RE: that migrating "opus"
David, Again, thank you for your direction/advice. Mark -Original Message- From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2018 6:05 PM To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: that migrating "opus" On Sun 11 Mar 2018 at 12:40:35 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > David, > > Your continued effort to address my inquiry is uncommon. Many more > esoteric and arcane matters appear on the list with multiple, and > often contentious, responses. Yet you are the only one to respond to > this simple inquiry and then it is not posted on the list. The convention on this list appears to be to: a person cc: the list so that's what I do. My response is on the list, but some mail systems do various things like: . deliver only one copy of messages (which could explain your case, where you received just the personal copy), . refuse to deliver messages they recognise as coming from the sender (which can lead people to keep reposting a message to a list because they think it never arrives). > Thank you for your kind attention. > > Your courtesy (your snippet is in my repository!) restricts any > further comment. Suffice it to say that I have found a simple > alternative: put the opus number in the "arranger" field. Fair enough. There are two things to watch out for: . the headings are left/right paired, so you can get gaps below them. (I use this as a positive feature with Anglican chants, using opus for the composer and meter for any necessary annotation, thereby ensuring that the composer is close-set and a lengthy annotation will not collide with it.) . There are LP headers that find their way into the PDF metadata, and they might end up mislabelled there. Not a worry for most people, and there are probably ways to edit such metadata anyway. Cheers, David. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: that migrating "opus"
On Sun 11 Mar 2018 at 12:40:35 (-0700), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > David, > > Your continued effort to address my inquiry is uncommon. Many more esoteric > and arcane matters appear on the list with multiple, and often contentious, > responses. Yet you are the only one to respond to this simple inquiry and > then it is not posted on the list. The convention on this list appears to be to: a person cc: the list so that's what I do. My response is on the list, but some mail systems do various things like: . deliver only one copy of messages (which could explain your case, where you received just the personal copy), . refuse to deliver messages they recognise as coming from the sender (which can lead people to keep reposting a message to a list because they think it never arrives). > Thank you for your kind attention. > > Your courtesy (your snippet is in my repository!) restricts any further > comment. Suffice it to say that I have found a simple alternative: put the > opus number in the "arranger" field. Fair enough. There are two things to watch out for: . the headings are left/right paired, so you can get gaps below them. (I use this as a positive feature with Anglican chants, using opus for the composer and meter for any necessary annotation, thereby ensuring that the composer is close-set and a lengthy annotation will not collide with it.) . There are LP headers that find their way into the PDF metadata, and they might end up mislabelled there. Not a worry for most people, and there are probably ways to edit such metadata anyway. Cheers, David. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: that migrating "opus"
David, Your continued effort to address my inquiry is uncommon. Many more esoteric and arcane matters appear on the list with multiple, and often contentious, responses. Yet you are the only one to respond to this simple inquiry and then it is not posted on the list. Thank you for your kind attention. Your courtesy (your snippet is in my repository!) restricts any further comment. Suffice it to say that I have found a simple alternative: put the opus number in the "arranger" field. Mark -Original Message- From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 8:05 PM To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: that migrating "opus" On Sat 10 Mar 2018 at 13:28:20 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > David, > > Thank you for your pointed reply. > Yes, I did take away something from your explanation. > I have used it on the previously referenced score. > My basic question, more operational than technical (I really don't get all of the \scoreTitlemarkup stuff!). > > Why is it that "piece" and "opus" are the only ones beatified to migrate? Because a musical work "typically" has one title at the top (cf a novel) and one composer (cf author), whereas each movement (particularly where they're often performed separately) will be numbered (cf chapters) and sometimed titled (like children's stories). > The process you provide seems a little kludgy to get "opus" behave as it would on a normal score with multiple movements. I think the example (which BTW I didn't write) was designed to give you a lot of flexibility without using the \fromproperty method. If your music is very conventional as just described, then the default scheme may work for you, as attached (modified from that example cited). Cheers, David. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: that migrating "opus"
On Sat 10 Mar 2018 at 13:28:20 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> David,
>
> Thank you for your pointed reply.
> Yes, I did take away something from your explanation.
> I have used it on the previously referenced score.
> My basic question, more operational than technical (I really don't get all of
> the \scoreTitlemarkup stuff!).
>
> Why is it that "piece" and "opus" are the only ones beatified to migrate?
Because a musical work "typically" has one title at the top
(cf a novel) and one composer (cf author), whereas each movement
(particularly where they're often performed separately) will be
numbered (cf chapters) and sometimed titled (like children's
stories).
> The process you provide seems a little kludgy to get "opus" behave as it
> would on a normal score with multiple movements.
I think the example (which BTW I didn't write) was designed to give
you a lot of flexibility without using the \fromproperty method.
If your music is very conventional as just described, then the
default scheme may work for you, as attached (modified from that
example cited).
Cheers,
David.
\version "2.18.2"
\paper {
#(set-paper-size "a6")
bookTitleMarkup = \markup \with-color #red \bookTitleMarkup
scoreTitleMarkup = \markup \with-color #green \scoreTitleMarkup
}
\header {
title = "Morning Canticles"
composer = "Edward Elgar (1857–1934)"
}
\score {
\new ChoirStaff <<
\new Staff { s1 }
\new Staff { \clef "bass" s1 }
>>
\header {
opus = "Op.34 no.1 (1897)"
piece = "Te Deum laudamus"
}
}
\score {
\new ChoirStaff <<
\new Staff { s1 }
\new Staff { \clef "bass" s1 }
>>
\header {
opus = "Op.34 no.2 (1897)"
piece = "Benedictus"
}
}
titles.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: that migrating "opus"
David,
Thank you for your pointed reply.
Yes, I did take away something from your explanation.
I have used it on the previously referenced score.
My basic question, more operational than technical (I really don't get all of
the \scoreTitlemarkup stuff!).
Why is it that "piece" and "opus" are the only ones beatified to migrate?
The process you provide seems a little kludgy to get "opus" behave as it would
on a normal score with multiple movements.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2018 8:31 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com>
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 21:35:34 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> David,
>
> Very interesting, been there, done that!
Except that the example you just posted doesn't seem to indicate that you took
anything away from the one already posted in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2017-04/msg00784.html
which you could use as a pattern for your own scores.
> Now I am focusing on Haydn Sonatas - very inventive!
>
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 9:20 PM
> To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com>
> Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
>
> On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 16:17:16 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> > I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
> > \version "2.19.80"
> > \header {
> > title = "Sonata"
> > composer = "F. J. Haydn"
> > opus = "XVI:6"
> > }
> > \include "XVI-6-1.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> >
> > As expected the "opus" migrates to each and every score. The
> > documentation
> > states: "only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score
> > Titles."
> >
> > Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on
> > each movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose
> > for having the opus migrate.
>
> If I've got hold of the right end of the stick, imagine you're setting the
> Brahms opus 118 Klavierstüke, then you would label the six scores thus:
>
> 1: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 1
> 2: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 2
> 3: piece=Ballade,opus=opus 118 no 3
> 4: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 4
> 5: piece=Romanze,opus=opus 118 no 5
> 6: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 6
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Cheers,
David.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: that migrating "opus"
On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 21:35:34 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> David,
>
> Very interesting, been there, done that!
Except that the example you just posted doesn't seem to indicate
that you took anything away from the one already posted in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2017-04/msg00784.html
which you could use as a pattern for your own scores.
> Now I am focusing on Haydn Sonatas - very inventive!
>
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 9:20 PM
> To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com>
> Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
>
> On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 16:17:16 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> > I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
> > \version "2.19.80"
> > \header {
> > title = "Sonata"
> > composer = "F. J. Haydn"
> > opus = "XVI:6"
> > }
> > \include "XVI-6-1.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> >
> > As expected the "opus" migrates to each and every score. The
> > documentation
> > states: "only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score
> > Titles."
> >
> > Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on
> > each movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose
> > for having the opus migrate.
>
> If I've got hold of the right end of the stick, imagine you're setting the
> Brahms opus 118 Klavierstüke, then you would label the six scores thus:
>
> 1: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 1
> 2: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 2
> 3: piece=Ballade,opus=opus 118 no 3
> 4: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 4
> 5: piece=Romanze,opus=opus 118 no 5
> 6: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 6
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Cheers,
David.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: that migrating "opus"
David,
Very interesting, been there, done that!
Now I am focusing on Haydn Sonatas - very inventive!
Mark
-Original Message-
From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 9:20 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek <carsonm...@ca.rr.com>
Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 16:17:16 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
> \version "2.19.80"
> \header {
> title = "Sonata"
> composer = "F. J. Haydn"
> opus = "XVI:6"
> }
> \include "XVI-6-1.ly"
> \pageBreak
> \include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
> \pageBreak
> \include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
> \pageBreak
>
> As expected the "opus" migrates to each and every score. The
> documentation
> states: "only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score
> Titles."
>
> Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on
> each movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose
> for having the opus migrate.
If I've got hold of the right end of the stick, imagine you're setting the
Brahms opus 118 Klavierstüke, then you would label the six scores thus:
1: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 1
2: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 2
3: piece=Ballade,opus=opus 118 no 3
4: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 4
5: piece=Romanze,opus=opus 118 no 5
6: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 6
Cheers,
David.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: that migrating "opus"
On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 16:17:16 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
> \version "2.19.80"
> \header {
> title = "Sonata"
> composer = "F. J. Haydn"
> opus = "XVI:6"
> }
> \include "XVI-6-1.ly"
> \pageBreak
> \include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
> \pageBreak
> \include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
> \pageBreak
>
> As expected the "opus" migrates to each and every score. The documentation
> states: "only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score
> Titles."
>
> Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on each
> movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose for having
> the opus migrate.
If I've got hold of the right end of the stick, imagine
you're setting the Brahms opus 118 Klavierstüke, then
you would label the six scores thus:
1: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 1
2: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 2
3: piece=Ballade,opus=opus 118 no 3
4: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 4
5: piece=Romanze,opus=opus 118 no 5
6: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 6
Cheers,
David.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: that migrating "opus"
Ben,
Attached is a compliable snippet. Your comments/suggestions are greatly
appreciated.
Mark
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org]
On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 6:36 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
On 3/8/2018 7:17 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
Hello,
I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
\version "2.19.80"
\header {
title = "Sonata"
composer = "F. J. Haydn"
opus = "XVI:6"
}
\include "XVI-6-1.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
\pageBreak
As expected the “opus” migrates to each and every score. The documentation
states: “only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score Titles.”
Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on each
movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose for having the
opus migrate.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Mark
Hi Mark,
As you probably know, your code doesn't compile at all (due to the includes) so
I can't really see the opus situation as you describe it.
But the opus does appear under the composer as expected otherwise. Can you
share code that we can compile to see what you're talking about more regarding
the opus?
\version "2.19.80"
\header {
composer = "Me"
title = "Song"
opus = "Op. 1 No.1"
}
\score {
\relative c'' {
\time 4/4
\key c \major
c4 c c c |
}
}
\score {
\relative c'' {
\time 4/4
\key c \major
c4 c c c |
}
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: that migrating "opus"
Ben,
Thanks for the offer/suggestion.
Shall compose a sample tonight.
Mark
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org]
On Behalf Of Ben
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 6:36 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
On 3/8/2018 7:17 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
Hello,
I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
\version "2.19.80"
\header {
title = "Sonata"
composer = "F. J. Haydn"
opus = "XVI:6"
}
\include "XVI-6-1.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
\pageBreak
As expected the “opus” migrates to each and every score. The documentation
states: “only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score Titles.”
Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on each
movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose for having the
opus migrate.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Mark
Hi Mark,
As you probably know, your code doesn't compile at all (due to the includes) so
I can't really see the opus situation as you describe it.
But the opus does appear under the composer as expected otherwise. Can you
share code that we can compile to see what you're talking about more regarding
the opus?
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: that migrating "opus"
On 3/8/2018 7:17 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
Hello,
I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
\version "2.19.80"
\header {
title = "Sonata"
composer = "F. J. Haydn"
opus = "XVI:6"
}
\include "XVI-6-1.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
\pageBreak
\include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
\pageBreak
As expected the “opus” migrates to each and every score. The
documentation states: “only/piece/ and /opus /fields are printed by
default in Score Titles.”
Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on
each movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose
for having the opus migrate.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Mark
Hi Mark,
As you probably know, your code doesn't compile at all (due to the
includes) so I can't really see the opus situation as you describe it.
But the opus does appear under the composer as expected otherwise. Can
you share code that we can compile to see what you're talking about more
regarding the opus?
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
