custom multiple bar number markup function

[Flaming Hakama by Elaine]

> Send lilypond-user mailing list submissions to
> lilypond-user@gnu.org


Hi,

I hope someone can point me in the right direction.

What I'd like to do is print multiple bar numbers for repeated sections.

The situation is that I have one instrument (upright bass) whose musical
figure repeats,
while other instruments have different material.

The bass player finds it difficult to turn pages, so to conserve space,
I notate their part with repeats, whereas everyone else has everything
written out.

I can get the overall bar numbers to coincide (after the repeat) by using
\set Score.currentBarNumber = #13

But in the repeated section, for the bass part,
only the first number prints (as expected).


Here is my MWE of what I have now:

\version "2.19.15"

% all parts but bass
\score {
\relative c'' {
c1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | \break
\bar "||"
cs1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | \break
ds1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | \break
\bar "||"
e1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
}
}

% bass part
\score {
\relative c {
\clef bass
c1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | \break

% I'd like this measure to show both bar numbers "5" and "9"
% Perhaps by invoking a function like this:
% \double-bar-numbers 4
\repeat volta 2 {
\bar "[|:"
b1 | 1 | 1 | 1
\bar ":|]"
} \break
\set Score.currentBarNumber = #13
e1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
}
}


My intention of the comment above,
\double-bar-numbers 4
is to specify the following logic:

"at this point, instead of using the default bar number markup function,
use this double-bar-numbers markup function, which takes an argument
for the number of repeated bars."

And then that function would do the following:

"Read the current bar number,
calculate a second bar number
by adding the current bar number to the supplied value
then print those two numbers in a column"



I'm basically unsure about every step here:

Is there such a thing as "the default measure number markup function"?

Can I specify another function to be used instead of the
default measure number markup function, and if so, how?

Can I invoke this new measure number markup function on an as-needed basis--
not replace the default measure number markup function, since I would use
that
everywhere other than the places I explicitly specify to use the new one?

Can I supply this function with a number-type argument?

Within my new measure number markup function, how can I access the current
measure number?

Within my new measure number markup function, how can I add numbers?

Within my new measure number markup function How can I turn a number into
markup?



Here is pseudocode, of what I thought the function might look like.
It doesn't work because, among other things,
* I don't know how to convert a number to a markup.
* I don't know how to override the default measure number markup function.
* The syntax of "let" is also confusing (I have to enclose everything
in another set of parens just to have scope where the variable is defined?)

#(define-markup-command (double-bar-numbers layout props barCount) (number?)
"Draw two bar numbers"
(interpret-markup layout props
(let repeatBarNumber (+ #currentBarNumber #barCount)
#{
<>^markup \center-column {
#currentBarNumber
#repeatbarNumber
}
#}
)
)
)



Any hints would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954   "*Confusion is
highly underrated*"
ela...@flaminghakama.com
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

lilypond.org Productions page

[marc.lanoiselee]

You can report publishers on imslp, for example

https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Garvin,_Allen

1164 editions with Lilypond engraving files

Marc Lanoiselée


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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[David Kastrup]

Carl Sorensen  writes:

> I haven’t seen anything about GNU software that tries to restrict
> freedom of use.  In fact, one of the key issues of GNU software is
> exactly freedom of use.  The GNU licenses don’t say that any code
> compiled with gcc must have a GPL license.  They only say that any
> modifications to *the GPL software* must have a GPL license.

The pertinent rules are the GNU maintainer guidelines.



> As far as I can see, as long as the copyright holder for the music has
> given the permission for the music to be published on the internet,
> it’s perfectly fine for LilyPond, as a GNU project, to link to the
> location where the music is published.

The passage in question is:

A GNU package should not recommend use of any non-free program, nor
should it require a non-free program (such as a non-free compiler or
IDE) to build. Thus, a GNU package cannot be written in a
programming language that does not have a free software
implementation. Now that GNU/Linux systems are widely available, all
GNU packages should provide full functionality on a 100% free
GNU/Linux system, and should not require any non-free software to
build or function. The GNU Coding Standards say a lot more about
this issue.

Similarly, a GNU package should not require the use of non-free
software, including JavaScript, for the coordination of its
development. For example, please don’t use Transifex for translation
of your software because it requires your translators to use
non-free, JavaScript-based editing tools. Instead, a service without
any ethical concerns should be used, such as The Translation Project
(https://translationproject.org).

A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free
documentation for free software. The need for free documentation to
come with free software is now a major focus of the GNU project; to
show that we are serious about the need for free documentation, we
must not contradict our position by recommending use of
documentation that isn’t free.

As you can clearly see, that the GNU licenses don't restrict freedom of
use (though they restrict non-freedom of use) and that GCC can be used
for compiling non-free software does not mean that referring to non-free
software in documentation (and web sites) is desired.

So your argument does not match what the guidelines clearly state.
However, as I stated the main concern of the FSF and of GNU's official
stance stops with software and its documentation.  Where we want ours to
stop with regard to musical scores is basically not proscribed.

My personal opinion is that if we have the ability to point people to
scores with clearly defined permissions of use, that's a preferable
value proposition to more comprehensive collections people may or may
not be using legally for some purpose.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Carl Sorensen]

From: Urs Liska 
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 10:15 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page



Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:


From: Ralph Palmer 
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
To: 
Cc: , lilypond-user Mailinglist 

Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed 
for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from 
the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The 
collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning 
to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole 
production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted 
(copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that 
would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.


I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and open 
content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music is available to 
see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let it be listed on our 
productions page.



I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a GNU 
project" etc. etc.

I haven’t seen anything about GNU software that tries to restrict freedom of 
use.  In fact, one of the key issues of GNU software is exactly freedom of use. 
 The GNU licenses don’t say that any code compiled with gcc must have a GPL 
license.  They only say that any modifications to *the GPL software* must have 
a GPL license.

As far as I can see, as long as the copyright holder for the music has given 
the permission for the music to be published on the internet, it’s perfectly 
fine for LilyPond, as a GNU project, to link to the location where the music is 
published.

Thanks,

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

Re: Raising fingerings

[Emilio Millan]

Perfect! Thank you, Harm. I appreciate it.

Emilio



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: Raising fingerings

[Thomas Morley]

Am So., 9. Dez. 2018 um 17:18 Uhr schrieb Emilio Millan :
>
> I'm using fingerings for some above-the-staff harmonica notation. They are
> working well for this purpose but there is one bit of fine tuning I'd like
> to do if possible. In the example below, the fingerings are well-placed but
> the "G4" and "A4" are a bit higher to appropriately avoid the note stems. Is
> there a way to increase the default distance between the top of the staff
> and the fingerings so that "C4" through "E5" would all be colinear?


Add
\override Fingering.staff-padding = 1.5
and adjust the numerical value at taste

Cheers,
   Harm

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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Ralph Palmer]

On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM David Kastrup  wrote:

> Urs Liska  writes:
>
> > Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
> >>
> >> *From: *Ralph Palmer 
> >> *Date: *Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
> >> *To: *
> >> *Cc: *, lilypond-user Mailinglist 
> >> *Subject: *Re: lilypond.org Productions page
> >>
> >> I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes
> >> transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but
> >> I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the
> >> collection publicly on the internet.
> >>
> >> I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain
> >> and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the
> >> music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we
> >> should let it be listed on our productions page.
> >>
> >
> > I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a
> > GNU project" etc. etc.
>
> The question is just what conditions we are talking about here regarding
> further distribution.  The GFDL is not a public license either.  And
> with regard to the FSF, Stallman is actually not all that much
> interested in matters outside of software and its documentation.
>
> So it's likely more a matter of what we want to see/promote.  A fuzzy "I
> can publish on the Internet" without clear idea about what people may
> actually do when tripping on this "on the Internet" is actually not
> unlikely to lead us into trouble.  "I can publish" and "the LilyPond
> project may publish" are different things.  If it's not clear what
> people may actually do with it, a subset (marked or even available
> separately) with more clearcut conditions may actually be more useful to
> some subset of users.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>

Thanks for the clarification, David.

Ralph

-- 
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska  writes:

> Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
>>
>> *From: *Ralph Palmer 
>> *Date: *Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
>> *To: *
>> *Cc: *, lilypond-user Mailinglist 
>> *Subject: *Re: lilypond.org Productions page
>>
>> I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes
>> transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but
>> I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the
>> collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced
>> using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the
>> introductory materials in another program and post the whole
>> production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with
>> copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted
>> materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful
>> to other violists.
>>
>> I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain
>> and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the
>> music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we
>> should let it be listed on our productions page.
>>
>
> I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a
> GNU project" etc. etc.

The question is just what conditions we are talking about here regarding
further distribution.  The GFDL is not a public license either.  And
with regard to the FSF, Stallman is actually not all that much
interested in matters outside of software and its documentation.

So it's likely more a matter of what we want to see/promote.  A fuzzy "I
can publish on the Internet" without clear idea about what people may
actually do when tripping on this "on the Internet" is actually not
unlikely to lead us into trouble.  "I can publish" and "the LilyPond
project may publish" are different things.  If it's not clear what
people may actually do with it, a subset (marked or even available
separately) with more clearcut conditions may actually be more useful to
some subset of users.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Urs Liska]

Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:


*From: *Ralph Palmer 
*Date: *Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
*To: *
*Cc: *, lilypond-user Mailinglist 
*Subject: *Re: lilypond.org Productions page

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes 
transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I 
have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the 
collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using 
LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the 
introductory materials in another program and post the whole 
production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted 
(copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, 
but that would certainly make the collection less useful to other 
violists.


I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and 
open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music 
is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let 
it be listed on our productions page.




I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a GNU 
project" etc. etc.




Thanks,

Carl


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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Carl Sorensen]

From: Ralph Palmer 
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
To: 
Cc: , lilypond-user Mailinglist 
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed 
for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from 
the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The 
collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning 
to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole 
production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted 
(copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that 
would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.


I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and open 
content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music is available to 
see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let it be listed on our 
productions page.

Thanks,

Carl

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

Raising fingerings

[Emilio Millan]

I'm using fingerings for some above-the-staff harmonica notation. They are
working well for this purpose but there is one bit of fine tuning I'd like
to do if possible. In the example below, the fingerings are well-placed but
the "G4" and "A4" are a bit higher to appropriately avoid the note stems. Is
there a way to increase the default distance between the top of the staff
and the fingerings so that "C4" through "E5" would all be colinear?

Regards,
Emilio

 

\version "2.19.82"

{
  \override Fingering.font-encoding = #'latin1
  \override Fingering.font-size = #-2
  \override Fingering.font-series = #'bold
  
  c' \finger "C4"
  d' \finger "D4"
  e' \finger "E4"
  f' \finger "F4"
  g' \finger "G4"
  a' \finger "A4"
  b' \finger "B4"
  c'' \finger "C5"
  
  d'' \finger "D5"
  e'' \finger "E5"
  f'' \finger "F5"
  g'' \finger "G5"
  a'' \finger "A5"
  b'' \finger "B5"
  c''' \finger "C6"
}



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Ralph Palmer]

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes
transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have
explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the collection
publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using LilyPond and
Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the introductory materials in
another program and post the whole production as PDF. Would my collection
be acceptable with copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the
copyrighted materials, but that would certainly make the collection less
useful to other violists.

All the best,

Ralph

On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 4:27 AM Federico Bruni  wrote:

>
>
> Il giorno mer 5 dic 2018 alle 16:32, Sandro Santilli  ha
> scritto:
> > On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0100, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
> >>  Am 2018-12-03 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska :
> >>
> >>  > I think we should rather try to do a general collection among
> >> users (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to
> >> get a number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more
> >> impressive.
> >>
> >>  My only publicly available LilyPond work is
> >> http://www.vorwaertsbuchverlag.de/buecher/das-vorwärts-liederbuch
> >>  LilyPond isn’t mentioned, and the layout is not by me.
> >
> > I've some lilypond files in https://strk.kbt.io/poetry/music
> >
> >
>
> Thanks, but I see copyrighted music.
> I think we should link only to public domain or open content licensed
> music.
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>


-- 
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

LSR-snippet "Add wings to all repeat barlines (simple version)"

[Thomas Morley]

To the author of the LSR-snippet "Add wings to all repeat barlines
(simple version)"
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1=1055

Many thanks for your snippet.

Though, I think it duplicates "Changing the default bar lines"
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=964
which is in our snippets-manual as well:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/snippets-big-page#staff-notation-changing-the-default-bar-lines

Thus, I tend to delete your snippet. Agreed?

One hint for further LSR-contributions:
The LSR always runs stable versions, currently 2.18.2
so \time #'(2 3) 5/8 would have been needed, instead of \time 2,3 5/8

Thanks,
  Harm

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

Re: [lyric sheet stylesheet] fixing lyric spacing

[Alexander Kobel]

Hi,

On 07.12.18 19:27, Kieren MacMillan wrote:

Hi Alex,


David's and Mike's "magnetic snapping lyrics"?
  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2014-03/msg00489.html


Yes — I have an old copy in my "Workarounds" include folder. But I ran into a 
lot of problems with it (maybe related to what Urs found?) and so had temporarily given 
up on it.


Jeez, I should have remembered that... Perhaps the issue is/was

https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/pull/128

? If so, there's a chance that the modifications/fixes were indeed 
quasi-local on my version of that file.



To see in action:
http://www.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Es_ist_ein_Ros%27_entsprungen_(Melchior_Vulpius)


Okay… first of all: What a gorgeous score! Fabulous font choices, spacing is 
perfect, whitespace is excellent. Well done.


Thanks. But there's really not so much credit for me to earn here:
Just stick to pre-1700 scores, plain SATB, no instruments, no fancy 
graphics, no Schenker graphs, and preferably at most one page. You'll 
suddenly be surprised to find that Lily is both great by default and 
reasonably pleasant to use. ;-)



But I only ever used it in the "usual" applications with notes, and never tried 
on a pure chord sheet.


I’ll let you know how it works out!


Sure. Good luck!


Cheers,
Alex



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Generate staff-less chord and lyrics sheet

[Thomas Morley]

Am Sa., 8. Dez. 2018 um 10:08 Uhr schrieb Johan Vromans :
>
> On Thu, 6 Dec 2018 21:15:43 +0100, Annette Kusma 
> wrote:
>
> > The output should look something like this:
> >
> > C   F C
> > Mary had a little lamb
> >  F   G  C
> > Its fleece was white as snow
> >
> > I could simply write my sheet in some office programme,
>
> Instead of trying to abuse office programs, why not take a look at
> https://www.chordpro.org ?

I doubt the initial request will ever work sufficiently with LilyPond.

Well, it's possible to eleminate the hyphen and the space it creates,
yes, but ligatures are not possible.
It's the same as in markup, regard
\markup \override #'(word-space . 0) \line { f i }

If one "joins" the texts, in markup one could do \markup \concat { f i
}, then for LyricText you would need to "join" the duration as well.
How to place ChordName then?

Evenwithout Hyphen
<<
  \new ChordNames \chordmode { c4:7 c:7.13 }
  \new Devnull { c' c' }
  \new Lyrics \lyricmode { f i }
>>

the manually joined result looks strange in both cases

<<
  \new ChordNames \chordmode { c4:7 c:7.13 }
  \new Devnull { c' c' }
  \new Lyrics \lyricmode { fi2 }
>>

The warning about "staff-affinities should only decrease" may be cured
easily, though

Admittedly even with a text-editing program placing two chords with
extensions over a very short syllable may lead to unsatisfying
results.

So for now I'd like to second Johan pointing to a different program.



Cheers,
  Harm

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

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno sab 8 dic 2018 alle 10:35, Federico Bruni 
 ha scritto:


I prefer a small list of active projects than a larger list of mostly 
abandoned ones.
We should also point out that the list is limited to a) projects 
using LilyPond exclusively (otherwise we might mention also IMSLP) b) 
works publicly available and distributed as either public domain or 
open content works. This would explain the small list.




I've just uploaded a patch:
https://codereview.appspot.com/348040043/

Please comment on Rietveld if you have any suggestion.

Thanks
Federico




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

Re: \repeat for markups?

[David Kastrup]

Aaron Hill  writes:

> On 2018-12-08 7:34 pm, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Is there a function to repeat markups? Like
>>
>> \repeat unfold 10 \markup { "foo" }
>
> Just threw this together, although I admit not looking in the LSR for
> prior work:
>
> 
> \version "2.19.82"
>
> #(define-markup-command
>   (replicate layout props count args) (number? markup?)
> (interpret-markup layout props
>   #{ \markup { #@(map (lambda (_) args) (iota count)) } #}))
>
> \markup \replicate #4 \box "Hello, World!"
> 

One would likely prefer
#(define-markup-list-command
  (replicate layout props count arg) (number? markup?)
(interpret-markup-list layout props (make-list count arg)))

since you can then choose how to format the resulting list.

-- 
David Kastrup

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