Mark Polesky wrote Tuesday, September 21, 2010 6:35 AM
% Is there a way to target a specific context (eg. one of
% several Staff contexts) from within the \layout block?
I don't believe so. Modifying a single named context
is the only reason for the continued existence of the
ungainly
I'm not particularly opposed to placing this in the
NR, but it's not clear what you are suggesting here.
Do you mean to leave the LM unchanged, or do you intend
to remove or change the corresponding section there?
Also, if it is to go in the NR it needs a separate
section heading. At the
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 08:09:42 -0700, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk
wrote:
Although this would seem to be a valuable addition to the
Notation Reference, the policy is not to add bugs which are
in the bug tracker to @knownissues. [...] as they would need to be removed
as soon as they
On 09/20/2010 03:41 PM, Hans Aberg wrote:
A sharp is M-m and a flat m-M.
If I understand right, this is a key trick of your system, since such
representations allow you to raise or lower the pitch without affecting
the degree.
So by extension, if we say that q is a quarter-tone, to raise or
On 21 Sep 2010, at 11:46, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
A sharp is M-m and a flat m-M.
If I understand right, this is a key trick of your system, since
such
representations allow you to raise or lower the pitch without
affecting
the degree.
Yes - accidentals do not affect the degree: they are
On 9/21/10 3:46 AM, Joseph Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote:
On 09/20/2010 03:41 PM, Hans Aberg wrote:
A sharp is M-m and a flat m-M.
If I understand right, this is a key trick of your system, since such
representations allow you to raise or lower the pitch without affecting
the
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 06:16:40AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 9/21/10 3:46 AM, Joseph Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote:
but where/how in that system do we distinguish between for example
natural + 1/4 and sharp - 1/4 ? Presumably the former is (m-q)
whereas the
On 21 Sep 2010, at 14:16, Carl Sorensen wrote:
A sharp is M-m and a flat m-M.
If I understand right, this is a key trick of your system, since
such
representations allow you to raise or lower the pitch without
affecting
the degree.
So by extension, if we say that q is a quarter-tone, to
On 09/20/2010 05:27 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
For arrowed quarter-tones the notation is described (and recommended) in
Kurt Stone's book Music Notation in the Twentieth Century.
Excellent reference! That book is frequently quoted on this list, so
this should settle any question of is it
On 09/21/2010 02:16 PM, Hans Aberg wrote:
Yes - accidentals do not affect the degree: they are of degree zero. One
can add notes and intervals on this abstract level, and the degrees add
as well. In mathematics, a function f is called a homomorphism (of
abelian groups) when f(0) = 0, f(x + y)
The main reason I did not just push this as-is is that the changed
example, though much more illustrative, is butt-ugly and does not appear
to lead to sensible output with regard to the accidentals. Suggestions
for improvement welcome.
I think it important to clarify that \applyOutput does not
On 21 Sep 2010, at 16:05, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Yes - accidentals do not affect the degree: they are of degree
zero. One
can add notes and intervals on this abstract level, and the degrees
add
as well. In mathematics, a function f is called a homomorphism (of
abelian groups) when f(0) = 0,
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Joseph Wakeling
joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote:
From a notational perspective, the first two numbers are used to
calculate the vertical staff position of the notehead, while the value
of the alteration is used to determine the accidental: e.g. (1,1,-1/2)
On 21 Sep 2010, at 14:16, Carl Sorensen wrote:
It seems to me that the pitches natural+1/4 and sharp - 1/4 are the
same
pitch (i.e. enharmonic equivalents) and that it is appropriate to have
either one represent the same pitch.
Arab music uses E24 quarter-tone accidentals, though the actual
On 09/21/2010 04:42 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
This is not the nuance implied, since by your definition,
natural-uparrow (+1/4) and sharp-downarrow are the same, and you
clearly want them to mean something different.
They are enharmonically the same pitch, which can be notated in two
On 09/21/2010 04:52 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
However, I was wrong in my assumption that something about the key signature
should determine which of the enharmonic equivalents should be used.
Instead, it appears that the neighboring notes should govern in tonal music.
In atonal music, it
On 09/21/2010 05:28 PM, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Stone's guidance about the choice of accidentals is IMO something for
composers to consider rather than Lilypond. From a Lilypond point of
view, the issue should simply be: the composer can have the accidentals
s/he chooses.
... but ... thank
On 21 Sep 2010, at 16:52, Carl Sorensen wrote:
Here are scans from the relevant section of Stone's book. It
explicitly
*says* that natural+1/4 and sharp-1/4 are enharmonic equivalents,
and that
the notation for those pitches must be chosen with care.
Another interpretation might be
Is it a known feature that using the font sizing commands \teeny, \huge,
etc., leads to inconsistent line spacing when compared with using fontsize?
\markup { \teeny
\column {
Teeny
Teeny
Teeny
}
}
\markup { \fontsize #-3
\column {
fontsize #-3
fontsize #-3
fontsize #-3
}
}
\markup {
David,
I'm only going to comment on the formatting (and not the
content), since I only have a minute here.
+(@rinternals{ApplyOutputEvent}). Its syntax is
Add a colon after Its syntax is. See here:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/other-text-concerns
@var{proc},
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote in message
news:i7an6l$sa...@dough.gmane.org...
Is it a known feature that using the font sizing commands \teeny, \huge,
etc., leads to inconsistent line spacing when compared with using
fontsize?
\markup { \teeny
\column {
Teeny
Teeny
Teeny
}
}
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 04:23:41PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
The main reason I did not just push this as-is is that the changed
example, though much more illustrative, is butt-ugly and does not appear
to lead to sensible output with regard to the accidentals. Suggestions
for improvement
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 03:55:52PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
On 09/20/2010 05:27 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
Excellent reference! That book is frequently quoted on this list, so
this should settle any question of is it necessary.
Does that settle the matter adequately? :-)
No, because
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
[Graham: I know this is, or at least was, the policy, but I don't
see it in the CG.]
I'll add it after the 2.14 alpha has finished building. I'm
always leery of playing with git branches.
Cheers,
- Graham
In algebraic terms, choose a neutral n between m and M. The total pitch
system will be i m + j M + k n, where i, j, k are integers. But the staff
system only has the pitches i' m + j' M. When taking the difference with the
staff note, reducing the degree to 0, and taking away the sharps/flat
On 09/21/2010 08:13 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
Does that settle the matter adequately? :-)
No, because it's not in the issue tracker.
I'll put it there! Just checking that the source is adequate.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
On 9/21/10 9:28 AM, Joseph Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote:
On 09/21/2010 04:52 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
However, I was wrong in my assumption that something about the key signature
should determine which of the enharmonic equivalents should be used.
Instead, it appears that the
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 04:23:41PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
The main reason I did not just push this as-is is that the changed
example, though much more illustrative, is butt-ugly and does not appear
to lead to sensible output with regard
On 21 Sep 2010, at 21:31, Benkő Pál wrote:
In algebraic terms, choose a neutral n between m and M. The total
pitch
system will be i m + j M + k n, where i, j, k are integers. But the
staff
system only has the pitches i' m + j' M. When taking the difference
with the
staff note, reducing the
Greetings everybody,
You may already have seen this, but just in case:
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Ghostscript-9-0-supports-ICC-profiles-1082459.html
Ghostscript 0.9 has support for ICC profiles (which we couldn't care
less about) but also makes more use of Freetype (which may be nice
Hi all,
when trying to build LilyPond on OSX 10.6.4, I get the following error:
/Users/thsoft/Development/lilypond/scripts/build/out/help2man
out/lilypond-invoke-editor out/lilypond-invoke-editor.1
Traceback (most recent call last):
File out/midi2ly, line 63, in module
import midi
On 9/21/10 4:51 PM, Dénes Harmath harmathde...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
when trying to build LilyPond on OSX 10.6.4, I get the following error:
/Users/thsoft/Development/lilypond/scripts/build/out/help2man
out/lilypond-invoke-editor out/lilypond-invoke-editor.1
Traceback (most recent
Reviewers: Trevor Daniels,
Message:
New patch set uploaded.
On 2010/09/21 07:44:52, Trevor Daniels wrote:
I'm not particularly opposed to placing this in the
NR, but it's not clear what you are suggesting here.
Do you mean to leave the LM unchanged, or do you intend
to remove or change the
On Sep 22, 2010, at 1:21 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 9/21/10 4:51 PM, Dénes Harmath harmathde...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
when trying to build LilyPond on OSX 10.6.4, I get the following error:
/Users/thsoft/Development/lilypond/scripts/build/out/help2man
out/lilypond-invoke-editor
34 matches
Mail list logo
