Re: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

On 1/7/2024 4:11 PM, Xavier Scheuer wrote: \once \override Dots.avoid-slur = #'ignore (Dots instead of Slur) Thank you!  That’s what I was misunderstanding. —Joel

Re: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

On Sun, 7 Jan 2024 at 21:35, Joel C. Salomon wrote: > > Reposting for clarity as to what I’m asking. > > In the second case below, instead of the slur attaching to the specific note, it moves vertically—I assume, to avoid collision with the duration dot. (Though it’s interesting that a tie does

Re: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

Hello Joel You can shape the Slur manually, like so: \version "2.25.11" \fixed c' {   % undotted note: slur attaches correctly   2   |   % dotted note: slur is moved vertically   \shape #'((1 . 0.5) (0.5 . 0.3) (0.5 . 0.3) (0 . 0)) Slur %adjusting the numbers control the four control points

Re: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

Reposting for clarity as to what I’m asking. In the second case below, instead of the slur attaching to the specific note, it moves vertically—I assume, to avoid collision with the duration dot.  (Though it’s interesting that a tie does not mind overlapping the dot, as in the fourth case.)

Re: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

9:28 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: Joel: Is this better? \fixed c' { 2 | 2. 4 | 2 q | 2. q4 | } Mark *From:* lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org *On Behalf Of *Joel C. Salomon *Sent:* Thursday, January 4, 2024 6:11 PM *To:* LilyPond Users *Subject:* Slurs within

RE: Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

Joel: Is this better? \fixed c' { 2 | 2. 4 | 2 q | 2. q4 | } Mark From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org On Behalf Of Joel C. Salomon Sent: Thursday, January 4, 2024 6:11 PM To: LilyPond Users Subject: Slurs within chords

Slurs within chords, and dotted notes

Somewhat surprising result, tested on 2.24 & 2.25.11: |``` \version "2.24" \fixed c' {   2   |   2.   4 |   2 q |   2. q4 | } ```| In the second instance, the tie attaches to the bottom of the initial chord, presumably to avoid colliding with the dot. (Interestingly, as in examples 3 &

Re: Slurs into chords

Jonathan Danner writes: > Hello, > > Im trying to make a slur, or even possibly a gliss into a chord and > can’t quite get it right without getting a warning message. Can anyone > provide a way I can do either of these? > > melody = \relative c'' { > \global > r8 a\f c a c4 e8 e~|e d16 (c)

Re: Slurs into chords

Hi Jonathan, Im trying to make a slur, or even possibly a gliss into a chord and can’t quite get it right without getting a warning message. Can anyone provide a way I can do either of these? Please try to remove from your examples everything that plays no role for your problem; otherwise,

Slurs into chords

Hello, Im trying to make a slur, or even possibly a gliss into a chord and can’t quite get it right without getting a warning message. Can anyone provide a way I can do either of these? My examples attached \version "2.20.0" \header { title = "" } global = { \time 4/4 \key c \major

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

> On Apr 12, 2017, at 5:18 AM, lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org wrote: > > Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored > (without warnings!) > This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, yet the Slurs in the > first two measures seem to be igno

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Hi Simon, Not obnoxious at all -- I'm grateful for the tips! Super helpful. Thank you. best, --p On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:26 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote: > Am 12.04.2017 um 10:59 schrieb Pete Farmer: > >> This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, >> > > Hi

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Am 12.04.2017 um 10:59 schrieb Pete Farmer: This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, Hi Pete, just as a side note, without wanting to be obnoxious: There’s a lot to be improved about the code formatting in your example. Much of this just improves legibility, other points are

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Hi Harm, Thank you very much for your kind and patient explanation -- very helpful indeed! best, --p On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Morley wrote: > 2017-04-12 10:59 GMT+02:00 Pete Farmer : > > Dear lilypond experts, > > > > This tiny

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

2017-04-12 10:59 GMT+02:00 Pete Farmer : > Dear lilypond experts, > > This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, yet the Slurs in the > first two measures seem to be ignored. > > Measures three and four demonstrate that the issue can be resolved by > splitting

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Don't forget to reset double slurs when you do not need them any more \set doubleSlurs = ##f Otherwise you will get double slurs even for single notes (bug or feature?) -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Slurs-within-chords-within-tuplets-seem

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Hi Malte Meyn, That does exactly what I want -- how super! Thank you very much. And sorry for the un-tininess! -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Slurs-within-chords-within-tuplets-seem-to-be-ignored-without-warnings-tp202205p202209.html Sent from the User

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

ontext: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Slurs-within-chords-within-tuplets-seem-to-be-ignored-without-warnings-tp202205p202208.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https:

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Am 12.04.2017 um 11:17 schrieb Phil Holmes: > Without actually trying this out, it seems to me that the reason is > likely to be that your slur markings are inside chord notation. Try > putting them outside the chords and see if that helps. You’re right (slurs work but not phrasing slurs; also

Re: Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

- Original Message - From: Pete Farmer To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2017 9:59 AM Subject: Slurs within chords,within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!) Dear lilypond experts, This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, yet

Slurs within chords, within tuplets -- seem to be ignored (without warnings!)

Dear lilypond experts, This tiny example compiles without warnings or errors, yet the Slurs in the first two measures seem to be ignored. Measures three and four demonstrate that the issue can be resolved by splitting into separate Voices, and could be cleaned up by tweaking, but as the music is

Re: Multiple slurs between chords

Ok thanks for the clarification Stephen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multiple slurs between chords

Stephen MacNeil writes: > Hi David > > I notice both > > ^(_(d) > > > and > > ^(_(d)) > > > work. The last with )) > > > is one way "more" correct? Slurs don't nest. The current implementation does not complain about spurious slur starts/ends. It's only when the

Re: Multiple slurs between chords

Hi David I notice both ^(_(d) and ^(_(d)) work. The last with )) is one way "more" correct? Stephen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Multiple slurs between chords

Stephen MacNeil writes: > \set doubleSlurs = ##t > > (d) Or just ^(_( d) since two slurs with explicit direction will both be kept around. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: Multiple slurs between chords

An hour ago, I wrote: > (In the [attached] larger file, I was able to put an explicit \oneVoice > overriding \voiceTwo and imitate the printed version, but this only > worked for the upper staff, and not in my excerpt.) > > Can anyone suggest the correct way forward? I figured something out;

RE:Multiple slurs between chords

\set doubleSlurs = ##t (d) other part \set doubleSlurs = ##t 4.(4) HTH Stephen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Slurs in Chords

Hi all, I am clearing slides for our church music projection and am having some areas of difficulty particularly with slurs. If I enter the notes as separate voices the slurs are correct but if I combine them as a chord or use part combine I only get one slur. This first example shows the

Re: Slurs in Chords

- Original Message - From: Stephen Sheasby sheas...@gmail.com To: lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 7:03 PM Subject: Slurs in Chords Hi all, I am clearing slides for our church music projection and am having some areas of difficulty particularly

Re: Slurs in Chords

Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2014 7:03 PM Subject: Slurs in Chords Hi all, I am clearing slides for our church music projection and am having some areas of difficulty particularly with slurs. If I enter the notes as separate voices the slurs are correct but if I combine them as a chord

Re: Beams, slurs and Chords

- Original Message - From: Paul Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Hans de Rijck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 7:10 PM Subject: Re: Beams, slurs and Chords Hans de Rijck wrote: Dear Lilyponders. I want to enter the following piece (see .GIF) from Dvorak

Re: Beams, slurs and Chords

Hans de Rijck wrote: Dear Lilyponders. I want to enter the following piece (see .GIF) from Dvorak symphony nr. 9, bar 19, clarinetti B and I just can't get it right in Lilypond. The closest I get is: c''4.\p( \\ f8.[ { e16 ] f8[} f, c' 8] g e' 2) but that results in an unterminated beam

Re: Beams, slurs and Chords

Hans de Rijck wrote: Hi Paul, Thanks for your answer. I see what you mean, and it certainly looks good, but it will be almost impossible to generate this from the input. You mean the published input? Anyway I believe this: { f''8.\p( e''16 f''8 c'' f' 8 e'' g' 2) } \\ c''4. does