Dynamic text vertical positioning issue
In the following example, dynamic text does not vertically reposition when
"+" marking (i.e., left-hand pizzicato) is given vertical offset. Please
advise if I have missed an obvious solution. Thanks!
\version "2.20.0"
{
% dynamic text has wrong vertical position:
\stemDown e'-\tweak extra-offset #'(0.3 . 1.5) _+ \p
% expected behaviour:
e'_1\p
}
Re: Cowell clusters
Hi Klaus, thanks for your reply! Yes, that function is great, that's the kind of thing I am looking for! This is already so much better than working on it manually. I have tweaked it a bit to my liking, particularly by setting \tweak Stem.thickness #6 for the stem that represents the cluster. I will try to see if I can come up with a way to automatically handle the stem up/down, as it would be so much easier if this function automatically detected those. Ideally, I think applying it to a chord (something like \cowellCluster 4) would be the ideal solution. It also does not handle whole notes, as those do not have stems to be hacked. If I come up with something interesting I will make sure to post it here. Many thanks once again! Gilberto
Re: Articulation mark & slur placement
On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 11:19 AM Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote: > Michael, > > Not sure how Gould became the be all and end all of music engraving. > My position is readability. . > > Mark > > -Original Message- > From: Michael Seifert [mailto:mseif...@gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 7:31 AM > To: Mark Stephen Mrotek > Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org > Subject: Re: Articulation mark & slur placement > > Well, if we’re doing everything the way Elaine Gould wants us to, > then: > > - articulation should go generally go next to the notehead, not > next to the stem; but > - the marcato mark usually goes above the staff, regardless of > stem direction. (Note: not directly above the stemm, but above the staff). > Elaine Gould is usually pretty precise and is an excellent reference, I think. So is "Music Notation", by Read. Different approaches, and different subject matter, but both are good. Neither speaks to the fact that Bela Bartok, at least for violin, distinguished between a staccato mark outside the slur and a staccato mark inside the slur. Be well, Ralph -- Ralph Palmer Brattleboro, VT USA (he, him, his) palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
RE: Articulation mark & slur placement
Michael,
Not sure how Gould became the be all and end all of music engraving.
My position is readability. .
In your snippet I prefer the marcato to be above the note. Placed next to the
head it competes with the head for my vision.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Michael Seifert [mailto:mseif...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2020 7:31 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Articulation mark & slur placement
Well, if we’re doing everything the way Elaine Gould wants us to, then:
- articulation should go generally go next to the notehead, not next to
the stem; but
- the marcato mark usually goes above the staff, regardless of stem
direction. (Note: not directly above the stemm, but above the staff).
So one could fix the problem for up-stemmed notes simply by putting the marcato
accent above the staff (and tweaking its vertical placement.) But the problem
would remain for the same snippet an octave higher, with down-stemmed notes.
Interestingly, the accent mark > *does* behave the way I want it to in
the code below. Effectively, I want the marcato mark (and the “staccato
wedge”) to behave like the accent mark in the code below, rather than behaving
like the staccato or tenuto marks.
\relative c' {
d'4-^( e4 f4-.) r4
d4->( e4 f4-.) r4
d4-.( e4 f4-.) r4
d4--( e4 f4-.) r4
d4-!( e4 f4-.) r4
}
Mike Seifert
> On Dec 19, 2020, at 7:49 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> Mike
>
> Any requirement that the marcato to be below the note?
>
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lilypond-user
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> Michael Seifert
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 3:10 PM
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Articulation mark & slur placement
>
> The following code
>
> \relative c' {
> d4-^( e4 f4-.) r4
> }
>
> produces a slur with all articulation marks “inside” the slur. Typically,
> however, articulation marks are supposed to go “outside” the first note of a
> slur: “Usually, only tenuto lines and staccato marks may go inside of the
> first and the last notes of a slur.” (“Behind Bars”, p. 121) If we follow
> this guideline in the excerpt above, the endpoint of the slur should be
> closer to the notehead than the marcato accent is. The staccato mark, on the
> other hand, is correctly placed.
>
> Is there a way to make it so that the “usual” placement occurs by default?
> Or do I need to tweak this manually for each articulation mark (other than
> staccato and tenuto) that begins a phrase?
>
> Mike Seifert
>
Re: Autochange with Staves named other than "up" and "down"
On 2020-12-19 3:14 pm, Pine, Zachary V wrote:
Hello Community,
I'm writing a piano piece across three staves. Sometimes I would like
to use autochange to engrave material on the top two staves, other
times across the bottom two. I know autochange works by default on
staves named "up" and "down".
Is there any way to override the names of the staves autochange looks
for? Perhaps there is another solution I'm not seeing other than
manually inputting \change Staff everytime.
Here is one approach, although I cannot be certain it covers all edge
cases:
\version "2.20.0"
#(define (symbol-pair? arg)
(and (pair? arg) (symbol? (car arg)) (symbol? (cdr arg
#(define (symbol-pair-list? arg)
(and (list? arg) (every symbol-pair? arg)))
replaceContextChanges =
#(define-music-function
(replacements music)
(symbol-pair-list? ly:music?)
(define (proc music)
(if (music-is-of-type? music 'context-specification)
(ly:music-set-property! music 'context-id
(let* ((id (ly:music-property music 'context-id))
(sym (string->symbol id)))
(if (eq? "" id) id ; Sometimes context-id is an empty string.
(symbol->string (ly:assoc-get sym replacements sym))
(if (music-is-of-type? music 'auto-change-instruction)
(ly:music-set-property! music 'context-change-list
(map (lambda (p) (let ((mom (car p)) (sym (cdr p)))
(cons mom (ly:assoc-get sym replacements sym
(ly:music-property music 'context-change-list
music)
#{ \musicMap #proc #music #})
<< \new Staff = upper { \clef treble s1*3 }
\new Staff = middle { \clef alto s1*3 }
\new Staff = lower { \clef bass
\replaceContextChanges #'((down . lower) (up . middle))
\autochange { a4 b d' e' }
\replaceContextChanges #'((down . middle) (up . upper))
\autochange { a4 b d' e' }
\replaceContextChanges #'((down . upper) (up . lower))
\autochange { a4 b d' e' }
} >>
-- Aaron Hill
Re: Articulation mark & slur placement
Well, if we’re doing everything the way Elaine Gould wants us to, then:
- articulation should go generally go next to the notehead, not next to
the stem; but
- the marcato mark usually goes above the staff, regardless of stem
direction. (Note: not directly above the stemm, but above the staff).
So one could fix the problem for up-stemmed notes simply by putting the marcato
accent above the staff (and tweaking its vertical placement.) But the problem
would remain for the same snippet an octave higher, with down-stemmed notes.
Interestingly, the accent mark > *does* behave the way I want it to in
the code below. Effectively, I want the marcato mark (and the “staccato
wedge”) to behave like the accent mark in the code below, rather than behaving
like the staccato or tenuto marks.
\relative c' {
d'4-^( e4 f4-.) r4
d4->( e4 f4-.) r4
d4-.( e4 f4-.) r4
d4--( e4 f4-.) r4
d4-!( e4 f4-.) r4
}
Mike Seifert
> On Dec 19, 2020, at 7:49 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> Mike
>
> Any requirement that the marcato to be below the note?
>
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lilypond-user
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
> Michael Seifert
> Sent: Saturday, December 19, 2020 3:10 PM
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Articulation mark & slur placement
>
> The following code
>
> \relative c' {
> d4-^( e4 f4-.) r4
> }
>
> produces a slur with all articulation marks “inside” the slur. Typically,
> however, articulation marks are supposed to go “outside” the first note of a
> slur: “Usually, only tenuto lines and staccato marks may go inside of the
> first and the last notes of a slur.” (“Behind Bars”, p. 121) If we follow
> this guideline in the excerpt above, the endpoint of the slur should be
> closer to the notehead than the marcato accent is. The staccato mark, on the
> other hand, is correctly placed.
>
> Is there a way to make it so that the “usual” placement occurs by default?
> Or do I need to tweak this manually for each articulation mark (other than
> staccato and tenuto) that begins a phrase?
>
> Mike Seifert
>
