.19.0, not 2.19.2x?)


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Cross-staff arpeggio line AND arpeggio bracket on the same notes

[Jean Menezes da Rocha]

Thanks for your tip, Pierre (and sorry for my delayed response).
The snippet really produces the intended output. I am still trying to
figure out how to apply this without having to redo a huge amount
of code as it is structured by now (I am typesetting a scorebook,
following a strict score layout, so I don't have much room for inserting
arbitrary polyphonic divisions in a scope where I include each voice
from an external file). But this is up to me now. Thanks again for
providing a valid method to solve my problem!

Best regards!

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 6:04 AM, Pierre Perol-Schneider <
pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jean,
>
> This works:
>
> \version "2.18.2"
>
> \score {
>   \new PianoStaff
>   \with {
> connectArpeggios = ##t
> \override Arpeggio.stencil = #ly:arpeggio::brew-chord-bracket
>   }
>   <<
> \new Staff \transpose c c' {
>   \time 3/4
>   s2.
>
>   \grace {
> s
> %% Draw a first arpeggio:
> _\markup
> \with-dimensions #'(0 . 0) #'(0 . 0)
> \raise #1
> {
>   \pattern #12 #Y #0
>   \rotate #90
>   \musicglyph #"scripts.trill_element"
> }
> %% put some space:
> \repeat unfold 3 s
>   }
>   a,4\arpeggio _( f4. ees8)
>   s2
> }
> \new Staff {
>   \clef F
>   \stemDown
>   s2.
>   <<
> {
>   \once\override NoteColumn.ignore-collision = ##t
>   \stemDown
>   ges2.\arpeggio
> }
> \\
> { 2. }
>   >>
>   s2
> }
>   >>
> }
>
>
> Cheers,
> Pierre
>
> 2015-11-11 1:07 GMT+01:00 Jean Menezes da Rocha 
> :
>
>> Hello, I am trying to transcribe some music which has notation like the
>> attached example image. There is a cross-staff arpeggio, with a nested
>> bracket indicating a cross-staff voicing. As per the examples I have found,
>> we can have only one or another, since the bracket should be printed using
>> the Arpeggio stencil.
>> Do you have any ideas on how can I achieve the desired result?
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> --
>> Jean Menezes da Rocha
>> Compositor
>> Professor -- Faculdades Est
>> Mestre e Doutorando em Composição pela Universidade Federal da Bahia
>>
>> ___
>> lilypond-user mailing list
>> lilypond-user@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>>
>>
>


-- 
Jean Menezes da Rocha
Compositor
Professor -- Faculdades Est
Mestre e Doutorando em Composição pela Universidade Federal da Bahia
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi Johan,
>
>> I'd hate the counting of measures…
>
> Me, too… but…?
>
>>  { \local LyricText.extra-offset = #’(0 . -1) … }
>
> Ah! Even better.

That looks like

\new Lyrics \with { \override LyricText.extra-offset = #'(0 . -1) }
{ ... }

with the main Lyrics packed inside of a \new OneStaff.

But if you have to close the group anyway with a brace, where is the
point in not just doing a music function doing

{ \temporary $xxx ... \undo $xxx }

?

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: ScholarLy and polymetric music? (bar numbering, \RemoveEmptyStaffContext)

[Graham King]

On Wed, 2015-11-11 at 18:44 +0100, Urs Liska wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> Am 11.11.2015 um 11:14 schrieb Graham King:
> 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > > > annotate "installs" itself in the Score context, and in polymetric
> > > > > scores the timing-translator has to be removed from that context.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So to approach the issue one would have to remove \annotationProcessor
> > > > > from the Score context and "consist" it in another context.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't know what would happen if it would be added to more than one
> > > > > context (I can't really imagine it would work).
> > > > > What would probably work *in principle* is adding that to the context
> > > > > Kieren would take as the "master" context.
> > > > 
> > > > This passeth my understanding.  
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Mine too :-) That's why I would like you to simply try it out ...
> > > 
> > > Best
> > > Urs
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > I'll play with contexts in the morning.  Thanks again. 
> > > > 
> > > > > I assume (can't test currently) that any annotation would then get the
> > > > > barnumber of the master context and the partial measure calculated 
> > > > > from
> > > > > there. Of course this wouldn't give very useful results but it would 
> > > > > be
> > > > > interesting to check out anyway ...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Good luck
> > > > > Urs
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I hope I'm making a valid test: Had a bit of trouble integrating
> > > > > > ScholarLy with a short test score, so I just plugged the \include
> > > > > > statements and a \criticalRemark stanza into the
> > > > > > Isaac_Confessoribus_Prosa2.ly (which is full of polyrhythms).  Will 
> > > > > > pick
> > > > > > up again late tonight or tomorrow, to check that \scaleDurations is 
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > messing things up.  Must dash now.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Urs
> > > > > > 
> > 
> > OK, I think I have a reasonable test case (attached).  Toggling the
> > block comment at lines 66 & 79 shows the effect of moving
> > \annotationProcessor between the Score and Staff contexts.
> > Alas, in Staff context, it still gives "Sorry, rhythmic position
> > could not be determined." 
> 
> 
> OK, I looked into it a little bit (this actually *is* a good test
> case), and I think we're in a kind of dead end. At least I don't see a
> way out or any use investigating further without a very clear idea
> what we eventually want to achieve. Sorry.

Alas.  Many thanks for your help and support anyway.

I too have spent part of today delving into both the default
bar-numbering mechanism and the Measure_counter_engraver, but both seem
to be built on the same foundation, which appears not to allow for the
case where the Default_bar_line_engraver has been moved into the Staff
context.  But I might be a bit hard-of-thinking and hence wrong.

To the general audience on the list:
In case anyone can breathe life into the issue at some future date, my
objective (perhaps refined and stated too late to be presently helpful)
is: 

"to enable ScholarLy to report annotations to a polyrhythmic score in
such a way that the position in the score, to which each annotation
refers, can be clearly, concisely, and unambiguously stated (in the
endnotes). "

To that end, I have assumed that bar-numbering for polyrhythmic music is
required, even at the expense of both a non-standard approach and the
possible need for manual intervention at a late stage of score
preparation.  I believe, in any case, that bar numbers are generally
helpful to performers, at least among those with whom I work.  At risk
of turning this paragraph into a manifesto, let's add: It is true that
Renaissance music had no regular barlines, and indeed I sing it, with
friends, from facsimile editions in which we have to rely on the signum
congruentiae if everything falls apart.  However, in modern times most
singers require modern notation, and tackle a far larger repertoire of
polyphony on (arguably) less rehearsal than our fifteenth- and
sixteenth-century forebears.  So we need all the navigational help we
can get.  As for the polyrhythmic modern editions that cause the present
difficulty: part of the point is to help preserve the closest possible
link to the original mensuration and proportion, and thereby to mitigate
the inappropriate rhythmic straightjacket of the modern barlines.

So, for the time being, I'll continue to add ScholarLy annotations to
the source, against the day when the software might be able to process
them.  But I'll take the log output, add a manually-derived bar number,
and publish the result in a manually-maintained \markup block.

best regards
-- Graham

> 
> The "error" message is produced when formatting an annotation for
> export, and actually is a workaround for a situation that would
> otherwise crash annotate: The "rhythmic-location" that is present in
> the annotation pretends to be (0 0/0). From my source comments this
> seems to be a "workaround for a problem that sometimes the paperColumn
> gets lost along 

LyricText center-on-word breaks lyricMelismaAlignment

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi all,

It seems that, when using the very useful center-on-word function 
(), setting lyricMelimsaAlignment to 
anything other than integer values (including #LEFT, etc.) fails.

Fixing the snippet is definitely beyond my Scheme-fu…
Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Semibreve rests look like breve rests

[tisimst]

Bockett,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Bockett Hunter [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183452...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Thank you!
> That did the trick!
>
> Less rest for the wicked now...
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 6:57 PM, David Wright <[hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
>> On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 17:24:54 (-0500), Bockett Hunter wrote:
>> > When I staff size to 30 or above, semibreve rests fill
>> > the area between lines, and look like breve rests.
>> >
>> > The gap below the rest shows for default staff size 20, but then
>> > the appearance is very sparse; heavier notes are
>> > more readable.
>> >
>> > \header{
>> >   title = \markup \center-column {
>> > "semibreve rests look like breve rests" }
>> > }
>> >
>> > global = {
>> >
>> >   \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'neomensural
>> >   \override Voice.NoteHead #'style = #'neomensural
>> >   \override Voice.Rest #'style = #'neomensural
>> >   \cadenzaOn % turn off bar lines
>> >
>> > }
>> >
>> > voiceOneNotes = {
>> >
>> > \clef "petrucci-g"
>> > \relative c'{
>> >
>> > d1 r1 d1
>> >
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > \score {
>> >   \new StaffGroup = choirStaff <<
>> > \new Voice =
>> >   "voiceOneNotes" << \global \voiceOneNotes >>
>> >   >>
>> >
>> >   \layout {
>> > #(layout-set-staff-size 30)
>> >   }
>> >
>> > }
>>
>> Perhaps add
>>   \with { \override StaffSymbol.staff-space = #1.5 }
>> between choirStaff [sic] and << to increase the line spacing
>> to taste.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>
>
Why not just use #(set-global-staff-size 30) at the top of the document
(and remove #(layout-set-staff-size 30) from the \layout block)? That will
automatically size everything much better, in my experience:

%< SNIP -

#(set-global-staff-size 30)

global = {
  \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'neomensural
  \override Voice.NoteHead #'style = #'neomensural
  \override Voice.Rest #'style = #'neomensural
  \cadenzaOn % turn off bar lines
}

voiceOneNotes =   \relative c' {
  \clef "petrucci-g"
  d1 r1 d1
}

\score {
  \new StaffGroup = choirStaff
  <<
\new Voice = "voiceOneNotes" <<
  \global
  \voiceOneNotes
>>
  >>
  \layout {}
}

%<  END SNIP 

HTH,
Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Semibreve-rests-look-like-breve-rests-tp183450p183453.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.org website is down

[Javier Ruiz-Alma]

Alternative: view an archive.org snapshot of 6-Nov:

https://web.archive.org/web/20151106034541/http://lilypond.org/
 

 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: switch to an additive music engraving mode

[Ryan Michael]

Looks like I could just use the example for Chants or Psalms notation:

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/snippets/rhythms#rhythms-changing-time-signatures-inside-a-polymetric-section-using-_005cscaledurations

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 11:02 PM, Ryan Michael 
wrote:

> I was wondering if there is a way to shift out of the divisive time model
> of lilypond
> and simple engrave notes, of whatever value, without setting a global
> system of bars. I know that you can remove bars, but, at least in that
> case, in the background, it still is functioning under the global time
> signature that is set for the piece. I would like there to be none for this
> particular thing I am working on.
>
>
>


-- 
ॐ नमः शिवाय
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

switch to an additive music engraving mode

[Ryan Michael]

I was wondering if there is a way to shift out of the divisive time model
of lilypond
and simple engrave notes, of whatever value, without setting a global
system of bars. I know that you can remove bars, but, at least in that
case, in the background, it still is functioning under the global time
signature that is set for the piece. I would like there to be none for this
particular thing I am working on.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Semibreve rests look like breve rests

[David Wright]

On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 17:24:54 (-0500), Bockett Hunter wrote:
> When I staff size to 30 or above, semibreve rests fill
> the area between lines, and look like breve rests.
> 
> The gap below the rest shows for default staff size 20, but then
> the appearance is very sparse; heavier notes are
> more readable.
> 
> \header{
>   title = \markup \center-column { 
>     "semibreve rests look like breve rests" }
> }
> 
> global = {
> 
>   \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'neomensural
>   \override Voice.NoteHead #'style = #'neomensural
>   \override Voice.Rest #'style = #'neomensural
>   \cadenzaOn % turn off bar lines
> 
> }
> 
> voiceOneNotes = {
> 
>     \clef "petrucci-g"
>     \relative c'{
> 
>     d1 r1 d1
> 
>     }
> }
> 
> \score {
>   \new StaffGroup = choirStaff <<
>     \new Voice =
>       "voiceOneNotes" << \global \voiceOneNotes >>
>   >>
> 
>   \layout {
>     #(layout-set-staff-size 30)
>   }
> 
> }

Perhaps add
  \with { \override StaffSymbol.staff-space = #1.5 }
between choirStaff [sic] and << to increase the line spacing
to taste.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Semibreve rests look like breve rests

[Bockett Hunter]

Thank you!
That did the trick!

Less rest for the wicked now...

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 6:57 PM, David Wright 
wrote:

> On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 17:24:54 (-0500), Bockett Hunter wrote:
> > When I staff size to 30 or above, semibreve rests fill
> > the area between lines, and look like breve rests.
> >
> > The gap below the rest shows for default staff size 20, but then
> > the appearance is very sparse; heavier notes are
> > more readable.
> >
> > \header{
> >   title = \markup \center-column {
> > "semibreve rests look like breve rests" }
> > }
> >
> > global = {
> >
> >   \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'neomensural
> >   \override Voice.NoteHead #'style = #'neomensural
> >   \override Voice.Rest #'style = #'neomensural
> >   \cadenzaOn % turn off bar lines
> >
> > }
> >
> > voiceOneNotes = {
> >
> > \clef "petrucci-g"
> > \relative c'{
> >
> > d1 r1 d1
> >
> > }
> > }
> >
> > \score {
> >   \new StaffGroup = choirStaff <<
> > \new Voice =
> >   "voiceOneNotes" << \global \voiceOneNotes >>
> >   >>
> >
> >   \layout {
> > #(layout-set-staff-size 30)
> >   }
> >
> > }
>
> Perhaps add
>   \with { \override StaffSymbol.staff-space = #1.5 }
> between choirStaff [sic] and << to increase the line spacing
> to taste.
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Alberto Simões]

Hi, Abraham



This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines
;-). I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that
I immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged
for: You should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage.
Here's what I mean:


I understand your point, and happy to use it that way (although it is 
not the way the book editor did it).


Although not doubting your suggestion, I would be very interested to 
know if there is such a thing like a document describing a "best 
practices" for writing/engraving music.


Thank you,
Alberto

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: addlyrics does not work properly

[tisimst]

Niels,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Niels [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183426...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> If I comment out the line with the text (cor -- di -- ae su ) the last
> line (eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4) will be compiled and appear in the pdf
> file. However, If I want the text with the notes (a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"}
> a8 gis4~gis fis2) the last line disappears. Could anyone tell me what I did
> wrong?
>
> partII=\relative c'{ \compressFullBarRests
>   %\global
>   \time 3/4
>   \tempo "Andante"
>\clef "C"  R2.*22
>  <<{\tiny \clef "G" a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2}
>  \addlyrics {
>%cor -- di -- ae su
>  }>>
> \normalsize \clef "C"
> eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4
> }
>

If you are using the latest stable (2.18.2), then you will see this
problem. Using any of the latest dev (2.19.XX) you get the desired result:

[image: Inline image 1]

Personally, I'd recommend NOT using \addlyrics for most cases. Here I think
it's ok, but not for more than simple cases like this.

Best,
Abraham


image.png (47K) 





--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/addlyrics-does-not-work-properly-tp183426p183430.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: Scorio Software

[tisimst]

I wouldn't say I've been "seduced" :-P. I cannot vouch for anything they
have or produce. I was more or less thinking out loud since I have little
experience dealing with MusicXML files.

Best,
Abraham

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 3:17 AM, Richard Shann-2 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183282...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 2015-11-08 at 21:48 -0700, Abraham Lee wrote:
> > It looks like they use MusicXML as their main data format then process
> > it into LilyPond syntax for engraving on their server.
>
> > Maybe we could work with them to leverage their converter if it works
> > well.
>
> This is highly unlikely, I think you have been seduced by the
> MusicXML-universal-format myth: it is very easy to create a MusicXML
> file from some music. And knowing exactly how you have created it, it is
> easy to read it back (and easy to create LilyPond for it). So Scorio can
> easily take input from the user store it using their version of MusicXML
> and retrieve it again without having the remotest chance of reading
> MusicXML generated by some other program.
>
> There are any number of ways you can create a "valid" MusicXML
> description of some music and it very unlikely that someone could create
> a MusicXML reader that will understand whatever choices you made and
> interpretation you gave without first seeing examples of what you
> generate. So Sibelius can read its own MusicXML (I presume) and so on
> for all the others. Only the people behind MusicXML (that's Finale I
> think) can expect their output to be read by others, because they are
> the de facto standard. They provide a set of examples which people use
> to test their reader - the pages of "documentation" look impressive but
> are (inevitably?) ambiguous.
>
> I notice that MEI talks happily about there being "many ways" you can
> describe the same music notation in its format. It seems to me that the
> ideal would be a way of describing a book containing music notation
> where there would be only one output file that correctly described it. I
> imagine it would need to be a highly constrained notion of what a book
> containing music notation is, to make that possible. And yet, at the
> other extreme, it seems clear that many people would wish to rescue all
> the notes that they had so painstakingly entered into some software for
> re-use in another program when the original gets dropped.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email] 
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
> --
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Scorio-Software-tp183277p183282.html
> To start a new topic under User, email ml-node+s1069038n...@n5.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from Lilypond, click here
> 
> .
> NAML
> 
>




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Scorio-Software-tp183277p183432.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: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[tisimst]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Alberto Simões-2 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183435...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Although not doubting your suggestion, I would be very interested to
> know if there is such a thing like a document describing a "best
> practices" for writing/engraving music.
>

There definitely is (though I'd hardly call any of them a "document"). The
most prominent work at the moment is Elaine Gould's "Behind Bars", but
there are others that are very good, some more dated than others:

   - Ted Ross - The Art of Music Engraving and Processing
   - Kurt Stone - Music Notation in the Twentieth Century: A Practical
   Guidebook
   - Gardner Read - Music Notation: A Manual of Modern Practice
   - Clinton Roemer - The Art of Music Copying

HTH,

Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Gounod-Le-Rendez-Vous-tp183419p183436.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

addlyrics does not work properly

[Niels]

If I comment out the line with the text (cor -- di -- ae su ) the last line
(eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4) will be compiled and appear in the pdf file.
However, If I want the text with the notes (a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8
gis4~gis fis2) the last line disappears. Could anyone tell me what I did
wrong?

partII=\relative c'{ \compressFullBarRests
  %\global 
  \time 3/4
  \tempo "Andante"
   \clef "C"  R2.*22
 <<{\tiny \clef "G" a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2}
 \addlyrics { 
   %cor -- di -- ae su 
 }>>
\normalsize \clef "C" 
eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4
}

Regards, Niels




-
Niels
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/addlyrics-does-not-work-properly-tp183426.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

addlyrics does not work properly

[Niels]

If I comment out the line with the text (cor -- di -- ae su ) the last line
(eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4) will be compiled and appear in the pdf file.
However, If I want the text with the notes (a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8
gis4~gis fis2) the last line disappears. Could anyone tell me what I did
wrong?partII=\relative c'{ \compressFullBarRests  %\global   \time 3/4 
\tempo "Andante"   \clef "C"  R2.*22 <<{\tiny \clef "G"
a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2} \addlyrics {%cor --
di -- ae su  }>>\normalsize \clef "C" eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8
cis4}Regards, Niels



-
Niels
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/addlyrics-does-not-work-properly-tp183425.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: [feature-request] optional duration for temporary

[Simon Albrecht]

On 11.11.2015 14:08, Johan Vromans wrote:

On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:42:58 +0100
David Kastrup  wrote:


But if you have to close the group anyway with a brace, where is the
point in not just doing a music function doing

{ \temporary $xxx ... \undo $xxx }

I do not see how to cope with the $xxx. Could you give an example
implememtation of \local using this method?


Just for completeness: See the other posts arrived by now.
Yours, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[tisimst]

Alberto,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 7:39 AM, Alberto Simões-2 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183419...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Dear list,
>
> Again, I am both pleased to announce the transcription of the Gounod
> Suite of Valses, "Le Rendez Vous" [1] and asking for any correction you
> might suggest.
>
> There is a couple of details you will find different from the original
> that are my own decision. But they should be clear.
>
> I will upload the PDF to IMSLP during the weekend.
>
> Thank you all for your precious help, without which I wouldn't be able
> to accomplish this task (both for Lilypond itself, as for feedback and
> random help).
>
> Best,
> Alberto
>
> [1] https://github.com/ambs/music/tree/master/Gounod/LeRendezVous
>

This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines ;-).
I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that I
immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged for:
You should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage. Here's what
I mean:

[image: Inline image 1]

Best,
Abraham


image.png (23K) 





--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Gounod-Le-Rendez-Vous-tp183419p183434.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: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Alberto Simões]

On 11/11/15 19:41, tisimst wrote:

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Alberto Simões-2 [via Lilypond]
<[hidden email] > wrote:

Although not doubting your suggestion, I would be very interested to
know if there is such a thing like a document describing a "best
practices" for writing/engraving music.


There definitely is (though I'd hardly call any of them a "document").
The most prominent work at the moment is Elaine Gould's "Behind Bars",
but there are others that are very good, some more dated than others:

  * Ted Ross - The Art of Music Engraving and Processing
  * Kurt Stone - Music Notation in the Twentieth Century: A Practical
Guidebook
  * Gardner Read - Music Notation: A Manual of Modern Practice
  * Clinton Roemer - The Art of Music Copying


Thank you.
Will try to find some of them. Mostly curiosity on the topic :)

Best,
Alberto

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: addlyrics does not work properly

[Simon Albrecht]

Hello Niels,
and welcome to the list.

On 11.11.2015 16:39, Niels wrote:
If I comment out the line with the text (cor -- di -- ae su ) the last 
line (eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4) will be compiled and appear in the 
pdf file. However, If I want the text with the notes 
(a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2) the last line disappears. 
Could anyone tell me what I did wrong? partII=\relative c'{ 
\compressFullBarRests %\global \time 3/4 \tempo "Andante" \clef "C" 
R2.*22 <<{\tiny \clef "G" a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2} 
\addlyrics { %cor -- di -- ae su }>> \normalsize \clef "C" eis 4. eis8 
cis4 a4. a8 cis4 }


Code formatting is _important_, and extremely so if you post code in 
public. What you gave us here, is a nightmare, to be plain. Not only is 
it impossible to read, it won’t compile either because of the comments. 
If it was your mailing interface that screwed up, use an attachment for 
the code.

Here’s how it should be formatted:

\version "2.18.2"

\relative c' {
  \compressFullBarRests
  %\global
  \time 3/4
  \tempo "Andante"
  \clef "C"
  R2.*22
  <<
{
  \tiny
  \clef "G"
  a'4.^\markup { "alto solo" } a8 gis4~
  gis4 fis2
}
\addlyrics {
  %cor -- di -- ae su
}
  >>
  \normalsize
  \clef "C"
  eis 4. eis8 cis4
  a4. a8 cis4
}

Most things will be obvious from this example, but a few notes:
– It is considered best practice to surround all kinds of braces with 
spaces (same for ‘=’). There are people who like to leave these out, 
which has its advantages, but with them, the code is easier to read. A ~ 
should have a space at least after it.
– The auto-formatting of Frescobaldi  generally 
does a great job. This concerns line breaks (not


\foo { bar
  baz }

but

\foo { bar baz }

or

\foo {
  bar
  baz
}

and indenting.

– Only one measure of music per line. There can be exceptions to this in 
music where measures play a different role (e.g. mensural music), but in 
almost every other case it’s a very useful guideline, even if there’s 
only one note in a bar for some time. (Except obviously for something 
like R2.*22)
– Post complete, compilable examples, that is including a version 
statement (which is important in this issue also) and consisting of more 
than a variable definition :-)


Now on the actual topic: You have encountered a bug, issue 2010, which 
has been fixed before version 2.19.16. So you probably need to upgrade 
to a version newer than that to get around the problem. Unfortunately I 
don’t know of any workaround in 2.18.
Another thing: What you want is actually a cue, see 
. 
So I’d suggest doing


\version "2.19.28"

\relative c' {
  \compressFullBarRests
  %\global
  \time 3/4
  \tempo "Andante"
  \clef "C"
  R2.*22
  <<
\new CueVoice = "cue" \with { instrumentCueName = "alto solo" } {
  \clef "G"
  a'4. a8 gis4~
  gis4 fis2
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "cue" {
  cor -- di -- ae \once\override LyricText.self-alignment-X = #-0.5 
"su -"

}
  >>
  \normalsize
  \clef "C"
  eis4. eis8 cis4
  a4. a8 cis4
}
%%

\addlyrics is generally unreliable, so it’s wise to use \lyricsto 
wherever possible.


HTH, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Simon Albrecht]

On 11.11.2015 20:29, Alberto Simões wrote:



Hi, Abraham



This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines
;-). I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that
I immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged
for: You should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage.
Here's what I mean:


I understand your point, and happy to use it that way (although it is 
not the way the book editor did it).


It has been common until the 19th century to write it how you did, and 
personally I see no problem with that. But indeed, modern practice 
vouches against it.




Although not doubting your suggestion, I would be very interested to 
know if there is such a thing like a document describing a "best 
practices" for writing/engraving music.


Mainly the ones Abraham mentioned. I’d not keep slavishly to these, 
though; there has always been room for disagreement and personal 
preference in this discipline.


Yours, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: misleading message and exit code when "program too old"

[Johannes Waldmann]

Hi,

it's really not a big deal since I have a work-around
(ignore the exit code in my Makefile)

I understand that specifying and checking the version
can be useful. I am just saying that the actual message
and behaviour (exit code) is surprising.

>From the compilers I know (say, gcc)
there's a clear difference between:
* a warning (processing continues, exit code 0)
* an error (processing stops, no output, exit code != 0)

Where is the semantics of "\version" documented?
(It's not in the index?
http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/lilypond-index
- It appears in the PDF version
of the notation manual, but without explanation)

Is it something like the following?
"If lilypond version X reads "\version Y" in the input,
then if X < Y, it prints an "error" message and sets exit code to 1,
else it is silent. It will continue processing in both cases."

Why am I doing this - I have a bunch of 2.18 files that still
need to be converted to 2.19, that's why I am using 2.18.

In an ideal world, 2.19 would respect the "2.18"
specification in the file and behave accordingly ... but I guess
that would require a lot of work - basically keep all the
old/buggy behaviour in addition to the new/fixed one.

Since we don't have this, a 2.19 executable
should also warn if it reads a 2.18 file?
Because output could be different - that's the
same reason for the warning as in the other case.

That would give a lot of warnings.
Then they could be turn-on/offable ( -Wversion? )

- J.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[David Wright]

On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 12:22:32 (-0700), tisimst wrote:

> This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines ;-).
> I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that I
> immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged for: 
> You
> should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage. Here's what I 
> mean:
> 
> Inline image 1

Would it be possible for you to attach your image to the email rather
than to insert it in this form. Not everyone reads their email in HTML.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[tisimst]

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 2:18 PM, David Wright [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183444...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 12:22:32 (-0700), tisimst wrote:
>
> > This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines
> ;-).
> > I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that I
> > immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged
> for: You
> > should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage. Here's what
> I mean:
> >
> > Inline image 1
>
> Would it be possible for you to attach your image to the email rather
> than to insert it in this form. Not everyone reads their email in HTML.
>

Absolutely. See attached.

Best,
Abraham


tie-enclosed-by-slur.png (38K) 





--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Gounod-Le-Rendez-Vous-tp183419p183446.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: addlyrics does not work properly

[Simon Albrecht]

P.S. If you had sent this as a reply to your first post, I’d have seen 
that part of my reply was pointless.

Regards, Simon

On 11.11.2015 16:42, Niels wrote:

If I comment out the line with the text (cor -- di -- ae su ) the last line
(eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4) will be compiled and appear in the pdf file.
However, If I want the text with the notes (a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8
gis4~gis fis2) the last line disappears. Could anyone tell me what I did
wrong?

partII=\relative c'{ \compressFullBarRests
   %\global
   \time 3/4
   \tempo "Andante"
\clef "C"  R2.*22
  <<{\tiny \clef "G" a'4.^\markup{"alto solo"} a8 gis4~gis fis2}
  \addlyrics {
%cor -- di -- ae su
  }>>
 \normalsize \clef "C"
 eis 4. eis8 cis4 a4. a8 cis4
}

Regards, Niels




-
Niels
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/addlyrics-does-not-work-properly-tp183426.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

Re: Re: misleading message and exit code when "program too old"

[tisimst]

Johannes,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Johannes Waldmann [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n183442...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> it's really not a big deal since I have a work-around
> (ignore the exit code in my Makefile)
>
> I understand that specifying and checking the version
> can be useful. I am just saying that the actual message
> and behaviour (exit code) is surprising.
>
> From the compilers I know (say, gcc)
> there's a clear difference between:
> * a warning (processing continues, exit code 0)
> * an error (processing stops, no output, exit code != 0)
>
> Where is the semantics of "\version" documented?
> (It's not in the index?
> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/lilypond-index
> - It appears in the PDF version
> of the notation manual, but without explanation)
>
> Is it something like the following?
> "If lilypond version X reads "\version Y" in the input,
> then if X < Y, it prints an "error" message and sets exit code to 1,
> else it is silent. It will continue processing in both cases."
>
> Why am I doing this - I have a bunch of 2.18 files that still
> need to be converted to 2.19, that's why I am using 2.18.
>
> In an ideal world, 2.19 would respect the "2.18"
> specification in the file and behave accordingly ... but I guess
> that would require a lot of work - basically keep all the
> old/buggy behaviour in addition to the new/fixed one.
>
> Since we don't have this, a 2.19 executable
> should also warn if it reads a 2.18 file?
> Because output could be different - that's the
> same reason for the warning as in the other case.
>
> That would give a lot of warnings.
> Then they could be turn-on/offable ( -Wversion? )
>

I've not seen the specifics for how it is *supposed* to work, but here's
what I've *observed* in actual use:

- If LilyPond version >= compiled file \version, then no warning or error
- If LilyPond version < compiled file \version, then compiler error

One thing to also note is that any \include'd files don't seem to be
version checked--only the main file being compiled. I'm not sure why there
isn't at least a warning in the first case (where LP version > File
version), but it doesn't. So, even if you run 2.18 files through your 2.19
compiler, then you shouldn't see any error about the \version statement.
The \version statement mostly serves two purposes:

1. Remind you what compiler version you initially coded it for
2. Makes it possible for convert-ly to upgrade it to newer versions when
desired

Best,
Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/misleading-message-and-exit-code-when-program-too-old-tp183414p183443.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: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Alberto Simões]

On 11/11/15 21:16, David Wright wrote:

On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 12:22:32 (-0700), tisimst wrote:


This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines ;-).
I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that I
immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged for: You
should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage. Here's what I mean:

Inline image 1


Would it be possible for you to attach your image to the email rather
than to insert it in this form. Not everyone reads their email in HTML.


Here it goes

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[Alberto Simões]

On 11/11/15 20:00, Simon Albrecht wrote:

I’d not keep slavishly to these, though; there has always been room for
disagreement and personal preference in this discipline.


Agreed :-)
I think that disagreement is always good. But to disagree I need to know 
with which to disagree about :)


Best,
Alberto

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: misleading message and exit code when "program too old"

[Urs Liska]

Am 11.11.2015 um 22:16 schrieb tisimst:
> The \version statement mostly serves two purposes:
> 
> 1. Remind you what compiler version you initially coded it for
> 2. Makes it possible for convert-ly to upgrade it to newer versions when
> desired

However (and including Simon's comments) I've always found the behaviour
annoying that LilyPond ends with a "failed file" although everything is
running properly.
I would also say that the *possibility* of changed output doesn't
warrant an error, at most a warning. And by the way, if I have a 2.18.2
file and compile it with 2.19.30 the result will be different as well.
So that's not really the issue.

As I see it that message is kind of a reminder that *if* something goes
wrong (when compiling a 2.19. file with 2.18) it *may* be due to the
version mismatch. But again:
- this doesn't justify an error condition
- the same is true the other way round.

My 2 cents
Urs

-- 
Urs Liska
www.openlilylib.org

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Gounod - Le Rendez Vous

[David Wright]

On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 14:21:45 (-0700), tisimst wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 2:18 PM, David Wright [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> 
> On Wed 11 Nov 2015 at 12:22:32 (-0700), tisimst wrote:
> 
> > This is looking MUCH better (nice work with the extended dynamic lines ;
> -).
> > I'll look at it in greater detail later, but here's one thing that I
> > immediately noticed quite a few instances of that you would get dinged
> for: You
> > should ALWAYS enclose a tied note within a slurred passage. Here's what 
> I
> mean:
> >
> > Inline image 1
> 
> Would it be possible for you to attach your image to the email rather
> than to insert it in this form. Not everyone reads their email in HTML.

> Absolutely. See attached.

Thanks to you both. Alberto's attachment is easier to look at with my
client, but Abraham's worked out fine too.

I also agree that modern practice is easier to read (the slur envelops
the time period that it represents). The older method would look even
worse if the first note was tied as well.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Semibreve rests look like breve rests

[Bockett Hunter]

When I staff size to 30 or above, semibreve rests fill
the area between lines, and look like breve rests.

The gap below the rest shows for default staff size 20, but then
the appearance is very sparse; heavier notes are
more readable.

\header{
  title = \markup \center-column {
"semibreve rests look like breve rests" }
}

global = {

  \override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'neomensural
  \override Voice.NoteHead #'style = #'neomensural
  \override Voice.Rest #'style = #'neomensural
  \cadenzaOn % turn off bar lines

}

voiceOneNotes = {

\clef "petrucci-g"
\relative c'{

d1 r1 d1

}
}

\score {
  \new StaffGroup = choirStaff <<
\new Voice =
  "voiceOneNotes" << \global \voiceOneNotes >>
  >>

  \layout {
#(layout-set-staff-size 30)
  }

}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Cross-staff arpeggio line AND arpeggio bracket on the same notes

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

Hi Jean,

This works:

\version "2.18.2"

\score {
  \new PianoStaff
  \with {
connectArpeggios = ##t
\override Arpeggio.stencil = #ly:arpeggio::brew-chord-bracket
  }
  <<
\new Staff \transpose c c' {
  \time 3/4
  s2.

  \grace {
s
%% Draw a first arpeggio:
_\markup
\with-dimensions #'(0 . 0) #'(0 . 0)
\raise #1
{
  \pattern #12 #Y #0
  \rotate #90
  \musicglyph #"scripts.trill_element"
}
%% put some space:
\repeat unfold 3 s
  }
  a,4\arpeggio _( f4. ees8)
  s2
}
\new Staff {
  \clef F
  \stemDown
  s2.
  <<
{
  \once\override NoteColumn.ignore-collision = ##t
  \stemDown
  ges2.\arpeggio
}
\\
{ 2. }
  >>
  s2
}
  >>
}


Cheers,
Pierre

2015-11-11 1:07 GMT+01:00 Jean Menezes da Rocha :

> Hello, I am trying to transcribe some music which has notation like the
> attached example image. There is a cross-staff arpeggio, with a nested
> bracket indicating a cross-staff voicing. As per the examples I have found,
> we can have only one or another, since the bracket should be printed using
> the Arpeggio stencil.
> Do you have any ideas on how can I achieve the desired result?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --
> Jean Menezes da Rocha
> Compositor
> Professor -- Faculdades Est
> Mestre e Doutorando em Composição pela Universidade Federal da Bahia
>
> ___
> 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: ScholarLy and polymetric music? (bar numbering, \RemoveEmptyStaffContext)

[Urs Liska]

Am 11.11.2015 um 01:32 schrieb Graham King:
> On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 22:50 +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
>> Am 10.11.2015 um 18:06 schrieb Graham King:
>> > On Tue, 2015-11-10 at 10:09 +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Am 09.11.2015 um 17:34 schrieb Graham King:
>> >>
>> >>> (This note describes an issue arising from the separate thread,
>> >>> "Scholarly footnotes" [1])
>> >>>
>> >>> I would like to use Urs' annotate.ily[2] to add some footnotes to an
>> >>> edition of sixteenth-century polyphony. But, before investing too
>> >>> much time, I need to check whether there is now a way for it to cope
>> >>> with polymetric music[3].
>> >>
>> >> As the discussion in this thread clearly shows this is firstly a
>> >> conceptual problem. Only if it is clear what you want to achieve we
>> >> can even start thinking about a solution implementation-wise.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not so sure that it will be possible to implement a solution that
>> >> really works automatically and is at the same time sufficiently
>> >> general. But you'd be in any case to create a manual solution, if
>> >> that's a viable approach given your material (that is: how many of
>> >> these annotations do you expect, will the numbering be stable or will
>> >> you have to expect any changes after the fact?)
>>
>> > Very happy to intervene manually in bar numbering. The remainder of
>> > this thread is opening my eyes to the difficulty of automating that.
>>
>> Just to avoid misunderstandings: What I am thinking about is an approach
>> where you add a custom property passing a barnumber manually to the
>> annotation. I don't think we'll be able to manually modify LilyPond's
>> idea of barnumbers.
> Thanks for the clarification.  I don't think it's a problem so long as
> two aspects of the workflow are covered:
> 1: during the preparation of the score, we'll need to be able to
> capture the issues and display them somehow, and relate each issue to
> its place in the score.  This does not need barnumbers as we still
> have source code (and maybe an IDE).  Almost certainly not a problem.  

The annotations do have their connection to the originating objects,
regardless of being able to determine a proper musical position. The
messages printed to the console are linked to the input position, so
clicking on a message will move the cursor to the annotation, and the
objects are colored in the score so you have the same navigation
available through point-and-click.

If you want to have something readable available I would suggest the
following:
(temporarily) move the \annotationProcessor from the Score to another
context. Choose the one that you consider the "master" context (as per
Kieren's concept). Then the annotations *should* (not tested yet) get
the master context's barnumber and a partial measure starting from that
context's last barline.

> 2: Bar numbers need to crystallise only at the publication stage.
>> >> We would surely be able to taylor a solution using either a custom
>> >> annotation type or a custom annotation property.
> Now I get it.  The human being at the keyboard tells ScholarLy the bar
> number.  I'm happy with that.  I might add a git hook to flash at me a
> message: "Now go back and adjust the bar numbers in the annotations!"
> :-)  Seriously: It will very rarely be an issue.

Well, actually I would then do that as one single step towards the end
of the edition process, when you're sufficiently sure that neither the
music nor your bar numbering scheme will change anymore.
It is a compromise, but so far I don't see a solution that could be
completely automated (due to the conceptual difficulties, not the
implementation).

>> >>
>> >> As a start you could try out and tell us what LilyPond/ScholarLY do by
>> >> default if used in polymetric scores. I *assume* that LilyPond
>> >> maintains individual bar numberings for each context
>>
>> > Yes, that appears to be the case.
>>
>> >> and that ScholarLY will just use the "local" barnumbers, without even
>> >> knowing there's an issue. But it would be nice if you could verify
>> that.
>>
>> > Scholarly gives the message: "Sorry, rhythmic position could not be
>> > determined."
>>
>> OK, I see why this happens (did I ever say that it is cool that I can
>> inspect openLilyLib code on Github using my phone?).
> Sheesh Urs! I know you're bright, but I've just had this image of your
> whipping out the phone in a few bars rest, with the thought "I've just
> got time to fix the earthling's problem..."  :-)
>> annotate "installs" itself in the Score context, and in polymetric
>> scores the timing-translator has to be removed from that context.
>>
>> So to approach the issue one would have to remove \annotationProcessor
>> from the Score context and "consist" it in another context.
>>
>> I don't know what would happen if it would be added to more than one
>> context (I can't really imagine it would work).
>> What would probably work *in principle* is adding that to the context
>> Kieren would 

Re: Poly rithm

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

Hi Christian,

See:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/snippets/rhythms#rhythms-changing-time-signatures-inside-a-polymetric-section-using-_005cscaledurations

Cheers,
~Pierre

2015-11-11 5:48 GMT+01:00 Christian :

> Hi all, I can't seem to get the poly-rhytm to display properly...
>
> flute = \relative c'' {
>   \global
>   \repeat volta 2 {
>   g'4.^"Inzet bij couplet 4" e | fis d | e c | d b |
>   }
>   \time 2/4 a8 d fis e | d4. d8 | e8 d e fis |
>   \time 3/4 \tuplet 3/2 { g fis e } d [c] b [g] | \time 2/4 a b c e |
> g2\fermata |
> }
>
> oboe = \relative c'' {
>   \global
>   e4. c | d b | c a | b g |
>   \time 2/4 fis8 g a b | a fis g g | e8 e a4 |
>   \time 3/4 g4 g g | \time 2/4 g8 e g c | b2\fermata |
> }
>
> altoSax = \relative c'' {
>   \global
>   %\transposition es
>   b4. g | a fis | g e | fis d |
>   \time 2/4
> \set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = 6/8
> \scaleDurations 2/3
> a'4. a4 g8 | a b c d c b | a2. |
>   \time 9/8 d4. e d | \time 6/8 c4 b8 a g a | g2.\fermata |
> }
>
> Where did I go wrong?
>
>
> ___
> 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