Re: Identify included files
On 24/05/20 21:28, Fr. Samuel Springuel wrote: > It’s not quite as straight-forward as you seem to think: > > 1) You haven’t accounted for the possibility of multiple folders with varying > levels of hierarchy. The changed file might be in ../ relative to one file, > ../../ relative to another, ../some/dir/levels relative to a third and other > possible variations. It might also be specified /with/an/absolute/path in > some files. All of that complicates the search string for grep. This is a real can of worms ... I THINK all paths are relative to where lilypond is running. So any include file that itself contains relative includes is asking for trouble - it's "random" whether those paths will be valid or not... Cheers, Wol
Re: musicxml2ly
On 5/23/20, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > > On Sat, 23 May 2020, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: >> There must be something seriously broken if musicxml2ly can't convert >> this > > P.S. I just tried downgrading to lilypond 2.19.84 (from Fedora repo) and > the problem disappeared. So it does look like a regression to me. Thanks Martin; I’ve opened this tracker page: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/5994 It seems weird that such a problem wasn’t caught by our pretty-extensive test suite, so I’m wondering what might be particular to your test file. (At any rate, this will need to be added to the regtests once the problem’s been solved.) Cheers, -- V.
Re: show key signature but also alterations
Maybe the simplest way to achieve this is the good old "!"
\language "english"
{
\key d \major
d' e' fs'! g' a' b' cs''! d''
}
On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 6:50 PM Timothy Lanfear wrote:
> On 24/05/2020 20:35, Frédéric wrote:
> >
> > Halas, my web server is under raspberry pi which has only lilypond
> > 2.18.2. But 2.18.2 does not give a suitable output (too many natural
> > signs).
> > Try that:
> > \version "2.18.2"
> > {
> >\override AccidentalCautionary.parenthesized = ##f
> >\accidentalStyle teaching
> >\key d \major
> >d'4 fis' d' fis' d'4 fis' d' fis'
> > }
> > and you'll get a natural sign on second, third and fourth d. But it's
> > perfectly fine on 2.19.84.
> >
> > Any possibility to install a more recent version of lilypond on
> > raspberry or to make it work on 2.18.2?
> >
>
> You could try the attached, which is the 2.20.0 source code for the
> teaching accidental style (+some helper functions) with one change to
> accommodate 2.18 syntax, i.e. the key signature is obtained from the
> localKeySignature context property instead of localAlterations. Thus the
> code does not work with Lilypond 2.20.0. Also note the override is no
> longer necessary.
>
> --
> Timothy Lanfear, Bristol, UK.
>
>
Re: show key signature but also alterations
On 24/05/2020 20:35, Frédéric wrote:
Halas, my web server is under raspberry pi which has only lilypond
2.18.2. But 2.18.2 does not give a suitable output (too many natural
signs).
Try that:
\version "2.18.2"
{
\override AccidentalCautionary.parenthesized = ##f
\accidentalStyle teaching
\key d \major
d'4 fis' d' fis' d'4 fis' d' fis'
}
and you'll get a natural sign on second, third and fourth d. But it's
perfectly fine on 2.19.84.
Any possibility to install a more recent version of lilypond on
raspberry or to make it work on 2.18.2?
You could try the attached, which is the 2.20.0 source code for the
teaching accidental style (+some helper functions) with one change to
accommodate 2.18 syntax, i.e. the key signature is obtained from the
localKeySignature context property instead of localAlterations. Thus the
code does not work with Lilypond 2.20.0. Also note the override is no
longer necessary.
--
Timothy Lanfear, Bristol, UK.
\version "2.18.2"
#(begin
(define (key-entry-bar-number entry)
"Return the bar number of an entry in @code{localAlterations}
or @code {#f} if the entry does not have a bar number.
See @code{key-entry-notename} for details."
(and (pair? (cdr entry)) (caddr entry)))
(define (key-entry-measure-position entry)
"Return the measure position of an entry in @code{localAlterations}
or @code {#f} if the entry does not have a measure position.
See @code{key-entry-notename} for details."
(and (pair? (cdr entry)) (cdddr entry)))
(define (key-entry-alteration entry)
"Return the alteration of an entry in localAlterations
For convenience, returns @code{0} if entry is @code{#f}."
(if entry
(if (number? (cdr entry))
(cdr entry)
(cadr entry))
0))
(define-public (my-teaching-accidental-rule context pitch barnum measurepos)
"An accidental rule that typesets a cautionary accidental if it is
included in the key signature @emph{and} does not directly follow a note
on the same staff line."
(let* ((keysig (ly:context-property context 'localKeySignature))
(entry (find-pitch-entry keysig pitch #t #t)))
(if (not entry)
(cons #f #f)
(let* ((global-entry (find-pitch-entry keysig pitch #f #f))
(key-acc (key-entry-alteration global-entry))
(acc (ly:pitch-alteration pitch))
(entrymp (key-entry-measure-position entry))
(entrybn (key-entry-bar-number entry)))
(cons #f (not (or (equal? acc key-acc)
(and (equal? entrybn barnum) (equal? entrymp measurepos)
)
\layout {
\context {
\Score
autoAccidentals = #`(Staff ,my-teaching-accidental-rule)
}
}
{
\key d\major
d'4 e' fis' g' a' b' cis'' d''
d'4 fis' d' fis' d'4 fis' d' fis'
}
Re: Identify included files
> On 23 May, 2020, at 7:34 PM, David Wright wrote: > > If you follow some simple rules in your source layout, constructing > such a list might be most straightforward to do in the shell, using > grep. It’s not quite as straight-forward as you seem to think: 1) You haven’t accounted for the possibility of multiple folders with varying levels of hierarchy. The changed file might be in ../ relative to one file, ../../ relative to another, ../some/dir/levels relative to a third and other possible variations. It might also be specified /with/an/absolute/path in some files. All of that complicates the search string for grep. 2) You haven’t accounted for -I options when lilypond is called. Some of the files included might not be in the same directory tree at all. You’ll need access to the list of -I options with which lilypond is called in order to properly identify all the possible top-of-tree/ folders. You might be able to extract what -I flags a particular project has that are specific to it by examining some file in the project folders, but what do you do if that information is stored in a personal shell script or alias setup that catches all lilypond calls and makes sure certain -I flags are added (as might be common for someone using openLilyLib or with a personal library of formatting snippets)? Now your shell script has to go analyze your personal shell script or shell profile. 3) What about the relative-includes option? If an included file includes other files, where are these files located? Is the given path relative to the current file or to the top-level file? Our grep search string is getting even more complicated to account for this. Sure, your ideas would probably catch most cases, and it would be possible to write a shell script that accounted for these complications. But you’re duplicating a whole lot of work that’s already been done. LilyPond itself already knows how to deal with these factors to find the included files (either because it’s built-in or because you’ve already told it what to do when you configured your system). Why reinvent this wheel in a shell script if LilyPond can be made to output what it already knows for you? Another issue: How are you keeping track of which files have changed (and thus should seed your script)? If you recompile frequently after only changing a file or two, it’s fairly easy, but what if the change you’re working on takes several days to (either due to complexity or restricted time) or touches a whole bunch of files? Are you supposed to manually remember all those changes? Or maybe you’re planning on querying your version control system (you are using one, right?) for that information? As a last resort, you might also look at modified times on the pdfs (if they exist) and the source files. Of course, given a proper list of file dependencies, make will do all this work for you. That’s what it is for. Pair make with a LilyPond based tool which can determine dependencies automatically and it becomes even simpler because the system is self-updating. Now, I will grant you, that if LilyPond could not be convinced to output what it knows about file dependencies (and the Frescobaldi project hadn’t written python-ly which has the include_args() command in the ly.slexer module), then I probably would have written a shell script like you describe to get the dependencies information (or, more likely, to just do the recompiling itself and not bothered with make at all). However, once David K. showed that it was possible for LilyPond to output that information (and even better, without going through all the work necessary to produce a score at the same time) it makes the most logical sense to me to use that rather than start from scratch with a shell script (or start from include_args() in python-ly to write a Python script). ✝✝ Fr. Samuel, OSB (R. Padraic Springuel) St. Anselm’s Abbey 4501 South Dakota Ave, NE Washington, DC, 20017 202-269-2300 (c) 202-853-7036 PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ
Re: show key signature but also alterations
> > {
> >\override AccidentalCautionary.parenthesized=##f
> >\accidentalStyle teaching
> >\key d\major
> >d'4 e' fis' g' a' b' cis'' d''
> > }
>
> This is really good and so simple!
> Thanks a lot all of you for your help.
Halas, my web server is under raspberry pi which has only lilypond
2.18.2. But 2.18.2 does not give a suitable output (too many natural
signs).
Try that:
\version "2.18.2"
{
\override AccidentalCautionary.parenthesized = ##f
\accidentalStyle teaching
\key d \major
d'4 fis' d' fis' d'4 fis' d' fis'
}
and you'll get a natural sign on second, third and fourth d. But it's
perfectly fine on 2.19.84.
Any possibility to install a more recent version of lilypond on
raspberry or to make it work on 2.18.2?
Thanks
Re: Notation: Piano: How best to indicate left hand or right hand fingering in polyphonic works?
Dear Pierre
Indeed, very helpful.
I also chieved coloring of notes, stems, etc. I did not want to color
lines, clef... but it works similar to what you suggest, but the solution
you proposed I did not know. Any suggestion allows me to learn more and
more about LP.
I will post my solution soon based on all input so far as it has a specific
purpose.
Thank you
Roland
On Sun, May 24, 2020, 10:51 Pierre Perol-Schneider <
pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Roland,
>
> Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 10:34, R.H. a écrit :
> ...
>
>> Let us assume you want the top or bass voice to be in another color.
>> Here, the way you created it seems to make this difficult to do, for
>> example to assign a different color to note heads of different voices --
>> independently of left or right hand fingering.
>>
> ...
>
> See: http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=443
> Ex.:
>
> \version "2.20.0"
>
> #(define (override-color-for-all-grobs color)
> (lambda (context)
>(let loop ((x all-grob-descriptions))
> (if (not (null? x))
> (let ((grob-name (caar x)))
> (ly:context-pushpop-property context grob-name 'color color)
> (loop (cdr x)))
>
> sop = { c''8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 }
> alt = { c'8 8 8 8 8 8 \change Staff = LH \stemUp 8 8 }
> bas = { \clef F c8 8 8 8 8 }
>
> \new PianoStaff <<
> \new Staff = RH <<
> \new Voice { \voiceOne \sop }
> \new Voice
> \with { \applyContext #(override-color-for-all-grobs (x11-color
> 'red)) }
> { \voiceTwo \alt }
> >>
> \new Staff = LH \bas
> >>
>
> HTH, cheers,
> Pierre
>
Re: bach chorales
On 5/24/20, Ph. Hezaine wrote: > many thanks Valentin. It seems my precedent mail was not receipt. Hey!! Nice to hear from you Phil. I hope your family’s all right, and I wish your health gets better soon. There are quite a few people here and on -user-fr who’ll be delighted to exchange with you if/when you find the time, energy and motivation to drop by… And as you can see, your work continues to be appreciated after all these years :-) Best wishes, -- V.
Re: A fatal error with a new installation
Hi Alasdair, Just in case, Sumatra PDF viewer does not cause such issue. Cheers, Pierre Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 17:11, Alasdair McAndrew a écrit : > Many thanks - yes, that's what it was. I'm using VSCode and its Lilypond > extension, and I had installed the vscode-pdf viewer, which clashed with my > LaTeX-Workshop extension, which has its own PDF viewer in it. Anyway, > after a bit of fiddling and a few VSCode restarts I was able to use the > LaTeX pdf viewer for the Lilypond output. All good now! > > As it's now 1am, and I have been wrestling with some 17th century music > (full of huge leaps and multiple changes of clef), time for whisky... and > sleep! > > Thank you again, > Alasdair > > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:56 PM Phil Holmes wrote: > >> You get this sort of error if the PDF from the previous compilation is >> still open in many PDF viewers - they lock the file. Try closing your PDF >> viewer and trying again. >> >> -- >> Phil Holmes >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> *From:* Alasdair McAndrew >> *To:* lilypond-user Mailinglist >> *Sent:* Sunday, May 24, 2020 1:43 PM >> *Subject:* A fatal error with a new installation >> >> I have just installed Lilypond on Windows 10, following the instructions >> to basically download, install, and add its path to the environment >> variable. >> >> However, it won't compile; on a simple file; the log finishes with: >> >> warning: `(gs -q -dNOSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28 >> -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 >> >> -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted= >> false -sOutputFile=/Users/amca/Lilypond/Butler_divisions_D_major.pdf >> -c.setpdfwrite -f./tmp-lilypond-c5ihri)' failed (1) >> >> fatal error: failed files: >> "C:\\Users\\amca\\Lilypond\\Butler_divisions_D_major.ly" >> >> >> When I changed the name of the file it compiled once, and then wouldn't >> compile again - it threw the same error message. >> >> As I say, this is a new installation - just installed this afternoon, and >> there were no previous versions of Lilypond on this system. I've checked a >> few times, and the only way I can get a new compilation is to rename the >> file. >> >> What's going on here and how can I fix it? >> >> Thanks, >> Alasdair >> >> -- >> https://numbersandshapes.net >> >> > > -- > https://numbersandshapes.net >
Re: Adding Ornamentations to Note Heads
Am So., 24. Mai 2020 um 16:36 Uhr schrieb Franz-Rudolf Kuhnen
:
>
> 914/5000
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm in the process of transcribing the suites from Charles Dieupart from the
> original. Like Rameau, Dieupart also uses special ornaments that are aligned
> directly with the notehead. ("Port de voix" and "Pincé").
>
> I found an interesting article about the realization under Lilypond by
> Nicolas Sceaux:
> https://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/adding-ornamentations-to-note-heads-part-1/
>
> This is actually exactly what I need. Unfortunately, this method no longer
> works with lilypond-2.20. Lilypond reports
>
>
> "Warning: Type check for" HeadOrnamation "failed; value" #
> "must be of the type" list "
> Interpretation of the music ...
> Programming error: No rough definition found for `HeadOrnamation’.
> Continued, fingers crossed "
>
> Crossing the fingers didn't help. :-(
>
> Maybe someone can help me.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Franz-Rudolf
Iirc switch
(set-object-property! grob-name 'translation-type? list?)
to
(set-object-property! grob-name 'translation-type? ly:grob-properties?)
and you're done.
Attached my version of his code working with 2.20.0.
Please compare with his original, I don't remember, if I changed other
things (for testings or the like).
The provided examples are demonstrating some issues ...
Cheers,
Harm
\version "2.19.42"
%% taken from:
%% https://github.com/nsceaux/nenuvar/blob/master/common/side-ornementations.ily
%% and adapted for v2.19.42
%%%
%%% Utilities for defining new grobs, grob properties and music event types
%%% (there should be built-in commands to do that in LilyPond)
%%%
#(define (define-grob-definition grob-name grob-entry)
"Define a new grob and add it to `all-grob-definitions', after
scm/define-grobs.scm fashion.
After grob definitions are added, use:
\\layout {
\\context {
\\Global
\\grobdescriptions #all-grob-descriptions
}
}
to register them."
(let* ((meta-entry (assoc-get 'meta grob-entry))
(class(assoc-get 'class meta-entry))
(ifaces-entry (assoc-get 'interfaces meta-entry)))
(set-object-property! grob-name 'translation-type? ly:grob-properties?)
(set-object-property! grob-name 'is-grob? #t)
(set! ifaces-entry (append (case class
((Item) '(item-interface))
((Spanner) '(spanner-interface))
((Paper_column) '((item-interface
paper-column-interface)))
((System) '((system-interface
spanner-interface)))
(else '(unknown-interface)))
ifaces-entry))
(set! ifaces-entry (uniq-list (sort ifaces-entry symbolhttp://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/crash-moving-DotColumn-td190493.html
(set! (ly:grob-property dot-column 'positioning-done)
(lambda (grob)
(ly:dot-column::calc-positioning-done grob)
(ly:grob-translate-axis! grob orn-width X)
#t)
ornementation))
#(define (head-ornementation-engraver-acknowledge-note-head
engraver note-grob source-engraver)
"Note head acknowledge method for the head ornementation engraver.
When the note head event attached to the note head grob has ornementation
events among its articulations, then create a HeadOrnementation grob"
(let* ((note-event (ly:grob-property note-grob 'cause)))
(for-each (lambda (articulation)
(if (memq 'head-ornementation-event
(ly:event-property articulation 'class))
(begin
(if (markup? (ly:event-property articulation 'text-left))
(make-head-ornementation
engraver
note-grob
(ly:event-property articulation 'text-left)
LEFT
(ly:event-property articulation 'is-inside)
(ly:event-property articulation 'shift-when-on-line)))
(if (markup? (ly:event-property articulation 'text-right))
(make-head-ornementation
engraver
note-grob
(ly:event-property articulation 'text-right)
RIGHT
(ly:event-property articulation 'is-inside)
(ly:event-property articulation 'shift-when-on-line)))
)))
(ly:event-property note-event 'articulations
%% The head-ornementation engraver, with its note-head acknowledger
Re: Adding Ornamentations to Note Heads
Hi Franz-Rudolf,
Try enclosed file.
Cheers,
Pierre
Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 16:35, Franz-Rudolf Kuhnen a
écrit :
> 914/5000
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm in the process of transcribing the suites from Charles Dieupart from
> the original. Like Rameau, Dieupart also uses special ornaments that are
> aligned directly with the notehead. ("Port de voix" and "Pincé").
>
> I found an interesting article about the realization under Lilypond by
> Nicolas Sceaux:
>
> https://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/adding-ornamentations-to-note-heads-part-1/
>
> This is actually exactly what I need. Unfortunately, this method no longer
> works with lilypond-2.20. Lilypond reports
>
>
> "Warning: Type check for" HeadOrnamation "failed; value" #
> "must be of the type" list "
> Interpretation of the music ...
> Programming error: No rough definition found for `HeadOrnamation’.
> Continued, fingers crossed "
>
> Crossing the fingers didn't help. :-(
>
> Maybe someone can help me.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Franz-Rudolf
>
\version "2.20.0"
%%%
%%% Utilities for defining new grobs, grob properties and music event types
%%% (there should be built-in commands to do that in LilyPond)
%%%
#(define (define-grob-type grob-name grob-entry)
"Define a new grob and add it to `all-grob-definitions', after
scm/define-grobs.scm fashion.
After grob definitions are added, use:
\\layout {
\\context {
\\Global
\\grobdescriptions #all-grob-descriptions
}
}
to register them."
(let* ((meta-entry (assoc-get 'meta grob-entry))
(class(assoc-get 'class meta-entry))
(ifaces-entry (assoc-get 'interfaces meta-entry)))
(set-object-property! grob-name 'translation-type? ly:grob-properties?)
(set-object-property! grob-name 'is-grob? #t)
(set! ifaces-entry (append (case class
((Item) '(item-interface))
((Spanner) '(spanner-interface))
((Paper_column) '((item-interface
paper-column-interface)))
((System) '((system-interface
spanner-interface)))
(else '(unknown-interface)))
ifaces-entry))
(set! ifaces-entry (uniq-list (sort ifaces-entry symbollisp-identifier type-name)
',parent))
parents)
(set-object-property! ',type-name
'music-description
(cdr (assq 'description ,gproperties)))
(set! ,gproperties (assoc-set! ,gproperties 'name ',type-name))
(set! ,gproperties (assq-remove! ,gproperties 'description))
(hashq-set! music-name-to-property-table ',type-name ,gproperties)
(set! music-descriptions
(cons (cons ',type-name ,gproperties)
music-descriptions)
%%%
%%% Grob definition
%%%
#(define (head-ornamentation::print me)
"Prints a HeadOrnamentation grob (at a note head side)"
(let* ((notes (ly:grob-object me 'elements))
(y-ref (ly:grob-common-refpoint-of-array me notes Y))
(x-ref (ly:grob-common-refpoint-of-array me notes X))
(x-ext (ly:relative-group-extent notes x-ref X))
(y-ext (ly:relative-group-extent notes y-ref Y))
(y-coord (interval-center y-ext))
(text (ly:text-interface::print me))
(width (/ (interval-length (ly:stencil-extent text X)) 2.0))
(x-coord (- (car x-ext) width)))
(ly:stencil-translate
text
(cons
(- x-coord (ly:grob-relative-coordinate me x-ref X))
(- y-coord (ly:grob-relative-coordinate me y-ref Y))
#(define-grob-type 'HeadOrnamentation
`((text . ,#{ \markup \fontsize #-4 \musicglyph "accidentals.leftparen" #})
(stencil . ,head-ornamentation::print)
(meta . ((class . Item)
(interfaces . (font-interface))
\layout {
\context {
\Global
\grobdescriptions #all-grob-descriptions
}
}
%%%
%%% Engraver
%%%
%% The head-ornamentation engraver, with its note-head acknowledger
%% (which add HeadOrnamentation grobs to note heads)
#(define head-ornamentation-engraver
(make-engraver
(acknowledgers
((note-head-interface engraver note-grob source)
;; When the note-head event attached to the note-head grob has
;; ornamentation events among its articulations, then create a
;; HeadOrnamentation grob
(let* ((note-event (ly:grob-property note-grob 'cause)))
(for-each
(lambda (articulation)
(if (memq 'head-ornamentation-event
(ly:event-property articulation 'class))
(let ((ornament-grob (ly:engraver-make-grob engraver
'HeadOrnamentation
note-grob)))
Re: A fatal error with a new installation
Many thanks - yes, that's what it was. I'm using VSCode and its Lilypond extension, and I had installed the vscode-pdf viewer, which clashed with my LaTeX-Workshop extension, which has its own PDF viewer in it. Anyway, after a bit of fiddling and a few VSCode restarts I was able to use the LaTeX pdf viewer for the Lilypond output. All good now! As it's now 1am, and I have been wrestling with some 17th century music (full of huge leaps and multiple changes of clef), time for whisky... and sleep! Thank you again, Alasdair On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 11:56 PM Phil Holmes wrote: > You get this sort of error if the PDF from the previous compilation is > still open in many PDF viewers - they lock the file. Try closing your PDF > viewer and trying again. > > -- > Phil Holmes > > > > - Original Message - > *From:* Alasdair McAndrew > *To:* lilypond-user Mailinglist > *Sent:* Sunday, May 24, 2020 1:43 PM > *Subject:* A fatal error with a new installation > > I have just installed Lilypond on Windows 10, following the instructions > to basically download, install, and add its path to the environment > variable. > > However, it won't compile; on a simple file; the log finishes with: > > warning: `(gs -q -dNOSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28 > -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 > > -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted= > false -sOutputFile=/Users/amca/Lilypond/Butler_divisions_D_major.pdf > -c.setpdfwrite -f./tmp-lilypond-c5ihri)' failed (1) > > fatal error: failed files: > "C:\\Users\\amca\\Lilypond\\Butler_divisions_D_major.ly" > > > When I changed the name of the file it compiled once, and then wouldn't > compile again - it threw the same error message. > > As I say, this is a new installation - just installed this afternoon, and > there were no previous versions of Lilypond on this system. I've checked a > few times, and the only way I can get a new compilation is to rename the > file. > > What's going on here and how can I fix it? > > Thanks, > Alasdair > > -- > https://numbersandshapes.net > > -- https://numbersandshapes.net
Re: bach chorales
On 24/05/2020 15:00, Ph. Hezaine wrote: An updated version with included tar.bz2 sources is available: http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article48 Phil, Many thanks for this work. With your permission, I would like to add the updates to the git repository I just set up at https://gitlab.com/pub8/music/scores/bach/371-chorales But the link http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article4 takes me somewhere unexpected. Could you check it? Best regards, Matt.
Adding Ornamentations to Note Heads
914/5000
Hi,
I'm in the process of transcribing the suites from Charles Dieupart from the
original. Like Rameau, Dieupart also uses special ornaments that are aligned
directly with the notehead. ("Port de voix" and "Pincé").
I found an interesting article about the realization under Lilypond by Nicolas
Sceaux:
https://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/adding-ornamentations-to-note-heads-part-1/[1]
Maybe someone can help me.
Thank you in advance.
Regards
Franz-Rudolf
[1] https://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/adding-ornamentations-to-note-heads-part-1/
Re: registering a composition
On 24/05/20 14:18, Valentin Villenave wrote: > On 5/24/20, David Kastrup wrote: >> You are working from the premise that everybody except you is an idiot. > > Guys, stop bickering and veering off-topic. The original purpose of > this thread was to help Francesco gain some insight into the copyright > modalities and possible publishing choices; arguing about whether one > particular license authorizes or not to sell software and/or CDs > and/or services may be interesting (though I believe this has already > been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere, and by more knowledgeable people > than *any* of us) but it remains absolutely orthogonal to the matter > at hand. Sorry - I'm being the pedantic lawyerly type ... > > Granted, I was probably the one who opened that can of worms in the > first place; although I do have my own principles and beliefs, the > only point I’ve been trying to get across is that Francesco has > _several_ options (and not that many risks), rather than the Single > Mandatory Way that’s ordinarily offered to authors and artists. > > As far as I’m concerned, there is no invalid or morally corrupt choice > (even publishing under all-rights-reserved and subjugating oneself to > some private copyright organization), as long as it _is_ a choice, > made deliberately and not out of ignorance or fear. > AOL. As I said, I probably spent too much time on Groklaw. I've come across too many - REAL - examples where this nitpicking determined cases... often for the worse :-( (Admittedly, pretty much all in the US ...) Cheers, Wol
Re: bach chorales
Regarding the set of 371 it's of interest that a scan of the 1784 edition is available at IMSLP: https://imslp.org/wiki/371_Vierstimmige_Choralges%C3%A4nge_(Bach%2C_Johann_Sebastian) And with proper clefs (my well known hobbyhorse!). Beautifully engraved and remarkably modern looking.And of course with marvellous German typography. Andrew
Re: A fatal error with a new installation
You get this sort of error if the PDF from the previous compilation is still open in many PDF viewers - they lock the file. Try closing your PDF viewer and trying again. -- Phil Holmes - Original Message - From: Alasdair McAndrew To: lilypond-user Mailinglist Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 1:43 PM Subject: A fatal error with a new installation I have just installed Lilypond on Windows 10, following the instructions to basically download, install, and add its path to the environment variable. However, it won't compile; on a simple file; the log finishes with: warning: `(gs -q -dNOSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28 -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS=841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted=false -sOutputFile=/Users/amca/Lilypond/Butler_divisions_D_major.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -f./tmp-lilypond-c5ihri)' failed (1) fatal error: failed files: "C:\\Users\\amca\\Lilypond\\Butler_divisions_D_major.ly" When I changed the name of the file it compiled once, and then wouldn't compile again - it threw the same error message. As I say, this is a new installation - just installed this afternoon, and there were no previous versions of Lilypond on this system. I've checked a few times, and the only way I can get a new compilation is to rename the file. What's going on here and how can I fix it? Thanks, Alasdair -- https://numbersandshapes.net
Re: bach chorales
Hello Phil, Thanks for writing and thank your for your efforts. From which edition did you derive this set? The Breitkopf edition of the original CPE Bach's edition? [As you may know, your website in the links has been hacked. Maybe take it down?] Andrew
Re: A fatal error with a new installation
I think it is a ghostscript version mismatch error., Have a search through the list archives about this. I use Linux so I cant comment apart from that, but I think this is commonly seen. Andrew
A fatal error with a new installation
I have just installed Lilypond on Windows 10, following the instructions to basically download, install, and add its path to the environment variable. However, it won't compile; on a simple file; the log finishes with: warning: `(gs -q -dNOSAFER -dDEVICEWIDTHPOINTS=595.28 -dDEVICEHEIGHTPOINTS= 841.89 -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH -r1200 -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None -dPrinted= false -sOutputFile=/Users/amca/Lilypond/Butler_divisions_D_major.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -f./tmp-lilypond-c5ihri)' failed (1) fatal error: failed files: "C:\\Users\\amca\\Lilypond\\Butler_divisions_D_major.ly" When I changed the name of the file it compiled once, and then wouldn't compile again - it threw the same error message. As I say, this is a new installation - just installed this afternoon, and there were no previous versions of Lilypond on this system. I've checked a few times, and the only way I can get a new compilation is to rename the file. What's going on here and how can I fix it? Thanks, Alasdair -- https://numbersandshapes.net
Re: bach chorales
Le 24/05/2020 à 15:01, Valentin Villenave a écrit : On 5/24/20, Andrew Bernard wrote: Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the name Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? It’s an alias of Philippe Hézaine, who was quite active on -user and -user-fr a few years ago: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-05/msg00169.html You can find the sources and PDF for his edition of Bach’s Chorals here, before his website got defaced: https://web.archive.org/web/20160906112534/http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article48 You can still find his other website here: http://philippe.hezaine.free.fr/ The address given on that website doesn’t appear to be relevant anymore, but you can find another one at the bottom of this page if you want to try and reach him: https://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=760 That being said, I can’t seem to find any recent traces of him online. I hope he’s okay; I remember him as a very nice guy (from northern France, I think), full of ideas and generosity; as an example, the musical play he wrote is dedicated “To Richard Stallman; To the FSF; To the LilyPond guys; To the Ardour guys; To food banks.” That doesn’t sound like someone who would object to his work being copied and made available online… Cheers, -- V. many thanks Valentin. It seems my precedent mail was not receipt. Phil.
Re: bach chorales
Le 24/05/2020 à 06:05, Andrew Bernard a écrit : Hello Marc, Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the name Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? Andrew On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:26, Marc via LilyPond user discussion wrote: Dropbox link https://www.dropbox.com/s/slxstuqpxbqojnp/Bach-371-Chorals-sources-ly_midi-3.zip?dl=0 • Copyleft 2011/01: cette oeuvre est libre, vous pouvez la (photo)copier, la diffuser ou la modifier, selon les termes de la Licence Art Libre, voir: http://www.artlibre.org/licence/lal/ [en, de, es, pt, it] Créé avec GNU LilyPond 2.13.51 http://www.LilyPond.org par Ph. Hardy. http://superbonus.project.free.fr Free Art License Hello Yes, i'm still active but I'm not in good health for now and it seems my site is down. There is also some another works around that, here is the different announces from 02/2011: (version GNU Lilypond 2.14.1 ) ANN: J. S. Bach - 371 Chorals à 4 voix + Etudes d'anamorphoses: les différentes versions d'un choral. An updated version with included tar.bz2 sources is available: http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article48 Some slight inconsistencies were corrected. Midi files of Lilypond were updated to take into account the duration of the fermatas, which improves the scansion of a chorale. Note however that the tempi are not relevant at all. But by changing the \guidemidi-ly in the sources you will be able to more easily produce a midi file that suits you. For those wishing a really detailed analysis of Chorales (especially the students) , I would advertise them when the time comes of the release: "Les colles de Bach - The Bach's School (You've got me, there)" for GNU Solfege which should include 352 chorales, each choral being an exercise of musical dictation of 1, 2, 3 or 4 voices. Because of an overlap midi problem as soon as two voices share an unison with different durations (we don't know that in Lilypond) I'm waiting the next version (GNU Solfege 3.19.3). The author, Tom Cato Amundsen, is taking this issue on hand. Be happy. Phil. Hi all, "Les 'colles' de Bach - The Bach's School (You've got me, there)" is the full version of Bach's Chorales transcribed (Under Free Art License) for GNU Solfege 3.19.4 This transcription is especially for music students, or classes of Solfege - Harmony - Counterpoint. You first need to install the 3.19.4 and read the LISEZ-MOI-README either on site or in the zip package. http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article48 Be happy. Phil.
Re: registering a composition
On 5/24/20, David Kastrup wrote: > You are working from the premise that everybody except you is an idiot. Guys, stop bickering and veering off-topic. The original purpose of this thread was to help Francesco gain some insight into the copyright modalities and possible publishing choices; arguing about whether one particular license authorizes or not to sell software and/or CDs and/or services may be interesting (though I believe this has already been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere, and by more knowledgeable people than *any* of us) but it remains absolutely orthogonal to the matter at hand. Granted, I was probably the one who opened that can of worms in the first place; although I do have my own principles and beliefs, the only point I’ve been trying to get across is that Francesco has _several_ options (and not that many risks), rather than the Single Mandatory Way that’s ordinarily offered to authors and artists. As far as I’m concerned, there is no invalid or morally corrupt choice (even publishing under all-rights-reserved and subjugating oneself to some private copyright organization), as long as it _is_ a choice, made deliberately and not out of ignorance or fear. Cheers, -- V.
Re: bach chorales
On 5/24/20, Andrew Bernard wrote: > Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the name > Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? It’s an alias of Philippe Hézaine, who was quite active on -user and -user-fr a few years ago: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-05/msg00169.html You can find the sources and PDF for his edition of Bach’s Chorals here, before his website got defaced: https://web.archive.org/web/20160906112534/http://superbonus.project.free.fr/spip.php?article48 You can still find his other website here: http://philippe.hezaine.free.fr/ The address given on that website doesn’t appear to be relevant anymore, but you can find another one at the bottom of this page if you want to try and reach him: https://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=760 That being said, I can’t seem to find any recent traces of him online. I hope he’s okay; I remember him as a very nice guy (from northern France, I think), full of ideas and generosity; as an example, the musical play he wrote is dedicated “To Richard Stallman; To the FSF; To the LilyPond guys; To the Ardour guys; To food banks.” That doesn’t sound like someone who would object to his work being copied and made available online… Cheers, -- V.
Re: registering a composition
On 24/05/20 12:52, David Kastrup wrote: > antlists writes: > >> So you don't understand the difference between the story, and the book? > > You are working from the premise that everybody except you is an idiot. > That does not make a backdrop for a discussion but monologueing. I am > not interested in that. > Sorry. But Carl quoted from GPL preamble which says you have the freedom to distribute COPIES of the software, and charge for it. I said you cannot charge for THE SOFTWARE. I fail to see any conflict between those two statements, and when you're talking law and litigious lawyers, the distinction is important. Sorry. I probably spent too long on Groklaw :-) Cheers, Wol
Re: bach chorales
Le dimanche 24 mai 2020 à 12:58 +0100, Matt Wallis a écrit : > On 24/05/2020 11:27, Urs Liska wrote: > > I would suggest doing so and making it somewhat more accessible in > > the > > sense to not having each chorale live in a self-contained file. I > > would > > love to see an interface where you can *select* which chorale(s) to > > engrave, apply style sheets, choose voices to engrave/hide etc. > > That > > would make a terrific resource for teachers too. > > > > This would also make a very nice case study for an exemplary > > Frescobaldi extension. I really can't do that but would surely be > > around helping out and/or mentoring such an effort. > > I've taken the first step - making it available in a public git > repository. Hopefully, there will be others who take some of the > next > steps you suggest, starting by cloning this repository :-) > > https://gitlab.com/pub8/music/scores/bach/371-chorales > > It would be great if someone could reply here to say if they could > access the repo. I could clone the repo. Cheers, Jean
Re: bach chorales
On 24/05/2020 11:27, Urs Liska wrote: I would suggest doing so and making it somewhat more accessible in the sense to not having each chorale live in a self-contained file. I would love to see an interface where you can *select* which chorale(s) to engrave, apply style sheets, choose voices to engrave/hide etc. That would make a terrific resource for teachers too. This would also make a very nice case study for an exemplary Frescobaldi extension. I really can't do that but would surely be around helping out and/or mentoring such an effort. I've taken the first step - making it available in a public git repository. Hopefully, there will be others who take some of the next steps you suggest, starting by cloning this repository :-) https://gitlab.com/pub8/music/scores/bach/371-chorales It would be great if someone could reply here to say if they could access the repo. Matt On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:26, Marc via LilyPond user discussion wrote: Dropbox link https://www.dropbox.com/s/slxstuqpxbqojnp/Bach-371-Chorals-sources-ly_midi-3.zip?dl=0
Re: registering a composition
antlists writes: > So you don't understand the difference between the story, and the book? You are working from the premise that everybody except you is an idiot. That does not make a backdrop for a discussion but monologueing. I am not interested in that. -- David Kastrup
Re: registering a composition
On 24/05/2020 11:59, David Kastrup wrote: Wols Lists writes: On 24/05/20 01:08, Carl Sorensen wrote: Actually, GNU allows charging for the software. From the Preamble to the GNU GPL: "When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish)" You have freedom to charge for the SERVICE of DISTRIBUTING the software (which I said :-), not the freedom of charging for the software itself. That is like saying I can charge for the service of distributing the contents of a book, not for the contents themselves. Exactly so - you are charging for the service of putting the words on paper, and for the paper and postage etc etc. What is the "contents themselves" without a means of dissemination, a medium? You are not charging for the words themselves, and more importantly, you are not charging for work of arranging those words in that specific order! Yes, I know I'm being pedantic, but when you're dealing with the law pedanticism matters :-) (GPL v2 contains some bugs, and some people actively exploit those bugs as features ...) A license does not contain "bugs". Pedanticism does not mean using words with a different meaning than anybody else. It means using them more carefully according to their agreed-upon meaning. So you don't understand the difference between the story, and the book? If I walk into a bookshop, the could easily be a shelf that has just one story on it, "The Half Blood Prince" lets say. There could be three or four different editions, and maybe 10 copies of each. BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE STORY. In the same vein, I can take GPL software written by other people, create my own edition, and copy it on to CD. I can sell that CD, charging for for the physical embodiment and my work in creating said embodiment, but I cannot - MUST NOT - charge for the software itself. That is basic GPL 101. As for bugs in the GPL, are you saying that software doesn't contain bugs? Just as software DOES contain bugs, so do legal documents, including the GPL! And whether you call them bugs or features, I can list at least two bugs in v2, which v3 was intended to correct. Bug 1 - the revocation of the licence - can you cure a breach of v2 by simply downloading another copy? PEOPLE ARGUE - WITH REASON - BOTH WAYS. The new language in v3 makes it quite clear that you can't get round a revocation by obtaining a new copy, but also that if you do try and comply with the licence in good faith then it isn't revoked. Bug 2 - if you make software available on the web as two separate archives, one binary and one source, this triggers the binary distribution clause of v2. So if I make the source available, and offer a pre-compiled binary as a convenience, I'm forced to keep the source available for three years? THAT'S NOT FAIR. So v3 makes it clear that if *you* *choose* not to avail yourself of the source at the same time as the binary, then it's *your* problem - you can't come back to me later and demand the source. These are bugs, according to the authors of the GPL, hence v3 aiming to correct them. Cheers, Wol
Re: registering a composition
Wols Lists writes: > On 24/05/20 01:08, Carl Sorensen wrote: >> Actually, GNU allows charging for the software. From the Preamble to the >> GNU GPL: >> >> "When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not >> price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that >> you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and >> charge for them if you wish)" > > You have freedom to charge for the SERVICE of DISTRIBUTING the software > (which I said :-), not the freedom of charging for the software itself. That is like saying I can charge for the service of distributing the contents of a book, not for the contents themselves. What is the "contents themselves" without a means of dissemination, a medium? > Yes, I know I'm being pedantic, but when you're dealing with the law > pedanticism matters :-) > > (GPL v2 contains some bugs, and some people actively exploit those bugs > as features ...) A license does not contain "bugs". Pedanticism does not mean using words with a different meaning than anybody else. It means using them more carefully according to their agreed-upon meaning. -- David Kastrup
Re: bach chorales
I would suggest doing so and making it somewhat more accessible in the sense to not having each chorale live in a self-contained file. I would love to see an interface where you can *select* which chorale(s) to engrave, apply style sheets, choose voices to engrave/hide etc. That would make a terrific resource for teachers too. This would also make a very nice case study for an exemplary Frescobaldi extension. I really can't do that but would surely be around helping out and/or mentoring such an effort. Urs Am Sonntag, den 24.05.2020, 12:02 +0200 schrieb Marc via LilyPond user discussion: > I'm not the author (I had it in my archives) The license seems to > show > that it can be placed in a git repository. > > Marc > > Le 24/05/2020 à 11:41, Matt Wallis a écrit : > > On 24/05/2020 05:05, Andrew Bernard wrote: > > > Hello Marc, > > > > > > Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the > > > name > > > Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? > > > > > > Andrew > > > > > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:26, Marc via LilyPond user discussion > > > wrote: > > > > Dropbox link > > > > > > > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/slxstuqpxbqojnp/Bach-371-Chorals-sources-ly_midi-3.zip?dl=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > • Copyleft 2011/01: cette oeuvre est libre, vous pouvez la > > > > (photo)copier, > > > > la diffuser ou la modifier, selon les termes de la Licence Art > > > > Libre, > > > > voir: > > > > http://www.artlibre.org/licence/lal/ [en, de, es, pt, it] > > > > Créé avec GNU LilyPond 2.13.51 http://www.LilyPond.org > > > > par Ph. Hardy. http://superbonus.project.free.fr > > > > Free Art License > > > > Marc, > > Many thanks for the link. > > Am I right to understand from the license that it would be ok to > > make > > these files available on a public git repository (e.g. Gitlab.com)? > > Matt > > > >
Re: bach chorales
I'm not the author (I had it in my archives) The license seems to show that it can be placed in a git repository. Marc Le 24/05/2020 à 11:41, Matt Wallis a écrit : On 24/05/2020 05:05, Andrew Bernard wrote: Hello Marc, Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the name Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? Andrew On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:26, Marc via LilyPond user discussion wrote: Dropbox link https://www.dropbox.com/s/slxstuqpxbqojnp/Bach-371-Chorals-sources-ly_midi-3.zip?dl=0 • Copyleft 2011/01: cette oeuvre est libre, vous pouvez la (photo)copier, la diffuser ou la modifier, selon les termes de la Licence Art Libre, voir: http://www.artlibre.org/licence/lal/ [en, de, es, pt, it] Créé avec GNU LilyPond 2.13.51 http://www.LilyPond.org par Ph. Hardy. http://superbonus.project.free.fr Free Art License Marc, Many thanks for the link. Am I right to understand from the license that it would be ok to make these files available on a public git repository (e.g. Gitlab.com)? Matt
Re: bach chorales
On 24/05/2020 05:05, Andrew Bernard wrote: Hello Marc, Who are we to thank for this wonderful and useful work? I see the name Ph. Hardy in the score with an email. Is he still active? Andrew On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 02:26, Marc via LilyPond user discussion wrote: Dropbox link https://www.dropbox.com/s/slxstuqpxbqojnp/Bach-371-Chorals-sources-ly_midi-3.zip?dl=0 • Copyleft 2011/01: cette oeuvre est libre, vous pouvez la (photo)copier, la diffuser ou la modifier, selon les termes de la Licence Art Libre, voir: http://www.artlibre.org/licence/lal/ [en, de, es, pt, it] Créé avec GNU LilyPond 2.13.51 http://www.LilyPond.org par Ph. Hardy. http://superbonus.project.free.fr Free Art License Marc, Many thanks for the link. Am I right to understand from the license that it would be ok to make these files available on a public git repository (e.g. Gitlab.com)? Matt
Re: Notation: Piano: How best to indicate left hand or right hand fingering in polyphonic works?
Hi Roland,
Le dim. 24 mai 2020 à 10:34, R.H. a écrit :
...
> Let us assume you want the top or bass voice to be in another color. Here,
> the way you created it seems to make this difficult to do, for example to
> assign a different color to note heads of different voices -- independently
> of left or right hand fingering.
>
...
See: http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=443
Ex.:
\version "2.20.0"
#(define (override-color-for-all-grobs color)
(lambda (context)
(let loop ((x all-grob-descriptions))
(if (not (null? x))
(let ((grob-name (caar x)))
(ly:context-pushpop-property context grob-name 'color color)
(loop (cdr x)))
sop = { c''8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 }
alt = { c'8 8 8 8 8 8 \change Staff = LH \stemUp 8 8 }
bas = { \clef F c8 8 8 8 8 }
\new PianoStaff <<
\new Staff = RH <<
\new Voice { \voiceOne \sop }
\new Voice
\with { \applyContext #(override-color-for-all-grobs (x11-color
'red)) }
{ \voiceTwo \alt }
>>
\new Staff = LH \bas
>>
HTH, cheers,
Pierre
Re: Notation: Piano: How best to indicate left hand or right hand fingering in polyphonic works?
Oh, thank you Mark I start understanding how differently source files are made by different people. It is very helpful. What I see is that you do not separate voices but you separate actually fingering into "rightone", "righttwo" and "left". I hope I understood this correctly? I have to study the effects more closely. Let us assume you want the top or bass voice to be in another color. Here, the way you created it seems to make this difficult to do, for example to assign a different color to note heads of different voices -- independently of left or right hand fingering. I believe, it is helpful for students to also visually separate the voices in polyphonic music -- with the idea, of course, to make such voices eventually also sound differently -- for Bach, Glenn Gould was doing this to perfection. Yes, I know, the original also does not contain any hints about tempo, phrasing marks, etc. which are up to interpretation for modern piano and style of expression of the performer. So, for a student's edition, I would like to add such marks and it is the original idea of starting to use Lilypond. Roland Am Sa., 23. Mai 2020 um 20:51 Uhr schrieb Mark Stephen Mrotek < carsonm...@ca.rr.com>: > Very Welcome, Roland, > > . > > The 3-voice that I could readily find is WTC I – 3. It is attached. > > Be free to ask and questions or request clarifications. > > > > Mark > > > > *From:* R.H. [mailto:roland.huettm...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, May 23, 2020 11:34 AM > *To:* Mark Stephen Mrotek > *Cc:* lilypond-user > *Subject:* Re: Notation: Piano: How best to indicate left hand or right > hand fingering in polyphonic works? > > > > Oh, thank you Mark > > > > Well, that would be great to see your version. Thank you for your offer! > > > > For me it is all exercise in LP now and, anyway, my next version would be > on the two-staff usual piano version. Nevertheless, as I may also publish > the documents for learners of piano including practicing notes, I was > thinking whether there is a standard way or any idea of indicating the > different voices and fingering in the standard version -- so, I would use > your version to add those details (if not existing of course). > > > > In the piano-two staves version I would color the different voices (notes > heads, stems, rests, etc.) -- again for practice. > > > > Thanks again > > Roland > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Sa., 23. Mai 2020 um 19:58 Uhr schrieb Mark Stephen Mrotek < > carsonm...@ca.rr.com>: > > Roland, > > > > I doubt is anyone can provide a “better” way since that valuation is > entirely based on how the way works for you. > > When I set the 3-part fugues I use two staves. The soprano and alto in the > upper and the bass in the lower. If the alto moves into the region of the > bass that is indicated with a \changeStaff = “lower”. > > > > I can send an example. > > > > Mark > > > > *From:* lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark= > ca.rr@gnu.org] *On Behalf Of *R.H. > *Sent:* Saturday, May 23, 2020 10:04 AM > *To:* lilypond-user > *Subject:* Notation: Piano: How best to indicate left hand or right hand > fingering in polyphonic works? > > > > Hello to all > > > > Since some days I got immersed into Lilypond learning and the addtional > usage of Frescobaldi then was a game changer. I see the dedication to > quality in both products. > > > > For my own piano practice, I am working on the Fugue IX from the > Well-Tempered Clavier Book 1 from S.B. Bach. The work has three voices. To > differentiate the voices I used a template for three voices and was able to > come up with a decent version. Next, I also want to add some harmonic > function to also visually better understand how the work is built (as a > Fugue of course). > > > > Now, I call these "My piano practice sheets" as they are for practice > only. My teacher asked me to practice each voice separately first and only > then start combining them. > > > > Since here the middle or "mezzio" voice is played sometimes with the > fingers of the left and sometimes with the fingers of the right hand, I > decided to consistently indicate this fingering "up" for the left hand, and > "down" for the right and use it per note such as "a16_4" for a down > fingering or "a16^1" for an up-fingering. > > > > I am not sure that this is the right way to do. Of course, there can be > indicators such as "r.h" and "l.h.", but there would be too many and it is > rather distracting to the eye. And it als forces me to have all fingering > either up and down, but not in inside the lines. > > > > Currently, I color the fingingerings of the voicing line. Maybe left or > right hand could have a color. > > > > But maybe somone has a better idea...? > > > > Thanks to all and have a nice weekend > > Roland > > > > Example: > > > > [image: image.png] > > > > > >
