Re: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
On 08/23, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> You can always use \fixed. =)
I didn't know about \fixed until just now. My first thought was to use
this to make the "default" pitches begin on the bottom space of the
staff, i.e., for treble clef
\fixed f' {f g a b c d e}
is equivalent to
{f' g' a' b' c'' d'' e''}
This way, notes inside the staff would need no "," or "'", and most
notes outside would need only a single "," or "'". I think I could keep
track of octaves pretty easily if the notation were connected visually
to the staff I'm reading from.
Unfortunately, only the octave, not the note name, of the reference
pitch appears to have an effect.
\fixed f' {f g a b c d e}
has the same output as
\fixed c' {f g a b c d e}
and
{f' g' a' b' c' d' e' f'}
> > Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if I got used to it though.
>
> That was certainly my experience — after nearly a decade of using
> \relative (despite *many* frustrations around transposing instruments,
> introduction of octavation errors via copy-and-paste, etc.), I moved
> to absolute, and within about 6 months, I was shocked that I ever
> worked any other way.
>
> > What's your experience with MIDI entry?
>
> In Frescobaldi, it is quite smooth — essential to my workflow, really.
Thanks, When I have time to make larger changes to my workflow I'll give
this a shot.
Mason
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
Hi Mason, > I thought of that, but my worry is that I'll still make octave errors, > but each will result in one transposed note instead of a transposed > phrase, which might be even less apparent than proofreading. That is a concern… > I also find relative note entry to be more intuitive and human readable. You can always use \fixed. =) > Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if I got used to it though. That was certainly my experience — after nearly a decade of using \relative (despite *many* frustrations around transposing instruments, introduction of octavation errors via copy-and-paste, etc.), I moved to absolute, and within about 6 months, I was shocked that I ever worked any other way. > What's your experience with MIDI entry? In Frescobaldi, it is quite smooth — essential to my workflow, really. Best, Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him) ‣ 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: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
Thanks Kieren, On 08/23, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > My primary suggestion: use absolute instead of relative note entry, and you > will never have incorrect octavation again. :) I thought of that, but my worry is that I'll still make octave errors, but each will result in one transposed note instead of a transposed phrase, which might be even less apparent than proofreading. I also find relative note entry to be more intuitive and human readable. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if I got used to it though. > My secondary suggestion: to make entry fast and super-accurate, use MIDI > entry if possible. I have never looked into MIDI entry for Lilypond. I was never fond of it back when I used Sibelius, because correcting things like the spelling of accidentals became more trouble than it was worth. A quick search finds this,[1] which likes like it has the potential for a reasonable workflow. What's your experience with MIDI entry? > If you stick with relative note entry, then perhaps use octave checks > regularly? Now that I know about octave checks I'm going to start using them and see if that's enough to avoid octave errors. Depending on how that goes I might try out absolute or MIDI entry next. Mason [1] https://github.com/jurihock/lilyfrog signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Noting temporarely 2 melodies (different lyrics) on same staff
On 23.08.19 22:17, Guy Stalnaker wrote:
Simon,
A question about your example if I may. I have used this construct
<< { \voiceOne }
\new Voice {
{ \voiceTwo } }
>> \oneVoice
You put the \oneVoice before the \new Voice inside the << >> and not
after/outside the << >> ... wondering why :-)
Just my personal preference, it really doesn’t make any difference
whatsoever.
Thanks btw for your explanation. Now I'm figuring out how to map it to
the structure I usually use from Frescobaldi's Score Wizard.
I’ve stopped using that years ago because I wanted more control over
everything…
Best, Simon
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
Hi Mason, > placing a note in the wrong octave My primary suggestion: use absolute instead of relative note entry, and you will never have incorrect octavation again. :) My secondary suggestion: to make entry fast and super-accurate, use MIDI entry if possible. If you stick with relative note entry, then perhaps use octave checks regularly? Hope that helps! Kieren. Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him) ‣ 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: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
Mason, My use is for transcribing 17th and 18th C piano music. After a line or two I compile using Frescobaldi. My errors, frequent, become apparent. Mark -Original Message- From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of ma...@masonhock.com Sent: Friday, August 23, 2019 1:41 PM To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors? I typically make few errors while inputting music. The two most common exceptions are incorrect note durations and placing a note in the wrong octave. The former generally is not a problem, because bar checks catch the error and tell me where to look. However, the latter slips by more easily. If after compiling I notice that a voice is in the wrong octave, I know to then go looking for the error, but with no equivalent to bar checks, it takes longer to find the error. Worse is when I have made two octave errors in opposite directions, causing the voice to end up in the correct octave. In this case, I don't spot the error until I do a round of proofreading. Does anyone have any tips they've found for avoiding this kind of error or catching it earlier? What I'm trying now is to get into a habit of compiling and checking against the manuscript more frequently, but this slows me down, so I'd also be interested in general strategies for avoiding octave errors in the first place. What would be terrific is some sort of "octave check" where at the end of a line I can enter a pitch in absolute notation which is checked against the most recent pitch in relative notation and throw an error if the octave is wrong, similar to \barNumberCheck. Mason ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
"Octave checks" occurred to me while I was writing. I should have thought to RTFM before sending... http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/changing-multiple-pitches#octave-checks Mason On 08/23, ma...@masonhock.com wrote: > I typically make few errors while inputting music. The two most common > exceptions are incorrect note durations and placing a note in the wrong > octave. The former generally is not a problem, because bar checks catch > the error and tell me where to look. However, the latter slips by more > easily. > > If after compiling I notice that a voice is in the wrong octave, I know > to then go looking for the error, but with no equivalent to bar checks, > it takes longer to find the error. Worse is when I have made two octave > errors in opposite directions, causing the voice to end up in the > correct octave. In this case, I don't spot the error until I do a round > of proofreading. > > Does anyone have any tips they've found for avoiding this kind of error > or catching it earlier? What I'm trying now is to get into a habit of > compiling and checking against the manuscript more frequently, but this > slows me down, so I'd also be interested in general strategies for > avoiding octave errors in the first place. What would be terrific is > some sort of "octave check" where at the end of a line I can enter a > pitch in absolute notation which is checked against the most recent > pitch in relative notation and throw an error if the octave is wrong, > similar to \barNumberCheck. > > Mason signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?
I typically make few errors while inputting music. The two most common exceptions are incorrect note durations and placing a note in the wrong octave. The former generally is not a problem, because bar checks catch the error and tell me where to look. However, the latter slips by more easily. If after compiling I notice that a voice is in the wrong octave, I know to then go looking for the error, but with no equivalent to bar checks, it takes longer to find the error. Worse is when I have made two octave errors in opposite directions, causing the voice to end up in the correct octave. In this case, I don't spot the error until I do a round of proofreading. Does anyone have any tips they've found for avoiding this kind of error or catching it earlier? What I'm trying now is to get into a habit of compiling and checking against the manuscript more frequently, but this slows me down, so I'd also be interested in general strategies for avoiding octave errors in the first place. What would be terrific is some sort of "octave check" where at the end of a line I can enter a pitch in absolute notation which is checked against the most recent pitch in relative notation and throw an error if the octave is wrong, similar to \barNumberCheck. Mason signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Noting temporarely 2 melodies (different lyrics) on same staff
Simon,
A question about your example if I may. I have used this construct
<< { \voiceOne }
\new Voice {
{ \voiceTwo } }
>> \oneVoice
You put the \oneVoice before the \new Voice inside the << >> and not
after/outside the << >> ... wondering why :-)
Thanks btw for your explanation. Now I'm figuring out how to map it to the
structure I usually use from Frescobaldi's Score Wizard.
Guy
Guy Stalnaker
jimmyg...@gmail.com
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 1:49 PM Simon Albrecht
wrote:
> Hello Ziad,
>
> On 23.08.19 17:28, Ziad Gholam wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am looking for a simple solution to the following subject :
> > while editiong a chorus part, the Soprani voice is temporarely split
> > (i.e. for 4 or 5 measures among 50 or more)
> > into 2 different melodies, with different rythms an different lyrics.
> >
> > I found a simple solution for the musical part of this subject, by
> > using the "formula" :
> > <<
> > {
> > \voiceOne
> > notes-notes-notes ...
> > }
> > \new Voice
> > {
> > \voiceTwo
> > different-notes-different-notes ...
> > }
> > >> \oneVoice
>
>
> That basically is the most convenient way to do it under these
> circumstances. It is important to know that this way everything before
> and after this <<>> closure as well as the first music expression within
> the <<>> will end up in the same Voice context, which means that one
> Lyrics context will easily follow them. However these lyrics are below
> the staff, which is where the lyrics for the second soprano need to go.
> Hence, it’s better to reverse them and make the new Voice the one for
> the first soprano.
>
> In order to add lyrics for the upper part, you need to label two
> contexts in order to reference them: the Staff context for the soprani
> needs something like
>
> \new Staff = "sopranoStaff"
>
> wherever you are creating it, and the Voice context for the first
> soprani needs a label.
>
> A complete minimal example:
>
> %
> \version "2.19.83"
>
> <<
>\new Staff = "sopranoStaff"
>\new Voice = "soprano" {
> c'4
> <<
>{
> \voiceTwo
> c'
> \oneVoice
>}
>\new Voice = "soprano1" {
> \voiceOne
> c''
>}
>\new Lyrics \with {
> % this places the new Lyrics context above the labeled staff
> alignAboveContext = "sopranoStaff"
>} \lyricsto "soprano1" {
> testt
>}
> >>
> d'
>}
>\new Lyrics \lyricsto "soprano" {
> tes test testtt
>}
> >>
> %
>
> Unfortunately, this minimal example exposes a bug
> (https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2010/) that was still
> present in v2.18 but has since been fixed. There is no harm to be
> expected from upgrading—and many benefits, so do consider using 2.19.83.
>
> Best, Simon
>
>
> >
> > Now, can anyone help to reach a solution taht would be "simple to
> > implement"
> > without changing my ready-to-use template ?
> > ( the lyricsto function is very delicate to use in this case, isn't it ?
> > because it will "follow" the Soprani_1 rythm and will ruin the
> > Soprani_2 melody) ...
> >
> > Remark : i am using the "2.18.2" version
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ziad Gholam
> > Paris - France
> >
> >
> > ___
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> > lilypond-user@gnu.org
> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Frescobaldi: show documentation for lilypond 2.19
Hi Werner, on Linux in the Edit>Preferences dialogue there is a tab for ‘LilyPond documentation’ where you can add URLs to both offline and online docs. HTH, Simon On 23.08.19 21:04, Werner LEMBERG wrote: [Frescobaldi 3 on Windows] If I press the F9 button to open the lilypond documentation, I get the pages for version 2.18. However, my installed lilypond version is 2.19.83. What must I do to make Frescobaldi display the 2.19 documentation? Werner ___ 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: Frescobaldi: show documentation for lilypond 2.19
I'm not sure and not at home, but there's a preference for the documentation path. -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Frescobaldi: show documentation for lilypond 2.19
[Frescobaldi 3 on Windows] If I press the F9 button to open the lilypond documentation, I get the pages for version 2.18. However, my installed lilypond version is 2.19.83. What must I do to make Frescobaldi display the 2.19 documentation? Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Noting temporarely 2 melodies (different lyrics) on same staff
Hello Ziad,
On 23.08.19 17:28, Ziad Gholam wrote:
Hello,
I am looking for a simple solution to the following subject :
while editiong a chorus part, the Soprani voice is temporarely split
(i.e. for 4 or 5 measures among 50 or more)
into 2 different melodies, with different rythms an different lyrics.
I found a simple solution for the musical part of this subject, by
using the "formula" :
<<
{
\voiceOne
notes-notes-notes ...
}
\new Voice
{
\voiceTwo
different-notes-different-notes ...
}
>> \oneVoice
That basically is the most convenient way to do it under these
circumstances. It is important to know that this way everything before
and after this <<>> closure as well as the first music expression within
the <<>> will end up in the same Voice context, which means that one
Lyrics context will easily follow them. However these lyrics are below
the staff, which is where the lyrics for the second soprano need to go.
Hence, it’s better to reverse them and make the new Voice the one for
the first soprano.
In order to add lyrics for the upper part, you need to label two
contexts in order to reference them: the Staff context for the soprani
needs something like
\new Staff = "sopranoStaff"
wherever you are creating it, and the Voice context for the first
soprani needs a label.
A complete minimal example:
%
\version "2.19.83"
<<
\new Staff = "sopranoStaff"
\new Voice = "soprano" {
c'4
<<
{
\voiceTwo
c'
\oneVoice
}
\new Voice = "soprano1" {
\voiceOne
c''
}
\new Lyrics \with {
% this places the new Lyrics context above the labeled staff
alignAboveContext = "sopranoStaff"
} \lyricsto "soprano1" {
testt
}
>>
d'
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "soprano" {
tes test testtt
}
>>
%
Unfortunately, this minimal example exposes a bug
(https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2010/) that was still
present in v2.18 but has since been fixed. There is no harm to be
expected from upgrading—and many benefits, so do consider using 2.19.83.
Best, Simon
Now, can anyone help to reach a solution taht would be "simple to
implement"
without changing my ready-to-use template ?
( the lyricsto function is very delicate to use in this case, isn't it ?
because it will "follow" the Soprani_1 rythm and will ruin the
Soprani_2 melody) ...
Remark : i am using the "2.18.2" version
Thanks
Regards,
Ziad Gholam
Paris - France
___
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
Noting temporarely 2 melodies (different lyrics) on same staff
Hello,
I am looking for a simple solution to the following subject :
while editiong a chorus part, the Soprani voice is temporarely split (i.e.
for 4 or 5 measures among 50 or more)
into 2 different melodies, with different rythms an different lyrics.
I found a simple solution for the musical part of this subject, by using
the "formula" :
<<
{
\voiceOne
notes-notes-notes ...
}
\new Voice
{
\voiceTwo
different-notes-different-notes ...
}
>> \oneVoice
Now, can anyone help to reach a solution taht would be "simple to
implement"
without changing my ready-to-use template ?
( the lyricsto function is very delicate to use in this case, isn't it ?
because it will "follow" the Soprani_1 rythm and will ruin the Soprani_2
melody) ...
Remark : i am using the "2.18.2" version
Thanks
Regards,
Ziad Gholam
Paris - France
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond and FontForge
>> I would really appreciate someone explaining how to generate these >> tables using FontForge. thanks! I've just updated `mf/README' in the git repository with an even more detailed description of the conversion process. Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Choral scores conventions question
Hi Jacques, I’ve created this score from a psalms book, both attached, with explicit, sometimes artificial, time signatures and rests for the time being. What is the usual way to setup such a choral, in terms of compound time signatures, partials, measure 13 spanning over a line break, minimizing the number of rests such as measure 4, the display of rests at measure 8, and the like? I would always recommend to keep everything as close as possible to the actual style of writing employed by composers like Schein. The original 1627 printing looks as follows: https://imgur.com/a/wZMsAq3 https://imgur.com/a/pcCDMoV Of course, today we would prefer using an actual score in 2 or 4 staves, but I'd strongly argue against pretending there is an actual alternating metre, actual measures and so on. I didn't typeset exactly this tune, but here is an example from Osiander's collection that I engraved some time ago: https://imgur.com/a/SKoDwJB Best Lukas ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Changing system-system-distance between scores
Hi Ben, See: http://lilypond.org/website/tiny-examples.html Cheers, Pierre Le jeu. 22 août 2019 à 13:20, bkal...@gmail.com a écrit : > This seems like it should be easy, but I can't find a way to do it. How do > I > change the spacing between systems, not for the whole book, but for a > single > score? I would think it would even be possible to do this within a score, > though I don't need that right now. > > My particular use case: I have two scores to be printed on the same page. > The first score is a fiddle tune with chord symbols. The second score > consists of alternative chords only, so just ChordNames. The spacing > between > the ChordNames systems is far, far too generous, and I would like to > tighten > it up. > > Many thanks! > > - Ben > > > > -- > 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 > ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
