On 18/04/2016 22:01, Sharon Rosner wrote:
Lilypond would expectedly complain about line 2, then proceed to put
together the PDF file and finally exit with a “fatal error”. The PDF
File would include 2 scores, so that means right after encountering
the syntax error on line 2, it continued to
Thats why I love these list!
Theres always people with the right sight!
My fault! I never notice the \\ resault of a copy/paste block
Thanks again!
Marcos
2016-01-26 21:32 GMT-03:00 Mark Stephen Mrotek :
> Marcos,
>
>
>
> The format for alternative is:
>
>
>
> \alternative
On 27/12/15 16:32, J Smith wrote:
> I'm trying to define a music function that transposes a chord and a
> melody multiple times. But for some reason, the transposition is done
> only once.
>
> Here's my attempt:
>
> repeatpattern =
> #(define-music-function (parser location chord pattern)
On 23/12/15 15:02, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Bernhard,
>
>> > When I searched for Lilypond transponieren (transpose) I was not at all
>> > clear that this could be done on an entire piece. There is no example
>> > where score is mentioned.
> While it doesn’t explicitly say “score”, it does [at
On 23/12/15 12:21, Robert Blackstone wrote:
> Yes, it should be a partial.
> But I do not know how to code that, 5 instead of 6 eighth notes, at the
> end of a section.
I've not tried it, but would an s8 work? If you just need to pad the bar
out, that seems obvious to me.
I was just thinking
On 14/11/15 11:52, Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Anybody running this combination?
>
> When attempting to run lilypond, libffi.so.6 is not found:
>
> error while loading shared libraries: libffi.so.6: cannot open
> shared object file: No such file or directory
>
>
> I am presently unable to
On 25/10/15 11:08, Chris Yate wrote:
> As I understand it, there are some differences in the commission payable
> for sending money to a friend vs buying a thing, but I've not looked
> into it for a couple of years. We were investigating it for managing our
> orchestra subs - I think it was about
On 23/10/15 05:48, Jacques Menu wrote:
> So, David, please send me your IBAN privately, and I’ll fix this problem on
> my side.
I know there's all this fuss about putting bank accounts on the web, but
here (in the UK) we have bank accounts that can't originate
transactions, and can't have an
On 13/10/15 11:09, Johan Vromans wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:39:35 +1100
> Andrew Bernard wrote:
>
>> > Whatever page description
>> > language your printer uses internally, the printer driver software on
>> > your computer will convert your file to that language
On 03/10/15 06:58, Brian Barker wrote:
> At 19:30 02/10/2015 +0100, Anthony Youngman wrote:
>> At the end of the day, it's down to the conductor to make sure the
>> players know what they're doing.
>
> But surely engraved music is designed to indicate this unambiguously? If
> the conductor needs
On 02/10/2015 07:24, Johan Vromans wrote:
On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:41:21 +0100
Anthonys Lists <antli...@youngman.org.uk> wrote:
Anyways, I think we've all missed the OPs problem. As he phrased it, I
understand he wants
{fixed part 1} {alternative 1} {alternative 2} {fixed part 2} repea
On 02/10/2015 08:58, N. Andrew Walsh wrote:
do I enter the transposing instruments into the score in concert pitch
or transposed? Can Frescobaldi (my editor of choice) take an entire
Voice and transpose it into concert pitch after I've edited, or should
I enter the content in concert pitch
On 01/10/2015 18:40, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Sep 30, 2015, at 8:22 AM, s.p.korzil...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Sir / Madam,
I’m trying to write a piece that has repeats with alternatives. It seems that “\repeat volta 2” is the way to go with supplying the alternatives in “\alternative”. However,
On 26/09/15 08:31, Andrew Bernard wrote:
> However, you don’t often see scores with every barline numbered, and
> generally publishers only print the bar number at the start of each line, and
> normally leaving out 1.
Actually, printing bar numbers at the start of each line is NOT general
On 26/09/15 09:52, T. Michael Sommers wrote:
> and if the numbers usually appear at the start of the line (which also
> appears odd to me)
Think of using a bar number as a rehearsal mark. If you say "start at
bar 17", and that is a rehearsal mark, it would be well weird if the
mark was placed
On 22/09/15 19:08, tisimst wrote:
>
> On 9/22/2015 12:06 PM, Simon Albrecht-2 [via Lilypond] wrote:
>
>> On 22.09.2015 19:53, T. Michael Sommers wrote:
>> > Is it possible to have multiple independent scores in a single
>> document,
>>
>> Of course it’s possible: just use more than one \score {}
On 15/09/15 19:46, Simon Albrecht wrote:
> Am 15.09.2015 um 20:32 schrieb poto...@posteo.de:
>> Unfortunately that didn't work, it still leaves a .ps file behind.
>
> Huh. Normally it wouldn’t; please try to create a tiny example. Also,
> check the log messages; they should have something like
>
On 14/09/15 21:42, Tim Reeves wrote:
> Well, as a hornist, I reckon my instrument of choice is a lot closer to
> a "vague pointing instrument" than to a keyboard instrument! Sometimes
> when I point it this way it goes the other way. In reality, it depends
> more on my lips etc. than on my
On 12/09/15 13:24, David Kastrup wrote:
> Depends on the composer's date of death and whether you are transcribing
> editorial annotations as well or just sticking to the Urtext. "we were
> given photocopy music sheet" does not exactly sound a lot more legal
> either, though I have indeed (from
On 10/09/15 19:59, Tim Reeves wrote:
> Age: 49
> Amateur hornist.
> Typesetting of existing parts, occasionally creating simple exercises,
> fingering charts, etc. Not a regular user, but like to keep up on
> development.
> I use Frescobaldi every time for some time now, and I've been using LP
>
On 24/08/15 19:32, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Am 24.08.2015 um 18:59 schrieb owainsut...@gmail.com:
Is there a way to (a) use 'transposedCueDuring' which retains these
details
from the original,
Yes, see
On 18/08/15 14:56, David Kastrup wrote:
Malte Meyn lilyp...@maltemeyn.de writes:
Am 18.08.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Blöchl Bernhard:
Thanks for clarifying my confusion. As long as I used lilypond I always
used \tuplet and argue that I did not even know that \times was/is a
possible
On 16/08/15 04:28, Andrew Bernard wrote:
In the following MWE, I would like to have the second bar have a primary
beam across all the notes, as per the first bar. I imagine it may
require more than what I have here, possibly something to do with
setting up beamExceptions? How does one do this?
On 16/08/15 20:21, Malte Meyn wrote:
Hi list,
sometimes there are more than 25 or 26 rehearsal marks in a piece.
LilyPond’s format-mark-(alphabet|letters) function and friends continue
after X, Y, Z with AA, AB, AC, …
I have never seen this in printed scores. Instead all scores I’ve seen
On 15/08/15 15:55, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Hello,
I’m looking for a way to quote another voice, but in a different octave.
My thinking was: ‘\quoteDuring is a music function, so it returns music,
so I can wrap it into \transpose c c, {} and all’s fine.’ However,
\transpose has no effect.
On 28/07/15 12:54, Malte Meyn wrote:
Hi list,
I would like to have the fonts from fonts.openlilylib.org in a directory
that is not overridden when installing a new version of LilyPond but
found by the program. Is this possible and if yes, where would that be?
I use the installation
On 28/07/15 14:06, Ralf Mattes wrote:
No, this is ba advice: anything under /usr/ is owned and managed by the
system/vendor
(on linux most likely by the system's package manager). The system is free to
(and often will)
remove/overwrite these files.
User/Admin installs should be put into
On 25/07/15 08:04, David Kastrup wrote:
If we wanted to support natural English note entry, it would become
LilyPond's problem.
As an irrelevant aside :-)
Throwing another little spanner in the works - about what words mean ...
I really hate it when people say English, and mean American ...
On 21/07/15 18:43, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Hello Brother Gabriel,
Am 21.07.2015 um 19:11 schrieb BGM:
My piece is in B Major and the repetition of the key signature takes
up a lot
of room on the page.
I would like to show it on the first staff only and suppress the rest.
That is unusual,
On 09/07/15 09:05, Mark Knoop wrote:
Thanks Jan-Peter,
I'll take a look at this and post back if I make any progress.
I was pointed at the scheme code that prints the header - can't remember
what it was and I'm not on the computer with it so I can't get easy
access. Find it and try modifying
On 09/07/15 19:48, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Am 09.07.2015 um 16:34 schrieb Wols Lists:
On 09/07/15 09:05, Mark Knoop wrote:
Thanks Jan-Peter,
I'll take a look at this and post back if I make any progress.
I was pointed at the scheme code that prints the header - can't remember
what
On 24/06/15 18:42, Paul Scott wrote:
Because in individual part score, it will look silly (alternative endings,
but they are identical)
Not silly at all. It lets the violists know the structure. What if the
conductor says Start at the 2nd ending? How will the violist(s) know
where to
On 25/06/15 17:50, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Hello everyone,
is it just me who has been having a kind of ‘snowballing’ problem on the
-user and -devel lists for the last two days or so? Most of the mails
arrive two up to six (!) times, and I’ve no clue why. A bug in mailman?
I have
On 25/06/15 22:17, N. Andrew Walsh wrote:
However, as the owner and player of (for example) a contrabassoon with a
key layout that differs from the one provided, I'd like to know: what
capabilities are there for expanding the library of diagrams? What
about, for example, bass flute? Or the
On 25/06/15 18:58, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Am 25.06.2015 um 19:05 schrieb Wols Lists:
On 25/06/15 17:50, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Hello everyone,
is it just me who has been having a kind of ‘snowballing’ problem on the
-user and -devel lists for the last two days or so? Most of the mails
arrive
On 26/05/15 15:02, Knute Snortum wrote:
Thanks for the reply and the cheat sheet.
The way I look at it, is to look at the *meaning*, not the *representation*.
First, you need the note, eg C above middle C, which is c''. Next
comes whether to display any accidentals, which is a property of the
On 17/05/15 12:51, Thomas Morley wrote:
2015-05-17 13:37 GMT+02:00 N. Andrew Walsh n.andrew.wa...@gmail.com:
That fixed it, thanks so much! Is this the sort of stuff covered in the
advanced/tweaks sections of the reference, or are they tricks one learns
through practice?
NR 5.4.7
On 09/05/2015 22:06, David Bellows wrote:
I'm not sure so this maybe wrong. But AFAIK copyright for content posted to the
list is by default with the author and has no license by itself. So I think you
can't assume it's PD.
This sounds correct as well. Does just making the code available to
On 27/04/15 09:30, Nick Payne wrote:
On 27/04/2015 08:14, Anthonys Lists wrote:
Simple problem, I can't find the solution ... :-)
Basically, what I want is \StaffOff ...text... \StaffOn.
Something like this? The values for offset and makegap have to be
fiddled with to get proper
Simple problem, I can't find the solution ... :-)
Basically, what I want is \StaffOff ...text... \StaffOn. So,
thinking treble clef, the text would be centred on the b line. Markup,
however, seems to want to be above or below the staff, and that's it.
How do I force it IN the staff, or am
On 26/04/2015 22:02, Anthonys Lists wrote:
And, I'm not quite sure of what it was before, but having changed
Take 2nd to D.S. to a rehearsal mark as you suggest, what do I get?
STAIRCASING MARKUP AGAIN as it collides with the volta spanner! The
text is supposed to be to the left of the barline
On 25/04/2015 00:35, Thomas Morley wrote:
Oh - and how do I get Score.VoltaBracket.shorten-pair to affect only the
*second* bracket? Do I stick it between the two alternatives? I know when I
tried something like that last time, it wouldn't even compile ...
\alternative {
{ R2*2 }
{ \once
On 25/04/2015 01:28, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
Hi Kieren, Thomas
So I'm now having another go, and it's just blown up again !!! :-(
It seems to me that there is too much addressing one issue, when my big
problem is conflicting solutions! In other words, the solution to one problem
On 26/04/2015 22:02, Anthonys Lists wrote:
As you suggested, I changed Allegretto con moto to a metronome mark
(that's \tempo, right?) Instant result? STAIRCASING MARKUP AGAIN :-(
wtf do I adjust now? The documentation is great at telling you HOW to
change things, but not WHAT to change. I
On 26/04/2015 17:08, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi Paul,
I don't know if that's in any way related to our talk yesterday or if
it has exclusively been triggered by Carl starting it. But this is
very much a skeleton of what I was talking about!
It would be absolutely great if you could pour that into a
On 24/04/2015 12:42, Gilles wrote:
Even if not everyone will agree on the standard layout, I feel that it
is extremely important to define one, with the maximum flexibility.
The problem arises, of course, when there are existing, conflicting,
standards.
There IS a standard out there, to
Hi, as mentioned by others your example is not very useful. Actually it
puzzles me, I have _no_ idea about the intended output. Nevertheless,
you happily mix different things all the time: TextScript and
RehearsalMark. They have different usecases and different default
settings. Anyway you
On 24/04/2015 23:48, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
Hope this helps!
It has!
So now I hope you see that Lilypond is *EXCELLENT* at handling collisions, if
you simply correctly instruct her to do so. =)
Cheers,
Kieren.
:-)
Yup. It's just finding out how
On 25/04/2015 00:35, Thomas Morley wrote:
And please, this is_not_ a tiny example!
You would significantly increase your chance to get help from the list
if you'd try to reduce it to tiny examples only showing_one_ problem.
I do appreciate that you don't want to look through too much code.
On 25/04/2015 01:28, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
It seems to me that there is too much addressing one issue, when my big
problem is conflicting solutions! In other words, the solution to one problem promptly
screws up the solution to another!
You need to apply the solution correctly to
On 25/04/2015 01:08, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
How do I justify markup against a note?
How about \once \override TextScript.self-alignment-X = #RIGHT ?
That's what Thomas has kindly suggested. Except it's not working for me
- his example works fine, my cut-n-paste doesn't ... what
On 24/04/2015 22:30, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 4/24/15 2:00 PM, Anthonys Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk wrote:
On 24/04/2015 20:23, Simon Albrecht wrote:
Please give us (code, eventually output) examples, else it¹s difficult
to get your point.
Yours, Simon
pdf and relevant lily code attached
On 25/04/2015 00:00, Anthonys Lists wrote:
On 24/04/2015 23:48, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
Hope this helps!
It has!
So now I hope you see that Lilypond is *EXCELLENT* at handling
collisions, if you simply correctly instruct her to do so. =)
Cheers,
Kieren
On 25/04/2015 00:44, Thomas Morley wrote:
Thanks. That looks great EXCEPT I can't get it to work for me :-( I run
your example, and it's bang on. I try to do the same in my part, and it
don't work :-(
You've got a rehearsal mark, followed by a right-aligned text markup. I
copy your
You can tell I've looked at the relevant section of the manual ...
But I have two problems bugging me at the moment, and it's related to a
problem I have in general with lilypond - it tries to avoid collsions by
separating stuff vertically. How do I tell it to push them apart
*horizontally*.
On 24/04/2015 20:54, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
I have in general with lilypond - it tries to avoid collsions by separating
stuff vertically. How do I tell it to push them apart *horizontally*
I have often asked about devising (and paying for) an automated system for this.
...)
Cheers,
Wol
Am 24.04.2015 um 18:09 schrieb Anthonys Lists:
You can tell I've looked at the relevant section of the manual ...
But I have two problems bugging me at the moment, and it's related to
a problem I have in general with lilypond - it tries to avoid
collsions by separating stuff
On 24/04/2015 22:32, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
As mentioned by others, actual code samples will be much better than abstract
complaints, if a solution is what you’re looking for.
If squeezing notes closer causes markup to collide and staircase, that's VERY
painful to me.
Does this
On 23/04/15 00:00, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Wol,
Hi Kieren
(NB, I've read Thomas' response)
What I'd like to see is worked, documented examples.
I’m happy to supply a few… But there are so many questions:
1. Where would they be kept?
Actually, the thought just struck me, maybe
On 23/04/15 20:35, Calixte Faure wrote:
I learned music in French (native French) and was at the beginning a
little bit confused with 2 4 8 16 etc. because we say white, black,
hooked, double-hooked, triple-, etc. but after all it is logical
with the numbers.
I understood the choice of 2 4 8
On 22/04/15 20:19, N. Andrew Walsh wrote:
I don't see anywhere in the reference or the manual where that sort of
comprehensive style guide is presented. I'm thinking something like the
doorstops O'Reilly's uses for documenting, say, HTML. I hate to use the
term (it's already been ruined by
On 20/04/15 15:54, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Some say that Microsoft obtained its original OS dominance (which at one
point was approaching 95%) specifically by giving the priority to non-users:
it wilfully allowed (or even secretly supported) the proliferation of pirated
copies of early
On 18/04/15 22:57, Wols Lists wrote:
I must admit this is an example of monkey see, monkey do coding, but
I'm pretty certain I was given it on this list originally, this is the
second time I've tried to do something like this, and it's most
definitely not right ...
I'm trying to replace
On 18/04/15 16:21, Urs Liska wrote:
So the choice of these names is actually an inconsistency in LilyPond's
terminology?
I'm asking this because I have just completed a tutorial about
define-music-function and its siblings, and I realized that I used the
terms function and procedure in an
On 18/04/15 19:56, PMA wrote:
AFAIK, of our major ancestor languages, only Pascal insisted on a
literal working
function-vs-procedure distinction. Did Wirth ever defend this insistence
(as more
than a track-keeping enforcer re value-outputting vs
non-value-outputting code)?
Actually, so did
On 18/04/15 22:11, PMA wrote:
Aha. So the improper-er their code got, the tougher time
compilers had trying to -- as Martin says -- throw it out.
All told, is there now any real need _not_ to use the terms
function and procedure interchangeably? That is, any
real need to try to enforce
On 19/04/15 00:33, bobr...@centrum.is wrote:
I'm trying to make a title/cover page within LilyPond. I'm aware of the
possibility of workarounds:
lilypond-book/LaTeX; Strikes me as a bit ham-fisted, not sure if I would run
into trouble as I've seen the warning about \pageBreak not playing
On 20/03/2014 10:30, Urs Liska wrote:
I think that LilyPond's main strength is transformative use: different
page formats, different media, different transpositions, individual
variations.
Yes, and I have/had the impression that it _is_ possible now to
promote this feature. Of course I don't
On 01/02/14 08:05, Federico Bruni wrote:
2014/2/1 Rachael Thomas Carlson r...@sleeplimited.org
mailto:r...@sleeplimited.org
Sometimes the standard notation is at sounding pitch and sometimes
it is at pitch as if there were no capo.
In all books I know (staff + tabstaff) I always
On 05/12/2013 02:09, Tim McNamara wrote:
Powerful software and simple software are usually mutually exclusive. Compare
Word, Pages and LaTeX, for example. Pages is more elegant but can do a small
fraction of what Word can do. Word can't do a lot of things that LaTeX can.
Word is aimed at
On 09/12/2013 06:12, James Harkins wrote:
My flippant response makes it sound like any reasonably intelligent
person would find the right information fairly quickly, casting the
problem in terms of user carelessness. That was a misstatement. My
point is that reasonably intelligent, reasonably
OK. Please consider my suggestion as obsolete, but I'd like to clarify
what I intended to say (but obviously failed to do so)
Quoting David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de writes:
Would something like
%@5 a,4 ( a4 ) ( b4 ) d4 |
be an option?
The combination'%@' would
Zitat von Joseph Rushton Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net:
Hello all,
A question which has come up, and where I'm not sure what the answer or
intention is.
Lilypond is licensed under the GPL and reading through the license file, I
didn't come across any granted exceptions (IIRC the
On 03/04/13 03:21, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/03/2013 01:14 AM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
If your work does not include any of their work, then you don't need any
permission to not copy their work! :-)
But I'm not talking about copying. I'm talking about the right to use
On 03/04/13 10:22, li...@ursliska.de wrote:
I think there is one thing this discussion proves impressively: Things
are much less non-ambiguous than most of the participants assume.
Something I've learnt from my time on Groklaw is that the GPL is, in
fact, extremely clear.
The problem is that
On 02/04/2013 15:04, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 03/30/2013 01:02 AM, Alexander Kobel wrote:
On the other hand, user C /should/ be allowed to distribute source code under
whatever license he wants to /as long as he doesn't ship the GPL libraries with
it./ It's useless without them, but
On 02/04/2013 15:19, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/02/2013 03:52 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
The main difference is work as a whole vs mere aggregation. If you
include some file as a form of invoking its documented interface, you
form no new combined work.
Indeed, which if I recall right
On 02/04/2013 18:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
When you add to that the fact that the particular case we're concerned with
involves copyleft licensing which gives a particular and precise definition to
what is considered a derivative work, it really doesn't seem to me possible to
just write
On 02/04/2013 22:01, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/02/2013 09:50 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
OK, now let's consider a specific example. Here's a bit of C code that
generates 100 random numbers and calculates their sum.
On 02/04/2013 22:34, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/02/2013 11:17 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
So as long as Google stuck to using interfaces that the kernel devs explicitly
published to user space, then using those header files EXPLICITLY does NOT
create a derivative work, and therefore
On 02/04/2013 22:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/02/2013 11:28 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
A derivative work is whatever the LAW says it is (whatever that is :-). NO open
source licence defines the term derivative work, although they may give their
own interpretation of what they think
On 02/04/2013 22:31, David Kastrup wrote:
Anthonys Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk writes:
Indeed, this legal claim (that using functions creates a derivative
work) is exactly the claim that Oracle tried with Android and Java,
and they came a royal cropper with it.
exactly in the meaning
On 02/04/2013 23:28, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/03/2013 12:01 AM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
But as I understand it, the lawsuit as actually sued said apis are copyright
and you would have needed a licence to use the apis - to use Oracle's Java.
That's exactly in line with what David said
On 02/04/2013 23:31, David Kastrup wrote:
Anthonys Lists antli...@youngman.org.uk writes:
If they DID relicence it, then it is copyrightable
Nonsense. An explicit license can be given for things not actually
requiring a license for particular uses under current legal standards
On 02/04/2013 23:37, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
On 04/02/2013 11:57 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote:
On 02/04/2013 22:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Indeed, and a consequence of distributing a covered work under
GPL-incompatible terms is that you lose the permissions granted under
On 02/04/2013 23:46, David Kastrup wrote:
That wasn't what the lawsuit was about. It was not even what Oracle
claimed the lawsuit to be about. The issue was the reimplementation of
Java classes, not the_use_ of Java classes.
Yes.
But the only thing that Oracle could sue over was the use of
On 13/03/2013 19:24, nothingwaver...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's the idea.
1. Define absolute octave syntax with the @-sign (let it be a mnemonic for
_A_bsolute) to be the syntax for temporarily specifying an ABSOLUTE PITCH
within a \relative block, such that the next pitch, if it doesn't use the
On 10/03/13 02:40, Jim Long wrote:
Just curious, how did the absolute notation system come about?
My main observations are that it is piano-centric, with
{ c d e f g a b c' } being an intuitive sequence, while { a b c d
e f g a' } is less logical. Mmm, well, maybe that's not
On 10/03/13 03:47, Sarah k Alawami wrote:
'd rather enter in the pitches like they are on a piano starting with c1
being low c and c8 being very high c all the way to the right of the
keyboard.
I assume you're a pianist? I'm not. So a piano-centric naming scheme
would be of no use to me at
On 10/03/2013 17:35, David Kastrup wrote:
I have a hard time imagining what you'd be writing after \relative if
you can't even remember the name of middle C.
Without knowing at least_one_ absolute pitch, anchoring \relative will
be a challenge.
I simply crib the start of everything from
On 12/11/10 20:09, Tim McNamara wrote:
There has been a significant fork which may affect this particular
Lilypond project. Many/possibly most of the OOo developers quit the
OOo project and have started LibreOffice in protest against the parent
company that was paying for OOo development. I
On 15/10/10 22:18, Phil Holmes wrote:
I made the comment since there had been a discussion about this
terminology on .devel.
BTW - staffs is a perfectly good plural of staff. Stave is a
perfectly good singular of staves.
And in music, as in English, the two words are pretty much
On 07/09/10 19:58, Jayaratna wrote:
Dear all,
I have been checking old posts for this same problems, but my case is
slightly different, and I would like to ask your opinion/advice on this.
I have a score ending with a partial measure, and some parts do not play on
that measure.
For
the subject line is a
pain in the neck! If done WELL, it's okay (several lists I'm on do it).
If done BADLY, however, a dodgy email client (like LookOut) turns it
into a right pain in the neck.
As for making the list the default reply-to, I'm on lists that do that.
And on MANY an occasion, I've
On 07/09/10 23:55, David Rogers wrote:
* Matthias Kilian k...@outback.escape.de [2010-09-07 22:22]:
On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 07:10:59PM -0700, David Rogers wrote:
I really only see two requests for change, which pop up again and
again;
those are of course the two recently discussed - making
got a badly behaved
mail client that can't cope, don't force your fix onto everyone else.
Why not do what I do, which is group by thread, and dump related groups
into the same folder - separate your music from your other lists, for
example.
Cheers,
Wol
On 12/08/10 17:55, Joe Neeman wrote:
Then I'm not sure. Isn't there some way, in windows, to check what
arguments are used when you drag a file to a shortcut? Apart from that,
according to the lilypond source, it will only print out the version
string if stdin is a terminal. So perhaps you
On 09/08/10 15:09, Graham Percival wrote:
The LilyPond Report is back, with its two “grumpy-and-fluffy”
editors! This issue contains some conference news, along with the
regular release news, snippet of the report, news from the frog
pond, and the bug report of the report!
Come read
On 28/07/10 18:21, Mike Solomon wrote:
I'd recommend entering your lyrics like normal and using notes or
spaces in the staff. Then, do massive amounts of transparency
overrides and/or context removes. The internals reference should give
you a lead on what to turn off. Also, check out:
On 17/07/10 05:02, James Lowe wrote:
Jatziri,
Hi James, Jatziri,
See:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/Documentation/user/lilypond-big-page#Transpose
I regularly am given music in 'A' or 'C' to write out and transpose for
B-flat for the small orchestra I am in (for example I play
301 - 400 of 414 matches
Mail list logo