On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 15:06 +, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Werner LEMBERG wrote Friday, March 22, 2013 1:31 PM
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically
aligned. In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
On 12/04/13 04:14, dra wrote:
There is no such thing as an authority on music notation, especially
that for guitar. Regards, daveA
Why do you set yourself up as one, then?
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
Nick Payne writes:
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new behaviour
better. What does the literature say?
The great majority of commercial guitar scores I possess align the
fingering vertically on chords, as 2.16 does.
Which means that there is no strict agreement? The
Original-Nachricht
Nick Payne writes:
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new behaviour
better. What does the literature say?
The great majority of commercial guitar scores I possess align the
fingering vertically on chords, as 2.16 does.
Which means
On 24/03/13 04:07, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
Nick Payne writes:
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new behaviour
better. What does the literature say?
The great majority of commercial guitar scores I possess align the
fingering vertically on chords, as 2.16 does.
Which means
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically aligned.
In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
}
attachment: 2.16.2.pngattachment: 2.17.14.png___
lilypond-user mailing list
On 22 mars 2013, at 11:32, Nick Payne nick.pa...@internode.on.net wrote:
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically aligned. In
2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
}
2.16.2.png
2.17.14.png
Nick/Mike
On 22 March 2013 11:14, m...@mikesolomon.org m...@mikesolomon.org wrote:
On 22 mars 2013, at 11:32, Nick Payne nick.pa...@internode.on.net wrote:
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically aligned.
In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically
aligned. In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
}
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new behaviour
better. What does the literature say?
Werner
James writes:
Nick/Mike
On 22 March 2013 11:14, m...@mikesolomon.org m...@mikesolomon.org wrote:
On 22 mars 2013, at 11:32, Nick Payne nick.pa...@internode.on.net wrote:
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically aligned.
In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
Werner LEMBERG wrote Friday, March 22, 2013 1:31 PM
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically
aligned. In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
}
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new
Hmm..I kind of like the new behavior too, it's easier on my eyes. I like how
it staggers to flow with the score, but I can see why some would want strict
lined-up fingerings as well.
Just my 2 cents.
Ben
Werner LEMBERG wrote
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically
On 22 mars 2013, at 18:32, SoundsFromSound soundsfromso...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm..I kind of like the new behavior too, it's easier on my eyes. I like how
it staggers to flow with the score, but I can see why some would want strict
lined-up fingerings as well.
Just my 2 cents.
Ben
On 23/03/13 00:31, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
See below. In 2.16.2, the fingering indications are vertically
aligned. In 2.17.14, they aren't.
\relative f'' {
\set fingeringOrientations = #'(left)
cis-1 a-1 e-14
}
Do you consider this a bug? Actually, I like the new behaviour
better.
14 matches
Mail list logo
