[OT] Critique a Short Essay on Free Music?
Yes, I realize that this has nothing to do with Lilypond - with the exception that the following essay explains *why* I have placed my scores under a copyleft license. The scores to two of my songs are engraved with Lilypond, with the rest to follow soon. I'm working on a new CD jewel case insert for my album Geometric Visions: The Rough Draft. The case insert will be a single sheet of paper printed on both sides, and folded in half for a total of four printed pages each the size of a jewel case. When the insert is removed from the case and unfolded, the essay will be on the inner, left-hand side. (The right-hand page explains why it's The Rough Draft.) The current draft just barely fits when set in 10-point Times. I can't make it any longer; any additional text must come at the cost of removing some. Following my draft, I'm also submitting a draft that was completely, independently written by a Kuro5hin member named mumble. I must admit that his piece is quite a bit more compelling than my leaden prose. Everyone who helps me will receive a free - and autographed! - copy of my compact disc. Just email - OFF LIST! - your snail mail address to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks for your help! - Mike Behold: Why Free Music? I don't charge money for my music, and have placed it under the Free-as-in-Freedom Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license so more people can get to know my music than would be possible if I sold it, or restricted copying. I actually give a free compact disc to everyone I meet! I hope that by doing so there will be lots of fans who will attend my performances when the time comes for me to play professionally. I have been studying piano intensively for several years with the aim of enrolling in music school to study musical composition. I want to write symphonies! Furthermore, I feel that setting my music Free is The Right Thing To Do. I am inspired by Richard Stallman and his Free Software movement; my music is Free as in Free Speech, not as in free beer. It's a matter of liberty and not price. The sharing of music over the Internet has been controversial for a decade now. The Recording Industry Association of America has threatened thousands with lawsuits for sharing music. But it's important to understand that, in America anyway, our Founding Fathers created copyright to benefit society, and not primarily to benefit the copyright holders. The framers of the US Constitution intended to promote the progress of science and useful arts by granting creative people temporary monopolies. But I feel that of greater benefit to society than copyright is that computers and the Internet enable digital media formats to be copied completely faithfully anywhere on Earth, and with near-zero cost. But how are we musicians to feed ourselves? I plan to do so by selling tickets to live performances, as well as T-shirts, posters and the like. I love my music so, that I know I must set it Free. * K5's mumble submitted the following; it's obviously a lot more compelling than my version, but I'd like to work in some of the factual info from my version, such as Stallman being my inspiration, for a sort of fusion of the two. The Internet Revolution and Free Music The advent of the Internet and the Web sparked a revolution - the Information Revolution. No longer is information difficult and expensive to copy - virtually unlimited amounts of information can now be copied and distributed at near zero cost. This is the revolution inspired by Gutenberg's Press magnified a thousand fold! In this new age, copyright seems quaint and redundant. There are stall-warts, many of them big and powerful! They are the ones that made their money the old way. But their time has come, and gone. It is our turn now. Music is culture, our culture, that should be shared freely by all, not locked behind high walls, leased out to only those that can pay the ransom. But I am only one, and the most I can do is humbly share my music. Please listen to my music, and share it with everyone you wish. Who knows, maybe one day I will become famous and write great symphonies. And you will already know my name. - Michael Crawford. *** Now, as to why my album is subtitled The Rough Draft. The following will appear on the inner right-hand page of my insert. I'm basically happy with this, but may try to tighten it up a bit: Howard by Baldwin Your ears do not deceive you: my piano really is out of tune. I recorded this album in 1994. The last time my piano was tuned was in the 1950's. My father, an accomplished musician, tuned it by ear. I feared that tuning it after so long would change its voice – the characteristic sound that is different for every piano. The strings were very old and might break. They could be replaced, but the new strings would have their own voices, quite
Re: [OT] Critique a Short Essay on Free Music?
2007/11/5, Michael David Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes, I realize that this has nothing to do with Lilypond - with the exception that the following essay explains *why* I have placed my scores under a copyleft license. The scores to two of my songs are engraved with Lilypond, with the rest to follow soon. Hi Michael, how is this text itself licensed? Would you mind if I translate it into French, and post it on my own website (with full credits, and a bunch of links to your website, of course)? Thanks. Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [OT] Critique a Short Essay on Free Music?
Valentin Villenave wrote: how is this text itself licensed? Would you mind if I translate it into French, and post it on my own website (with full credits, and a bunch of links to your website, of course)? Hi, That's a complicated question. Generally, I place works expressing my personal opinion under the CC Attribution-NoDerivs license, and that had been my plan for a web page that will include the essay as a subsection. But the case insert on which I plan to print my essay is part of a larger compilation, that will be available via BitTorrent, that is otherwise CC-Attribution-ShareAlike. Besides the case insert, there is the label printed on the CD itself, the front of the case insert, the scores in PDF and Lilypond format, and of course audio recordings of my music. Including a NoDerivs document in a DFSG-Free compilation (Debian Free Software Guidelines) renders an otherwise Free work as Non-Free. It would have the same problem as the GNU Free Documentation License, which provides for invariant sections which may not be altered, expressly for the purpose of expressing opinions! However, as I am the copyright owner, I have the right to grant you a separate license of any kind. And I would be *honored* if you translated my essay! I just request that you wait until the final draft is *completely* finished. I had hoped to complete it today, but the work of relicensing my music from by-sa 2.5 to by-sa 3.0 is taking a lot longer than I expected. There is a lot of artwork to revise, license notices on several web pages, all my sheet music... The essay is too important to me - and too important to those who might read it - for me not to do the best job on it I possibly can. I'll wait to regenerate my torrents, if need be, to do right by my essay. Thanks! -- Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geometricvisions.com/ -- Creative Commons Sheet Music ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: erratic key change marking
If you refer to the reminder of the new key signature at the end of the
previous line,
that's a common typesetting convention (which is why LilyPond does it
this way).
If you want to use some other typesetting convention, you can turn this
off.
To find out how, go to www.lilypond.org - Documentation - LSR
and search for key signature.
/Mats
Michael Listrom wrote:
I am having some trouble with an erratic key change mark. The d major change
seems to leave an open staff line with the d mark before that actual begining of
the music. Any help would be great!
Regards,
Michael
Here is the code:
\version 2.10.33
\header{
title = Breaking Something
subtitle = Copy Right Michael Listrom
}
\score {
\relative c'' {
\tempo 8 = 180
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff {
\time 5/8
%intro
c8 [b c] r g
c [d c] r g
f' [e] r g [b,]
d [e f] r b,
%bar 2
f'[e f] r b,
f'[g f] r d
g [a g] r g,
d' [e f] r g
%bar 3
f [e f] r b,
c [d e f g]
f [e f] r b,
c [d e f g]
%bar 4
c, [d ees d c]
b [d c g aes]
g [aes b c d]
c [d ees d c]
%bar 5
f [g aes g f]
c [d ees d c]
g' [g, g' f ees]
d [ees f ees d]
%bar 6
c [b c d c]
d [ees] r d [es]
g [d ees d ees]
c [b c g aes]
%bar 7
c4. f8 [e]
c [d c] r4
f8 [e] r4.
c8 [b c] r d
%verse 1
c r f [e d]
b r e [d c]
a r b [d e]
g r a [b a]
%chorus
\key a \major
a [e a] r fis
gis [fis] r gis [fis]
gis [a e] r fis
gis [fis] r gis [e]
%chorus pt 2
e [f e a, b]
e [f e a, g]
b [c d f e]
%verse 2
\key c \major
a [b a f e]
d [e f g a]
b [d, c d e]
d [c b a g]
%bridge
f' [ees] r ees [d]
f [e] r f [g]
f [ees] r ees [d]
f [e] r f [g]
%bar 8
a [b a g f]
f [e b d g,]
a [b d e f]
g [a g f e]
%bar 9
f [f f g, c]
c [g e' d c]
g' [a g f e]
e [f e d c]
%bar 10
\key d \major
d [a] r b [cis]
d [a] r g [fis]
g [a b a g]
fis [e fis d a'']
\key c \major
%part 11
b [a g e d]
c [g a b d]
e [f g g, f']
e [d b a g]
%part 12
c [d ees g, d']
ees [f g aes g]
f [ees d ees f]
d [c b c d]
%part 13
g, [g g a b]
c [g a b a]
c [b aes g aes]
f' [ees d ees d]
%part 14
c [g] r a [b]
c [g] r a [b]
c [g] r a [b]
c [g] r a [b]
%part 15
d [e f] r g,
d' [c b] r a
b [d e f g]
a [b a g, a]
%part 16
b [d c g] r
b [d c g] r
d' [e f g] r
b, [d c g] r
}
\new Staff {
\clef bass
%intro
e, [d e c] r
e [d e c] r
r4 r4 r8
r4 r4 r8
%bar 2
r4. b4
b8 [c a] r g
r4 r4 r8
r4 r4 r8
%bar 3
c [b c g'] r
c, [b c d e]
c [b c g'] r
c, [b c d e]
%bar 4
Re: GDP: renaming Program {usage, reference}
On 04.11.2007 (01:23), Graham Percival wrote: Eyolf Østrem wrote: Sorry - my fault, I was thinking of the Program Usage, which to a large extent has to do with how to write code to produce a certain output (the LP-book part) leaving bits and pieces which not necessarily belongs together with the notation reference thematically, but which on the other hand is so few pages, dealing with the fundamentals of how to run the program, that it seems logical to have it in one place. I don't follow -- especially the to a large extent. In the current version of lilypond-program.pdf, 12 out of 31 pages (not counting the licence and the index) are about lilypond-book -- that's what I meant with to a large extent. The rest is Installation and setup (8pp), command-line usage etc (7 pp), and the conversion utilities (3p). In the newly-renamed Application Usage, is there anything other than chapter 4 which you believe should be in NR? I really can't see anything of the sort. No, only ch. 4 belongs in a Notation Ref., strictly speaking (even this is debatable, depending on HOW strictly one is speaking). I'm thinking more of the NR as the document that one would want to save to the harddisk, or even print out as a handy reference to cover all the things that one would need to know in the day-to-day dealings with LP. Given the character of LP, as a compiler of external text files, and not a gui or a wysiwyg environment, text input and compilation will always go hand in hand. This is the reason why I'd like to have ch. 3 in the same book (on my imaginary shelf, together with the vim manual and the LaTeX companion). This would leave the three pages about conversion, which don't necessarily belong in the same book, but which doesn't do any harm either. 2.2. Text editor support could well defend its place in a notational referece: how to edit LP code, which leaves 1 Install, which is more README or man page-like, and setup, which is mainly about mac problems... In other words: if it is a strong editorial decision that there should be one document which contains only the details about notational syntax and nothing else, then my suggestion of course falls flat. The document I'm talking about is broader: Everything You Need To Know To Produce A Score With Lilypond (Once It's Installed And Provided You Don't Need To Change Too Many Scheme Lists). Eyolf -- All hope abandon, ye who enter here! -- Dante Alighieri ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scrore et PianoStaff
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
Bonjour,
Voici le texte entier de mon problème: toto.ly
Et voici ce qu'il me génère : toto.log
J'ai beau repasser tout cela dans ma tête et feuilleter la doc, je ne
m'en sors pas. Est-ce que qqn peut m'aider a comprendre pourquoi cela
ne fonctionne pas !
Alors que cela fonctionne !
\score {
\context PianoStaff
\override Score.MetronomeMark #'extra-offset = #' (-5.2 . +1.8)
\override Score.SeparationItem #'padding = #0
\set allowBeamBreak = ##t
\new voice \context Staff=flute \fluteT
%% \set Staff.InstrumentName = \markup{ \fontsize #2
{Flute}
\new PianoStaff
\set PianoStaff.instrumentName = \markup{ \fontsize
#2 {Piano}
\hspace #1.0 }
\context Staff=upper \upperT
\context Staff=lower \lowerT
\layout { }
\midi {
\context {
\Score tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment 60 4)
}
}
}
Pourquoi je ne peux pas sortir la flute du \context PianoStaff ?
J'aimerais réellement comprendre car travailler par mimétisme cela a
ces limites
Merci de votre aide
Christophe
Bonsoir,
Voici un exemple de ton fichier remanié. C'est loin d'etre un modèle
exhaustif mais je crois que tu as fait pas mal de fautes.
Compare-le attentivement avec le tien. Amicalement.
\version 2.10.33
\paper {
#(define dump-extents #t)
indent = 2\cm
ragged-right = ##t
force-assignment = #
}
TimeKey = { \key d \major \time 3/4 }
fluteT= \relative c' {
\clef treble
\override Score.SeparationItem #'padding = #0
\set allowBeamBreak = ##t
c4 d e f g a
}
upperT= \relative c {
\clef treble
c4 d e f g a
}
lowerT= \relative c, {
\clef bass
c4 d e f g a
}
\score {
\new Staff {
\set Staff.instrumentName = \markup{ \fontsize #2 {Flute} }
\new Voice = flute { \TimeKey \fluteT }
}
\new PianoStaff
\override Score.MetronomeMark #'extra-offset = #' (-5.2 . +1.8)
\set PianoStaff.instrumentName = \markup{ \fontsize #2 {Piano}
\hspace #1.0 }
\new Staff=upper \TimeKey \upperT
\new Staff=lower
\clef bass
\TimeKey \lowerT
\layout { }
\midi {
\context {
\Score tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment 60 4)
}
}
}
%
Phil.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: educational first draft
Hope this is not too late to be of use. Graham Percival wrote on 03 November 2007 06:55 I've decided to do the rest of the first drafts right now. http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/ Here's the TODO list. Educational notation Was Educational use; name change? Quite a lot in this section is not really educational notation or use. Could the bits that are not educational be moved into the main text perhaps? - Improvisation: link to relevant section of This is one section that has nothing to do with education. In a negative sense it is to do with pitches - the lack of them. Would it be better there? Changing default? is this still valid? Not sure what this means introduce \with in LM? This appears in ambitus (which would also be better under Pitches, BTW). Yes, \with in LM would be good. REWRITE - most is pretty good. - Blank music sheet: add an example without tab staff. Check if there's a template for this already. Actually, move this to a template, and add this to modifying the templates to LM. Fine Cheers, - Graham Trevor D ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Trevor Daniels wrote: Hope this is not too late to be of use. No, not at all. Educational notation Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. Quite a lot in this section is not really educational notation or use. Could the bits that are not educational be moved into the main text perhaps? Specific suggestions, please. Either for renaming the whole section, or for moving stuff. (or both!) - Improvisation: link to relevant section of This is one section that has nothing to do with education. In a negative sense it is to do with pitches - the lack of them. Would it be better there? Hmm. We _do_ include no meter in Rhythms, so I suppose we could stuff no pitches in Pitches. I'm not convinced, though (either way). Any other opinions about this? This appears in ambitus (which would also be better under Pitches, BTW). Definitely agreed; moved. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: song with multi-voice ending
Am 2007-11-04 um 22:46 schrieb Mats Bengtsson:
What LilyPond version do you use?
2.10.29
I don't have the time now to make dummy definitions of all your
variables, so I have not done any trial and error. However, I would
first try something along the lines of
Sorry, I forgot to provide a minimal working example or at least to
explain what means what...
But you got it anyway, thank you very much!
I've got now:
---
\score {
\new ChordNames {
\germanChords
\set chordChanges = ##t
\akkorde \akkordeSchluss
}
\new Staff = Oben
\global % clef, key, time
\new Voice = eins {
\hauptstimme % unison main song
% choir ending
\schlussEins
\new Staff = mitte \new Voice = zwei
\schlussZwei
\new Staff = unten \new Voice = drei
\schlussDrei
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto eins { \text \textSchlussEins }
\new Lyrics \with { alignBelowContext=mitte } \lyricsto zwei
\textSchlussZwei
\new Lyrics \with { alignBelowContext=unten } \lyricsto drei
\textSchlussDrei
}
---
Problem: The lyrics of ending two and three (textSchlussZwei/Drei)
are below voice eins instead of their own voices.
(alignBelowContext doesn't seem to to anything, gives also no error,
though.)
Greetlings from Lake Constance
---
fiëé visuëlle
Henning Hraban Ramm
http://www.fiee.net
http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/
https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Graham Percival wrote: Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. It seems to me that much of what's in this section could be classed as editorial rather than simply educational. So what about Editorial Notation or maybe Editorial and Educational Notations? Just a thought. Brett ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: educational first draft
Brett Duncan wrote: Graham Percival wrote: Was Educational use; name change? No particular good reason. That said, I'm quite open to a real name change. It seems to me that much of what's in this section could be classed as editorial rather than simply educational. So what about Editorial Notation or maybe Editorial and Educational Notations? Ooo, I really like Editorial notation. Anybody object? Of course, then it really looks like it should be moved into NR 2 Specialist notation. Again, any objections? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
New user, linux, Xp, jEdit, Lilypond tool, cutting and pasting
Dear All,
I am a new Lilypond user. I have processed some single staff scores, and
found the transpose function
quite easy and useful. I had a problem with collisions between grobs and
notes but discovered how to use
the padding to move things, thanks to some advice. This was on OpenSuse
10.2 using a text editor, a file selector
and a terminal. Unfortunately, the machine was an old, slow one. Now I am
trying Lilypond in Windows XP, which will, hopefully, speed things up.
Browsing the letters, I came across a very helpful one which mentioned jEdit
and the Lilypond tool which can be installed as a plugin. First you have to
install Java runtime environment 1.4 or later. Within the jEdit, once setup
with the plugin, you can run a wizard which will set up your score in great
detail, saving lots of coding and brain-ache. A very useful REM (comment)
says: Insert your notes here.
jEdit colours the various components of the coding, enabling easy analysis.
Also, errors are immediately underlined, enabling swift correction (in the
case of simple errors).
As regards documentation, there is plenty of it. Would it be an idea to
include quite a lot of simple, entire examples, as snippets still have to be
incorporated within one's code and the full examples contain many
complexities which are peculiar to themselves and not useful in other
contexts. I am thinking of say, two-part inventions, three-part inventions,
hymns, simple piano pieces e.g. Bergmüller, small symphony movements e.g.
Mozart's 1st, flute sonata movements (J.C. Bach for instance). It is then
possible for the novice to simply cut and paste, having compared the code
with the pdf. You could then process endless hymns, symphonies whatever. For
any particular feature, the novice could be referred to a short, simple but
complete code and have the pdf to see its effect. Cutting and pasting is
easier than trying to understand or remember complicated code. Yes, I know
that you can build up your own library, I'm thinking of the novice.
A problem I have encountered is the version number. When I process the
welcome file, I get 2.10.0 but when I ran some other code, I got 2.10.33
What is an external error? My jEditor says there are no errors, but Lilypond
will not process the code.
% Created on Mon Nov 05 23:43:17 GMT 2007
\version 2.10.33
\header {
title = 1. Eclipse
composer = Pam Wedod
meter = Gently - with a little movement
}
\include english.ly
staffAltoSaxophone = \new Staff {
\time 4/4
\tempo 4 = 72
\set Staff.instrumentName=Alto Saxophone
\set Staff.midiInstrument=alto sax
\transposition ef,
\key ef \major
\clef treble
\relative c' {
r1 r1 e4. ( d16 c) b4.( a16 g e2) r8 a( gis b)
% bar 5
e4.( c16 a) f'4.( e16 d e2)\ r8 f( g e)\! a4.\mf( g16 f) g4 c,
f4.( e16 d) e4 a, b8(\ c d2) c8( b)\!
% bar 10
a2 r2 r1 a8(\p\ b c e) b'\!\( a\ e c)\! d2. c8( b)
% bar 14
a2. r4 r1 r2 a'8 g e d e d a b c4.(\ b8\!
% bar 18
a2) r2 a'8 g e a, c4.(\ b8\! a2)\p r a4(\poco c b\ gis
% bar 22
a2)\a r2 r1 e4.\mf( d16 c) b4.( a16 g e2) r8 a8(\ gis b)\!
% bar 26
e4.(\mp c16 a) f'4.( e16 d e2\) r8 f( g e)\! a4.\f( g16 f) g4 c,
f4.( e16 d) e4 a, b8(\ c d2) c8( b)\!
% bar \mp
a2 r2 r1 a8(\mf\ b c e) b'\!\( a\ e c)\! d2.\p c8( b)
% bar 35
a2. r4 r1 e'4. ( d16 c) b4.( a16 g e1)\ r1\!^\fermataMarkup
\bar |.
}
}
staffPiano = \new PianoStaff {
\set PianoStaff.midiInstrument = #acoustic grand
\set PianoStaff.instrumentName = #Piano
\tempo 4 = 72
\context Staff = RH { % Right hand
\clef treble
\key ef \major
\relative c' {
}
}
\context Staff = LH { % Left hand
\clef bass
\key ef \major
\relative c {
}
}
}
\score {
\staffAltoSaxophone
\staffPiano
\midi {
}
\layout {
}
}
\paper {
}
By the way, I am wearing my asbestos coms in anticipation of the flames.
Frederick Dennis.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Cross-staff fingerings when using \autochange
Hi everybody,
I'm typesetting a Brahms exercise for my pupils, using \autochange (it
would be quite annoying to have to do the staff changes manually).
But I do have a problem with the Fingerings. Not only do they *not*
follow the notes (particularly the left hand), but they also mess up
the beams. I tried to put the Fingering_engraver everywhere I could
(well, almost) but I can't find any solution. Removing the engraver
from its Voice context and putting it the PianoStaff context does give
something less ugly, but it only works for the right hand fingerings.
I've been trying to solve it for a dozen days now, so I'm just about
to give up and let my pupils put whatever fingers they want. But if
anyone happens to have an idea, it would be great.
Thank you everybody; here's the snippet:
\include italiano.ly
droiteDoigts = {
s16-2 s-1 s-2 s-3 s-4 s-1 s-2 s-3 s-4 s-1 s-2 s-3
s-4 s-5 s-4 s-3 s-2 s-1 s-4 s-3 s-2 s-1 s-4 s-3 s-2 s-1}
droiteB = \autochange \relative {
\time 3/4
\stemUp
re, do mi sol si do mi sol si do mi sol
si do la fa re do la fa re do la fa
reb do
}
gaucheDoigts = {
s16-4 s-5 s-4 s-3 s-2 s-1 s-4 s-3 s-2 s-1 s-4 s-3
s-2 s-1 s-2 s-3 s-4 s-1 s-2 s-3 s-4 s-1 s-2 s-3 s-4 s-5 }
gaucheB = { \clef bass
\autochange \relative {
\time 3/4
\stemDown
re,,16 do mi sol si do mi sol si do mi sol
si do la fa re do la fa re do la fa
reb do
}}
\score {
\new PianoStaff {
\context Staff=up \new Voice = droite { \droiteB }
\context Staff=down \new Voice = gauche { \gaucheB }
\context Voice=droite { \override Voice.Fingering #'direction = #up
\droiteDoigts }
\context Voice =gauche { \override Voice.Fingering #'direction = #down
\gaucheDoigts }
}
}
Thanks
Valentin
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
