Hello
You don't say which version of LilyPond you are using, but I'm sure the
answers to your questions are contained in the documentation which came with
it.
I am using 2.11.35
Alternatively, you may find the answers in the documentation being
prepared for release 2.12, which can currently be found under the 2.11
development pages. To be more specific, look at chapters 2 and 3 in
the Learning Manual at
http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/Documentation/user/lilypond-learning/index.html.
These explain the concepts of Staff and Voice. I'd be interested to
hear if they help.
Yes, I had read that documentation and that was what prompted my
questions as well as the project I am currently working on.
2.3.1 Musical Expressions Explained.
The illustration of { { a4 g } fg} as rendered in sequence is
understandable, but the minute you used a mathematical analogy, you
lost me completely. It only complicated things for me.
polyphony:
Am I correct in assuming that it is that tells lilypond that it
is polyphonic? Although I know how they are used, I have never known
exactly what they mean.
In my mind, polyphony and the number of staves are not linked
concepts. One does not depend or imply the other. The number of staves
(to me) is merely for the convenience of the performers. So before
using lilypond, I didn't consider that piano music was mostly 4 part
polyphonic writing. I saw it as two handed -- two part. I then
considered the possibility of single voiced piano writing using two
hands. I hadn't thought that two hands might be playing one part
between them.
2.3.2
These Staff elements are then combined in parallel with and
The last sentence describes what happens *after* the \new staff is
created. So they are created in parallel| f with ... what if there are
no because there is no polyphony happening? Consider this
passage of piano music. I have only given two bars, but it continues
like this for 24 bars with no simultaneous notes. It is not
polyphonic, though it is divided between two hands as originally
written and as it is performed. In the score, right and left hands are
indicated completely by stem direction and not by presence or absence
on either staff (there is treble and bass clefs in the original). So
the clefs and staves are for ease of reading. The right hand has the
first beamed group, the left hand alternates with it after that. For
the sake of this question, I have not put this in a piano staff
context, though that is where it will ultimately reside. The previous
section has two voices, this B section is single voiced.
Schumann Kreisleriana opus 16 number 1 bar 25
\relative c''
\key d \minor
\clef treble
\time 2/4
trip = \times 2/3 % this may not be the correct way to crete this variable
g''16 | trip {f''[ bf' ] d'' } trip { f,[ bf' ] ef'' } trip { d''[ f,
] bf } trip { d'',[ bf, ] d'' } | trip { c''[ f', ] gf' } trip { ef'[
bf, ] d'' } trip { ef''[ f' ] g' } trip { ef'[ bf, ] d'' } |
This is the passage which prompted me to ask the quetsion after
reading the documentation. If this is polyphonic, then there must be
staff changes and rests or hidden rests. If not, then there are no
rests and no need for staff changes even if there are two staves
present. In the score there are no rests indicated where one hand is
silent, so it is really a single voice.
This puzzles me:
In terms of syntax, prepending \new to a music expression creates a
bigger music expression. In this way it resembles the minus sign in
mathematics. The formula (4+5) is an expression, so -(4+5) is a bigger
expression.
Arithmetically 4+5 = 9 AND (4+5) = (9)
-(4+5)= -(9) = -9
Or
Do you mean that the expression -(4+5) has more elements in it (that
is 6 elements) where (4+5) has only 5 elements in it?
Have I missed something here?
2.3.3
Piano music is typeset in two staves connected by a brace. Printing
such a staff is similar to the polyphonic example in Multiple staves.
However, now this entire expression is inserted inside a PianoStaff:
A point of confusion is what creates the polyphonic character, the
brace or the ? Would it be monophonic writing without the ?
Or would Lilypond simply be confused.
I think many of my questions arise from the divide between thinking of
a programmer and that of a non-programmer. I have read music for so
long that I no longer think about how I understand it, I simply read
it like you would read a book. So when I come to working with
Lilypond, I have to re-examine many of these things. I don't think
about English grammar when I read or write and often I may not even
completely understand my own grammatical choices. I may not even why
my sentence construction is correct.
--
David Fedoruk
B.Mus. UBC,1986
Certificate in Internet Systems Administration, UBC, 2003
http://recordjackethistorian.wordpress.com
Music is enough for one's life time, but one life time is not enough
for music Sergei
