Re: Finale challenge

[tisimst]

Here's another non-single measure one in 6/8 time:

http://static1.squarespace.com/static/527ae92fe4b0febeee4f40d2/t/52a265f0e4b08d7f85fde3e5/1386374655454/02.png

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n176869...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> both assumption are correct but it would have been great to have that file
> available in a presentatipn ;-/
>
> Urs
>
> Am 22. Mai 2015 01:39:10 MESZ, schrieb Simon Albrecht <[hidden email]
> >:
>>
>> Am 22.05.2015 um 00:45 schrieb Jacques Menu:
>>
>>>  Hello Urs,
>>>
>>>  Sorry, no joke intended actually… I just don’t know what a Finale 
>>> challenge is!
>>>
>> I think the point was about typesetting some complicated music, which
>> Urs will send to anyone interested.
>>
>>>
>>>  Here are the sizes:
>>>
>>>  menu@macbookprojm:~/Documents/LaTeX/PartitionsLilypond > ltt *Finale*
>>>  -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  36302 May 21 22:55:52 2015 
>>> PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.pdf
>>>  -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  86554 May 21 22:54:19 2015 
>>> PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.musx
>>>
>> And here the point was that a Lilypond file for the same music is around
>> two hundred times smaller… :-) I made the test.
>> The .pdfs are virtually the same size, though.
>>
>> Cheers, Simon
>>
>>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email] 
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
> --
>  If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Finale-challenge-tp176856p176869.html
>  To start a new topic under User, email ml-node+s1069038n...@n5.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from Lilypond, click here
> 
> .
> NAML
> 
>




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Finale-challenge-tp176856p176872.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Finale challenge

[tisimst]

Urs,

Why so specific about the time signature? Just curious. I've got a couple
of decently complex examples that could be good (see attached). What do you
think?

- Abraham

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n176869...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> both assumption are correct but it would have been great to have that file
> available in a presentatipn ;-/
>
> Urs
>
> Am 22. Mai 2015 01:39:10 MESZ, schrieb Simon Albrecht <[hidden email]
> >:
>>
>> Am 22.05.2015 um 00:45 schrieb Jacques Menu:
>>
>>>  Hello Urs,
>>>
>>>  Sorry, no joke intended actually… I just don’t know what a Finale 
>>> challenge is!
>>>
>> I think the point was about typesetting some complicated music, which
>> Urs will send to anyone interested.
>>
>>>
>>>  Here are the sizes:
>>>
>>>  menu@macbookprojm:~/Documents/LaTeX/PartitionsLilypond > ltt *Finale*
>>>  -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  36302 May 21 22:55:52 2015 
>>> PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.pdf
>>>  -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  86554 May 21 22:54:19 2015 
>>> PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.musx
>>>
>> And here the point was that a Lilypond file for the same music is around
>> two hundred times smaller… :-) I made the test.
>> The .pdfs are virtually the same size, though.
>>
>> Cheers, Simon
>>
>>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email] 
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
> --
>  If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Finale-challenge-tp176856p176869.html
>  To start a new topic under User, email ml-node+s1069038n...@n5.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from Lilypond, click here
> 
> .
> NAML
> 
>


rachmaninoff-handengraved.jpg (251K) 

tuplets.pdf (53K) 





--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Finale-challenge-tp176856p176871.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Putting lyrics below its staff?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/21/15 5:23 PM, "Kaj Persson"  wrote:
>The example shows, that LilyPond perfectly understands the implied
>structure and it also understands which lyric belongs to which note.
>So that is not the problem. A minor issue is that the lyrics for the
>top staff is broken into separate lines, one for each individual
>"\new Lyrics". This can certainly be solved by a clever definition
>of the string for this staff (and maybe every staff). But the main
>issue is, that at least I have not found any method to put the text
>below the respective staff, exept for the top staff, despite this
>would be the normal behaviour according to the manual.  And that was
>my wish by calling for assistance on this mailing list.
>
>Here is the new example:
>
>  \version "2.18.2"
>
>% The next line does not belong to the task, but
>% just to get shorter music lines in the printout.
>\paper { ragged-right = ##t }
>
>% Music definitions, mA..mD for the  top staff:
>mA = \relative c' { c4 c c c \break }
>mB = \relative c' { d4 d d d \break }
>mC = \relative c' { e4 e e e \break }
>mD = \relative c' { f4 f f f \break }
>
>mE = \relative c''' { g4 g g g }
>mF = \relative c''' { a4 a a a }
>mG = \relative c''' { b4 b b b }
>
>% Lyrics for each part of the staves:
>tA = \lyricmode { A A A A }
>tB = \lyricmode { B B B B }
>tC = \lyricmode { C C C C }
>tD = \lyricmode { D D D D }
>tE = \lyricmode { E E E E }
>tF = \lyricmode { F F F F }
>tG = \lyricmode { G G G G }
>
>\score {
>  \new ChoirStaff
>  <<
>{
>  \new Staff = "sAB" {
><<
>  {
><<
>  \new Voice = "vA" { \mA }
>>>
><<
>  \new Voice = "vB" { \mB }
>  \new Staff = "sB" {
>\new Voice = "vE" { \mE }
>  }
>>>
><<
>  \new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
>>>
><<
>  \new Voice = "vD" { \mD }
>  \new Staff = "sF" <<
>\new Voice = "vF" { \mF }
>  >>
>  \new Staff = "sG" <<
>\new Voice = "vG" { \mG }
>  >>
>>>
>  }
>>>
>  }
>}

You must put the Lyrics contexts in parallel with the Staff where you want
the lyrics to be aligned.


>  \new Lyrics = "lA" \lyricsto "vA" { \tA }
>  \new Lyrics = "lB" \lyricsto "vB" { \tB }
>  \new Lyrics = "lC" \lyricsto "vC" { \tC }
>  \new Lyrics = "lD" \lyricsto "vD" { \tD }
>  \new Lyrics = "lE" \lyricsto "vE" { \tE }
>  \new Lyrics = "lF" \lyricsto "vF" { \tF }
>  \new Lyrics = "lG" \lyricsto "vG" { \tG }
>  >>
>  
>  \layout { indent = #0 }
>}
>  
>
>   


\version "2.18.2"

% The next line does not belong to the task, but
% just to get shorter music lines in the printout.
\paper { ragged-right = ##t }

% Music definitions, mA..mD for the  top staff:
mA = \relative c' { c4 c c c  }
mB = \relative c' { d4 d d d }
mC = \relative c' { e4 e e e }
mD = \relative c' { f4 f f f }

mE = \relative c''' { g4 g g g }
mF = \relative c''' { a4 a a a }
mG = \relative c''' { b4 b b b }

% Lyrics for each part of the staves:
tA = \lyricmode { A A A A }
tB = \lyricmode { B B B B }
tC = \lyricmode { C C C C }
tD = \lyricmode { D D D D }
tE = \lyricmode { E E E E }
tF = \lyricmode { F F F F }
tG = \lyricmode { G G G G }

\score {
  \new ChoirStaff
  <<
{
  \new Staff = "sAB" {
<<
  {
<<
  \new Voice = "vA" { \mA }
>>
<<
  \new Voice = "vB" { \mB }
  \new Staff = "sB" {
\new Voice = "vE" { \mE }
  }
  \new Lyrics = "IE" \lyricsto "vE"{\tE}
>>
<<
  \new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
>>
<<
  \new Voice = "vD" { \mD }
  \new Staff = "sF" <<
\new Voice = "vF" { \mF }
  >>
 \new Lyrics = "lF" \lyricsto "vF" { \tF }
  \new Staff = "sG" <<
\new Voice = "vG" { \mG }
  >>
 \new Lyrics = "lF" \lyricsto "vF" { \tF }
>>
  }
>>
  }
}
  \new Lyrics = "lA" \lyricsto "vA" { \tA }
  \new Lyrics = "lB" \lyricsto "vB" { \tB }
  \new Lyrics = "lC" \lyricsto "vC" { \tC }
  \new Lyrics = "lD" \lyricsto "vD" { \tD }
  >>
  
  \layout { indent = #0 }
}

Re: Finale challenge

[Urs Liska]

Hi Simon,

both assumption are correct but it would have been great to have that file 
available in a presentatipn ;-/

Urs

Am 22. Mai 2015 01:39:10 MESZ, schrieb Simon Albrecht :
>Am 22.05.2015 um 00:45 schrieb Jacques Menu:
>> Hello Urs,
>>
>> Sorry, no joke intended actually… I just don’t know what a Finale
>challenge is!
>I think the point was about typesetting some complicated music, which 
>Urs will send to anyone interested.
>>
>> Here are the sizes:
>>
>> menu@macbookprojm:~/Documents/LaTeX/PartitionsLilypond > ltt *Finale*
>> -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  36302 May 21 22:55:52 2015
>PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.pdf
>> -rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  86554 May 21 22:54:19 2015
>PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.musx
>And here the point was that a Lilypond file for the same music is
>around 
>two hundred times smaller… :-) I made the test.
>The .pdfs are virtually the same size, though.
>
>Cheers, Simon
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/21/15 4:42 PM, "pls"  wrote:

>
>On 21.05.2015, at 21:06, Carl Sorensen  wrote:
>
>> 
>> Transposing doesn't work on chord shapes.  Transposing works on notes.
>> The automatic fretboard creator looks at the notes and creates a
>> fretboard.  At that point, it has no knowledge of a chord shape, so we
>> can't do the shape shifting algorithm there.
>
>Ah, ok, now I¹m beginning to understand the problem.  The line between
>transposing and shape shifting is sometimes very thin, though.  (The
>notes of) Some chord structures like e.g. 1.3.5.8.10.15 (G shape) or
>1.5.8.10.12.15 (E shape) cannot be transposed without also shifting and
>thus keeping their shapes.  Transposing the notes of other chord
>structures like 1.5.8.10 could mean using either the same shape (shape
>shifting) or switching to at least one (sometimes two) alternative
>shape(s) (A shape, D shape, E shape)

Actually, this is not what I meant.

I am now speaking solely in LilyPond internals terms.  When \transpose is
applied to a chord, it changes the pitches of the chord, but does not
change the fingerings.  And there is no reasonable system I can imagine
that would allow \transpose to do the right thing on both chords and
single notes, relative to fingerings.  So \transpose is almost guaranteed
*not* to work effectively on automatically-generated fret diagrams.

That is *why* there is a predefined fretboard capability defined in
LilyPond.  You are free to define the set of chords you want to work with,
complete with fingerings.  And if you do that, the predefined fretboards
will work *exactly* the way you want them to work when you transpose.

As part of the predefined fretboard code, to make it easy to define
fretboards, we have the concept of a chord shape (e.g. E-shape, A-shape,
D-shape).  And we can define other chords as these shapes shifted by a
certain number of frets.  That is what I meant by shape shifting.  Not
changing shapes, but moving a shape along the fretboard by a given number
of frets.  I apologize for my lack of clarity.

In the current usage of predefined-guitar-fretboards, we actually don't
use E-shape, because it is missing the barre.  So we use F-shape (which
has the barre) and then slide it along the fretboard wherever we want to
go, to get F#, G, G#, etc.  Same with A-shape.  We use bes-shape (because
it has the barre) and then slide it along the fretboard.

The predefined fretboards are really quite robust to LilyPond
transposition, meaning you can apply \transpose to a music expression
going to a FretBoards context, and it will give you what you want.  The
only problem is if you don't like the predefined fretboards, you'll have
to make your own predefined fret diagram table, but that is a one-time
thing.

>
>Hm, I¹d either use 

Yes, that is what I meant to type -- the other was a typo.

>or (even more likely) ,

This is my most often played E-chord.  But if this is used with automatic
(not predefined) fretboards, it will not be transposable.

>the latter making it even more complicated! When transposing this open
>chord to a barred chord all fingers would have to be raised by 1.

Yes, and this rule would apply in the case of E, but would not apply in
the case of A if you are playing the A as a barre on fret 2.  And I can
imagine no straightforward means of configuring the transposition if you
don't like the default output.  That's why we have predefined fret
diagrams.
>
>They both sound fine to me!  Are they mutually exclusive? I¹d suggest
>another condition:
>
>if we make a barre on the lowest fret and set the fingering of all the
>dots on the lowest fret to 1, the other fingers should be automatically
>raised by one.

It does make sense, but I can find some counterexamples, so I don't think
that rule should be implemented.

I've made some changes to the automatic fret diagram generator code that
will add barres, as long as you have fingerings listed in the diagram.
I've attached it to this email.

If you would like to try it out, copy translation-functions.scm to the
scm/ subdirectory of your lilypond installation.  Make a copy of the
original, of course.

Thanks,

Carl




translation-functions.scm
Description: translation-functions.scm


automatic-fretboards-barre.ly
Description: automatic-fretboards-barre.ly
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Finale challenge

[Simon Albrecht]

Am 22.05.2015 um 00:45 schrieb Jacques Menu:

Hello Urs,

Sorry, no joke intended actually… I just don’t know what a Finale challenge is!
I think the point was about typesetting some complicated music, which 
Urs will send to anyone interested.


Here are the sizes:

menu@macbookprojm:~/Documents/LaTeX/PartitionsLilypond > ltt *Finale*
-rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  36302 May 21 22:55:52 2015 
PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.pdf
-rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  86554 May 21 22:54:19 2015 
PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.musx
And here the point was that a Lilypond file for the same music is around 
two hundred times smaller… :-) I made the test.

The .pdfs are virtually the same size, though.

Cheers, Simon
\version "2.19.20"

\header {
  title = "Piano Score"
  subtitle = "For Finale challenge"
  piece = "Score"
  copyright = "©"
  tagline = ##f
}

\paper {
  ragged-right = ##f
}

global = {
  \tempo "Ad libitum" 4=120
  \key d \major
  \time 6/8
  s2.
  \bar "|."
}

right = \new Voice <<
  \global
  { R2. }
>>

left = \new Voice <<
  \global
  { R2. }
>>

\score {
  \new PianoStaff \with {
instrumentName = "Piano"
  } <<
\right
\left
  >>
}
  

ly-beats-musx.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Re: Putting lyrics below its staff?

[Kaj Persson]

On 2015-05-21 15:30, tisimst wrote:

Kaj,

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Kaj [via Lilypond] <[hidden email] 
> wrote:


I am working on a piece of choir music. It consists of two parts,
the first of which is written on one staff, and the second two
staves. The upper staff in part two is a continuation of the staff
in part one. All the staves are accompanied with lyrics. My wish
is that this lyrics should be written below its respective staff.
However, whatever I do, the lyrics for the lower staff in part
two, which I denote C, is written above the staff, hence directly
below the lyrics for the upper staff (B). I suspect there should
be a simple solution for this, and in the handbook they say that
the lyrics is normally written below the staff. To get it above
the staff you would have to do some overrides.

In the code you can see the commented lines, which are part of all
the tries I have done, but nothing seems to help. To me it almost
looks as if the behaviour is hard coded, just because of putting
the lyrics between the staves is the normal. After an experience
like this I feel strengthened in a thought, grown in my head, that
LilyPond will never ever be a tool for everybody. It is too
complicated and inconsistent to be used by anybody else than the
absolute top expert. Which is a pity, as it produces an excellent
result.

This is the result of my efforts so far:

\version "2.18.2"

\paper { ragged-right = ##t }

mA = \relative c' { c4 d e f }
mB = \relative c'' { g4 a b c }
mC = \relative c' { c'4 b a8 g f4 }
mAB = \relative c' { c4 d e f g4 a b c }

tA = \lyricmode { A B C D }
tB = \lyricmode { E F G H }
tC = \lyricmode { i j k l m }
tAB = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }

xA = { s1*1 \break }
xB = { s1*1 }
xC = { s1*1 }

\score {
  \new ChoirStaff
  <<
\new Staff = "sAB" {
  <<
\new Voice = "vAB" { \mAB }
{
  \new Voice = "vA" { \xA }
  <<
\new Voice = "vB" { \xB }
\new Staff = "sC" {
  \new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
}
  >>
}
  >>
}
\new Lyrics = "lAB" \lyricsto "vAB" { \tAB }
\new Lyrics = "lC" \with {
% alignBelowContext = #"sC"
% \override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #UP
}
{ \lyricsto "vC" { \tC } }
  >>

  \layout { indent = #0 }
}

/which produces this:/

/Kaj


I think LilyPond is just getting confused by all the nested 
voices/staves. As Phil suggested, a little restructuring of your 
example score can bring a nice solution to light:


\version "2.18.2"

mA = \relative c' {
  c4 d e f | \break
  g a b c
}
mB = \relative c'' {
  s1 |
  c4 b a8 g f4
}
tA = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }
tB = \lyricmode { i j k l m }

\score {
\new ChoirStaff <<
\new Staff {
\new Voice = "vA" \mA
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "vA" \tA
\new Staff \with {
\RemoveEmptyStaves
\override VerticalAxisGroup.remove-first = ##t
}{
\new Voice = "vB" \mB
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "vB" \tB
>>
\layout {
indent = 0
  }
}

There are a few things I'd point out:

 1. All \new Staff declarations are only within the ChoirStaff
 2. Each staff gets its own voice and the second voice gets a spacer
rest before its notes.
 3. The second staff's empty measures are removed via two overrides
\RemoveEmptyStaves and \override VerticalAxisGroup.remove-first = ##t
 4. Each set of Lyrics is placed immediately after its staff so there
is no need to direct it above or below anything

I hope that this provides a clearer logic to how to construct a score 
that is quite obvious to what's happening (to the user) and relatively 
mistake-proof in interpretation (for LilyPond).


Regards,
Abraham


View this message in context: Re: Putting lyrics below its staff? 

Sent from the User mailing list archive 
 at Nabble.com.


Phil and Abraham

Thank you for your comments, and for the example showing a solution to 
my problem. At least it solves this much simplified example. However I 
get an impression it being a "fix" for just this, so I made an, a wee 
more complicated, but never the less much realistic example. Sorry, of 
course it will occupy a lot of valuable space on this mailing list, but 
to illustrate my thought I see no other way to go. It shows a case with 
several regions with note systems containing more than one staff, but 
with regions between them with just one staff. Generally there could of 
course also be a base system with a number of staves, more than one, 
which is expanded with excess staves. It follows a quite simple 
algorithm

Re: Finale challenge

[Jacques Menu]

Hello Urs,

Sorry, no joke intended actually… I just don’t know what a Finale challenge is!

Here are the sizes:

menu@macbookprojm:~/Documents/LaTeX/PartitionsLilypond > ltt *Finale*
-rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  36302 May 21 22:55:52 2015 
PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.pdf
-rw-r--r--@ 1 menu  admin  86554 May 21 22:54:19 2015 
PianoScoreForFinaleChallenge.musx


JM

> Le 21 mai 2015 à 23:32, Urs Liska  a écrit :
> 
> 
> 
> Am 21. Mai 2015 22:56:18 MESZ, schrieb Jacques Menu :
>> Hello Urs,
>> 
>> Does the attached file (Finale 2014) suit your need?
>> 
> 
> Well, if that's meant as a joke it is a good one. But maybe there's something 
> wrong with your files?
> In any case it's interesting to see the size of the Finale file ...
> 
> Urs
> 
>> JM
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Le 21 mai 2015 à 19:47, Urs Liska  a écrit :
>>> 
>>> Anyone ready for a new Finale challenge? I need someone entering one
>> 6/8 measure of a two-voice piano part in a current Finale vetsion :-/
>>> 
>>> 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: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[pls]

On 21.05.2015, at 21:06, Carl Sorensen  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 5/21/15 8:39 AM, "pls"  wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> I thought about this issue quite a bit when I was creating predefined
>>> fret
>>> diagrams.  There, we introduced the idea of a chord shape.  There is a
>>> function that shifts a chord shape by N frets (offset-fret).  At
>>> present,
>>> it adds N to the fret number for every dot.  I thought about setting the
>>> fret number to N for every open string, but elected not to do it
>>> because I
>>> wouldn't know what to do with the finger.  I guess it's possible to set
>>> it
>>> to 1.
>> 
>> I would argue that it would make a lot of sense to "set the fret number
>> to N for every open string² and to automatically add a barre indication
>> when transposing open chord shapes.  Otherwise these resulting diagrams
>> look really daunting and unplayable.
> 
> There is a difference between transposing and shape shifting.
> 
> Shape shifting is done on chord shapes, rather than music.  It would be
> trivial to set the fret to N and the finger to 1 when shifting a chord
> shape.  I think that probably makes sense to do.
> 
> Transposing doesn't work on chord shapes.  Transposing works on notes.
> The automatic fretboard creator looks at the notes and creates a
> fretboard.  At that point, it has no knowledge of a chord shape, so we
> can't do the shape shifting algorithm there.

Ah, ok, now I’m beginning to understand the problem.  The line between 
transposing and shape shifting is sometimes very thin, though.  (The notes of) 
Some chord structures like e.g. 1.3.5.8.10.15 (G shape) or 1.5.8.10.12.15 (E 
shape) cannot be transposed without also shifting and thus keeping their 
shapes.  Transposing the notes of other chord structures like 1.5.8.10 could 
mean using either the same shape (shape shifting) or switching to at least one 
(sometimes two) alternative shape(s) (A shape, D shape, E shape)

> 
> Do you represent an E chord as
> 
> 
> or
>  ?
> 
> If the latter, you will get a warning when you try to transpose the chord,
> because you're asking for open strings, and the transposed notes don't
> work on open strings.  It makes for an incorrect diagram, with the finger
> listed as 0 and a dot on the fret corresponding to the transposition.
> 
> \new FretBoards {
> 1
> \transpose e f 1
> }
> 
> 
> 
> If you use the former notation, you get an incomplete fretboard when you
> transpose the code,
> because you:
> 
> 1) Don't have the barre indicator
> 2) Don't have the finger listed for the barred notes
> 
> However, you don't get the warning, and you don't have the inconsistency
> of asking for an open string and showing a dot simultaneously.
> 
> \new FretBoards {
> 1
> \transpose e f 1
> 
>  }

Hm, I’d either use  or (even more likely) , the latter making it even more complicated! When 
transposing this open chord to a barred chord all fingers would have to be 
raised by 1.

> 
> It would be possible to employ some code like the following:
> 
> If (some notes have fingers given) and
>   (there is more than one dot on the lowest fret in the diagram)
> then
>   make a barre on the lowest fret and set the fingering of all the dots
> on the lowest fret to 1
> 
> Or alternatively 
> 
> If (some notes have fingers given) and
>   (a note has a finger of 0 and a fret >= 1)
> then
>   give that note a finger of 1
> 
> If (we have more than one note with the same finger)
> then
>   make a barre from the lowest note to the highest note on that finger
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think either of these algorithms would do what you want?

They both sound fine to me!  Are they mutually exclusive? I’d suggest another 
condition:

if we make a barre on the lowest fret and set the fingering of all the dots on 
the lowest fret to 1, the other fingers should be automatically raised by one.

Does that make sense? I will probably need some more time to think about it 
myself...

Thanks for your help and your detailed explanations!
patrick
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Finale challenge

[Urs Liska]

Am 21. Mai 2015 22:56:18 MESZ, schrieb Jacques Menu :
>Hello Urs,
>
>Does the attached file (Finale 2014) suit your need?
>

Well, if that's meant as a joke it is a good one. But maybe there's something 
wrong with your files?
In any case it's interesting to see the size of the Finale file ...

Urs

>JM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Le 21 mai 2015 à 19:47, Urs Liska  a écrit :
>> 
>> Anyone ready for a new Finale challenge? I need someone entering one
>6/8 measure of a two-voice piano part in a current Finale vetsion :-/
>> 
>> 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: Finale challenge

[Peter Crighton]

I’m not at all experienced with Finale and only have Finale 2012. If that
is sufficient for you, I can do it.


--
Peter Crighton | Musician & Music Engraver based in Mainz, Germany
http://www.petercrighton.de

2015-05-21 19:47 GMT+02:00 Urs Liska :

> Anyone ready for a new Finale challenge? I need someone entering one 6/8
> measure of a two-voice piano part in a current Finale vetsion :-/
>
> 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: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/21/15 8:39 AM, "pls"  wrote:
>
>> 
>> I thought about this issue quite a bit when I was creating predefined
>>fret
>> diagrams.  There, we introduced the idea of a chord shape.  There is a
>> function that shifts a chord shape by N frets (offset-fret).  At
>>present,
>> it adds N to the fret number for every dot.  I thought about setting the
>> fret number to N for every open string, but elected not to do it
>>because I
>> wouldn't know what to do with the finger.  I guess it's possible to set
>>it
>> to 1.
>
>I would argue that it would make a lot of sense to "set the fret number
>to N for every open string² and to automatically add a barre indication
>when transposing open chord shapes.  Otherwise these resulting diagrams
>look really daunting and unplayable.

There is a difference between transposing and shape shifting.

Shape shifting is done on chord shapes, rather than music.  It would be
trivial to set the fret to N and the finger to 1 when shifting a chord
shape.  I think that probably makes sense to do.

Transposing doesn't work on chord shapes.  Transposing works on notes.
The automatic fretboard creator looks at the notes and creates a
fretboard.  At that point, it has no knowledge of a chord shape, so we
can't do the shape shifting algorithm there.

Do you represent an E chord as


or
 ?

If the latter, you will get a warning when you try to transpose the chord,
because you're asking for open strings, and the transposed notes don't
work on open strings.  It makes for an incorrect diagram, with the finger
listed as 0 and a dot on the fret corresponding to the transposition.

\new FretBoards {
 1
 \transpose e f 1
}



If you use the former notation, you get an incomplete fretboard when you
transpose the code,
because you:

1) Don't have the barre indicator
2) Don't have the finger listed for the barred notes

However, you don't get the warning, and you don't have the inconsistency
of asking for an open string and showing a dot simultaneously.

\new FretBoards {
 1
 \transpose e f 1
   
  }

It would be possible to employ some code like the following:

If (some notes have fingers given) and
   (there is more than one dot on the lowest fret in the diagram)
then
   make a barre on the lowest fret and set the fingering of all the dots
on the lowest fret to 1

Or alternatively 

If (some notes have fingers given) and
   (a note has a finger of 0 and a fret >= 1)
then
   give that note a finger of 1

If (we have more than one note with the same finger)
then
   make a barre from the lowest note to the highest note on that finger



Do you think either of these algorithms would do what you want?

Thanks,

Carl



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

Re: How to avoid a collision?

[Larry Kent]

As a relative newcomer myself, I have also found it useful to grab the code
that people post here - like this discussion - and dropping it into
Frescobaldi and seeing how far I can get in solving the problem, or
modifying a good solution to see what happens when I make small changes to
perfectly good code.

Larry Kent
Tampa, FL


On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Simon Albrecht 
wrote:

>  Am 21.05.2015 um 15:21 schrieb Olivier Vogel:
>
>
> 2015-05-21 13:54 GMT+01:00 Kieren MacMillan  >:
>
>>
>> May I ask why you’re not using Lilypond’s built-in (and generallly
>> excellent) voice-handling? e.g. In the modified snippet (below), I’m using
>> \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, etc., which eliminates the need for \stemUp,
>> \tieDown, etc., and appears (to my eye) to eliminate all note collisions.
>>
>
>  Simply because, I'm learning Lilypond since only a few days.
>
>  Your solution avoids the collision at the third measure, but introduces
> an horizontal shift at the fourth measure, which I'd like to prevent. Is it
> possible?
>
>
>>
>> p.s. Also note that I abstracted your note code from your score code — it
>> is so much easier to read and debug this way, in my opinion, and it keeps
>> the score block as clean and simple as possible.
>>
>
>  Thank you very much for your advice. As a beginner, where can I learn
> how to write a better code?
>
> 1. Learning by doing – and by trying yourself how you might improve it, so
> that it’s more flexible, easy to type and read.
> 2. Use the templates of Frescobaldi 
> , which besides is extremely recommendable anyway.
> 3. Learn from others – look at code examples from experienced users like
> in the LSR, like on this list, or elsewhere on the web (but there are all
> sorts of code around, including less elegant or outdated ones…)
>
> HTH and keep going :-),
> Simon
>
> ___
> 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: How to avoid a collision?

[Simon Albrecht]

Am 21.05.2015 um 15:21 schrieb Olivier Vogel:


2015-05-21 13:54 GMT+01:00 Kieren MacMillan 
mailto:kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca>>:



May I ask why you’re not using Lilypond’s built-in (and generallly
excellent) voice-handling? e.g. In the modified snippet (below),
I’m using \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, etc., which eliminates the need
for \stemUp, \tieDown, etc., and appears (to my eye) to eliminate
all note collisions.


Simply because, I'm learning Lilypond since only a few days.

Your solution avoids the collision at the third measure, but 
introduces an horizontal shift at the fourth measure, which I'd like 
to prevent. Is it possible?



p.s. Also note that I abstracted your note code from your score
code — it is so much easier to read and debug this way, in my
opinion, and it keeps the score block as clean and simple as possible.


Thank you very much for your advice. As a beginner, where can I learn 
how to write a better code?
1. Learning by doing – and by trying yourself how you might improve it, 
so that it’s more flexible, easy to type and read.
2. Use the templates of Frescobaldi , which 
besides is extremely recommendable anyway.
3. Learn from others – look at code examples from experienced users like 
in the LSR, like on this list, or elsewhere on the web (but there are 
all sorts of code around, including less elegant or outdated ones…)


HTH and keep going :-),
Simon
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Fine tuning

[Simon Albrecht]

Hello Bernhard,

some more remarks from me:
– Generally, I wouldn’t go for one page at any cost. I understand your 
wish, but it would be easier to read if the choir were on four staves. 
And that’s what the great 19th century complete works editions used to 
do. Also, your current setup throws warnings because of the first bars 
of soprano and alto: either use \voiceThree and \voiceFour (look for 
"temporary polyphonic section" in the NR), or write both soprano parts 
as chords in one voice (), or move the alto parts to the lower staff.

– Use R1 instead of r1.
– m.9, organ: there is no a,, on all but a very few organs
– m.11, bass: is the e, intentional?
– m.17, tenor should be one whole note
– m.18, inconsistent breathing sign. How about
Breathe = \tweak text \markup \musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight" ?
– m.19, bass, 2nd note should be e
– I’d use only one lyrics context, also for the first line. The 
differences between voices are small, and through the slurs it’s 
unambiguous. I think every choir singer should be able to cope with 
that, and they will, if it’s explained to them :-)
– Organ part: use chords wherever possible (instead of two voices), 
except for what will likely be the pedal part.

– m.12, organ: missing \oneVoice here
– Experiment with slur direction (i.e. ^( and _( ), e.g. m.18f., organ


Am 21.05.2015 um 13:43 schrieb Dr. Bernhard Kleine:

Thank you and the other contributors very much,

  1.with set-global-staff-size 16 only one page
  2.the \tempo solved the other problem
  3.however,  halign  #0.5 does not make the proper horizontal orientation,
the four entries sopran , alto, tenor and bass are not vertically aligned.

Any idea?
Try for example c2-\tweak self-alignment-X 0.8 _\markup "Tenor" (play 
with the value).
There is no way to really align them, so you’d have to do it manually. 
But why would you need to?


HTH, Simon

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

Finale challenge

[Urs Liska]

Anyone ready for a new Finale challenge? I need someone entering one 6/8 
measure of a two-voice piano part in a current Finale vetsion :-/

Best
Urs___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to avoid a collision?

[tisimst]

Olivier,

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:26 AM, Olivier Vogel [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n176852...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

>
>
> 2015-05-21 13:54 GMT+01:00 Kieren MacMillan <[hidden email]
> >:
>
>>
>> May I ask why you’re not using Lilypond’s built-in (and generallly
>> excellent) voice-handling? e.g. In the modified snippet (below), I’m using
>> \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, etc., which eliminates the need for \stemUp,
>> \tieDown, etc., and appears (to my eye) to eliminate all note collisions.
>>
>
> Simply because, I'm learning Lilypond since only a few days.
>

Well, keep going! You'll get the hang of things. I'd follow Kieren's advice
in separating the musical *content* from the score *structure*. You'll find
it will pay off. However, there's an unnecessary duplication of identifying
voices in his solution. Let me explain. There are basically two ways to
create simultaneous voices, an implicit way and an explicit way.

*Implicit Voicing:*

... old voice before ...
<<
  { ... first voice stuff ... }
  \\
  { ... second voice stuff ... }
  \\
  { ... third voice stuff ... }
  \\
   ... etc.
>>
... new voice after ...

In this form, there is no need to include \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, etc. unless
you *really* mean to change the voice, but normally this is not necessary.
Adding them (which is what Kieren did) won't hurt it, it's just
unnecessary. This syntax can be convenient if the sections are not too
long. However, be aware that this syntax creates COMPLETELY NEW voices and
discards the old ones, so don't use this form when you need to attach lyric
text. The voice it's connected to will be lost once this section starts.

*Explicit Voicing:*

... original voice stuff, neutral direction ...
<<
  { \voiceOne ... continuation of original voice (but now as "first") ... }
  \new Voice { \voiceTwo ... second voice stuff ... }
  \new Voice { \voiceThree ... third voice stuff ... }
>>
\oneVoice
... original voice continues, but without a specified direction ...

Notice that there are no "\\" in between the voices here. I tend to prefer
this syntax unless each section is *very* temporary and there are no lyrics
involved. Otherwise, this is the way to go.

In either case, the odd numbered voices move associated elements upwards
(i.e., stems, slurs, ties, articulations, etc.) and move progressively to
the right, away from the primary note column. Even numbered voices move
associated elements downwards and move progressively to the left of the
primary note column.


> Your solution avoids the collision at the third measure, but introduces an
> horizontal shift at the fourth measure, which I'd like to prevent. Is it
> possible?
>

It's certainly possible, but the real issue that keeps makes it this way
that LilyPond deals with things tied to specific voices. As of now, there
isn't a convenient mechanism that allows you to put a tie across voices. To
*fake it*, there are a couple of options:

   1. Use an override similar to what you were using initially (e.g., \override
   NoteColumn.force-hshift = #0) for both notes in the connected ties of
   the third voice.
   2. Use a hidden notehead that connects to the first g1 and create a real
   chord in the first voice for the second set of ties.

In your case, after cooking up both options, the first tends to be easier
(when using the voicing that Kieren described) and the second requires the
same force-shift override anyway to put the tie in the right place.

>
>> p.s. Also note that I abstracted your note code from your score code — it
>> is so much easier to read and debug this way, in my opinion, and it keeps
>> the score block as clean and simple as possible.
>>
>
> Thank you very much for your advice. As a beginner, where can I learn how
> to write a better code?
>

Do you mean syntax structure (e.g., where to put the music vs. structure)
or coding style (e.g., how much to indent, when to start a new line, etc.)?

Regards,
Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/How-to-avoid-a-collision-tp176849p176855.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[pls]

On 21.05.2015, at 15:10, Carl Sorensen  wrote:

> On 5/21/15 1:30 AM, "pls"  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Nice! Thanks a lot.
>> 
>> Yes, transposing chords with open strings probably poses a problem.
>> Fingering information would have to be included automatically in order to
>> decide whether they should be part of a barre.  I¹d think it¹s safe to
>> assume that transposed open strings in chords will always be played with
>> the first finger.
> 
> For right now, transposing chords with open strings will leave the strings
> open.  Transposing doesn't affect fingering, only pitches.
> 
> I'm actually OK with that.  An E chord (with open 6, 2, and 1) is a
> different shape from an F chord (with barred 6, 2, and 1) in my opinion.
> Yes, the pattern on strings 3, 4, and 5 is the same.  But the hand pattern
> on the chord is different.

Yes, the hand pattern is slightly different but nevertheless F is an E chord 
shape moved up by one fret.  The very popular CAGED system claims that there 
are only five basic open chord shapes: C, A, G, E, and D.  All other chords 
shapes can be derived from these five basic shapes.

> 
> I thought about this issue quite a bit when I was creating predefined fret
> diagrams.  There, we introduced the idea of a chord shape.  There is a
> function that shifts a chord shape by N frets (offset-fret).  At present,
> it adds N to the fret number for every dot.  I thought about setting the
> fret number to N for every open string, but elected not to do it because I
> wouldn't know what to do with the finger.  I guess it's possible to set it
> to 1.

I would argue that it would make a lot of sense to "set the fret number to N 
for every open string” and to automatically add a barre indication when 
transposing open chord shapes.  Otherwise these resulting diagrams look really 
daunting and unplayable.

> 
> The fundamental issue that causes the problem is that a fingering of 0 not
> only sets a finger, but also a fret.
> 
> However, you can easily fix this yourself in your chords that request
> automatic fret diagrams.  Set the finger to 1, and if the automatic
> diagram asks for a fret of 0, it will automatically change it to zero.
> 
> \new FretBoards {
>  1
>  \transpose e f 1
>  1
>  \transpose f e  1
> 
>  }

Ah, thank you, I didn’t know that. It’s a clever trick but I don’t think I 
would really like to use it in practice because it messes with the fingerings 
of open chord shapes.  In this case I’d rather prefer to use a “manual” \barre 
function when transposing fretboards with correct fingerings.

Thanks for your help!
patrick


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

Re: Putting lyrics below its staff?

[tisimst]

Kaj,

On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 2:05 AM, Kaj [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n176837...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:

> I am working on a piece of choir music. It consists of two parts, the
> first of which is written on one staff, and the second two staves. The
> upper staff in part two is a continuation of the staff in part one. All the
> staves are accompanied with lyrics. My wish is that this lyrics should be
> written below its respective staff. However, whatever I do, the lyrics for
> the lower staff in part two, which I denote C, is written above the staff,
> hence directly below the lyrics for the upper staff (B). I suspect there
> should be a simple solution for this, and in the handbook they say that the
> lyrics is normally written below the staff. To get it above the staff you
> would have to do some overrides.
>
> In the code you can see the commented lines, which are part of all the
> tries I have done, but nothing seems to help. To me it almost looks as if
> the behaviour is hard coded, just because of putting the lyrics between the
> staves is the normal. After an experience like this I feel strengthened in
> a thought, grown in my head, that LilyPond will never ever be a tool for
> everybody. It is too complicated and inconsistent to be used by anybody
> else than the absolute top expert. Which is a pity, as it produces an
> excellent result.
>
> This is the result of my efforts so far:
>
> \version "2.18.2"
>
> \paper { ragged-right = ##t }
>
> mA = \relative c' { c4 d e f }
> mB = \relative c'' { g4 a b c }
> mC = \relative c' { c'4 b a8 g f4 }
> mAB = \relative c' { c4 d e f g4 a b c }
>
> tA = \lyricmode { A B C D }
> tB = \lyricmode { E F G H }
> tC = \lyricmode { i j k l m }
> tAB = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }
>
> xA = { s1*1 \break }
> xB = { s1*1 }
> xC = { s1*1 }
>
> \score {
>   \new ChoirStaff
>   <<
> \new Staff = "sAB" {
>   <<
> \new Voice = "vAB" { \mAB }
> {
>   \new Voice = "vA" { \xA }
>   <<
> \new Voice = "vB" { \xB }
> \new Staff = "sC" {
>   \new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
> }
>   >>
> }
>   >>
> }
> \new Lyrics = "lAB" \lyricsto "vAB" { \tAB }
> \new Lyrics = "lC" \with {
> % alignBelowContext = #"sC"
> % \override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #UP
> }
> { \lyricsto "vC" { \tC } }
>   >>
>
>   \layout { indent = #0 }
> }
>
> *which produces this:*
> [image: --- (Image from LilyPond) ---]
> /Kaj
>

I think LilyPond is just getting confused by all the nested voices/staves.
As Phil suggested, a little restructuring of your example score can bring a
nice solution to light:

\version "2.18.2"

mA = \relative c' {
  c4 d e f | \break
  g a b c
}
mB = \relative c'' {
  s1 |
  c4 b a8 g f4
}
tA = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }
tB = \lyricmode { i j k l m }

\score {
  \new ChoirStaff <<
\new Staff {
  \new Voice = "vA" \mA
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "vA" \tA
\new Staff \with {
  \RemoveEmptyStaves
  \override VerticalAxisGroup.remove-first = ##t
}{
  \new Voice = "vB" \mB
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "vB" \tB
  >>
  \layout {
indent = 0
  }
}

There are a few things I'd point out:

   1. All \new Staff declarations are only within the ChoirStaff
   2. Each staff gets its own voice and the second voice gets a spacer rest
   before its notes.
   3. The second staff's empty measures are removed via two overrides
   \RemoveEmptyStaves and \override VerticalAxisGroup.remove-first = ##t
   4. Each set of Lyrics is placed immediately after its staff so there is
   no need to direct it above or below anything

I hope that this provides a clearer logic to how to construct a score that
is quite obvious to what's happening (to the user) and relatively
mistake-proof in interpretation (for LilyPond).

Regards,
Abraham




--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Putting-lyrics-below-its-staff-tp176837p176853.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to avoid a collision?

[Olivier Vogel]

2015-05-21 13:54 GMT+01:00 Kieren MacMillan :

>
> May I ask why you’re not using Lilypond’s built-in (and generallly
> excellent) voice-handling? e.g. In the modified snippet (below), I’m using
> \voiceOne, \voiceTwo, etc., which eliminates the need for \stemUp,
> \tieDown, etc., and appears (to my eye) to eliminate all note collisions.
>

Simply because, I'm learning Lilypond since only a few days.

Your solution avoids the collision at the third measure, but introduces an
horizontal shift at the fourth measure, which I'd like to prevent. Is it
possible?


>
> p.s. Also note that I abstracted your note code from your score code — it
> is so much easier to read and debug this way, in my opinion, and it keeps
> the score block as clean and simple as possible.
>

Thank you very much for your advice. As a beginner, where can I learn how
to write a better code?

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

Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/21/15 1:30 AM, "pls"  wrote:

>
>Nice! Thanks a lot.
>
>Yes, transposing chords with open strings probably poses a problem.
>Fingering information would have to be included automatically in order to
>decide whether they should be part of a barre.  I¹d think it¹s safe to
>assume that transposed open strings in chords will always be played with
>the first finger.

For right now, transposing chords with open strings will leave the strings
open.  Transposing doesn't affect fingering, only pitches.

I'm actually OK with that.  An E chord (with open 6, 2, and 1) is a
different shape from an F chord (with barred 6, 2, and 1) in my opinion.
Yes, the pattern on strings 3, 4, and 5 is the same.  But the hand pattern
on the chord is different.

I thought about this issue quite a bit when I was creating predefined fret
diagrams.  There, we introduced the idea of a chord shape.  There is a
function that shifts a chord shape by N frets (offset-fret).  At present,
it adds N to the fret number for every dot.  I thought about setting the
fret number to N for every open string, but elected not to do it because I
wouldn't know what to do with the finger.  I guess it's possible to set it
to 1.

The fundamental issue that causes the problem is that a fingering of 0 not
only sets a finger, but also a fret.

However, you can easily fix this yourself in your chords that request
automatic fret diagrams.  Set the finger to 1, and if the automatic
diagram asks for a fret of 0, it will automatically change it to zero.

\new FretBoards {
  1
  \transpose e f 1
  1
  \transpose f e  1
   
  }

Thanks,

Carl



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

Re: How to avoid a collision?

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Olivier,

> In the following example, I don't understand why there is a collision at the 
> third measure and I don't know how to avoid it.

May I ask why you’re not using Lilypond’s built-in (and generallly excellent) 
voice-handling? e.g. In the modified snippet (below), I’m using \voiceOne, 
\voiceTwo, etc., which eliminates the need for \stemUp, \tieDown, etc., and 
appears (to my eye) to eliminate all note collisions.

If this doesn’t answer your question, please post again.

Hope this helps!
Kieren.

p.s. Also note that I abstracted your note code from your score code — it is so 
much easier to read and debug this way, in my opinion, and it keeps the score 
block as clean and simple as possible.


\version "2.18.2"

\paper {
  indent = 0\cm
}

global = {
  \key c \major
  \time 4/4\tempo "Allegro vivace"
}

theMusic = \relative c' {
  c4^"Tutti"\f r8 \tuplet 3/2 { g16( a b } c4) r8 \tuplet 3/2 { g16( a b } |
  c4) r r r8
  <<
{ \voiceOne
  c'^"Strings" |
  c4. b8 d4. c8   |
  g'2( f4)
}
\\
\new Voice
{ \voiceTwo
r8\p |
2  |
~ 4 r4
}
\\
\new Voice
{ \voiceThree
  s8 |
  g1 ~ |
  g2 ~ g4
}
  >>
  r4
}

\score {
 \new Staff << \global \theMusic >>
}



Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


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

How to avoid a collision?

[Olivier Vogel]

In the following example, I don't understand why there is a collision at
the third measure and I don't know how to avoid it.

Many thanks for your help


\version "2.18.2"

\header { }

\paper {
  %system-count = 2% nombre total de systèmes
  indent = 0\cm
}

global = {
  \key c \major
  \time 4/4\tempo "Allegro vivace"
}


\score {
 \new Staff <<
   \global
   \new Voice {
  \relative c' {
\stemUp
c4^"Tutti"\f r8 \tuplet 3/2 { g16( a b } c4) r8 \tuplet 3/2 { g16( a b
} |
c4) r r r8 c'^"Strings" |
c4. b8 d4. c8 |
\slurUp g'2( f4) r4 |
  }
 }
 \new Voice {
  \relative c' {
\stemDown\tieDown
s1 |
s2 s4 s8 r8\p |
{ 2  |
~ 4 r4 } |
  }
 }
 \new Voice {
  \relative c'' {
\stemDown\tieUp
s1 |
s1 |
\once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #2 g1~ |
\tieDown g2~ g4 r4 |
  }
 }
 >>
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

non-greedy regexp don't seem to work

[Michael Gerdau]

Hi list,

the following two statements should provide the exakt same strings:
(match:substring (string-match "_(.*?)_" "a_ä_ö_de_fü_") 1)
(match:substring (string-match "_([^_]*)_" "a_ä_ö_de_fü_") 1)

However for me they don't. Here is a log how I tested it:
$ guile
GNU Guile 2.0.11
  
Copyright (C) 1995-2014 Free Software Foundation, Inc.  
  

  
Guile comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `,show w'.
This program is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
under certain conditions; type `,show c' for details.

Enter `,help' for help.
scheme@(guile-user)> (match:substring (string-match "_(.*?)_" 
"a_ä_ö_de_fü_") 1)
$1 = "ä_ö_de_fü"
scheme@(guile-user)> (match:substring (string-match "_([^_]*)_" 
"a_ä_ö_de_fü_") 1)
$2 = "ä"
scheme@(guile-user)> ,q

I checked the same regexps in Perl and there both results are the same.

Am I overlooking the obvious or is this a bug ?

Best wishes,
Michael
-- 
 Michael Gerdau   email: m...@qata.de
 GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

AW: Fine tuning

[Dr. Bernhard Kleine]

Thank you and the other contributors very much,

 1.with set-global-staff-size 16 only one page
 2.the \tempo solved the other problem
 3.however,  halign  #0.5 does not make the proper horizontal orientation,
the four entries sopran , alto, tenor and bass are not vertically aligned.

Any idea?

Kind regards 
Bernhard

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: lilypond-user-bounces+bernhard.kleine=gmx@gnu.org
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+bernhard.kleine=gmx@gnu.org] Im Auftrag
von Rutger Hofman
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 21. Mai 2015 12:59
An: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Betreff: Re: Fine tuning

On 05/21/2015 12:15 PM, Dr. Bernhard Kleine wrote:
[snip]
> 1.The piece should fit to one page.

Use a smaller point size: #(set-global-staff-size 17) for example. As a
last resort, the number of pages can be forced in the paper block:
\paper {
page-count = #1
}

> 2.The markups Ruhig should be on Top of Sanctus

Use \tempo\markup{Ruhig}

> 3.The voisce nominator Ten. and Bass in Number 4 should be in front
> of the notes and texts, same in 8.

You might try \markup\right-align{Ten.}, or play with \halign -- see
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/formatting-text#text-al
ignment

Good luck,

Rutger


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
\version "2.19.5"
\language "deutsch"
 #(set-global-staff-size 16) 
\header {
  title = "Messe in C"
  subtitle = "für Chor und Orgel"
  composer = "Anton Bruckner"
  arranger = "bearb. v. Jos. Messner"
  piece = "Sanctus"
  tagline = \markup {
Gesetzt durch Bernhard Kleine mit 
\line { LilyPond \simple #(lilypond-version) (http://lilypond.org/) }
  }
}

global = {
  \key c \major
  \time 4/4
}

soprano = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \dynamicUp
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
 \tempo\markup { Ruhig } e2\p e2| d (e) | d h2\rest | f'^\markup {\halign #0.5 Ten. } e~\> | e4\! e2\< ( d4 |
  c2\! d)\> | e\! h\rest | h4.^\markup {\halign #0.5 Sopr.} h8 h2 | a\< h\! | a2.\> a4  |
  gis1\fermata | gis2^-\!\f gis4^- gis^- | a2^- a4 \breathe a | a2 (gis2) |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  } a \breathe a~\ff |
  a g4 f | e2 (d) |e4 \breathe e\p e e | f2 <> | f2\pp\> e\! \bar"|."


}

sopranoTwo = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \dynamicUp \shiftOff
  \stemUp c2 c2| h (c) | h s2| \stemDown \dynamicDown d2\p \tieDown c~ |c4 \slurDown c2 (h4|
  a2 h) | c2 s2
}
alto = \relative c' {
  \global
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  c2 ( e4) f| g2 (e4 c) \shiftOff g2 s2|
  s1*4 |
  h4._\markup {\halign #0.5 Alt} e8 gis2 | e2 e | e2. e4 |
  e1 | e2 e4 e4 |e2 e4  e4| e1 | e2 f2~ | f c4 c | c2 (h) | d4 c c c | c2 c2 | c2 c

}

altoTwo = \relative c' {
  \global \shiftOff
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  g'2 \shiftOn g2| g1| \shiftOff g2
}

tenor = \relative c' {
  \global \dynamicUp
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  d,1\rest | d1\rest |d1\rest | g1| g2 gis( |
  a2. g!8 f) | g2 d2\rest | gis4.^\markup {\halign #0.5 Tenor} gis8 h2| c2 h | c2. c4 |
  h1\fermata | h2 h4 h | c2 a4 \breathe c | h1 | c2 c~|
  c h!4 a| g2~ g | g4 \breathe g\< c\! b | a2 g | a g |
}

tenorTwo =  \relative c' {
  \global \dynamicUp

}
bass = \relative c {
  \global
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  s1 s1 s1 h2_\markup {\halign #0.5 Bass}( << c4 { s8 s8\>} >> d4)| e2\! e\< ( |
  <> e8\> d) | c2\! s2 | e4._\markup {\halign #0.5 Bass} e8 e2| a\< gis\! |a2.\> a4 |
  << e1 {s2. s8 s8\!} e,1>> | e'2\f e4 e | e2 << e4 c4>> <> | <> |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  }  2 \breathe  f~\ff|
  f2 f4 f4 | g2  g,| c4 c\p c c | f2 d |f\pp\>  c\!|
}

bassTwo =  \relative c' {
  \global
}
verse = \lyricmode {
  % Liedtext folgt hier.

}

verseSoprano = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  
}

verseAlto = \lyricmode {
San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  Do -- mi -- nus De  -- us Sa -- ba -- oth.
  Ple -- ni sunt coe -- li et ter -- ra glo -- ri -- a tu -- a.
  ho -- san -- na in ex -- cel -- sis
}

verseTenor = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus
}

verseBasso = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus
}


rightOne = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \shiftOnn
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  h1\rest | h1\rest |h4\rest g,4\pp( h4 d8 e |f2 e4) h'4\rest | h1\rest
  h1\rest | h4\rest c,4 ( e\< g8 a\! | h2) h4\rest gis4 | < a c, >2  h | a4( c e4. fis8) |
  gis1\fermata | h,4\rest e,8\f( gis h4. e8) | h4\rest a8( c e4. a8) | h,4\rest h,8(e gis h e4) |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  }  h2\rest  \breathe a4 ( c|
  f2 c4 a) | g8( a h c d2 | c4) \breathe g ( c b | a f c) g'^\markup { \italic rit.} a8 f a h! c2
}


rightTwo = \relative c' {
  \global
  \shiftOnn \stemDown
  s1|s1|s2 h4 h4| d2 c4 s4 s1|s1 s4 g2 ( c4| e2) s4 e8\mf d8 | s2 e2 | e a |
  gis1 | s1 | s1| s1| s2 f2 | a g4 f4 | e2 g4 f4 | e r\p h2\rest | s2. c4~ (| c f e2) |
}

leftOne = \relative c' {
  \gl

Re: Fine tuning

[Rutger Hofman]

On 05/21/2015 12:15 PM, Dr. Bernhard Kleine wrote:
[snip]

1.The piece should fit to one page.


Use a smaller point size: #(set-global-staff-size 17) for example. As a
last resort, the number of pages can be forced in the paper block:
\paper {
page-count = #1
}


2.The markups Ruhig should be on Top of Sanctus


Use \tempo\markup{Ruhig}


3.The voisce nominator Ten. and Bass in Number 4 should be in front
of the notes and texts, same in 8.


You might try \markup\right-align{Ten.}, or play with \halign -- see
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/formatting-text#text-alignment

Good luck,

Rutger


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

Re: Fine tuning

[Phil Holmes]

1.  With this font size, forcing it to one page causes collisions.  Look at:

#(set-global-staff-size 16)
\paper {
page-count=1
}

and adjust them to suit.

2.  I would set "Ruhig" as a tempo marking, which then places it appropriately.

3.  Place you markup after the spacer rests prior to the music.  If you want to 
adjust the horizontal position, you can subdivide the rests; e.g.:

s2. s4_"Markup"

HTH

--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: Dr. Bernhard Kleine 
  To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:15 AM
  Subject: Fine tuning


  I have prepared the Sanctus of the Missa in C by Bruckner. There are some 
points that need fine tuning. 

   

  1.  The piece should fit to one page.

  2.  The markups Ruhig should be on Top of Sanctus

  3.  The voisce nominator Ten. and Bass in Number 4 should be in front of 
the notes and texts, same in 8.

   

  It would be very niece if some could point me to the ways to change these 
issues.

   

  Thank you very much

   

  Bernhard



--


  ___
  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: [OT] Figured bass numbering practice: +4 / 4+ / 4# / #4

[flup2]

It's much more clearer to me, now.

Thanks a lot :-)

Philippe



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/OT-Figured-bass-numbering-practice-4-4-4-4-tp176834p176844.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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

Fine tuning

[Dr. Bernhard Kleine]

I have prepared the Sanctus of the Missa in C by Bruckner. There are some
points that need fine tuning. 

 

1.  The piece should fit to one page.

2.  The markups Ruhig should be on Top of Sanctus

3.  The voisce nominator Ten. and Bass in Number 4 should be in front of
the notes and texts, same in 8.

 

It would be very niece if some could point me to the ways to change these
issues.

 

Thank you very much

 

Bernhard

\version "2.19.5"
\language "deutsch"
\header {
  title = "Messe in C"
  subtitle = "für Chor und Orgel"
  composer = "Anton Bruckner"
  arranger = "bearb. v. Jos. Messner"
  piece = "Sanctus"
  tagline = \markup {
Gesetzt durch Bernhard Kleine mit 
\line { LilyPond \simple #(lilypond-version) (http://lilypond.org/) }
  }
}

global = {
  \key c \major
  \time 4/4
}

soprano = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \dynamicUp
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  e2^\markup { Ruhig }\p e2| d (e) | d h2\rest | f'^\markup { Ten. } e~\> | e4\! e2\< ( d4 |
  c2\! d)\> | e\! h\rest | h4.^\markup {Sopr.} h8 h2 | a\< h\! | a2.\> a4  |
  gis1\fermata | gis2^-\!\f gis4^- gis^- | a2^- a4 \breathe a | a2 (gis2) |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  } a \breathe a~\ff |
  a g4 f | e2 (d) |e4 \breathe e\p e e | f2 <> | f2\pp\> e\! \bar"|."


}

sopranoTwo = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \dynamicUp \shiftOff
  \stemUp c2 c2| h (c) | h s2| \stemDown \dynamicDown d2\p \tieDown c~ |c4 \slurDown c2 (h4|
  a2 h) | c2 s2
}
alto = \relative c' {
  \global
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  c2 ( e4) f| g2 (e4 c) \shiftOff g2 s2|
  s1*4 |
  h4._\markup {Alt} e8 gis2 | e2 e | e2. e4 |
  e1 | e2 e4 e4 |e2 e4  e4| e1 | e2 f2~ | f c4 c | c2 (h) | d4 c c c | c2 c2 | c2 c

}

altoTwo = \relative c' {
  \global \shiftOff
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  g'2 \shiftOn g2| g1| \shiftOff g2
}

tenor = \relative c' {
  \global \dynamicUp
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  d,1\rest | d1\rest |d1\rest | g1| g2 gis( |
  a2. g!8 f) | g2 d2\rest | gis4.^\markup {Tenor} gis8 h2| c2 h | c2. c4 |
  h1\fermata | h2 h4 h | c2 a4 \breathe c | h1 | c2 c~|
  c h!4 a| g2~ g | g4 \breathe g\< c\! b | a2 g | a g |
}

tenorTwo =  \relative c' {
  \global \dynamicUp

}
bass = \relative c {
  \global
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  s1 s1 s1 h2_\markup {Bass}( << c4 { s8 s8\>} >> d4)| e2\! e\< ( |
  <> e8\> d) | c2\! s2 | e4._\markup {Bass} e8 e2| a\< gis\! |a2.\> a4 |
  << e1 {s2. s8 s8\!} e,1>> | e'2\f e4 e | e2 << e4 c4>> <> | <> |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  }  2 \breathe  f~\ff|
  f2 f4 f4 | g2  g,| c4 c\p c c | f2 d |f\pp\>  c\!|
}

bassTwo =  \relative c' {
  \global
}
verse = \lyricmode {
  % Liedtext folgt hier.

}

verseSoprano = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  
}

verseAlto = \lyricmode {
San -- ctus,  San -- ctus,
  Do -- mi -- nus De  -- us Sa -- ba -- oth.
  Ple -- ni sunt coe -- li et ter -- ra glo -- ri -- a tu -- a.
  ho -- san -- na in ex -- cel -- sis
}

verseTenor = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus
}

verseBasso = \lyricmode {
  San -- ctus,  San -- ctus
}


rightOne = \relative c'' {
  \global
  \shiftOnn
  % Die Noten folgen hier.
  h1\rest | h1\rest |h4\rest g,4\pp( h4 d8 e |f2 e4) h'4\rest | h1\rest
  h1\rest | h4\rest c,4 ( e\< g8 a\! | h2) h4\rest gis4 | < a c, >2  h | a4( c e4. fis8) |
  gis1\fermata | h,4\rest e,8\f( gis h4. e8) | h4\rest a8( c e4. a8) | h,4\rest h,8(e gis h e4) |
  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  }  h2\rest  \breathe a4 ( c|
  f2 c4 a) | g8( a h c d2 | c4) \breathe g ( c b | a f c) g'^\markup { \italic rit.} a8 f a h! c2
}


rightTwo = \relative c' {
  \global
  \shiftOnn \stemDown
  s1|s1|s2 h4 h4| d2 c4 s4 s1|s1 s4 g2 ( c4| e2) s4 e8\mf d8 | s2 e2 | e a |
  gis1 | s1 | s1| s1| s2 f2 | a g4 f4 | e2 g4 f4 | e r\p h2\rest | s2. c4~ (| c f e2) |
}

leftOne = \relative c' {
  \global
  \dynamicUp% Die Noten folgen hier.
  s1*2 | d,4\rest g2.~ | g2~ g4 d4\rest |d1\rest |
  d1\rest d4\rest e2.( |gis2) d4\rest h'4 a2 gis4 fis8 gis8 | c2 c2|
  h1\fermata | d,4\rest \stemDown e8( gis h4. e8) | h4\rest a8( c e4. a8) | h,4\rest h,8(e gis h e4)

  \override BreathingSign.text = \markup {
\musicglyph #"scripts.caesura.straight"
  }  d,2\rest  \breathe  \stemUp c'4\ff a | c1 | c2 h c4 \breathe d,4\rest d2\rest | d2\rest d4\rest s4 s1|


}

leftTwo = \relative c {
  \global
  d1\rest d1\rest d4\rest g2. ( | h,2 c4) s4| s1 |
  s1| \break
  s4 c2. ( |e,2 ) s4 e4 | a, c e fis8 gis8| a2 a|
  e1 s1 s1 s1 | s2 f'2| f1 | g2 g | 4 s4 s2 | s2 s4 4( |< a f>2 2)|
}
leftThree = \relative c {
  \global \stemUp  \slurDown \shiftOff
  s1*6 s4 c2. (| h2)
}

choirPart = \new ChoirStaff <<
  \new Staff = "Frauen" \with {
midiInstrument = "choir aahs"
instrumentName = \markup \center-column { "Sopran" "Alt" }
  } <<
\new Voice = "soprano"{ \voiceOne \soprano }
\new Voice = "alto"   { \voiceTwo \alto }
\

Re: [OT] Figured bass numbering practice: +4 / 4+ / 4# / #4

[Andrew Bernard]

Greetings Philippe,

This practice predates the age of industrialisation and standardisation. People 
were inconsistent. Similarly with spelling. Very normal in Baroque scores in 
general. If you are preparing an edition then you must make musicological 
decisions about how to handle such things. You can either regularise the 
notation, or copy the original and provide a critical report that discusses the 
matter (or not!). The notations you mention are equivalent. Often with 4 you 
see a small vertical slash through the horizontal bar of the four - this is 
also common and means the same. There’s no one answer. It’s up to you. It 
depends how ‘urtext’ you want to be. Slashes are faster to write for copyists 
in a hurry!

Andrew


On 21 May 2015 at 17:10:55, flup2 (phili...@philmassart.net) wrote:


Does someone know what could explain the use of different numbering for the
same meaning? 
Philippe

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

Re: Putting lyrics below its staff?

[Phil Holmes]

Without looking at this in too much depth, it appears that it's an issue with 
creating temporary voices, which is becoming a bit of a FAQ.  Lilypond is not 
generally able to attach lyrics to temporary voices.  If you restructure the 
music to use only staves and voices that are permanent (with appropriate spacer 
rests) I would expect you to get what you want.

Developers/documenters: is this a documentation issue?

--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: 70147pers...@telia.com 
  To: Lilypond-User Mailing List 
  Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 9:04 AM
  Subject: Putting lyrics below its staff?


  I am working on a piece of choir music. It consists of two parts, the first 
of which is written on one staff, and the second two staves. The upper staff in 
part two is a continuation of the staff in part one. All the staves are 
accompanied with lyrics. My wish is that this lyrics should be written below 
its respective staff. However, whatever I do, the lyrics for the lower staff in 
part two, which I denote C, is written above the staff, hence directly below 
the lyrics for the upper staff (B). I suspect there should be a simple solution 
for this, and in the handbook they say that the lyrics is normally written 
below the staff. To get it above the staff you would have to do some overrides.

  In the code you can see the commented lines, which are part of all the tries 
I have done, but nothing seems to help. To me it almost looks as if the 
behaviour is hard coded, just because of putting the lyrics between the staves 
is the normal. After an experience like this I feel strengthened in a thought, 
grown in my head, that LilyPond will never ever be a tool for everybody. It is 
too complicated and inconsistent to be used by anybody else than the absolute 
top expert. Which is a pity, as it produces an excellent result.

  This is the result of my efforts so far:

  \version "2.18.2"

  \paper { ragged-right = ##t }

  mA = \relative c' { c4 d e f }
  mB = \relative c'' { g4 a b c }
  mC = \relative c' { c'4 b a8 g f4 }
  mAB = \relative c' { c4 d e f g4 a b c }

  tA = \lyricmode { A B C D }
  tB = \lyricmode { E F G H }
  tC = \lyricmode { i j k l m }
  tAB = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }

  xA = { s1*1 \break }
  xB = { s1*1 }
  xC = { s1*1 }

  \score {
\new ChoirStaff
<<
  \new Staff = "sAB" { 
<<
  \new Voice = "vAB" { \mAB }
  {
\new Voice = "vA" { \xA }
<<
  \new Voice = "vB" { \xB }
  \new Staff = "sC" {
\new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
  }
>>
  }
>>
  }
  \new Lyrics = "lAB" \lyricsto "vAB" { \tAB }
  \new Lyrics = "lC" \with {
  % alignBelowContext = #"sC"
  % \override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #UP
  }
  { \lyricsto "vC" { \tC } }
>>

\layout { indent = #0 }
  }

  which produces this:

  /Kaj




--


  ___
  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

Putting lyrics below its staff?

[70147persson]

I am working on a piece of choir music. It consists of two parts, the 
first of which is written on one staff, and the second two staves. The 
upper staff in part two is a continuation of the staff in part one. All 
the staves are accompanied with lyrics. My wish is that this lyrics 
should be written below its respective staff. However, whatever I do, 
the lyrics for the lower staff in part two, which I denote C, is written 
above the staff, hence directly below the lyrics for the upper staff 
(B). I suspect there should be a simple solution for this, and in the 
handbook they say that the lyrics is normally written below the staff. 
To get it above the staff you would have to do some overrides.


In the code you can see the commented lines, which are part of all the 
tries I have done, but nothing seems to help. To me it almost looks as 
if the behaviour is hard coded, just because of putting the lyrics 
between the staves is the normal. After an experience like this I feel 
strengthened in a thought, grown in my head, that LilyPond will never 
ever be a tool for everybody. It is too complicated and inconsistent to 
be used by anybody else than the absolute top expert. Which is a pity, 
as it produces an excellent result.


This is the result of my efforts so far:

\version "2.18.2"

\paper { ragged-right = ##t }

mA = \relative c' { c4 d e f }
mB = \relative c'' { g4 a b c }
mC = \relative c' { c'4 b a8 g f4 }
mAB = \relative c' { c4 d e f g4 a b c }

tA = \lyricmode { A B C D }
tB = \lyricmode { E F G H }
tC = \lyricmode { i j k l m }
tAB = \lyricmode { A B C D E F G H }

xA = { s1*1 \break }
xB = { s1*1 }
xC = { s1*1 }

\score {
  \new ChoirStaff
  <<
\new Staff = "sAB" {
  <<
\new Voice = "vAB" { \mAB }
{
  \new Voice = "vA" { \xA }
  <<
\new Voice = "vB" { \xB }
\new Staff = "sC" {
  \new Voice = "vC" { \mC }
}
  >>
}
  >>
}
\new Lyrics = "lAB" \lyricsto "vAB" { \tAB }
\new Lyrics = "lC" \with {
% alignBelowContext = #"sC"
% \override VerticalAxisGroup #'staff-affinity = #UP
}
{ \lyricsto "vC" { \tC } }
  >>

  \layout { indent = #0 }
}

/which produces this:/
--- (Image from LilyPond) ---
/Kaj

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

Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[pls]

On 21.05.2015, at 02:44, Thomas Morley  wrote:

> 2015-05-20 13:16 GMT+02:00 pls :
>> 
>> 
>> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: pls 
>> Subject: Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?
>> Date: 20. Mai 2015 13:12:30 MESZ
>> To: Stephen MacNeil 
>> 
>> Hi Stephen,
>> On 20.05.2015, at 13:02, Stephen MacNeil  wrote:
>> 
>> sorry forgot one
>> 
>> \version "2.18.2"
>> barre = #(define-music-function (barre location str ) (number?)
>> #{
>> \once \override FretBoard.before-line-breaking =
>> #(lambda (grob)
>> ;(display (ly:grob-property grob 'dot-placement-list))
>> (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'dot-placement-list
>> (cons `(barre 6 1 ,str) (ly:grob-property grob 'dot-placement-list
>> 
>> #})
>> fMajorEShape = {  }
>> gMajorEShape = { \transpose f g { \fMajorEShape } }
>> 
>> \new FretBoards {
>> \barre #3
>> \transpose f g { \fMajorEShape }
>> \barre #4
>> \gMajorEShape
>> \barre #3
>> 
>> \set FretBoards.minimumFret = #3
>> \barre #4
>> \gMajorEShape
>> }
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that’s what I was looking for! Thank you very much! I cleaned it up a
>> little bit to get rid of some unnecessary bits and pieces (and to make it
>> easier to understand what it does):
>> 
>> \version "2.19.15"
>> 
>> barre = #(define-music-function (bend location str ) (number?)
>>  #{
>>\once \override FretBoard.before-line-breaking =
>>#(lambda (grob)
>>   ;(display (ly:grob-property grob 'dot-placement-list))
>>   (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'dot-placement-list
>> (cons `(barre 6 1 ,str) (ly:grob-property grob
>> 'dot-placement-list
>>  #})
>> 
>> fMajorEShape = {  }
>> 
>> \new FretBoards {
>> \barre #1
>> \fMajorEShape
>> \barre #3
>> \transpose f g { \fMajorEShape }
>> \barre #5
>> \transpose f a { \fMajorEShape }
>> \barre #7
>> \transpose f b { \fMajorEShape }
>> }
>> 
>> Thanks again!
>> patrick
> 
> 
> More automated:
> 
> \version "2.19.15"
> 
> \new FretBoards
> \transpose c d
> {
> 
> \override FretBoard.before-line-breaking =
> #(lambda (grob)
>   (let* ((dots-list (ly:grob-property grob 'dot-placement-list))
>  (fingered-frets
>(filter
>  (lambda (d)
>(and (eq? 'place-fret (car d)) (>= (length d) 4)))
>dots-list))
>  ;; TODO do better mapping, loop or the like!
>  (finger-1
>(filter
>  (lambda (f) (and (number? (last f)) (= (last f) 1)))
>  fingered-frets))
>  (finger-2
>(filter
>  (lambda (f) (and (number? (last f)) (= (last f) 2)))
>  fingered-frets))
>  (finger-3
>(filter
>  (lambda (f) (and (number? (last f)) (= (last f) 3)))
>  fingered-frets))
>  (finger-4
>(filter
>  (lambda (f) (and (number? (last f)) (= (last f) 4)))
>  fingered-frets))
>  (barre-1
>(if (> (length finger-1) 1)
>(let* ((strgs
> (sort (map cadr finger-1) >))
> )
>  (list 'barre (car strgs) (last strgs) (third (car 
> finger-1
>'()))
>  (barre-2
>(if (> (length finger-2) 1)
>(let* ((strgs
> (sort (map cadr finger-2) >))
> )
>  (list 'barre (car strgs) (last strgs) (third (car 
> finger-2
>'()))
>  (barre-3
>(if (> (length finger-3) 1)
>(let* ((strgs
> (sort (map cadr finger-3) >))
> )
>  (list 'barre (car strgs) (last strgs) (third (car 
> finger-3
>'()))
>  (barre-4
>(if (> (length finger-4) 1)
>(let* ((strgs
> (sort (map cadr finger-4) >))
> )
>  (list 'barre (car strgs) (last strgs) (third (car 
> finger-4
>'()))
>  (barres
>(filter
>  (lambda (l)
>(not (null? l)))
>  (list barre-1 barre-2 barre-3 barre-4
> 
> (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'dot-placement-list
>(append
>  barres
>  dots-list
> 
>  
> 
>  \override Score.RehearsalMark.self-alignment-X = #LEFT
>  \mark
>  \markup
>\fontsize #-6 \column { "transposing" "this one," "will be" "strange ofc" }
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> }
> 

Nice! Thanks a lot.

Yes, transposing chords with open strings probably poses a problem.  Fingering 
information would have to be included automatically in order to decide whether 
they should be part of a barre.  I’d think it’s safe to assume that transposed 
open strings in chords will always be played with the first finger.

Carl has already added a feature request 
(https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4409). 

Thanks again
patrick___

Re: how to add barre indications to automatic fret diagrams?

[pls]

On 21.05.2015, at 03:49, Carl Sorensen  wrote:

> 
> 
> On 5/20/15 7:30 PM, "Carl Sorensen"  wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 5/19/15 12:45 PM, "pls"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> LilyPond¹s automatic fret diagrams really are a very helpful feature!
>>> More often than not it helps to not having to predefine and store a
>>> diagram in a lookup table.  But it has one little drawback: it doesn¹t
>>> automatically include a barre indication when several strings are to be
>>> covered by one finger.  The default diagram actually looks a bit as if
>>> six fingers were needed to play this chord (see example).
>>> 
>> Actually, this should be a feature request for automatic fret diagrams.
>> Any time two strings have the same finger, they could be part of a barre.
>> And it would be relatively straightforward to keep a list of minimum and
>> maximum strings for each finger, and add the necessary barre indications.

This sounds great!

Unfortunately this thread got broken some days ago.  Harm already sketched a 
first automated solution (see 
http://osdir.com/ml/lilypond-user-gnu/2015-05/msg00565.html).  It shows a 
problematic area of implementing the approach “Any time two strings have the 
same finger, they could be part of a barre": transposing chords with open 
strings.

> 
> A feature request has been added as Issue #4409.
> https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4409

Thank you for the wonderful fret diagram code and for adding this feature 
request!

patrick



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

[OT] Figured bass numbering practice: +4 / 4+ / 4# / #4

[flup2]

Hello,

I'm engraving a work with figured bass numbering: concerti grossi n° 1 -> 6
by Geminiani, based on Corelli's op. 5

My problem is that it uses several different numbering that have, for what I
now, the same meaning: for instance +4, 4+, #4, 4#. Sometimes, that
concertino cello part uses +4, the bass in the grosso (ripieno) shows a 4+
at the same time.

Does someone know what could explain the use of different numbering for the
same meaning? Could it come from different engravers (the work was publish
in 1727 in London, as separate parts, not as a score)? A later version of
the same work (published in France 30 years later) show sometimes (not
always) the same thing, being perhaps a copy of the original publishing.

Philippe



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/OT-Figured-bass-numbering-practice-4-4-4-4-tp176834.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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