On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
On 29 April 2010 21:36, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
That would already be handled by
{ ...} * 4
which is much more intuitive than ;4
I hadn't even considered that: to me, '*' means altering
Kieren:
It's not obvious to me whether
c\chord #'(1 7)
should produce c b or c bes. Musically speaking, I'd look at
the key signature; if it were c major, I would assume it meant
c b since b is the seventh note of the scale.
This may be a problem for the numeric syntax. I suppose
David Kastrup:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
...
And what if you see \chordmode { c,4:1/c c g,:1/g c } in the input
(which is basically how you put bass notes in now if you really must)?
...
For the simple chords c\maj c\dim c\maj7 etc. could suffice.
For more complex chords
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 01:33:42PM +0200, Karl Hammar wrote:
David Kastrup:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
...
And what if you see \chordmode { c,4:1/c c g,:1/g c } in the input
(which is basically how you put bass notes in now if you really must)?
...
For the simple
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
But I think we could use ; in LilyPond, even though it's used for comments
in Scheme, because the ; inside a scheme function aren't interpreted by the
LilyPond parser, IIUC.
I like ';' very much (mostly because it feels
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 4/29/10 7:12 AM, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
I think I really like this. It allows a transparent definition of what is
meant by a chord that is really easy to override.
But
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
Honestly, I'm just looking at the syntax form, not how to use it. It
simply looks good to me from a syntactical point of view. Whether
it's praktical or not, I don't know. I've never used chord mode.
Werner
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
It is not clear to me how this would extend to
\chordmode {
c1:7+ c:5+.3- c:3-.5-.7-
}
\chordmode {
c1:sus c:sus2 c:sus4 c:5.4^3
}
\chordmode {
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 4/29/10 7:12 AM, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
c 3 5
I like this
Why c 3 5 instead of c e g?
Because bes 3 5 requires less brain than what it would need to be.
--
David Kastrup
___
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
It is not clear to me how this would extend to
\chordmode {
c1:7+ c:5+.3- c:3-.5-.7-
}
\relative c' {
On 4/29/10 10:17 AM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
c 3 5
I like this
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this too.
Or, when we define \sus4 to be equivalent to \chord #'(1
Graham:
...
OTOH, what about doing something like this:
c\maj
c\dim
c\chord #'(1 4 5)
c\chord #'(1 3 5 7 11)
I like this.
Regards,
/Karl Hammar
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Am Donnerstag, 29. April 2010 22:20:27 schrieb Karl Hammar:
Graham:
...
OTOH, what about doing something like this:
c\maj
c\dim
We already have \dim for text diminuendo...
Cheers,
Reinhold
--
--
Reinhold Kainhofer,
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:11:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Speaking of which, I often wished we had a cool shortcut for writing
repeats using a postfix syntax, e.g.
{ large music expression here };4
instead of
\repeat unfold 4 { large music expression }
That would already be handled
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
? I'm not prepared to claim that there's no theory of chords that
includes doubly-augmented intervals relative to
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:17:51AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
It's nice, but a single mode where the full power of
voicing _and_ chords is available similarly convenient would be
preferable to me. Making chordmode and musicmode
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
? I'm not prepared to claim that there's
On 29 April 2010 21:36, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:11:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
Speaking of which, I often wished we had a cool shortcut for writing
repeats using a postfix syntax, e.g.
{ large music expression here };4
instead of
On 4/29/10 2:48 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 10:17:51AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 9:29 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
It's nice, but a single mode where the full power of
voicing _and_ chords is available similarly
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 02:51:59PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
c\chord #'(4 1 3 5)
I'm not entirely comfortable about have 4 1.
I'm totally comfortable with #'(4 1 3 5). I can easily parse that so that
steps that
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 08:55:13AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
But we'll need to be sure it handles things like
c\chord #'(1 3- 5-)
Hmm. Might we need
c\chord #'(1 3++ 7--)
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 03:02:08PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
OK. I guess I was looking at this as a step to eliminating the *need* for
chordmode and deprecating it (as was suggested by David originally). Of
course chordmode won't be eliminated until 3.0 (because we're in a syntax
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:14:43PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
There is at least one common chord that uses doubly altered steps: the
dim7 chord, which uses a double-flatted 7th., along with a minor thrd
and a diminished fifth. So yes, we do need
Hi all,
It's not obvious to me whether
c\chord #'(1 7)
should produce c b or c bes. Musically speaking, I'd look at
the key signature; if it were c major, I would assume it meant
c b since b is the seventh note of the scale.
This may be a problem for the numeric syntax. I suppose we
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 05:27:36PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi all,
It's not obvious to me whether
c\chord #'(1 7)
should produce c b or c bes. Musically speaking, I'd look at
Or... we could use dodecaphonic intervals, i.e.
c\chord #'(1 11) is a minor seventh
c\chord
On 4/29/10 3:12 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 02:51:59PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/29/10 2:42 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
c\chord #'(4 1 3 5)
I'm not entirely comfortable about have 4 1.
I'm totally
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid I couldn't resist testing this, so if you're interested,
try the attached patch.
That's great! You might also want to include simultaneous music
(...*4). Thanks!
-Jay
Jay Anderson horndud...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm afraid I couldn't resist testing this, so if you're interested,
try the attached patch.
That's great! You might also want to include simultaneous music
(...*4). Thanks!
Hi, from a user perspective, chordmode is unnecessary and restricted.
You can't combine different voices (in particular for adding bass
notes), you can't write chords and bass notes together, you can't put
non-chorded material in between, relative mode is not possible (like for
chord
On 4/28/10 5:38 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Hi, from a user perspective, chordmode is unnecessary and restricted.
You can't combine different voices (in particular for adding bass
notes), you can't write chords and bass notes together, you can't put
non-chorded material in
On 28 April 2010 12:38, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
That's not enough of a distinction to keep it around. Just let normal
music mode accept chords with : notation, and \chordmode is unnecessary
and can be deprecated.
How would you distinguish between chords and tremolos?
\notemode {
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
What effect would this have on the parser?
I have only taken a cursory look so far. When entering chordmode,
something records the chord names and the pitch names, and some grouping
is involved.
I think that I like this idea, even though I didn't at
Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com writes:
On 28 April 2010 12:38, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
That's not enough of a distinction to keep it around. Just let normal
music mode accept chords with : notation, and \chordmode is unnecessary
and can be deprecated.
How would you distinguish
Am Mittwoch, 28. April 2010 18:02:56 schrieb David Kastrup:
Anyway, here is how I would do this: Chords are much more common than
tremolos, so changing notation for the latter seems like the better
choice.
Oh, really???
In all the classical orchestra scores that I have looked at (and I have
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@kainhofer.com writes:
Am Mittwoch, 28. April 2010 18:02:56 schrieb David Kastrup:
Anyway, here is how I would do this: Chords are much more common than
tremolos, so changing notation for the latter seems like the better
choice.
Oh, really???
Yup.
In all the
2010/4/28 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
\notemode { c4:8 } - two quaver stem tremolo
Ugh. Did not remember that.
Anyway, here is how I would do this: Chords are much more common than
tremolos, so changing notation for the latter seems like the better
choice. There is already verbose syntax
Hi all,
1. I also disagree with David's statement/opinion that chords are much more
common than tremolos. This is certainly true in the pop (e.g., music theatre)
scores I compose/arrange/engrave, but absolutely false in the classical scores
I compose/arrange/engrave. Since I do roughly equal
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
1. I also disagree with David's statement/opinion that chords are
much more common than tremolos. This is certainly true in the pop
(e.g., music theatre) scores I compose/arrange/engrave, but absolutely
false in the classical scores I
Hi David,
Actually, I find that a rather encouraging statement. I'd have expected
don't change current tremolo syntax. c...@8 has some mnemonic value
(play a quarter at eighths, oops sounds like a time). But I don't
like its look. Would you consider c4/8 an adequate syntax?
c4/8 can be
Am Mittwoch, 28. April 2010 20:15:00 schrieb David Kastrup:
But I don't like its look. Would you consider c4/8 an adequate syntax?
Unfortunately, it's already in use. How would you distinguish the two
currently possible syntaxes:
c2*3/8
c2*3:8
Cheers,
Reinhold
--
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Hi David,
Actually, I find that a rather encouraging statement. I'd have expected
don't change current tremolo syntax. c...@8 has some mnemonic value
(play a quarter at eighths, oops sounds like a time). But I don't
like its look.
Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@kainhofer.com writes:
Am Mittwoch, 28. April 2010 20:15:00 schrieb David Kastrup:
But I don't like its look. Would you consider c4/8 an adequate syntax?
Unfortunately, it's already in use. How would you distinguish the two
currently possible syntaxes:
c2*3/8
On 28 April 2010 20:48, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
So I think we can come up with something that is both typographically
simple and mnemonically compelling… How about c4t8 (a c quarter note,
tremolo-d in eighths).
I don't
2010/4/28 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Actually, I find that a rather encouraging statement. I'd have
expected don't change current tremolo syntax. �...@8 has some
mnemonic value (play a quarter at eighths, oops sounds like a time).
But I don't like its look. Would you consider c4/8 an
Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com writes:
2010/4/28 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Actually, I find that a rather encouraging statement. I'd have
expected don't change current tremolo syntax. �...@8 has some
mnemonic value (play a quarter at eighths, oops sounds like a time).
But I don't
Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com writes:
On 28 April 2010 20:48, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
So I think we can come up with something that is both typographically
simple and mnemonically compelling… How about c4t8 (a c quarter
On 4/28/10 3:41 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com writes:
2010/4/28 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Actually, I find that a rather encouraging statement. I'd have
expected don't change current tremolo syntax. �...@8 has some
mnemonic value (play a
2010/4/28 Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu:
Does LilyPond use ;? I can't find a use for it in the index, and I
can't think of one.
'?' is used for cautionary accidentals.
I'm not a dev but I think ';' is used to express comments in Scheme
(not in LilyPond however).
Not so easy...
--
Xavier
On 4/28/10 4:21 PM, Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/4/28 Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu:
Does LilyPond use ;? I can't find a use for it in the index, and I
can't think of one.
'?' is used for cautionary accidentals.
I'm not a dev but I think ';' is used to express
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
On 4/28/10 3:41 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
My current approach is what would look best for both tremolo and
chords since the conflict has to be resolved in some manner or
other. If there is a particular good combination that is downwards
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:45:10AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
c4;7 does not really look anything like a chord. Neither does c4:7, to
be honest. So at best slightly worse.
Trying to channel Han-Wen here, I think the discussion is going in
the wrong direction. It started off with a few
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Xavier Scheuer x.sche...@gmail.com wrote:
Current syntax (using colons):
c4:16 d4: e: f: |
g: a: b: c: | % etc.
with \repeat tremolo:
\repeat tremolo 4 c16 \repeat tremolo 4 d16
\repeat tremolo 4 e16 \repeat tremolo 4 f16 |
\repeat tremolo 4 g16
David Kastrup dak at gnu.org writes:
Hi, from a user perspective, chordmode is unnecessary and restricted.
You can't combine different voices (in particular for adding bass
notes), you can't write chords and bass notes together,
You can do this:
\context Voice {
\chordmode {c}
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 12:45:10AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
c4;7 does not really look anything like a chord. Neither does c4:7, to
be honest. So at best slightly worse.
Trying to channel Han-Wen here, I think the discussion is going in
55 matches
Mail list logo
