Re: Font problem

[Michael Gerdau]

Hi Thiago,

> Michael, the actual sheet music (don't know the precise word in English,
> sorry) looks ok. But if I put any text, even change the time to a 3/4, it
> screws up. I tried changing the font size of the title. It doesn't work
> when I use #1 or fractions:
> 
> piece = \markup { \fontsize #1 \bold "PRAELUDIUM I" }
> 
> But if I put something like #30 I can see it is bigger because the whole
> top of the file becomes a black bar.

That's exactly the problem I'm experiencing on my system (Arch Linux
with KDE Plasma).

When you change your original sample code to e.g.

title = \markup { \fontsize #-20 "Test" }

you can see that the "T" is about the right size. But then the kerning
is scaled down and thus completely of.

> I suspect it is a PDF/font problem (though it also happens with PNG, but I
> don't know if the compiling proccess is the same). I'll keep trying ;-)

I don't think it is a PDF problem. I have not been able to detect any
other software having a problem with fonts and scaling whatsoever.

Creating my lilypond PDFs on any of my other systems (including Win10
and Mac Sierra) does not show this problem either, i.e. those PDFs are
displayed fine on the Arch Linux system.

The fact that this problem exists for both PNG and PDF to me suggests
it has nothing to do with PDF per se but with the rendering of characters
as done by lilypond.

Note I'm not saying there is a bug. However I suspect there is a setting
that somehow got changed on my and probably your system as well that
has a "character scaling" influence on the rendering process.

Unfortunately I'm not that knowledgeable with the finer details
involved in that process to actually dig into that. Or maybe I should
start to anyway...

Kind regards,
Michael
-- 
 Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
 GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Urs Liska]

Am 18. November 2016 03:21:14 MEZ, schrieb mclaren :
>It's easy to show that Kieren is being deceptive with his example.

I have another suggestion for you.  You started this thread with a score and 
complained that LilyPond cannot insert barlines and breaks into it.  I showed 
you that this input file is completely messed up. Why don't you just go on an 
use your valuable time and fix that in the first place?


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: grace notes ties

[Gianmaria Lari]

That's very clear, I will not forget. Thank you David!
g.

On 18 November 2016 at 03:08, David Wright 
wrote:

> On Fri 18 Nov 2016 at 01:17:25 (+0100), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> > ahem I'm sorry I wrote tie but I meant slur... I always mix up these
> > english term :(
> >
> > Your code works. My mistake was closing the round brackets after the
> curly
> > bracket...
> >
> > b \afterGrace a ({ g16 b a }) g4 g
> >
> >
> > Why this is not correct? Doesn't look 'better' then ({ g16 b a)}? I'm
> > joking but really, why my code is not acceptable?
>
> Here are several ways of understanding this.
>
> ) must follow the actual note where the slur finishes.
>
> } is not a note, so }) is meaningless.
>
> { g16 b a } is a sequence. You can't attach the end of a slur to all
> three notes in the sequence: you have to choose which note to finish at.
>
> "look 'better'" suggests you like the look of nested brackets. But
> the function of () in LP is nothing like parentheses. Try to think of
> ) and ( in the way you would think of postfix operators.
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Colin Campbell]

On 2016-11-17 03:47 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote:


Here’s the point where I instantly feel compelled to say “ok, now 
let’s really ban him from the list”. You are calling Kieren, honorable 
member of the community and one of the most proficient LilyPond users 
there are, an outright liar. That’s outrageous. Begone.




In the early days of Usenet, we would reach a point where we Do Not Feed 
The Troll. It seems clear to me that the person posting as mclaren is 
unlikely to be part of a constructive and civilised discussion, given 
the tone of the posts I've seen, so I've added a filter to my email 
which simply deletes mclaren posts unread.


It may be useful to document LilyPond's problems with irrational 
numbers, probably as a Known Issue in NR 1.2.3, but, while irrational 
time signatures and tuplets may well be interesting, I doubt that 
mclaren's insistence is shared, and certainly not to the point of being 
an obsession.


Cheers,
Colin


--
The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They 
have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of 
government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. - H. 
L. Mencken


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Carl Sorensen]

On 11/17/16 7:21 PM, "mclaren"  wrote:
>This kind of trolling by Kieren (and others) is not useful.  Yes, you can
>bend and twist Lilypond into printing out tuplet numbers that bear no
>relation to the actual tuplets generated by Lilypond...but that's not what
>was asked for. Any reasonable person understands that the point of this
>entire example is actually to get Lilypond to generate those tuplets so
>that
>Lilypond can produce the MIDI for a Nancarrow-typle 1% acceleration,
>meaning
>nested tuplets in the ratio 100:99, and then Lilypond can print out the
>actual score and not a fake score done by inserting numbers on the page
>that
>are never actually used in the music.

I agree with part of what you say here, but not all of it.

The part I agree with is that Kieren's code (using 10:9 tuplets but
printing 100:99 tuplets) is a hack in that the printed output does not
match the semantics of the musical input.  This is clearly less than ideal.

The part I disagree with is the implication that the problem is that then
LilyPond won't create the right MIDI.  LilyPond is aimed at creating
printed output, not MIDI output. MIDI output is a side benefit, not the
primary reason for being.

So while it would be better to be able to actually use 100:99 nested
tuplets (and I hope that you can figure out how to do it), for the primary
purpose of LilyPond (which is producing printed scores), it would be quite
straightforward to make a music function that would fake the tuplets.

As I said, it's not optimal.  But it's considerably better than using
photoshop or inkscape to create the score.

And I'm sure that we really would welcome a patch that solved the problem,
as long as it didn't hugely slow down processing of more traditional (e.g.
19th century) music.

Carl




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Carl Sorensen]

On 11/17/16 7:21 PM, "mclaren"  wrote:
>
>The deceptive Lilypond code shown above that prints those fake tuplets is
>truly contemptible because it doesn't address the real issue.  The real
>issue is that Lilypond doesn't allow nested tuplets beyond very small
>values
>of tuplets (like 4:3, 7:5, etc.) for reasons having to do with internal
>integer limits on calculations in Lilypond.  Now, that truly is
>ridiculous.
>We're dealing with modern computers with 4 or 8 or 16 gigs of RAM or more,
>multi-core CPUs with full floating point units in hardware, and hard
>drives
>with terabytes of storage. And you're telling me all this computing power
>is
>incapable of calculating an approximation to .99^10 or .99^20 or .99^50?
>You're telling me that that approximation of .99^50 can't be turned into
>an
>integer with some negligible error in the approximation? Please.

There is a GNU library for arbitrary precision rationals.  It may be
possible to replace the LilyPond Rational type with an arbitrary precision
rational type.  Then the ability to go to big nested tuplets would be
limited by the amount memory (perhaps the amount on the heap or the stack).

You can find more information about GMP here:  https://gmplib.org/

HTH,

Carl


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hey “mclaren”,

> that's not what was asked for

In fact, the example I provided does *exactly* what you asked for:

> you should no trouble entering the following photoshopped score fragment into
> lilypond and compiling the score and getting a pnd or svg file out

p.s. How does it feel to be so constantly and consistently wrong?
(Sorry/notsorry that I feel the need to point it out to you when you are.)

> As always in America

I’m not in “America”… yet another error on your part.
WHEEE This is fun!

> people spend most of their time and energy demonizing
> the person who points out a problem, rather than fixing that problem.

Fix the problem yourself.

In the meantime, I’ll pop up some more popcorn and continue enjoying your 
reactions to my “trolling” (a.k.a. showing you how Lilypond can do exactly what 
you've asked for).

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Carl Sorensen]

On 11/17/16 7:21 PM, "mclaren"  wrote:
>
>The deceptive Lilypond code shown above that prints those fake tuplets is
>truly contemptible because it doesn't address the real issue.  The real
>issue is that Lilypond doesn't allow nested tuplets beyond very small
>values
>of tuplets (like 4:3, 7:5, etc.) for reasons having to do with internal
>integer limits on calculations in Lilypond.  Now, that truly is
>ridiculous.
>We're dealing with modern computers with 4 or 8 or 16 gigs of RAM or more,
>multi-core CPUs with full floating point units in hardware, and hard
>drives
>with terabytes of storage. And you're telling me all this computing power
>is
>incapable of calculating an approximation to .99^10 or .99^20 or .99^50?
>You're telling me that that approximation of .99^50 can't be turned into
>an
>integer with some negligible error in the approximation? Please.

I'm telling you I don't know how to do it.  You claim it should be easy
for you.

As I said before, patches would certainly be appreciated.

Thanks,

Carl


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RE: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

To the Unknown Critic,

Lilypond amazes me in many different and varied ways. I shall focus on only
one.
It was written for FREE.
It is developed for FREE.
It is provided for FREE.
It is supported for FREE.
It is documented for FREE.
If what is FREE is inadequate then be FREE to write one that is or purchase
one that is.

Mark Stephen Mrotek
"Do not look a gift horse in the mouth!"

-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
mclaren
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 6:21 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

It's easy to show that Kieren is being deceptive with his example. Here's
how he did it: Kieren used a Lilypond function to suppress printing of the
actual tuplet number, then used another Lilypond function to substitute a
text string with no connection to the actual tuplet number instead of the
real tuplet number. Meanwhile, the actual tuplets he used were small enough
to avoid Lilypond's internal calculation limit.

I've reproduced Kieren's example in this score, and for extra fun I've added
completely preposterous tuplet numbers in the ratio 16252638738:998272829.
Notice that Lilypond C*A*N*N*O*T actually handle a tuplet ratio like
16252638738:998272829 as nested tuplets. If you enter that ratio value in
the form of \tuplet 16252638738/998272829 for three or more nested tuplets,
Lilypond blows up and hangs. For more than 5 nested tuplets of ratio 100:99,
Lilypond also blows up and hangs.

 

This is a crude form of trolling by Kieren. Here's the Lilypond code to do
it, and it's really not useful or productive. Kieren spent more time than I
want to waste clearing space around the numbers so the tuplet numbers don't
overlap, but that's not hard and would require only a little more work. I
wasted about a minute of my valuable time reproducing Kieren's Lilypond
example to show how his sleight-of-hand trick was done, but I'm not about to
waste more time getting it to look as pretty as Kieren's output. The
important point is to show that the code does not actually generate 100:99
tuplets, so it's deceptive at a fundamental level. The actual tuplets used
are nested 4:3 tuplets, which are small enough for Lilypond to handle.
Kieren almost certainly did the same sort of thing:  
  
   \version "2.18.2"

\header {
  title = "deceptive Lilypond code that prints out the required tuplets"
  subtitle = "without actually generating those tuplets"
  tagline = ""  % removed
} 
 
\layout{
   
\context {
\Score
   
\override BarLine.transparent = ##t
proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 20)
tupletFullLength = ##t
}

}
   \new Staff { \clef "treble"
   
\override TupletNumber #'text = #f
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f  

  
{\override TupletNumber #'text =
#(tuplet-number::non-default-tuplet-fraction-text 100 99)  c''2[ \tuplet
4/3 {b'2 \tuplet 4/3 {a'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet 4/3 {e'2
\tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet
4/3 {e'2]}

  }
}


\new Staff { \clef "treble"
   
\override TupletNumber #'text = #f
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f  

  
{\override TupletNumber #'text =
#(tuplet-number::non-default-tuplet-fraction-text 16252638738
998272829)
 c''2[ \tuplet 4/3 {b'2 \tuplet 4/3 {a'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2
\tuplet 4/3 {e'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet
4/3 {e'2]}

  }
}

As you can see, these fake tuplets print right out. But they're not real. 

This kind of trolling by Kieren (and others) is not useful.  Yes, you can
bend and twist Lilypond into printing out tuplet numbers that bear no
relation to the actual tuplets generated by Lilypond...but that's not what
was asked for. Any reasonable person understands that the point of this
entire example is actually to get Lilypond to generate those tuplets so that
Lilypond can produce the MIDI for a Nancarrow-typle 1% acceleration, meaning
nested tuplets in the ratio 100:99, and then Lilypond can print out the
actual score and not a fake score done by inserting numbers on the page that
are never actually used in the music. 

Claiming that nested tuplets beyond 4:3 or 11:10 is a ridiculous request or
that it's not musically useful is ludicrous. Aside from Conlon Nancarrow,
many other composers have created music like this with continuous small
accelerations or decelerations over dozens or hundreds of notes (listen to
"Canon X"), and some have spent their entire careers doing it. To claim that
what some of the most respected contemporary composers have done is
"ridiculous" or "not musically useful" doesn't pass the straight-face test.
Conlon Nancarrow's lifetime body of work?  "Not musically useful"?  Come on.


The deceptive Lilypond code shown 

Re: Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

[SoundsFromSound]

David Pirotte wrote
> Hello,
> 
> Does anyone know if a lilypond free score exists for this piece:
> 
>   Bach - Brahms Chaconne (Violin Partita - V) No. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004:
>   arranged for piano left hand
> 
> I couldn't find it, but I'm not [by far] the best when it comes to
> searching for
> something on the web...
> 
> Many thanks,
> David
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
> 
> attachment0 (465 bytes)
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/attachment/196806/0/attachment0;

Apologies, that was the link to the original Bach.

This link has the Brahms at the bottom. :) 

http://imslp.org/wiki/5_Studies,_Anh.1a/1_(Brahms,_Johannes)




-
composer | sound designer 
LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Bach-Brahms-Chaconne-for-left-hand-tp196806p196810.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: Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

[SoundsFromSound]

David Pirotte wrote
> Hello,
> 
> Does anyone know if a lilypond free score exists for this piece:
> 
>   Bach - Brahms Chaconne (Violin Partita - V) No. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004:
>   arranged for piano left hand
> 
> I couldn't find it, but I'm not [by far] the best when it comes to
> searching for
> something on the web...
> 
> Many thanks,
> David
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
> 
> attachment0 (465 bytes)
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/attachment/196806/0/attachment0;

Hello,

http://imslp.org/wiki/Violin_Partita_No.2_in_D_minor,_BWV_1004_(Bach,_Johann_Sebastian)

Sheet music at the bottom of the page. Enjoy!



-
composer | sound designer 
LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Bach-Brahms-Chaconne-for-left-hand-tp196806p196809.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: Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

David

http://www.free-scores.com/download-sheet-music.php?pdf=1288

Mark

-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
David Pirotte
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 7:03 PM
To: lilypond-user 
Subject: Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

Hello,

Does anyone know if a lilypond free score exists for this piece:

Bach - Brahms Chaconne (Violin Partita - V) No. 2 in D minor, BWV
1004:
arranged for piano left hand

I couldn't find it, but I'm not [by far] the best when it comes to searching
for something on the web...

Many thanks,
David


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

[Gilles]

Hi.

On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 01:03:20 -0200, David Pirotte wrote:

Hello,

Does anyone know if a lilypond free score exists for this piece:

	Bach - Brahms Chaconne (Violin Partita - V) No. 2 in D minor, BWV 
1004:

arranged for piano left hand

I couldn't find it, but I'm not [by far] the best when it comes to
searching for
something on the web...


http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/make-table.cgi?searchingfor=chaconne

HTH,
Gilles



Many thanks,
David



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Bach - Brahms Chaconne ... for left hand

[David Pirotte]

Hello,

Does anyone know if a lilypond free score exists for this piece:

Bach - Brahms Chaconne (Violin Partita - V) No. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004:
arranged for piano left hand

I couldn't find it, but I'm not [by far] the best when it comes to searching for
something on the web...

Many thanks,
David


pgpoVwd1RNcIe.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[mclaren]

It's easy to show that Kieren is being deceptive with his example. Here's how
he did it: Kieren used a Lilypond function to suppress printing of the
actual tuplet number, then used another Lilypond function to substitute a
text string with no connection to the actual tuplet number instead of the
real tuplet number. Meanwhile, the actual tuplets he used were small enough
to avoid Lilypond's internal calculation limit.

I've reproduced Kieren's example in this score, and for extra fun I've added
completely preposterous tuplet numbers in the ratio 16252638738:998272829.
Notice that Lilypond C*A*N*N*O*T actually handle a tuplet ratio like
16252638738:998272829 as nested tuplets. If you enter that ratio value in
the form of \tuplet 16252638738/998272829 for three or more nested tuplets,
Lilypond blows up and hangs. For more than 5 nested tuplets of ratio 100:99,
Lilypond also blows up and hangs.


 

This is a crude form of trolling by Kieren. Here's the Lilypond code to do
it, and it's really not useful or productive. Kieren spent more time than I
want to waste clearing space around the numbers so the tuplet numbers don't
overlap, but that's not hard and would require only a little more work. I
wasted about a minute of my valuable time reproducing Kieren's Lilypond
example to show how his sleight-of-hand trick was done, but I'm not about to
waste more time getting it to look as pretty as Kieren's output. The
important point is to show that the code does not actually generate 100:99
tuplets, so it's deceptive at a fundamental level. The actual tuplets used
are nested 4:3 tuplets, which are small enough for Lilypond to handle.
Kieren almost certainly did the same sort of thing:  
  
   \version "2.18.2"

\header {
  title = "deceptive Lilypond code that prints out the required tuplets"
  subtitle = "without actually generating those tuplets"
  tagline = ""  % removed 
} 
 
\layout{
   
\context {
\Score
   
\override BarLine.transparent = ##t
proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 20)
tupletFullLength = ##t
}

}
   \new Staff { \clef "treble"
   
\override TupletNumber #'text = #f
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f  

  
{\override TupletNumber #'text =
#(tuplet-number::non-default-tuplet-fraction-text 100 99)
 c''2[ \tuplet 4/3 {b'2 \tuplet 4/3 {a'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2
\tuplet 4/3 {e'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet
4/3 {e'2]}  

 
  }
}


\new Staff { \clef "treble"
   
\override TupletNumber #'text = #f
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f  

  
{\override TupletNumber #'text =
#(tuplet-number::non-default-tuplet-fraction-text 16252638738 
998272829)
 c''2[ \tuplet 4/3 {b'2 \tuplet 4/3 {a'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2
\tuplet 4/3 {e'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet 4/3 {g'2 \tuplet 4/3 {f'2 \tuplet
4/3 {e'2]}  

 
  }
}

As you can see, these fake tuplets print right out. But they're not real. 

This kind of trolling by Kieren (and others) is not useful.  Yes, you can
bend and twist Lilypond into printing out tuplet numbers that bear no
relation to the actual tuplets generated by Lilypond...but that's not what
was asked for. Any reasonable person understands that the point of this
entire example is actually to get Lilypond to generate those tuplets so that
Lilypond can produce the MIDI for a Nancarrow-typle 1% acceleration, meaning
nested tuplets in the ratio 100:99, and then Lilypond can print out the
actual score and not a fake score done by inserting numbers on the page that
are never actually used in the music. 

Claiming that nested tuplets beyond 4:3 or 11:10 is a ridiculous request or
that it's not musically useful is ludicrous. Aside from Conlon Nancarrow,
many other composers have created music like this with continuous small
accelerations or decelerations over dozens or hundreds of notes (listen to
"Canon X"), and some have spent their entire careers doing it. To claim that
what some of the most respected contemporary composers have done is
"ridiculous" or "not musically useful" doesn't pass the straight-face test.
Conlon Nancarrow's lifetime body of work?  "Not musically useful"?  Come on. 

The deceptive Lilypond code shown above that prints those fake tuplets is
truly contemptible because it doesn't address the real issue.  The real
issue is that Lilypond doesn't allow nested tuplets beyond very small values
of tuplets (like 4:3, 7:5, etc.) for reasons having to do with internal
integer limits on 

Re: grace notes ties

[David Wright]

On Fri 18 Nov 2016 at 01:17:25 (+0100), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> ahem I'm sorry I wrote tie but I meant slur... I always mix up these
> english term :(
> 
> Your code works. My mistake was closing the round brackets after the curly
> bracket...
> 
> b \afterGrace a ({ g16 b a }) g4 g
> 
> 
> Why this is not correct? Doesn't look 'better' then ({ g16 b a)}? I'm
> joking but really, why my code is not acceptable?

Here are several ways of understanding this.

) must follow the actual note where the slur finishes.

} is not a note, so }) is meaningless.

{ g16 b a } is a sequence. You can't attach the end of a slur to all
three notes in the sequence: you have to choose which note to finish at.

"look 'better'" suggests you like the look of nested brackets. But
the function of () in LP is nothing like parentheses. Try to think of
) and ( in the way you would think of postfix operators.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

>> Here’s the point where I instantly feel compelled to say “ok, now
>> let’s really ban him from the list”. You are calling Kieren, honorable
>> member of the community and one of the most proficient LilyPond users
>> there are, an outright liar.

[Simon: Thank you for your kind and vigourous defense. I do appreciate it.]

> I don't think Kieren stated explicitly that no image editing was involved.

Although it was implied in the email to which Simon has referred, you are 
correct that I didn’t make that fact explicit until later emails.

Regards,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: grace notes ties

[Gianmaria Lari]

ahem I'm sorry I wrote tie but I meant slur... I always mix up these
english term :(

Your code works. My mistake was closing the round brackets after the curly
bracket...

b \afterGrace a ({ g16 b a }) g4 g


Why this is not correct? Doesn't look 'better' then ({ g16 b a)}? I'm
joking but really, why my code is not acceptable?

Thank you, g.

On 17 November 2016 at 16:01, David Kastrup  wrote:

> Gianmaria Lari  writes:
>
> >> On 17 November 2016 at 15:07, David Kastrup  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gianmaria Lari  writes:
> >>>
> >>> > I need to tie the first 'a' with the second 'a' that is inside some
> grace
> >>> > notes.
> >>> >
> >>> > Here it is a fragment of the code:
> >>> >
> >>> > \version "2.19.49"
> >>> > {
> >>> >   b \afterGrace a {g16 b a} g4 g
> >>> > }
> >>> >
> >>> > Any suggestion?
> >>>
> >>> Well,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> works just like that.  It just doesn't make any sense.  Are you sure
> you
> >>> want a tie here?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> David Kastrup
> >>>
> >
> > I'm far from be sure but it is just what I found:) Anyway check the
> > attached image (taken from Mary Cohen, Technique takes off, "14
> Romance").
> >
> > And thank you for your code, it works perfectly.
>
> The attached image most emphatically does _not_ use a tie but a slur.
> There is a world of difference between the two: the _tie_ would mean to
> _hold_ the a while you play g and b ending a smattering before the beat
> and only then release the a after its tied part has ended.  It would be
> very strange to write it like this, however.
>
> A slur means to run notes into another.  A tie means to have only one
> note in the first place (so you can only tie equal pitches).  A slur on
> equal pitches, when executed on the piano, would usually be played with
> alternating fingers with the second striking before the first has
> completely left the key.  A tie just means to do nothing and hold the
> note for the added duration of the tied notes.
>
> So you probably wanted
>
>
>
> and that still works without a hitch and is even simpler.  So where was
> the actual problem?
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Simon,

Consider that this nuisance refuses to answer polite requests to say his
name, and will not sign posts. One cannot assume his name is his email
address. This luser hiding behind anonymity, come here with the express
purpose of disrupting the community needs to leave. Generally lusers like
this do after a while, but this one seems particularly offensive, What
disturbs me most is that blacklisting the posts does no good as I still get
all the replies. The sort of pathology we see here in this type of luser
is one where they delight in sucking time and energy out of people, giving
nothing in return. Cases like this are sadly quite common on mailing lists
and similar channels.

It disturbs me to think that I may have to unsubscribe to this list in
order to stop my inbox containing the vitriol from this person.

I know the list moderator never takes steps to intervene, but if he is out
there, it would be helpful to all to have something done about this matter.

To the person in question: whoever you are, Phantomas, you are clearly not
welcome in this community, despite David Kastrup's ameliorating comments.
Stop wasting peoples' energy. Write your own engraving program. Let us see
it. Cease insulting the good hearted people on this list. Begone.

Andrew



On 18 November 2016 at 09:47, Simon Albrecht  wrote:

> On 17.11.2016 05:09, mclaren wrote:
>
>> "You do realize, don't you, that if you had just asked for help creating
>> that music, Kieren would have helped you and taught you some of his coding
>> skills (and he IS really good, BTW). "
>>
>> Not likely. What I realize is that Kieren is good with photoshop.
>>
>
> Here’s the point where I instantly feel compelled to say “ok, now let’s
> really ban him from the list”. You are calling Kieren, honorable member of
> the community and one of the most proficient LilyPond users there are, an
> outright liar. That’s outrageous. Begone.
>
> Regards, Simon
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[David Kastrup]

Simon Albrecht  writes:

> On 17.11.2016 05:09, mclaren wrote:
>> "You do realize, don't you, that if you had just asked for help creating
>> that music, Kieren would have helped you and taught you some of his coding
>> skills (and he IS really good, BTW). "
>>
>> Not likely. What I realize is that Kieren is good with photoshop.
>
> Here’s the point where I instantly feel compelled to say “ok, now
> let’s really ban him from the list”. You are calling Kieren, honorable
> member of the community and one of the most proficient LilyPond users
> there are, an outright liar.

I don't think Kieren stated explicitly that no image editing was
involved.  So it's more like calling Kieren disingenuous.  And frankly
I'd have a problem assigning levels of honority to list members.

Putting the fancy talk aside, mclaren is making a spectacle of himself
in an ugly manner.  I rather doubt that is conducive for increasing the
amount of help available to him.

> That’s outrageous. Begone.

That's one possible reaction.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Font problem

[SoundsFromSound]

Thiago Censi wrote
> Hello.
> 
> I am new to Lilypond. I am on Xubuntu 16.04 and installed the packages via
> the default repositories. I am having a problem with the fonts used in the
> score. I don't know if it is a Lilypond problem or a package missint or
> something else. I tried looking in the manual, Google and etc, but didn't
> get lucky (or maybe didn't ask the right questions).
> 
> Here is the code used:
> \version "2.18.2"
> 
> \header {
> title = "Test"
> }
> 
> \relative c''{
> \time 3/4
> % \tempo "Andante"
> a4 a a4. a8
> }
> 
> Here is the png generated (PDF looks the same):
> http://imgur.com/Vi4ZxLU
> 
> I created a Gist with the Debug output:
> https://gist.github.com/tacensi/cbc5aec59d426ee356141a877e8f7941
> 
> All the fonts are there, there seems to be nothing out of order.
> 
> Any directions are welcome.
> 
> -- 
> tacensi.
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Hi there,

I actually run XFCE too, and I ran your test file on my machine here. It
engraved fine, and I install the same way you did via the repo. There must
be something missing on your computer, is this a clean install of Xubuntu or
do other programs show issues? PDF, text, etc. (fonts) I have a clean
install, more or less, just LilyPond, Frescobaldi, Latex, and Inkscape. Hope
this helps!

This is what your test looks like on my XFCE:

 

(sorry the attachment didn't work the way I wanted it to!)





-
composer | sound designer 
LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Font-problem-tp196737p196797.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: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Simon Albrecht]

On 17.11.2016 05:09, mclaren wrote:

"You do realize, don't you, that if you had just asked for help creating
that music, Kieren would have helped you and taught you some of his coding
skills (and he IS really good, BTW). "

Not likely. What I realize is that Kieren is good with photoshop.


Here’s the point where I instantly feel compelled to say “ok, now let’s 
really ban him from the list”. You are calling Kieren, honorable member 
of the community and one of the most proficient LilyPond users there 
are, an outright liar. That’s outrageous. Begone.


Regards, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Font problem

[Thiago Censi]

Hi, Mark.

I knew there was nothing wrong with the code itself, I wanted some
directions with the font problem. I sownloaded the liilypond file here:
http://eugenecormier.com/?p=157

And this is what it looks like after compiling on my system:
http://i.imgur.com/uZMzfZw.png

Michael, the actual sheet music (don't know the precise word in English,
sorry) looks ok. But if I put any text, even change the time to a 3/4, it
screws up. I tried changing the font size of the title. It doesn't work
when I use #1 or fractions:

piece = \markup { \fontsize #1 \bold "PRAELUDIUM I" }

But if I put something like #30 I can see it is bigger because the whole
top of the file becomes a black bar.

I suspect it is a PDF/font problem (though it also happens with PNG, but I
don't know if the compiling proccess is the same). I'll keep trying ;-)

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Gerdau, Michael  wrote:

> Hi Thiago,
>
> > I am new to Lilypond. I am on Xubuntu 16.04 and installed the packages
> via
> > the default repositories. I am having a problem with the fonts used in
> the
> > score. I don't know if it is a Lilypond problem or a package missint or
> > something else. I tried looking in the manual, Google and etc, but didn't
> > get lucky (or maybe didn't ask the right questions).
> >
> > Here is the code used:
> > \version "2.18.2"
> >
> > \header {
> > title = "Test"
> > }
> >
> > \relative c''{
> > \time 3/4
> > % \tempo "Andante"
> > a4 a a4. a8
> > }
> >
> > Here is the png generated (PDF looks the same):
> > http://imgur.com/Vi4ZxLU
>
> That is exactly the same problem I'm having for some time with my system as
> well. Uncommenting \tempo as well as removing the quotes around the String
> after
> \tempo has nothing to do with it though. On my system any score that
> involves
> any text (title, page numbers, lyrics, dynamics) has the letters magnified
> by
> about a factor of ten. Kerning and placement is as if the letters had their
> normal size though.
>
> I don't think it is a lilypond problem as such since my system used to
> work just
> nicely for a long time. Only recently after upgrading some packages or
> playing
> with some different desktop/window manager this behaviour appeared. My
> current
> working guess is that by one of these actions some "font scaling factor"
> (or so
> - I lack a better word) somewhere got corrupted and so far I have not been
> able
> to find out what that is or how to revert that setting.
>
> I'm pretty sure if I'd reinstall my system that problem would be gone.
>
> Any hint as to where/what I could/should look at appreciated.
>
> Kind regards,
> Michael
> --
> Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
> GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver
>



-- 
tacensi.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Performance advice: Tied quavers in British (sacred) music

[Michael Gerdau]

Hi Alexander,

> especially the King's Singers et al. among you... ;-)

well...not qualifying but answering anyway ;-)

[longish explanation about how tied quavers are to be sung
 in british choral music snipped]


What follows is by no means authoritative but only what I picked up
during my choral singing.


I know both conventions (as far as I understood your explanation) and
I have sung both, under british church musicians and german ones
likewise.

It is my understanding that there is no such thing as a strict rule
as to how that is to be sung. To a certain extend it is a matter of
taste and at least in german music does depend on the context and
possibly even on the time that music was written (read: it is my
impression that this also had been more fashionable at times and
less so at other times).

In the end it IMO boils down to what you (or your conductor) likes
better.

The above is somewhat similar to the way singing Bach is different
from singing Mendelssohn (just to give an example).

Kind regards,
Michael
-- 
 Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
 GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Performance advice: Tied quavers in British (sacred) music

[Alexander Kobel]

Dear all,

especially the King's Singers et al. among you... ;-)

A few weeks ago, a conductor (whom I appreciate a lot) gave a lesson 
about how to execute tied quavers in British choral music. My whole life 
before, another conductor (whom I appreciate a lot) taught me the 
exactly opposite opinion. Researching on the topic, I find a post on

  http://jandrewowen.com/en/2015/03/19/tied-eighth-notes-in-choral-music/
mentioning both variants, and in fact the very piece we currently 
rehearse (Howell's "Like as a hart desireth the waterbrooks").
Hence, I inquire to the great community here to provide me with more 
opinions, surveys, and references...


The question is whether the singers are supposed to sing the note values 
true to notation, or whether a final quaver after a long note indicates 
that the final consonant is to be executed on the very beat where the 
note is.


For the beginning of a word, I learned that you should pronounce 
consonants exactly on the beat. Consequently, the final consonants of a 
word would be performed on the *next* beat, that is, on the beat of the 
rest.
In the meantime I've been told that some conductors in Britain prefer to 
have the consonants at the beginning of a syllable spoken *before* the 
beat, so that the vowel already is delivered with full sound *on* the 
beat. With that agreement, it would make some sense to add a short 
additional note to mark the position of an end consonant, just as a 
notational convention.


Attached are a few typical excerpts demonstrating the situation. The 
first is from Howell's "Like as the hart"; the second is from Rutter's 
Gloria, and unusual in that the final quaver is not even on a note that 
appears in the chord of the accompaniment; the last two are from Mathias 
"A babe is born", and interesting because the "cry" has no consonant to 
end in, and the final "Noel!" has an accent on the tied quaver. 
Interestingly, also the tied g in the organ pedal has an accent, which 
is obviously impossible to perform by other means than adjusting the length.



I hope I could bring my point across, and look forward to interesting 
opinions...



Cheers,
Alexander
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Create a bookpart with a scheme function

[Urs Liska]

Am 17. November 2016 19:19:40 MEZ, schrieb Freddy Ouellette 
:
>Looks like an interesting link, but I can't download it fully - the
>.zip file comes damaged. And I'm not sure what works in the /includes. 
>
>Freddy 

I know it's complicated with all the transitive includes - and references to 
external library code.  Maybe I'll find the opportunity for some help (still 
only mobile).

The point is: you need to have the book available as a variable, then you can 
use ly:add-bookpart.

Urs

PS: it would be better to kerp this on-list

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Stepping down and moving on

[Graham King]

David,
I'll add to the thread my deep thanks for your skill, insight, hard
work, helpfulness, articulacy, and (yes, really) diplomacy. May your new
employer prove as congenial and rewarding as they are evidently
discerning.

best regards
-- Graham


On Wed, 2016-11-09 at 18:09 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:

> Hi folks and team,
> 

...
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Create a bookpart with a scheme function

[Urs Liska]

Am 17. November 2016 16:24:04 MEZ, schrieb Freddy Ouellette 
:
>I am transcribing music from the 1500s. I would like to include the
>original facsimile in my arrangement as EPS files that take up entire
>pages. These EPS files are dispersed between the pieces. I have to
>create
>separate bookparts for them because I need to have \paper blocks - I
>don't
>want my normal footer on these pages. Is there a way I can create a
>dynamic
>bookpart that does all of my formatting for me, but simply has a
>different
>EPS file per part? This is what I want:
>
>\book {
>  \bookpart {
>\score {
>  % arranged music...
>}
>  }
>
>  \facsimile_page #140 #"eps_file.eps"}
>
>and this function will insert this bookpart :
>
>\bookpart {
>  \markup \null
>  \header {}
>  \paper {
>bookTitleMarkup = ##f
>
>evenHeaderMarkup = \markup \fill-line { \epsfile #X #130
>#"***eps_file.eps***" }
>oddHeaderMarkup = \markup \fill-line { \epsfile #X #130
>#"***eps_file.eps***" }
>evenFooterMarkup = \markup {
>  \fill-line {
>   \column { \vspace #-63 \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string }
>\null
>\null
>  }
>}
>oddFooterMarkup = \markup {
>  \fill-line {
>\null
>\null
>   \column { \vspace #-63 \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string }
>  }
>}
>  }}
>
>Is it possible to use Scheme/Guile to create this bookpart each time I
>call
>the function? Any time I try to create a function like this, the page
>just
>doesn't show up at all.

This is definitely possible.

I'm not sure this will help you but if you can get hold of the content at 
https://git.openlilylib.org/bfsc/kayser (presumably from the 'karlsruhe' 
branch) and look into the /includes directory you might find something. 

I'm only at the mobile phone right now so I can't look into it more closely.

HTH
Urs

>
>Thanks for any help.
>
>Freddy
>
>
>
>
>___
>lilypond-user mailing list
>lilypond-user@gnu.org
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Font problem

[Gerdau, Michael]

Hi Thiago,

> I am new to Lilypond. I am on Xubuntu 16.04 and installed the packages via
> the default repositories. I am having a problem with the fonts used in the
> score. I don't know if it is a Lilypond problem or a package missint or
> something else. I tried looking in the manual, Google and etc, but didn't
> get lucky (or maybe didn't ask the right questions).
> 
> Here is the code used:
> \version "2.18.2"
> 
> \header {
> title = "Test"
> }
> 
> \relative c''{
> \time 3/4
> % \tempo "Andante"
> a4 a a4. a8
> }
> 
> Here is the png generated (PDF looks the same):
> http://imgur.com/Vi4ZxLU

That is exactly the same problem I'm having for some time with my system as
well. Uncommenting \tempo as well as removing the quotes around the String after
\tempo has nothing to do with it though. On my system any score that involves
any text (title, page numbers, lyrics, dynamics) has the letters magnified by
about a factor of ten. Kerning and placement is as if the letters had their
normal size though.

I don't think it is a lilypond problem as such since my system used to work just
nicely for a long time. Only recently after upgrading some packages or playing
with some different desktop/window manager this behaviour appeared. My current
working guess is that by one of these actions some "font scaling factor" (or so
- I lack a better word) somewhere got corrupted and so far I have not been able
to find out what that is or how to revert that setting.

I'm pretty sure if I'd reinstall my system that problem would be gone.

Any hint as to where/what I could/should look at appreciated.

Kind regards,
Michael
--
Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Create a bookpart with a scheme function

[Freddy Ouellette]

I am transcribing music from the 1500s. I would like to include the
original facsimile in my arrangement as EPS files that take up entire
pages. These EPS files are dispersed between the pieces. I have to create
separate bookparts for them because I need to have \paper blocks - I don't
want my normal footer on these pages. Is there a way I can create a dynamic
bookpart that does all of my formatting for me, but simply has a different
EPS file per part? This is what I want:

\book {
  \bookpart {
\score {
  % arranged music...
}
  }

  \facsimile_page #140 #"eps_file.eps"}

and this function will insert this bookpart :

\bookpart {
  \markup \null
  \header {}
  \paper {
bookTitleMarkup = ##f

evenHeaderMarkup = \markup \fill-line { \epsfile #X #130
#"***eps_file.eps***" }
oddHeaderMarkup = \markup \fill-line { \epsfile #X #130
#"***eps_file.eps***" }
evenFooterMarkup = \markup {
  \fill-line {
\column { \vspace #-63 \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string }
\null
\null
  }
}
oddFooterMarkup = \markup {
  \fill-line {
\null
\null
\column { \vspace #-63 \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string }
  }
}
  }}

Is it possible to use Scheme/Guile to create this bookpart each time I call
the function? Any time I try to create a function like this, the page just
doesn't show up at all.

Thanks for any help.

Freddy
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Knut Petersen]

Hi Vaughan!


I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would like to 
test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It takes my computer 
between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.


My system:
=
   mainboard:  asus h97 pro gamer
   cpu: i7-4790K, 4.00 Ghz (turbo speed: up to 4.4 GHZ,)
   SSD: Samsung SSD 850 PRO 512GB
   os: Linux, based on openSuSE Tumbleweed
   For the test I used lilypond 2.18.2.

Compile times:

   1st run: 27,123 seconds
   2nd run: 26,697 seconds
   3rd run: 26,700 seconds
   4th run: 26,901 seconds


For lilypond single thread performance is critical ... the high turbo speed of 
the
i7-4790K helps a lot. An i7-6700K will probably be slightly slower,  a system
built around an i7-7700K will probably be slightly faster.

Put your system on a fast SSD. Nowadays there are SSDs faster than the one I 
use.

Use HGST hard disks.

cu,
 Knut


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: grace notes ties

[David Kastrup]

Gianmaria Lari  writes:

>> On 17 November 2016 at 15:07, David Kastrup  wrote:
>>
>>> Gianmaria Lari  writes:
>>>
>>> > I need to tie the first 'a' with the second 'a' that is inside some grace
>>> > notes.
>>> >
>>> > Here it is a fragment of the code:
>>> >
>>> > \version "2.19.49"
>>> > {
>>> >   b \afterGrace a {g16 b a} g4 g
>>> > }
>>> >
>>> > Any suggestion?
>>>
>>> Well,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> works just like that.  It just doesn't make any sense.  Are you sure you
>>> want a tie here?
>>>
>>> --
>>> David Kastrup
>>>
>
> I'm far from be sure but it is just what I found:) Anyway check the
> attached image (taken from Mary Cohen, Technique takes off, "14 Romance").
>
> And thank you for your code, it works perfectly.

The attached image most emphatically does _not_ use a tie but a slur.
There is a world of difference between the two: the _tie_ would mean to
_hold_ the a while you play g and b ending a smattering before the beat
and only then release the a after its tied part has ended.  It would be
very strange to write it like this, however.

A slur means to run notes into another.  A tie means to have only one
note in the first place (so you can only tie equal pitches).  A slur on
equal pitches, when executed on the piano, would usually be played with
alternating fingers with the second striking before the first has
completely left the key.  A tie just means to do nothing and hold the
note for the added duration of the tied notes.

So you probably wanted

\version "2.19.49"
{
  b
  \afterGrace a( { g16 b a) } g4 g
}

and that still works without a hitch and is even simpler.  So where was
the actual problem?

-- 
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: grace notes ties

[Gianmaria Lari]

I'm far from be sure but it is just what I found:) Anyway check the
attached image (taken from Mary Cohen, Technique takes off, "14 Romance").

And thank you for your code, it works perfectly.

Ciao, g.





On 17 November 2016 at 15:07, David Kastrup  wrote:

> Gianmaria Lari  writes:
>
> > I need to tie the first 'a' with the second 'a' that is inside some grace
> > notes.
> >
> > Here it is a fragment of the code:
> >
> > \version "2.19.49"
> > {
> >   b \afterGrace a {g16 b a} g4 g
> > }
> >
> > Any suggestion?
>
> Well,
>
>
>
> works just like that.  It just doesn't make any sense.  Are you sure you
> want a tie here?
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

> It's worth noting that something like this may work in a minimal example
> and fail when it occurs 20 measures into the score

Of course. I was simply responding to mclaren’s snide email, with all of its 
false claims and laughably-easy challenges (both explicit and implicit):

> What I realize is that Kieren is good with photoshop.

100% FALSE. I used only Lilypond.

> lilypond hangs permanently when you try to compile that example.

100% FALSE: My snippet compiles without a problem (and whether or not one wants 
to argue about the “hackiness” of the actual solution/code, the output was 
clearly sufficient since it fooled mclaren into thinking I had to use 
Photoshop).

> This example hits [the limits]. That's life.

100% FALSE: See above.

> while it's not possible to output a score or a MIDI file from lilypond for 
> this kind of thing

100% FALSE (re: “score”): See above.

ALMOST CERTAINLY 100% FALSE (re: “MIDI”): With a few well-placed fraction note 
factors, I could likely output a “perfect” MIDI file.

That being said, in the interest of fairness…

> Approximating a score via photoshop takes more time than working
> with lilypond would, of course, but then anything worth doing takes time.

100% TRUE. It’s just too bad mclaren doesn’t see that actually learning how to 
use Lilypond well, rather than bitching about it on this list, is worth doing 
and takes time.

Cheers,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: grace notes ties

[David Kastrup]

Gianmaria Lari  writes:

> I need to tie the first 'a' with the second 'a' that is inside some grace
> notes.
>
> Here it is a fragment of the code:
>
> \version "2.19.49"
> {
>   b \afterGrace a {g16 b a} g4 g
> }
>
> Any suggestion?

Well,

\version "2.19.49"
{
  b \once \set tieWaitForNote = ##t
  \afterGrace a~ {g16 b a} g4 g
}

works just like that.  It just doesn't make any sense.  Are you sure you
want a tie here?

-- 
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

grace notes ties

[Gianmaria Lari]

I need to tie the first 'a' with the second 'a' that is inside some grace
notes.

Here it is a fragment of the code:

\version "2.19.49"
{
  b \afterGrace a {g16 b a} g4 g
}

Any suggestion?

Thank you, g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[SoundsFromSound]

Vaughan McAlley wrote
> Greetings,
> 
> My 2008 iMac is reaching the end of its useful life, and I would like to
> replace it with some kind of desktop computer that runs Debian. Given that
> a significant proportion of my time on this new computer will be compiling
> Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should be prioritizing.
> 
> I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would like
> to test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It takes my
> computer between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.
> 
> Cheers,
> Vaughan
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
> 
> Carver.zip (81K)
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/attachment/196736/0/Carver.zip;

Hi there,

On my 2010 Linux custom build machine it compiled on average between 60-70
seconds. I'm running an original core i7 860 from back in the day (ca.
2009), with 8GB ram. Great looking score! 

Hope this helps you. 

You should be all set with almost any machine these days, compared to what
you have been used to...LilyPond is not as demanding on CPU/GPU as you may
think she is... ;)






-
composer | sound designer 
LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Getting-a-new-computer-tp196736p196779.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: rehearsal A'

[Gianmaria Lari]

>
>
> it seems that the default RehearsalMarks use bold characters while the
> custom-made ones don't.
>
[]

> I get the same look if I override the property that's responsible for that:
>   \override Score.RehearsalMark.font-series = #'bold
>   \mark "A"
>

Great thank you!
g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: rehearsal A'

[Klaus Blum]

Hi Gianmaria, 


Gianmaria Lari wrote
> the resulting character looks different compared to the other default
> rehearsal mark. Should I use some markup?

it seems that the default RehearsalMarks use bold characters while the
custom-made ones don't. 
I get the same look if I override the property that's responsible for that: 

% 
\relative c' {
  f1 
  \mark \default
  f 
  \override Score.RehearsalMark.font-series = #'bold
  \mark "A"
  f 
  \mark "A'"
  f 
}
% 

Cheers, 
Klaus



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/rehearsal-A-tp196776p196777.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

rehearsal A'

[Gianmaria Lari]

I need to write a rehearsal mark followed by an apostrophe, so something
like: A'.

If I try to do

\mark "A'"


the resulting character looks different compared to the other default
rehearsal mark. Should I use some markup?
Thank you, g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Potential improvements to the homepage?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno mer 16 nov 2016 alle 21:07, Flaming Hakama by Elaine 
 ha scritto:


Some comments in response to the most recent (but not quite actually 
recent)  iteration of the perennial web site discussion.




State of Translation

Looking at the translated versions of the website, most of the 
content from the homepage isn't actually translated, but remains in 
English.


This is not accurate. Most up-to-date translations have all content 
translated except the pondings:

http://lilypond.org/index.it.html
http://lilypond.org/index.fr.html
http://lilypond.org/index.ja.html
http://lilypond.org/index.de.html (even though german is not really 
maintained at the moment)



Even within the translated versions, the links within there quickly 
revert to English:  For example, on the French site 
http://lilypond.org/essay.fr.html, I click through to "Essai (HTML 
multipages): manuel sous forme de plusieurs pages HTML – chaque 
page est assez petite." 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/essay/index.fr.html.   
From there, when I click on a subheading in the left column, I get 
english: "1.1 L’histoire de LilyPond" brings me to Engish page "The 
Lilypond Story" 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/essay/the-lilypond-story


This is a known problem. Read from here:
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/2273/#3b1d
So, I'm not convinced that our current infrastructure actually meets 
reasonable requirements for internationalization.  This despite the 
factd that the amount of language support we have is both surprising 
and impressive.


Given that various people on this list recently complained about an 
LSR snippet with German variable names, pointing out that English is 
almost a neccessary evil when using lilypond, it makes me wonder how 
useful are the non-english websites?  Are we just setting up 
non-English speakers for failure by making it seem like they can get 
along in their language?


I met some italian users who thanked me a lot for translating website 
and documentation.
In Italy there are still people who can't read english fluently. OTOH I 
don't think that e.g. any Scandinavian user will ever need the 
documentation in his language.


If I understand correctly, the website content is (or could easily) 
also be produced as PDF?  If so, then in the worst case, the 
translated websites could point to the PDF documentation for that 
language.


Given the amount of content in the existing translation 
infrastructure, it seems like we should absolutely keep it available 
in some fashion.


Are you proposing to remove unmaintained translations but keeping a 
link to the PDF of the translated website (even if out-of-date)?


I have other ideas.
The first would be adding a warning for untranslated/out-of-date pages, 
like the one used on FSFE website:
https://fsfe.org/activities/policy/eu/policy-goals/privacy.it.html 
(untranslated)

https://fsfe.org/contribute/internship.it.html (not up-to-date)

This should be not too difficult to add in the current infrastructure. 
At least for someone who knows Python.


Another possibility would be switching _the website only_ (not the 
entire documentation) to gettext.
I've read some Gnome documentation, where out-of-date paragraphs are 
replaced by the original english text. This may make the text 
"bilingual" but the contents would be kind of up-to-date.


If it is a possibility to develop a much better site experience, and 
not have 100% of the content translated, is that an acceptable 
trade-off?  Or is it more important to have language parity than it 
is to have a overall better site in English?


I don't see the link between the two goals.
Please be more specific.




CMS

In most cases, the choice of a CMS should be based on who is going to 
maintain the content.


One benefit of the current approach is that only "the usual suspects" 
can maintain it.
One drawaback of the current approach is that only "the usual 
suspects" can maintain it.


One benefit of using a CMS like Wordpress is that people other than 
"the usual suspects" can maintain it.
One drawaback of using a CMS like Wordpress is that people other than 
"the usual suspects" can maintain it.


In short, we need to figure out what website content we want and who 
should produce it (in terms of what skills they do or do not possess) 
before any reasonable decisions can be made as to a technology stack.



In general Wordpress is the current standard in website deployment.  
According to data from this year at 
https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/cm-wordpress/all/all, 
"WordPress is used by 59.2% of all the websites whose content 
management system we know. This is 26.6% of all websites."  It has 
more market share than all other CMSs put together, although still 
less than "no CMS", which is the majority.


It is a safe bet to say that the future of Wordpress is much more 
rosy than the future of lilypond.  There are probably 1000X more 

Re: accordion notation facility

[David Kastrup]

Gianmaria Lari  writes:

> David Kaustrup wrote:
>
>
>> Well, standard bass is severely underrepresented in what I am
>> occasionally working with: I don't need it for accordion orchestra, and
>> I am not a particularly skilled arranger so I tend to just use the free
>> bass when playing stuff written for other instruments.
>>
>> But that's sort of underwhelming.  There are a number of different
>> notations for standard bass (German, Russian, Italian) and it would nice
>> to have basically the same input.
>
>
> Yes it would be absolutely nice :)
>
> Anyway, I thought there was a standard international notation for
> accordion! Or anyway something that today is considered the way to go when
> you write accordion score. Isn't it?

You mean AAA (American Accordionists' Association) notation?  There are
so many standards to choose from...



>> That's a bit more tricky for German since it often diverges into
>> having notes that would work also for free bass or piano and no
>> longer are in a 1:1 relation with buttons in the standard bass:
>> particularly bass melodies tend to be spelled out without a rigidly
>> located octave break in the notation, so one bass button may be
>> written in several different octaves, and chords may use different
>> inversions or a number of notes differing from 3 while keeping the
>> same harmonic function.
>
>
> Can you send me one example of german accordion notation?

Well, stuff like attached


is not uncommon.  Basically this works on accordion with standard bass
(just use the rhythm and the chord names), free bass accordion,
keyboard, piano.

Other variants are less extreme and vary mostly by picking a nicer chord
inversion (translating g7 cm into   is not a cadenza but
an ailment: you want either   or  )
and/or by letting bass melodies continue rather than jumping
octave.

>> So in the extreme case, you'll want to use one source for the chord
>> _namings_ that still are written as scripts to a bass staff generated
>> with _another_ source.
>>
>
> I'm sorry I don't understand.

When the notes have little to do with the chord buttons, you want to
enter them independently from the chord buttons.

>> I wrote AccordionStandardBass few months ago. Now that I understand a
>> > bit more lilypond I would like to rewrite it. The idea is to have a
>> > tool to write for accordion in "standard notation" and also generating
>> > corresponding midi output. If you David, or anybody else with more
>> > experience than me can help to do a better work it would be great.
>>
>> It would be reasonable if one form of input could be just notes since
>> that is what a Midi accordion will deliver as its raw form.
>>
>
> and here too, I'm sorry but I don't understand what do you mean.

A Midi accordion delivers note events on the Midi, nothing else.
Commonly even in the "correct" octave for accordion notation (even if
particularly acoustic instrument with Midi output sound quite
differently).  A ChordNames context can interpret notes (though it sucks
at picking a good inversion), so obviously it would be nice if this also
worked for accordion notation input.

-- 
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Override SystemStartSquare width?

[dtsmarin]

Hi Thomas,

My code uses Scorlatti font and I'm trying to replicate SCORE's look. 
 

I simply changed the offset and width of the brackets because Lilypond's
defaults are so far from the staves. Also I can't fix the vertical distance
of the brackets even if I used this code:
\override StaffGroup.SystemStartBracket.stencil = 
#(lambda (grob)
 (let* ((stil (ly:system-start-delimiter::print grob))
(extra-height (ly:grob-property grob 'padding))
(yext (ly:stencil-extent stil Y))
(ytop (cdr yext))
(ylen (interval-length yext))
(yfinal (+ ylen (* 2 extra-height)))
(yscale (/ yfinal ylen))
   )
   (ly:stencil-translate
 (ly:stencil-scale 
   (ly:stencil-translate stil (cons 0 (- ytop)))
   1 yscale)
 (cons 0 (+ ytop extra-height)))
 ))

I'm trying to achieve this type of bracketing (for violin sections when
multiple staves are used)
 




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Override-SystemStartSquare-width-tp196731p196771.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

accordion notation facility

[Gianmaria Lari]

David Kaustrup wrote:


> Well, standard bass is severely underrepresented in what I am
> occasionally working with: I don't need it for accordion orchestra, and
> I am not a particularly skilled arranger so I tend to just use the free
> bass when playing stuff written for other instruments.
>
> But that's sort of underwhelming.  There are a number of different
> notations for standard bass (German, Russian, Italian) and it would nice
> to have basically the same input.


Yes it would be absolutely nice :)

Anyway, I thought there was a standard international notation for
accordion! Or anyway something that today is considered the way to go when
you write accordion score. Isn't it?

That's a bit more tricky for German
> since it often diverges into having notes that would work also for free
> bass or piano and no longer are in a 1:1 relation with buttons in the
> standard bass: particularly bass melodies tend to be spelled out without
> a rigidly located octave break in the notation, so one bass button may
> be written in several different octaves, and chords may use different
> inversions or a number of notes differing from 3 while keeping the same
> harmonic function.


Can you send me one example of german accordion notation?


> So in the extreme case, you'll want to use one
> source for the chord _namings_ that still are written as scripts to a
> bass staff generated with _another_ source.
>

I'm sorry I don't understand.

> I wrote AccordionStandardBass few months ago. Now that I understand a
> > bit more lilypond I would like to rewrite it. The idea is to have a
> > tool to write for accordion in "standard notation" and also generating
> > corresponding midi output. If you David, or anybody else with more
> > experience than me can help to do a better work it would be great.
>
> It would be reasonable if one form of input could be just notes since
> that is what a Midi accordion will deliver as its raw form.
>

and here too, I'm sorry but I don't understand what do you mean.

Ciao, g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Orm Finnendahl]

Am Donnerstag, den 17. November 2016 um 13:24:24 Uhr (+1100) schrieb Vaughan 
McAlley:
> Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should be prioritizing.

As lilypond is single-threaded, the number of cores is less important,
than CPU Freq and you should go for a lot of RAM (>= 16
GB).

Since I've been using them, I find fanless, passively cooled systems
with SSD Drives a must (completely silent!)

Here are the ones I'm using: http://www.deltatronic.de

Note that I'm not affiliated with the company, it's just an example!
There are probably more companies out there.

--
Orm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Alexander Kobel]

Hi,

mid-2014 laptop: Lily 2.19.49 on a Dell Latitude E5440, Arch Linux 
chroot running on Debian Jessie: 49 sec, 1.25 GB peak memory usage.
Wouldn't recommend this particular laptop, though, but just included it 
so that you have a ballpark figure.


% inxi -Fxz
System:Host: lap-11-52 Kernel: 4.4.30.1.pm64-smp x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 
4.7.2) Desktop: i3 Distro: Arch Linux

Machine:   Device: laptop System: Dell product: Latitude E5440 v: 00
   Mobo: Dell model: 009TY8 v: A00 BIOS: Dell v: A14 date: 
01/06/2016

BatteryBAT0: charge: 60.0 Wh 186.7% condition: 32.1/60.0 Wh (54%)
   model: LGC-LGC3.0 DELL NVWGM4B status: Full
CPU:   Dual core Intel Core i5-4310U (-HT-MCP-) cache: 3072 KB
   flags: (lm nx sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx) bmips: 
10375
   clock speeds: max: 3000 MHz 1: 2613 MHz 2: 2600 MHz 3: 2602 
MHz 4: 2620 MHz
Graphics:  Card-1: Intel Haswell-ULT Integrated Graphics Controller 
bus-ID: 00:02.0
   Card-2: NVIDIA GF117M [GeForce 610M/710M/810M/820M / GT 
620M/625M/630M/720M] bus-ID: 03:00.0

   Display Server: N/A driver: (unloaded: nv) Resolution: 272x90
Audio: Card-1 Intel 8 Series HD Audio Controller driver: 
snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:1b.0
   Card-2 Intel Haswell-ULT HD Audio Controller driver: 
snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:03.0

   Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture v: k4.4.30.1.pm64-smp
Network:   Card-1: Intel Ethernet Connection I218-LM driver: e1000e 
port: f080 bus-ID: 00:19.0

   IF: eth0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: 
   Card-2: Intel Wireless 7260 driver: iwlwifi bus-ID: 02:00.0
   IF: wlan0 state: down mac: 
Drives:HDD Total Size: 250.1GB (38.4% used)
   ID-1: /dev/sda model: Samsung_SSD_750 size: 250.1GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 104G used: 82G (83%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda6
   ID-2: /tmp size: 44G used: 35G (83%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/root
   ID-3: swap-1 size: 9.44GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap dev: 
/dev/sda7

RAID:  No RAID devices: /proc/mdstat, md_mod kernel module present
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 50.0C mobo: N/A
   Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A
Info:  Processes: 235 Uptime: 33 min Memory: 2771.9/7892.9MB Init: 
systemd Gcc sys: 6.2.1

   Client: Shell (zsh 5.2) inxi: 2.3.4


On 2016-11-17 03:24, Vaughan McAlley wrote:

Greetings,

My 2008 iMac is reaching the end of its useful life, and I would like to
replace it with some kind of desktop computer that runs Debian. Given
that a significant proportion of my time on this new computer will be
compiling Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should be
prioritizing.

I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would
like to test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It takes
my computer between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.

Cheers,
Vaughan



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Jacques Peron]

Compiled 3 times on my Clevo w110er (Intel Core i7 3632QM - 2.2 Ghz - Ram 8
Go - Ubuntu 16.04 - LilyPond 2.19.47) :

lilypond MSDM.ly  48,50s user 0,96s system 99% cpu 49,706 total
lilypond MSDM.ly  51,27s user 0,79s system 99% cpu 52,244 total
lilypond MSDM.ly  51,66s user 0,78s system 99% cpu 52,442 total

It replies 'Fatal error', but the resulting pdf looks fine.

2016-11-17 9:52 GMT+01:00 Henning Hraban Ramm :

> Thank you for this useful test project!
> Also just for fun and comparison,
> on my Mac mini (2.3 GHz i7, 16 GB RAM) running OSX 10.9.5 and LilyPond
> 2.18.2 it took 2:41, 2:30, or 4:47 min
>
> Greetlings, Hraban
>
>
> Am 2016-11-17 um 03:24 schrieb Vaughan McAlley :
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > My 2008 iMac is reaching the end of its useful life, and I would like to
> replace it with some kind of desktop computer that runs Debian. Given that
> a significant proportion of my time on this new computer will be compiling
> Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should be prioritizing.
> >
> > I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would
> like to test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It takes my
> computer between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Vaughan
> >
> > ___
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> > lilypond-user@gnu.org
> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Two different time signatures with different tuplets in 'em

[David Kastrup]

David Wright  writes:

> On Mon 07 Nov 2016 at 03:12:15 (-0700), mclaren
>  wrote
>> Musicians must develop a very thick skin and learn to expect this. The
>> crucial issue is to get a score, by whatever means possible, and then move
>> on. Practicing musicians quickly learn to regard programmers as a form of
>> damage and route around them.
>
> I guess you have some problems which are far more serious than those
> that arise when playing about with LilyPond or posting here.

Shrug.  For a number of people getting humans to do what they'd like
them to do is a lot less straightforward and more puzzling than getting
a computer program to do what they'd like it to do.

Imagine how frustrating it must be when you then end up trying to get
humans to make the computer program indeed do what you'd like it to do.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[David Kastrup]

mclaren  writes:

> It's pretty clear from the nature of the bugs that there was some internal
> rational integer calculation limit in lilypond. What's baffling is the way
> it's dealt with internally in lilypond. The procedure seems to be to do
> everything in 32 bit integers and then throw an error if that limit gets
> exceeded.  Moving to 64 bit integers would extend the range of possible
> musical inputs, but David Kastrup is right -- not by much. 2 x 10^19 as
> opposed to 4 billion for 32 bit ints.
>
> This is the way video games tend to deal with this stuff.

Music is not a video game.  LilyPond needs to know whether two events
line up in time (only then are they aligned or have a common stem, and
only the first such event gets an accidental and so on).  Once
arithmetic does no longer guarantee

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1

it becomes impossible to reliably synchronize matters.

> They use 32 bits integers or 64 bit integers and that's typically good
> enough for the game spaces they're dealing with.

They have a bounded universe there.  You can't tell a musician "1
beats, and you are out since then our fixed point numbers overflow".  Or
"1 beats and you can't use triplets any more since then our floating
point numbers get too grainy."

For better or worse, written music requires exactness to work reliably.

> A long time ago I had to work on an 8 bit microcontroller and write my
> own floating point routines.  With the small amount of RAM and the
> slow CPU speed (4 MHz back then), you quickly started to throw
> errors. The better solution seems like figuring out what a practical
> integer limit is and then dump the intermediate result into floating
> point, then recast as an integer on the final output. The range of
> floating point values is large, somwhere in the ballpark of 1 x 10^300
> if memory serves. You typically don't run into those limits unless you
> encounter really exotic situations.

I wrote video games in my youth on 8 bit computers and timed them
(including every single toggle of the 1bit speaker output) by manually
counting all the execution cycles of every machine instruction (and the
assembly was hand-written).  I've worked with fixed-point, floating
point, residual polynomial fields and a number of other stuff.  I know
my shit, and Han-Wen and Jan, responsible for much of the design
decisions underlying LilyPond, did too.

What you don't seem to understand is that you are not dealing with
idiots who were just waiting for you to pour out your wisdom so that
they then are able to solve all of your problems.

There are deliberate reasons and tradeoffs involved in LilyPond's
design.  There may be some programming mistakes, and some of the reasons
and tradeoffs might be based on history that is no longer immanent.  But
all in all, there is a reason for everything that cannot even remotely
be characterized as "people just weren't as smart as mclaren or they'd
have done it better".

If you want something done, do it.  You are of the opinion that you can
do better than those who worked so far on LilyPond, do it.  Don't beat
your chest, do it.  Stuff in LilyPond gets done by people doing what
they can much more by people telling other people what they should.

And if you believe everybody else to be too stupid to do stuff like you
know it should be done, there really is no other option than doing it
yourself.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

Thank you for this useful test project!
Also just for fun and comparison,
on my Mac mini (2.3 GHz i7, 16 GB RAM) running OSX 10.9.5 and LilyPond 2.18.2 
it took 2:41, 2:30, or 4:47 min

Greetlings, Hraban


Am 2016-11-17 um 03:24 schrieb Vaughan McAlley :

> Greetings,
> 
> My 2008 iMac is reaching the end of its useful life, and I would like to 
> replace it with some kind of desktop computer that runs Debian. Given that a 
> significant proportion of my time on this new computer will be compiling 
> Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should be prioritizing.
> 
> I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would like to 
> test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It takes my computer 
> between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.
> 
> Cheers,
> Vaughan
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting a new computer

[Mark Knoop]

36 seconds on i5-2500 3.3GHz, 8GB RAM, LilyPond 2.19.49

At 13:24 on 17 Nov 2016, Vaughan McAlley wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>My 2008 iMac is reaching the end of its useful life, and I would like
>to replace it with some kind of desktop computer that runs Debian.
>Given that a significant proportion of my time on this new computer
>will be compiling Lilypond files, I was wondering which specs I should
>be prioritizing.
>
>I’ve included a large project if anyone with a newish computer would
>like to test their compilation time. The main file is MDSM.ly. It
>takes my computer between 4 and 5 minutes to compile.
>
>Cheers,
>Vaughan


-- 
Mark Knoop

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Solution to 7 over sqr(71) time against integer polyrhythms

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> On Nov 16, 2016, at 11:09 PM, mclaren  wrote:
>
>> "You do realize, don't you, that if you had just asked for help creating 
>> that music, Kieren would have helped you and taught you some of his coding 
>> skills (and he IS really good, BTW). "
>> 
>> Not likely. What I realize is that Kieren is good with photoshop.
>
> Ah, poor deluded mclaren… I don’t even own Photoshop (or anything like
> it).  Or more to the point of how you seem to be approaching things:
> “When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."
>
> Note that in the snippet below, I fixed the last “single note” tuplet that I 
> hadn’t noticed was there the first time.

It's worth noting that something like this may work in a minimal example
and fail when it occurs 20 measures into the score since LilyPond keeps
track of the current time as a fraction too, and if p/q fits its sizes,
that does not mean that p/q+80 (or whatever) will also fit.

So it's quite possible to "demonstrate" that something works when it is
not actually usable in practice.

Of course the Photoshop accusation is pure delusion: who'd go to that
kind of work for that kind of gain?

But there are also ways to "photoshop" in LilyPond and generate visuals
that do not actually correspond to LilyPond's own idea of the music.
And those, cast into music functions, might be the best path towards
getting such stuff reliably typeset until LilyPond's precision catches
up.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user