Re: increasing the distance between tie and note generally

[Stefan Thomas]

Dear Neil,
thanks! Now I understand.

2009/4/3 Neil Puttock :
> 2009/4/3 Stefan Thomas :
>> Dear Neil,
>> I tried it with
>> \relative { c1 ~ c
>>  \override Tie #'(details ratio 1.2) \override Tie #'(details heigth-limit 
>> 13)
>>  c ~ c }
>> but without sucess!
>
> Overrides need an equals sign, even if the properties are nested.
>
> \override Tie #'(details ratio) = #1.2
>
> or
>
> \override Tie #'details #'ratio = #1.2
>
> Regards,
> Neil
>


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

Re: Music Glossary - 1.64 Concert Pitch (2.12.2)

[Paul Scott]

On Apr 3, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Anthony W. Youngman wrote:

In message  
<7ca3d5a30904031519ya3b89hb87cf8f81a544...@mail.gmail.com>, Neil  
Puttock  writes

2009/4/3 Anthony W. Youngman :
In message , Anthony W.  
Youngman

 writes


Ow!

Sorry, reading this was painful (I play the trombone, as many of  
you know

:-)


Replying to myself ... Just in case anyone didn't realise (and I  
certainly
didn't make myself clear :-) these are my revised versions that I  
think

should replace the existing entries. Feel free to edit and improve.


For example Concert A is 440Hz, the speed of sound in air is  
343m/s,
therefore an A clarinet (or any other A wind instrument) will  
have a length

of 343/440 = 78cm. (Or be a power of 2 longer or shorter.)


Concert A is definitely not the fundamental for an A clarinet: it's a
cylindrical tube stopped at one end, so the wavelength of the
fundamental is four times the length.  Since the lowest note on a
clarinet is usually the E below middle C unless it has an extension,
the fundamental would be C sharp (D on a B flat).


Ummm ... I think I might be getting physics fundamentals confused  
with musical fundamentals. But I'm COMPLETELY puzzled at your  
statement that the wavelength of the fundamental is FOUR times the  
length. I would guess the trombone is also "a cylindrical tube  
stopped at one end", and the wavelength of any note played must be  
an integral number of half-wavelengths. So we have 1/2-wavelength  
giving me a pedal Bb, 2/2 giving me the fundamental Bb, and 3/2  
giving me an F.


I don't see how the physics would work to give you a quarter- 
wavelength as you claim.



I just did some quick online research and he is right.  A tube closed  
on one end like a clarinet or trumpet has a wavelength that is four  
times the length of the tube.  A flute is open on both ends so it has  
a wavelength of double the length of the tube.





Concert A would be either the first (B flat clarinet) or second (A
clarinet) overblown note, i.e., third harmonic of  E or F.


Mmmm... I think that explains a lot. Most notes played by brass  
instruments are "overblown" in the wind sense - do most wind  
instruments mostly not overblow?



Sure! anything above the first octave of a conical instrument (flute,  
saxophone) or the first 12th of a cylindrical bore instrument  
(clarinet) is overblown or uses a vent key to give the same effect.



Paul





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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Andrew Hawryluk]

Thanks for catching this! Both have been fixed.

Andrew

On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 4:08 AM, Francisco Vila  wrote:
> 2009/4/3 Johan Vromans :
>> Andrew Hawryluk  writes:
>>
>>> http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html
>>
>> How did you make the image of the LilyPond Händel score? It suffers
>> from very thick vertical lines, similar to the Evince/PDF bug that has
>> been discussed here several times.
>>
>> It may turn readers away from LP.
>
> The Bach fragment also suffers from this.
>
> --
> Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
> www.paconet.org
>
>
> ___
> 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: Problem with barre music function

[Nick Payne]

> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Puttock [mailto:n.putt...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 4 April 2009 07:53
> To: Nick Payne
> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Problem with barre music function
> 
> 2009/4/3 Nick Payne :
> 
> > If that's the case, then the only solution I can see is the rather
> ugly hack of waiting until the score is complete so I can see where the
> line breaks fall, and then taking any spanner that has this problem and
> putting \stopTextSpan on the note after the note where it should
> actually end with manual tweaking of the RH padding so that it appears
> to end on the desired note.
> 
> You could also prevent the text spanner from being broken by editing
> the `meta' entry for TextSpanner in define-grobs.scm, though it might
> causing spacing problems:
> 
> (meta . ((class . Spanner)
>  (interfaces . (line-spanner-interface
> line-interface
> side-position-interface
> font-interface
> ; forbid breaks unless 'breakable = ##t
> unbreakable-spanner-interface))
> 
When I look at the present entry for that in define-grobs.scm (LP 2.12.2), it 
is:

(meta . ((class . Spanner)
 (object-callbacks . ((normal-stems . ,ly:beam::calc-normal-stems))) 
 (interfaces . (staff-symbol-referencer-interface
unbreakable-spanner-interface
beam-interface
font-interface))

Are you suggesting that I should comment that and replace it with what you have 
above?

Nick



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

Re: increasing the distance between tie and note generally

[Neil Puttock]

2009/4/3 Stefan Thomas :
> Dear Neil,
> I tried it with
> \relative { c1 ~ c
>  \override Tie #'(details ratio 1.2) \override Tie #'(details heigth-limit 13)
>  c ~ c }
> but without sucess!

Overrides need an equals sign, even if the properties are nested.

\override Tie #'(details ratio) = #1.2

or

\override Tie #'details #'ratio = #1.2

Regards,
Neil


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

Re: Problem with barre music function

[Neil Puttock]

2009/4/3 Nick Payne :

> If that's the case, then the only solution I can see is the rather ugly hack 
> of waiting until the score is complete so I can see where the line breaks 
> fall, and then taking any spanner that has this problem and putting 
> \stopTextSpan on the note after the note where it should actually end with 
> manual tweaking of the RH padding so that it appears to end on the desired 
> note.

You could also prevent the text spanner from being broken by editing
the `meta' entry for TextSpanner in define-grobs.scm, though it might
causing spacing problems:

(meta . ((class . Spanner)
 (interfaces . (line-spanner-interface
line-interface
side-position-interface
font-interface
; forbid breaks unless 'breakable = ##t
unbreakable-spanner-interface))

Regards,
Neil


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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op vrijdag 03-04-2009 om 23:27 uur [tijdzone +0800], schreef Graham
Percival:
> I really don't see anything in the comments that we need to be
> worried about.

You're probably right.  I have a hard time getting used to uninformed
posts on lwn.

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: test files for musicxml

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

Am Freitag, 3. April 2009 schrieb Laura Conrad:
> There's a site called  that has a lot of
> lead sheets in both PDF and musicxml.  The one I looked at first
>   (Edith Piaf's _La vie en rose_)
> might show up some problems with the musicxml2ly import of both chords
> and lyrics.

Yes, there are some nasty issues, in particular with inserting proper spacing 
notes and with lyrics on manually beamed notes (which lilypond understands as 
melisma...)

The other problem is that the MusicXML files use the chord type "dominant-
seventh", which does not exist in MusicXML. The correct chord type would be 
"dominant" for the dominant-seventh chord...
I've also fixed some other issues (in particular those bar check warnings) with 
chords. There are still some issues remaining...

Cheers,
Reinhold


- -- 
- --
Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJ1jR/TqjEwhXvPN0RAq4rAJ9eBWUGFFNiqPz6XmtLxJvPiYFZnACffPlW
maUpDAdij8A3kVPOKjqkTts=
=8/fI
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Graham Percival]

I really don't see anything in the comments that we need to be
worried about.  I mean, do you think that Microsoft programmers
freak out when they read (-1, troll) comments on slashdot?  If
there were intelligent, well-argued comments on LWN dissing
lilypond, I might care, but I haven't seen any yet.


As for LilyPond vs. Sibelius: if we do it, we should do it
objectively.  One thing we might do in the new website is to have
examples of notation from the latest software (lilypond stable,
finale 20XY, sibelius 20AB, etc) and point out flaws in the
default output.  We could then point out the ease (or not!) of
fixing said problems.

However, this section would need to be planned quite carefully.
First, we need to be fair in the assessments.  Second, it needs to
be easy to update as new software becomes available.  Third, we
need volunteers with access to the latest software.

Andrew Hawryluk: yes, I know.  :)

Cheers,
- Graham


On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 04:21:32PM +0200, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> There's been quite some bashing on Sibelius from the LilyPond side as  
> well, so we should probably not complain too much. I think we can agree  
> that both LilyPond and Sibelius are among the better options when it  
> comes to typesetting quality, right?
>
> /Mats
>
> Valentin Villenave wrote:
>> 2009/4/3 Dave Phillips :
>>   
>>> If your objection to LWN is re: someone else's comment on my articles, then
>>> that's fine with me. But if anyone has a problem with my articles per se I'd
>>> prefer they take it up with me, not with my publishers.
>>> 
>>
>> Not at all. It's just some comments that (by design, I think) lead us to 
>> react.
>>
>> On a personal note: a few months ago I was working on my opera with my
>> laptop at a parent/teachers reunion with my colleagues, and then a man
>> stops by and goes "oh, you're copying music, that's nice; what
>> software are you using?"
>>
>> Obviously, I immediately go astroturfing-mode, "This is the finest
>> piece of software you'll ever meet, it is a free software called
>> LilyPond and..."
>>
>> Him: "I do know LilyPond".
>>
>> Me: "Oh. Great, then!"
>>
>> Him: "... And I don't like it."
>>
>> Me: "Oh. Why is that? You know it must be the finest piece of..."
>>
>> Him: "Nah, it's just crap. That's all."
>>
>> Me: "But, do you know how many things you can achieve with LilyPond?
>> It has more features than..."
>>
>> Him: "Nothing any decent software can't do. LilyPond just makes it harder."
>>
>> Me: "But the quality of its output is..."
>>
>> Him: "No, it's just plain shit. Listen, I understand you're making a
>> big score; you have to use a /real/ music software. Why don't you come
>> next Saturday, I'll show you some stuff?"
>>
>> Me: "??? What is there on Saturday?"
>>
>> Him: "It's the Sibelius Demonstration Day, at Steinberg France."
>>
>> Me: "..."
>>
>> Him: "... I work there."
>>
>>
>>
>> What's the phrase already? First they ignore you...
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Valentin
>>
>>
>> ___
>> 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: mats.bengts...@ee.kth.se
>   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: test files for musicxml

[Paul Scott]

Laura Conrad wrote:

There's a site called  that has a lot of
lead sheets in both PDF and musicxml.  The one I looked at first
  (Edith Piaf's _La vie en rose_)
might show up some problems with the musicxml2ly import of both chords
and lyrics.
  


What's most interesting is that the few that I looked at say they were 
engraved by Lilypond.  In my few minutes there I didn't see if we could 
get the Lily source.


Paul Scott





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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Mostly, in such situations, I let the text editor do the job.  The
> simplest solution is simply to use copy/paste, but many text editors
> also allows you to define macros that can be useful in these
> situations.

This is error prone.  In piano music, after, say, seven similar chords
it suddenly happens that single note differs.

> Yet another alternative is to let LilyPond do the job, either using
> simple techniques like \repeat unfold {} or Scheme based
> solutions like http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=390,
> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=390 or
> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=346.

IMHO, this is visually unattractive while reading a lilypond source
and takes far too much time to enter.  I really can't understand why
there is so much resistance to a one-letter chord repeat item --
ideally an unused letter like `q' or another ascii character (as the
proposed `&').


Werner


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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op vrijdag 03-04-2009 om 15:50 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Valentin
Villenave:

Hi Valentin,

> On a personal note: 


LOL, hilarious.  Thanks Valentin.  We should have added this with much
pump and circumstance to our new website/what users think page two days
ago :-)

Maybe next year?

Greetings,
Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Laura Conrad]

> "Mats" == Mats Bengtsson  writes:

Mats> I think we can agree that both LilyPond and Sibelius are
Mats> among the better options when it comes to typesetting
Mats> quality, right?

Sibelius is certainly not one of the better options for establishing
communication with free software.  

They usually have a booth at the Boston Early Music Festival, so one
time I decided to discuss both LINUX and ABC import.  The guy turned
purple and assured me that there was no business reason for doing
either of those things, because all those people want is to get
software for free without paying for it.

-- 
Laura   (mailto:lcon...@laymusic.org http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139   

>From a pound of iron worth a few pennies can be made many thousand
watch-springs, which are worth hundreds of thousands. Put to good use
the pound that God has given you.

Robert Schumann, Preface to 'Album für die Jugend'


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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Joseph Wakeling]

Valentin Villenave wrote:
> What's the phrase already? First they ignore you...

You have forgotten the positive ending of that phrase ... :-)

"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you,
then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi



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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Mats Bengtsson]

There's been quite some bashing on Sibelius from the LilyPond side as 
well, so we should probably not complain too much. I think we can agree 
that both LilyPond and Sibelius are among the better options when it 
comes to typesetting quality, right?


/Mats

Valentin Villenave wrote:

2009/4/3 Dave Phillips :
  

If your objection to LWN is re: someone else's comment on my articles, then
that's fine with me. But if anyone has a problem with my articles per se I'd
prefer they take it up with me, not with my publishers.



Not at all. It's just some comments that (by design, I think) lead us to react.

On a personal note: a few months ago I was working on my opera with my
laptop at a parent/teachers reunion with my colleagues, and then a man
stops by and goes "oh, you're copying music, that's nice; what
software are you using?"

Obviously, I immediately go astroturfing-mode, "This is the finest
piece of software you'll ever meet, it is a free software called
LilyPond and..."

Him: "I do know LilyPond".

Me: "Oh. Great, then!"

Him: "... And I don't like it."

Me: "Oh. Why is that? You know it must be the finest piece of..."

Him: "Nah, it's just crap. That's all."

Me: "But, do you know how many things you can achieve with LilyPond?
It has more features than..."

Him: "Nothing any decent software can't do. LilyPond just makes it harder."

Me: "But the quality of its output is..."

Him: "No, it's just plain shit. Listen, I understand you're making a
big score; you have to use a /real/ music software. Why don't you come
next Saturday, I'll show you some stuff?"

Me: "??? What is there on Saturday?"

Him: "It's the Sibelius Demonstration Day, at Steinberg France."

Me: "..."

Him: "... I work there."



What's the phrase already? First they ignore you...


Regards,
Valentin


___
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: mats.bengts...@ee.kth.se
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius

[Mats Bengtsson]

Werner LEMBERG wrote:

Notice that I don't write out each repeated chord in the manuscript.
It's understood by the editors and engravers that the "|" means
simply "print the previous chord again". It would be great if there
was a shorthand for this in LilyPond code for situations



I've asked for that feature already last year or the year before.  I'm
not sure whether we have such a feature request in the bug database,
but it would be a good idea to add it right now in case it is missing.

  
Mostly, in such situations, I let the text editor do the job. The 
simplest solution is simply to use copy/paste, but many text editors 
also allows you to define macros that can be useful in these situations.
Yet another alternative is to let LilyPond do the job, either using 
simple techniques like \repeat unfold {} or Scheme based solutions 
like http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=390, 
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=390 or 
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=346.


   /Mats



Werner


___
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: mats.bengts...@ee.kth.se
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Notice that I don't write out each repeated chord in the manuscript.
> It's understood by the editors and engravers that the "|" means
> simply "print the previous chord again". It would be great if there
> was a shorthand for this in LilyPond code for situations

I've asked for that feature already last year or the year before.  I'm
not sure whether we have such a feature request in the bug database,
but it would be a good idea to add it right now in case it is missing.


Werner


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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Valentin Villenave]

2009/4/3 Dave Phillips :
> If your objection to LWN is re: someone else's comment on my articles, then
> that's fine with me. But if anyone has a problem with my articles per se I'd
> prefer they take it up with me, not with my publishers.

Not at all. It's just some comments that (by design, I think) lead us to react.

On a personal note: a few months ago I was working on my opera with my
laptop at a parent/teachers reunion with my colleagues, and then a man
stops by and goes "oh, you're copying music, that's nice; what
software are you using?"

Obviously, I immediately go astroturfing-mode, "This is the finest
piece of software you'll ever meet, it is a free software called
LilyPond and..."

Him: "I do know LilyPond".

Me: "Oh. Great, then!"

Him: "... And I don't like it."

Me: "Oh. Why is that? You know it must be the finest piece of..."

Him: "Nah, it's just crap. That's all."

Me: "But, do you know how many things you can achieve with LilyPond?
It has more features than..."

Him: "Nothing any decent software can't do. LilyPond just makes it harder."

Me: "But the quality of its output is..."

Him: "No, it's just plain shit. Listen, I understand you're making a
big score; you have to use a /real/ music software. Why don't you come
next Saturday, I'll show you some stuff?"

Me: "??? What is there on Saturday?"

Him: "It's the Sibelius Demonstration Day, at Steinberg France."

Me: "..."

Him: "... I work there."



What's the phrase already? First they ignore you...


Regards,
Valentin


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Valentin Villenave]

2009/4/3 Jonathan Kulp :
> What's nice about Lilypond from my "composer's" point of view is that it's
> gotten me back to writing music with pencil and paper instead of doing it in
> Finale.  I've realized for a while that in some pieces Finale was making me
> lazy as a composer (and the same happens with my students).  I was using the
> copy-and-paste function way too much and not thinking enough about the
> content of the music.  With Lilypond I'm again separating composition from
> typesetting, which is a good thing IMO. Last semester I bought a book of
> staff paper for the first time in more than 15 years!

Absolutely, I can say the same thing for me (except that I bought a
laser printer instead of staff paper) :-)

Writing with pencil/paper really feels nice, and then when you have a
written model, typesetting can go very fast. (I can easily typeset 5
minutes of dense orchestral music a day).

2009/4/3 David Stocker :
> Notice that I don't write out each repeated chord in the manuscript. It's
> understood by the editors and engravers that the "|" means simply "print the
> previous chord again". It would be great if there was a shorthand for this
> in LilyPond code for situations (like in many forms of popular music) an
> accompaniment pattern consists of many repeated chords--perhaps something
> like ""--simply instructing LilyPond to reprint the previous chord. It
> would be doubly useful if the command were sensitive enough to allow the
> user to specify things like different rhythms or whether the chord is tied
> or has different articulations attached to it, etc. on the repeated chords
> (as in 4 2. ~ 1 ).

I can certainly agree with that, except that  is still a bit long
to type and r usually implies rests. We'd better have a single special
character such as &:

4 &2 ~ &1

Regards,
Valentin


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[David Stocker]

Please see this picture of what it looks like when I'm hand-writing 
music with repeated chords.


http://notesettersinc.com/Hal_Leonard_Project-1.html

Notice that I don't write out each repeated chord in the manuscript. 
It's understood by the editors and engravers that the "|" means simply 
"print the previous chord again". It would be great if there was a 
shorthand for this in LilyPond code for situations (like in many forms 
of popular music) an accompaniment pattern consists of many repeated 
chords--perhaps something like ""--simply instructing LilyPond to 
reprint the previous chord. It would be doubly useful if the command 
were sensitive enough to allow the user to specify things like different 
rhythms or whether the chord is tied or has different articulations 
attached to it, etc. on the repeated chords (as in 4 2. ~ 1 ).


David

Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:

Op donderdag 02-04-2009 om 21:53 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Andrew
Hawryluk:

Hi Andrew,

The full report is at
  

http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html, but here's my
conclusion:
"At least for me, MIDI entry is much faster than typing the pitches
and durations myself.

 
That's a real interesting report!.  You note that entering chords in 
lilypond is real slow as compared to using MIDI entry.  


While that's no surprise, I wonder if there's anything  that we can or
should do about it.  Typing <> is just real awkward...

In certain cases, such as the Handel piece, it may be advantageous to 
enter all chords seperate as voices, and combine them later?  Ie, type


\relative c''{
  \time 3/4
  \context Voice <<
{ b4( b4. c8 d4 d2) }
{ g,4 g4. g8 a4 a2 }
{ d,4 d4. e8 d4 d2 }
  >>
}

Wouldn't that be much faster?  It shouldn't even be necessary to enter
the note durations in every voice.

Also, the plain lilypond timing you did on the wtc prelude 3

   Counting only the note entry time, by computer keyboard it took me 
   2:51


struck me as a bit much, so I did my own timing.  We're talking about
8 measures with 6 eight notes, plus 7 measures with 2 notes and 5
loose ones.  Also I count 9 commas and apostrophes, which makes for

8*6 + 7*2 + 5 + 9 = 76

pitches to enter.  Double that for typing spaces (hmm, come to think
of it, even spaces are not necessary in this case) makes for 152
keystrokes.  Taking 2:51 for that, is 171 seconds, which means you
took 1.1 seconds per keystroke, or 55 keystrokes per minute).

For a regular touch typing course, you need more than 150 keystrokes
per minute to graduate, ie, 0.4 seconds per character: about three
times faster.  So I'm sure there's much room for you to improve ;-)

You noted that what you measure is your own skill rather than the
program's speed, but the 152 keystrokes of the wtc piece took me 46
seconds (198 keystrokes per minute).

That is without the search and replace needed to add "is" after
each note, adding that took me 15 seconds ( M-% \(.\) SPACE RET
\1is SPACE RET !), making a total time of 1:01.

Greetings,
Jan.


  



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

test files for musicxml

[Laura Conrad]

There's a site called  that has a lot of
lead sheets in both PDF and musicxml.  The one I looked at first
  (Edith Piaf's _La vie en rose_)
might show up some problems with the musicxml2ly import of both chords
and lyrics.

-- 
Laura   (mailto:lcon...@laymusic.org http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139   

Gov'r. Thomas was so pleas'd with the construction of this stove, as
described in it, that he offered to give me a patent for the sole
vending of them for a term of years; but I declin'd it from a
principle which has ever weighed with me on such occasions, viz.,
That, as we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we
should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of
ours; and this we should do freely and generously.

Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography, Chapter 10



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op vrijdag 03-04-2009 om 13:21 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Valentin
Villenave:

> Count me in!

Yay, independent informed comments!

/me hits ^R

:-)

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op vrijdag 03-04-2009 om 07:44 uur [tijdzone -0400], schreef Dave
Phillips:

Hi Dave,

> If your objection to LWN is re: someone else's comment on my articles

Yeah, that's it.  Somehow, whenever you write a fine piece on or even 
mentioning Lily, there are uninformed comments that "need" to be
replied on -- but I'd rather not do that myself.  You see, I'm biased,
so it's better to have an independent user comment on this, like
Valintin ;-)

> then that's fine with me. But if anyone has a problem with my articles 
> per se I'd prefer they take it up with me, not with my publishers.

Of course.  And if I like your articles, eg I really enjoyed your
last week's Progress Report part I, to whom should I send an email?

> Of course it should be obvious from these articles just how I feel about 
> LilyPond :

Yes, sometimes I'm even afraid it's a bit too obvious... and thanks
a lot for that!

Greetings,
Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius

[Laura Conrad]

> "Andrew" == Andrew Hawryluk  writes:

Andrew> The full report is at
Andrew> http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html, but here's my
Andrew> conclusion:
Andrew> "At least for me, MIDI entry is much faster than typing the pitches
Andrew> and durations myself. 

I prefer MIDI entry to typing the pitches and durations, too, but I'm
not sure it's any faster.  In my case, it's a bit less error prone,
particularly for the "wrong octave" kind of error in relative mode.

In my case, I use the emacs midi-input-mode for entering with the
MIDI keyboard.

And I think when there are lots of articulations or chords, it
probably gets faster to type than to use the MIDI keyboard.

I've never used either Finale or Sibelius, but I think my typing speed
in lily is about the same as in ABC.

-- 
Laura   (mailto:lcon...@laymusic.org http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139   

A computer is like a violin. You can imagine a novice trying first a
phonograph and then a violin. The latter, he says, sounds
terrible. That is the argument we have heard from our humanists and
most of our computer scientists. Computer programs are good, they say,
for particular purposes, but they aren't flexible. Neither is a
violin, or a typewriter, until you learn how to use it.

Marvin Minsky, ``Why Programming Is a Good Medium for Expressing
Poorly-Understood and Sloppily-Formulated Ideas''



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

my articles and astroturfng LWN

[Dave Phillips]

Greetings,

If your objection to LWN is re: someone else's comment on my articles, 
then that's fine with me. But if anyone has a problem with my articles 
per se I'd prefer they take it up with me, not with my publishers.


Of course it should be obvious from these articles just how I feel about 
LilyPond :


 
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/music-notation-software-linux-progress-report-part-1


 
http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/music-notation-programs-recent-releases


 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8629 "Music Notation Software For 
Linux, Part 1"


 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8670 "Music Notation Software For 
Linux Part 2"


 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8738 "Music Notation Software For 
Linux, Part 3"


 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8972 "Music Notation Software For 
Linux, Part 4"


 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7657 "LilyPond, Part 1"

 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/7719 "LilyPond, Part 2"

 http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8928 "LilyPond Helper Applications"


Best regards,

Dave Phillips



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Jonathan Kulp]

Nick Payne wrote:

...
That's a real interesting report!.  You note that entering chords in
lilypond is real slow as compared to using MIDI entry.

While that's no surprise, I wonder if there's anything  that we can or
should do about it.  Typing <> is just real awkward...


Try setting guitar scores. I just did a quick count on the first page of the
BVW1004 Chaconne that I have been playing around with setting for guitar in
Lilypond, and I have 187 left-hand fingering indications, 10 right-hand
fingering indications, and 23 string number indications. A typical note
entry would be something like



If only there was some way to avoid all those <>...

Nick

The way I avoid this on my guitar scores is to put minimal fingerings, 
only ones that I really, really care about that are not obvious from the 
context.  If I'm actually performing the piece later I'll write in more 
fingerings with a pencil. :)


My thoughts on this thread: I can enter music much more quickly in 
Lilypond than in Finale, in most cases.  It helps that I've gotten 
comfortable with Vim and learned how to take advantage of some of its 
editing features, too.  The syntax for entering expressive markings like 
slurs, articulations, and dynamics is excellent and much quicker than in 
Finale, where you have to switch from one tool to another.  Chords are 
slower, though, for sure.  What takes longest for me is precise 
positioning of things like fingerings, because I usually don't like the 
default placement and have to use extra-offset to get them exactly where 
 I want them.


What's nice about Lilypond from my "composer's" point of view is that 
it's gotten me back to writing music with pencil and paper instead of 
doing it in Finale.  I've realized for a while that in some pieces 
Finale was making me lazy as a composer (and the same happens with my 
students).  I was using the copy-and-paste function way too much and not 
thinking enough about the content of the music.  With Lilypond I'm again 
separating composition from typesetting, which is a good thing IMO. 
Last semester I bought a book of staff paper for the first time in more 
than 15 years!


Jon

--
Jonathan Kulp
http://www.jonathankulp.com


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

RE: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Nick Payne]

> -Original Message-
> From: lilypond-user-bounces+nick.payne=internode.on@gnu.org
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+nick.payne=internode.on@gnu.org] On
> Behalf Of Jan Nieuwenhuizen
> Sent: Friday, 3 April 2009 19:59
> To: Andrew Hawryluk
> Cc: Laura Conrad; lilypond-user@gnu.org; Nicolas Sceaux
> Subject: Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's
> Opera)
> 
> ...
> That's a real interesting report!.  You note that entering chords in
> lilypond is real slow as compared to using MIDI entry.
> 
> While that's no surprise, I wonder if there's anything  that we can or
> should do about it.  Typing <> is just real awkward...
> 
Try setting guitar scores. I just did a quick count on the first page of the
BVW1004 Chaconne that I have been playing around with setting for guitar in
Lilypond, and I have 187 left-hand fingering indications, 10 right-hand
fingering indications, and 23 string number indications. A typical note
entry would be something like



If only there was some way to avoid all those <>...

Nick



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Valentin Villenave]

2009/4/3 Jan Nieuwenhuizen :
> Op donderdag 02-04-2009 om 18:00 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Han-Wen
> Nienhuys:
>
>> I think there are a couple of memorable quotes here for the website...
>
> Indeed, thanks for all the praise!  For sure its more fun to read than
> eg http://lwn.net/Articles/326698/
>
>> Do we now have a team that takes care of this?
>
> And what about a team for astroturfing lwn ;-)

Count me in!

Valentin


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool)]

Johan Vromans wrote:

Andrew Hawryluk  writes:

  

http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html



How did you make the image of the LilyPond Händel score? It suffers
from very thick vertical lines, similar to the Evince/PDF bug that has
been discussed here several times.

It may turn readers away from LP.

-- Johan
  
Yes, they are not really output. The best comparison is to compare the 
printed and scanned versions.


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op donderdag 02-04-2009 om 18:00 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Han-Wen
Nienhuys:

> I think there are a couple of memorable quotes here for the website...

Indeed, thanks for all the praise!  For sure its more fun to read than
eg http://lwn.net/Articles/326698/

> Do we now have a team that takes care of this?

And what about a team for astroturfing lwn ;-)

Jan.

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Francisco Vila]

2009/4/3 Johan Vromans :
> Andrew Hawryluk  writes:
>
>> http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html
>
> How did you make the image of the LilyPond Händel score? It suffers
> from very thick vertical lines, similar to the Evince/PDF bug that has
> been discussed here several times.
>
> It may turn readers away from LP.

The Bach fragment also suffers from this.

-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Johan Vromans]

Andrew Hawryluk  writes:

> http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html

How did you make the image of the LilyPond Händel score? It suffers
from very thick vertical lines, similar to the Evince/PDF bug that has
been discussed here several times.

It may turn readers away from LP.

-- Johan



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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Op donderdag 02-04-2009 om 21:53 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Andrew
Hawryluk:

Hi Andrew,

The full report is at
> http://www.musicbyandrew.ca/finale-lilypond-4.html, but here's my
> conclusion:
> "At least for me, MIDI entry is much faster than typing the pitches
> and durations myself.
 
That's a real interesting report!.  You note that entering chords in 
lilypond is real slow as compared to using MIDI entry.  

While that's no surprise, I wonder if there's anything  that we can or
should do about it.  Typing <> is just real awkward...

In certain cases, such as the Handel piece, it may be advantageous to 
enter all chords seperate as voices, and combine them later?  Ie, type

\relative c''{
  \time 3/4
  \context Voice <<
{ b4( b4. c8 d4 d2) }
{ g,4 g4. g8 a4 a2 }
{ d,4 d4. e8 d4 d2 }
  >>
}

Wouldn't that be much faster?  It shouldn't even be necessary to enter
the note durations in every voice.

Also, the plain lilypond timing you did on the wtc prelude 3

   Counting only the note entry time, by computer keyboard it took me 
   2:51

struck me as a bit much, so I did my own timing.  We're talking about
8 measures with 6 eight notes, plus 7 measures with 2 notes and 5
loose ones.  Also I count 9 commas and apostrophes, which makes for

8*6 + 7*2 + 5 + 9 = 76

pitches to enter.  Double that for typing spaces (hmm, come to think
of it, even spaces are not necessary in this case) makes for 152
keystrokes.  Taking 2:51 for that, is 171 seconds, which means you
took 1.1 seconds per keystroke, or 55 keystrokes per minute).

For a regular touch typing course, you need more than 150 keystrokes
per minute to graduate, ie, 0.4 seconds per character: about three
times faster.  So I'm sure there's much room for you to improve ;-)

You noted that what you measure is your own skill rather than the
program's speed, but the 152 keystrokes of the wtc piece took me 46
seconds (198 keystrokes per minute).

That is without the search and replace needed to add "is" after
each note, adding that took me 15 seconds ( M-% \(.\) SPACE RET
\1is SPACE RET !), making a total time of 1:01.

Greetings,
Jan.


-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen  | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien   | http://www.lilypond.org



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

Re: left aligned tempo markings different over multimeasure rests

[Francisco Vila]

2009/4/2 Paul Scott :
> version 2,21,2
>
> When creating a score and parts I have not found a reliable way to cause
> markup like tempo indications to always appear at the left side of a measure
> even when a particular part has a multimeasure rest at that location.
> s1*0^\markup and \tempo and left-align don't consistently produce attractive
> results.  What are any of you doing to solve this?

In the Spanish list arose a similar issue. It would be fine to do this
using \tempo.

This hack makes the measure to grow making the tempo indication to fit:

{
 \compressFullBarRests
 \textLengthOn
 \tempo "Allegretto interminable" 4=96
 \once \override TextScript #'X-extent = #'(0 . 36) s1*0_\markup { "" }

 R1*19
 R1*30

}

But it is non-automatic. It would have been easier to put a long
markup full of spaces.

Looking further for a solution, we saw that the definition of textLengthOn

textLengthOn = {
 \override TextScript #'extra-spacing-width = #'(0 . 0)
 \override TextScript #'extra-spacing-height = #'(-inf.0 . +inf.0)
}

now the problem is to find what type of object is a tempo indication,
and do the same. Later on we found that a tempo indication such as

\tempo "String" 2=90

is not an object, but rather a sequence consisting of a tempoText
object followed by a tempoWholesPerMinute object, then a
tempoUnitDuration and finally a tempoUnitCount. If we could calculate
what's the extent of this all, we could give the measure a sensible
width.

I'm sorry here is where my knowledge ends. Please share whatever you find.

-- 
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org


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

Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius (was Review of Valentin's Opera)

[Graham Percival]

No, but we will in two months plus three days.  I'll keep a
reminder about this thread for that time.

Cheers,
- Graham

On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 06:00:02PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> I think there are a couple of memorable quotes here for the website...
>  Do we now have a team that takes care of this?
> 
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:02 PM, Neil Thornock  wrote:
> >> The way that music is entered for LilyPond causes me to think in a more
> >> musical way - there have been times when I've been stumped as to how to
> >> tell Lily to engrave something, only to realize that even if I did get
> >> it exactly as the composer wanted, the music would be confusing to read.
> >> LilyPond makes it much easier for me to work in my dual editor+engraver
> >> role.
> >
> > From a compositional point of view, Finale encourages the worst kind
> > of laziness.  LilyPond, by the manner in which it encourages a focus
> > on the notational details, makes me think more critically toward my
> > musical material.  LilyPond also encourages a kind of healthy
> > perfectionism, because control over any element of the score *is*
> > possible.  Finale keeps resetting to certain bad defaults, and
> > eventually the typesetter caves and goes with it.  But with Lily I
> > can't be lazy about it.  And that has translated itself into my
> > composition work.  It's been a heaven send that way.
> >
> > --
> > Neil Thornock, D.M.
> > Assistant Professor of Music
> > Composition/Theory
> > Brigham Young University
> > http://neilthornock.net
> >
> >
> > ___
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> > lilypond-user@gnu.org
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
> 
> 
> ___
> 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