Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Vaughan McAlley]

On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 at 23:54, Kieren MacMillan
 wrote:
> 3. The *single* serious argument against absolute music — that it requires 
> extra typing [of apostrophes and commas] — is essentially eliminated by using 
> an IDE like Frescobaldi: using MIDI input means I avoid typing note code 
> (including octavation symbols) almost entirely, and the transposition 
> functions let me instantaneously re-octavate large sections of code if that’s 
> ever required (which it basically never is). I believe we should be 
> encouraging users to use tools like Frescobaldi — because I believe their 
> coding lives would be made easier in *so* many ways — and the “crutch” of 
> \relative means there’s less incentive to do so in the early stages of the 
> learning curve (which is exactly when habits, good or bad, tend to be formed).

Using variables for pieces longer than two bars is probably more
crucial than teaching beginners the intricacies of using \transpose
inline.

I’ve been using MIDI for years and still use \relative. I mostly work
with vocal music and find it easier to read, and to me, propagating an
octave error to the end of the piece is a feature rather than a bug.
Frescobaldi happily processes \relative music as easily as it does
\absolute music.

If I sent a score to Kieran, the first thing he would spend 20 seconds
converting it to \absolute in Frescobaldi :-)

Vaughan

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Karlin High]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 7:36 PM Paul Scott  wrote:

> Any suggestions for small inexpensive MIDI keyboards?
>

I have an M-AUDIO Keystation 49e. Current version:



Also available in 61-key and 88-key versions, entire product family here:



Note it's strictly a midi input device. It cannot make any sound whatsoever
by itself.

When I was using it most, I had a free version of the Bome Midi Translator
software...



...to map unused MIDI-keys to text-keystrokes, and SpeedyMIDI for recording
the input:



Then I used midi2ly on the results.
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

RE: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Mogens Lemvig Hansen]

I would like to forward another argument for the use of \relative.
I have used Lilypond for several years, but I am certainly not a professional 
musician or music typesetter.  The music I set is not overly complicated - 
usually up to five of six (vocal) voices on up to maybe six pages.  I seem 
unable to remember which octave is c' through c''.  Memorizing this is likely 
simpler than memorizing that the derivative of arctan(x) is 1/(1+x²), but while 
the latter to me is rock solid, the former is a fleeting breath.  Therefore I 
always end up taking a wild guess for the first note of my \relative; once that 
note has been corrected, the rest is mostly right.  Using \absolute would, for 
me, be a nightmare of wrong octaves.

Regards,
Mogens

From: Paul Scott
Sent: March 16, 2021 15:56
To: Kieren MacMillan
Cc: David Kastrup; lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested 
transposition"]



> 3. The *single* serious argument against absolute music — that it requires 
> extra typing [of apostrophes and commas] — is essentially eliminated by using 
> an IDE like Frescobaldi: using MIDI input means I avoid typing note code 
> (including octavation symbols) almost entirely, and the transposition 
> functions let me instantaneously re-octavate large sections of code if that’s 
> ever required (which it basically never is). I believe we should be 
> encouraging users to use tools like Frescobaldi — because I believe their 
> coding lives would be made easier in *so* many ways — and the “crutch” of 
> \relative means there’s less incentive to do so in the early stages of the 
> learning curve (which is exactly when habits, good or bad, tend to be formed).

I am a copyist, not a composer.  I currently don’t have a MIDI keyboard. I 
enter everything through Emacs without a mouse for pitch, therefore haven’t 
considered tools like Frescobaldi so far.
I have been using \relative for many years and am aware of the problems.

Because of this discussion I have just started using \absolute for bass clef 
parts and I just noticed \fixed which I will start experimenting with.  Any 
other suggestions for my situation as described above?  

I will consider getting a small MIDI keyboard which would probably lead to 
experimenting with Frescobaldi.

Thanks for any other thoughts.

> 
> Making other people’s (especially newbies’) lives easier *is* ultimately what 
> I’m trying to do.

Agreed! 

Paul

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Paul Scott]

On 3/16/21 3:58 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

Paul Scott  writes:

I am a copyist, not a composer.  I currently don’t have a MIDI
keyboard. I enter everything through Emacs without a mouse for pitch,
therefore haven’t considered tools like Frescobaldi so far.
I have been using \relative for many years and am aware of the problems.

Because of this discussion I have just started using \absolute for
bass clef parts and I just noticed \fixed which I will start
experimenting with.  Any other suggestions for my situation as
described above?

I will consider getting a small MIDI keyboard which would probably
lead to experimenting with Frescobaldi.
Ah, but Emacs' MIDI input mode deals better with chorded notes.



Any suggestions for small inexpensive MIDI keyboards?

Paul

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan  writes:

> Hi David,
>
>> but Emacs' MIDI input mode deals better with chorded notes.
>
> It does?
> I find Frescobaldi’s “chord mode” works wonderfully.
> How does Emacs handle chorded notes, and what makes it better?

It doesn't confuse legato with chords.  Last time I checked Frescobaldi,
it was pretty awful with legato in chord mode.

Of course it is also convenient for me as an accordion player that I can
record one rendition in a keyboard macro and then replay it several
times, with Emacs listening to different MIDI channels each time.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi David,

> but Emacs' MIDI input mode deals better with chorded notes.

It does?
I find Frescobaldi’s “chord mode” works wonderfully.
How does Emacs handle chorded notes, and what makes it better?

Thanks,
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info

Problem with Mac OS X x86 32-bit: LilyPond 2.23.0-1

[Jacques Menu]

Hello,

I’m using Mac OS X Mojave 10.14.6 (32 bits), and I get this message when 
launching this version, which I just download from Lily’s web site at 
https://lilypond.org/development.html :



 dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/../lib/libintl.8.dylib
  Referenced from: 
/var/folders/jc/xrpy67_x6_vcjfzpzds_9_6mgn/T/AppTranslocation/1C54EF34-518E-4A6E-9E08-0C34C7830CCE/d/LilyPond-1.app/Contents/Resources/bin/lilypond
  Reason: image not found


The same occurs on the command line:

menu@macbookprojm: ~/Downloads/LilyPond-1.app/Contents/Resources/bin > 
./lilypond
dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/../lib/libintl.8.dylib
  Referenced from: 
/Users/menu/Downloads/LilyPond-1.app/Contents/Resources/bin/./lilypond
  Reason: image not found
Abort trap: 6

Any hint is welcome!

JM

Re: Rhythmic expressions and bar repeats in ChordNames

[Carl Sorensen]

On 3/16/21, 2:20 PM, "lilypond-user on behalf of Louis Guillaume" 
 wrote:

Hi - I have 2 somewhat related questions here dealing with ChordNames:

1. How would one add rhythmic expressions (such as slashes)

For example - in 4/4 I want a:m7 for 6 beats then e:7 for 2 beats, so 
the ChordNames look like:

| A-7| / / E7  |

You could \set the noChordSymbol to "/" and put a1:m7 r4 r4 e1:7 in the chord 
music.

See http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.20/Documentation/internals-big-page#chordnames  
for the documentation on the context properties for the ChordNames context.

Carl

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[David Kastrup]

Paul Scott  writes:

>> 3. The *single* serious argument against absolute music — that it
>> requires extra typing [of apostrophes and commas] — is essentially
>> eliminated by using an IDE like Frescobaldi: using MIDI input means
>> I avoid typing note code (including octavation symbols) almost
>> entirely, and the transposition functions let me instantaneously
>> re-octavate large sections of code if that’s ever required (which it
>> basically never is). I believe we should be encouraging users to use
>> tools like Frescobaldi — because I believe their coding lives would
>> be made easier in *so* many ways — and the “crutch” of \relative
>> means there’s less incentive to do so in the early stages of the
>> learning curve (which is exactly when habits, good or bad, tend to
>> be formed).
>
> I am a copyist, not a composer.  I currently don’t have a MIDI
> keyboard. I enter everything through Emacs without a mouse for pitch,
> therefore haven’t considered tools like Frescobaldi so far.
> I have been using \relative for many years and am aware of the problems.
>
> Because of this discussion I have just started using \absolute for
> bass clef parts and I just noticed \fixed which I will start
> experimenting with.  Any other suggestions for my situation as
> described above?
>
> I will consider getting a small MIDI keyboard which would probably
> lead to experimenting with Frescobaldi.

Ah, but Emacs' MIDI input mode deals better with chorded notes.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: why Kieren is a \relative evangelist [was “Re: Nested transposition"]

[Paul Scott]

> 3. The *single* serious argument against absolute music — that it requires 
> extra typing [of apostrophes and commas] — is essentially eliminated by using 
> an IDE like Frescobaldi: using MIDI input means I avoid typing note code 
> (including octavation symbols) almost entirely, and the transposition 
> functions let me instantaneously re-octavate large sections of code if that’s 
> ever required (which it basically never is). I believe we should be 
> encouraging users to use tools like Frescobaldi — because I believe their 
> coding lives would be made easier in *so* many ways — and the “crutch” of 
> \relative means there’s less incentive to do so in the early stages of the 
> learning curve (which is exactly when habits, good or bad, tend to be formed).

I am a copyist, not a composer.  I currently don’t have a MIDI keyboard. I 
enter everything through Emacs without a mouse for pitch, therefore haven’t 
considered tools like Frescobaldi so far.
I have been using \relative for many years and am aware of the problems.

Because of this discussion I have just started using \absolute for bass clef 
parts and I just noticed \fixed which I will start experimenting with.  Any 
other suggestions for my situation as described above?  

I will consider getting a small MIDI keyboard which would probably lead to 
experimenting with Frescobaldi.

Thanks for any other thoughts.

> 
> Making other people’s (especially newbies’) lives easier *is* ultimately what 
> I’m trying to do.

Agreed! 

Paul

Re: Rhythmic expressions and bar repeats in ChordNames

[Knute Snortum]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 1:45 PM Xavier Scheuer  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 21:19, Louis Guillaume  wrote:
> >
> > Hi - I have 2 somewhat related questions here dealing with ChordNames:
> >
> > 1. How would one add rhythmic expressions (such as slashes)
> >
> > For example - in 4/4 I want a:m7 for 6 beats then e:7 for 2 beats, so
> > the ChordNames look like:
> >
> > | A-7| / / E7  |
> >
> >
> > 2. If I "\set ChordChanges = ##f" can the repeated chord symbol be a
> > bar-repeat sign instead of a repeated chord symbol? At least if it's
> > on the same line?
> >
> > I've tried doing
> >
> > \repeat percent 2 a:m7
> >
> > but it just omits the chord symbol in that case.
>
> Hello Louis,
>
> No idea about 1., but for 2. you could add the repeat percent (and double and 
> slash) engravers to the ChordNames context.
>
> \chords {
>   \repeat percent 2 a4:m7
> }
>
> \layout {
>   \context {
> \ChordNames
> \consists "Percent_repeat_engraver"
> \consists "Double_percent_repeat_engraver"
> \consists "Slash_repeat_engraver"
> \override ChordName.Y-offset = #-1
> % delete the following two lines if you don't need barlines:
> \override BarLine.bar-extent = #'(-2 . 2)
> \consists "Bar_engraver"
>   }
> }
>
> Based on LSR snippet #993
> https://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=993
>
> Cheers,
> Xavier
>
> --
> Xavier Scheuer 
>

Not exactly what you asked for, but I like:

\version "2.22.0"

beats = \relative { \improvisationOn b'4 b b b | b b b b }
chrds = \chordmode { a1:m7 | s2 e:7 }

<<
  \new ChordNames {
\chrds
  }
  \new Staff \beats
>>

--
Knute Snortum

Re: Rhythmic expressions and bar repeats in ChordNames

[Xavier Scheuer]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 21:19, Louis Guillaume  wrote:
>
> Hi - I have 2 somewhat related questions here dealing with ChordNames:
>
> 1. How would one add rhythmic expressions (such as slashes)
>
> For example - in 4/4 I want a:m7 for 6 beats then e:7 for 2 beats, so
> the ChordNames look like:
>
> | A-7| / / E7  |
>
>
> 2. If I "\set ChordChanges = ##f" can the repeated chord symbol be a
> bar-repeat sign instead of a repeated chord symbol? At least if it's
> on the same line?
>
> I've tried doing
>
> \repeat percent 2 a:m7
>
> but it just omits the chord symbol in that case.

Hello Louis,

No idea about 1., but for 2. you could add the repeat percent (and double
and slash) engravers to the ChordNames context.

\chords {
  \repeat percent 2 a4:m7
}

\layout {
  \context {
\ChordNames
\consists "Percent_repeat_engraver"
\consists "Double_percent_repeat_engraver"
\consists "Slash_repeat_engraver"
\override ChordName.Y-offset = #-1
% delete the following two lines if you don't need barlines:
\override BarLine.bar-extent = #'(-2 . 2)
\consists "Bar_engraver"
  }
}

Based on LSR snippet #993
https://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=993

Cheers,
Xavier

-- 
Xavier Scheuer 

Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

Hi Jan,

But it only works if there's no clash with the time signature. So you 
can have three arguments in a 3/4 or 3/2 or 6/8 but not in a 4/4. 
Conversely, you can have four tremolo pitches in a 4/4 but not 3 -- at 
least not without the kind of hack devised by Lukas in the first 
response to my email.


And then again, to do so without generating warnings from LP, I 
suppose you would indeed have to modify tremolo properties on a more 
fundamental level. That's currently beyond my LP knowledge, however.


I think we needn't worry too much about that warning: It states that 
some calculation of stem lengths (which make sense for the "c32 g f" 
expression if taken without the \repeat tremolo) yields an unlikely 
value. I don't understand the internals at the moment, and I agree that 
it would be nice to have a solution that does not trigger warnings, but 
I wouldn't mind just suppressing the warning.


Thanks to Aaron Hill, there's even a nice way to suppress the right 
amount (3) of expected instances of that warning (taken from 
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2019-09/msg00326.html). 
So, what about:


\version "2.22.0"

#(define ly:expect-warning-times
   (lambda args
 (for-each (lambda _ (apply ly:expect-warning (cdr args)))
   (iota (car args)

\new Staff \relative {
  a'4 b c d
  \omit Dots
  \once\override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 1)
  #(ly:expect-warning-times 3 "weird stem size, check for narrow beams")
  \repeat tremolo 16 { { c32*2/3 g f } }
  \undo\omit Dots
  a4 b c d
}

I'm not even convinced that I would call this solution a "hack" (of 
course it's no use arguing about that term):


- It is the correct music (try exchanging "tremolo" by "unfold"!).
- The dots that I had to suppress manually actually make sense: 16 
groups of notes consisting of three 32's each do amount to 3*16/32 = 3/2 
of a whole measure, after all. So, what we generate is a 1.*2/3, and I 
don't mind having to tell LilyPond explicitly to engrave this by just 
omitting the dot.
- But I concede that LilyPond's default positioning of the beams isn't 
good enough. That might qualify as a bug, and the fact that manually 
supplying the placement triggers a warning doesn't help things - and of 
course having to suppress a warning is a bit hack-ish... :-)


I think what I want to say is that none of this involves, for example, 
deviating from the actual semantics of entered music ("hijacking 
staccato dots and turning them into flower-symbols"), or explicitly 
abusing side-effects of commands, etc. Instead, we write the actual 
music we want to hear and force-set only those layout parameters that 
LilyPond isn't at the moment ready to supply automagically.


Lukas

Rhythmic expressions and bar repeats in ChordNames

[Louis Guillaume]

Hi - I have 2 somewhat related questions here dealing with ChordNames:

1. How would one add rhythmic expressions (such as slashes)

For example - in 4/4 I want a:m7 for 6 beats then e:7 for 2 beats, so 
the ChordNames look like:


   | A-7| / / E7  |


2. If I "\set ChordChanges = ##f" can the repeated chord symbol be a
   bar-repeat sign instead of a repeated chord symbol? At least if it's
   on the same line?

I've tried doing

\repeat percent 2 a:m7

but it just omits the chord symbol in that case.



Any help would be great!

--
Louis

Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Dijkhuizen, J.F. van]

Thanks, Carl!


The rule about \repeat tremolo expecting 2 musical arguments is no longer 
up-to-date; I think 2.13 or 2.14 introduced the possibility of having more than 
two arguments.


But it only works if there's no clash with the time signature. So you can have 
three arguments in a 3/4 or 3/2 or 6/8 but not in a 4/4. Conversely, you can 
have four tremolo pitches in a 4/4 but not 3 -- at least not without the kind 
of hack devised by Lukas in the first response to my email.


And then again, to do so without generating warnings from LP, I suppose you 
would indeed have to modify tremolo properties on a more fundamental level. 
That's currently beyond my LP knowledge, however.


Jan



Van: Carl Sorensen 
Verzonden: dinsdag 16 maart 2021 19:21
Aan: Dijkhuizen, J.F. van; lilypond-user@gnu.org
Onderwerp: Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4






From: lilypond-user  
on behalf of "Dijkhuizen, J.F. van" 
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:26 AM
To: "lilypond-user@gnu.org" 
Subject: Three-note tremolo in 4/4



Hello everyone,



I'm trying to fit a three-note tremolo into a 4/4 measure.  I've sort of been 
able to do this as follows:



\version "2.22.0"

\relative c''

{

\repeat tremolo 8 {\tuplet 3/4 { g32 d c }}

}



(Of course you could hide the tuplet numbers here.)



or:



\version "2.22.0"

\relative c''

\new Staff = "Example" {

\time 4/4

\set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = 3/4

\scaleDurations 4/3 { \repeat tremolo 8 { g32 d c } }



While both look more or less OK, the notes appear as dotted half notes, rather 
than as whole notes. They should be whole notes, since the tremolo lasts the 
entire measure but I can't figure out how to do this.



Does anybody know of a way to create a 3-note tremolo in 4/4 time in which all 
three notes appear as whole notes?



It appears that this cannot be done with \repeat tremolo.  I’m a little bit 
surprised that your code worked.  Note the following from the Notation 
Reference:



The \repeat tremolo syntax expects exactly two notes within the braces



This could probably be hacked (anything can be in LilyPond).  It looks like you 
would need to modify the properties of tremolo-repeated-music.  
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.22/Documentation/internals/tremolorepeatedmusic

LilyPond Internals Reference: 1.1.96 
TremoloRepeatedMusic
lilypond.org
LilyPond Internals Reference: 1.1.96 TremoloRepeatedMusic





I have no experience working with this type of music, so I can’t give you any 
pointers beyond this.



Carl

Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Dijkhuizen, J.F. van]

Hi Lukas,


Thanks so much for this! It does indeed work (though it does indeed also 
generate a LilyPond warning about "weird stem size").


I'm fairly new to LP and my experiment with timeSignatureFraction et cetera was 
essentially an attempt to juggle around with the 3-against-4 problem that I was 
running up against.


Jan



Van: Lukas-Fabian Moser  namens Lukas-Fabian 
Moser 
Verzonden: dinsdag 16 maart 2021 18:45
Aan: Dijkhuizen, J.F. van; lilypond-user@gnu.org
Onderwerp: Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4


Hi Jan,

I'm unsure what you want to accomplish with the manual setting of 
timeSignatureFraction etc.


But if I understand you correctly, I think


\version "2.22.0"

\new Staff \relative {
  a'4 b c d
  \omit Dots
  \once\override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 1)
  \repeat tremolo 16 { \scaleDurations 2/3 { c32 g f } }
  \undo\omit Dots
  a4 b c d
}


should come close to your MuseScore mockup (and I think its semantic is 
correct). The manual positioning of Beam positions seems to be necessary, but 
it makes LilyPond complain with a warning - which could be silenced if push 
comes to shove.


Lukas

Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Carl Sorensen]

From: lilypond-user  
on behalf of "Dijkhuizen, J.F. van" 
Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:26 AM
To: "lilypond-user@gnu.org" 
Subject: Three-note tremolo in 4/4


Hello everyone,



I'm trying to fit a three-note tremolo into a 4/4 measure.  I've sort of been 
able to do this as follows:


\version "2.22.0"
\relative c''
{
\repeat tremolo 8 {\tuplet 3/4 { g32 d c }}
}


(Of course you could hide the tuplet numbers here.)



or:



\version "2.22.0"
\relative c''
\new Staff = "Example" {
\time 4/4
\set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = 3/4
\scaleDurations 4/3 { \repeat tremolo 8 { g32 d c } }


While both look more or less OK, the notes appear as dotted half notes, rather 
than as whole notes. They should be whole notes, since the tremolo lasts the 
entire measure but I can't figure out how to do this.



Does anybody know of a way to create a 3-note tremolo in 4/4 time in which all 
three notes appear as whole notes?



It appears that this cannot be done with \repeat tremolo.  I’m a little bit 
surprised that your code worked.  Note the following from the Notation 
Reference:


The \repeat tremolo syntax expects exactly two notes within the braces



This could probably be hacked (anything can be in LilyPond).  It looks like you 
would need to modify the properties of tremolo-repeated-music.  
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.22/Documentation/internals/tremolorepeatedmusic



I have no experience working with this type of music, so I can’t give you any 
pointers beyond this.



Carl

Re: Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Lukas-Fabian Moser]

Hi Jan,


Am 16.03.21 um 17:19 schrieb Dijkhuizen, J.F. van:


Hello everyone,


I'm trying to fit a three-note tremolo into a 4/4 measure.  I've sort 
of been able to do this as follows:



\version "2.22.0"
\relative c''
{
\repeat tremolo 8 {\tuplet 3/4 { g32 d c }}
}


(Of course you could hide the tuplet numbers here.)


or:


\version "2.22.0"

\relative c''
\new Staff = "Example" {
\time 4/4
\set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = 3/4
\scaleDurations 4/3 { \repeat tremolo 8 { g32 d c } }

While both look more or less OK, the notes appear as dotted half 
notes, rather than as whole notes. They should be whole notes, since 
the tremolo lasts the entire measure but I can't figure out how to do 
this.


I'm unsure what you want to accomplish with the manual setting of 
timeSignatureFraction etc.



But if I understand you correctly, I think


\version "2.22.0"

\new Staff \relative {
  a'4 b c d
  \omit Dots
  \once\override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 1)
  \repeat tremolo 16 { \scaleDurations 2/3 { c32 g f } }
  \undo\omit Dots
  a4 b c d
}


should come close to your MuseScore mockup (and I think its semantic is 
correct). The manual positioning of Beam positions seems to be 
necessary, but it makes LilyPond complain with a warning - which could 
be silenced if push comes to shove.



Lukas

Three-note tremolo in 4/4

[Dijkhuizen, J.F. van]

Hello everyone,


I'm trying to fit a three-note tremolo into a 4/4 measure.  I've sort of been 
able to do this as follows:


\version "2.22.0"
\relative c''
{
\repeat tremolo 8 {\tuplet 3/4 { g32 d c }}
}


(Of course you could hide the tuplet numbers here.)


or:


\version "2.22.0"

\relative c''
\new Staff = "Example" {
\time 4/4
\set Staff.timeSignatureFraction = 3/4
\scaleDurations 4/3 { \repeat tremolo 8 { g32 d c } }


While both look more or less OK, the notes appear as dotted half notes, rather 
than as whole notes. They should be whole notes, since the tremolo lasts the 
entire measure but I can't figure out how to do this.


Does anybody know of a way to create a 3-note tremolo in 4/4 time in which all 
three notes appear as whole notes? A bit like the MuseScore mock-up below:


[cid:7e922d93-4f40-4bfe-83cf-b751840cdc45]

Thanks for your help!


Jan van Dijkhuizen

Re: lilypond-user Digest, Vol 220, Issue 40

[Christian Masser]

I used a similar workflower earlier, but without Frescobaldi. I coded a
small script years ago that would convert MIDI-input to keystrokes, but at
some point I lost track of maintaining it (didn't do much with Lilypond for
a time then).
But I remember using the pitch up/down buttons on my Korg nanoKey for
switching between sharps and flats. (I also did a second pass for durations
then.)

If anyone's interested I can try and look whether I find it somewhere, but
what I can read here, Frescobaldis system should be more sophisticated and
as I was using Xorg to emulate the keystrokes it's probably Linux-only.

All the best
Christian


Kieren MacMillan  schrieb am So., 14. März
2021, 19:24:

> Hi Peter,
>
> > How do you manage enharmonics? Is the black key between C and D a C
> sharp or D flat? Unless the music is completely tonal, I'd have thought you
> spent more time adjusting the accidentals than simply inputting the music
> from the computer keyboard. But I may be wrong. Certainly in the song I was
> transcribing both accidentals are used in profusion.
>
> Most songs I transcribe are heavily tonal, and the accidentals tend to be
> consistent enough that Frescobaldi’s input setting (use the key signature
> whenever possible, favour sharps or favour flats when outside the k.s.)
> keeps outliers in the <5% range (and often literally zero!). Where I do
> have to adjust, I do it in the second/proofreading pass, and that change is
> very quick to implement.
>
> That being said, I’ve also used my workflow on Second Viennese School
> transcriptions, and while obviously slower than tonal music it’s still
> impressively fast to crank out that kind of note-code.
>
> > how does it manage durations?
>
> I just “plunk” each note out one by one, with no particular care about
> durations; in the “second half” of the input process, I pass through and
> add durations. My workflow is more finessed than that — e.g. if I come up
> to a large run of 16th notes, I’ll stop the playing process to add a “16”
> after the first one — but I do find that multi-tasking slows me down, so I
> tend to just play all the notes through in a single pass (using the MIDI
> keyboard, ignoring durations), then add durations (using the computer
> keyboard/numberpad) as a second pass. I can usually “code” the pitch
> portion of an entire vocal line of a standard (~3') musical theatre song in
> less than 30s; “running string lines” can be played at maximum speed (n.b.
> my undergrad degree was in piano performance), so I can get dozens or
> hundreds of notes from a string part into pitch-code form in less than a
> minute; etc.
>
> There is a “QuickKeys” plug-in somewhere that lets you trigger durations
> with one hand (on the keypad) while playing in the notes using the other
> hand (on the MIDI keyboard)… but my current workflow is so fast that any
> potential speed gain (and it isn’t immediately obvious to me there would be
> one!) is countered by the learning/coordination curve I’d have to climb.
>
> > And can one input a piano piece (as opposed to a single voice)? Two
> hands, lots of splitting into separate voices.
>
> 1. Chords are wicked fast, obviously: just play all the notes (it doesn’t
> even have to be "exactly together"!), and Frescobaldi does the right thing.
>
> 2. The way my code is formatted, every voice has its own variable — so I
> just play each voice into the right variable, and combine them later in the
> score block.
>
> Naturally, every tune is different in terms of the challenges to get the
> data-entry done. But now that I’ve found this “MIDI -> pitch code, then add
> durations” workflow, I’m kicking my 12-year-ago-self that it took me so
> long to get on board with Frescobaldi+MIDI.
>
> Hope that helps!
> Kieren.
> 
>
> Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
>
>
>