Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Jean-Charles Malahieude wrote: > Le 22/03/2012 13:00, Janek Warchoł disait : >> >> On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila wrote: >>> Melismas are indicated in the score by slurs, so slur >>> equals melisma. >> >> Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes. > > I then use a "phrasing slur": a4\( \melisma b8 c\) \melismaEnd I did that, too. But sooner or later you'll stumble upon a piece where both portamento slur and phrasing slur happen simultaneously. Sure, there are workarounds - but what we need is a semantically correct solution, not a workaround. Using logical and structurally correct solutions is one of the most important advantages of LilyPond. On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 8:08 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Jean-Charles Malahieude writes: > >> The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even >> build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming >> is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*. > > Beaming is prefix? manual beaming is of course postfix, but what we need here is \autoBeamOn/Off, and that isn't a postevent. (we need autobeaming, because in long melismas notes aren't beamed all together. In long melismas notes are beamed almost like they would be done using autobeaming). cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Le 22/03/2012 20:20, Jean-Charles Malahieude disait :
Le 22/03/2012 20:08, David Kastrup disait :
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even
build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming
is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*.
Beaming is prefix?
just tried :
mbY = { \autoBeamOn \melisma } % melisma & beaming = Yes
mbN = { \melismaEnd \autoBeamOff } % melisma & beaming = No
\score {
\new Staff <<
\set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c' {
\time 3/4
f4 g8 \mbY f e f\mbN
\autoBeamOn e8( d \autoBeamOff e2)
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "melody" {
One -- two -- three __ }
>>
}
oops! too fast
I mean in fact that it would be more useful to have \melisma behave like
\autoBeamOn: "there will now will happen a melisma"
Cheers,
Jean-Charles
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Le 22/03/2012 20:08, David Kastrup disait :
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even
build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming
is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*.
Beaming is prefix?
just tried :
mbY = { \autoBeamOn \melisma } % melisma & beaming = Yes
mbN = { \melismaEnd \autoBeamOff } % melisma & beaming = No
\score {
\new Staff <<
\set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c' {
\time 3/4
f4 g8 \mbY f e f\mbN
\autoBeamOn e8( d \autoBeamOff e2)
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "melody" {
One -- two -- three __ }
>>
}
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes: > The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even > build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming > is *prefix* and melisma *postfix*. Beaming is prefix? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Le 22/03/2012 13:00, Janek Warchoł disait :
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila wrote:
2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł:
What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be
indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he
wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically
marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for
it, or something different (or nothing at all).
For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate
melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurs, so slur
equals melisma.
Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes.
I then use a "phrasing slur": a4\( \melisma b8 c\) \melismaEnd
But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of
that music in other contexts.
Glad that we agree here.
Also, one all-purpose melisma command would be simpler to understand for users.
Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be
chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing.
It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names
for commands and you can always define your shorter commands.
well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas
appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized.
But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut,
similarly to -\staccato and -.
The main problem in this case, in my opinion, is that you can't even
build a shortcut for combining melisma and autobeaming, since beaming is
*prefix* and melisma *postfix*.
By the way, I always write:
\new Staff <<
\set Staff.autoBeaming = ##f
\new Voice = "melody" { \notes }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "melody" { \words }
>>
in order to reuse \notes anywhere else.
Cheers,
Jean-Charles
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł : > well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas > appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized. > But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut, > similarly to -\staccato and -. Totally agreed. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Francisco Vila wrote: > 2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł : >> What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be >> indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he >> wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically >> marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for >> it, or something different (or nothing at all). > > For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate > melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur > equals melisma. Not always. Sometimes they're also used for portamento between syllabes. > But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of > that music in other contexts. Glad that we agree here. Also, one all-purpose melisma command would be simpler to understand for users. >> Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be >> chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. > > It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names > for commands and you can always define your shorter commands. well, we don't have a \slur and \slurEnd commands. Aslo, melismas appear so often that i think the syntax should be standarized. But i'm not at all against having both full name and shortcut, similarly to -\staccato and -. thanks, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
2012/3/22 Janek Warchoł : > The current behavior is bad, because it mixes two different things: > melismas themselves and how they are represented. If i use either slurs or > manual beams for melismas, i'm hardcoding some redundant (or at least > partially redundant) information into my source file. For example, if > i specify melismas using either slurs or manual beaming, i cannot > easily make an automatic keyboard reduction using previously entered > vocal variables, or change melisma representation to other style. > > What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be > indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he > wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically > marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for > it, or something different (or nothing at all). For (specifically) vocal scores, slurs are not redundant to indicate melismas. Melismas are indicated in the score by slurls, so slur equals melisma. It is also very convenient to type. We are talking about modern-style vocal music. But I agree on it would be good to separate both so to ease reusing of that music in other contexts. > Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be > chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. It is standard policy of lilypond's syntax to have meaningful names for commands and you can always define your shorter commands. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Automatic beaming in melismas
Moving from -user. On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Here's my opinion: > > 1. The default auto-beaming should produce scores which represent > the current best practice in the engraving industry, which is to ignore lyrics > (inside and outside melismas) and beam as if it were instrumental music. > > 2. \autoBeamOff should mean exactly that — no automatic beaming > (inside or outside a melisma) — or the command could be confusing. > > 3. In order to achieve "old" (e.g., 19th Century Novello) conventions, > there should be an *additional* or *different* switch that needs to be > "turned on" by the user, e.g. \vocalBeaming. Ok, if \vocalBeamOn would mean "turn autobeaming off outside of melismas, but automatically use beaming inside melismas", i'm all for it. On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Francisco Vila wrote: > And using slurs for melismas (which are interpreted as melismas by > lilypond) [...] > This way there is no need of the \melisma command in common modern practice. > > Also, manual beams do melismas automatically [...] The current behavior is bad, because it mixes two different things: melismas themselves and how they are represented. If i use either slurs or manual beams for melismas, i'm hardcoding some redundant (or at least partially redundant) information into my source file. For example, if i specify melismas using either slurs or manual beaming, i cannot easily make an automatic keyboard reduction using previously entered vocal variables, or change melisma representation to other style. What i suggest would be quite the opposite: every melisma should be indicated using a melisma command, and *then* user can decide how he wants melismas to look like: should every melisma be automatically marked with a slur, or a dotted slur, or should beaming be used for it, or something different (or nothing at all). Of course, a shorter (preferably one-character) command name should be chosen. \melisma and \melismaEnd is too much typing. > ([however manual beams are] not a solution for long melismas) Exactly. Since they don't make sense for long melismas, they're not a solution at all. How do you like this revised proposal? cheers, Janek ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
