Re: Large set of parts

[Karlin High]

On 4/27/2018 8:28 PM, Andrew Bernard wrote:

It falls into the category of alliteration, which abounds in English


As a poetry form, too - "Beowulf" and J. R. R. Tolkien's unfinished work 
"The Fall of Arthur" come to mind. Sort of like "rhyming" the beginnings 
of the words instead of the endings.

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Shane,

It's not really a tongue twister for Mandarin speakers, so much as a
wonderful play on tones on the same phoneme. It's not hard to pronounce -
my definition of a tongue twister - but just a glorious play with language.
There's only four tones in Mandarin. [This latter point can be argued a
little, but only four tines are common and essential.]

While we are here, David's original phrase is not hard to pronounce for an
English speaker at all. It falls into the category of alliteration, which
abounds in English, rather than tongue twisters.

Andrew


On 28 April 2018 at 08:17, shane  wrote:

> There is a chinese tongue twister that is really long and consists
> entirely of the sound "shi." The vice president of the shanghai
> conservatory told me that one.  It is worth looking up.
>
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Large set of parts

[Karlin High]

On 4/27/2018 5:17 PM, shane wrote:
There is a chinese tongue twister that is really long and consists 
entirely of the sound "shi."


Oh, dear - tonal language yet too. I give up in advance. There are 
probably two to seven differently-toned "shi" sounds...

--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: Large set of parts

[shane]

There is a chinese tongue twister that is really long and consists entirely of 
the sound "shi." The vice president of the shanghai conservatory told me that 
one.  It is worth looking up. 
Regards,Shane Brandes


Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
 Original message From: Jacques Menu Muzhic 
 Date: 4/27/18  3:51 PM  (GMT-05:00) To: Werner LEMBERG 
 Cc: d...@gnu.org, nathan.r.sprang...@maine.edu, 
lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: Large set of parts 
Excellent, Werner!

JM

> Le 27 avr. 2018 à 20:17, Werner LEMBERG  a écrit :
> 
> 
>>> Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:
>>> 
>>> "The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"
>>> 
>>> Say it several times fast for full effect.
>> 
>> The worst German one I know is "Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid und
>> Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut.  Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut und
>> Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid".
> 
> While I can (relatively) easily pronounce this one, I'm completely
> lost with the Swiss variant, which you can see in this video :-)
> 
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg
> 
> 
>    Werner
> 
> ___
> 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: spacer rest *

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 27 April 2018 at 15:45, Simon Albrecht  wrote:

> On 27.04.2018 10:53, Gianmaria Lari wrote:
>
>> To fix it I found two different ways.
>> First one:
>>
>> \version "2.19.81"
>> \score {
>> \new Voice <<
>>   {f4 g a b}
>>   {s4\< s4 s4 s4\!}
>>
>> Other possibilities:
> { s4*3\< s4\! }
> { s2.\< s4\! }
> { s4\< s s s\! }
>

Thank you Simon, this make things even more clear.


>
> By the way: It is customary to always surround { and } with whitespace,
> even if it’s not technically necessary, and I like that convention because
> it’s much better to read that way.
>
>
> >>
>> \layout {}
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>> ... and second one (but I'm not sure it is "correct" even if it compiles
>> and works...)
>>
>> \version "2.19.81"
>> \score {
>>   \new Voice <<
>> {f4 g a b}
>> \new Dynamics {s4\< 4 4 4\!}
>>   >>
>>   \layout {}
>> }
>>
>>
> If you’re doing that, you can go all the way and write
> \new Dynamics { 4\< 4 4 4\! }
> Then all the ‘4’s are converted into note events, which are ignored in a
> Dynamics context.


:) I discovered this today while testing. I think I will write in this way,
it looks clearer to me.

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 27 April 2018 at 15:44, David Wright  wrote:

> [...]
> Well, I don't know how the decision was arrived at, but my own view is
> that it's the correct one. The duration-only notation is aimed at
> people writing rhythms, and they write them for instruments that play
> notes (and pseudonotes like snare above). They don't compose rythmic
> riffs for rests and spacers.
>

Yes, I understand the advantage for people writing rhythms.

On 27 April 2018 at 15:45, Simon Albrecht  wrote:

> [...]
>
> Even if David K. says that could be changed, I find the current behaviour
> pretty clear and sensible from my experience.
>

Yes, the behavior is definitely very clear. And when you know it, it also
easy!

The disadvantage is that introduce one exception and the exception has to
be specified in the manual. But when you start learning something new, you
concentrate on essentials things not on details/exceptions. Don't know if
other people work the same but this is how does it works for me.

I'm not saying exceptions should be banned but introducing an exception
make things a bit "more difficult" and this have to be considered. I'm
speaking for me and in general terms. I have no idea if, in this specific
case, the advantages of this behaviour are greater than the disadvantages.

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Kieren MacMillan]

> ah, the wonders of the English language

“Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.” is a 
grammatically correct sentence.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo)

=)

Kieren.


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

Re: Easy definition of music function

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

Use $pa $pb $pc (and make sure to add a space before adding something
like ] afterwards) and $pd .  For # in music expressions, Lily expects
music expressions, not pitches.  For $ it chooses the syntactical
category according to expression type.


Brillant! Thanks a bundle :-) I knew there must be some easy way...

Lukas

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Jacques Menu Muzhic]

Excellent, Werner!

JM

> Le 27 avr. 2018 à 20:17, Werner LEMBERG  a écrit :
> 
> 
>>> Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:
>>> 
>>> "The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"
>>> 
>>> Say it several times fast for full effect.
>> 
>> The worst German one I know is "Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid und
>> Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut.  Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut und
>> Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid".
> 
> While I can (relatively) easily pronounce this one, I'm completely
> lost with the Swiss variant, which you can see in this video :-)
> 
>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg
> 
> 
>Werner
> 
> ___
> 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: \textLengthOn relative to bar lines instead of following note

[Thomas Morley]

2018-04-27 17:39 GMT+02:00 Robert Hickman :
>>
>> Another hack:
>>
>> \version "2.18.2"
>>
>> pushRight =
>> #(define-event-function (parser location amount)(number?)
>> #{
>>   \tweak text \markup \with-dimensions #(cons 0 amount) #'(0 . 0) ""
>>   -\rightHandFinger #5
>> #})
>>
>> {
>>   \partial 2
>>   a'4^"Unprefixed" a'\pushRight 7
>>   |
>>   a' a'^"Prefixed" a' a'
>> }
>>
>> Cheers,
>>   Harm
>>
>
> This produces the desired result, thanks.

Hi Robert,

glad it works for you.

Please always reply to all, even in case just conforming a suggestion works.
So that others know the problem is solved.

Thus, cc-ing the list again.

Cheers,
  Harm

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

Re: Easy definition of music function

[David Kastrup]

Lukas-Fabian Moser  writes:

> Folks,
>
> I sometimes enter music which consists of a lot of "patterns" where
> (relatively complicated) constructions of beams, tuplets etc. are used
> repeatedly with changing pitches. Of course I'd like to put those in a
> function.
>
> For instance, in a Mozart symphony I have
>
>   r16 \once \omit TupletBracket \tuplet 3/2 { c32([ e g] } c16) c-!
>
> all over the place. So, I want do define a function \pat that takes
>
> \pat c e g c
>
> and creates just this pattern.
>
> QUESTION: I am under the impression that, since I want to give only
> pitches to the function, I have to create the music in Scheme, and
> hence I do not know how to attach the various articulations etc. other
> than in Scheme. Hence, my function now reads:

[...]

> Works like a charm, but I admit that I find the definition quite
> tedious (me being a non-Schemer, essentially), especially I think that
> I only realized part of -! in my articulation definition (the MIDI
> part being omitted).
>
> What I really would like to have is something like:
>
> pat = #(define-music-function
>     (pa pb pc pd)
>     (ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch?)
>     #{
>  r16 \once \omit TupletBracket \tuplet 3/2 { #pa 32([ #pb
> #pc] } #pd 16) #pd-!
>     #}
>     )
>
> But of course this does not work since pitch #pa and 32([ do not glue
> together.
>
>
> Is there some easy way to define the function I want?

Use $pa $pb $pc (and make sure to add a space before adding something
like ] afterwards) and $pd .  For # in music expressions, Lily expects
music expressions, not pitches.  For $ it chooses the syntactical
category according to expression type.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Easy definition of music function

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

Folks,

I sometimes enter music which consists of a lot of "patterns" where 
(relatively complicated) constructions of beams, tuplets etc. are used 
repeatedly with changing pitches. Of course I'd like to put those in a 
function.


For instance, in a Mozart symphony I have

  r16 \once \omit TupletBracket \tuplet 3/2 { c32([ e g] } c16) c-!

all over the place. So, I want do define a function \pat that takes

\pat c e g c

and creates just this pattern.

QUESTION: I am under the impression that, since I want to give only 
pitches to the function, I have to create the music in Scheme, and hence 
I do not know how to attach the various articulations etc. other than in 
Scheme. Hence, my function now reads:


pat = #(define-music-function
    (pa pb pc pd)
    (ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch?)
    #{
  r16
  \once \omit TupletBracket
  \tuplet 3/2 {
    #(make-music 'NoteEvent
   'duration (ly:make-duration 5)
   'pitch pa
   'articulations (list
   (make-music 'SlurEvent 'span-direction -1)
   (make-music 'BeamEvent 'span-direction -1)
   )
   )
    #(make-music 'NoteEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 5) 
'pitch pb)
    #(make-music 'NoteEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 5) 
'pitch pc
   'articulations (list (make-music 'BeamEvent 
'span-direction 1))

   )
  }
  #(make-music 'NoteEvent
 'duration (ly:make-duration 4)
 'pitch pd
 'articulations (list (make-music 'SlurEvent 
'span-direction 1))

 )
  #(make-music 'NoteEvent
 'duration (ly:make-duration 4)
 'pitch pd
 'articulations (list
 (make-music 'ArticulationEvent
   'articulation-type "staccatissimo"
   ))
 )
    #}
    )

Works like a charm, but I admit that I find the definition quite tedious 
(me being a non-Schemer, essentially), especially I think that I only 
realized part of -! in my articulation definition (the MIDI part being 
omitted).


What I really would like to have is something like:

pat = #(define-music-function
    (pa pb pc pd)
    (ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch? ly:pitch?)
    #{
 r16 \once \omit TupletBracket \tuplet 3/2 { #pa 32([ #pb 
#pc] } #pd 16) #pd-!

    #}
    )

But of course this does not work since pitch #pa and 32([ do not glue 
together.



Is there some easy way to define the function I want? My present 
solution (see above) takes almost as much time to write and debug that I 
often wonder if I shouldn't just to copy and paste in frescobaldi and 
change pitches along the way ...



Best
Lukas


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

RE: Beam Length override not working.

[foxfanfare]

But for your initial problem, if it is what you want, maybe:

\version "2.18.2"
\new Staff 
\relative c'' {
\time 2/4
  << 
{\voiceOne \stemUp r16  r8 r16   r8 }
\\
{\override Beam.positions = #'(-1 . -1)
 \voiceOne \stemDown e8 e16 ees
 \override Beam.positions = #'(-1 . -1)
 d8 d16 des }
\\ 
{\voiceTwo \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 } 
  >> 
}



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

RE: Beam Length override not working.

[foxfanfare]

Or maybe:

\version "2.18.2"

\new Staff 

\relative c'' {

\time 2/4

  << 

{ \stemNeutral 
  \override Rest.staff-position = #0 
  r16  
  \override Rest.staff-position = #-1 
  r8 r16   
  \override Rest.staff-position = #-2 r8 }

\\

{ \stemUp 

e8 e16 ees  

%\override Stem.details.beamed-lengths = #'(2)  

d8 d16 des  }


\\ 

{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 } 

  >> 

}

Looks clearer to me...



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:
>>
>> "The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"
>>
>> Say it several times fast for full effect.
> 
> The worst German one I know is "Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid und
> Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut.  Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut und
> Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid".

While I can (relatively) easily pronounce this one, I'm completely
lost with the Swiss variant, which you can see in this video :-)

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg


Werner

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

RE: Beam Length override not working.

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Rodrigo,

 

As a pianist what I wrote is clear, it may not be proper guitar, yet hopefully 
it might give you some idea of what to do.

 

Mark

 

\version "2.18.2"

\new Staff 

\relative c'' {

\time 2/4

  << 

{ e8 e16 ees d8 d16 des }

\\

{ s16  s8 s16  s8 }

\\ 

{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 } 

  >> 

}

 

From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] 
On Behalf Of Rodrigo Pinto
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 7:47 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Beam Length override not working.

 

Hello all. My first message here. 

I'm writing a guitar music and I have a problem I could not solve.

I'm using Lilypond for Windows (v2.18.2).

I tried to make a minimal example of my problem. Here is the code:

 

%%begin% 

\version "2.18.2"

\new Staff 

\relative c'' {

\time 2/4

  << 

{\stemUp r16  r8 r16  r8 }

\\

{ \stemDown e8 e16 ees d8 d16 des }

\\ 

{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 } 

  >> 

}

 

%%end% 

Following the documentation on 

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/snippets/tweaks-and-overrides#tweaks-and-overrides-altering-the-length-of-beamed-stems

I modified the code trying to shorten the beam for the D notes that are ugly:

 

%%begin% 

 

\version "2.18.2"

\new Staff 

\relative c'' {

\time 2/4

  << 

{\stemUp r16  r8 r16  r8 r16  r8 r16  r8}

\\

{ \stemDown 

e8 e16 ees  

\override Stem.details.beamed-lengths = #'(2)  

d8 d16 des 

\revert Stem.details 

e8 e16 ees d8 d16 des }

\\ 

{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 c8. c16 b8. bes16 } 

  >> 

}

%%end% 

 

 

But there is no change at all. I noticed that if I overding the beam length 
before the first E (on the same voice) it changes the beam for the E, but not 
for the D.

 

Thanks,

 

Rodrigo

 

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

Tongue twisters (was: Large set of parts)

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup  writes:

> Karlin High  writes:
>
>> On 4/27/2018 9:07 AM, Guy Stalnaker wrote:
>>> "very thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English
>>> language <3 )"
>>>
>>> Brilliant!
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Guy Stalnaker
>>> jimmyg...@gmail.com 
>>
>> Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:
>>
>> "The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"
>>
>> Say it several times fast for full effect.
>
> The worst German one I know is "Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid und
> Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut.  Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut und Brautkleid
> bleibt Brautkleid".
>
> Basically "Bridal dress stays bridal dress and red cabbage stays red
> cabbage."  And vice versa, it's not that hard in English.

A German "English" classic 
is Evelyn Hamann's summary of a hypothetical English series.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Beam Length override not working.

[Rodrigo Pinto]

Hello all. My first message here.
I'm writing a guitar music and I have a problem I could not solve.
I'm using Lilypond for Windows (v2.18.2).
I tried to make a minimal example of my problem. Here is the code:

%%begin%
\version "2.18.2"
\new Staff
\relative c'' {
\time 2/4
  <<
{\stemUp r16  r8 r16  r8 }
\\
{ \stemDown e8 e16 ees d8 d16 des }
\\
{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 }
  >>
}

%%end%
Following the documentation on
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/snippets/tweaks-and-overrides#tweaks-and-overrides-altering-the-length-of-beamed-stems
I modified the code trying to shorten the beam for the D notes that are
ugly:

%%begin%

\version "2.18.2"
\new Staff
\relative c'' {
\time 2/4
  <<
{\stemUp r16  r8 r16  r8 r16  r8 r16  r8}
\\
{ \stemDown
e8 e16 ees
\override Stem.details.beamed-lengths = #'(2)
d8 d16 des
\revert Stem.details
e8 e16 ees d8 d16 des }
\\
{ \stemDown c,8. c16 b8. bes16 c8. c16 b8. bes16 }
  >>
}
%%end%


But there is no change at all. I noticed that if I overding the beam length
before the first E (on the same voice) it changes the beam for the E, but
not for the D.

Thanks,

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

Re: Large set of parts

[David Kastrup]

Karlin High  writes:

> On 4/27/2018 9:07 AM, Guy Stalnaker wrote:
>> "very thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English
>> language <3 )"
>>
>> Brilliant!
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> Guy Stalnaker
>> jimmyg...@gmail.com 
>
> Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:
>
> "The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"
>
> Say it several times fast for full effect.

The worst German one I know is "Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid und
Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut.  Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut und Brautkleid
bleibt Brautkleid".

Basically "Bridal dress stays bridal dress and red cabbage stays red
cabbage."  And vice versa, it's not that hard in English.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Karlin High]

On 4/27/2018 9:07 AM, Guy Stalnaker wrote:
"very thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English 
language <3 )"


Brilliant!

:-)

Guy Stalnaker
jimmyg...@gmail.com 


Guiness Book claim for worst tongue-twister:

"The sixth sick sheikh's sixth sick sheep's sixth sheep's sick"

Say it several times fast for full effect.
--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Guy Stalnaker]

"very thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English language
<3 )"

Brilliant!

:-)

Guy Stalnaker
jimmyg...@gmail.com

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Simon Albrecht 
wrote:

> On 27.04.2018 06:52, Nathan Sprangers wrote:
>
>> Does anyone have any suggestions on how to produce a large set of parts
>> from an existing score?
>>
>> Each instrument's music is saved as a variable separate from the score
>> staves. So I need to create a \score and \staff for 31 parts. Do I create
>> 31 separate files? Can I do something with bookparts so  end up in a single
>> output file?
>>
>
> There are infinitely many ways to do this. From what I’ve seen, nearly
> every LilyPond user working on major projects ends up creating their own
> framework, ranging from elaborate systems of include files without using
> Scheme, via simpler Scheme functions, make files, programmatically
> generating files, to something like GridLy (part of OpenLilyLib) or even
> more advanced methods of simplifying maintenance at the cost of seriously
> blowing up the amount of custom program code used.
> I’ve never had the time for such a large project myself, but I have the
> impression that it’s very well possible, using a well-devised hierarchy of
> files and \include-s, to do all of this with LilyPond’s native commands,
> without too much Scheme programming or external software like Make.
> But my experience also suggests that such a system needs to be very
> thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English language <3 )
> in order to be manageable in the long run.
>
> Best, 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: Schenkerian analysis diagram

[David Kastrup]

Simon Albrecht  writes:

> On 26.04.2018 23:48, Jérôme Plût wrote:
>>> I don’t think you need to patch LilyPond. Have a look at
>>> 
>>> and
>>> 
>>>
>>> You can just redefine those.
>> Thanks for the pointers! I did not know that you could play with the
>> lexer by just assigning to strings, but this seems quite limited (I
>> can assign to "\\*" or "@", but neither to "@+" nor to "@foo", and
>> anything starting with a dash is also off-limits).
>>
>> On the other hand, the dashHat etc. mechanisms are hard-coded in
>> lily/parser.yy (at the script_abbreviation label), so this is the
>> place I would need to touch to add any extra shortcuts. At first sight
>> it seems that enlarging the list to - where  is anything
>> different from {backslash, space, digits, #, $} would not interfere
>> with anything (since these are currently syntax errors anyway), is
>> this correct?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>
> That would be a question for David K.

I think it would be reasonable to have the shortcuts assigned in a
similar manner.  It's just that they aren't right now.

One reason may be that you can write

c -blabla

right now and that becomes a textscript as if you had written

c -"blabla"

so one has to decide what kind of shortcuts should be considered
finished after a single character.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: spacer rest *

[David Kastrup]

David Wright  writes:

> On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 14:58:13 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
>> David Wright  writes:
>>
>> > I would assume it's because this notation (which arrived too late for
>> > me to make use of when it would have been handy¹) is designed for
>> > percussion and lets you write, say:
>> >
>> > snare8 8 8 8 r2 R1 8 8 8 8 r2
>> >
>> > ¹ a spoken work.
>> 
>> For example.  I agree that pitched rests at least seem like they might
>> make a reasonable candidate for repetition in that manner even though it
>> could beg the question of why unpitched rests aren't.
>> 
>> There are no fundamental technical reasons to do one or the other.  This
>> is just the current implementation choice.  If changes are to be made,
>> it would likely be smart to do that before 2.20 gets released.
>
> Well, I don't know how the decision was arrived at,

Not consciously made.  I cooked up that feature and that was what I
ended implementing.  Never thought about pitched rests at all.  I think
there may have been some minor bit of discussion, but basically I wrote
the Scheme code expand-repeat-notes! without much feedback and review
and it looked at chords (actually rhythmic events in chords, not just
note events: that looks fishy though probably takes some tomfoolery to
trigger) and note events.

> but my own view is that it's the correct one. The duration-only
>  notation is aimed at people writing rhythms, and they write them for
>  instruments that play notes (and pseudonotes like snare above). They
>  don't compose rythmic riffs for rests and spacers.

Cage will have a word with you.  But yes, that sounds reasonable to me
as a defense of the current behavior.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Simon Albrecht]

On 27.04.2018 06:52, Nathan Sprangers wrote:
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to produce a large set of 
parts from an existing score?


Each instrument's music is saved as a variable separate from the score 
staves. So I need to create a \score and \staff for 31 parts. Do I 
create 31 separate files? Can I do something with bookparts so  end up 
in a single output file?


There are infinitely many ways to do this. From what I’ve seen, nearly 
every LilyPond user working on major projects ends up creating their own 
framework, ranging from elaborate systems of include files without using 
Scheme, via simpler Scheme functions, make files, programmatically 
generating files, to something like GridLy (part of OpenLilyLib) or even 
more advanced methods of simplifying maintenance at the cost of 
seriously blowing up the amount of custom program code used.
I’ve never had the time for such a large project myself, but I have the 
impression that it’s very well possible, using a well-devised hierarchy 
of files and \include-s, to do all of this with LilyPond’s native 
commands, without too much Scheme programming or external software like 
Make.
But my experience also suggests that such a system needs to be very 
thoroughly thought through (…ah, the wonders of the English language <3 
) in order to be manageable in the long run.


Best, Simon

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

Re: Schenkerian analysis diagram

[Simon Albrecht]

On 26.04.2018 23:48, Jérôme Plût wrote:

I don’t think you need to patch LilyPond. Have a look at

and


You can just redefine those.

Thanks for the pointers! I did not know that you could play with the
lexer by just assigning to strings, but this seems quite limited (I
can assign to "\\*" or "@", but neither to "@+" nor to "@foo", and
anything starting with a dash is also off-limits).

On the other hand, the dashHat etc. mechanisms are hard-coded in
lily/parser.yy (at the script_abbreviation label), so this is the
place I would need to touch to add any extra shortcuts. At first sight
it seems that enlarging the list to - where  is anything
different from {backslash, space, digits, #, $} would not interfere
with anything (since these are currently syntax errors anyway), is
this correct?

Thanks,



That would be a question for David K.

Best, Simon

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Simon Albrecht]

On 27.04.2018 10:53, Gianmaria Lari wrote:

To fix it I found two different ways.
First one:

\version "2.19.81"
\score {
\new Voice <<
  {f4 g a b}
  {s4\< s4 s4 s4\!}


Other possibilities:
{ s4*3\< s4\! }
{ s2.\< s4\! }
{ s4\< s s s\! }

By the way: It is customary to always surround { and } with whitespace, 
even if it’s not technically necessary, and I like that convention 
because it’s much better to read that way.




>>
\layout {}
}



... and second one (but I'm not sure it is "correct" even if it 
compiles and works...)


\version "2.19.81"
\score {
  \new Voice <<
    {f4 g a b}
    \new Dynamics {s4\< 4 4 4\!}
  >>
  \layout {}
}



If you’re doing that, you can go all the way and write
\new Dynamics { 4\< 4 4 4\! }
Then all the ‘4’s are converted into note events, which are ignored in a 
Dynamics context.




And why spacer rests and rests don't "propagate" like note?


Because isolated durations are automatically interpreted as note events, 
whose pitch is taken from the last encountered pitch. (Notes, rests and 
spacer rests generate different kinds of event.)
Even if David K. says that could be changed, I find the current 
behaviour pretty clear and sensible from my experience.


Best, Simon

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

Re: spacer rest *

[David Wright]

On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 14:58:13 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
> David Wright  writes:
> 
> > On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 13:49:24 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> >> On 27 April 2018 at 11:56, Andrew Bernard  wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Hi Gianmaria,
> >> >
> >> > The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not 
> >> > rests.
> >> >
> >> > As per the NR:
> >> >
> >> > Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a 
> >> > music
> >> > sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the 
> >> > technical
> >> > explanation underlying this.
> >> >
> >> > Andrew
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Thank you for pointing me out the documentation.
> >> 
> >> If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
> >> s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest 
> >> differently?
> >
> > I would assume it's because this notation (which arrived too late for
> > me to make use of when it would have been handy¹) is designed for
> > percussion and lets you write, say:
> >
> > snare8 8 8 8 r2 R1 8 8 8 8 r2
> >
> > ¹ a spoken work.
> 
> For example.  I agree that pitched rests at least seem like they might
> make a reasonable candidate for repetition in that manner even though it
> could beg the question of why unpitched rests aren't.
> 
> There are no fundamental technical reasons to do one or the other.  This
> is just the current implementation choice.  If changes are to be made,
> it would likely be smart to do that before 2.20 gets released.

Well, I don't know how the decision was arrived at, but my own view is
that it's the correct one. The duration-only notation is aimed at
people writing rhythms, and they write them for instruments that play
notes (and pseudonotes like snare above). They don't compose rythmic
riffs for rests and spacers.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: Dots wrongly positioned in not merged chords - Final

[70147persson]

Hi folks,

Thank you all foradvice, sparkling ideas and brilliant thoughts.

When I put my question onto the forum I had a hope for hints about a 
property of some grob or engraver something. Which I could just change a 
value from ##t to ##f and the landscape suddenly should show up as it 
was on my map. Something that everybody except me knew about, but I had 
missed. But it was not so. The magic button is not there to push. But I 
have got a toolbox to help navigate in the strange environment. Instead 
of the glittering special key I have got a monkey wrench, not equally 
elegant, but it works.


Thank you all for your assistance! Perhaps someone who has read this, 
rolls up her/his sleeves and designs that button, so the problem gets 
that elegant solution we are used to when working with LilyPond.


So, once again, thank you all for your aid.

Kaj


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

Re: frescobaldi clipboard file name

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 24 April 2018 at 16:30, David Wright  wrote:

> On Tue 24 Apr 2018 at 08:53:01 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> > On 23 April 2018 at 15:48, David Wright 
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon 23 Apr 2018 at 09:43:01 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> > > > The following frescobaldi snippet call the "more.com" program with
> the
> > > > parameter "\\readme"
> > > >
> > > > -*- python;
> > > > from subprocess import call
> > > > call(["more.com", "\\readme"])
> > > >
> > > > This other one-line snippet pastes, in the frescobaldi editor window
> at
> > > the
> > > > cursor position, the lilypond file name (including path) of the
> current
> > > > document
> > > >
> > > > $FILE_NAME
> > > >
> > > > Now I would like to merge the two worlds:) I would like a snippet
> that
> > > > calls an external application passing as parameter $FILE_NAME.
> > > > Any suggestion?
> > >
> > > import os # likely to have been imported already
> > > call(["more.com", os.environ['FILE_NAME']])
> > >
> >
> > I have not been able to make it working.
> > Let's make a step back and simplify things.
> > Let's use FRESCOBALDI_VERSION that should always be defined (FILE_NAME is
> > not defined when the file has not been explicitly saved).
> > And let's use a simple assignement instead of an external call.
> >
> > The following code paste in the editor window the text "ciccio" at the
> > cursor position.
> >
> > -*- python;
> >
> > text = "ciccio"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Now if I try
> >
> > -*- python;
> > import os
> > text = os.environ['FRESCOBALDI_VERSION']
> >
> >
> > I expect to see pasted the frescobaldi version. But this does not work
> and
> > I get the errror KeyError: FRESCOBALDI_VERSION.
> > Maybe the variables are not part of os.environ?
>
> I think we're falling foul of this:
>
> This mapping is captured the first time the os module is imported,
> typically during Python startup as part of processing
> site.py. Changes to the environment made after this time are not
> reflected in os.environ, except for changes made by modifying
> os.environ directly.
>
> So if Fresco is running a child process, that child could interrogate
> the environment set by the parent. As it is, I don't know where your
> FRESCOBALDI_VERSION and FILE_NAME come from. If they're being set in
> a Fresco parent process, then they would have to be inserted into
> the environment for you to use them:
>
> $ pyth
> Python 3.5.3 (default, Jan 19 2017, 14:11:04)
> [GCC 6.3.0 20170118] on linux
> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
> >>> import os
> >>> os.environ["SHELL"]
> '/bin/bash'
> >>> os.environ["SPQR"]
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File "", line 1, in 
>   File "/usr/lib/python3.5/os.py", line 725, in __getitem__
> raise KeyError(key) from None
> KeyError: 'SPQR'
> >>> os.environ["SPQR"]="Senatus Populusque Romanus"
> >>> os.environ["SHELL"],os.environ["SPQR"]
> ('/bin/bash', 'Senatus Populusque Romanus')
> >>>
>
> Cheers,
> David.
>

It's becoming a bit too difficult and for my need it does not worth it. I
would follow another way,  Thank you David for your help!
g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: spacer rest *

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 27 April 2018 at 14:58, David Kastrup  wrote:

> David Wright  writes:
>
> > On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 13:49:24 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> >> On 27 April 2018 at 11:56, Andrew Bernard 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Gianmaria,
> >> >
> >> > The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not
> rests.
> >> >
> >> > As per the NR:
> >> >
> >> > Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a
> music
> >> > sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the
> technical
> >> > explanation underlying this.
> >> >
> >> > Andrew
> >> >
> >> >
> >> Thank you for pointing me out the documentation.
> >>
> >> If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
> >> s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest
> differently?
> >
> > I would assume it's because this notation (which arrived too late for
> > me to make use of when it would have been handy¹) is designed for
> > percussion and lets you write, say:
> >
> > snare8 8 8 8 r2 R1 8 8 8 8 r2
> >
> > ¹ a spoken work.
>
> For example.  I agree that pitched rests at least seem like they might
> make a reasonable candidate for repetition in that manner even though it
> could beg the question of why unpitched rests aren't.
>
> There are no fundamental technical reasons to do one or the other.  This
> is just the current implementation choice.  If changes are to be made,
> it would likely be smart to do that before 2.20 gets released.


How it is decided this type of things? Is the lilypond community that
express his opinion or something different?
g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: spacer rest *

[David Kastrup]

David Wright  writes:

> On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 13:49:24 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
>> On 27 April 2018 at 11:56, Andrew Bernard  wrote:
>> 
>> > Hi Gianmaria,
>> >
>> > The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not rests.
>> >
>> > As per the NR:
>> >
>> > Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a music
>> > sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.
>> >
>> >
>> > That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the technical
>> > explanation underlying this.
>> >
>> > Andrew
>> >
>> >
>> Thank you for pointing me out the documentation.
>> 
>> If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
>> s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest differently?
>
> I would assume it's because this notation (which arrived too late for
> me to make use of when it would have been handy¹) is designed for
> percussion and lets you write, say:
>
> snare8 8 8 8 r2 R1 8 8 8 8 r2
>
> ¹ a spoken work.

For example.  I agree that pitched rests at least seem like they might
make a reasonable candidate for repetition in that manner even though it
could beg the question of why unpitched rests aren't.

There are no fundamental technical reasons to do one or the other.  This
is just the current implementation choice.  If changes are to be made,
it would likely be smart to do that before 2.20 gets released.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: spacer rest *

[David Wright]

On Fri 27 Apr 2018 at 13:49:24 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> On 27 April 2018 at 11:56, Andrew Bernard  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Gianmaria,
> >
> > The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not rests.
> >
> > As per the NR:
> >
> > Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a music
> > sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.
> >
> >
> > That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the technical
> > explanation underlying this.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> Thank you for pointing me out the documentation.
> 
> If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
> s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest differently?

I would assume it's because this notation (which arrived too late for
me to make use of when it would have been handy¹) is designed for
percussion and lets you write, say:

snare8 8 8 8 r2 R1 8 8 8 8 r2

¹ a spoken work.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Gianmaria,

You would have to get somebody like DK to explain it. I think it may have
something to do with the semantics of the parser, where an isolated number
represents a pitch with the pitch name elided, and since rests have no
pitch, the parser would not know what to do. It seems hard to deal with
this case. Since rests are less common that notes mostly, it's an OK
compromise, and once you know it, it's not a pain.

I mostly use explicitly positions rests like b'4\rest. It would be nice if
I could say b'4\rest 4 to get another rest, but you cant. Oh well.

Andrew


On 27 April 2018 at 21:49, Gianmaria Lari  wrote:

>
> If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
> s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest differently?
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: spacer rest *

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 27 April 2018 at 11:56, Andrew Bernard  wrote:

> Hi Gianmaria,
>
> The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not rests.
>
> As per the NR:
>
> Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a music
> sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.
>
>
> That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the technical
> explanation underlying this.
>
> Andrew
>
>
Thank you for pointing me out the documentation.

If "d4 4 " -> "d4 d4" I would expect "r4 4" -> "r4 r4" and "s4 4" -> "s4
s4". What was the reason to make lilypond handle pitch and rest differently?

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Gianmaria,

The shorthand of using a duration number only applies to notes, not rests.

As per the NR:

Isolated durations – durations without a pitch – that occur within a music
sequence will take their pitch from the preceding note or chord.


That is how it is. More learned fellows may be able to offer the technical
explanation underlying this.

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

Re: Large set of parts

[Martin Neubauer]

For me it depends primarily on the length and complexity of the score.
For (larger) orchestral works I usually prefer having separate output
files for each part. That way it's easy to just print out a single part
and to distribute the parts electronically to the players.
(\bookOutputName and \bookOutputSuffix are quite handy for that.) But
having a single output file using \bookpart to separate the individual
parts is certainly fine if you don't like having numerous files. From
your description, one of those two would be the way to go.

For shorter pieces for few players I often just put everything in one
output file, sometimes using \bookpart, sometimes not.

Hope that helps a little,
Martin

On 27/04/2018 06:52, Nathan Sprangers wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions on how to produce a large set of parts
> from an existing score?
> 
> Each instrument's music is saved as a variable separate from the score
> staves. So I need to create a \score and \staff for 31 parts. Do I
> create 31 separate files? Can I do something with bookparts so  end up
> in a single output file?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nathan
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
-- 
Wireless grip handle player Emeritus.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: large bottom text area only on first page

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> let's assume that I want to add a large block of text at the bottom
>> of the first page only: [...]
>
> I'd go for a page-footer and `on-page'.
> 
> Below our modified
> input/regression/page-headers-and-footers.ly

Thanks a lot!


Werner

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

Re: large bottom text area only on first page

[Thomas Morley]

2018-04-27 10:32 GMT+02:00 Thomas Morley :

> I'd go for a page-footer and `on-page'.

For page 1 `first-page' would do it already.

Cheers,
  Harm

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Thomas Morley]

2018-04-27 10:53 GMT+02:00 Gianmaria Lari :
>
>
>
> On 25 April 2018 at 10:09, Gianmaria Lari  wrote:
>>
>> I don't understand the difference between s8 8 8 and s8*3.
>>
>> For example have a look to the following code that engrave two scores:
>>
>> \version "2.19.81"
>> rh = \fixed c'{g8 8 8 8}
>>
>> dyn = { s8 \> 8 8 8 \!}
>> { << \rh \new Dynamics \dyn >> }
>>
>> dyn = { s8 \> 8*3 \!}
>> { << \rh \new Dynamics \dyn >> }
>>
>>
>> These are the resulting scores:
>>
>>
>> I expected that dynamics would be the same. Why they are not?
>> Thank you, g.
>
>
> I made some test with the code above and discovered something that maybe for 
> you all was clear but it wasn't for me. Have a look to the following code:
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> \score {
>   \new Voice <<
> {f4 g a b}
> {s4\< 4 4 4\!}
>   >>
>   \layout {}
> }
>
> I didn't expect to see this output:
>
>
>
> If I understood correctly this is the fact that spacer rest (and normal rest) 
> does not "propagate".
>
> To fix it I found two different ways.
> First one:
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> \score {
>   \new Voice <<
> {f4 g a b}
> {s4\< s4 s4 s4\!}
>   >>
>   \layout {}
> }
>
>
>
> ... and second one (but I'm not sure it is "correct" even if it compiles and 
> works...)
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> \score {
>   \new Voice <<
> {f4 g a b}
> \new Dynamics {s4\< 4 4 4\!}
>   >>
>   \layout {}
> }
>
>
> Any comments?
>
> And why spacer rests and rests don't "propagate" like note?
>
> Thank you, g.


>From Changes:
"Isolated durations in music now stand for unpitched notes. Pitches
are taken from the preceding note or chord."

Spacers and rests don't have a pitch.
Iiuc the last seen note-event-pitch is taken, `b' in your case.
Falling back to c' if none was entered so far.

Cheers,
  Harm

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

Re: spacer rest *

[Martin Neubauer]

On 27/04/2018 10:53, Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> And why spacer rests and rests don't "propagate" like note?
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but »regular« notes behave just the
same way:

<<
  {f'4 g' a' b'}
  \\
  {d'4\< d'4*3\! }
>>

-- 
I am my own reality check.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: spacer rest *

[Gianmaria Lari]

On 25 April 2018 at 10:09, Gianmaria Lari  wrote:

> I don't understand the difference between s8 8 8 and s8*3.
>
> For example have a look to the following code that engrave two scores:
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> rh = \fixed c'{g8 8 8 8}
>
> dyn = { s8 \> 8 8 8 \!}
> { << \rh \new Dynamics \dyn >> }
>
> dyn = { s8 \> 8*3 \!}
> { << \rh \new Dynamics \dyn >> }
>
>
> These are the resulting scores:
>
>
> I expected that dynamics would be the same. Why they are not?
> Thank you, g.
>

I made some test with the code above and discovered something that maybe
for you all was clear but it wasn't for me. Have a look to the following
code:

\version "2.19.81"
\score {
  \new Voice <<
{f4 g a b}
{s4\< 4 4 4\!}
  >>
  \layout {}
}

I didn't expect to see this output:



If I understood correctly this is the fact that spacer rest (and normal
rest) does not "propagate".

To fix it I found two different ways.
First one:

\version "2.19.81"
\score {
  \new Voice <<
{f4 g a b}
{s4\< s4 s4 s4\!}
  >>
  \layout {}
}



... and second one (but I'm not sure it is "correct" even if it compiles
and works...)

\version "2.19.81"
\score {
  \new Voice <<
{f4 g a b}
\new Dynamics {s4\< 4 4 4\!}
  >>
  \layout {}
}


Any comments?

And why spacer rests and rests don't "propagate" like note?

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

Re: large bottom text area only on first page

[Thomas Morley]

2018-04-27 9:50 GMT+02:00 Werner LEMBERG :
>
> Folks,
>
>
> let's assume that I want to add a large block of text at the bottom of
> the first page only:
>
>
>page 1   page 2, 3, ...
> +-+  +-+
> | |  | |
> | music   |  | music (cntd.)   |
> | |  | |
> | |  | |
> | |  | |
> | |  | |
> |-|  | |
> | text|  | |
> | |  | |
> | |  | |
> | |  | |
> +-+  +-+
>
>
> How can I achieve that?
>
>
> Werner



Hi Werner,

I'd go for a page-footer and `on-page'.

Below our modified
input/regression/page-headers-and-footers.ly

txt = \markup \wordwrap-string
"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing
elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna
aliqua.  Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco
laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet,
consectetur adipisicing
elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna
aliqua.  Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco
laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat."

\paper {
  ragged-last-bottom = ##f


  oddHeaderMarkup = \markup  {
\override #'(baseline-skip . 2.5)
\center-column {
  \fill-line { \teeny " " " " }
  \on-the-fly #not-first-page \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string
}
  }

  evenHeaderMarkup = \oddHeaderMarkup

  oddFooterMarkup = \markup \fill-line {
\override #'(baseline-skip . 1)
\center-column {
\on-the-fly #(on-page 1) \txt
\fill-line { \teeny " " " " }
}
  }
}

#(set-default-paper-size "a6" 'portrait)

\book {
  \score {
\new Staff \relative {
  \repeat unfold 18 { a b c d \break }
}
  }
}

HTH,
  Harm

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

large bottom text area only on first page

[Werner LEMBERG]

Folks,


let's assume that I want to add a large block of text at the bottom of
the first page only:


   page 1   page 2, 3, ...
+-+  +-+
| |  | |
| music   |  | music (cntd.)   |
| |  | |
| |  | |
| |  | |
| |  | |
|-|  | |
| text|  | |
| |  | |
| |  | |
| |  | |
+-+  +-+


How can I achieve that?


Werner

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