RE: what does adorn mean in this context? question continues GDP

[Trevor Daniels]

Hi Jay

I'd rewite the sentence containing 'adorn' as:

There are two music functions, balloonGrobText and balloonText.  The former is 
used like rather like \once \override to attach text to any grob, and the 
latter is used like \tweak, typically within chords, to attach text to an 
individual note when there are several occuring at the same musical moment.

Perhaps a clearer example would be:

\new Voice \with { \consists "Balloon_engraver" }
 {
   \balloonGrobText #'Stem #'(3 . 4) \markup { "I'm a Stem" }
   a'8
   8
 }

HTH

Trevor

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+t.daniels=treda.co.u
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
> Jay Hamilton
> Sent: 22 February 2008 03:17
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Re:what does adorn mean in this context? 
> question continues GDP
> 
> 
> I knew/know what adorn in English and 
> articulations are in music however in the context 
> of 1.7.2.1 of the GDP they don't seem to mean 
> that.  What is 'adorned' here?  Does it mean 
> enhanced? (not to me)  And looking at the code 
> and seeing the result does anyone see a 
> difference between text and GrobText?
> 
> Just need an clearer way to say whatever it is 
> that is happening with this code.
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> 
> Yours-
> Jay
> 
> Jay Hamilton
> www.soundand.com
> 206-328-7694
> 
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:20:09 +0100
> From: Nicholas WASTELL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: what does adorn mean in this context? GDP
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> 
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:26:58 -0800
> "Jay Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > There are two music functions, balloonGrobText 
> and balloonText; the former takes the name of the 
> grob to adorn, while the latter may be used as an 
> articulation on a note. The other arguments are 
> the offset and the text of the label.
> > 
> > the words after the semicolon (;) look like 
> they make sense but adorn and articulation don't 
> really make sense
> 
> I'm a native English (en-GB) speaker, but I am 
> not familiar with the balloon function. ;-)  However:
> 
> To adorn is to decorate and enhance.  It's rather 
> an old-fashioned word, I suppose. 


Articulation in this context is a musical term, meaning a mark (e.g., accent, 
staccato dot, stopped mark) against a note showing how it should be delivered 
(i.e., articulated).  

It doesn't explain (to me) the difference between the two functions.  I'd have 
a look in LSR, but it appears to be down at the moment.

hth,

Nick.
-- 
Nicholas WASTELL
France




___
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: Error about paper block?

[Mats Bengtsson]

If you check carefully what line number LilyPond complains about,
you'll probably notice that it's the \layout block within the \book
block. As the following small example shows, it not related to
if you have any \paper block or not.


\book{

{c d e f R1*5 }

\layout{\context{\Score skipBars = ##t } }
}

What's even worse is that the layout block is completely ignored.
I have no idea about why this limitation exists in the syntax and
there doesn't seem to be any syntax available to specify a
\layout setting that applies to all \score:s in one \book but not
to the other \book:s. If you only have a single \score in every
\book, then the simple solution is to include the \layout within
the \book block. Also, if the same layout setting should apply
to all book blocks in the file, then you can move it to the top level   
of the file.


Can any of the main hackers clarify this issue?

   /Mats

Ben Lewis wrote:

When running Lilypond, I'm continually getting a notice about a \paper { ... } 
block, when I have one at the top of my document. I'm preparing a file with 
multiple \book { ... } sections, each with a \layout { ... } block. Is there 
something special about this that I need to know?

~Ben
 




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
 




--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Several issues transcribing ancient notation (clefs, noteheads, spacing)

[Gilles THIBAULT]

As a little help, there is an LSR snippet that takes given notes and 
applies

the same rhythm to them (i.e. it applies certain durations to the passed
notes), so I suppose it should be able to adjust it to your needs:

http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=346


You have that, too
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=390 




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

text spanner to short

[Stefan Thomas]

Dear lilypond users,
in the below quoted file, the end of the text spanner is a little bit to
early, in my opinion. What can I do, to move it a little to the right?
Thanks for Your help
Stefan

mute = {\textSpannerUp \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
\markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style = #'dashed-line
\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01 \override TextSpanner
#'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) } }

 \relative
{ \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Collisions in tuplet beams across staffs

[Oscar van Eijk]

Hi all,


I've written arpeggios using tuplets with this code:

\times 8/7 { es,,32 g bes es  \change Staff = upper g bes es}
\times 8/7 { g es bes g \change Staff = lower es bes g}
\times 8/7 { es g bes es  \change Staff = upper g bes es}
\times 8/7 { g es bes g \change Staff = lower es bes g}

It used to work ok with v2.6.0, but in 2.10+ I can't get the tuplet
beams right anymore; see the attached screenshots.
Overriding the direction doesn't seem to help me:

\times 8/7 { \override TupletBracket #'direction = #down es,,32 g bes es
\change Staff = upper \override TupletBracket #'direction = #up g bes
es}


I tried 2.11.40 as well; that has the same result as the 2.11.39
screenshot.

Any suggestions? Is this a bug?
Thanks in advance,
Oscar
<><><>___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re:what does adorn mean in this context? question continues GDP

[Ian Hulin]

Jay Hamilton wrote:

I knew/know what adorn in English and articulations are in music however in the 
context of 1.7.2.1 of the GDP they don't seem to mean that.  What is 'adorned' 
here?  Does it mean enhanced? (not to me)  And looking at the code and seeing 
the result does anyone see a difference between text and GrobText?

Just need an clearer way to say whatever it is that is happening with this code.

Thanks in advance.


Yours-
Jay

Jay Hamilton
www.soundand.com
206-328-7694


Message: 6
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2008 09:20:09 +0100
From: Nicholas WASTELL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: what does adorn mean in this context? GDP
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:26:58 -0800
"Jay Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  

There are two music functions, balloonGrobText and balloonText; the former 
takes the name of the grob to adorn, while the latter may be used as an 
articulation on a note. The other arguments are the offset and the text of the 
label.

the words after the semicolon (;) look like they make sense but adorn and 
articulation don't really make sense



I'm a native English (en-GB) speaker, but I am not familiar with the balloon 
function. ;-)  However:

To adorn is to decorate and enhance.  It's rather an old-fashioned word, I suppose. 


Articulation in this context is a musical term, meaning a mark (e.g., accent, 
staccato dot, stopped mark) against a note showing how it should be delivered (i.e., 
articulated).  

It doesn't explain (to me) the difference between the two functions.  I'd have 
a look in LSR, but it appears to be down at the moment.

hth,

Nick.
  

"There are two music functions, balloonGrobText and balloonText; the former takes 
the name of the grob to adorn, while the latter may be used as an articulation on a note. 
The other arguments are the offset and the text of the label."


Jay, Nick,
I'm writing this  from similar perspective to Nick.
This is my best guess at what the original wanted to say:

"There are two music functions, /balloonGrobText /and /balloonText/; 
/balloonGrobText /takes the name of the grob to which the balloon is 
attached, while you may use /balloonText /if the balloon is to behave 
similarly to the way an articulation does when it is attached to a note. "


The resulting English is fairly horrible but I think it puts back some 
of the facts that got distilled out when the original documenters were 
trying to go for conciseness.


Hope this helps rather than obfuscates

Cheers,

Ian Hulin


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: GDP: Repeats

[Ian Hulin]

Palmer, Ralph wrote:


Hi, All -

I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation Reference, 
and I don't care for the existing structure. Currently, it looks like 
this:


1.4 Repeats

1.4.1 Writing repeats

1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax

1.4.1.2 Normal repeats

1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands

1.4.2 Other repeats

1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats

1.4.2.2 Measure repeats

However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for all the 
repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it  out of the 
section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:


1.4 Repeats

1.4.1 Repeat syntax

1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats

(introduction of the syntactic
construct)

(following types of repetition are
supported . . .)

1.4.2 Writing repeats

1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better
term than "normal")

1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands

1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats

1.4.2.4 Measure repeats

It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax, 
followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats supported.


Comments, please?

Ralph



This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
http://www.netintelligence.com/email


This looks like it needs an overhaul.  I'd suggest you went for:

  1. Writing Repeats

1. Types of Repeat Supported

  (following types of repeat are supported and what 
they mean, don't describe how this is implemented in the syntax yet)


  1. Section repeats - covering several bars/measures
 ( i.e. ||:   |||| |  :||  )
1. Simple section repeats
2. Section repeats with varying endings
  2. One-and two bar/measure repeats
 (repeating a single bar/measure)
 (repeating a two-bar phrase)
  3. Single-note repeats/measure
 (tremolos)
  4. Manual repeats to save typing
 (no special notation produced, just the sequence of notes
 printed however many times)

2. Syntax of  repeat command
   (structure this like the previous section, but show what you
   code with \repeat to achieve this, and the output)
  1. Section repeats - covering several bars/measures
1. Simple section repeats
2. Section repeats with varying endings
  2. One-and two bar/measure repeats
 (repeating a single bar/measure)
 (repeating a two-bar phrase)
  3. Single-note repeats/measure
 (tremolos)
  4. Manual repeats to save typing
 (no special notation produced, just the sequence of
 notes printed however many times)

(Please note I couldn't reproduce the structured headings in my mail 
client, but I meain 1.4 Writing Repeats, 1.4.1 Types of Repeats 
Supported, 1.4.1.1  Section Repeats etc.)


Cheers,

Ian Hulin
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RE: Repeats

[Trevor Daniels]

Hi Ralph

I'd go for the simpler structure:

1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.2 Normal repeats
1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
1.4.5 Measure repeats

This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also removing a level is
good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
distinguish them from the syntax section but I don't think
that's necessary.

Trevor D

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: GDP: Repeats


Hi, All -
I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation
Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
Currently, it looks like this:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Writing repeats
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2 Other repeats
1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for
all the repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it
out of the section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
(introduction of the syntactic construct)
(following types of repetition are supported . . .)
1.4.2 Writing repeats
1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
"normal")
1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
supported.
Comments, please?
Ralph



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Repeats

[Mats Bengtsson]

Don't forget that it probably isn't obvious to most first time readers that
a tremolo or measure repeat is even considered a repeat, i.e. they won't
look in the section called repeats.
Also, don't forget about \repeat unfold, which actually is very useful
in some circumstances, but perhaps doesn't require a subsection of its own.

  /Mats

Trevor Daniels wrote:

Hi Ralph

I'd go for the simpler structure:

1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.2 Normal repeats
1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
1.4.5 Measure repeats

This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also removing a level is
good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
distinguish them from the syntax section but I don't think
that's necessary.

Trevor D

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: GDP: Repeats


Hi, All -
I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation
Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
Currently, it looks like this:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Writing repeats
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2 Other repeats
1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for
all the repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it
out of the section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
(introduction of the syntactic construct)
(following types of repetition are supported . . .)
1.4.2 Writing repeats
1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
"normal")
1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
supported.
Comments, please?
Ralph



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
  


--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
School of Electrical Engineering
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Repeats

[Mats Bengtsson]

Also, could we find a better term than "Measure repeats", so that it
covers also \repeat percent 4 { c4 }. I think we used to have the title
"percent repeats" in some old version of the manual, but I'm not sure
if that rings a bell either, for most readers.

   /Mats

Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Don't forget that it probably isn't obvious to most first time readers 
that

a tremolo or measure repeat is even considered a repeat, i.e. they won't
look in the section called repeats.
Also, don't forget about \repeat unfold, which actually is very useful
in some circumstances, but perhaps doesn't require a subsection of its 
own.


  /Mats

Trevor Daniels wrote:

Hi Ralph

I'd go for the simpler structure:

1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.2 Normal repeats
1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
1.4.5 Measure repeats

This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also removing a level is
good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
distinguish them from the syntax section but I don't think
that's necessary.

Trevor D

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: GDP: Repeats


Hi, All -
I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation
Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
Currently, it looks like this:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Writing repeats
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2 Other repeats
1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for
all the repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it
out of the section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:
1.4 Repeats
1.4.1 Repeat syntax
1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
(introduction of the syntactic construct)
(following types of repetition are supported . . .)
1.4.2 Writing repeats
1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
"normal")
1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
supported.
Comments, please?
Ralph



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
  




--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
School of Electrical Engineering
Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
   Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: text spanner to short

[Trevor Bača]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Thomas <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Dear lilypond users,
> in the below quoted file, the end of the text spanner is a little bit to
> early, in my opinion. What can I do, to move it a little to the right?
> Thanks for Your help
> Stefan
>
> mute = {\textSpannerUp \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text
> = \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style = #'dashed-line
> \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01 \override TextSpanner
> #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) } }
>
>  \relative
> { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 
> }



Hi Stefan,

There's an #'attach-dir property that's useful for this sort of thing.
TextSpanner #'left #'attach-dir defaults to #-1 (meaning the left edge of
the parent notehead). This makes sense. Oddly, however, TextSpanner #'right
#'attach-dir likewise defaults to #-1. This is weird. It would be better for
TextSpanner #'right #'attach-dir to default to #1 (meaning the *RIGHT* edge
of the parent notehead).

Fortunately, this is easy to override:

%%% BEGIN %%%

\version "2.11.34"

mute = {
   \textSpannerUp
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
  \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
 #'dashed-line
   \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
  \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
   }

 \relative
{ \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }

%%% END %%%


Now the spanner nib lines up exactly at the right edge of the final
notehead.

Personally, I prefer the spanner to be even a bit longer in the X direction.
There's a padding attribute that is helpful here:


%%% BEGIN %%%

\version "2.11.34"

mute = {
   \textSpannerUp
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
  \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
 #'dashed-line
   \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
  \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #-0.5
   }

 \relative
{ \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }


%%% END %%%


Note that you could make all of your adjusts using only #'right #'padding.
But it's better to set #'right #'attach-dir first, and then save #'right
#'padding for optical tweaks only.




-- 
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: text spanner to short

[Trevor Bača]

On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:28 AM, Trevor Bača <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Thomas <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Dear lilypond users,
> > in the below quoted file, the end of the text spanner is a little bit to
> > early, in my opinion. What can I do, to move it a little to the right?
> > Thanks for Your help
> > Stefan
> >
> > mute = {\textSpannerUp \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left
> > #'text = \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
> > #'dashed-line \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01 \override
> > TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1)
> > } }
> >
> >  \relative
> > { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 
> > }
>
>
>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> There's an #'attach-dir property that's useful for this sort of thing.
> TextSpanner #'left #'attach-dir defaults to #-1 (meaning the left edge of
> the parent notehead). This makes sense. Oddly, however, TextSpanner #'right
> #'attach-dir likewise defaults to #-1. This is weird. It would be better for
> TextSpanner #'right #'attach-dir to default to #1 (meaning the *RIGHT* edge
> of the parent notehead).
>
> Fortunately, this is easy to override:
>
> %%% BEGIN %%%
>
> \version "2.11.34"
>
> mute = {
>\textSpannerUp
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
>   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
>  #'dashed-line
>\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
>   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
>}
>
>  \relative
> { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
>
> %%% END %%%
>
>
> Now the spanner nib lines up exactly at the right edge of the final
> notehead.
>
> Personally, I prefer the spanner to be even a bit longer in the X
> direction. There's a padding attribute that is helpful here:
>
>
> %%% BEGIN %%%
>
> \version "2.11.34"
>
> mute = {
>\textSpannerUp
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
>   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
>  #'dashed-line
>\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
>   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #-0.5
>}
>
>  \relative
> { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
>
>
> %%% END %%%
>
>
> Note that you could make all of your adjusts using only #'right #'padding.
> But it's better to set #'right #'attach-dir first, and then save #'right
> #'padding for optical tweaks only.
>


Oh, and you might like to try setting #'stencil-align-dir-y to #0 to try out
centering the spanner vertically relative to the left text.

And you might also try changing "mute" to "mute " (note the extra space) as
a way of getting some whitespace after the left text and before the start of
the spanner.

So the complete cluster of settings might look like this:


%%% BEGIN %%%

\version "2.11.34"

mute = {
   \textSpannerUp
   \override TextSpanner #'style = #'dashed-line
   \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
  \markup {\italic "mute " }
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'stencil-align-dir-y = #0
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
  \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
   \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #-0.5
   }

 \relative
{ \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }

%%% END %%%






-- 
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RE: Repeats

[Trevor Daniels]

How about "Repeating note patterns"?  Perhaps an example of
\repeat unfold could be included here too, then.

Trevor D

> -Original Message-
> From: Mats Bengtsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 22 February 2008 15:11
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org; Palmer, Ralph
> Subject: Re: Repeats
>
>
> Also, could we find a better term than "Measure
> repeats", so that it
> covers also \repeat percent 4 { c4 }. I think we
> used to have the title
> "percent repeats" in some old version of the
> manual, but I'm not sure
> if that rings a bell either, for most readers.
>
> /Mats
>
> Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> > Don't forget that it probably isn't obvious to
> most first time readers
> > that
> > a tremolo or measure repeat is even considered
> a repeat, i.e. they won't
> > look in the section called repeats.
> > Also, don't forget about \repeat unfold, which
> actually is very useful
> > in some circumstances, but perhaps doesn't
> require a subsection of its
> > own.
> >
> >   /Mats
> >
> > Trevor Daniels wrote:
> >> Hi Ralph
> >>
> >> I'd go for the simpler structure:
> >>
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.2 Normal repeats
> >> 1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.5 Measure repeats
> >>
> >> This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
> >> removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
> >> Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also
> removing a level is
> >> good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
> >> distinguish them from the syntax section but I
> don't think
> >> that's necessary.
> >>
> >> Trevor D
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+t.daniels=treda.co.u
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
> >> Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
> >> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> >> Subject: GDP: Repeats
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, All -
> >> I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in
> the Notation
> >> Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
> >> Currently, it looks like this:
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Writing repeats
> >> 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
> >> 1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.2 Other repeats
> >> 1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
> >> However, since Repeat syntax discusses the
> common syntax for
> >> all the repeats, it would seem to make more
> sense to take it
> >> out of the section dealing with normal. I'd
> like to suggest:
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
> >> (introduction of the syntactic construct)
> >> (following types of repetition are supported . . .)
> >> 1.4.2 Writing repeats
> >> 1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
> >> "normal")
> >> 1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
> >> It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
> >> Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
> >> supported.
> >> Comments, please?
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> lilypond-user mailing list
> >> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> >>
> >
>
> --
> =
>   Mats Bengtsson
>   Signal Processing
>   School of Electrical Engineering
>   Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
>   SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
>   Sweden
>   Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
> Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
>   Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
> =
>
>



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: text spanner to short

[Stefan Thomas]

Dear Trevor,
many thanks for Your very useful tip and Your excellent explanations! It
works exactly, how I want to have it.
One last question: If I use later in the score other text-spanners (like e.g.
ritardando ) do I have to revert the settings? Or would it maybee better to
use \once \override instead of \override?

2008/2/22, Trevor Bača <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Thomas <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Dear lilypond users,
> > in the below quoted file, the end of the text spanner is a little bit to
> > early, in my opinion. What can I do, to move it a little to the right?
> > Thanks for Your help
> > Stefan
> >
> > mute = {\textSpannerUp \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left
> > #'text = \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
> > #'dashed-line \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01 \override
> > TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1)
> > } }
> >
> >  \relative
> > { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 
> > }
>
>
>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> There's an #'attach-dir property that's useful for this sort of thing.
> TextSpanner #'left #'attach-dir defaults to #-1 (meaning the left edge of
> the parent notehead). This makes sense. Oddly, however, TextSpanner #'right
> #'attach-dir likewise defaults to #-1. This is weird. It would be better for
> TextSpanner #'right #'attach-dir to default to #1 (meaning the *RIGHT* edge
> of the parent notehead).
>
> Fortunately, this is easy to override:
>
> %%% BEGIN %%%
>
> \version "2.11.34"
>
> mute = {
>\textSpannerUp
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
>   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
>  #'dashed-line
>\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
>   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
>}
>
>  \relative
> { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
>
> %%% END %%%
>
>
> Now the spanner nib lines up exactly at the right edge of the final
> notehead.
>
> Personally, I prefer the spanner to be even a bit longer in the X
> direction. There's a padding attribute that is helpful here:
>
>
> %%% BEGIN %%%
>
> \version "2.11.34"
>
> mute = {
>\textSpannerUp
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
>   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
>  #'dashed-line
>\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
> \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
>   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
>\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #-0.5
>}
>
>  \relative
> { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
>
>
> %%% END %%%
>
>
> Note that you could make all of your adjusts using only #'right #'padding.
> But it's better to set #'right #'attach-dir first, and then save #'right
> #'padding for optical tweaks only.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Trevor Bača
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: text spanner to short

[Trevor Bača]

Hi Stefan,

Probably it's best to create a macro just like you've done, but use \once
\override. Then you can call the macro immediately before each mute spanner.
And your settings will apply to your mute spanners only.

(On the other hand, if your score contained only these mute spanners, then
it would make sense to make all of these settings global and enduring with
\override like you have now, possibly even in the \layout block.)

Trevor.

2008/2/22 Stefan Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Dear Trevor,
> many thanks for Your very useful tip and Your excellent explanations! It
> works exactly, how I want to have it.
> One last question: If I use later in the score other text-spanners (like
> e.g. ritardando ) do I have to revert the settings? Or would it maybee
> better to use \once \override instead of \override?
>
> 2008/2/22, Trevor Bača <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Stefan Thomas <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear lilypond users,
> > > in the below quoted file, the end of the text spanner is a little bit
> > > to early, in my opinion. What can I do, to move it a little to the right?
> > > Thanks for Your help
> > > Stefan
> > >
> > > mute = {\textSpannerUp \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left
> > > #'text = \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
> > > #'dashed-line \override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01 \override
> > > TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text = \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . 
> > > -1)
> > > } }
> > >
> > >  \relative
> > > { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 
> > > }
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > There's an #'attach-dir property that's useful for this sort of thing.
> > TextSpanner #'left #'attach-dir defaults to #-1 (meaning the left edge of
> > the parent notehead). This makes sense. Oddly, however, TextSpanner #'right
> > #'attach-dir likewise defaults to #-1. This is weird. It would be better for
> > TextSpanner #'right #'attach-dir to default to #1 (meaning the *RIGHT* edge
> > of the parent notehead).
> >
> > Fortunately, this is easy to override:
> >
> > %%% BEGIN %%%
> >
> > \version "2.11.34"
> >
> > mute = {
> >\textSpannerUp
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
> >   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
> >  #'dashed-line
> >\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
> >   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
> >}
> >
> >  \relative
> > { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
> >
> > %%% END %%%
> >
> >
> > Now the spanner nib lines up exactly at the right edge of the final
> > notehead.
> >
> > Personally, I prefer the spanner to be even a bit longer in the X
> > direction. There's a padding attribute that is helpful here:
> >
> >
> > %%% BEGIN %%%
> >
> > \version "2.11.34"
> >
> > mute = {
> >\textSpannerUp
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'left #'text =
> >   \markup {\italic "mute" } \override TextSpanner #'style =
> >  #'dashed-line
> >\override TextSpanner #'dash-period = #0.01
> > \override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'attach-dir = #1
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'text =
> >   \markup { \draw-line #'(0 . -1) }
> >\override TextSpanner #'bound-details #'right #'padding = #-0.5
> >}
> >
> >  \relative
> > { \mute d\startTextSpan e f e d2\stopTextSpan c1 }
> >
> >
> > %%% END %%%
> >
> >
> > Note that you could make all of your adjusts using only #'right
> > #'padding. But it's better to set #'right #'attach-dir first, and then save
> > #'right #'padding for optical tweaks only.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Trevor Bača
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>


-- 
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: send you all the files

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Am Freitag, 22. Februar 2008 schrieben Sie:
>   Sorry for missending files because of  errors of my screen reader. I
> again included my piece for orchestra. The Xml file is here too, to see why
> it can't be converted. 

Thanks, I found the problem in musicxml2ly and will be committing the fix 
shortly, so it will be in 2.11.41 or so.

> And I don't know whether you can do ly2xml tool. 

Actually, this should be implemented directly in lilypond by a musicxml 
backend. However, this is currently way too much work and also requires way 
more knowledge about the lilypond internals than I have. Sorry.

Cheers,
Reinhold


- -- 
- --
Reinhold Kainhofer, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial and Actuarial Mathematics, TU Wien, http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/
 * K Desktop Environment, http://www.kde.org, KOrganizer maintainer
 * Chorvereinigung "Jung-Wien", http://www.jung-wien.at/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHvvhUTqjEwhXvPN0RAmqkAKCJT6vPeBFSNKdTolDqJsJeDCNNQwCfXEOh
KUUJQOOTv4u/OUQsxUXGicU=
=A0Nw
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Repeats

[Graham Percival]

I changed it about two years ago; a few users complained
that "perfect repeats" didn't make sense.  (a fake musical
term, or wasn't understandable by non-English readers, or
something like that).

Cheers,
- Graham


On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:11:00 +0100
Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Also, could we find a better term than "Measure repeats", so that it
> covers also \repeat percent 4 { c4 }. I think we used to have the
> title "percent repeats" in some old version of the manual, but I'm
> not sure if that rings a bell either, for most readers.
> 
> /Mats
> 
> Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> > Don't forget that it probably isn't obvious to most first time
> > readers that
> > a tremolo or measure repeat is even considered a repeat, i.e. they
> > won't look in the section called repeats.
> > Also, don't forget about \repeat unfold, which actually is very
> > useful in some circumstances, but perhaps doesn't require a
> > subsection of its own.
> >
> >   /Mats
> >
> > Trevor Daniels wrote:
> >> Hi Ralph
> >>
> >> I'd go for the simpler structure:
> >>
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.2 Normal repeats
> >> 1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.5 Measure repeats
> >>
> >> This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
> >> removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
> >> Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also removing a level is
> >> good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
> >> distinguish them from the syntax section but I don't think
> >> that's necessary.
> >>
> >> Trevor D
> >>
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
> >> Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
> >> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> >> Subject: GDP: Repeats
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi, All -
> >> I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation
> >> Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
> >> Currently, it looks like this:
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Writing repeats
> >> 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
> >> 1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.2 Other repeats
> >> 1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
> >> However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for
> >> all the repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it
> >> out of the section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:
> >> 1.4 Repeats
> >> 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> >> 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
> >> (introduction of the syntactic construct)
> >> (following types of repetition are supported . . .)
> >> 1.4.2 Writing repeats
> >> 1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
> >> "normal")
> >> 1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
> >> 1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
> >> 1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
> >> It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
> >> Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
> >> supported.
> >> Comments, please?
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> lilypond-user mailing list
> >> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> >> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> >>   
> >
> 
> -- 
> =
>   Mats Bengtsson
>   Signal Processing
>   School of Electrical Engineering
>   Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
>   SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
>   Sweden
>   Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
> Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
>   Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
> =
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: Repeats

[Graham Percival]

Well, we can't help a user who doesn't search the table of contents
or index for "tremolo".

It just occurred to me that we could probably remove "repeat syntax"
entirely with no ill effects:
1.4.1 Repeating phrases
1.4.1.1 Normal (volta) repeats
1.4.1.2 Written out repeats
%% note that volta and unfold are the only ones that \alternative
%% can be used for
1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands

1.4.2 Repeating notes
1.4.2.1 Tremolo
1.4.2.2 Measure


Given the wide variety in applications, I don't see the value
of trying to have a general syntax subsubsection.

Cheers,
- Graham

On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 16:03:11 +0100
Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Don't forget that it probably isn't obvious to most first time
> readers that a tremolo or measure repeat is even considered a repeat,
> i.e. they won't look in the section called repeats.
> Also, don't forget about \repeat unfold, which actually is very useful
> in some circumstances, but perhaps doesn't require a subsection of
> its own.
> 
>/Mats
> 
> Trevor Daniels wrote:
> > Hi Ralph
> >
> > I'd go for the simpler structure:
> >
> > 1.4 Repeats
> > 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> > 1.4.2 Normal repeats
> > 1.4.3 Manual repeat commands
> > 1.4.4 Tremolo repeats
> > 1.4.5 Measure repeats
> >
> > This puts the syntax at the front, as you wanted, and
> > removes the ugly, somewhat artificial, separation into
> > Writing repeats and Other repeats.  Also removing a level is
> > good.  You could add "Writing" before headings 2-5, to
> > distinguish them from the syntax section but I don't think
> > that's necessary.
> >
> > Trevor D
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Behalf Of Palmer, Ralph
> > Sent: 21 February 2008 21:04
> > To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> > Subject: GDP: Repeats
> >
> >
> > Hi, All -
> > I'm currently working on rewriting Repeats in the Notation
> > Reference, and I don't care for the existing structure.
> > Currently, it looks like this:
> > 1.4 Repeats
> > 1.4.1 Writing repeats
> > 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax
> > 1.4.1.2 Normal repeats
> > 1.4.1.3 Manual repeat commands
> > 1.4.2 Other repeats
> > 1.4.2.1 Tremolo repeats
> > 1.4.2.2 Measure repeats
> > However, since Repeat syntax discusses the common syntax for
> > all the repeats, it would seem to make more sense to take it
> > out of the section dealing with normal. I'd like to suggest:
> > 1.4 Repeats
> > 1.4.1 Repeat syntax
> > 1.4.1.1 Repeat syntax and types of repeats
> > (introduction of the syntactic construct)
> > (following types of repetition are supported . . .)
> > 1.4.2 Writing repeats
> > 1.4.2.1 Normal repeats (I'd prefer a better term than
> > "normal")
> > 1.4.2.2 Manual repeat commands
> > 1.4.2.3 Tremolo repeats
> > 1.4.2.4 Measure repeats
> > It might also make sense to split 1.4.1.1 into 1.4.1.1
> > Repeat syntax, followed by 1.4.1.2 Types of repeats
> > supported.
> > Comments, please?
> > Ralph
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> > lilypond-user@gnu.org
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> >   
> 
> -- 
> =
>   Mats Bengtsson
>   Signal Processing
>   School of Electrical Engineering
>   Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
>   SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
>   Sweden
>   Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
> Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
>   Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
> =
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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: what does adorn mean in this context? question continues GDP

[Nicholas WASTELL]

On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:17:23 -0800
"Jay Hamilton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>  What is 'adorned' here?

With decoration added?  Musical decoration, though -- turn, trill, prall, 
whatever -- though it is obviously text to be attached in a similar way.

From your original question:

> ... but adorn and articulation don't really make sense to a common English 
> reader ...

There's a limit to how far technical vocabulary can be simplified for common 
access.  You said you didn't understand those words: they actually seem quite 
reasonable to me.

-- 
Nicholas WASTELL
France



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

#'extra-offset not working

[David Bobroff]

I'm having a weird problem.  In the following example I'm able to move a 
rehearsal mark but not a \markup.  Am I missing something or is this 
some sort of bug?


-David

%%* BEGIN LILYPOND *

\version "2.11.40"

\score {
\relative c {
\set Score.skipBars = ##t
\once \override Score.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(0 . 4) 
R1*4^\markup{"some text taking up space"}
\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'extra-offset = #'(0 . -4)
\mark \default
R1*4
}
}

\paper {
ragged-right = ##t
}


%%* END LILYPOND *


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user