Re: midi2ly

On 17 Aug 2014, at 01:40, Davide Liessi davide.lie...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-08-09 10:27 GMT+02:00 ole m...@oleschmidt.info: Am 09.08.2014 um 07:35 schrieb James pkx1...@gmail.com: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2208 There is a workaround in there I think. Thank

Re: arabic tabs?

On 13 Aug 2015, at 17:51, BB bb-543...@telecolumbus.net wrote: Thanks for the interesting links! There are other differences: Turkish music is typically notated a 4th above sounding. In AEU notation, the sharp is erroneously given 4 commas—the E53 sharp has value 5 commas. In Arab music,

Re: arabic tabs?

On 14 Aug 2015, at 15:18, BB bb-543...@telecolumbus.net wrote: Persian qauartertones are generally played flatter, Turkish quartertones generally are played sharper, arabic ones are in the middle. But that is not a question of the notation. That is a regional difference in taste. Even in

Re: arabic tabs?

On 12 Aug 2015, at 15:54, BB bb-543...@telecolumbus.net wrote: I tried to to rivet on differences in turkish/arab way of noatation, but I am sure I missed the point. For someone interested, here is a much better (short) description: http://www.oud.eclipse.co.uk/notation.html For Arab

Re: sharping naturals

On 10 Aug 2015, at 13:05, Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote: I hesitated to post in this thread for some reasons. One reason was, I had no clue what it was about. I simply did not understand the question. I think OP might have been about being used to ABC style syntax, where

Re: makam.ly

On 10 Aug 2015, at 12:49, BB bb-543...@telecolumbus.net wrote: When using makam.ly the normal lilypond notation for accidentials i. e. cis gives an error. One has to use cbm for a full sharp with makam.ly. It is easy to edit - just give it a name not in the LilyPod library, and keep it in

Re: makam.ly

On 10 Aug 2015, at 15:32, BB bb-543...@telecolumbus.net wrote: On 10.08.2015 15:04, Hans Åberg wrote: The most advanced solution so far is to use SMuFL http://www.smufl.org together with OpenLilyLib and Graham Breed’s regular.ly, which gives any ET. Tanks for this suggestion as well

Re: JI notation (was: converting svg glyph to path data for use in scheme)

> On 14 Dec 2015, at 20:28, Graham Breed wrote: > >> From: "N. Andrew Walsh" > >> Converting cents to ratios only makes even a bit of sense if you have some >> preexisting music in some temperament, which you then want to approximate >> in just

Re: A twelve tone matrix engraver

> On 3 Jan 2016, at 13:21, Caio Giovaneti de Barros > wrote: > > One thing that I really wanted is an automatic way for the software to decide > what notes should be flat and what should be sharp, even if it's not perfect. > Currently my code only outputs sharps and to

Re: Microtonal notation - arrows up and down

> On 8 Jan 2016, at 18:35, Luca Danieli wrote: > It works. Unfortunately I can only re-name the existing standard notation. > What about adding arrow-"ed" accidentals to the already existing ones? SMuFl works together with OpenLilyLib. This way

Re: Microtonal notation - arrows up and down

> On 8 Jan 2016, at 18:35, Luca Danieli wrote: > It works. Unfortunately I can only re-name the existing standard notation. > What about adding arrow-"ed" accidentals to the already existing ones? SMuFl works together with OpenLilyLib. This way

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 26 May 2016, at 17:40, Jacques Menu Muzhic wrote: > My bassoon teacher told me the same, and in particular that D major is the > brightest key on our instrument (440). So I asked whether it’s E flat major > on the baroque instrument (415). > > And the answer is

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 27 May 2016, at 08:16, Michael Hendry wrote: >> Don't forget, G# and Fb are NOT the same note. > > This is where my lack of formal musical education shows me up - I’m a > self-taught amateur guitarist. F# and Gb look and sound the same on the > guitar (and on

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 26 May 2016, at 20:17, Johan Vromans wrote: > > On Thu, 26 May 2016 10:48:44 -0400 > Kieren MacMillan wrote: > >> For discussion: >> > > Provided the video is bona fide, this is merely a

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 26 May 2016, at 16:48, Kieren MacMillan > wrote: > >> "Perfect pitch" is a sham. > > For discussion: > > (and several related videos of the same young boy) A video for those without absolute pitch: trying to

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 26 May 2016, at 09:57, Michael Hendry wrote: > Another phenomenon about which I have doubts involves people who claim that > when they hear music in “sharp” keys (e.g. G, D, A, E) their experience is of > brightness, while the flat keys make for a more sombre

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

> On 26 May 2016, at 08:49, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > >>> Absolutely fascinating stuff but bizarre all the considerations >>> that affect pitch over time. >> >> Off topic, I know, but how do those gifted with perfect pitch cope >> with all this? > > They simply dispair. I speak

Re: makam.ly

> On 23 Feb 2016, at 09:27, Blöchl Bernhard wrote: > > Thank you for your detailed information. There is something to think about > for me. And I will investigate regular.ly. I’ll send you some files in private mail.

Re: makam.ly

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 13:23, BB wrote: > one full tonal step divided into 9 comma, in my opinion this is only of > interest for classical/historical Turkish music, or for geographic intonation > differences of folk music for field studies. > In the today music

Re: makam.ly

> On 22 Feb 2016, at 13:23, BB wrote: > one full tonal step divided into 9 comma, in my opinion this is only of > interest for classical/historical Turkish music, or for geographic intonation > differences of folk music for field studies. > In the today music

Re: simplifying chromatic scale notation

> On 26 Jan 2016, at 18:01, Sharon Rosner wrote: > So you see, it's quite a straight-forward a technique. Yes, accidental > translation can be tricky, but with practice it becomes second nature. And > again, 300 years ago it was considered a basic skill for any musician worth

Re: simplifying chromatic scale notation

> On 26 Jan 2016, at 18:01, Sharon Rosner wrote: > So you see, it's quite a straight-forward a technique. Yes, accidental > translation can be tricky, but with practice it becomes second nature. And > again, 300 years ago it was considered a basic skill for any musician worth

Re: Swedish letters in Lilypond lyrics?

> On 19 Jan 2016, at 13:11, Karin wrote: > I would like the Lillypad to support UTF-8. Would be a good Christmas gift > next year :-) On OS X, the editor in the LilyPond application works fine with UTF-8. ___

Re: Swedish letters in Lilypond lyrics?

> On 19 Jan 2016, at 13:11, Karin wrote: > I would like the Lillypad to support UTF-8. Would be a good Christmas gift > next year :-) On OS X, the editor in the LilyPond application works fine with UTF-8. ___

Re: Technical question

> On 8 Apr 2016, at 00:15, Simon Albrecht wrote: > >> So i was wondering if lilypond could work faster if the calculations are >> calculated by the gpu in stead if the cpu? Because that is another sort of >> processor? > > My understanding is quite limited, but I

Re: Typesetting a Bach Ornament; Sarabande, French Suite 5

> On 22 May 2016, at 21:43, Sam Bivens wrote: > > I'm having trouble typesetting an ornament in the fifth measure of the > Sarabande from the E-flat French Suite. An image can be found at > https://www.dropbox.com/s/hhgmne640fs1twb/ornament.jpg?dl=0 The ornament in >

Re: Typesetting a Bach Ornament; Sarabande, French Suite 5

> On 23 May 2016, at 02:48, Andrew Bernard wrote: > Do you want to do that or do you want to get close to what Bach wrote? If you > look at the Bach autograph of this piece, available in the Digital Bach > Archive, you will see not only no nachschlag there but hardly

Re: high-precision tuner app

> On 23 May 2016, at 21:09, N. Andrew Walsh wrote: > I'm using a system of scales with over 180 distinct pitches (and which is > theoretically unlimited; I just chose to stop there). If it is enough to play the pitches and tune by ear, I have written two programs

Re: Replacement for "parser"

> On 30 Jul 2016, at 18:21, Malte Meyn wrote: >> That one, I discovered, but “parser” must be there in another location. > Are you sure? input/regression/note-names.ly doesn’t have parser or > (*parser*) anywhere. Looking at the file I am actually using (with SMuFL

Re: Replacement for "parser"

> On 30 Jul 2016, at 19:09, Urs Liska wrote: >> Looking at the file I am actually using (with SMuFL glyphs), (*parser*) >> is not needed, but Graham’s file regular.ly has a line >> retune = #(define-music-function (parser location ET midc m) >> (rational? integer?

Re: Replacement for "parser"

> On 30 Jul 2016, at 15:47, Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de> wrote: > Am 30.07.2016 um 14:53 schrieb Hans Åberg: >> When using Graham Breed’s regular.ly, one writes a line like >> #(ly:parser-set-note-names parser SomePitchNames) >> which worked in Li

Replacement for "parser"

When using Graham Breed’s regular.ly, one writes a line like #(ly:parser-set-note-names parser SomePitchNames) which worked in LilyPond 2.19.10. But in 2.19.45, there is an error: error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression beginning here newglyphs = #… Unbound variable: parser So the

Re: Replacement for "parser"

> On 30 Jul 2016, at 19:09, Urs Liska wrote: >> Looking at the file I am actually using (with SMuFL glyphs), (*parser*) >> is not needed, but Graham’s file regular.ly has a line >> retune = #(define-music-function (parser location ET midc m) >> (rational? integer?

Re: Slur over single note?

> On 19 Jul 2016, at 22:10, Joel C. Salomon wrote: > > On 2016-07-19 2:37 PM, Urs Liska wrote: >> Mind sending that (privately if you want) or a download link? > > The file is “39087011212125score.pdf” from > , the piece “The Flying

Re: Beam slashed on the right

> On 4 Jul 2016, at 18:50, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> wrote: > > On 04.07.2016 09:48, Hans Åberg wrote: >> >>> On 4 Jul 2016, at 03:03, Andrew Bernard <andrew.bern...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> No, it’s a slash to indicate the group o

Re: Beam slashed on the right

> On 3 Jul 2016, at 14:56, Andrew Bernard wrote: > > Recently I posted a query about putting a slash (as per grace notes) on the > right hand side of a beamed group, posting the code I have which does a very > fine job of this for the left hand side. > > Having

Re: Beam slashed on the right

> On 4 Jul 2016, at 03:03, Andrew Bernard wrote: > No, it’s a slash to indicate the group of notes are grace notes. Feathered > beams indicate tempo chnage. Couldn’t you notate them as such, using \afterGrace and a slur?

Re: Section repeat

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 19:35, Chris Yate wrote: >> > I'd write and expect to read numbered horizontal brackets for each >> > alternative, and expect a repeat symbol at the end of any section that >> > needed it. >> > >> > Of course you might put labelling like "1, 3", "2",

Re: Section repeat

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 20:56, David Wright wrote: >> Yes, the idea was to just add "2x" to a repeat with two alternatives. How >> would that look, in your view? > > Isn't there a danger that the "2x" will be seem as merely a redundant > reinforcement of an ordinary

Re: Section repeat

> On 3 Feb 2017, at 21:51, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Fri 03 Feb 2017 at 20:23:07 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >> >> FYI, here are two versions with the repeat combined fro visual comarison. In >> the first, there is a terminatin

Re: Section repeat

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 22:41, Flaming Hakama by Elaine > wrote: > > I'd say, in general, you need as many alternatives as there is unique > material. > > Only 1 & 3 are the same, so you can combine those. > 2 and 4 differ in that 2 needs a repeat barline at the end

Section repeat

When the whole section is repeated when it has alternatives, how is that normally engraved? Specifically, the section has two alternatives, but is repeated in full. One way is to use Score.repeatCommands for alternatives markup "1. 3" resp "2. 4", but then the "2." does not have a repeat. One

Re: Section repeat

> On 4 Feb 2017, at 01:58, Flaming Hakama by Elaine > wrote: > > Comparing yesterday's version (2 and 4 separate) and A (2&4 together), > > I'd maintain that A describes the music more faithfully, and is > > actually easier to read: when you reach 15 on the 4th-time

Re: Section repeat

Yt was David Wright who wrote what you quote, not me. > On 4 Feb 2017, at 01:58, Flaming Hakama by Elaine > wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 1:12 PM, [David Wright ] > wrote: > > > Comparing yesterday's version (2 and 4 separate) and A

Re: Section repeat

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 17:09, Chris Yate wrote: > > Did you mean, how to achieve it in Lilypond, or what is the best engraving > practice? The latter. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: Section repeat

> On 2 Feb 2017, at 17:52, Chris Yate wrote: > > Did you mean, how to achieve it in Lilypond, or what is the best engraving > > practice? > > The latter. > > I'd write and expect to read numbered horizontal brackets for each > alternative, and expect a repeat symbol at

Re: A staff change and phrasing slur problem

> On 14 Feb 2017, at 15:34, Urs Liska wrote: >> I have similar problem in the code below, wanting the last note ef4 of the >> first measure to be tied to the one in the following measure. I could not >> make your suggestion work. > > Well, the ef4 in the first bar is in

Re: A staff change and phrasing slur problem

> On 14 Feb 2017, at 15:34, Urs Liska wrote: > Well, the ef4 in the first bar is in the *lower* voice while the ones in the > second bar are in the *upper* voice. In order to tie these notes both have to > be in the upper voice. I was able to fix it using this

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:18, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> wrote: > > On 09.02.2017 20:59, Hans Åberg wrote: >> Multiples of 12 are straightforward, though LilyPond glyphs are limited. For >> other ETs, use Graham Breed's regular.ly. More glyphs can be

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 20:18, Bernardo Barros wrote: > Quarter-tones (24ET) work very well and use the most used symbols. > > Is there any implementation of eighth-tone (48ET) with arrows for the > 8th-tone alterations, or even better, 72ET? Multiples of 12 are

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Cole Ingraham wrote: > > I've used Sagittal notation based on http://x31eq.com/lilypond/ before. I > don't know if that still works with more recent versions though. Haven't > touched it in a while. I was able to tweak regular.ly so it

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Bernardo Barros wrote: > > On 09/02/2017 16:29, Bernardo Barros wrote: >> It indeed looks like LilyPond default font doesn't have all the >> necessary glyphs. > > You're right, SMuFL implements Sims’s accidental system for 72-ET, and >

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:29, Bernardo Barros <bernardo.bar...@nyu.edu> wrote: > > On 09/02/2017 14:59, Hans Åberg wrote: >> Multiples of 12 are straightforward, though LilyPond glyphs are >> limited. For other ETs, use Graham Breed's regular.ly. More glyphs >&

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:53, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:44, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >>

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:05, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > > On Thu, 9 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: >> I'll stick with my "that doesn't even make sense" verdict, thank you >> very much. > > Don't ask the question if you're going to attack the answer. Your > contributions to LilyPond

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Cole Ingraham wrote: > > I've used Sagittal notation based on http://x31eq.com/lilypond/ before. I > don't know if that still works with more recent versions though. Haven't > touched it in a while. I get an error in LilyPond 2.19.45, with

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:10, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Cole Ingraham <coledingra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I've used Sagittal notation bas

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:13, Bernardo Barros <bernardo.bar...@nyu.edu> wrote: > > On 09/02/2017 16:46, Hans Åberg wrote: >> Yes, I have. I use it for E53 Helmholtz-Ellis notation, which >> requires the Bravura font... > > Have you publish this code somewhere?

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:24, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:10, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:44, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:24, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >>

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:00, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: > > >> On 9 Feb 2017, at 22:47, Cole Ingraham <coledingra...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I've used Sagittal notation based on http://x31eq.com/lilypond/ before. I >> don't know if that

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:16, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Feb 2017, at 23:53, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >>

Re: A staff change and phrasing slur problem

> On 14 Feb 2017, at 14:37, Urs Liska wrote: > The actual problem is that the notes are encapsulated in different Voice > expressions and therefore can't be connected by spanners such as slurs > or \< \! etc. > > When you write > c' << { d'' } // { d' } >> c' > LilyPond

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:35, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:16, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> So is there any reason people don't use convert-ly wh

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:39, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: >> enthused. Why wouldn't we want to have best practices pointed out and >> promoted on the user list? > > Best practices do not include attacking other list users. It is the human

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:55, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> wrote: > > On 10.02.2017 00:19, Hans Åberg wrote: >> If LilyPond knows how to run the code via convert-ly, why does it not do it? > > LilyPond itself doesn’t change the code it is reading. convert

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 10:24, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:39, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: >>> >>> On Fri, 10 Feb 2017, David Kastrup wrote: >>>> ent

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 10:22, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:35, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: &

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 00:34, Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> wrote: > > Am 10.02.2017 um 00:22 schrieb Hans Åberg: >>> So is there any reason people don't use convert-ly when upgrading to a >>> newer version? >>> >> For libraries, you woul

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 04:20, Bernardo Barros <bernardo.bar...@nyu.edu> wrote: > > On 09/02/2017 17:22, Hans Åberg wrote: > >> 1. >> https://secure2.storegate.com/Shares/Home.aspx?ShareID=35e0b920-6910-4e4f-8340-7d8290115dda > th

Re: 48 and 72 ET

> On 10 Feb 2017, at 10:58, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 10 Feb 2017, at 10:24, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >

Re: brittenPhrygolydian

> On 17 Jan 2017, at 22:42, Simon Albrecht wrote: > The question came up about a curious key signature used by Britten, which > indicates only Ab and C#, ... Mode names are listed at [1]. Compute the differences in E12: G Ab B C# D E F G 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 and make

Re: Choosing glyph variants

> On 29 Aug 2016, at 23:26, Erik Ronström wrote: > > I found another workaround: even though the glyph variants share the same > codepoint in the font, the alternative glyphs are actually defined in the > unicode ”Private Use Area”, so they also have codepoints of their own. So

Re: Choosing glyph variants

> On 29 Aug 2016, at 22:02, Erik Ronström wrote: > I’m using Computer Modern in my score to match the surrounding text (set in > LaTeX). However, I discovered that the french quotes (guillemet) display > differently in the lyrics, compared to the TeX text (see attached image).

Re: use of set Timing.measurePosition is disrupting automatic beaming

> On 13 Sep 2016, at 10:17, Roderick Mackenzie > wrote: > I use repeat barlines at the start of each part because > bagpipe tunes always have them at the start and end of each part, and > repeat volta only places them at the end. You can override that with \bar,

Re: What to do wanting a 4th order Bézier?

> On 19 Sep 2016, at 10:41, David Kastrup wrote: > It would be my guess that the hands-on manipulative features of control > points have made cubic Beziers the go-to curve approximation and design > tool. Perhaps it looks better with the second derivatives lined up as well.

Re: What to do wanting a 4th order Bézier?

> On 19 Sep 2016, at 20:25, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >> Perhaps it looks better with the second derivatives lined up as well. > > That precludes a straight line (second derivative 0) running into a > ci

Re: What to do wanting a 4th order Bézier?

> On 18 Sep 2016, at 14:41, Simon Albrecht wrote: > > On 18.09.2016 13:54, Andrew Bernard wrote: >> What is it exactly that you are expecting a quartic to give you? > > Oh, I think you’re quite overestimating the amount of in-depth mathematical > background I had – I

Re: makam.ly and Staff.keySignature

> On 28 Aug 2016, at 13:11, bb wrote: > > Thank you for your help and example some days ago! Sorry, I was busy and > therefore my delayed thanks. You are welcome. If you want some source code, drop me a note-I updated Graham’s regular.ly to LilyPond 2.19.45.

Re: makam.ly and Staff.keySignature

> On 23 Aug 2016, at 21:45, Blöchl Bernhard > wrote: > How can I get a key signature with makam.ly? The implementation is not correct, so it might be tricky. I use Graham Breed’s regular.ly together with the SMuFL fonts to get Helmholtz-Ellis notation,

Re: makam.ly and Staff.keySignature

> On 23 Aug 2016, at 21:45, Blöchl Bernhard > wrote: > I use Farahfaza ( http://www.maqamworld.com/maqamat/nahawand.html#farahfaza > ), that is a Nahawand transposed to g and compares to our g minor. I posted all the Arabic maqam on this site in

Re: e in the time of phi and square root of pi tuplet hijinks

> On 8 Nov 2016, at 08:45, mclaren wrote: > > This example eschews numbers for the irrational tuplets in favor of Greek > letters, or at least the Greek names for the symbols. I'm not sure how to > get a Greek font in Lilypond. There are the STIX fonts

Re: How to get irrational tuplets inside a regular meter like 9/8

> On 8 Nov 2016, at 08:28, mclaren wrote: > > An alternative method involves simply adding in the required rests, rather > than squishing or stretching the entire measure with a large tuplet. Since > this method is easy to calculate exactly because you're just adding

Re: [Why you don't really want] irrational tuplets [nor CF approximations]

> On 8 Nov 2016, at 21:00, Alexander Kobel <a-ko...@a-kobel.de> wrote: > > On 2016-11-08 18:15, Hans Åberg wrote: >> I gave an example of a true irrational time signature [1]. The code >> is actually written in 12/8, with a MIDI approximation in 19/8. Such >> met

Notational conventions

> On 8 Nov 2016, at 23:41, Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 2016-11-08 22:20 GMT+01:00 Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com>: > >> And a reason of writing a complex time signature might be to make it >> impossible for the performer to f

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 00:35, Thomas Morley wrote: >>> Isn't it a good idea to do _always_ such studies? >>> You can't even perform baroque-music adequat without them. >>> Another example, I recall several printed editions of >>> Flamenco-Alegrias in 3/4, but following

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 4 Nov 2016, at 20:31, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Fri 04 Nov 2016 at 10:55:45 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >> On 4 Nov 2016, at 03:21, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > (in a different timezone) > >&g

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 10:45, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >> Indeed, mostly one only writes what is needed for a performance, >> subject to musical interpretation. J.S. Bach was criticised in his >> times

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 13:37, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >>> On 9 Nov 2016, at 10:45, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> >>> The problem with appoggiature is that the

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 14:47, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: >> I prefer no overlap in the ornaments, that is, legato style. > > Hm? I was not talking about overlap (and when referring to a singing > manu

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 15:39, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >> In your video, I got the impression you had chosen a style with heavy >> overlap on a trill there. > > Uh, the topic I talked about were ap

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 16:22, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >> I couldn't tell for buttons, but with full scale keyboard, is normally >> an advantage with adjacent, or close together, keys. > >

Re: Notational conventions

> On 9 Nov 2016, at 18:16, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> writes: > >> An accordion instruction book shows one should play buttons from >> above. Check what pros do. Fingering is individual, so if your fingers

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 5 Nov 2016, at 00:03, David Wright wrote: >>> Mairi's Wedding is completely regular; it has five 8-bar >>> sections, which happens to sum to 40: >> >> But they have to play it A B A B B, where each letter is a 8-bar section. > > For that original tune, that's

Re: Curious thing about ties

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 22:34, Robert Schmaus <robert.schm...@web.de> wrote: > >> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:22, Hans Åberg <haber...@telia.com> wrote: >> >>> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:09, Robert Schmaus <robert.schm...@web.de> wrote: >>> >>>

Re: Curious thing about ties

> On 14 Nov 2016, at 21:09, Robert Schmaus wrote: > > I've wondered why in the first instance, the tie is a down-tie, while in the > second it's an up-tie (see attached screenshot). Is there a reason for this? > Something like visual balance? It is different in the

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 28 Oct 2016, at 21:48, David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 28 Oct 2016 at 11:22:00 (-0700), Tobin Chodos wrote: >> Forgive me if this is a too-easy issue for the list, but: is there a way to >> define a time compound time signature such as 4/4 + 1/3? That is, the >>

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 2 Nov 2016, at 19:02, tisimst wrote: > > ... as Kieren and I saw on a facebook group the other day when a composer > started a discussion about having a bar with an "irrational" 2/6 time > signature. Wow, the flames that ensued! It's quite simple: > > { \time

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 3 Nov 2016, at 03:04, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Wed 02 Nov 2016 at 22:13:54 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >> >>> On 2 Nov 2016, at 21:08, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>> On

Re: compound time signature with non duple denominator

> On 3 Nov 2016, at 21:28, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > > On Thu 03 Nov 2016 at 10:37:36 (+0100), Hans Åberg wrote: >> >>> On 3 Nov 2016, at 03:04, David Wright <lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>>> The

  1   2   3   4   5   >