Re: Microtone accidentals
Where can I find the patch? I haven't yet sent it over because it still needs a bit of cleanup (hmm, quite a bit, actually). Don't worry about that. In case I can tweak it without too much problems I'll handle it (this is, the MetaFont glyph stuff). Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
I'd be curious to know what one of the TeX / engraving gurus thinks ... Maybe Werner has an opinion? (If the engraving gurus agree, I'd personally love to see the arrowed accidentals show up in 2.12 ...) Trevor. On 10/18/07, v!ictor [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Max, I agree with Trevor. These arrowed accidentals would be great to have... even indispensable I would say. I'm sure many other composers will be interested in having them as well. I printed out your 20pt example sheet in a standard laser printer at 1200dpi. They look great. However, if you allow me to be ultra picky, I might suggest stretching the arrows slightly (maybe an extra 50%), keeping the width as it is. The reason being that the hight of the arrows now seems to be exactly that of the separation between staff lines, so when arrows fall on spaces ( e.g. d'#, f'#) the staff pattern is not interrupted because the staff lines are not intersected by the arrow, which seems to me to make them a tiny bit less noticeable than when the arrows do break a line ( e.g. c'#, e'#). If you make the arrows a bit longer, then they will always intersect a staff line (assuming they fall withing the staff of course), therefore (maybe) making them a bit more salient. Maybe a trivial observation, but it might be worth trying out. In terms of design I think they do look feta. Thanks again for the glyphs! Victor. On 10/18/07, Maximilian Albert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: These are outstanding! I don't have access to a true high-resolution printer, but the output on my end is perfectly legible and I'd very much like to have access to these new glyphs for use in my own scores. Thanks for your kind feedback. Much appreciated. :) Also, I have a question: have you given any thought to adding these same arrows to the quartertone accidentals as well? Indeed I have. But I figured it might be good to ask for some feedback first. :) It shouldn't be a big problem to get these working once the design is settled and approved, since they all have similar shapes and the arrow design is largely parametrized. Only the mirroredflat.flat symbol might cause a bit more work since the bottom is wider than that of the other symbols so that some curves may need to be adapted in order to integrate smoothly with the arrowshaft. But that can be tackled when the time comes. First, it would be nice to know if there is any interest in having these included and if anything needs to be improved. Max ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel -- Trevor Bača [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
Hi Victor, sorry for this late reply - I was away over the weekend and got stuck in work once more. I printed out your 20pt example sheet in a standard laser printer at 1200dpi. Thanks for your feedback and your help in trying to assess these glyphs! However, if you allow me to be ultra picky, [...] Sure. :) I might suggest stretching the arrows slightly (maybe an extra 50%), keeping the width as it is. The same thought had crossed my mind, and I did indeed play with taller (and sometimes wider) versions. It turned out that making them taller (while keeping the width) makes them look rather awkward. On the other hand, increasing both width and height makes them look unproportionally big compared to the accidentals themselves, which gives a really ugly impression. Also, in playing with these parameters I found it difficult to decide whether the arrowtip should be covered by the staffline or if it should protrude through it (and in this case how far). For I got the impression that if the arrowtips of arrows that fall into spaces are not clearly discernible (because they are covered by the staffline or protrude too little), the corresponding arrowheads appear a bit larger than the other ones (probably caused by the additional blackness of the staffline), which gives an uneven overall impression. But this may be remediable by a careful design. If you or anyone else has any suggestions in this direction, I could try again to produce something reasonably-looking (although honestly I doubt that I would succeed, and I almost certainly won't get around to it during the next two weeks, I'm afraid :( ). Best, Max ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
I'd be curious to know what one of the TeX / engraving gurus thinks ... Maybe Werner has an opinion? I haven't had time yet to look at those accidentals, sorry. Will do so in the next days. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
Thanks for your feedback and your help in trying to assess these glyphs! Where can I find the patch? Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
Werner LEMBERG schrieb: Thanks for your feedback and your help in trying to assess these glyphs! Where can I find the patch? I haven't yet sent it over because it still needs a bit of cleanup (hmm, quite a bit, actually). Thus I thought I'd ask first if there are any major objections before I invest too much time polishing something that runs the risk of ending up being fundamentally reworked. But if you'd like a patch then I will try to provide it as soon as possible (can't promise if it will be before the weekend, though, sorry). Max ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
Trevor Bača wrote: These are outstanding! I don't have access to a true high-resolution printer, but the output on my end is perfectly legible and I'd very much like to have access to these new glyphs for use in my own scores. Thanks for your kind feedback. Much appreciated. :) Also, I have a question: have you given any thought to adding these same arrows to the quartertone accidentals as well? Indeed I have. But I figured it might be good to ask for some feedback first. :) It shouldn't be a big problem to get these working once the design is settled and approved, since they all have similar shapes and the arrow design is largely parametrized. Only the mirroredflat.flat symbol might cause a bit more work since the bottom is wider than that of the other symbols so that some curves may need to be adapted in order to integrate smoothly with the arrowshaft. But that can be tackled when the time comes. First, it would be nice to know if there is any interest in having these included and if anything needs to be improved. Max ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
Hi Max, I agree with Trevor. These arrowed accidentals would be great to have... even indispensable I would say. I'm sure many other composers will be interested in having them as well. I printed out your 20pt example sheet in a standard laser printer at 1200dpi. They look great. However, if you allow me to be ultra picky, I might suggest stretching the arrows slightly (maybe an extra 50%), keeping the width as it is. The reason being that the hight of the arrows now seems to be exactly that of the separation between staff lines, so when arrows fall on spaces (e.g. d'#, f'#) the staff pattern is not interrupted because the staff lines are not intersected by the arrow, which seems to me to make them a tiny bit less noticeable than when the arrows do break a line (e.g. c'#, e'#). If you make the arrows a bit longer, then they will always intersect a staff line (assuming they fall withing the staff of course), therefore (maybe) making them a bit more salient. Maybe a trivial observation, but it might be worth trying out. In terms of design I think they do look feta. Thanks again for the glyphs! Victor. On 10/18/07, Maximilian Albert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Trevor Bača wrote: These are outstanding! I don't have access to a true high-resolution printer, but the output on my end is perfectly legible and I'd very much like to have access to these new glyphs for use in my own scores. Thanks for your kind feedback. Much appreciated. :) Also, I have a question: have you given any thought to adding these same arrows to the quartertone accidentals as well? Indeed I have. But I figured it might be good to ask for some feedback first. :) It shouldn't be a big problem to get these working once the design is settled and approved, since they all have similar shapes and the arrow design is largely parametrized. Only the mirroredflat.flat symbol might cause a bit more work since the bottom is wider than that of the other symbols so that some curves may need to be adapted in order to integrate smoothly with the arrowshaft. But that can be tackled when the time comes. First, it would be nice to know if there is any interest in having these included and if anything needs to be improved. Max ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Microtone accidentals
On 10/8/07, Maximilian Albert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, here is the last and biggest unfinished project that has been resting on my hard drive for a while: Arrowed accidentals for microtone notation. At present Lilypond already has good support for quarter- and other microtones (see, e.g., section 6.1.4 of the manual or the NEWS file of v2.11 where Turkish makam music is mentioned). But from earlier requests on this list it seems that at least some composers frequently use accidentals with up- and down-arrows to indicate microtones, which is not yet natively supported by Lilypond (although I seem to remember another thread proposing a postcript-based workaround). Inspired by a request a while ago I started to implement these arrowed accidentals as new glyphs in their own right. At that time I encountered problems with the design of the arrowhead because it either turned out too small or was poorly separated from the surrounding stafflines. Attached is a sample [1] of redesigned glyphs where this problem is hopefully solved. IMHO the size, blackness, and overall style of the arrowheads goes together well the accidentals, but I have the slight fear that the arrowheads might be a bit too small to be legible when printed. Unfortunately I don't own a high resolution printer myself, so I can only judge the design based on the visual appearance on the screen (which seems to be fine). Thus I would be extremely grateful if someone with a good printer could comment on the design (of course, other comments from the experts and interested users are very welcome, too). If there are no problems related to legibility and the design is approved of by the main developers, I'd be glad to send over a patch (I presume that there is interest to include them in Lilypond?). Otherwise please let me know how the glyphs can be improved (or at least what is wrong with them). I don't know the exact timeline for v2.12, and I will be able to invest only little time in the near future, I'm afraid, but if there is interest to include them and it turns out that not too many adaptions need to be made, it would be terrific if they made it into the new stable release. Hi Max, These are outstanding! I don't have access to a true high-resolution printer, but the output on my end is perfectly legible and I'd very much like to have access to these new glyphs for use in my own scores. So the versions here certainly have my vote of approval. What do the real engraving gurus on the list think? Engraving gurus? Also, I have a question: have you given any thought to adding these same arrows to the quartertone accidentals as well? Some composers (myself included here) use the regular quartertone accidentals when we mean a pitch that is *exactly* within 24-tone ET and then use the arrowed accidentals to mean just a little bit higher (or lower) than exact pitch specified by the accidental. (I guess this means that I use the arrows to indicate a type of detuning relative to the exact pitch specified by the base accidental.) I don't mean to induce scope creep on your work ... but I'm fairly certain that the arrowed accidentals will meet with very good adoption and ... it will be only a matter of time before you receive the feature request! :-) These arrowed accidentals will be a real asset to Lily; I hope the folks with the really sharp eyes approve the design and that we can make these available in the standard distribution soon! Trevor. -- Trevor Bača [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Microtone accidentals
Hi everyone, here is the last and biggest unfinished project that has been resting on my hard drive for a while: Arrowed accidentals for microtone notation. At present Lilypond already has good support for quarter- and other microtones (see, e.g., section 6.1.4 of the manual or the NEWS file of v2.11 where Turkish makam music is mentioned). But from earlier requests on this list it seems that at least some composers frequently use accidentals with up- and down-arrows to indicate microtones, which is not yet natively supported by Lilypond (although I seem to remember another thread proposing a postcript-based workaround). Inspired by a request a while ago I started to implement these arrowed accidentals as new glyphs in their own right. At that time I encountered problems with the design of the arrowhead because it either turned out too small or was poorly separated from the surrounding stafflines. Attached is a sample [1] of redesigned glyphs where this problem is hopefully solved. IMHO the size, blackness, and overall style of the arrowheads goes together well the accidentals, but I have the slight fear that the arrowheads might be a bit too small to be legible when printed. Unfortunately I don't own a high resolution printer myself, so I can only judge the design based on the visual appearance on the screen (which seems to be fine). Thus I would be extremely grateful if someone with a good printer could comment on the design (of course, other comments from the experts and interested users are very welcome, too). If there are no problems related to legibility and the design is approved of by the main developers, I'd be glad to send over a patch (I presume that there is interest to include them in Lilypond?). Otherwise please let me know how the glyphs can be improved (or at least what is wrong with them). I don't know the exact timeline for v2.12, and I will be able to invest only little time in the near future, I'm afraid, but if there is interest to include them and it turns out that not too many adaptions need to be made, it would be terrific if they made it into the new stable release. Cheers, Max [1] In two versions: Both as a kind of proof sheet for on-screen inspection (which features a really huge staffsize) and also with normal-sized (= 20pt) staves for printing. arrowed_accidentals_big.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document arrowed_accidentals.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
