Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
Am 27.12.2014 08:27, schrieb Jayaratna: Just a few days ago I had to correct the following incipit: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n169753/dentestui01.png In the original the longae rests at the beginning of the piece indicate that the Modus Longarum is imperfect, thus: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n169753/dentestui02.png It’s only natural that mensural notation follows wholly different conventions than 19th/20th century typesetting standards, since inspite of many similarities they are essentially different systems of notation. So your example does not say anything about how to typeset an arrangement by Moszkowski. Best regards, Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
Simon Albrecht-2 wrote It’s only natural that mensural notation follows wholly different conventions than 19th/20th century typesetting standards The (maybe ot) point was that the rest position can have a meaning. Incipits are quite a common feature in modern notation. Cheers, A -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Unresolvable-rest-collision-tp169585p169768.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: Unresolvable rest collision?
Just a few days ago I had to correct the following incipit: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n169753/dentestui01.png In the original the longae rests at the beginning of the piece indicate that the Modus Longarum is imperfect, thus: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n169753/dentestui02.png -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Unresolvable-rest-collision-tp169585p169753.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: Unresolvable rest collision?
Phil Holmes-2 wrote According to typesetting rules (see Behind Bars by Elaine Gould, for example) rests should remain consistently placed with respect to staff lines. I don't know if it is mentioned by Gould or others but the placement of rests sometimes is not just a matter of design balance, but can be meaningful per se. A -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Unresolvable-rest-collision-tp169585p169680.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: Unresolvable rest collision?
- Original Message -
From: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com
To: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
Cc: Lilypond-User Mailing List lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2014 2:37 PM
Subject: 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.)
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.
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
Am 23. Dezember 2014 11:41:38 MEZ, schrieb Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net:
- Original Message -
From: Ted Lemon mel...@fugue.com
To: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
Cc: Lilypond-User Mailing List lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2014 2:37 PM
Subject: 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.)
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.
So regarding the OP's question:
LilyPond behaves correctly here,but you can force the behaviour you want by
overriding the vertical offset of the rest if you think zhat's a good idea.
Urs
--
Phil Holmes
___
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: 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
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?
Hi Ted,
Can anyone see what it is that I am doing wrong here?
Personally, I would start with “you’re using \parallelMusic” and “you’re using
\relative”… ;)
But seriously:
1. Use r8 instead of (e.g.) c’’8\rest, and letting Lilypond make her [generally
excellent] placement choices.
2. Use explicit voices, e.g.
\new Voice = bass-a { \voiceOne \relative c \vba }
\new Voice = bass-b { \voiceTwo \relative c \vbb }
\new Voice = bass-c { \voiceThree \relative c \vbc }
Hope this helps!
Kieren.
___
Kieren MacMillan, composer
www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info
email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
___
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
Re: Unresolvable rest collision?
Hi Ted, The placement of the rests isn't exactly what I want Maybe use a \tweak, then? 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. Unless you tell her otherwise, Lily will move things around to avoid collisions, maintain minimum padding values, etc. Hope this helps! Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ 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
