Re: \bookpart and the \include trouble
___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Space before staff lines in ossia
jancsika wrote: Hello, Here's a picky little question: what's the best way to get the staff lines of the ossia measure to extend, say, half a staff space before the first note (*without* changing any of the current spacing between notes)? Ideally I'd like to be able to set this in a \layout block. instead of removing the Time_signature_engraver you can \override TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f which automagically creates more distance at the left hope this does what you want -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Space-before-staff-lines-in-ossia-tp25288074p25290931.html Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: The best way for a book?
Yes, thank you very much, Mats and Marc, my LaTeX is beginner...
Mats Bengtsson a écrit :
Marc Hohl wrote:
Pierre Couderc schrieb:
What is the best way for a book with Lilypond extracts in it?
I have tried LaTeX with lilypond book, but I get mixs of lilyponds
'images with other images.
What am I missing?
I am not sure that this solves your problems, but you can tell LaTeX
whether your
graphics are allowed to float or not via options:
\begin{figure}[h] % h stands for 'here'
Right! I guess you problems are rather LaTeX related. There are twp
main reasons to use \begin{figure}...\end{figure} in LaTeX. The first
one is is to tell the program that it may move the figure to wherever
LaTeX thinks it's best placed (to the top or bottom of the page or to
a separate page with only figures). The other reason is if you want a
figure caption with a figure number that can be referred to in the
main text.
In your example, it seems that you don't want any of these two
featuress, so if you just want your included JPEG file to end up where
you placed it in the input file, then just use
...
\begin{document}
\thispagestyle{empty}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=80mm]{../Vierge_au_Chapelet_1.jpg}
% from
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Vierge_au_Chapelet_1.jpg
{\Huge Ordinaire des Vêpres du Jeudi}
Rite romain
\end{center}
...
\begin{lilypond}
...
\end{lilypond}
/Mats
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: linking render frames in Scribus
___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: linking render frames in Scribus
It is in the Version135 branch. So if you get the 135 branch with SVN, and can build it, you can have it. svn://scribus.info/Scribus/branches/Version135 Federico Bruni wrote: Franz Schmid has fixed this bug in the Scribus SVN trunk, so will be included in the 1.3.6 release. Bert Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote: http://bugs.scribus.net/view.php?id=8400 does anybody know where I can find Scribus 1.3.6svn for Linux? I've seen just a Windows version on Sourceforge (released on 27th august): http://sourceforge.net/projects/scribus/files/ Also, AFAIK, there is not any public source code for version 1.3.6: http://www.scribus.net/?q=taxonomy/term/39 So.. no way to get immediately that version running on Linux? ___ 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: Contemporary music documentation
Graham Percival wrote: Those actual contemporary scores must be placed in the public domain, licensed under Creative Commons, or licensed under the GNU FDL. If you're thinking about an exerpt of Shostakovich or Glass, then forget about it. Blame copyright law[1], not me. Actually I was thinking of Ferneyhough, but ... :-P Anyway, exactly the answer I was expecting. Not a problem -- will just have to be inventive with examples. Thanks for the explanation. I'll get on with more work/patches (hopefully without DOS line-endings...) and we'll see where this goes ... Oh, and make sure you vote for your country's Pirate Party. Branches started recently in the UK and Canada, so I've got my next elections' votes lined up. ;) :-) Best wishes, -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Graham Percivalgra...@percival-music.ca wrote: Oh, and make sure you vote for your country's Pirate Party. Branches started recently in the UK and Canada, so I've got my next elections' votes lined up. ;) [off-topic] btw: French Pirate Party's first election is in two weeks here, and since I'm the campaign manager that (partly) explains my lack of time to work on LilyPond ;-) Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Pirate Party [was: Re: Contemporary music documentation]
Valentin Villenave wrote: [off-topic] btw: French Pirate Party's first election is in two weeks here, and since I'm the campaign manager that (partly) explains my lack of time to work on LilyPond ;-) On that note ... does the Pirate Party have any kind of official response to this article by Richard Stallman? http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pirate-party.html ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: one bar number per system
Thanks for your replies. \bar allows a break, but does not force it. Ideally, I would like a bar number printed only after a break. If memory serves, the all-visible override didn't work in mid-measure for the upcoming full-measure bar line. (I do not have the time right now to override the next full-measure bar line by hand in 250 scores.) I have pieced together an experimental solution to build a hash of manually specified measure numbers, which is used by a custom barNumberVisibility function. It doesn't yet work for my multi-score book, because I based it on the table of contents implementation, so the list is global. I suppose I need to store the list of visible bar numbers in the Score context instead. Is that right? This will give me a bar number wherever I specify it, whether it is the first one after a break or not. It would be functional, but not exactly what I want. -- Dan On 2 Sep 2009, at 09:17, Trevor Daniels wrote: Mats Bengtsson wrote Wednesday, September 02, 2009 1:38 PM Trevor Daniels wrote: Does this not work when inserted immediately before the first full bar on the line? (I haven't actually tried it) \once \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #'#(#t #t #t) Why not write it as \once \override Score.BarNumber #'break-visibility = #all-visible Of course, this method works, but it requires that you manually insert it where you know that there will be a line break. Yes, I know. But since Dan is already inserting \bar in the places where a mid-bar break is required I wondered why he could not also insert this override before the following bar. Trevor ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
On 9/4/09 3:36 AM, Joseph Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote: Graham Percival wrote: Those actual contemporary scores must be placed in the public domain, licensed under Creative Commons, or licensed under the GNU FDL. If you're thinking about an exerpt of Shostakovich or Glass, then forget about it. Blame copyright law[1], not me. Actually I was thinking of Ferneyhough, but ... :-P But as we've mentioned before, one could take that two-measure excerpt and change the pitches and perhaps the durations, but still keep the contemporary notation elements. This would not be a violation of copyright law anywhere that I know of. Also, as you plan sections, remember that anything using \set or \override belongs in a snippet, not in the main text body. In order to have a meaningful manual, this may require the addition of some new LilyPond commands, which is *not* a problem. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond - chord progression
Here is what I have now. It's only the first few bar but I like the
output. Please comment if you see something:
\version 2.12.2
#(ly:set-option 'delete-intermediate-files #t) % deletes the .ps file
automatically
\header {
title = Creep
composer = Radiohead
}
\new ChordNames {
\chordmode
{
g1 |
g16*6:sus4 g16*10 | \break
bes1 |
bes16*6:sus4 bes16*10 | \break
c1 |
c2:sus4 c2| \break
c1:m |
c1:m | \break
g4*3 g4:sus4 |
bes4*3 bes4:sus4 | \break
}
}
\new Voice \with
{
\consists Pitch_squash_engraver
}
\relative c''
{
\improvisationOn
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8. g16 g16 g g8~g16 g g g g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8. g16 g16 g g8~g16 g g g g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8 g g8. g16 g16 g16 g8 g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8 g8 g8. g16 g g g g g g g g
g8 g8 g8. g16 g g g g g g g g
}
Christian
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Making the .texi files
Hello all, When I'm testing my doc revisions I check them by attempting to build the docs, at least as far as the .texi files (in fact, I've been having problems building the HTML/PDF docs which seem to be down to failing regression tests). One thing I've noticed is that if there are errors in my markup the build will fail -- but that I have to make clean and build everything over from the start once I've fixed the errors, or else they keep recurring. I must be doing something wrong here -- so what can I do to clean/rebuild the texi files from scratch without having to bother about the other parts of LilyPond? Should I be using make doc-stage-1 ... ? How about cleaning them? Thanks best wishes, -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
Carl Sorensen wrote: Also, as you plan sections, remember that anything using \set or \override belongs in a snippet, not in the main text body. In order to have a meaningful manual, this may require the addition of some new LilyPond commands, which is *not* a problem. Do you mean in the sense of the actual Snippets section of the documentation? I note that the World Music section currently contains several examples using \set or \override. One of the hopes in writing this section is that it will provoke/enable further development in LP's support for contemporary notation -- some of my personal wishlist examples would be expanded out-of-the-box support for more forms of microtonal notation, easier and expanded support for contemporary methods of notating time signatures (building on Graham's work), transposition styles (tonal vs. chromatic) as an option that can be enabled Voice-, Staff-, StaffGroup- or Score-wide ... I'm sure I'll think of others. (Re chromatic transposition: yes, I know the snippet and will be experimenting with it at some point to try and solve some of the issues with the microtonal notation solutions I've been developing.) Best wishes, -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Pirate Party [was: Re: Contemporary music documentation]
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Joseph Wakelingjoseph.wakel...@webdrake.net wrote: On that note ... does the Pirate Party have any kind of official response to this article by Richard Stallman? http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pirate-party.html Yes we do (as a matter of fact I am the Pirate member he refers to in the next-to-last paragraph). Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: The best way for a book?
___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
Carl Sorensen wrote c_soren...@byu.edu Friday, September 04, 2009 3:06 PM Also, as you plan sections, remember that anything using \set or \override belongs in a snippet, not in the main text body. This certainly is a rule for NR 1, but is not absolutely essential for NR 2. But in general you're right - self-contained snippets are usually the best way of demonstrating \set and \override commands. When appropriately tagged and referenced they appear in the manual exactly as they would if placed there, and can be easily modified by anyone. I would add: don't discuss the actual command in the text - use an example - as examples will be automatically updated with convert-ly; text will not. In order to have a meaningful manual, this may require the addition of some new LilyPond commands, which is *not* a problem. And is to be recommended if it results in an easier user interface. Trevor ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond - chord progression
Hi Christian,
your pdf looks fine. But there are some aspects you could have achieved easier:
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 10:25:46 -0400
Von: Christian Henning chhenn...@gmail.com
An: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Betreff: Re: Lilypond - chord progression
Here is what I have now. It's only the first few bar but I like the
output. Please comment if you see something:
\version 2.12.2
#(ly:set-option 'delete-intermediate-files #t) % deletes the .ps file
automatically
\header {
title = Creep
composer = Radiohead
}
Beware of copyrights!
\new ChordNames {
\chordmode
{
g1 |
g16*6:sus4 g16*10 | \break
bes1 |
bes16*6:sus4 bes16*10 | \break
c1 |
c2:sus4 c2| \break
c1:m |
c1:m | \break
g4*3 g4:sus4 |
bes4*3 bes4:sus4 | \break
}
}
Instead of writing e.g. g16*6 you could have used g4.. A dotted quarter
note consists of six sixteenth notes. Instead of g16*10 you could have used
g8 s2 which is easier to read. You should consult the Learning Manual p.
14-15 and the section Rhythm in the Notation Reference (p. 29-40)
\new Voice \with
{
\consists Pitch_squash_engraver
}
\relative c''
{
\improvisationOn
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8. g16 g16 g g8~g16 g g g g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8. g16 g16 g g8~g16 g g g g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8 g g8. g16 g16 g16 g8 g4
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g4 g8. g16 g8 g~g16 g g g
g8 g8 g8. g16 g g g g g g g g
g8 g8 g8. g16 g g g g g g g g
}
Also, yes, this is my first project with lilypond. I think my goal is
to create sheets similar to what you have in books like this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Unplugged-New-York-Guitar-School/dp/0793544130/ref=sr_1_
3?ie=UTF8=books=1251991185=8-3
http://www.amazon.com/Unplugged-New-York-Guitar-School/dp/0793544130/ref=sr_1
_3?ie=UTF8s=booksqid=1251991185sr=8-3
You can look inside here to see what I'm talking about. QQ, do you
think lilypond can produce that?
Maybe this helps a bit to achieve your goal:
\version 2.13.3
\include predefined-guitar-fretboards.ly
#(ly:set-option 'delete-intermediate-files #t)
\paper {
indent = 0.0
ragged-last = ##t
}
\header {
title = Title
composer = Composer
meter =
copyright =
}
global = {
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'()
\time 4/4
\clef treble_8
\key g \major
}
Chords = \chordmode {
c
}
strumming = \relative c'' {
c4\downbow c8\downbow c\upbow c4\downbow c8\downbow c\upbow
}
melody = \relative c' {
g1
}
songtext = \lyricmode {
Yeah!
}
tab = \relative c {
c8 g' c e g c,8 g' c e g
}
\score {
\new ChordNames {
\set chordChanges = ##t
\Chords
}
\new FretBoards {
\Chords
}
\new Staff = singer
\new Voice = melody { \global \melody }
\addlyrics { \songtext }
\new Voice \with {
\consists Pitch_squash_engraver
}
{\improvisationOn \global\strumming}
\new TabStaff = guitar tab
\context TabVoice = tab \tab
}
Cheers,
patrick
--
Jetzt kostenlos herunterladen: Internet Explorer 8 und Mozilla Firefox 3 -
sicherer, schneller und einfacher! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/chbrowser
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
Trevor Daniels wrote: In order to have a meaningful manual, this may require the addition of some new LilyPond commands, which is *not* a problem. And is to be recommended if it results in an easier user interface. I do have some concrete ideas here, which I'll lay out in an email sometime soon. I know what I _want_, and have a rough idea of how best to achieve them, but will need some advice/assistance with the actual implementation. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Space before staff lines in ossia
Message: 1 Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 02:15:52 -0700 (PDT) From: -Eluze elu...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Space before staff lines in ossia To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: 25290931.p...@talk.nabble.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii jancsika wrote: Hello, Here's a picky little question: what's the best way to get the staff lines of the ossia measure to extend, say, half a staff space before the first note (*without* changing any of the current spacing between notes)? Ideally I'd like to be able to set this in a \layout block. instead of removing the Time_signature_engraver you can \override TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f which automagically creates more distance at the left hope this does what you want Yes, that does exactly what I want. Thanks a lot. -Jonathan -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Space-before-staff-lines-in-ossia-tp25288074p25290931.html Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 82, Issue 13
Message: 5 Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2009 11:36:49 +0200 From: Joseph Wakeling joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net Subject: Re: Contemporary music documentation To: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: 4aa0dfb1.6090...@webdrake.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Graham Percival wrote: Those actual contemporary scores must be placed in the public domain, licensed under Creative Commons, or licensed under the GNU FDL. If you're thinking about an exerpt of Shostakovich or Glass, then forget about it. Blame copyright law[1], not me. Actually I was thinking of Ferneyhough, but ... :-P Anyway, exactly the answer I was expecting. Not a problem -- will just have to be inventive with examples. Thanks for the explanation. I'll get on with more work/patches (hopefully without DOS line-endings...) and we'll see where this goes ... Oh, and make sure you vote for your country's Pirate Party. Branches started recently in the UK and Canada, so I've got my next elections' votes lined up. ;) :-) Best wishes, -- Joe I was surprised to see that someone has made a pdf of John Cage's Notations. Some of the overarching techniques I see are: * angular and squiggly lines in the staff to denote general pitch content * angular and squiggly lines outside the staff * grace notes without heads, slash through the left corner of beamed grace notes * feathered beams that swell in the middle of the beam group * long horizontal lines, both outside the staff, and inside the staff following a notehead to show the duration * lots of different arrows, brackets and boxes that go around notes, staves, staff groups, and other parts of the score * text in between staves, systems, in margins, with bounding boxes, etc., * text rotated 90 degrees Btw- what do you call the little signature that is rotated 90 degrees and put to the right of the final barline? It's usually the composer's signature and the date (and sometimes the name of the city where the piece was written). There should be a way to specify that in the \header block if there isn't already. There's also a lot of creative placement of text. Of course if you were to notate one of the purely textual pieces you probably would be better off using another piece of software, but it would still be nice to have a guide to controlling vertical text placement for a title page. -Jonathan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
partial chord ties in second alternative
hi folks,
is there a way to achieve repeated ties of selected notes of a chord in an
alternative ending (apart from using a polyphonic approach in a homophonic
context)?
e.g.
\repeat volta 2 {
e b e~ g~ b~ e~1
}
\alternative {
{ c e g b e1 }
{ c e g b e1 }
}
The \repeatTie command can only be used outside of chords which would create an
open tie for all the notes of the chord in the second alternative. But here I
would like to engrave a repeated tie only for the higher notes (e g b e) of the
chord.
Thanks for any hint!
patrick
--
Jetzt kostenlos herunterladen: Internet Explorer 8 und Mozilla Firefox 3 -
sicherer, schneller und einfacher! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/atbrowser
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Speed
Frank wrote: Am Donnerstag, 3. September 2009 schrieb Tim Reeves: Mainly for my own curiosity, I compiled the Reubke Sonata score to check timing: WinXP SP3 32-bit, LP 2.13.3, LPT 2.12.869, on Intel C2D E9600 (2.8GHz), 2 GB RAM 5 min 38 seconds. A bit slower than the Linux times others got. W00t, I got only real5m47.699s user5m32.306s sys 0m11.697s on my linux system (C2D @ 2 GHz), but I'm still on 2.12.1, which gave me some error messages, though the PDF was created. Perhaps 2.13 is a little faster(?) - Frank, I forgot to mention that I also got quite a few warnings [not errors] on 2.13.3 - I think due to a missing font - but like you still got the output file. Did you also have 2GB of RAM? - I understand that the amount of physical memory available makes a big difference in compile times on a large LP file. Perhaps if I ran Linux on my machine it would really scream, but I have to have Windows XP for work. At least its not Vista! Tim ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
beam heigth
Dear community,
in the below quoted example I see a very small collision between the beam
and the natural sign.
Is there a way to alter the maximum beam-heigth generally?
Here the example:
\version 2.13.3
{
#(set-accidental-style 'neo-modern)
\clef treble_8 {fis' 16 dis' d'' dis'
\repeat unfold 2 { fis' dis' d'' dis' }
\context Voice { \repeat unfold 4 { f' e'' b' }} {s2 } f'' 16 b
a, b fis' c' f'' b } \\
{r4 r16 e, 8 g 16 ~ g a, \ g fis f' 8 \ gis ~ \! | %47
gis 8[ d ] es[ d 16 gis 16 ] ~ gis 8[ a, ~ ] a, 16 c' 8. } }
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: partial chord ties in second alternative
Patrick Schmidt schrieb:
hi folks,
is there a way to achieve repeated ties of selected notes of a chord in an alternative
ending (apart from using a polyphonic approach in a homophonic context)?
e.g.
\repeat volta 2 {
e b e~ g~ b~ e~1
}
\alternative {
{ c e g b e1 }
{ c e g b e1 }
}
The \repeatTie command can only be used outside of chords which would create an
open tie for all the notes of the chord in the second alternative. But here I
would like to engrave a repeated tie only for the higher notes (e g b e) of the
chord.
\repeat volta 2 {
e b e~ g~ b~ e~1
}
\alternative {
{ c e g b e1 }
{ c1 \\ e g b e1\repeatTie }
works just fine for me. Or is this the polyphonic approach you
mentioned and you just want to avoid?
Marc
Thanks for any hint!
patrick
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Speed
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Frank Steinmetzgerwar...@gmx.de wrote: W00t, I got only real 5m47.699s user 5m32.306s sys 0m11.697s on my linux system (C2D @ 2 GHz), but I'm still on 2.12.1, which gave me some error messages, though the PDF was created. Perhaps 2.13 is a little faster(?) Actually, I stumbled upon something very odd: though I haven't the exact numbers, with 2.12 my opera used to compile in ~40 minutes on Win32, ~25 minutes on Linux64 -- but now that I have upgraded to the latest git sources (that include Joe's recent work on vertical spacing), it takes more than... 90 minutes!!! (the PDF looks nicer though). I'll investigate this problem a bit more, as I can hardly believe it myself. Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: partial chord ties in second alternative
Patrick Schmidt wrote:
is there a way to achieve repeated ties of selected notes of a chord ... ?
This is rather like Nick Payne's LaisserVibrer question in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-04/msg00313.html
because both are what Lilypond calls semi-ties.
Maybe you are content with
\override RepeatTieColumn #'tie-configuration =
#(list (cons -4 -1) (cons -2 -1) (cons 0 -1) (cons 4.4 1) )
which is fiddly and doesn't transpose.
Or how about ugly (+ transposable) instead of fiddly:
\hideNotes
\set tieWaitForNote = ##t
\grace { e g b e4 ~ s4 }
\unHideNotes
c e g b e1
My choice would be to mirror my feta-laisserVibrer code (as attached).
It is easy to apply, but it may be inconvenient to keep around.
Cheers,
Robin
%
% repeatTie using feta char overlay: dir: UP or DOWN (or pad per magnitude)
#(define (frtSt dir) (lambda (grob)
(define dirsign (if (positive? dir) + -) )
(let* ((pos (ly:grob-property grob 'staff-position))
(height (if (odd? pos) +0.8 +0.55)) (angle +90))
(ly:stencil-combine-at-edge (ly:note-head::print grob) 0 -1
(grob-interpret-markup grob (markup #:with-dimensions '(0 . 0) '(0 . 0)
#:concat ( #:raise (dirsign height) #:rotate (dirsign angle)
#:musicglyph accidentals.rightparen )
#:hspace (abs dir))) 0 0
frtUP = \once \override NoteHead #'stencil = #(frtSt UP)
frtDOWN = \once \override NoteHead #'stencil = #(frtSt DOWN)
% or \tweak #'stencil ___ditto
frtUPtw =
#(define-music-function (parser location mus) (ly:music?)
(set! (ly:music-property mus 'tweaks) (acons 'stencil
(frtSt UP) (ly:music-property mus 'tweaks))) mus)
frtDOWNtw =
#(define-music-function (parser location mus) (ly:music?)
(set! (ly:music-property mus 'tweaks) (acons 'stencil
(frtSt DOWN) (ly:music-property mus 'tweaks))) mus)
%
\relative c'
\repeat volta 2 {
e b e~ g~ b~ e~1
}
\alternative {
{ c e g b e1 }
{ c \frtDOWNtw e \frtDOWNtw g \frtDOWNtw b \frtUPtw e1 }
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Speed
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 10:52:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote: Actually, I stumbled upon something very odd: though I haven't the exact numbers, with 2.12 my opera used to compile in ~40 minutes on Win32, ~25 minutes on Linux64 -- but now that I have upgraded to the latest git sources (that include Joe's recent work on vertical spacing), it takes more than... 90 minutes!!! (the PDF looks nicer though). How is that odd? More complicated algorithms take more time. I haven't followed the details of the spacing changes, but I'd certainly expect them to take longer. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Making the .texi files
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 05:09:58PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote: When I'm testing my doc revisions I check them by attempting to build the docs, at least as far as the .texi files (in fact, I've been having problems building the HTML/PDF docs which seem to be down to failing regression tests). One thing I've noticed is that if there are errors in my markup the build will fail -- but that I have to make clean and build everything over from the start once I've fixed the errors, or else they keep recurring. This is a question for -devel, not -user. But the answer is to touch the relevant manual. i.e. touch notation.tely make doc Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Speed
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:05 PM, Graham Percivalgra...@percival-music.ca wrote: How is that odd? More complicated algorithms take more time. I haven't followed the details of the spacing changes, but I'd certainly expect them to take longer. I do too, but -- let me do the math -- a _360%_ increase, really? :-) Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Speed
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 22:05 +0100, Graham Percival wrote: On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 10:52:13PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote: Actually, I stumbled upon something very odd: though I haven't the exact numbers, with 2.12 my opera used to compile in ~40 minutes on Win32, ~25 minutes on Linux64 -- but now that I have upgraded to the latest git sources (that include Joe's recent work on vertical spacing), it takes more than... 90 minutes!!! (the PDF looks nicer though). How is that odd? More complicated algorithms take more time. I haven't followed the details of the spacing changes, but I'd certainly expect them to take longer. The algorithms shouldn't really be more complicated, just differently organized. If you can figure out which commit caused the problem, that would be helpful. Cheers, Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
On 9/4/09 10:27 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote c_soren...@byu.edu Friday, September 04, 2009
3:06 PM
Also, as you plan sections, remember that anything using \set or
\override
belongs in a snippet, not in the main text body.
This certainly is a rule for NR 1, but is not
absolutely essential for NR 2. But in general
you're right - self-contained snippets are usually
the best way of demonstrating \set and \override
commands. When appropriately tagged and referenced
they appear in the manual exactly as they would if
placed there, and can be easily modified by anyone.
CG 3.1 says A few other policies (such as not permitting the use of tweaks
in the main portion of NR 1 + 2) may also seem counterintuitive Later
on, in CG 3.5 (under Tips, not 3.4 Policy, which is potentially confusing;
perhaps the Tweaks subsubsection should be moved to Documentation policy),
it says In general, any \set or \override commands should go in the
'selected snippets' section.
I feel that this policy should continue to be enforced. If tweaks are
necessary to produce the base functionality of any LilyPond feature (e.g.
Turkish music), we should add appropriate commands to do the tweaks. Then
tweaks are reserved for a method of modifying the base functionality, and
can be appropriately placed in Selected Snippets.
I would add: don't discuss the actual command in
the text - use an example - as examples will be
automatically updated with convert-ly; text will not.
In order to have a
meaningful manual, this may require the addition of some new
LilyPond
commands, which is *not* a problem.
And is to be recommended if it results in an
easier user interface.
Hence the reason I would push for a continued enforcement of a policy
restricting \set and \override to Selected Snippets except for the case of
instrumentName.
And perhaps we should avoid the \set Staff.instrumentName tweaks by defining
a \setInstrumentName command
setInstrumentName =
#(define-music-function (parser location instrument-name) (string?)
#{
\set Staff.instrumentName = $instrument-name
#})
Then we wouldn't even need the instrumentName exception.
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 04:57:11PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote: On 9/4/09 10:27 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote: Carl Sorensen wrote c_soren...@byu.edu Friday, September 04, 2009 3:06 PM Also, as you plan sections, remember that anything using \set or \override belongs in a snippet, not in the main text body. This certainly is a rule for NR 1, but is not absolutely essential for NR 2. But in general you're right - self-contained snippets are usually the best way of demonstrating \set and \override commands. When appropriately tagged and referenced they appear in the manual exactly as they would if placed there, and can be easily modified by anyone. CG 3.1 says A few other policies (such as not permitting the use of tweaks in the main portion of NR 1 + 2) may also seem counterintuitive Later on, in CG 3.5 (under Tips, not 3.4 Policy, which is potentially confusing; perhaps the Tweaks subsubsection should be moved to Documentation policy), it says In general, any \set or \override commands should go in the 'selected snippets' section. I feel that this policy should continue to be enforced. If tweaks are necessary to produce the base functionality of any LilyPond feature (e.g. Turkish music), we should add appropriate commands to do the tweaks. Then tweaks are reserved for a method of modifying the base functionality, and can be appropriately placed in Selected Snippets. Well, the policy says in general, not you must. So *bamph* it's enforced! :) As for how it's currently enforced... gperc...@sapphire:~/src/lilypond/Documentation/notation$ grep set editorial.itely expressive.itely pitches.itely repeats.itely rhythms.itely simultaneous.itely staff.itely text.itely | wc 51 2662973 gperc...@sapphire:~/src/lilypond/Documentation/notation$ grep override editorial.itely expressive.itely pitches.itely repeats.itely rhythms.itely simultaneous.itely staff.itely text.itely | wc 72 4654521 That's 631 instances of \set or \override, not including the snippets. Oh wait; I forgot \tweak... add another 20 to that. Granted, many of them are instrument name stuff. But fixing all those would still be a non-trivial task. It would be great fodder for GDP2, though. However, I'm particularly wondering about things like the autobeaming docs. Would it really make sense to move all that stuff into snippets? I'm not certain it does. The overall intent behind the policy was to restrict the main NR stuff to the core functionality. For stuff like repeats or dynamics, this makes a lot of sense. But certain doc pages are explicitly about changing that core functionality. I suppose we /could/ move autobeaming out of NR 1.2, but I think it makes more sense to keep it where it is. I think the current policy of generally not using tweaks, unless that paricular doc page was *all* about tweaks, is ok. As such, it makes sense that many (or most? or all?) of the contemporary music pages would make heavy use of tweaks. And perhaps we should avoid the \set Staff.instrumentName tweaks by defining That would be nice! a \setInstrumentName command NOO!!! % Graham falls off the walkway into the garbage % chute, soon to reappear with an artificial hand We definitely don't want more confusion between \set foo #'bar \setFoo #'bar A simple \instrumentName or something like that would suffice. We can discuss the specifics later, during GLISS. :) Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
Joseph Wakeling wrote: (i) Would people be interested in having this in the docs? (ii) Any requests or suggestions for topics that should be covered? (iii) What are the restrictions on including examples from actual contemporary scores? I'm not thinking huge extracts, but maybe a couple of bars from a known work just to illustrate how a particular thing can be achieved. (iv) Anyone interested in helping out with this? I've already done a ton of work on keyboard tone-clusters and percussion pictograms, but my Windows hard drive tragically fried last week, and I won't be able to do any LilyPond work until next Wednesday at the earliest, and that's when my work starts up again, so I may be delayed quite a bit. If you're willing to wait several weeks for me to get my act together, I'm happy to help out as time permits. This is of course in addition to all the other stuff I was helping out with before I lost the hard drive (code cleanup, doc fixes, GLISS stuff, parser documentation, fixing autochange, auto clefs, smart arpeggios), all of which will now be seriously delayed. Ugh. Well at the very least, don't waste your energy on clusters or pictograms. Maybe I can have a proof of concept for one or both some time before October. And in case you're worried, I did back up most of my work, but some of it I'll have to re-do. Oh well. Hope everyone's well though! - Mark ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Contemporary music documentation
Mark Polesky wrote: I've already done a ton of work on keyboard tone-clusters and percussion pictograms, but my Windows hard drive tragically fried last week, and I won't be able to do any LilyPond work until next Wednesday at the earliest, and that's when my work starts up again, so I may be delayed quite a bit. If you're willing to wait several weeks for me to get my act together, I'm happy to help out as time permits. This is of course in addition to all the other stuff I was helping out with before I lost the hard drive (code cleanup, doc fixes, GLISS stuff, parser documentation, fixing autochange, auto clefs, smart arpeggios), all of which will now be seriously delayed. Ouch. :-( But as for your suggestions -- it would be great to have your input! No worries about taking your time as I will probably be working at a slow (but hopefully steady) pace. I really look forward to seeing your work on this. Best wishes, -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
