Hi there,
I have a situation here with a few pieces in which I need to 'convert' every
note of these scores into a stemless note. What's the most
efficiently-coded and straight approach for wrapping the entire score with
some sort of stem off command? Is this possible? I hope I don't have to
Hi Ben,
just add
\context {
\Staff
\override Stem #'transparent = ##t
\override Flag #'transparent = ##t
}
to the layout block. If there's anything else you'd like to hide, just
set the respective property transparent as well ...
Best,
Robert
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013,
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
Hi Ben,
just add
\context {
\Staff
\override Stem #'transparent = ##t
\override Flag #'transparent = ##t
}
to the layout block. If there's anything else you'd like to hide, just
set the respective property
Greetings,
You wrote:-
+++
I have a situation here with a few pieces in which I need to 'convert' every
note of these scores into a stemless note. What's the most
efficiently-coded and straight approach for wrapping the entire
On 19/03/13 18:59, David Kastrup wrote:
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
Hi Ben,
just add
\context {
\Staff
\override Stem #'transparent = ##t
\override Flag #'transparent = ##t
}
to the layout block. If there's anything else you'd like to hide,
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 10:20:39AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
It might also make sense to replace the multimeasure rest with a normal
rest depending on the musical aim.
I'll keep that in my bag of tricks for the future. The example
is exaggerated,
Decimo quinto Kalendas Apriles MMXIII scripsit james :
they come from the header.
That's what I figured from the documentation about footer markup. But
this does not answer my question: is there a way to put in there, for
example, a counter that gets incremented at each page and reset at
each
Just a follow up:
David's idea of adding --
\context {
\Staff
\omit Stem
\omit Flag
}
worked perfectly from what I can tell. Hope this helps others!
Thank you all for your input and suggestions, much appreciated.
LilyPond is so powerful...
Ben
David Kastrup wrote
Robert
Yes, you are correct; beams do remain however in my situation, that actually
worked even better than I originally thought it would! :) The score has new
life now! Thank you!
Ben
Nick Payne-3 wrote
On 19/03/13 18:59, David Kastrup wrote:
Robert Schmaus lt;
robert.schmaus@
gt; writes:
Hi
Le jeudi 14/03/13 à 11h36,
Torsten Hämmerle torsten.haemme...@web.de a écrit :
here it is again in a second attempt:In the first place: I've
attached a zip file containing the current (albeit unfinished)
versions of the LilyJAZZ music and LilyJAZZ Text font plus the
corresponding LilyJAZZ.ily
There are a couple of peculiar side effects. I find that using this turns off
the bar count engraver and it also defeats \improvisationOn resulting in
regular notes instead of parallelogram note heads. The easy workaround is to
use \jazzOff before \improvisationOn. The appearance of the
Hi,
I'm a little late. There is a bug in PyQt4 last version that prevents
frescobaldi to run smoothy. There is a work around but you would need
frescobaldi development version.
That's why I didn't answer right away.
I would recommend to install qt4-mac (aqua) instead of the X11 version. This
Hello,
I typeset a song in (4+5)/8 time signature. One staff starts with full
measure rests:
\version 2.16.0
\relative c'' {
\compoundMeter #'((4 5 8))
R1 R8 |
R1 R8 |
r1 c8 |
}
The Lilypond output looks good. But why does I get a barcheck failed
at: 1 for the first measure? Can
Hi Helge,
why does I get a barcheck failed at: 1 for the first measure? Can I
suppress the warning by improvement of my input?
Yes: Use R8*5 instead of R1 R8.
Hope this helps!
Kieren.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
What is the bug in PyQt4? I haven't come across one in my own trials here.
Jean-Alexis Montignies-2 wrote
There is a bug in PyQt4 last version that prevents frescobaldi to run
smoothy. There is a work around but you would need frescobaldi development
version.
Jean-Alexis
On 10 mars
Am 19.03.2013 19:58, schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Yes: Use R8*5 instead of R1 R8.
I think you reckon R8*9. Of course, this helps. Silly me.
Thanks
Helge
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
Hello all,
While answering Helge's post about multi-measure rests, I had a couple of
R-elated observations/thoughts:
1. We shouldn't be encouraging code like R4*3 in a 4/4 measure, right? So the
duration ultimately makes no sense anyway.
2. The most elegant solution would be to use R (i.e.,
Kieren,
What happens when we need an awkward length R like R1*12/8*14?
Shane
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
Hello all,
While answering Helge's post about multi-measure rests, I had a couple of
R-elated observations/thoughts:
1. We
Hi Shane,
What happens when we need an awkward length R like R1*12/8*14?
I'm not sure what you mean by awkward length…
I'm suggesting that R (with no duration given) should give you a one-measure
multi-measure rest, regardless of what the measure duration is.
And that Rx (where x is an
Even while I am a bit sceptical whether the syntax for R should differ
from r, I see your point.
Rather than R14 for a 14 measure rest, I would suggest to keep the
syntax close to the one before: R*14 (This way I would almost be
convinced ;) )
Could the duration be optional this way, keeping the
I see now, but one would think that might cause more difficult
programming necessitating the keeping tracking of various R values
through out the piece as defined by a time signature as opposed to us
setting the value, which probably would also slow down lilypond having
to parse and hang on to
I just used a \fermata marking on a top-line f2., and it struck me as
much too tight - the dot by the half note almost ran into the bottom
of the fermata. When coming up with an example, I noticed that this
happened for all the notes sitting on ledger lines.
\version 2.16.2
\relative c'' {
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n143065/cadences.png
Hi, first post on this forum.
I wish to have something similar to the image attached. At the moment my
code is rather simple:
/upper = {
\override Score.KeyCancellation #'stencil = ##f
\set Score.explicitKeySignatureVisibility
Hi Shane,
one would think that might cause more difficult
programming necessitating the keeping tracking of various R values
through out the piece as defined by a time signature as opposed to us
setting the value, which probably would also slow down lilypond having
to parse and hang on to
rem-d wrote
Hi, first post on this forum.
I wish to have something similar to the image attached. At the moment my
code is rather simple:
welcome to the list, Andy
please try to reduce your code to be tiny and compiling!
I think looking at http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=250 could be
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 19:38:10 -0400
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
Hi Shane,
one would think that might cause more difficult
programming necessitating the keeping tracking of various R values
through out the piece as defined by a time signature as opposed to us
2013/3/19 Jérôme Plût jerome.p...@normalesup.org:
Decimo quinto Kalendas Apriles MMXIII scripsit james :
they come from the header.
That's what I figured from the documentation about footer markup. But
this does not answer my question: is there a way to put in there, for
example, a counter
2013/3/20 Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com:
Nevertheless here's the code:
\version 2.16.2
Hi again,
forgot you asked for 2.12.3
Will see tomorrow if it's possible to downgrade.
Though, please consider upgrading. Current stable is 2.16.2
Cheers,
Harm
On 03/19/2013 04:21 PM, Shane Brandes wrote:
I see now, but one would think that might cause more difficult
programming necessitating the keeping tracking of various R values
through out the piece as defined by a time signature as opposed to us
setting the value, which probably would also slow
29 matches
Mail list logo
