Re: Notation of french horn
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 21:31, Helge Kruse helge.kruse-nos...@gmx.net wrote: Thanks to all for the answer. I wasn't aware of the transposed notation praxis for this instrument. So I think it will be best to write the actual notes as they should appear on the sheet. This can make discussions with the performers easier. If I generate a MIDI file to look for mistakes I will use the \transpose by a fifth to get a well sounding output. In order to get a good MIDI file, you may have to also use \transposition (as well as \transpose) to get it to sound right. My memory is always fuzzy on when this is needed, so every time I want to use MIDI, I have to look it up (and sometimes have to dance the trial-and-error dance). Best, Josiah ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 15:44, Timothy Reeves timothyrree...@gmail.com wrote: I've played horn for a while (albeit for only a third of a century not a full half century ;) and I would say that while you *may* write it with no key signature and accidentals where needed, it is not expected by modern players, who are all quite used to key signatures. The former way was the norm over a hundred years ago, but not now. ...or, if you're working with a horn player, you could ask them for their preference. Many horn players, especially those with a more-or-less strictly traditional orchestral background, have a preference for no key signature. That said, any horn player of any reasonable skill can play music with a key signature with no real problems. This is, after all, nearly two hundred years since the valve was invented (though we still haven't done the sensible thing and moved to C clefs). Now, as for my personal preference as a horn player? I've only got about a fifth of a century behind me, but I only want to see a key signature if it makes reading the music easier. If the music is heavily chromatic, I'd rather not see a key signature. I have re-notated composers' parts for me because I did not like their choices regarding key signatures and accidentals. Maybe that's just because I'm a nerd, though, but now I'm off-topic. Best, Josiah ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
Even though I do understand the nature of the valveless horn, I do not see why one omits the key signature today. Just tradition doesn't really explain it. Could someone clarify this? Here's how I understand it so far: On the valveless horn you change crooks to give the instrument a transposition that matches the music. That way, the music is always notated in C major (assuming major mode), just like how music sounding in B♭ major, played on a B♭ clarinet, is written as C major. Rather than calling this no key signature, I'd say we have the key signature of C major. When we switch over to valves, we no longer match the transposition of the instrument to the key of the music, so it's only natural for other key signatures to appear. To continue the tradition of valveless horns, one would rather have to consider every valve press to be a change of crooks that alters the transposition of the instrument, and then write for this transposition until it's time for the next valve press. In summary, having no key signature (rather, the key signature of C major) appears natural to me when dealing with valveless horns (whose transposition match the key of the music) but not when it comes to horns with valves. I'm looking forward to getting this explained to me! Regards, Jonas ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
is shapeSlur broken?
Hi list,
the shapeSlur function from the LSR
(http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=777) doesn't seem to work
anymore (at least for me).
That's the 'entrance' function:
shapeSlur =
#(define-music-function (parser location offsets)
(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #(shape-slur $offsets)
#})
When calling this function I get the error:
Fehler: GUILE signalisierte einen Fehler für den hier beginnenden Ausdruck
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #
(shape-slur $offsets)
then
Warnung: Typprüfung für »control-points« gescheitert; Wert »#unspecified«
muss vom Typ »list« sein
and finally
Unbound variable: $offsets
From what I see I assume that this is due to some change in syntax at
some point (the last time I recall using this function was with 2.14.0).
But as you know I'm still quite lost with Scheme, so I can't neither
verify nor fix this, and so I'd be gracious for any advice. Of course I
can't be sure that this type check at the calling of the 'main' function
is all there is to it, but lilyPond doesn't even get to call shape-slur ...
Best
Urs
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hello Urs,
yes there was a syntax change:
you might try
shapeSlur = #(define-music-function (parser location offsets)(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = $(shape-slur offsets)
#})
Variables in musicfunctions now are available by there name without the
preceding $.
The $-sign now introduces a scheme-expression and returns the result
directly ... now here should be more explanation, that I am not able to
put in words right now ;-)
HTH
Cheers, Jan-Peter
On 27.04.2012 10:11, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi list,
the shapeSlur function from the LSR
(http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=777) doesn't seem to work
anymore (at least for me).
That's the 'entrance' function:
shapeSlur =
#(define-music-function (parser location offsets)
(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #(shape-slur $offsets)
#})
When calling this function I get the error:
Fehler: GUILE signalisierte einen Fehler für den hier beginnenden
Ausdruck
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #
(shape-slur $offsets)
then
Warnung: Typprüfung für »control-points« gescheitert; Wert
»#unspecified« muss vom Typ »list« sein
and finally
Unbound variable: $offsets
From what I see I assume that this is due to some change in syntax at
some point (the last time I recall using this function was with 2.14.0).
But as you know I'm still quite lost with Scheme, so I can't neither
verify nor fix this, and so I'd be gracious for any advice. Of course
I can't be sure that this type check at the calling of the 'main'
function is all there is to it, but lilyPond doesn't even get to call
shape-slur ...
Best
Urs
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext doesn't remove empty staff
Thomas Ruedas rue...@dtm.ciw.edu writes: Hi Kieren, On 27/4/12 3:00 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: I doubt that this new default behavior reflects common practice, though As a pianist, I can tell you it absolutely does reflect common engraving practice for piano staves: It is a very rare piano score (perhaps 1/10 of 1%) that contains only a single staff. That is precisely the reason Keep_alive_together_engraver was [fairly recently] added to Lilypond. to avoid misunderstandings, my full statement was this: I doubt that this new default behavior reflects common practice, though; to me, it doesn't make much sense, and I'd like to suggest to the developers (in case they read this) to reconsider this and keep empty staves only if the total number of staffs would otherwise be one (or maybe not even then). i.e., my main concern here is the situation where you may have more than two staves, which is a much more common situation. Why would you be using a PianoStaff for those? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
Josiah Boothby josi...@gmail.com writes: On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 21:31, Helge Kruse helge.kruse-nos...@gmx.net wrote: Thanks to all for the answer. I wasn't aware of the transposed notation praxis for this instrument. So I think it will be best to write the actual notes as they should appear on the sheet. This can make discussions with the performers easier. If I generate a MIDI file to look for mistakes I will use the \transpose by a fifth to get a well sounding output. In order to get a good MIDI file, you may have to also use \transposition (as well as \transpose) to get it to sound right. My memory is always fuzzy on when this is needed, so every time I want to use MIDI, I have to look it up (and sometimes have to dance the trial-and-error dance). \transposition is needed when the visual pitch and the sounding pitch are different. It does not affect the visual pitch (except when quoting, of course). -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with articulate.ly
Hello,
On 27 April 2012 02:42, Nick Payne nick.pa...@internode.on.net wrote:
The example below builds without error and gives the output I want. However,
if I include articulate.ly, then the output is garbaged even though I
haven't used \unfoldRepeats \articulate, and I get the following warnings in
the log:
/home/nick/lilypond/examples/test.ly:8:59: warning: already have a beam
\times 4/6 { a32[( g) fis( g) \appoggiatura { fis16
[ g] } a32 g] }
warning: cannot end slur
warning: unterminated slur
%=
\version 2.15.37
%\include articulate.ly
\relative c'' {
\times 4/6 { a32[( g) fis( g) \appoggiatura { fis16[ g] } a32 g] }
}
%=
This also occurs on 2.14.2. We've had some changes made to
articulate.ly recently for 2.15.x - phew! So this isn't a regression
in LP code.
--snip--
GNU LilyPond 2.14.2
Processing `test.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
test.ly:9:54: warning: already have a beam
\times 4/6 { a32[( g) fis( g) \appoggiatura { fis16
[ g] } a32 g] }
warning: cannot end slur
warning: unterminated slur
Preprocessing graphical objects...
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 1 page...
Drawing systems...
Layout output to `test.ps'...
Converting to `./test.pdf'...
success: Compilation successfully completed
--snip--
James
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with articulate.ly
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes: This also occurs on 2.14.2. We've had some changes made to articulate.ly recently for 2.15.x - phew! So this isn't a regression in LP code. articulate.ly is not really ported to the new way of working with EventChord: it just converts the new representation to the old one at invocation time and goes from there with the old code. As a consequence, bug compatibility is rather thorough. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de writes:
Hello Urs,
yes there was a syntax change:
you might try
shapeSlur = #(define-music-function (parser location offsets)(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = $(shape-slur offsets)
#})
I would write #(shape-slur offsets) here: there is no need for an
immediate Scheme expression here (the point of $ over # is that the
syntactical function of the $ expression is determined by its expression
type, but here the syntactical function needed is Scheme anyway).
Variables in musicfunctions now are available by there name without
the preceding $.
The $-sign now introduces a scheme-expression and returns the result
directly ... now here should be more explanation, that I am not able
to put in words right now ;-)
$some-expression is equivalent to \name if you had written
name = #some-expression
some times earlier where an assignment is allowed. Actually, whenever
name is a valid LilyPond identifier name as well as a valid Scheme
identifier name, $name and \name are perfectly equivalent.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hello Jan-Peter,
thank you very much.
This seems to solve the problem. Maybe it's not perfectly robust, though.
The function now works when the number of lists exactly matches the
number of slur fragments. I'm not sure if this has been the case earlier
or if it had been a little bit more 'generous'.
For the project at hand I can live with that anyway.
Best ans many thanks
Urs
Am 27.04.2012 10:28, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt:
Hello Urs,
yes there was a syntax change:
you might try
shapeSlur = #(define-music-function (parser location offsets)(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = $(shape-slur offsets)
#})
Variables in musicfunctions now are available by there name without
the preceding $.
The $-sign now introduces a scheme-expression and returns the result
directly ... now here should be more explanation, that I am not able
to put in words right now ;-)
HTH
Cheers, Jan-Peter
On 27.04.2012 10:11, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi list,
the shapeSlur function from the LSR
(http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=777) doesn't seem to work
anymore (at least for me).
That's the 'entrance' function:
shapeSlur =
#(define-music-function (parser location offsets)
(list?)
#{
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #(shape-slur $offsets)
#})
When calling this function I get the error:
Fehler: GUILE signalisierte einen Fehler für den hier beginnenden
Ausdruck
\once \override Slur #'control-points = #
(shape-slur $offsets)
then
Warnung: Typprüfung für »control-points« gescheitert; Wert
»#unspecified« muss vom Typ »list« sein
and finally
Unbound variable: $offsets
From what I see I assume that this is due to some change in syntax at
some point (the last time I recall using this function was with 2.14.0).
But as you know I'm still quite lost with Scheme, so I can't neither
verify nor fix this, and so I'd be gracious for any advice. Of course
I can't be sure that this type check at the calling of the 'main'
function is all there is to it, but lilyPond doesn't even get to call
shape-slur ...
Best
Urs
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hello David, I would write #(shape-slur offsets) here: there is no need for an immediate Scheme expression here (the point of $ over # is that the syntactical function of the $ expression is determined by its expression type, but here the syntactical function needed is Scheme anyway). thank you! Variables in musicfunctions now are available by there name without the preceding $. The $-sign now introduces a scheme-expression and returns the result directly ... now here should be more explanation, that I am not able to put in words right now ;-) $some-expression is equivalent to \name if you had written name = #some-expression some times earlier where an assignment is allowed. Actually, whenever name is a valid LilyPond identifier name as well as a valid Scheme identifier name, $name and \name are perfectly equivalent. Cheers, Jan-Peter ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with articulate.ly
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:04:20AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: James pkx1...@gmail.com writes: This also occurs on 2.14.2. We've had some changes made to articulate.ly recently for 2.15.x - phew! So this isn't a regression in LP code. articulate.ly is not really ported to the new way of working with EventChord: it just converts the new representation to the old one at invocation time and goes from there with the old code. Although there is an open tracker against articulate.ly http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1749 it is specialised and does not cover the behaviour reported by Nick and confirmed by James. I've created an issue tracker for this: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2501 Cheers, Colin. -- Colin Hall ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
table-of-contents page links
Hello list, for some Books, I set the first page number to -1, to start page numbers with the real music. Now the PDF-internal links to the corresponding pages refer to the wrong page: If a tocItem displays page 8 it will open PDF-page 8 but that has the printed page-number 6, if its started with -1. Is this a bug, or can one tweak it? Cheers, Jan-Peter ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:07:42 +0200 Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se wrote: Even though I do understand the nature of the valveless horn, I do not see why one omits the key signature today. Just tradition doesn't really explain it. Could someone clarify this? Here's how I understand it so far: On the valveless horn you change crooks to give the instrument a transposition that matches the music. That way, the music is always notated in C major (assuming major mode), just like how music sounding in B♭ major, played on a B♭ clarinet, is written as C major. Rather than calling this no key signature, I'd say we have the key signature of C major. When we switch over to valves, we no longer match the transposition of the instrument to the key of the music, so it's only natural for other key signatures to appear. To continue the tradition of valveless horns, one would rather have to consider every valve press to be a change of crooks that alters the transposition of the instrument, and then write for this transposition until it's time for the next valve press. In summary, having no key signature (rather, the key signature of C major) appears natural to me when dealing with valveless horns (whose transposition match the key of the music) but not when it comes to horns with valves. I'm looking forward to getting this explained to me! Regards, Jonas ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Your are totally right. There is no reason today to write the English Horn (in F) with key signature and the French Horn (in F) without. We do it just out tradition. But the point is that tradition here means, that French Horn players are used to see alterations before notes. In other words the problem would be not the key signature but missing alterations before notes. Similar problems were (specially at the beginning of XX century) the transposition of the French Horn when is written in Bass Clef (at the forth ABOVE instead at the fifth below) and the transposition of the Bass Clarinet again when is written in Bass Clef (see for example the Rite of Spring) Regards, TG ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hi Urs, On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de wrote: Hello Jan-Peter, thank you very much. This seems to solve the problem. Maybe it's not perfectly robust, though. The function now works when the number of lists exactly matches the number of slur fragments. I'm not sure if this has been the case earlier or if it had been a little bit more 'generous'. For the project at hand I can live with that anyway. I've rewritten shape-slur so that you should be able to use lists of offsets which don't match with the number of slur fragments. I've tested it somewhat, but if you run into a problem, let me know. Here's the relevant part: #(define ((shape-slur offsets) grob) (let* ( ;; have we been split? (orig (ly:grob-original grob)) ;; if yes, get the split pieces (our siblings) (siblings (if (ly:grob? orig) (ly:spanner-broken-into orig) '() )) (total-found (length siblings))) (define (helper sibs offs) (if (and (eq? (car sibs) grob) (pair? offs)) ((alter-curve (car offs)) grob) (if (pair? offs) (helper (cdr sibs) (cdr offs)) ((alter-curve '()) grob (if (= total-found 2) (helper siblings offsets) ((alter-curve offsets) grob Hope this helps! David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hi Urs, On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:51 AM, David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.comwrote: Hi Urs, I've rewritten shape-slur so that you should be able to use lists of offsets which don't match with the number of slur fragments. I've tested it somewhat, but if you run into a problem, let me know. I noticed that you'll produce an error if you apply a list of lists to a slur which isn't broken (i.e., if a layout change results in a once-broken slur appearing on a single line). Here is a fix for that: #(define ((shape-slur offsets) grob) (let* ( ;; have we been split? (orig (ly:grob-original grob)) ;; if yes, get the split pieces (our siblings) (siblings (if (ly:grob? orig) (ly:spanner-broken-into orig) '() )) (total-found (length siblings))) (define (helper sibs offs) (if (and (eq? (car sibs) grob) (pair? offs)) ((alter-curve (car offs)) grob) (if (pair? offs) (helper (cdr sibs) (cdr offs)) ((alter-curve '()) grob (if (= total-found 2) (helper siblings offsets) (if (list? (car offsets)) ((alter-curve (car offsets)) grob) ((alter-curve offsets) grob) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext doesn't remove empty staff
Hi Kieren, On 27/4/12 3:41 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: It should be easy to define a custom context (e.g. MultiStaffPiano) to behave this way — perhaps when you've got it worked out as you think it should behave, you can add it to the codebase? I would like to, but I guess I would have to know GUILE/Scheme and/or C++ in order to do that, and I don't even have the most basic knowledge of those languages. I'm only an end-user, and a rather inexperienced one. Maybe I'll try sometime and take a look, but don't hold your breath for it. Cheers, Thomas -- --- Thomas Ruedas http://www.dtm.ciw.edu/users/ruedas/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext doesn't remove empty staff
Hi David, On 27/4/12 10:34 AM, David Kastrup wrote: Thomas Ruedasrue...@dtm.ciw.edu writes: i.e., my main concern here is the situation where you may have more than two staves, which is a much more common situation. Why would you be using a PianoStaff for those? I'm not sure I understand what you are wondering about. I chose a PianoStaff, because, well, it's a piece for piano :-). Being a rather unsophisticated user, I chose it because it would give me the correct layout (in particular a staff with a brace instead of a bracket), and as I said, it behaved exactly the way I expected in an earlier version. In some piano music, you may have three different levels, as it were, e.g. a melodic line in the treble, played by the right hand, a deep bass consisting of long notes in the left hand, and in between chords filling in the time between the bass notes, also played by the left hand. In such a situation, which would likely involve large jumps of the left hand that may even reach into the realm of the treble clef, the score is easier to read if you distribute the notes played by the left hand on two staves and have the line of the right hand in the third (uppermost) staff. Thomas -- --- Thomas Ruedas http://www.dtm.ciw.edu/users/ruedas/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext doesn't remove empty staff
Hi, In some piano music, you may have three different levels, as it were, e.g. a melodic line in the treble, played by the right hand, a deep bass consisting of long notes in the left hand, and in between chords filling in the time between the bass notes, also played by the left hand. In such a situation, which would likely involve large jumps of the left hand that may even reach into the realm of the treble clef, the score is easier to read if you distribute the notes played by the left hand on two staves and have the line of the right hand in the third (uppermost) staff. And sometimes four can be used, as in Rachmaninoff's Prelude in C# minor where the number of staves to a system fluctuates between two and four: http://javanese.imslp.info/files/imglnks/usimg/0/02/IMSLP00333-Rachmaninoff_-_Fantasy_Pieces_2.pdf Can't think of an example off-hand that uses more. -David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hi David, thank you for now. I'll look into it. But isn't it very likely that I have to reshape a slur anyway when it changes from broken to unbroken? In that case I'd even say the errors are a 'feature' so you notice it ... Provided it is documented enough not to drive you crazy ... Best Urs Am 27.04.2012 15:22, schrieb David Nalesnik: Hi Urs, On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 6:51 AM, David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com mailto:david.nales...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Urs, I've rewritten shape-slur so that you should be able to use lists of offsets which don't match with the number of slur fragments. I've tested it somewhat, but if you run into a problem, let me know. I noticed that you'll produce an error if you apply a list of lists to a slur which isn't broken (i.e., if a layout change results in a once-broken slur appearing on a single line). Here is a fix for that: #(define ((shape-slur offsets) grob) (let* ( ;; have we been split? (orig (ly:grob-original grob)) ;; if yes, get the split pieces (our siblings) (siblings (if (ly:grob? orig) (ly:spanner-broken-into orig) '() )) (total-found (length siblings))) (define (helper sibs offs) (if (and (eq? (car sibs) grob) (pair? offs)) ((alter-curve (car offs)) grob) (if (pair? offs) (helper (cdr sibs) (cdr offs)) ((alter-curve '()) grob (if (= total-found 2) (helper siblings offsets) (if (list? (car offsets)) ((alter-curve (car offsets)) grob) ((alter-curve offsets) grob) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: String Bass Notation
Vaughan McAlley wrote: On 19 April 2012 03:08, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: This is a hand-drawn score. I'm thinking that they probably meant snap pizzicato, and it was easier to draw the line all the way through than to stop part way through. Snap pizzicato would fit in the context, and I have found no source that shows the exact phi symbol. Have any of you string players seen that notation? Snap pizzicato and the very Victorian Arthur Sullivan don’t really gel together in my mind. I wish I could offer an alternative theory. Well, this orchestration is from the 1981 Joseph Papp revival that was used for the Linda Ronstadt / Kevin Kline movie version. It contains a number of improvements over the original. The notation occurs in With Cat-Like Tread, where the pirates stomp around loudly while all the time bragging (loudly) about how quiet they are. By now the point is moot, because the scores have gone back to the rental agency, but I appreciate the comments. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: String Bass Notation
- Original Message - From: Tim Roberts t...@probo.com To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 6:16 PM Subject: Re: String Bass Notation Vaughan McAlley wrote: On 19 April 2012 03:08, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: This is a hand-drawn score. I'm thinking that they probably meant snap pizzicato, and it was easier to draw the line all the way through than to stop part way through. Snap pizzicato would fit in the context, and I have found no source that shows the exact phi symbol. Have any of you string players seen that notation? Snap pizzicato and the very Victorian Arthur Sullivan don’t really gel together in my mind. I wish I could offer an alternative theory. Well, this orchestration is from the 1981 Joseph Papp revival that was used for the Linda Ronstadt / Kevin Kline movie version. It contains a number of improvements over the original. The notation occurs in With Cat-Like Tread, where the pirates stomp around loudly while all the time bragging (loudly) about how quiet they are. By now the point is moot, because the scores have gone back to the rental agency, but I appreciate the comments. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. s/improvements/changes/ -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Hi Urs, On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de wrote: Hi David, thank you for now. I'll look into it. But isn't it very likely that I have to reshape a slur anyway when it changes from broken to unbroken? In that case I'd even say the errors are a 'feature' so you notice it ... Provided it is documented enough not to drive you crazy ... Sure, that's true. Presumably when you're looking for that fine control, you've settled on the layout in all but the tiny details! Without the modification, though, the error would cause the file to fail and the error message is a little opaque. (Well, it's quite exact, but it takes some study to figure out how it happened.) I could create a warning here, something like: slur is not broken anymore. One thing you can do is \shapeSlur #'( ... list of offsets ...) or \shapeSlur #'(( ... list of offsets ...)) without the file failing. Since this function has come up again, I wonder if I could get your (and other people's) opinion on syntax. When I first wrote the offsetting function (http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=639)I thought that alists were a bother to type. But 'control-pojnts _is_ an alist '((x1 . y1) (x2 . y2) ... )) , so shouldn't we have something like this? \shapeSlur #'((dx1 . dy1) (dx2 . dy2) ...) I realize that there's more to type, but wouldn't this be clearer to use? (As well as being more consistent with how LilyPond represents this type of data)? Any thoughts? -David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: printing empty staff
or by \repeat unfold 32 { s1 }
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Choan Gálvez choan.gal...@gmail.comwrote:
On 4/25/12 15:10 , rathcof...@comcast.net wrote:
The attached .LY file is a 32-bar song with the melody printed in the
top staff.
What I'm trying to do is print an empty staff beneath the first one (to
permit pencilled in notations, etc.)
The program will only print the measures in the second staff if the
measure contains content. I can't get it to print the empty staff (or
even an empty measure). There's probably some way to do this, I just
haven't found it.
You can fill the empty staff by using
s1 * 32
Best.
--
Choan Gálvez
Ukecosas. Los ukeleles que nos gustan, también para ti
Visítanos: http://ukecosas.es/
Degústanos en Facebook: http://facebook.com/ukecosas
__**_
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/**listinfo/lilypond-userhttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
*Nesmotren govori kao da mačem probada, a jezik je mudrih iscjeljenje.
Izreke 12:18*
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 01:07, Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se wrote: On the valveless horn you change crooks to give the instrument a transposition that matches the music. That way, the music is always notated in C major (assuming major mode), just like how music sounding in B♭ major, played on a B♭ clarinet, is written as C major. Rather than calling this no key signature, I'd say we have the key signature of C major. Close, but not exactly. Horns and trumpets were generally given no key signatures even in movements that were in keys other than that for their crooks. This convention is more related to a harpist's preference to see notes flatted or sharped based on what strings they would be using, since it makes it easier to see what our hand has to do when we have to make an alteration. When we switch over to valves, we no longer match the transposition of the instrument to the key of the music, so it's only natural for other key signatures to appear. To continue the tradition of valveless horns, one would rather have to consider every valve press to be a change of crooks that alters the transposition of the instrument, and then write for this transposition until it's time for the next valve press. That would be hilarious. I would pay you twenty-five cents to arrange the horn parts to, say, Tristan und Isolde so that each new fingering is notated as a crook change. I'd pay fifty cents if it was actually legible. In summary, having no key signature (rather, the key signature of C major) appears natural to me when dealing with valveless horns (whose transposition match the key of the music) but not when it comes to horns with valves. I'm looking forward to getting this explained to me! As Tiresia explained, the tradition has more to do with horn players being accustomed to one way rather than another. Perhaps this is like bass clef,[1] and eventually horn players will generally prefer to see key signatures to bring them fully into the modern world. But in the meantime, you can always spot an orchestral horn player griping about having to deal with key signatures. —Josiah [1] old notation bass clef is another vestige of the natural horn that had us reading bass clef notes an octave lower than the treble clef transposition (middle C would be in the second space of the bass clef). If only we'd move to using C clefs and no transposition! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Josiah Boothby josi...@gmail.com wrote: When we switch over to valves, we no longer match the transposition of the instrument to the key of the music, so it's only natural for other key signatures to appear. To continue the tradition of valveless horns, one would rather have to consider every valve press to be a change of crooks that alters the transposition of the instrument, and then write for this transposition until it's time for the next valve press. That would be hilarious. I would pay you twenty-five cents to arrange the horn parts to, say, Tristan und Isolde so that each new fingering is notated as a crook change. I'd pay fifty cents if it was actually legible. Wagner sometimes got close to this. Look at the first horn part to Lohengrin. Especially the beginning of act 3: http://imslp.org/wiki/Lohengrin,_WWV_75_(Wagner,_Richard). It's silly. -Jay ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
Interesting to see the variations that occur. fre 2012-04-27 klockan 11:50 -0700 skrev Tim Reeves: Mozart horn concerto in D major (1791) - originally played on a natural horn with a D crook, so written with no key signature - the modern player playing on an F horn simply (!) transposes the part down a minor third as he plays it. Exception is to transpose the part for him, so write it out for horn in F. Then the key signature is two sharps (for the horn - one sharp for everyone else!) This is beside the main point, but just so I don't misunderstand something. Music in D major would have tree sharps for an instrument in F and two sharps for non-transposing instruments, wouldn't it? Jonas ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
Jay Anderson wrote: On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Josiah Boothby josi...@gmail.com wrote: That would be hilarious. I would pay you twenty-five cents to arrange the horn parts to, say, Tristan und Isolde so that each new fingering is notated as a crook change. I'd pay fifty cents if it was actually legible. Wagner sometimes got close to this. Look at the first horn part to Lohengrin. Especially the beginning of act 3: http://imslp.org/wiki/Lohengrin,_WWV_75_(Wagner,_Richard). It's silly. Amazing. It's like Wagner was being charged double for every ledger line, and used crook changes and clef changes to avoid them. The trumpet part has as many changes as the horn part. I do have to say that I don't intuitively understand why no key signatures were used. I understand it is tradition, but I don't see why an exception was needed. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Using \tempo or multiple events in define-event-function
Hello David,
Sorry for replying so late :(
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 15:31:15 +0200
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Pavel Roskin pro...@gnu.org writes:
Yup. define-event-function can only be used to return _one_
postevent.
Too bad. I'm glad I don't really need one :)
There is an additional problem with \tempo. It returns a value
that causes an error:
\version 2.15.36
rit = #(define-event-function (parser location) () #{
\tempo 4=40
#})
\new Voice { \tempo 4=50 c'4 e'4 \rit g'2 }
\tempo is not a postevent.
My MIDI files sound much better now that you told me that! Thank
you!
After trying almost all permutations of \tempo, s1*0 and markup, I came
to this working solution:
aTempo = { \tempo 4=58 s1*0 -a tempo }
rit = { \tempo 4=42 s1*0 -rit. }
moltoRit = { \tempo 4=38 s1*0 - molto rit. }
...
% In the melody part
\override TextScript #'direction = #UP
\override TextScript #'font-shape = #'italic
\set Score.tempoHideNote = ##t
By the way, I'm surprised we have dynamicsUp and even dotsUp but not
textScriptUp.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: table-of-contents page links
Am 27. April 2012 12:36 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de:
Hello list,
for some Books, I set the first page number to -1, to start page numbers
with the real music.
Now the PDF-internal links to the corresponding pages refer to the wrong
page:
If a tocItem displays page 8 it will open PDF-page 8 but that has the
printed page-number 6, if its started with -1.
Is this a bug, or can one tweak it?
Cheers, Jan-Peter
Hi,
not sure it's a bug. It's the way \with-link works.
But you may want to redefine it. See code below.
I didn't manage to get acces to the `first-page-number' of \paper from
inside define-markup-command, so I used a work-around. Do you know how
to do?
%
\version 2.15.36
#(define firstPageNumber -1)
#(define-markup-command (with-link layout props label arg)
(symbol? markup?)
(let* ((arg-stencil (interpret-markup layout props arg))
(x-ext (ly:stencil-extent arg-stencil X))
(y-ext (ly:stencil-extent arg-stencil Y)))
(ly:make-stencil
`(delay-stencil-evaluation
,(delay (ly:stencil-expr
(let* ((table (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'label-page-table))
(orig-page-number (if (list? table)
(assoc-get label table)
#f))
(page-number (+ orig-page-number (+ 1 (* -1
firstPageNumber) )))
(link-expr (list 'page-link page-number
`(quote ,x-ext) `(quote ,y-ext
(ly:stencil-add (ly:make-stencil link-expr x-ext y-ext)
arg-stencil)
x-ext
y-ext)))
% Test
\paper {
first-page-number = \firstPageNumber
}
mus = \relative c'' {
\repeat unfold 10 { c1 \break }
}
\book {
\bookpart {
\markup \bold \fontsize #10 \fill-line { TITLE }
}
\bookpart {
\markup \fontsize #2 \fill-line { Some Text }
\paper {
oddHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
evenHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
}
}
\bookpart {
\markuplist \table-of-contents
\paper {
oddHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
evenHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 1 }
\score {
\mus
\header { piece = Piece 1 }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 2 }
\score {
\transpose c cis \mus
\header { piece = Piece 2 }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 3 }
\score {
\transpose c d \mus
\header { piece = Piece 3 }
}
}
}
%
HTH,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: is shapeSlur broken?
Am 27.04.2012 19:30, schrieb David Nalesnik:
Hi Urs,
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de
mailto:li...@ursliska.de wrote:
Hi David,
thank you for now. I'll look into it.
But isn't it very likely that I have to reshape a slur anyway when
it changes from broken to unbroken?
In that case I'd even say the errors are a 'feature' so you notice
it ...
Provided it is documented enough not to drive you crazy ...
Sure, that's true. Presumably when you're looking for that fine
control, you've settled on the layout in all but the tiny details!
it's not only this. I think that with any slur that one might decide to
shape manually a change in line break will spoil it anyway. So I'm not
so sure it's a useful goal to make such a function fool-proof in this
respect.
Without the modification, though, the error would cause the file to
fail and the error message is a little opaque. (Well, it's quite
exact, but it takes some study to figure out how it happened.)
Well, the file fails (at least lilypond says so), but it actually
compiles, it's only the function that isn't applied. But you're right to
assume that the normal user can't cope with the error messages ;-)
I could create a warning here, something like: slur is not broken
anymore.
If that's possible in such functions, I'd find it very useful. Even
better: tell the user: The slur has now X parts, please adapt the
function call
One thing you can do is
\shapeSlur #'( ... list of offsets ...)
or
\shapeSlur #'(( ... list of offsets ...))
without the file failing.
Since this function has come up again, I wonder if I could get your
(and other people's) opinion on syntax. When I first wrote the
offsetting function (http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=639)I
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=639%29I thought that alists were
a bother to type. But 'control-pojnts _is_ an alist '((x1 . y1) (x2 .
y2) ... )) , so shouldn't we have something like this?
\shapeSlur #'((dx1 . dy1) (dx2 . dy2) ...)
I realize that there's more to type, but wouldn't this be clearer to
use? (As well as being more consistent with how LilyPond represents
this type of data)?
First: I think this is a _very_ useful function that should even be made
more widely known. The need to shape slurs is one of the most important
issues when it comes to the major problems of a LilPond score. Not
because it's a deficit of LilyPond but because it's a very complex topic
that needs human intervention in most cases.
Second: your syntax suggestion looks very good to me.
Of course it is more to type. But that is more than outweighed by the
advantages. it's easier to write and it's especially much easier to
read. When changing the offsets (which you do multiple times until you
get a good result ...) I'm always finding me counting params (in order
to find the right item to change) which surely takes more time and
concentration than typing (once) a few brackets and points.
Third: I suggest to add support for PhrasingSlurs and Ties in order to
make it more general. For PhrasingSlurs it's just a matter of writing a
new entrance function, but for Ties you need new shape-ties and
alter-tie-curve subroutines. See the attached file that is the result of
an earlier enquiry on this mailing list.
The functions themselves don't incorporate your newest additions (sorry,
it's still a bit over my head), but you'll see what I mean.
Any thoughts?
to sum up what I said:
If you'd volunteer to do the following it would be a very valuable
contribution to LilyPond's usability ;-)
- let the function check the number of arguments and give meaningful
warnings instead of errors
(count arguments and compare against number of slur siblings)
- don't try to make the function robust so that it accepts wrong input.
This may be trivial from a programmer's perspective but I can't imagine
that it makes sense aesthetically.
- add support for phrasingSlurs and ties
- make all this visible, at least through an updated snippet in the LSR.
Personally I think this should also be in the docs.
With best wishes
Urs
-David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
%{
shapeXXX.ily
base include file with typographic tweaks
modifing the shapes of Bezier curved spanners.
Provided by Urs Liska (m...@ursliska.de)
Exported functions:
- shapeSlur
- shapePhrasingSlur
- shapeTie
This version works also with line broken curves
and modifies the shapes of the siblings individually
Usage: \shapeXXX (offsets) music
offset is a list of eight numbers indicating the x and y offsets
for the four control-points of the curve
for each part of a broken slur one can give a separate list.
An empty list means that the respective slur isn't altered
in contrast to overriding the control-points property
this function
Re: table-of-contents page links
Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes: Am 27. April 2012 12:36 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de: Hello list, for some Books, I set the first page number to -1, to start page numbers with the real music. Now the PDF-internal links to the corresponding pages refer to the wrong page: If a tocItem displays page 8 it will open PDF-page 8 but that has the printed page-number 6, if its started with -1. Is this a bug, or can one tweak it? Cheers, Jan-Peter Hi, not sure it's a bug. It's the way \with-link works. But you may want to redefine it. See code below. I didn't manage to get acces to the `first-page-number' of \paper from inside define-markup-command, so I used a work-around. Do you know how to do? Shouldn't (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'first-page-number) do the trick? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \RemoveEmptyStaffContext doesn't remove empty staff
Hi Thomas, I would like to, but I guess I would have to know GUILE/Scheme and/or C++ in order to do that Not really… Just Lilypond. What are the features/behaviours you want? I'm sure we can quickly build it together. Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: table-of-contents page links
Am 28. April 2012 01:07 schrieb David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Shouldn't (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'first-page-number) do the trick?
Surprisingly not!
If first-page-number is not set it returns 3
setting 2 gives 4
setting 3 gives 5
...
Well, the relationship is linear. One could deal with it.
But for now I altered `book-first-page?' from toc-init.ly:
%%%
\version 2.15.36
#(define (book-first-page layout props)
(define (ancestor layout)
Return the topmost layout ancestor
(let ((parent (ly:output-def-parent layout)))
(if (not (ly:output-def? parent))
layout
(ancestor parent
(ly:output-def-lookup (ancestor layout) 'first-page-number))
#(define-markup-command (with-link layout props label arg)
(symbol? markup?)
(let* ((arg-stencil (interpret-markup layout props arg))
(x-ext (ly:stencil-extent arg-stencil X))
(y-ext (ly:stencil-extent arg-stencil Y)))
(ly:make-stencil
`(delay-stencil-evaluation
,(delay (ly:stencil-expr
(let* ((table (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'label-page-table))
(first-page-number (book-first-page layout props))
(orig-page-number (if (list? table)
(assoc-get label table)
#f))
(p-nr (ly:output-def-lookup layout 'first-page-number))
(page-number (+ orig-page-number (+ 1 (* -1
first-page-number) )))
(link-expr (list 'page-link page-number
`(quote ,x-ext) `(quote ,y-ext
(newline)(display first-page-number__)(display first-page-number)
(newline)(display p-nr___)(display p-nr)
(ly:stencil-add (ly:make-stencil link-expr x-ext y-ext)
arg-stencil)
x-ext
y-ext)))
% Test
\paper {
first-page-number = #-2
}
mus = \relative c'' {
\repeat unfold 10 { c1 \break }
}
\book {
\bookpart {
\markup \bold \fontsize #10 \fill-line { TITLE }
}
\bookpart {
\markup \fontsize #2 \fill-line { Some Text }
\paper {
oddHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
evenHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
}
}
\bookpart {
\markuplist \table-of-contents
\paper {
oddHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
evenHeaderMarkup = \markup { \null }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 1 }
\score {
\mus
\header { piece = Piece 1 }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 2 }
\score {
\transpose c cis \mus
\header { piece = Piece 2 }
}
}
\bookpart {
\tocItem \markup { Piece 3 }
\score {
\transpose c d \mus
\header { piece = Piece 3 }
}
}
}
The lines with p-nr and (display ...) should be deleted. I let them in
for testing-purpose.
Regards,
Harm
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notation of french horn
That would be hilarious. I would pay you twenty-five cents to arrange the horn parts to, say, Tristan und Isolde so that each new fingering is notated as a crook change. I'd pay fifty cents if it was actually legible. Wagner sometimes got close to this. Look at the first horn part to Lohengrin. Especially the beginning of act 3: http://imslp.org/wiki/Lohengrin,_WWV_75_(Wagner,_Richard). It's silly. Amazing. It's like Wagner was being charged double for every ledger line, and used crook changes and clef changes to avoid them. The trumpet part has as many changes as the horn part. I do have to say that I don't intuitively understand why no key signatures were used. I understand it is tradition, but I don't see why an exception was needed. You're not far off, actually, and Wagner did this for his horns and trumpets (and Wagner tubas). He knew he was writing extraordinarily difficult horn parts for players who were playing technologically new instruments, and he knew that early adopters of the valves were very accustomed to transposing. So not only did he end up eschewing key signatures (they would only confuse the poor horn players!), but he took advantage of our little mind games: writing for Horn in A or Bb doesn't actually make the high notes easier for a valved horn, but horn players seem less likely to choke on the high notes when they don't have ledger lines to scare them. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
