RE: font use
Hello,
From: lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
[lilypond-user-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] on behalf of Fr.
Michael Gilmary, mma [frmichaelgilm...@maronitemonks.org]
Sent: 25 April 2011 19:29
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: font use
Hi everyone:
I'm using Lilypond v. 2.13.37-1 and the question is:
what has changed in the use of fonts --- for lyrics especially? I mean in terms
of the common ligatures: ff, fi, fl, etc. When I used v. 2.12 (I think, or
2.11) they were generated without any problem. But now, they aren't rendered
anymore. Is it now required to call them explicitly? This is probably related
to the fact that the font also used to render using a different optical weight
than it does now (I'm using Garamond PP with optical sizes).
Below is a sample snip of code that used to generate the fi ligature and a
lighter weight. Any help is appreciated.
\score {
\relative {
\set autoBeaming = ##f
c8 d e4 f8 e4 d8 f e4 \bar |
}
\addlyrics{
\override LyricText #'font-name = #Garamond Premier Pro
\set fontSize = #1.2
A -- round me the fire will be quenched
}
}
\version 2.13.37
-
I'm sure that those who know better will give you more detail but over the last
6 months there have been similar type questions about ligatures, looking back
over these threads they are always led back to this thread
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-11/msg00128.html
Ligatures it seems are not just joining an 'f' to an 'i' for example, but
require that an actual glyph be available in that font for it to work. The
'engine' that Lilypond uses (Pango) to lay out fonts has changed so this might
be a cause, but the thread above explains other issues with the 'font spec' and
how Lilypond uses it as well.
You can probably tell I don't really know the specifics that well :)
but I wonder if you are seeing a difference in Lilypond than a difference in
the font you are using (i.e. the font you are using doesn't have a Ligature
character).
I don't know if it would be useful to get a before (2.12) and after (2.13) of
the ligature you say used to be shown.
James
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Again vertical spacing FiguredBass / Staff / Lyrics
Hi Carl, thanks, but increasing system-system-spacing will increase distance between all system groups. What I want is increasing just the distance between the lowest staff line (resp. the Figured Bass line) and the staff above. It works, but only if there is no Lyrics line between the two staffs. I'd like to understand, why... Another question in general: Am I right that padding and minimum-distance adjust the same minimal distance between the object and the next object, only with different reference points? (padding: bounding box, minimum-distance: refpoints of the objects) Regards, Michael You most likely need to increase the system-system-spacing. Most likely the systems are spaced too close together, so the Lyrics and FiguredBass are squeezed in. You also need to make sure that you set the Lyrics staff-affinity to #CENTER HTH, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: ghostscript-8.70-6 broke my lilypond, no more PDF
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 05:54:24PM -0500, Ivan Kuznetsov wrote: Could you try to run ghostscript manually to convert it to pdf (but omit the `-q' flag)? Like, just run gs -dSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=612.00 -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=792.00 \ -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -r1200 \ -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -sOutputFile=./song02.pdf -c .setpdfwrite \ -f song02.ps from your shell. I just ran the above and song02.pdf was created with no errors. So only difference between the above command and what lilypond executes is the -q flag I see. Why does the -q flag now fail? I don't think it's the `-q' that causes the failure, because this flag only makes ghostscript quiet (no startup message, no progress information written to stdout). My best guess is that the newer ghostscript (when run from within lilypond) hits some resource limit like open file descriptors or memory. But in this case it *should* have printed *some* error message to stderr, and I've no idea why it didn't in the output you pastet in your original mail. Assuming that you're running a shell like ksh or bash, you can display the current limits for file descriptors with ulimit -n and the data size limit with ulimit -d If those are rather small, try to increase them. For example 512 file descriptors and 1GB data size: ulimit -Sn 512 ulimit -Sd 1048576 But please note that this is just a wild guess. It may help or not. Ciao, Kili ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Is a cross-staff chord with ties possible in lilypond?
On 21. april 2011 06:47, Jay Anderson wrote: On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Helge Haftinghelge.haft...@hist.no wrote: I am trying to enter a piece by Grieg, which contains the attached interesting construct. The manual shows how to write out an arpeggio like this, using a set of consecutive notes all tied to a chord. Unfortunately, these consecutive notes also cross from the lower to the upper staff. They have a common beam, so one voice jumps from one staff to another. So far, so good. But tieing to the cross-staff chord that follows doesn't work. A cross-staff chord must be entered in two voices, because you can't switch staff _inside_ a chord. (I tried, it was a syntax error.) But ties seems to work in the same voice only. So I can make the lower ties work, but not also the upper ones. Is this possible, or is there currently a limitation of lilypond? If there is a solution, I hope it also works for the midi output. So simply forcing some curved lines is not a good or complete solution. Yes, it's possible (and to work with midi too), but it can get complicated. Below is pretty close (without dynamics, articulations, arpeggios, etc.). Thanks. I see it is possible to print what I want - using a lot of 'fakery' with hidden notes. MIDI plays the hidden notes also, so I'll need to write the same music twice. Once for MIDI, and once for PDF. - Cross staff chords aren't really a limitation of lilypond. They're mostly just awkward to work with because, as you said, you must enter them in separate voices and manually lengthen the stem (and remove flags for shorter durations). - Ties across voices aren't possible. You can fake them by hiding identical tied notes in the other voice. I see. Ties must be in a single voice. A cross-staff beam also have all notes in a single voice. But a cross-staff chord must be in two voices, because you can't switch staff without moving forward in time. So I wish I could switch staff within a chord construct. That would help in several ways: 1. My example would be trivial to produce: a cross-staff beam with ties to a cross-staff chord. Classical composers do that now and then. A staff switch within a chord would allow this construct to exist in a single voice, with no hidden notes and MIDI+PDF from the same source. 2. Cross-staff chords could get simpler too. Switch staff inside a chord, and lilypond would know to connect the stems. Helge Hafting ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Is a cross-staff chord with ties possible in lilypond?
2011/4/26 Helge Hafting helge.haft...@hist.no: 2. Cross-staff chords could get simpler too. Switch staff inside a chord, and lilypond would know to connect the stems. Cross-staff chords is one of the very first features I tried in lilypond and could not achieve. I used to teach Finale and gave a Satie example as an exercise to my students; when I switched to lilypond I could not use the piece (first Gnossienne) any more, you can not ask for such a complicated exercise at the initial stages of learning, but it was fairly easy with the afore mentioned visual package. The idea was: you select a special tool, choose a measure and a number of handles appear on noteheads. Then just drag and drop notes onto the desired staff. In lilypond we have not a syntax for this but we do have one for simple cross staff voices, so I guess we have a small step done towards this. Remember, however, that a syntax is not by far all you need to have for a feature to work. I'd be delighted to sponsor the feature. ¿A price? -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Is a cross-staff chord with ties possible in lilypond?
Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com writes: 2011/4/26 Helge Hafting helge.haft...@hist.no: 2. Cross-staff chords could get simpler too. Switch staff inside a chord, and lilypond would know to connect the stems. Cross-staff chords is one of the very first features I tried in lilypond and could not achieve. I used to teach Finale and gave a Satie example as an exercise to my students; when I switched to lilypond I could not use the piece (first Gnossienne) any more, you can not ask for such a complicated exercise at the initial stages of learning, but it was fairly easy with the afore mentioned visual package. The idea was: you select a special tool, choose a measure and a number of handles appear on noteheads. Then just drag and drop notes onto the desired staff. In lilypond we have not a syntax for this but we do have one for simple cross staff voices, so I guess we have a small step done towards this. Remember, however, that a syntax is not by far all you need to have for a feature to work. I'd be delighted to sponsor the feature. ¿A price? Staff changes are currently done by music events IIRC, meaning that they occur at a certain point of time. With the current architecture of Lilypond, the most straightforward approach at the moment would appear to specify cross-staff notes via tweaks instead. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Change print-appearance of chord members to different duration, but not the logic behind.
Thank you for your answer. This is what I'm looking for.
{ c' e' \tweak #'duration-log #1 g' }
because it respects notehead-styles.
The other method mentioned is limited to one style.
Do you know how breve and longa can be produced with that? #breve or #0.5 does
not give an error, but it also does not work.
Greetings,
Nils
On Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:56:44 -0400
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
On Apr 25, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Nils wrote:
Hello,
The goal is to have a very simple way of creating mixed-duration chords.I
do not know of any way to do this in lilypond which does not involve
different voices.
So I want to change single notes in a chord so that they appear as
different duration, but only as printed item. The duration of the whole
chord, Measure-calculation etc. should not be affected by this.
Is there some override to achieve this?
Nils
{ c' e' \tweak #'duration-log #1 g' }
{ c' e' \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph noteheads.s1))) g' }
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Change print-appearance of chord members to different duration, but not the logic behind.
On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:04 AM, Nils wrote:
Thank you for your answer. This is what I'm looking for.
{ c' e' \tweak #'duration-log #1 g' }
because it respects notehead-styles.
The other method mentioned is limited to one style.
The other one can use any glyph you'd like.
Do you know how breve and longa can be produced with that? #breve or #0.5
does not give an error, but it also does not work.
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph noteheads.slmensural))) f' a' c'' }
You can throw whatever you want in there...
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph clefs.G))) f' a' c'' }
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Change print-appearance of chord members to different duration, but not the logic behind.
Eventhough I thought I had prevented this it happened :)
That you can rewrite the notehead replacement to any glyph I want does not
change the fact that it is exactly the glyph/notehead I give it. Once the
enviroment changes I have to replace all the noteheads. Imagine this for a
complex piano score where you need this kind of mixed-duration chords.
Yes, I know I can use variables but its still less elegant than using
duration-log.
Nils
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:10:30 -0400
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:04 AM, Nils wrote:
Thank you for your answer. This is what I'm looking for.
{ c' e' \tweak #'duration-log #1 g' }
because it respects notehead-styles.
The other method mentioned is limited to one style.
The other one can use any glyph you'd like.
Do you know how breve and longa can be produced with that? #breve or #0.5
does not give an error, but it also does not work.
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph noteheads.slmensural))) f' a' c'' }
You can throw whatever you want in there...
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph clefs.G))) f' a' c'' }
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Change print-appearance of chord members to different duration, but not the logic behind.
On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:27 AM, Nils Hammerfest wrote:
Eventhough I thought I had prevented this it happened :)
That you can rewrite the notehead replacement to any glyph I want does not
change the fact that it is exactly the glyph/notehead I give it. Once the
enviroment changes I have to replace all the noteheads. Imagine this for a
complex piano score where you need this kind of mixed-duration chords.
Yes, I know I can use variables but its still less elegant than using
duration-log.
Nils
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 06:10:30 -0400
m...@apollinemike.com m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
On Apr 26, 2011, at 6:04 AM, Nils wrote:
Thank you for your answer. This is what I'm looking for.
{ c' e' \tweak #'duration-log #1 g' }
because it respects notehead-styles.
The other method mentioned is limited to one style.
The other one can use any glyph you'd like.
Do you know how breve and longa can be produced with that? #breve or #0.5
does not give an error, but it also does not work.
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph noteheads.slmensural))) f' a' c'' }
You can throw whatever you want in there...
{ \tweak #'stencil #(lambda (grob) (grob-interpret-markup grob (markup
#:musicglyph clefs.G))) f' a' c'' }
Cheers,
MS
Ah, I gotchya...I thought you wanted a method that could insert anything...
Negative duration logs get you breves and longas.
{ \tweak #'duration-log #-1 f' a' c''
\tweak #'duration-log #-2 f' a' c''
\override NoteHead #'style = #'mensural
\tweak #'duration-log #-1 f' a' c''
\tweak #'duration-log #-2 f' a' c''
}
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Again vertical spacing FiguredBass / Staff / Lyrics
On 4/26/11 12:41 AM, Michael Käppler xmichae...@web.de wrote:
Hi Carl,
thanks, but increasing system-system-spacing will increase distance
between all system groups.
What I want is increasing just the distance between the lowest staff
line (resp. the Figured Bass line)
and the staff above. It works, but only if there is no Lyrics line
between the two staffs. I'd like to understand, why...
Oops, my mistake. I should have said default-staff-staff-spacing.
The reason why the Lyrics causes problems is because it comes between the
FiguredBass and the staff above, so it's used for calculating the spacing.
The real surprise to me is that the 'padding value works at all. Non-staff
lines are supposed to be placed in *after* the staves are already placed.
HTH,
Carl
% Begin lilypond code
\version 2.13.58
notes = \repeat unfold 20 { a4 b c b }
text = \lyricmode {
\repeat unfold 20 { bla bla bla bla }
}
numbers = \figuremode {
\repeat unfold 20 { 3 54 4 6 _+ 7 }
}
\layout {
\context {
\FiguredBass
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'nonstaff-unrelatedstaff-spacing #'padding=
#20
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #DOWN
}
\context {
\Staff
\override VerticalAxisGroup #'default-staff-staff-spacing
#'basic-distance = #20
}
}
\score {
\new Staff {
\new Voice = one \relative c'' \notes
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto one \text %% Comment this out
\new FiguredBass \numbers
\new Staff { \clef bass \relative c \notes }
}
% End lilypond code
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Drawing systems...ERROR: In procedure min: ERROR: Wrong type: lilyvartmpbh
This code used to work for me about a year ago, but when I try to build
it using 2.13.60, I get the weird error shown in the console log output
at the bottom. Is this a bug or not? I'm running 2.13.60 on Ubuntu 10.04
amd64.
%===
\version 2.13.60
% e.g. \spanbox #-8 #'(-1 . -1)
spanbox = #(define-music-function (parser location yval shorten)
(number? pair?) #{
\once \override TextSpanner #'style = #'line
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text = \markup
{ \draw-line #'(0 . $yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
\markup { \draw-line #'(0 . $yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'padding =
#(car $shorten)
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding =
#(cdr $shorten)
#})
\relative c' {
\spanbox #-8 #'(-1 . -1) c4\startTextSpan c c c\stopTextSpan
}
%===
Processing `/home/nick/lilypond/examples/box.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
Preprocessing graphical objects...
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 1 page...
Drawing systems...ERROR: In procedure min:
ERROR: Wrong type: lilyvartmpbh
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Drawing systems...ERROR: In procedure min: ERROR: Wrong type: lilyvartmpbh
On Apr 26, 2011, at 8:02 AM, Nick Payne wrote:
This code used to work for me about a year ago, but when I try to build it
using 2.13.60, I get the weird error shown in the console log output at the
bottom. Is this a bug or not? I'm running 2.13.60 on Ubuntu 10.04 amd64.
%===
\version 2.13.60
% e.g. \spanbox #-8 #'(-1 . -1)
spanbox = #(define-music-function (parser location yval shorten) (number?
pair?) #{
\once \override TextSpanner #'style = #'line
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text = \markup {
\draw-line #'(0 . $yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup {
\draw-line #'(0 . $yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'padding = #(car
$shorten)
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #(cdr
$shorten)
#})
\relative c' {
\spanbox #-8 #'(-1 . -1) c4\startTextSpan c c c\stopTextSpan
}
%===
Processing `/home/nick/lilypond/examples/box.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
Preprocessing graphical objects...
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 1 page...
Drawing systems...ERROR: In procedure min:
ERROR: Wrong type: lilyvartmpbh
This should do the trick - the problem is that you need to quasiquote the list
and then unquote the temp variable that lilypond uses to store yval.
spanbox = #(define-music-function (parser location yval shorten) (number?
pair?) #{
\once \override TextSpanner #'style = #'line
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text = \markup {
\draw-line #`(0 . ,$yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup {
\draw-line #`(0 . ,$yval) }
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'padding = #(car
$shorten)
\once \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #(cdr
$shorten)
#})
\relative c' {
\spanbox #-8 #'(-1 . -1) c4\startTextSpan c c c\stopTextSpan
}
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: font use
On Apr 26 AD 2011, at 2:21 AM, James Lowe wrote: I'm sure that those who know better will give you more detail but over the last 6 months there have been similar type questions about ligatures, looking back over these threads they are always led back to this thread http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-11/msg00128.html Thanks, James. Yes, I saw that thread and it's certainly related to what I'm looking for ... but the font I've been using almost exclusively for the last several years has all the glyphs and tables needed. In fact, I've been using XeLaTeX with Lilypond successfully for all that time (since about 2008). Only since I've obtained 2.13 did I notice the change in font handling --- both a change in ligature use and optical size selection. I'm also on the same OS since I began using Lilypond and friends (Mac OS 10.4.11). While the source code has not changed from 3 years ago (in the example I sent last time) the results definitely have changed. Even if I don't specify the font, the default font used by Lilypond no longer renders the ligatures either --- although that used to work, too. I've tried to go back to v. 2.12 and the problem is still there. I can't get v. 2.11 to work since it complains about something in lilypond-book and returns a Child 11 or something like that So, IF the engine now needs some explicit call to use ligatures as before, does anyone know what that is? United in adoration of Jesus, fr. michael gilmary, mma Most Holy Trinity Monastery 67 Dugway Road Petersham, MA 01366 www.MaroniteMonks.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: font use
There have been a few reports of problems with fonts on Macs. These seem all to be related to a GhostScript upgrade - I think an upgrade to 8.70? Perhaps you're seeing a similar problem? -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Fr. Michael Gilmary, mma To: lilypond-user@gnu.org ; James Lowe Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 2:48 PM Subject: Re: font use On Apr 26 AD 2011, at 2:21 AM, James Lowe wrote: I'm sure that those who know better will give you more detail but over the last 6 months there have been similar type questions about ligatures, looking back over these threads they are always led back to this thread http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-11/msg00128.html Thanks, James. Yes, I saw that thread and it's certainly related to what I'm looking for ... but the font I've been using almost exclusively for the last several years has all the glyphs and tables needed. In fact, I've been using XeLaTeX with Lilypond successfully for all that time (since about 2008). Only since I've obtained 2.13 did I notice the change in font handling --- both a change in ligature use and optical size selection. I'm also on the same OS since I began using Lilypond and friends (Mac OS 10.4.11). While the source code has not changed from 3 years ago (in the example I sent last time) the results definitely have changed. Even if I don't specify the font, the default font used by Lilypond no longer renders the ligatures either --- although that used to work, too. I've tried to go back to v. 2.12 and the problem is still there. I can't get v. 2.11 to work since it complains about something in lilypond-book and returns a Child 11 or something like that So, IF the engine now needs some explicit call to use ligatures as before, does anyone know what that is? United in adoration of Jesus, fr. michael gilmary, mma Most Holy Trinity Monastery 67 Dugway Road Petersham, MA 01366 www.MaroniteMonks.org -- ___ 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: ghostscript-8.70-6 broke my lilypond, no more PDF
Matthias Kilian k...@outback.escape.de wrote: I don't think it's the `-q' that causes the failure, because this flag only makes ghostscript quiet And it is not the -q flag as I just ran the command with it. It is as you say suggest, lilypond is bombing when trying to run the ghostscript command. But why? My best guess is that the newer ghostscript (when run from within lilypond) hits some resource limit like open file descriptors or memory. [...] Does not seem likely. Assuming that you're running a shell like ksh or bash, you can display the current limits for file descriptors with [...] Actually, I normally run things under a tcsh shell, but it is easy enough to start a bash shell. The results: ulimit -n 1024 ulimit -d unlimited I think I might just uninstall lilypond and do a fresh install. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: font use
On Apr 26 AD 2011, at 12:09 PM, Phil Holmes wrote: There have been a few reports of problems with fonts on Macs. These seem all to be related to a GhostScript upgrade - I think an upgrade to 8.70? Perhaps you're seeing a similar problem? Well, from what this machine tells me, the version of ghostscript we have is GPL Ghostscript 8.71 (2010-02-10) --- which, I suppose, was automatically upgraded via MacTeX2010. If that's the case, what's next? I downloaded v. 8.64 of ghostscript and, after isolating the executable from v. 8.71, tried to do the ./ configure, etc. for v. 8.64 ... but the make failed. (I'm no geeky guru-type). Supposing that's the problem, what's next? United in adoration of Jesus, fr. michael gilmary, mma Most Holy Trinity Monastery 67 Dugway Road Petersham, MA 01366 www.MaroniteMonks.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: Divisi Vocals
Looking at the 2.12.3 documentation this did not seem to be appreciably
different...
Anyway, I tooled a bit in my old 2.6.5 world and got a method to work using a
combination of split voices in my variable for the melody, and set associated
voice in the lyrics. It was probably a consequence of the sylable placement,
but part of the split voice had to be the same notes in each part - for that I
had use hideNotes and spacers to get the note stems right...
Yes, a bit of tweaking, but worth it as I 1) learned more (played a bit with
part combining while hacking), and got things working into my code style well.
Now I have to create a PDF only version using DS and Coda for the piece, but
after a while I've come to accept that I generally end up with 2 versions when
I have a vocal tune...
Thanks for the prodding. I'll report when I try to see if this hack works in
12.2.3!
From: m...@philholmes.net
To: ed_ardzin...@hotmail.com; lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Divisi Vocals
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 15:17:32 +0100
There are a number of examples of vocal music on the LSR - if you search for
template you'll find a few. I think that should get you started.
--
Phil Holmes
- Original Message -
From: Ed Ardzinski
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 3:01 PM
Subject: Divisi Vocals
I have tried to look up examples of how to have a divisi vocal part, and all
the examples seem to have the music definitions in the score block. In fact,
looking at the 2.12 documentation I can't find anything about it. Looking
through the archives I saw something about a potential feature for hiding a
complete staff...is that available in 2.12?
My code style is to create most of my music definitions in variables, and put
the various fragments together in larger parts - eventually my score blaock
look something like this (just an example)
\score
{
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff {\rh}
\new Staff {\lh}
\layout {\context {}}
}
I'd like to be able to keep this code style - it's been really helpful and
clean. Any pointers to archives and documentation would be appreciated.
Thanks!
___
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
strang output
Hi!
In this file i have strange autput and this log:
errore di programmazione: No viable beam quanting found. Using unquanted y
value.
continua, incrociare le dita
IV° variazione.ly:55:14: attenzione: strana dimensione del gambo, controllare
di non avere travature strette
Thank's!
--
oiram/bin/selom
%
Quarta Variazione`
%
\version 2.13.53
% \include gui.ly
global = {
\key e \minor
\time 3/4
\partial 4
}
classicalGuitarOne = \relative c' {
\global
% Qui segue la musica.
\override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t)
b4|
g e' r r|
\times 2/3 {e'8 dis b} \times 2/3 {e dis b} \times 2/3 {e dis b}|
g e'4 r r|
\times 2/3 {g'8 fis c} \times 2/3 {g' fis c} \times 2/3 {g' fis c}|
b g'4 r r|
c fis r fis a|
g fis e|
e dis8 r r4|
g, e' r r|
\times 2/3 {e'8 dis b} \times 2/3 {e dis b} \times 2/3 {e dis b}|
b g'4 r r|
\times 2/3 {g'8 fis c} \times 2/3 {g' fis c} \times 2/3 {g' fis c}|
b g'4 r r|
c fis r fis a|
g fis dis|
e e,, r| \bar |.
}
classicalGuitarTwo = \relative c' {
\global
% Qui segue la musica.
s4|
s2.*9|
g4\rest fis a fis a|
}
classicalGuitarThree = \relative c {
\global
% Qui segue la musica.
}
classicalGuitarFour = \relative c {
\global
% Qui segue la musica.
b4|
\times 2/3 {e,8 g b} \times 2/3 {e^( dis) e} \times 2/3 {g fis e} |
b fis' a2.|
\times 2/3 {e,8 g b} \times 2/3 {e^( dis) e} \times 2/3 {g fis e} |
d a'2.|
\times 2/3 {g,8 b d} \times 2/3 {g^( fis) g} \times 2/3 {b a g}|
\times 2/3 {d fis a} \times 2/3 {c a fis} \times 2/3 {dis c' a}|
\times 2/3 {e b' g} \times 2/3 {a, c' a} \times 2/3 {ais, cis' g}|
\times 2/3 {b, b' g} \times 2/3 {fis c b} \times 2/3 {a g fis}|
\times 2/3 {e g b} \times 2/3 {e dis e} \times 2/3 {g fis e} |
b2 s4|
\times 2/3 {e,8 g b} \times 2/3 {e^( dis) e} \times 2/3 {g fis e} |
d a'2.|
\times 2/3 {g,8 b d} \times 2/3 {g^( fis) g} \times 2/3 {b a g}|
\times 2/3 {d fis a} \times 2/3 {c a fis} \times 2/3 {dis c' a}|
\times 2/3 {e b' g} \times 2/3 {a, c' a} \times 2/3 {b, a' fis}|
\times 2/3 {e b' g} e,4 s|
}
\score {
\new Staff \with {
midiInstrument = acoustic guitar (nylon)
instrumentName = 5)
} { \clef treble_8 \classicalGuitarOne \\ \classicalGuitarTwo \\ \classicalGuitarThree \\ \classicalGuitarFour }
\layout { }
\midi {
\context {
\Score
tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment 80 4)
}
}
\header {
poet =\markup \italic {Quarta variazione}
}
}___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
For a Weird Key Signature
Dear List, I have a single clef (treble) with key signature consisting of one Natural (on 2nd-line G) and one Sharp (on above- the-staff G), as follows: \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((0 . 4) . ,NATURAL) ((1 . 4) . ,SHARP)) Unfortunately the PDF output displays these signs, not vertically aligned, but with the lower (Natural) ca 1/8 to the right. How can I shift it back that far to the left for a vertical alignment? I have managed horizontal shifts, but not in the context of a keySignature specification or its silently-printed individual results. Would welcome any thoughts. Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
OS X update for problems with OpenType fonts in 10.6.7
This may fix the issues with Lilypond and 10.6.7; I haven't tested it yet. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4605 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
