Re: aleatoric box / frameEngraver
2013/7/14 Karol Majewski :
> Yes, I tried that before. The point is that I don't want move these
> engravers, because it messes up the score (no bar numbers, some bar lines
> missing). Need some other way to insert those repeat signs. I can always put
> them in \markup { \score } and move them via extra-offset, but maybe there is
> simpler way?
[..]
Perhaps with the code below:
\version "2.16.2"
% For 2.17.21 change glyphs:
% ".|:" for the starting repeat-sign,
% ":|." for the ending repeat-sign.
startSingleStaffRepeat = {
% Some effort needed to make it work.
% The simple command
% @samp{\\once \\override Staff.BarLine #'glyph-name = #":|"}
% doesn't work sufficient.
\once \override Staff.BarLine #'break-visibility = ##(#t #t #t)
\once \override Staff.BarLine #'before-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob) (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'glyph "|:"))
}
stopSingleStaffRepeat = {
\once \override Staff.BarLine #'glyph-name = #":|"
}
\new PianoStaff
\relative c' <<
\new Staff {
\time 3/4
% We need to set the SpanBar-glyph, otherwise the BarLine-glyph from
% the bottom-Staff would determine the SpanBar-glyph.
\override PianoStaff.SpanBar #'glyph-name = #"|"
\startSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c|
\stopSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c|
c4 c c|
\break
\startSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c|
\stopSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c|
c4 c c|
}
\new Staff
{
\time 3/4
c4 c c |
\startSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c |
\stopSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c |
\break
c4 c c |
\startSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c |
\stopSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c |
}
\new Staff \repeat unfold 2 {
c4 c c |
c4 c c |
\startSingleStaffRepeat
c4 c c |
\stopSingleStaffRepeat
}
>>
Cheers,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Slur collides with Sharp
thanks Nick this does the job. Shouldn't this be handled automatically though? -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Slur-collides-with-Sharp-tp147826p148042.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
2013/7/14 Frédéric Bron : >>> I have looked at the examples. Have you also a set of good examples? >>> Of course, we do not want them to become bad... >> >> Do you mean ties that are currently engraved correctly by default, or >> example good-looking ties scanned from hand-engraved music? > > I mean engraved correctly by default. Ah, ok. Well, i don't recollect many of these :) But i do collect them, mostly in real-lie examples/consider these. Also, "systematic tests" serve as a good testing ground that should ensure that there are no regressions. On to your next email... ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
>> I have looked at the examples. Have you also a set of good examples? >> Of course, we do not want them to become bad... > > Do you mean ties that are currently engraved correctly by default, or > example good-looking ties scanned from hand-engraved music? I mean engraved correctly by default. >> But maybe the >> regression tests just play that role? > I don't think so. There simply aren't enough ties in the regression tests.' OK, have you started a list of good examples or can I start this? Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
2013/7/14 Frédéric Bron : > I have looked at the examples. Have you also a set of good examples? > Of course, we do not want them to become bad... Do you mean ties that are currently engraved correctly by default, or example good-looking ties scanned from hand-engraved music? > But maybe the > regression tests just play that role? I don't think so. There simply aren't enough ties in the regression tests.' cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
I have looked at the examples. Have you also a set of good examples? Of course, we do not want them to become bad... But maybe the regression tests just play that role? Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
Am 13.07.2013 18:15, schrieb Trevor Daniels: Urs Liska wrote Saturday, July 13, 2013 4:59 PM The same goes for ties spanning clef or staff changes. I suggest catching such cases and implicitly pass on to a slur. That might look acceptable in the printed score, but it would break the midi output. Trevor OK, maybe I have to think more precisely. We can't replace a tie for a slur on the input level (i.e. pretend the user had entered a slur). Besides the midi output issue this would also interfere with another slur that is already in effect. A setting like c d( e~ e f) should of course not be affected when the tie is replaced for a slur. I don't know enough about how LilyPond works internally, but isn't the midi generation somewhat independent from the graphical output? In other words: Is the engraver that prints a tie in any way related at all with the midi output? If not it should be possible to defer the graphical generation of the the grob from the Tie to the Slur engraver in such cases, isn't it? The following cases should be caught: c~ \clef alto c c~ \change Staff = "down" c c~ bis BTW when checking them I noticed that the second line crashes lilypond when "preprocessing graphical objects". Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
2013/7/14 Michael Rivers : > I'd like to join the effort, but I don't have the skills -- the last > programming I did was 12 years ago in college, and it was it C, not C++ (I > don't even know what the difference is). That's not a problem *at all!* We have a few non-programming tasks; the only skill required is the ability to think :-) > However, I'd be willing to make a > small financial contribution if someone could tell me where to send it -- > this seems like an worthy cause. Thanks for the offer! We'll see when we're past 50% of the work. At least I wouldn't want to take money in advance myself. > I still think that throwing an error for an enharmonic tie is as bad as > having bad looking ties. It's the first case I've encountered where Lilypond > doesn't understand pretty basic music notation. I fully agree that this is important and i would really like to fix it. I just don't want to stretch the scope of the project, but i'll keep this in mind when reading code. ...actually, i found the place that is probably responsible for this. I'll investigate, but before that i have to get back my laptop or set up my development environment, which may take a day or two. best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: aleatoric box / frameEngraver
Yes, I tried that before. The point is that I don't want move these engravers,
because it messes up the score (no bar numbers, some bar lines missing). Need
some other way to insert those repeat signs. I can always put them in \markup {
\score } and move them via extra-offset, but maybe there is simpler way?
> Hi Karol,
>
> how about
>
> \version "2.17.21"
>
> \layout {
> \context {
> \Score
> \remove "Timing_translator"
> \remove "Default_bar_line_engraver"
> \remove "Repeat_acknowledge_engraver"
> }
> \context {
> \Staff
> \consists "Timing_translator"
> \consists "Default_bar_line_engraver"
> \consists "Repeat_acknowledge_engraver"
> }
> }
>
> \new ChoirStaff \with { systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBrace }
> \relative c' <<
> \new Staff {
> \time 3/4
> c4 c c |
> \repeat volta 2 {
> c4 c c |
> }
> }
> \new Staff {
> \time 2/4
> c4 c |
> \repeat volta 2 {
> c4 c |
> }
> c4 c |
> \bar "|."
> }
> \new Staff {
> \time 3/8
> c4. |
> \repeat volta 2 {
> c8 c c |
> c4. |
> c8 c c |
> }
> }
> >>
>
> Taken from NR 1.2.3 Displaying rhythms -> Polymetric notation
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/displaying-rhythms#polymetric-notation
> slightly modified.
>
> HTH,
> Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Editorial figured bass
Hi all,
I need some help in order to reproduce the enclosed image.
I don't care replacing the parentheses used in the original by brackets,
but impossible to get only either the opening or closing bracket, even if
\displayMusic {
\new Staff \with { implicitBassFigures = #'(99) } {
\figuremode { <[6 99]>4 <[6 5]> <[6 99> <6 5]> } }
}
announces them. It seem like only balanced brackets on the same very
figure can be outputted, and I don't find my path in constructing an
"adapted" engraver that would "blank" the missing bracket.
Thanks in advance for any pointer,
Jean-Charles
<>___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie Crusade
I'd like to join the effort, but I don't have the skills -- the last programming I did was 12 years ago in college, and it was it C, not C++ (I don't even know what the difference is). However, I'd be willing to make a small financial contribution if someone could tell me where to send it -- this seems like an worthy cause. I still think that throwing an error for an enharmonic tie is as bad as having bad looking ties. It's the first case I've encountered where Lilypond doesn't understand pretty basic music notation. -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Tie-Crusade-tp147937p148011.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Why do these chords not line up vertically?
Thomas Morley writes:
> 2013/7/13 Phil Holmes :
>>
>> Because you've set them as separate voices, not chords. Please see
>> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/single-voice
>
> Or try:
>
> \version "2.16.2"
>
> \include "english.ly"
>
>
> \score {
>
> \new Staff
> {
> \time 4/4
> \clef "treble"
>
> <<
> {
> \voiceOne
> bf'1 ef''1 ef''1 gs''1 af''1 cs'''1
> }
>
> {
> \voiceTwo
> g'1g'1 c''1c''1 f''1 f''1
> }
>
> {
> \voiceThree
> b1 e'1 e'1 a'1a'1d''1
> }
> >>
> }
> }
Without compiling it: this can't work. Either you get separate voices
(which is likely since \time or \clef likely don't start voices but more
fragile as use of explicit \new Voice). Or you don't, in which
\voiceOne ... \voiceThree will all be executed in the same voice and all
notes will be typeset as chords, likely with \voiceThree active.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Why do these chords not line up vertically?
2013/7/13 Phil Holmes :
> - Original Message - From:
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, July 13, 2013 9:16 PM
> Subject: Why do these chords not line up vertically?
>
>
>
>>
>> In this example, why does the lowest voice not line
>> up vertically with the first five chords?
>>
>> What do I need to do to make this voice line up?
>>
>> Thank you for your help.
>
>
> Because you've set them as separate voices, not chords. Please see
> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/single-voice
Or try:
\version "2.16.2"
\include "english.ly"
\score {
\new Staff
{
\time 4/4
\clef "treble"
<<
{
\voiceOne
bf'1 ef''1 ef''1 gs''1 af''1 cs'''1
}
{
\voiceTwo
g'1g'1 c''1c''1 f''1 f''1
}
{
\voiceThree
b1 e'1 e'1 a'1a'1d''1
}
>>
}
}
HTH,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Appoggiatura or not appoggiatura?
Many thanks to the lilypond-user group for their advice on measure #47 of the
Chopin Nocturne #3 (Op 9 No 3). Urs' article on voices was particularly
helpful.
My next challenge appeared in measure #69. This is working for me :
\version "2.16.0"
\relative c'
{ \clef treble
\time 6/8
\key b \major
ais'4.\p \once \override Slur #'stencil = ##f \appoggiatura {b8[\( ais gisis
ais]}
<<
{dis4 b8}
\new Voice
{\stemUp
\once \override TupletBracket #'bracket-visibility = ##f
\once \override TupletNumber #'stencil = ##f
\times 1/2
{dis8 \teeny d cis c}
\normalsize b8}
>>
\oneVoice
ais4 gis8\)
}
At first I assumed that both tuplets were appoggiatura, but I couldn't get that
to work. I also tried cue notes, but merging the head of a cue note with a
full-size note head was no good either. So my final version (above) treats the
first tuplet as an appoggiatura, but the second is a new voice in a smaller
font.
I'm delighted with the results. But I do wonder if anyone in the group thinks
I may have missed a better approach?
--John K
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: aleatoric box / frameEngraver
2013/7/13 Karol Majewski :
> OK, so now I'm playing with \set Score.repeatCommands = #'(start-repeat). The
> big question is: how can I apply repeat sign only to one staff inside
> PianoStaff. \set Staff.repeatCommands = #'(start-repeat) does not work.
Hi Karol,
how about
\version "2.17.21"
\layout {
\context {
\Score
\remove "Timing_translator"
\remove "Default_bar_line_engraver"
\remove "Repeat_acknowledge_engraver"
}
\context {
\Staff
\consists "Timing_translator"
\consists "Default_bar_line_engraver"
\consists "Repeat_acknowledge_engraver"
}
}
\new ChoirStaff \with { systemStartDelimiter = #'SystemStartBrace }
\relative c' <<
\new Staff {
\time 3/4
c4 c c |
\repeat volta 2 {
c4 c c |
}
}
\new Staff {
\time 2/4
c4 c |
\repeat volta 2 {
c4 c |
}
c4 c |
\bar "|."
}
\new Staff {
\time 3/8
c4. |
\repeat volta 2 {
c8 c c |
c4. |
c8 c c |
}
}
>>
Taken from NR 1.2.3 Displaying rhythms -> Polymetric notation
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/displaying-rhythms#polymetric-notation
slightly modified.
HTH,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
