chubb.wattle.id.au> writes:
> As an aside, dutch note names and \relative make data entry MUCH
> faster. See below (part 2).
FWIW, English note names are shorter if you use "f" for flat and "s" for
sharp: cs vs cis is 33% more efficient.
I understand why some prefer the Dutch names, as you c
On 2014-12-21 4:30 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
Your irritation originates in the fact that you want to produce a
score that*looks* like chords but is structurally a polyphonic
setting. There's nothing wrong with this but it implies expecting
some "uncommon" behaviour. Concretely you have to hide the
ar
> "Br" == Br Samuel Springuel writes:
Br> On 2014-12-21 12:20 AM, pe...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote:
>> As both cases have the same stem direction one has to be shifted.
>> Usually if you want two voices you either give them separate
>> staves, or give one the \voiceOne and the other the \voiceT
Am 21. Dezember 2014 21:09:23 MEZ, schrieb "Br. Samuel Springuel"
:
>The piece I'm typesetting is a modern chant "Our Father" that we use in
>
>our morning office. It's sung acapella and has a melody and harmony
>line. The lyrics, dynamics, and articulations are always in sync
>between the t
Am 21. Dezember 2014 21:57:37 MEZ, schrieb "Br. Samuel Springuel"
:
>On 2014-12-21 3:27 PM, Kevin Barry wrote:
>> Does the piece you are reproducing have two sets of articulations,
>> both above the staff? I can't remember ever having seen that kind of
>> notation before.
>
>No, it has only on
On 2014-12-21 3:27 PM, Kevin Barry wrote:
Does the piece you are reproducing have two sets of articulations,
both above the staff? I can't remember ever having seen that kind of
notation before.
No, it has only one set of articulations, but they apply to
both parts when they appear.
If you
Hi,
Does the piece you are reproducing have two sets of articulations, both
above the staff? I can't remember ever having seen that kind of notation
before.
If you want to remove the articulations from one voice you can add the
following line to it (place it in the same block as the music, befor
The piece I'm typesetting is a modern chant "Our Father" that we use in
our morning office. It's sung acapella and has a melody and harmony
line. The lyrics, dynamics, and articulations are always in sync
between the two parts, it's just that the harmony has a different note
(effectively, the
Am 21.12.2014 um 18:00 schrieb Br. Samuel Springuel:
On 2014-12-21 12:20 AM, pe...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote:
As both cases have the same stem direction one has to be shifted.
Usually if you want two voices you either give them separate staves,
or give one the \voiceOne and the other the \voiceT
On 2014-12-21 12:20 AM, pe...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote:
As both cases have the same stem direction one has to be shifted.
Usually if you want two voices you either give them separate staves,
or give one the \voiceOne and the other the \voiceTwo appellations.
Ah! I didn't notice this because I'
> "Br" == Br Samuel Springuel writes:
Br> 1) Some notes that don't collide (to my eye), are getting shifted
Br> as if they did. When the same pair of notes are set as a chord,
Br> there is no shift. Clearly there's a difference between what
Br> lilypond considers a collision between notes
So, I'm trying out voices for the first time, switching a piece I had
written using chords for single staff polyphony to using voices. In the
process I have run into a couple of things I don't understand:
1) Some notes that don't collide (to my eye), are getting shifted as if
they did. When
12 matches
Mail list logo
