Re: Your thoughts on Lilypond exposure (2015)
On Feb 21, 2015, at 9:50 AM, Jacques Menu imj-muz...@bluewin.ch wrote: To be sure I get you right : you’d like the users of your site to able to adapt and complement an existing score according to their taste, is that it? IMSLP supports uploading arrangements. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \shiftOn and friends
On Jan 29, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote: http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/learning/real-music-example This example actually nicely illustrates one of the things I've found frustrating about working with Lilypond: why is it necessary to do so much deliberate annotation to deal with clashes that one would think could be dealt with automatically? Is this by design, or simply an indication that there is more work to do? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \shiftOn and friends
On Jan 29, 2015, at 10:41 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote: Certainly the latter. But quite a lot of work has been done. More than a few of the examples of overrides in the earlier manuals have had to be removed, as LilyPond now does that particular right thing out of the box. There is always more that could be done, of course. But sometimes is is not possible to determine what the best layout option is, either because it is a matter of convention or taste, which vary over time and with composer, or because the processing time needed to detect and correct collisions and other positioning errors would be too great to tolerate. OK, thanks for the explanation! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Pianostaff 4-part writing and rests
On Jan 24, 2015, at 10:44 AM, Peter Danemo petedom...@gmail.com wrote: I need it to be just one. I learned how to make a rest invisible, but that doesn't change the position for the remaining rest. Use 's' instead of 'r' for one of the rests. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Staccato
On Jan 19, 2015, at 9:43 PM, Cynthia Karl pck...@mac.com wrote: You must have an intimate knowledge of LP source code to be able to say that. In the Learning Manual, there is a single mention of dotsDown, in a discussion of UP and DOWN. In the Notation Manual, there are five mentions, one saying simply that it is a predefined command, and four references to that statement in the appendices. I don't think there are any other mentions of dotsDown in the other LP documentation. How would anyone know what \dotsDown does? Not that I would be one to sing a paean to the wonders of the Lilypond manual, but when I had an issue with a dot clashing with another note, I was able to figure out \dotsDown and \dotsNeutral. It may be because it's consistent with other similar constructs, but it definitely didn't come from reading the source code. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Suppress command (\arpeggio) in music variable
On Dec 25, 2014, at 10:50 AM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: \override Arpeggio.stencil = ##f \barsSixToEight \revert Arpeggio.stencil This will prevent it showing up in the output, but it'll still show up in the midi, won't it? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Use of Stackoverflow for Question/Answer forum
On Dec 24, 2014, at 12:52 PM, Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com wrote: I wonder... Why are there so many different archives of the lilypond mailing list? Would there be a way to prevent some of them from showing up in google search results? (e.g. by having them indicate no index in robots.txt) Attracting search clicks is a money-making proposition, particularly if it's cheap, so putting up an archive of a mailing list is an easy way to do that. There has to be content that will match searches in order for it to be worthwhile. You see the same thing with phpBB sites--there will be a dozen archives of any reasonably popular site, all just clickbait. So far StackOverflow seems to be policing this to the extent that it apparently doesn't happen with them. FWIW, I sometimes try a general search (DuckDuckGo), but just as often I'll start with the manuals (usually doing a single-page search on the index page of the notation manual), then I'll search either the LSR or the mailing list using the nabble interface ( http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/ ). ...and then ask on the mailing list if I get stuck. The manuals are great as far as they go, but they aren't comprehensive, nor are they systematic. To the extent that I'm any good at typesetting manuscripts with Lilypond, it's a result of reading the manual, beating my head against some weird behavior, occasionally asking questions, and iterating. E.g., unless I have just missed some valuable resource, there is no systematic document about what can appear between the braces in any of \layout, \staff, \score, \book, etc. The information is in many cases _there_, but it's organized in such a way that it's a bit of a treasure hunt trying to find it. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Use of Stackoverflow for Question/Answer forum
On Dec 23, 2014, at 5:45 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: Definitive answers are frequently found by learning to use the manuals and their indices. HAH! :) Believe me, if I hadn't RTFM'd, you'd have had such a barrage of silly questions from me yesterday you would have plotzed. But the manual is not an oracle. Anyway, I'm fine either way--I'm very grateful for the help I got yesterday, and also last time I asked a question a couple of weeks ago. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
On Dec 23, 2014, at 5:41 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: According to typesetting rules (see Behind Bars by Elaine Gould, for example) rests should remain consistently placed with respect to staff lines. This means that when they are moved, they should be moved in 2 pitch increments, not one. Yup, I tried that; for some reason it didn't move. I haven't investigated further--I wound up finding a much more elegant way to place the rests (which did require manual tweaking). I think a clearer understanding of how the \voiceOne ... \voiceN stuff works would have helped me--I'd seen something about it when I did my previous manuscript, but then forgot about it by the time I started this one. Hopefully I won't forget to use explicit voices next time. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Use of Stackoverflow for Question/Answer forum
On Dec 23, 2014, at 5:46 PM, Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com wrote: Use the Google search tip above to search only the archive you want results from. The beauty of Google Search is that it searches everywhere, not just one place, so it'll return results from mailing lists, stack exchange, random blogs, etc. So throwing chaff into the search engine really detracts from its effectiveness. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Unresolvable rest collision?
I'm getting a puzzling error message when I try to typeset the following
lilypond source file. The error is being reported in measure 17 in the first
bass clef voice (\vba). The error that's reported is romanza.ly:143:47:
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set. Can anyone
see what it is that I am doing wrong here?
#(set-global-staff-size 22)
\header{
title = Romanza
composer = Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
arranger = Arr. by M. Moszkowski
copyright = July 1919
subtitle = from Concerto for Piano in D minor
}
#(set-global-staff-size 21)
keyMeter = { \key bes \major \time 4/4 }
\parallelMusic #'(vta vtb vtc dynD vba vbb vbc) {
% 1
f'2-4(\ e8 f e f\! |
s1 |
s1-c espress. |
s1\p |
\stemUp d'2_3_5^( cis8 d c d |
\stemDown bes'4 bes bes bes |
s1 |
% 2
g8\ f ees d d4\!) f8.( d16 |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
ees8 d ces bes) bes4 r |
bes4 r r2 |
s1 |
% 3
bes8) r bes r f r f r |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
d,8^( f d f ees f ees f |
bes,2 c a |
s1 |
% 4
bes4.^a)( c16 d a c8-1-2 d ees e-1 |
s4 s\turn s2 |
s1 |
s1 |
d8 f d f f,4) r |
bes2 s2 |
s1 |
% 5
\break f2-1)( e8\ f e f\! |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
d''2^( cis8 d cis d |
bes'4 bes bes bes |
s1 |
% 6
g8\ f e d d4\!) f8.( d16 |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
ees8 d c bes bes4) r |
bes4 r r2 |
s1 |
% 7
bes8) r bes r f r f-5 r |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
d,8( f d f c f c f |
bes,2 a f |
s1 |
% 8
f,~ a c ees2^( f bes d8) bes'_[_( c d] |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
bes,4_\finger \markup \tied-lyric #3~1 f bes,) r |
s1 |
s1 |
% 9
\break ees4. \stemUp \tuplet 3/2 { d16 c bes } \stemNeutral a8) c8^[( d ees]
| s1 | s1 |
s1 |
s1 | r8 f'8~ f~ a~8 f~ a~ c~ 8 f a c ees8 r8 r4 | s1 |
% 10
f4. \tupletNeutral \tuplet 3/2 { ees16 d c } bes8) f'8_[( g a] | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
s1 | r8 f8~ f~ bes~8 f~ bes~ d~ 8 f bes d f8 r8 r4 | s1 |
% 11
bes4. \tuplet 3/2 { a16 g f } e8) g8_[( a bes] | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
r8 c'8~ c~ e~8 c~ e~ g~ 8 c e g bes8 r8 r4 | s1 | s1 |
% 12
c4. \tuplet 3/2 { bes16 a g } f8) f8_[--( 8-- 8--] | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
s4. f'4.^( r8 r |
r8 f8~ f~ a~8 f a c 4 d'8_[ ees c_4 ] | s1 |
% 13
f2)( e8_[ f e f] | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
d2)^( cis8 d cis d |
bes, f' bes8\arpeggio r bes'4 4 4 | s1 |
% 14
g8_[\ f ees d\!] d8)^b) d_[(\turn f d] | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
ees8 d c bes bes4) r |
bes4 r r2 | s1 |
% 15
bes8) r bes r f r f r |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
d,8^( f d f c f c f |
bes, f2 a f |
s1 |
% 16
f,~ a c ees2^( f bes d8)
\acciaccatura bes bes'( \acciaccatura c, c' \acciaccatura d, d' |
s1 |
s1 |
s1 |
bes,4_\finger \markup \tied-lyric #3~1 f bes,8) r r4 |
s1 |
s1 |
% 17
ees, a c ees4.\arpeggio \tuplet 3/2 { d16 c bes } a8) (c d ees | s1 | s1 |
s1 |
c''8\rest c a8^( c a d bes c ees4.) f8\rest |
f8 f'4._~ f e8\rest | s1 |
}
\score {
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff = trebleStaff {
\tempo Andante 4 = 72
\keyMeter
\set midiInstrument = #piano
\new Voice = tenor-a { \relative c' \vta }
\new Voice = tenor-b { \relative c' \vtb }
\new Voice = tenor-c { \relative c' \vtc } }
\new Dynamics { \dynD }
\new Staff = bassStaff {
\keyMeter \clef bass
\set midiInstrument = #piano
\new Voice = bass-a { \relative c \vba }
\new Voice = bass-b { \relative c \vbb }
\new Voice = bass-c { \relative c \vbc } }
\layout { } }
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
On Dec 22, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
wrote:
\new Voice = bass-a { \voiceOne \relative c \vba }
\new Voice = bass-b { \voiceTwo \relative c \vbb }
\new Voice = bass-c { \voiceThree \relative c \vbc }
Thanks, that fixed it. The placement of the rests isn't exactly what I want
when I let Lilypond do it automatically, although now with the explicit voice
markings it's at least sensible. I am a bit puzzled that even with explicit
marking, I don't actually have that much control over where the head of the
rest lands. I want the bottom rest head to be at e, and the top at e', but
when I specify that, they wind up at f and f' respectively, and changing for
example to d and d' doesn't change the position of the rest.
(Obviously not a problem that really needs to be solved, but I found it curious
that one could specify the note on which a rest would land, but that that
specification would be treated so loosely.)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Trying to replicate an obscure pedal marking from a ~1919 score...
As one might have seen from my previous question, I'm trying to re-typset a manuscript that was published in 1919, and it has a way of marking pedals that I hadn't seen before. You can see an example of this marking here: http://www.dolmetsch.com/musicalsymbols.htm search for The Raindrop. The marking seems related to what you'd get if you did something like this: \set Staff.pedalSustainStyle = #'bracket c4\sustainOn g c d d\sustainOff Except that the horizontal line connects to the vertical line at the top on the left, the line marking the end of the pedal is vertical, not slanted, and the horizontal line connects to the _bottom_ of the vertical line on the right. In my score the vertical line on the left doesn't have a crook at the top. This is not a big problem for me--the bracketed pedal style that I quoted above will work just fine--but I'm curious if this is a style that lilypond can support. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
On Dec 22, 2014, at 9:55 AM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Unless you tell her otherwise, Lily will move things around to avoid collisions, maintain minimum padding values, etc. Hope this helps! You have been tremendously helpful--thank you! I'm typesetting this for my dad, who was really impressed with something simpler I did in lilypond last week; he was curious to see if I could do this one, and I have learned quite a bit already in the process of trying! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Trying to replicate an obscure pedal marking from a ~1919 score...
On Dec 22, 2014, at 10:04 AM, David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com wrote: I always thought the traditional Ped. looked a bit like an elephant... Heh! Yes, I can see that. Or perhaps like a Snuffleupagus, if that reference makes any sense to you. Anyway, yes, Kieren's right. You can replace the drawing with whatever you'd like. You'd simply need to come up with a replacement stencil function. There will be a bit of complication for markings that stretch across system breaks, but that's also doable. In this particular piece they do not, although the vertical tics on either and do actually adjust relative to the music on the staff, similarly to slurs. Maybe later today I'll get a chance to work something out--something similar to get you started. If you happen to have time I would be interested and grateful, but please don't let my obscure inquiry sidetrack you if you have better things to do this afternoon! :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Use of Stackoverflow for Question/Answer forum
On Dec 22, 2014, at 4:26 PM, Garrett Fitzgerald sarekofvul...@gmail.com wrote: It's actually been discussed on meta - consensus is that people should actually come over here for help. :-) Yeah, so, this is intensely frustrating for anybody who tries to google for help with lilypond, because there are several dozen archives of the lilypond mailing list, each slightly different, so that if you do virtually any google search for help with lilypond, it returns a page with about a dozen identical copies of the same wrong answer, a couple of random document pages for different versions of the document that don't tell you what you need to know, and nothing whatsoever useful. So essentially, when you give this as the answer to the question why not use stack overflow, what you are really saying is don't google for help with Lilypond. Instead, just ask your question. That's sort of a reasonable thing to say: whenever I ask a question on the mailing list, some helpful person (or likely two) come back with an answer. But this isn't an answer that scales: if lilypond were to get more popular, at some point this would no longer work, and it seems to me that the difficulty of getting answers out of google is an impediment to lilypond's popularity. It just astonishes me that when I google for something like how to shrink a staff in lilypond I can't find any useful answer (although I find dozens of copies of the same utterly absurd answer: just shrink the notes, but keep the staff the same size!), and I think part of that is the way lilypond questions are asked and answered. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Staves as footnotes, and some random layout issues.
I'm trying to typeset a rather complicated manuscript and I've run into two brick walls right at the end of the process. The first is that I can't for the life of me figure out how lilypond does staff fragments for manuscript annotation. If you look at the bottom of the first page of the following PDF, you can see what I mean: https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/master/romanza.pdf?raw=true I attached the two staff fragments to the bottom of an existing system because I can't think of any other way to place them where I want on the page. This sort of works, but it comes with two problems. First, they're too close to the system above, and so the spacing is all wrong on the page. And second, they're the wrong size, and I can't see how to scale them. The source code is here: https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/master/romanza.ly Oh, I guess a third problem with these fragments is that it would be nice to eliminate the treble clef, but I have a feeling that's an easier problem to solve, so it's not the one I'm focusing on. Any clues would be appreciated. Oh, and of course it would also be nice if the a) and b) could be to the left of the staff fragment rather than above it, but again I suspect that this would be tractable if I had a better idea of how to do the actual layout. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Staves as footnotes, and some random layout issues.
On Dec 22, 2014, at 5:30 PM, Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com wrote: I'm trying to typeset a rather complicated manuscript and I've run into two brick walls right at the end of the process. The first is that I can't for the life of me figure out how lilypond does staff fragments for manuscript annotation. The second problem, which I failed to mention, is that I can't figure out why there's all that extra padding between the systems on the first page. It looks terrible--I'd rather have the blank space on the bottom. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Thanks for the help with the footnotes and the pedal brackets!
Thanks to Kieran, David, Trevor and Klaus for all the help on this. If anyone's curious, a reasonably final version of the score is available here: https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/master/romanza.pdf?raw=true And the source is here: https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/master/romanza.ly This was quite a project, and I learned a lot. Now maybe I'll try to learn to play it... :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \parallelMusic incompatible with slur marker at beginning of measure?
On Nov 24, 2014, at 7:21 AM, Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote: An input like a | ( b) would mean play legato from the BarCheck Ofcourse nonsense and LilyPond complains. Even the error-message: syntax error, unexpected EVENT_IDENTIFIER is correct, because a BarCheck will not take any musical event. Yes, now this makes sense. I got some private email as well explaining what's going on here. The problem is that the open paren looks lisp-ish, and so I want it to be a grouping syntax, but it's really just a marker that happens to pair with another marker that happens to be a closing paren. I am not in love with this, but I see how it happened, at least. It would be better if the error message were something like barcheck doesn't take an event, but at least now I understand how we got here. Thanks to you and Pierre (and the private person whom I shall not name here) for walking me through this. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
\parallelMusic incompatible with slur marker at beginning of measure?
I've been learning lilypond this weekend, so forgive me if this is a question
with an obvious answer, but I am having trouble getting slurs to work with
\parallelMusic. If the slur marker is on the note at the beginning of the
line, I get a fun error. This:
\parallelMusic #'(va dynD vb) {
% ...
% 7
c2 (f,4-.) d'-4-. |
s2. s4\f |
f4-. f'-1-. ees-. d-. |
(ees2-- c-- |
s1 |
(c2-- ees-- |
% 9
d2.--) s4 |
s1 |
d2.--) s4 |
}
produces this:
aylesford.ly:47:3: error: syntax error, unexpected EVENT_IDENTIFIER
(ees2-- c-- |
aylesford.ly:49:3: error: syntax error, unexpected EVENT_IDENTIFIER
(c2-- ees-- |
aylesford.ly:67:3: error: errors found, ignoring music expression
The whole file is here:
https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/7f9f30aa69ce08bdcf55ced7695e3621d7f9a066/aylesford.ly
If I use a phrasing slur, it works fine:
% 7
c2 (f,4-.) d'-4-.\( |
s2. s4\f |
f4-. f'-1-. ees-. d-.\( |
ees2-- c-- |
s1 |
c2-- ees-- |
% 9
d2.--\) s4 |
s1 |
d2.--\) s4 |
Complete file with phrasing slurs here:
https://github.com/Abhayakara/music/blob/master/aylesford.ly
Did I do something wrong here?
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \parallelMusic incompatible with slur marker at beginning of measure?
On Nov 24, 2014, at 12:35 AM, Pierre Perol-Schneider pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com wrote: The answer is in your question : you're putting slurs at a wrong place and phrasing slurs at the right one. Hm, okay. So a (b c d) is wrong, and a( b c d) is right? I tried putting the regular slur at the end of the measure instead of the beginning of the next, but I put a space between the note and the slur mark, and that didn't work: a ( | b c d). Anyway, if a (b c d) is wrong, and a( b c d) is right, then it should give the same error message regardless of where the mistake is in the measure, shouldn't it? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \parallelMusic incompatible with slur marker at beginning of measure?
On Nov 24, 2014, at 1:03 AM, Pierre Perol-Schneider pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Here both are ok; you simply omit to put any bar check: So a | (b c d) is wrong, and a( | b c d) is right. So to be clear, I am asking whether the behavior we are seeing is intended for some reason that I haven't understood yet. It is obviously the case that the behavior is as it is. From the perspective of a user who just wants to write music, there is no reason at all for me to think that a | (b c d) is wrong and a (b c d) is okay. For instance, a | b (c d) works, and a (b | c d) works. So it doesn't make any sense that a | (b c d) doesn't work. It may be that making it work is really hard because of the way bar checks are implemented. If so, it may be that there is no way to make things consistent in the way I am suggesting they should be. I can even see how, from a data structure perspective, making a | (b c d) work consistently is difficult. But if consistency is desired, then the fact that a | (b c d) doesn't work is a bug that is hard to fix, not a feature that doesn't need to be fixed. The question I was asking is whether this is a feature that I just don't understand, but your response isn't really answering that question. If in fact a (b c d) is wrong, but just happens to work, and a( b c d) is right, then it would be helpful for users if a (b c d) threw an error, instead of working, and if a | (b c d) threw the _same_ error. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
