\magnifyStaff and Horizontal Spacing

[Benjamin Strecker]

I’m working on a project that involves one full size staff and several smaller 
staves providing cues for other instruments.  I’m using \magnifyStaff to 
accomplish this, but it seems to be adjusting the horizontal spacing in ways 
that I’m not liking.  My hope is to have the spacing largely determined by the 
full-size staff (except in circumstances where the more space is needed to fit 
a more active line in the cues).

In the example below, the score using the different sizes seems to be taking 
it’s spacing from smaller staff.  I first noticed this when I saw that the clef 
and time signature for the full-size staff were much closer together than they 
would normally be, but the note spacing is clearly different when compared with 
the second score in the example.

I have been able to adjust SpacingSpanner.spacing-increment to make the note 
spacing a bit better, but it was largely trial and error.  Doubling the default 
value didn’t quite work out.  Adjusting the clef/time signature issue involved 
changing Clef.spacing-alist.time-signature back to the default.

Am I missing something, or is this just the current state of affairs with using 
\magnifyMusic?

%%%
\version "2.19.52"

music = {
  \repeat unfold 16 {f'16}
}

\score {
  <<
    \new Staff = "full-size" \music
    \new Staff \with {
      \magnifyStaff #1/2
    } \music
  >>
}

\score {
  <<
    \new Staff \music
    \new Staff \music
  >>
}

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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[David Wright]

On Thu 16 Mar 2017 at 12:40:28 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> I have tried lots of solutions for this. I am thinking this cannot be
> satisfactorily done in lilypond at this time. The attached solution
> works up to a point, but the chord names clash. Using really large
> paper - which I also tried - to gain space such as architectural A0
> does not seem practical for a music stand, although technically it
> solves the clashing problem.

But isn't that the primary aim? I just assumed that growing the paper
is the same as shrinking the global score size, but a lot less bother
for a proof of concept.

You experts can probably push the lines of chords closer together
(vertical spacing was never my forte) to produce a ribbon. Then there
are plenty of tools for slicing and dicing PDFs. I use pdfjam myself;
a vital tool in a country where A4 paper is virtually unknown.
Perhaps SVG is a possibility. (That assumes you aren't just going to
use a rolling display on a screen.)

> I am not sure that it is currently entirely reasonable to expect that
> chordnames can be laid out proportionally the same as notes. Perhaps a
> development request?

If it's easy and isn't going to involve a period when proportional
gets messed up for the rest of us. But if it's difficult, aren't there
more profitable developments to make to LP.

We have demonstrated a methodology for achieving what the OP asked for
(I think; I haven't had any feedback but it's only been 8 hours or so).
There's even a second string: stack with simultaneous music. The midi
is irrelevant: it's quite usual to generate midi in a separate \score.

> Mr Vromans on the list has a chord chart program called playtab -
> perhaps you could export something to that. It may be a case of using
> the right tool for the job.

(I'm ignorant about this.)

> On 15 March 2017 at 11:11, Adam Spiers  wrote:
> > I have a transcription of a jazz solo by John Coltrane which I made
> > several years ago.[0]  It contains chord symbols which I produced via
> > manual analysis to match the harmony of his improvisation, rather than
> > the (much simpler) chord progression of the 12-bar blues over which he
> > was improvising.  Therefore the chords are different for each of the 8
> > choruses of the solo.
> >
> > It would be very instructive to produce a clear visualisation of the
> > harmonic variations he uses in each chorus, so I have dropped the
> > notes of the solo from the .ly file, leaving only the chords, rendered
> > in landscape, with all the choruses vertically stacked on top of each
> > other, one per line.  This should allow easy visual comparison of any
> > part of the 12-bar progression simply by scanning vertically at that
> > point within the progression.  However this vertical scan only works
> > effectively if all the choruses are vertically aligned, hence the need
> > for proportional spacing.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Adam,

I have tried lots of solutions for this. I am thinking this cannot be
satisfactorily done in lilypond at this time. The attached solution
works up to a point, but the chord names clash. Using really large
paper - which I also tried - to gain space such as architectural A0
does not seem practical for a music stand, although technically it
solves the clashing problem.

I am not sure that it is currently entirely reasonable to expect that
chordnames can be laid out proportionally the same as notes. Perhaps a
development request?

Mr Vromans on the list has a chord chart program called playtab -
perhaps you could export something to that. It may be a case of using
the right tool for the job.


Andrew


On 15 March 2017 at 11:11, Adam Spiers  wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> How can I achieve proportional spacing when I only have chord names
> and bar lines, and no staff or notes?  Attached is a file with a very
> naive attempt which fails to achieve this; corrections would be most
> welcome.
>
> For the curious, the background and motivation behind this question is
> as follows:
>
> I have a transcription of a jazz solo by John Coltrane which I made
> several years ago.[0]  It contains chord symbols which I produced via
> manual analysis to match the harmony of his improvisation, rather than
> the (much simpler) chord progression of the 12-bar blues over which he
> was improvising.  Therefore the chords are different for each of the 8
> choruses of the solo.
>
> It would be very instructive to produce a clear visualisation of the
> harmonic variations he uses in each chorus, so I have dropped the
> notes of the solo from the .ly file, leaving only the chords, rendered
> in landscape, with all the choruses vertically stacked on top of each
> other, one per line.  This should allow easy visual comparison of any
> part of the 12-bar progression simply by scanning vertically at that
> point within the progression.  However this vertical scan only works
> effectively if all the choruses are vertically aligned, hence the need
> for proportional spacing.
>
> Thanks a lot in advance for any hints!
> Adam
>
> [0] http://blog.adamspiers.org/2013/01/28/cello-lessons-from-a-dead-genius/
\version "2.19.56"
\include "english.ly"

\paper {
  #(set-paper-size "a3" 'landscape)
  indent = 0
}

allchords = \chordmode {
  \time 4/4
  \set minorChordModifier = \markup { "-" }

  \mark \markup { \box "1" }
  | ef1:m9   | af:7   | ef1:m9 | s
  | af:13| s  | ef:m7  | s2 ef2:m9
  | bf1:7   | af2:m7/bf bf:9+ | ef1| s
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 2
  \mark \markup { \box "2" }
  | ef:7 | af2.:7 a4:dim  | ef1| bf2:m7+ ef:m
  | af1:7.9  | s2 a:dim   | ef1| s2 c:7.9-
  | f1:m7+   | f2:m7+ bf:7| ef1:7  | s
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 3
  \mark \markup { \box "3" }
  | ef:7 | af2:7 af:7.11+ | bf1:m11/ef   | e:maj7.5+/bf
  | af:7.11+ | s2 af:7.9- | ef1:maj7 | s2. c4:7.9-
  | f2:sus4 f:m7+ | bf1:7 | s2. f4:m7/bf | bf:7 f:m7/bf bf2:7
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 4
  \mark \markup { \box "4" }
  | ef1:7| bf:7.9-| ef:7  | s4 e2.:m7/ef
  | af1:7.9- | af4:7.11+ gf2.:maj7/af | ef2.:maj7 c4:7.9- | s8 ef:maj7 s4 bf2:7.9-.9+
  | f1:m7+  | bf2.:7 bf4:9-.10-.11+.13- | ef1:maj7| s2 bf:7.9-
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 5
  \mark \markup { \box "5" }
  | ef1:7| af2:7 ef:m7.6-| ef1:7| bf2:m7 ef:7
  | af1:7.9  | bf:7.9-.13-   | bf4 ef f:m c:m7  | bf4:7 b2.:7
  | f1:m7| b2.:maj/bf bf4:m7 | bf4:m ef2.:6-.9  | bf1:7
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 6
  \mark \markup { \box "6" }
  | ef1:7| af:9| ef:m7  | bf2:m7 ef:7.9-.10-.11+.13-
  | af1:13   | bf4.:7.9- ef4:m7 bf4.:7 | ef4.:maj f8.:m7+ g4..:m | s4 g:m fs:m f:m7+
  | f1:m7.7+ | bf:7.9-.10-.11+.13- | ef2. e4| f2:m bf:7.9-.10-.11+.13-
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 7
  \mark \markup { \box "7" }
  | s4 ef2.:7 | af1:m   | r4 bf2:m7 ef4 | bf2:m7 ef4:7 e/ef
  | af1:m7.9  | af:m7.9 | ef2.:maj f4:m | ef2.:maj/g fs4:m
  | f1:m7 | bf:m7   | ef:7  | f2:m7 bf:7.9-.13-
  \bar "||"
  \break
  % chorus 8
  \mark \markup { \box "8" }
  | ef1   | af | ef:7   | bf4:m ef2.:7
  | af1:7 | af:7   | g:m7   | fs:m7
  | f:m7.11   | bf2:sus4.13- e:maj7/bf | ef1| f2:m7+ bf:7
  \bar "||"
}



\score {
  \new ChordNames = "allchords" \with {
\override ChordName.X-offset = #ly:self-alignment-interface::aligned-on-x-parent
%\override ChordName.self-alignment-X = #CENTER
\override ChordName.self-alignment-X = #LEFT
\override BarLine.bar-extent = #'(-2 . 2)
\consists Bar_engraver
  }
  {
\allchords
  }


  \layout {
\context {
  \Score
  proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1/4)
  \override SpacingSpanner.uniform-stretching = ##t
  \override SpacingSpanner.strict-note-spacing = ##t

  

Midi velocity output

[Tim Aldegarmann]

Hello!

My question concerns MIDI output. I wonder if there is way in Lilypond to
give every note a velocity value. I don't mean using dynamic markings, just
want to enhance the MIDI output by for example giving every note in a chord
a random velocity value.  I know that Lilypond is primarily used for music
engraving, I'm just curious if there is way to do this.

Best regards,
Tim Aldegarmann



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Midi-velocity-output-tp201139.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: Unexpected stem behaviour

[Simon Albrecht]

Am 15.03.2017 um 17:07 schrieb Gerard:

\version 2.18.2

% bar 30
\relative bes'' << {bes4 c d} \\ {\relative bes'' {bes32 f d bes} 
\change Staff = "lower" {f,, d bes f}  \change Staff = "upper" {c''' 
bes f c} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f c bes} \change Staff = "upper" 
{d'' bes f d} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f d bes} \change Staff = 
"upper"}>> 


I second what Phil said. Some hints in addition:

– \change Staff = "lower" doesn’t need the following music to be 
enclosed in braces. It emits an event at one point of time (moving the 
voice to the other staff) rather than actually modifying the following 
music.
– Please surround all { } with spaces and apply appropriate line breaks 
(rule of thumb: maximum 80 characters per line, exceptions 
notwithstanding). It helps legibility of the code.
– It seems you’d be well off using explicit voices like \new Voice { 
\voiceOne … }. These are explained in the Learning Manual.


HTH, Simon

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

Re: Unexpected stem behaviour

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: "Gerard" 

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 4:07 PM
Subject: Unexpected stem behaviour



Dear All,
I noticed some weird behaviour with stem directions after compiling (both 
on Linux and Windows).

Consider these two lines of code from a score:

\version 2.18.2

% bar 30
\relative bes'' << {bes4 c d} \\ {\relative bes'' {bes32 f d bes} \change 
Staff = "lower" {f,, d bes f}  \change Staff = "upper" {c''' bes f c} 
\change Staff = "lower" {bes f c bes} \change Staff = "upper" {d'' bes f 
d} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f d bes} \change Staff = "upper"}>>


% bar 32
\relative f''' << {f4 e d} \\ {\relative f''' {f32 d bes f} \stemUp 
\change Staff = "lower" {d, bes f d} \stemNeutral \change Staff = "upper" 
{e'' d bes e,} \change Staff = "lower" {d bes e, d } \change Staff = 
"upper" {d'' bes f d} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f d bes} \change Staff 
= "upper"}>>


The desired stem direction is "up" for the top Voice quarter and 4*down 
and 4*up for the 32nd notes of each quarter.

In bars 1 - 29 this compiles perfectly.
In bar 30 it compiles as 8*down for the 32nd notes.

In bar 31 the first quarter the stem direction if forced to up on the 
lower staff and reverted to produce the correct stem direction.
Now also the stem direction of the succeeding quarters are correct. They 
changed automatically??

And then in bar 32 it compiles again as 8*down.

Did I run into a bug or am I missing something?

Thanks for any comment.

Regards,
Gerard



It's difficult to say why what you see is happening, because the code you've 
provided runs with loads of errors.  Could you either provide a compilable 
tiny version, or check the output from LilyPond for errors yourself?


--
Phil Holmes 



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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[David Wright]

On Wed 15 Mar 2017 at 16:07:31 (+), Adam Spiers wrote:
> On 15 March 2017 at 14:33, Robert Schmaus  wrote:
> > Am 15/03/2017 um 14:54 schrieb Adam Spiers:
> >> On 15 March 2017 at 13:45, Robert Schmaus  wrote:
> >>> How about this:
> >>>
> >>> \context {
> >>>   \Score
> >>>   proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1/10)
> >>>   \override SpacingSpanner.uniform-stretching = ##t
> >>> }
> >>
> >> That's what I was already trying ...
> >
> > I know - but in your file the proportionalNotationDuration was set to 64/256
> > ... with 1/10, the chords are placed furher apart. Maybe it's too far apart
> > with 1/10 but with smaller font size, you can navigate to some value that's
> > better.
> 
> I tried with several different values, and beyond a certain fraction,
> the results
> were always the same, i.e. roughly proportional if barlines are omitted, and
> hopelessly non-proportional if barlines are included :-/
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

I took your source and changed two things:
a4 → a0
64/256 → 1/32
and it looks superficially ok to me. (It would have been nice
to have a conventional score available as a crib. I'm not
prepared to start comparing the source with the display.)

Perhaps you just have a room problem. I've made limited use of
proportional notation, very useful for certain pieces, but I
would prefer the music to look like a proper score rather than
have some rigorous mathematical constraint applied to the
notes. So I've never expected the barlines in each system to
line up exactly with the others.

Cheers,
David.


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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Adam Spiers]

On 15 March 2017 at 14:33, Robert Schmaus  wrote:
> Am 15/03/2017 um 14:54 schrieb Adam Spiers:
>> On 15 March 2017 at 13:45, Robert Schmaus  wrote:
>>> How about this:
>>>
>>> \context {
>>>   \Score
>>>   proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1/10)
>>>   \override SpacingSpanner.uniform-stretching = ##t
>>> }
>>
>> That's what I was already trying ...
>
> I know - but in your file the proportionalNotationDuration was set to 64/256
> ... with 1/10, the chords are placed furher apart. Maybe it's too far apart
> with 1/10 but with smaller font size, you can navigate to some value that's
> better.

I tried with several different values, and beyond a certain fraction,
the results
were always the same, i.e. roughly proportional if barlines are omitted, and
hopelessly non-proportional if barlines are included :-/

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

Unexpected stem behaviour

[Gerard]

Dear All,
I noticed some weird behaviour with stem directions after compiling 
(both on Linux and Windows).

Consider these two lines of code from a score:

\version 2.18.2

% bar 30
\relative bes'' << {bes4 c d} \\ {\relative bes'' {bes32 f d bes} 
\change Staff = "lower" {f,, d bes f}  \change Staff = "upper" {c''' bes 
f c} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f c bes} \change Staff = "upper" {d'' 
bes f d} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f d bes} \change Staff = "upper"}>>


% bar 32
\relative f''' << {f4 e d} \\ {\relative f''' {f32 d bes f} \stemUp 
\change Staff = "lower" {d, bes f d} \stemNeutral \change Staff = 
"upper" {e'' d bes e,} \change Staff = "lower" {d bes e, d } \change 
Staff = "upper" {d'' bes f d} \change Staff = "lower" {bes f d bes} 
\change Staff = "upper"}>>


The desired stem direction is "up" for the top Voice quarter and 4*down 
and 4*up for the 32nd notes of each quarter.

In bars 1 - 29 this compiles perfectly.
In bar 30 it compiles as 8*down for the 32nd notes.

In bar 31 the first quarter the stem direction if forced to up on the 
lower staff and reverted to produce the correct stem direction.
Now also the stem direction of the succeeding quarters are correct. They 
changed automatically??

And then in bar 32 it compiles again as 8*down.

Did I run into a bug or am I missing something?

Thanks for any comment.

Regards,
Gerard


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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Adam Spiers]

On 15 March 2017 at 14:35, Klaus Blum  wrote:
> Adam Spiers-5 wrote
>> On 15 March 2017 at 12:28, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
>>> why not put all the music expressions in one score in
>>> parallel?
>> But please could you give an example of how to do that, bearing in mind that
>> there are no notes or staves, only chord names?
>
>basically the structure would be like this:
>
> <<
>   \new ChordNames { ... }
>   \new ChordNames { ... }
>   ...
>>>
>
>But please consider that you will need more horizontal space, because the
>different choruses lose their individual spacing.

That's fine.  Gaps are expected and desired.

>Therefore I reduced the
>staff size to prevent an automatic line break.

That's fine too.  I don't have any restrictions on page size or font size.

>Nevertheless, having strictly proportional spacing would eat up even more
>space.

Yes, but that's really what I need, to make it clear where additional chords
appear within each bar.  Viewing a 12-bar chorus (or any jazz chord sheet,
really) just doesn't make much sense without proportional spacing.

>Different Rehearsal marks at the same time are only possible by moving the
>Mark_engraver to the ChordNames context. Instead, I "abused" instrumentName.

Yeah, that's slightly unfortunate but tolerable - another reason why a
non-parallel solution would be nicer.

>Blue-Train-chords-parallel.ly

Thanks a lot!  If you find a way to get this proportionally spaced then
that would be good enough for me.  But I suspect if you do, the
parallelisation wouldn't bring any additional benefit ...

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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Klaus Blum]

Hi Adam, 


Adam Spiers-5 wrote
> On 15 March 2017 at 12:28, Simon Albrecht 

> simon.albrecht@

>  wrote:
>> why not put all the music expressions in one score in
>> parallel?
> But please could you give an example of how to do that, bearing in mind
> that
> there are no notes or staves, only chord names?

basically the structure would be like this: 

<<
  \new ChordNames { ... }
  \new ChordNames { ... }
  ...
>>

But please consider that you will need more horizontal space, because the
different choruses lose their individual spacing. Therefore I reduced the
staff size to prevent an automatic line break. 
Nevertheless, having strictly proportional spacing would eat up even more
space.

Different Rehearsal marks at the same time are only possible by moving the
Mark_engraver to the ChordNames context. Instead, I "abused" instrumentName. 

Cheers, 
Klaus

Blue-Train-chords-parallel.ly

  



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/proportional-spacing-for-chords-tp201117p201133.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: proportional spacing for chords?

[Robert Schmaus]

Am 15/03/2017 um 14:54 schrieb Adam Spiers:

On 15 March 2017 at 13:45, Robert Schmaus  wrote:

Hi Adam,

you're right ... I might have changed something else. Anyway, applying the
overrides to the Score seems to be the correct way.

I tried your file. Maybe you'll have to insert more line breaks - some of
your bars get rather long, so the other will have to get more space too.


That can be addressed via

\override ChordName.font-size = #-2

Adding extra line breaks is not an option considering the original goal of
vertically stacking choruses.


How about this:

\context {
  \Score
  proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1/10)
  \override SpacingSpanner.uniform-stretching = ##t
}


That's what I was already trying ...



I know - but in your file the proportionalNotationDuration was set to 
64/256 ... with 1/10, the chords are placed furher apart. Maybe it's too 
far apart with 1/10 but with smaller font size, you can navigate to some 
value that's better.



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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Adam Spiers]

On 15 March 2017 at 12:28, Simon Albrecht  wrote:
> Am 15.03.2017 um 01:11 schrieb Adam Spiers:
>> It would be very instructive to produce a clear visualisation of the
>> harmonic variations he uses in each chorus, so I have dropped the
>> notes of the solo from the .ly file, leaving only the chords, rendered
>> in landscape, with all the choruses vertically stacked on top of each
>> other, one per line.  This should allow easy visual comparison of any
>> part of the 12-bar progression simply by scanning vertically at that
>> point within the progression.  However this vertical scan only works
>> effectively if all the choruses are vertically aligned, hence the need
>> for proportional spacing.
>
> Excuse me, but why not put all the music expressions in one score in
> parallel?

Mainly because I already had the chords as a single continuous "stream",
obtained by removing the notes and staves from the existing transcription.
And semantically it's more correct to represent it this way, rather than as
8 chord sequences which all happen in parallel.  For example a MIDI
rendering of the latter would be hopelessly wrong.  But if that's the only
way to achieve it then I'm open to the idea.

> That would be the more conventional/simpler approach to vertical
> alignment…

I'm not sure it would be more conventional bearing in mind the above,
and I'm also not sure it would be simpler given that (IIUC) it would require
8 chord sequences all happening in parallel.

But please could you give an example of how to do that, bearing in mind that
there are no notes or staves, only chord names?

Thanks!

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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Simon Albrecht]

Am 15.03.2017 um 01:11 schrieb Adam Spiers:

It would be very instructive to produce a clear visualisation of the
harmonic variations he uses in each chorus, so I have dropped the
notes of the solo from the .ly file, leaving only the chords, rendered
in landscape, with all the choruses vertically stacked on top of each
other, one per line.  This should allow easy visual comparison of any
part of the 12-bar progression simply by scanning vertically at that
point within the progression.  However this vertical scan only works
effectively if all the choruses are vertically aligned, hence the need
for proportional spacing.


Excuse me, but why not put all the music expressions in one score in 
parallel? That would be the more conventional/simpler approach to 
vertical alignment…
However, I do get the point of proportional spacing for such a purpose. 
Just my 2cts :-)


Best, Simon

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

Re: proportional spacing for chords?

[Adam Spiers]

On 15 March 2017 at 05:48, Robert Schmaus  wrote:
> Just a thought - you apply the SpacingSpanner modifications to context
> \Score ... did you already try to apply those to context \ChordNames
> instead? That *does* change something, but I'm not sure if it is what you
> want ...
>
> Cool analysis, by the way!

I just tried that, but I couldn't see any difference at all.  What difference
do you see?  Any chance you could provide the .ly from the way you
tried it?  Thanks!

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

Re: Find ties enclosed in slur (while overriding stencil)

[Urs Liska]

Hi David (Nalesnik),


Am 14.03.2017 um 16:12 schrieb David Nalesnik:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
>>
>> Am 14.03.2017 um 13:37 schrieb David Kastrup:
>>
>> (let ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties
>>
>> but in that case "grob"  is a TieColumn, and I don't know how I could
>> access that (which is something I need anyway in order to do further
>> formatting later).
>> Hi 
>> Well, looks like you need to pursue that approach...
>>
>>
>> But as said I don't know how I can get to the tie column.
>> The notehead's parent is the note-column, and the note-column's parents are
>> PaperColumn (X) and VerticalAxisGroup (Y), both seemingly not giving any
>> handle back down to something like a TieColumn.
>>
>> Hm, I think this is really under-documented, and I'm completely stumbling in
>> the dark ...
>>
> Well, in my experience there are few pointers to Ties and TieColumn grobs.
>
> It looks like the Slur's property 'encompass-objects could help:
>
>
> \version "2.19.56"
>
> {
>   \override Slur.stencil =
>   #(lambda (slur)
>  (pretty-print (grob::all-objects slur))
>  (ly:slur::print slur))
>   c''(~ c'' f''~ f'')
> }
>
> HTH,
> David

Indeed this helps! Somehow I was led to think 'encompass-objects was a
property that determines which types of objects to consider for
collision handling, but indeed I can retrieve a list of all ties
enclosed by the slur. Tthrough their X parent I can access the
corresponding note head. And when iterating over the note heads (through
the 'note-columns of the slur) I can match them against the ties
(obviously everything points at the actual objects so I can use eq? for
the matching.

So hopefully I have everything now to solve *this* part of the challenge ...

Best
Urs

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


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

Re: Find ties enclosed in slur (while overriding stencil)

[Urs Liska]

Am 14.03.2017 um 13:11 schrieb Urs Liska:
> From
> https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/blob/master/notation-snippets/shaping-bezier-curves/shape-tie-column/definition.ily
> I got this:
> (let ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties
> but in that case "grob"  is a TieColumn, and I don't know how I could
> access that (which is something I need anyway in order to do further
> formatting later). 

Stupid me. Of course TieColumn is the *parent* of the tie so I can get
it from there ...

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org

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

Re: state-of-the-art multi-instrumental/transposing mechanism

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi again,

it needs some more thinking, how key signatures can be treated right for 
this case. It is all about the timing - if you set the 
instrumentTransposition with the editionEngraver, the properties are set 
early and the keys look fine here.
I am going to add key-sigs to the EE, so that they can be added as 
editionMods.


Best
Jan-Peter

Am 15.03.2017 um 08:29 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt:

Hi Kieren,

now I had a look into the autotranspose code. The problem is the order
of context properties set in the Staff. If you change the transposed
code to:

\new Staff \with \autoTranspose << \global \flutepart >>

It should get the key-signatures right. Though this is only a hint where
the autotransposer fails. I'll search a way to make the engraver act
later - perhaps in the acknowledger slot. But still I have to set the
Staff-context-properties, so that accidentals are set right.

Jan-Peter


Am 06.03.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:

Hi Urs,


it's too late for me right now to properly understand the issue


1. Thanks for responding anyway!  =)
2. Looks like you do understand most of the issue.


but I wanted to direct you to Jan-Peter's
https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/editorial-tools/auto-transpose,

not knowing if it's even *related* to your question.


It is!

In the modified snippet (below), I use \autotranspose. It works great
EXCEPT the [abstracted] key signature part. If we could just figure
out how to have the key signature properly displayed in the transposed
part, I think we’d be most of the way to a complete solution (though
admittedly I don’t know the internals of this engraver yet, so there
may be other issues it doesn’t or can’t handle.

Thanks!
Kieren.

%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS
\version "2.19.56"
\include
"openlilylib/snippets/editorial-tools/auto-transpose/definitions.ily"

\paper { line-width = 6\in }

flute = {
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Flute"
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "Fl."
\transposition c'
}
altoflute = {
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto Flute"
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "A. Fl."
\transposition g
}
toF = \markup "take flute"
toAF = \markup "take alto flute"

global = {
\key c \major s1 \break
\key d \major s1 \break
\key e \major s1 \break
}

flutepart = {
\flute
a'2 r^\toAF
\altoflute
a'2 r^\toF
\flute
a'2 r
}

\markup \bold "C score:"
\score {
\new Staff << \global \flutepart >>
}

\markup \vspace #4
\markup \bold "Transposed score/part (incorrect):"
\score {
\new Staff \with \autoTranspose << \global \flutepart >>
}
%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS



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




___
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: state-of-the-art multi-instrumental/transposing mechanism

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Kieren,

now I had a look into the autotranspose code. The problem is the order 
of context properties set in the Staff. If you change the transposed 
code to:


\new Staff \with \autoTranspose << \global \flutepart >>

It should get the key-signatures right. Though this is only a hint where 
the autotransposer fails. I'll search a way to make the engraver act 
later - perhaps in the acknowledger slot. But still I have to set the 
Staff-context-properties, so that accidentals are set right.


Jan-Peter


Am 06.03.2017 um 01:15 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:

Hi Urs,


it's too late for me right now to properly understand the issue


1. Thanks for responding anyway!  =)
2. Looks like you do understand most of the issue.


but I wanted to direct you to Jan-Peter's
https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/tree/master/editorial-tools/auto-transpose,
not knowing if it's even *related* to your question.


It is!

In the modified snippet (below), I use \autotranspose. It works great EXCEPT 
the [abstracted] key signature part. If we could just figure out how to have 
the key signature properly displayed in the transposed part, I think we’d be 
most of the way to a complete solution (though admittedly I don’t know the 
internals of this engraver yet, so there may be other issues it doesn’t or 
can’t handle.

Thanks!
Kieren.

%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS
\version "2.19.56"
\include "openlilylib/snippets/editorial-tools/auto-transpose/definitions.ily"

\paper { line-width = 6\in }

flute = {
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Flute"
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "Fl."
\transposition c'
}
altoflute = {
\set Staff.instrumentName = "Alto Flute"
\set Staff.shortInstrumentName = "A. Fl."
\transposition g
}
toF = \markup "take flute"
toAF = \markup "take alto flute"

global = {
\key c \major s1 \break
\key d \major s1 \break
\key e \major s1 \break
}

flutepart = {
\flute
a'2 r^\toAF
\altoflute
a'2 r^\toF
\flute
a'2 r
}

\markup \bold "C score:"
\score {
\new Staff << \global \flutepart >>
}

\markup \vspace #4
\markup \bold "Transposed score/part (incorrect):"
\score {
\new Staff \with \autoTranspose << \global \flutepart >>
}
%%%  SNIPPET BEGINS



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




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