Orm,
As I was reading more about concatenating various sections and/or combining
multiple movements into a larger Lilypond file, I came across your post that
included a link to your impressive orchestral score! I was able to download
and study the PDF you attached in your post. Would you be
Hi,
This is not hard to implement at all, you just have to set things up
appropriately.
You give a perfect example of why we need to improve Lilypond’s implementation.
The method
clarinetIPart = \relative c'' {
... % clarinet music here
}
clarinetIIPart
Hi,
this is the way how I finally had to do it in my piece, but
unfortunately this method doesn't work very well in orchestra parts
where instruments are changed (like Clarinets changing between Eb, Bb
and Bassclarinet, or French Horns changing from G-Clef to F-Clef) as
you either have to
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 09:18:39AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi,
This is not hard to implement at all, you just have to set things up
appropriately.
You give a perfect example of why we need to improve Lilypond’s
implementation. The method
clarinetIPart = \relative c'' {
Hi,
Rather, one should simply be able to say [something
like]
clarinets = {
\takeInstrument #”clar.Bf”
%% Bb clarinet music here
\takeInstrument #“clar.A”
%% A clarinet music here
}
and all scores (transposing and concert-pitch) should Do The Right
Thing™, with
Hi Kieren,
Am Samstag, den 18. April 2015 um 17:54:44 Uhr (-0400) schrieb Kieren
MacMillan:
Would love to see it, but the link didn’t work for me… =\
that's strange. I just tried again and it works for me. Could it be
that your browser complained because of a missing certificate as the
system
Hi.
[Sorry for the thread hijacking.]
[...]
Another thing: For me, also the implementation of transposing
instruments is less than ideal (I prefer to write the pitches in
concert pitch and have them transposed for the parts, rather than the
other way around, as it is implemented at the
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 03:12:20PM +0200, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
[...]
Another thing: For me, also the implementation of transposing
instruments is less than ideal (I prefer to write the pitches in
concert pitch and have them transposed for the parts, rather than the
other way around, as it is
Hi Gilles,
[...]
Another thing: For me, also the implementation of transposing
instruments is less than ideal (I prefer to write the pitches in
concert pitch and have them transposed for the parts, rather than the
other way around, as it is implemented at the moment).
[...]
Can you
Hi Orm,
the biggest score so far for me is a piece for big orchestra, 6
soloists, live-electronics and fixed media from last year.
This sounds great!
Would love to see it, but the link didn’t work for me… =\
considering the amount of source files
Curious! For my 57-part orchestra piece, I
On 4/16/15, Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net wrote:
That being said, orchestral music is not what's the most difficult to
engrave (even dual-voices staves remain somewhat simple overall, even
with unmetered contemporary notation, microtones, feathered beams
etc.). To me, complex
On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 05:54:44PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
[...]
The only really painful part was the partcombiner
This is a big one for me. I would love to see — and would be happy to
help fund — a GUPPY (Grand Unified Partcombiner Project, Yay!) to
tackle a rewrite from the ground
Am 18.04.2015 um 00:33 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 09:12:50PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 17.04.2015 um 20:44 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
[...]
More annoying is the fact that \partcombine often gets confused when
the two voices have very divergent rhythms -- crescendo hairpins
don't
I'd be down for helping out with commissioned engraving work, but I think
it raises some issues with which I have not yet made myself familiar within
Lily's workflow. Primarily, how is the work distributed? Does each
participant get individual parts, while a general editor makes sure things
line
Hi,
Am Donnerstag, den 16. April 2015 um 19:43:38 Uhr (+0200) schrieb Urs
Liska:
... I'd like to know what might be the biggest score anyone has
successfully created with LilyPond.
the biggest score so far for me is a piece for big orchestra, 6
soloists, live-electronics and fixed media from
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:51:41AM +0200, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
[...]
The only really painful part was the partcombiner which seems very
buggy, but was indispensable as I needed to save as much vertical
space as possible.
Yeah, I've run into quite a number of \partcombine myself. Most of it
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 11:44:57AM -0700, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:51:41AM +0200, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
[...]
The only really painful part was the partcombiner which seems very
buggy, but was indispensable as I needed to save as much vertical
space as possible.
Yeah,
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote:
I'd like to know what might be the biggest score anyone has successfully
created with LilyPond.
Not exactly a single score, but I've been working on a
transcription/transposition of the Bartok violin duets for my personal
Am 17.04.2015 um 20:44 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 10:51:41AM +0200, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
[...]
The only really painful part was the partcombiner which seems very
buggy, but was indispensable as I needed to save as much vertical
space as possible.
Yeah, I've run into quite a
On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 09:12:50PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 17.04.2015 um 20:44 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
[...]
More annoying is the fact that \partcombine often gets confused when
the two voices have very divergent rhythms -- crescendo hairpins
don't merge, dynamics get printed twice,
I have
Hey all,
this is not related to the discussion about the recently improved
processing speed, although it may sound related:
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are regularly
dealing with big scores, and maybe I'd like to know what might be the
biggest score anyone has
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:43:38PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Hey all,
this is not related to the discussion about the recently improved
processing speed, although it may sound related:
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are regularly
dealing with big scores, and maybe
Am 16.04.2015 um 19:42 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:43:38PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Hey all,
this is not related to the discussion about the recently improved
processing speed, although it may sound related:
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are
Hi Urs (et al.),
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are regularly
dealing with big” scores
I am regularly dealing with what I would consider “big” scores: for example,
the Piano/Conductor scores of my musicals usually run over 100 pages.
maybe I'd like to know what
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote:
Am 16.04.2015 um 19:42 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:43:38PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Hey all,
this is not related to the discussion about the recently improved
processing speed, although it may
Dear Urs,
The largest score I have worked on is a full edition of Schubert's
German Stabat Mater D. 383:
https://gitlab.com/edition-kainhofer/0002_schubert_stabatmater_d383/
(PDF output files are at:
https://gitlab.com/edition-kainhofer/0002_schubert_stabatmater_d383/tree/master/out
)
The
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 7:55 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote:
Basically I'd be interested in an estimate if there are practical
limitations where one would be better off skipping a commission because
LilyPond would be at its limit.
I don’t think it’s likely to happen anytime soon.
Il 16/04/2015 19:43, Urs Liska ha scritto:
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are regularly
dealing with big scores, and maybe I'd like to know what might be
the biggest score anyone has successfully created with LilyPond.
Dear Urs and all,
my 'score monstre' is
Urs Liska wrote Thursday, April 16, 2015 6:43 PM
I'd like to have an idea how many people have already or are regularly
dealing with big scores, and maybe I'd like to know what might be the
biggest score anyone has successfully created with LilyPond.
Most of my work with LilyPond is
Not one big score, but lots of smaller ones bundled:
http://horndude77.github.io/horn-solos/. About 700 total pages
(10x13in horn part, 9x12in piano).
2.19.17 - 9m39s
2.19.18 - 7m00s (a nice speed bump here.)
Both max out around 6.5gb. I recall past versions required more memory.
-Jay
On
Hi Urs,
Basically I'd be interested in an estimate if there are practical limitations
where one would be better off skipping a commission because LilyPond would be
at its limit.
I have yet to reach that point, and I’ve Lily-pound four stage musicals, a
chamber opera, 9-minute works for
Am 16.04.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi Urs,
Basically I'd be interested in an estimate if there are practical limitations
where one would be better off skipping a commission because LilyPond would be
at its limit.
I have yet to reach that point, and I’ve Lily-pound four stage
Hi Urs and all,
I recently created a full score (and parts for instruments, solists and
choir) for a new reconstruction of J.S.Bachs Passionsmusik nach Marco,
BWV 247. That was a bit more than 200 pages on B4 paper size. The
setting is flute I+II, oboe I+II (with parts da caccia, d'amore),
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 07:55:48PM +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
[...]
What's your definition of a big score?
Well, actually that depends on the results of the survey, I guess ...
Basically I'd be interested in an estimate if there are practical
limitations where one would be better off skipping
34 matches
Mail list logo
