Questions about ragged-right and margins
Hello All, I have two questions related to ragged-right. #1: Is it possible to change the behavior of ragged-right so that rather than a system being an arbitrary length, the length snaps to certain intervals? The out-of-the-box behavior of ragged-right = ##t can result in systems that are minutely different lengths, which isn't particularly attractive. Instead, it would be nice to snap to, say increments of 10% of the maximum line length. I recognize that it's still possible to have two similar-length lines that snap in opposite directions. #2: Given #1 above, is it possible to set the margins of the score dynamically so that the longest system is centered on the page, and all other systems are left-aligned with it? Ideally, everything outside the score would take the full margin/line length defined in the \paper block. I'm typesetting a psalter with tune pairings. We want to generally match the layout of a previously published hymnal that was done in Finale with some of the above layout decisions. We're doing this project in LP because the scope of the project (195 psalm paraphrases, each paired and notated with multiple common tunes, prepared in multiple slide and print formats) would be infeasible without the ability to automate the work using LP and a language like Python. Thanks in advance, Carl Peterson
Question about page break time indices
All, I am involved in some choral recording projects where we are having the singers sing from projected slides. To aid in timing, pitch, etc., we have it set up where they have headphones feeding them the MIDI of the song being recorded as they sing. All of this is synchonored through the recording software, with the slides being pre-rendered to a video file. Right now, the music slides are being created in Finale (cringe), the MIDI is being manually input into the recording software because we've had issues with Finale's MIDI being accurate on tempo changes, and I am using Apple Keynote to render the slides to video using manual timings. I would like to use Lilypond to render the individual slides and the MIDI, then use ffmpeg and some other things to programmatically render the video itself. The issue is that in order to do that, I need accurate timing information on slide changes. Which gets to my question/request. Is there a way, when Lilypond is running, for it to output some sort of auxiliary file with some kind of tick/time code information about each page? In other words, what is the time index of the first note on a given slide/page? With this, I can work with scripting tools to work backwards from each time code to generate the still images for the transitions from slide to slide. Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
How to make staff spacing with lyrics fixed
Hey all, How do I get the spacing between lyrics and the surrounding staves to be equal and fixed, regardless of whether noteheads/stems collide with the lyrics? I've tried a number of different combinations of settings and can't get the stems ignored. Also, I noticed that the spacing depends on whether the lyric letters have any descenders. Any way to make it based on the baseline? Thanks, Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Problems installing Frescobaldi for Mac, issue with py27-pyqt4 install
All (but particularly anyone with experience/knowledge on fresco for mac), I'm trying to install the latest stable of Frescobaldi on my Mac (10.9), and it gets to installing the py27-pyqt4 dependency, and fails with this message: Error: org.macports.configure for port py27-pyqt4 returned: configure failure: command execution failed Error: Failed to install py27-pyqt4 Please see the log file for port py27-pyqt4 for details: /opt/local/var/macports/logs/_opt_local_var_macports_sources_rsync.macports.org_release_tarballs_ports_python_py-pyqt4/py27-pyqt4/main.log Error: The following dependencies were not installed: py27-pyqt4 py27-python-poppler-qt4 poppler-qt4-mac autoconf m4 automake curl curl-ca-bundle libidn lcms2 openjpeg15 jbigkit poppler poppler-data To report a bug, follow the instructions in the guide: http://guide.macports.org/#project.tickets Error: Processing of port frescobaldi failed Any suggestions on how to get through this? Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Survey: Git (G)UIs
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Daniel Rosen drose...@gmail.com wrote: I use SourceTree for almost everything; the exceptions are a couple of commands that I can't figure out how to do in the GUI (e.g. git stash apply). I learned/am learning Git by using SourceTree, and I haven't had much difficulty understanding the concepts. What has confused me somewhat so far is the workflows, and how branching can best be incorporated into them. SourceTree isn't available for Linux, last time I checked...I use it on Mac/Windows for my other repos, but alas, not for LP. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Survey: Git (G)UIs
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Daniel Rosen drose...@gmail.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Carl Peterson [mailto:carlopeter...@gmail.com] SourceTree isn't available for Linux, last time I checked...I use it on Mac/Windows for my other repos, but alas, not for LP. Carl P. That's correct. I guess I should clarify that I don't use Git to develop LilyPond itself because I'm not a developer. :-P I use it to manage a couple of my larger LilyPond projects. DR Ah. That's what I do as well. I am moving from lily-git.tcl to command line for dev work, but I use SourceTree for managing my LP projects on my Macs. The problem I have is that I moved from using Dropbox to store my project files to using git, and I have to remember to commit/push my changes if I want to use them on another computer. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Is it possible to invert the two-sided option?
On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Speldosa l4rs...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to use \paper{two-sided = ##t} in order to have different
margins for even and odd pages. However, when activating this option, odd
pages get larger right margins and even pages get larger left margins. I'd
like to have it the other way around, so that odd pages get larger left
margins and even pages larger right margins. Is this possible to achieve?
See
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/horizontal-spacing-paper-variables#paper-variables-for-two_002dsided-mode
for the parameters you need to add to your \paper block.
Cheers,
Carl P.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Weirdness With Fonts and Font Tree Snippet
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com wrote: I figured I'd wait till 2.18.0 to see if something magical occurred, but now I know for sure... When I use the snippet: #(define fonts (make-pango-font-tree Linux Libertine G Nimbus Sans Luxi Mono (/ myStaffSize 20))) On my Mac (which is Snow Leopard) I do not get Linux Libertine but some sans serif font (I imagine it is Nimbus Sans). I promise I have the font installed, and (for some reason) I remember it worked a while ago... but now I have no clue. It works properly with Windows machines (both of my work machines are windows) and have shown no signs of error. I also tried installing the font from the source, (it was under Linux Libertine O) and tried it too. I did try the TTF version as well; alas, to no avail. I imagine this may be an internal thing (with respect to my personal computer) but was wondering anyone if ya'll had any thoughts in regard to this matter. It would also be nice to know if there is a clear cut way to change the default internal fonts to LilyPond (when I see all the developer jargon, I get all fuzzy and dizzy). See attached for default output when I run it through my Mac. Sincerely, Josh I've experienced the same issue before. Is the font installed at the User level or at the Computer level? I seem to recall that it has to be at the Computer level. I also think you might need to use something like LinLibertine as the font name...I'll have to go back later and look at the scores I've done using Linux Libertine O. (and is Linux Libertine G above a typo or really what you have in your score? In which case you may have your problem). Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Weirdness With Fonts and Font Tree Snippet
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com wrote: see attached. It was lengthy. IC, Josh I didn't find an entry for Linux Libertine in your listing. On my machine, I checked Font Book and it looks like I have it installed both as a user copy and as a system copy. And Linux Libertine O works for me. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Weirdness With Fonts and Font Tree Snippet
On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 7:38 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, so I did the obvious and went through the Fontbook and literally clicked and dragged the fonts into the computer (I guess that's the sys place) tab, and then I re-typeset the file: It worked... Well... there's for a lot of heartburn! Thank y'all for helping out! I can't believe that to get that effect it worked that *easily*. IC, Josh Indeed, I have found that on Mac OS X, the system is very picky about what it sees and doesn't see. For instance, I use the SkyFonts program to install fonts from the Google Fonts site. Apparently, it doesn't install them as system fonts, so if I want to use them in LilyPond (and PT Sans Narrow, one of the fonts in that collection, is the font I currently use for LilyPond), I have to go ahead and download the ZIP file and install them through FontBook, but almost every other program I use has no issue with it. I think Inkscape might be picky as well, but I don't do enough stuff with those fonts in that program to remember. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: arrrgh. manuals download link hard to find...
Note at the bottom of the Nanuals page: Manual formats The LilyPond manuals generally come in three formats: split HTML, big HTML and PDF. Split HTML is good for reading online. Big HTML (and some of these can be very big) contains the whole manual in a single page. PDF is available for downloading and using offline. To get to these 3 formats, follow the links that read details of and then the manual name. Each manual has a link in parentheses that says details of [manual name] Click there, and all three formats are available. To your point, not the most obvious, but it is there. Perhaps this explanation should be at the top of the page. Cheers, Carl P. On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Tom Cloyd tomcloydm...@gmail.com wrote: Updating everything, due to new release of Ly, I'm trying to get the new manuals. Running into an old problem: On the homepage, on the right, in the Quick Links columns, there's a software download link, and link to the manuals. I always assume the manual link will lead also to a download, which it does not. It merely duplicates the link already in the menu at the top of the page. Why give me what I already have? Well, ok - convenience. But... browsing to the manuals page, OR the downloads page, my search for a clearly labeled manuals download link yields absolutely nothing. Not helpful. Not all the world lives eternally in connection with the Internet. Some of us NEED to have local versions of everything on our box so we can always work, regardless of situation. WE need a full manual download. If only it could be found Well, it DOES exist, if you are persistent enough in looking: on the manual page, in the Other material section, click the all link. PLEASE - could we not make the manuals download page location a LOT more obvious than this? Just a thought. Tom -- ~~~ Tom Cloyd, MS MA (LMHC, WA State) Cedar City / St. George, UT, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332 * t...@tomcloyd.com (email) TomCloyd.com (website) * Sleight of Mind blog: Sleightmind.com (mental health issues) * Trauma Psych blog: http://thetraumapsych.wordpress.com * Trauma! A PTSD blog: http://www.healthyplace.com/blogs/traumaptsdblog/ * Founder: Google+ Trauma and Dissociation Education and Advocacy community ~~~ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Question about parallel git repos of source/output files
I have a question for the git experts on the list. I've migrated my current collection of lilypond projects to a git repository so that I can migrate the source files among my various workstations and use versioning as part of my editing process (so that I can theoretically keep track of my changes). Since I'm working primarily on my iMac, using the packaged editor, all my output files are going to the same folder as my source files. I don't want them to necessarily be wrapped up in my git repo for my source files, so I have the exclude file set to ignore .pdf and .midi files. That said, I would like to have a managed repository of my PDF and MIDI files so that they can be shared from one computer to another. So I have a couple of questions regarding that: 1) Is it possible to reconfigure the default LilyPond editor on a Mac to output to a different location (something I did on the command line in Linux)? Then I would be able to just shove those to a different folder and either include them as separate files in the main repo or run a separate git repo there. 2) Is it possible to interleave two repos so that in one folder in the main repo, the main repo ignores PDF and MIDI files and the secondary repo *only* tracks PDFs and MIDIs? The files that are actually compiled are in a subfolder of the main repository folder. Thanks, Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MIDI output: Possible to change PPQ?
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:47 AM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: I was just searching, without success, for a way to change the number of pulses-per-quarter in MIDI output. The default, 384, handles double divisions and triplets, but quintuplets are inexact. I would rather use 480 for this particular file. Am I missing something, since 384 / 4 = 96? Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MIDI output: Possible to change PPQ?
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 12:47 AM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: I was just searching, without success, for a way to change the number of pulses-per-quarter in MIDI output. The default, 384, handles double divisions and triplets, but quintuplets are inexact. I would rather use 480 for this particular file. Am I missing something, since 384 / 4 = 96? Carl P. Apparently I am, since quint = 1/5. Ignore my ramblings. It's 1AM here. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond for ios
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Am 13.12.2013 14:14, schrieb Stephanie Mitchell: Hi all, Just wondering if there is an app for ios that can write and print lilypond files? I'm looking for a ios app that will do this, so I can print music while away from home. Thanks, Steph At least currently that's not possible IISC. One problem is that compiling scores has high demands on processing power, so it may never appear on ios or android. What's theoretically possible (but I don't know of an implementation yet is having a server application where you could send your .ly files to, that produces a PDF (or SVG) and sends that back to your device. That's not a tip what you could do now but a more general idea what would be possible. The closest I can think of to what Urs described would be something like LilyBin (http://lilybin.com/), which allows you to connect to a Dropbox account and load/edit ly source files and compile them, then download either a PDF or MIDI. I don't know what the usability on iOS is, and I would probably not recommend it for the iPhone. I would suggest using a plain text editor that can work with Dropbox, then compiling in LilyBin. The caveat that I've seen is that if your ly file throws any errors, you will only see that there *is* an error, and not what that error is. I've had it throw an error (and not display any output) when it has used the default 2.16 compiler and I had a 2.17 \version statement, so it is a bit sensitive there. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: tranpose relative to the last pitch
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Tom van der Hoeven
t...@vanderhoeven.bizwrote:
Suppose I have
music = \relative c'{c b a g f e e f g a b c}
my instrument is limited so it cannot play the pitch f end below
I have to raise f e e f by a terts of an octave
Is there a function shift or can it be made such that
music = \relative c'{c b a g \terts{f e e f} g a b c}
is equivalent to
\relative c'{c b a g a g g a g a b c}
if you use :
terts = #(define-music-function (parser location ploep) (ly:music?)
#{ \transpose c e \relative c' $ploep #})
the c' after \relative should actualy be the last-pitch (in the example g)
Help will be appreciated
Tom
A couple of things:
I don't think you can do what you're wanting to do in relative mode. I
think you need to use
music = { c' b a g \terts{f e e f} g a b c' }
and keep everything in absolute, at least, if you're going to embed a
Scheme function like this. I can foresee possible combinations of this that
are going to make your music go all over the place.
Secondly, as a musical point, what you're wanting is not what you're going
to get. Your function looks like it should produce
c' b a g a gis gis a g a b c
What you ideally need is a function that takes a musical expression and a
cutoff note, then inspects each note and translates the note (raises it) if
it falls outside the range. I'm not versed enough in Scheme to produce this
function, but it would provide the flexibility of allowing you to use
relative mode if so desired, and would not require you to explicitly define
the notes to transpose ahead of time.
Cheers,
Carl P.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: survey on multiple development versions
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Mike Solomon m...@mikesolomon.org wrote: Hey all, I recently e-mailed the development list about multiple concurrent development versions and I’d like to ask users, especially those currently using the development version, to take the time to respond to a question regarding the proposal. If lilypond.org were to propose multiple development versions (say 5 instead of 1), each offering a different set of experimental features (including the canonical development version), and if lilypond.orgoffered information on which versions were in need of testing by what types of users, would you be interested in helping out by doing some typesetting with these alternative versions? The problem I see is an issue of mixing and matching. What if there is a feature I want to use on Development Version A and one I want to use on Development Version B, within the same score? I also foresee a multiplication of the issues regarding who is using what version on this list, as in: Today: A: I have this problem. I am using version 2.17.3 B: We fixed this problem in 2.17.23 With multiple versions: A: I have this problem. I am using version 2.19.A.3 B: This was fixed on version 2.19.B A: Okay, that fixed that, now I have this problem. C: This was fixed on version 2.19.C A: I'm confused. How do I fix both of these problems? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: survey on multiple development versions
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:23 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: If we have branches with personal interests, it must become more feasible for the respective authors with personal interests to provide binaries if they consider that a good idea. Any solution that will only work via the Phil, do more route is not going to scale. This, to me, sounds like a plug-in solution is needed, at least for things that do not involve changing the C++ code (and maybe even then). The question is, if we're looking at releasing these binaries to reflect personal interest, how much are they actually going to be used? I have the feeling, though it may be unjustified, that while there may be a few people who would grab a binary with an experimental feature (self included, if it is one that I'm interested in and know something about), the use of the binaries may not be enough to justify the extra effort to make them available. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: survey on multiple development versions
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Simon Bailey si...@bailey.at wrote: for instance: - the cool new features in 2.17 were \tuplet, tighter spacing, dot.notation.of.objects and \markLengthOn, several articulations feature; - 2.15 didn't have much exciting for me in it -- here i stuck with 2.14 until 2.16 came out. - 2.13 was a good development version with the instrument names fixed, q for repeating chords, dotted/dashed slurs, two-sided margins, white-out, segno bar-line, cresc text spanners, the partcombiner, cueDuringWithClef, beam collisions, ... [2.14. was a GOOD release] My personal upgrading experience is similar. I had a hiatus of a couple of years (at least) when I didn't use LilyPond (dating back to around 2.13.17 or so, IIRC), but recently, I was using 2.16.2 on my main computer until it became necessary to tweak things to fit a stylesheet I was working on, then I installed LilyDev on my iMac and eventually fired up my old Debian box. I used 2.17.26 or so for awhile, until I found out that the most recent releases incorporate MIDI panning, so right now I do my work on a hacked version of 2.17.95 for Mac (copying in modified versions of the part combiner Scheme file and the Feta font). Even though it doesn't take much to integrate those hacks now, I'm reluctant to do much upgrading unless there's a benefit to doing so. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: on marketing
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Richard Shann rich...@rshann.plus.comwrote: only some people are interested in everything, many want just their own bits of interest. Denemo is customizable to a great extent, all menus and palettes can be modified; most users will not do so, but it would be possible to create specialized versions of Denemo for many different areas of interest. Richard Agreed. But consider this. One of the things that the Adobe Creative Suite programs have is customizable workspaces. They have a number of workflow-specific workspaces (for print production or typography, etc.), but then they also have workspaces that emulate other Creative Suite programs so that you can work in one program similarly to another. For instance, when I use Adobe Illustrator, I can use the Like Photoshop workspace if I'm familiar with that program, or Like InDesign if I'm familiar with it. The workspaces aren't 100% identical, since each has its own set of tools, but it makes it easier to use. The workspace customization includes menu options, toolbars and palettes (and perhaps a couple of other things I can't think of offhand). Similarly, you could offer the user a Like Finale or Like Sibelius or Like MuseScore environment. While not identical, a similar logic to how those palettes/toolbars are constructed could be applied to ease the learning curve. This would not require specialized versions, per se, so much as preconfigured preferences, perhaps? Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond editing environments
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Would a section Online Tools better be placed between the full-fledged editors (Frescobaldi/Denemo) and Text editors or after the Text editors. I think we could consider not only score editors but also tools like - http://scalematcher.adamspiers.org/ or - a tool for harmonic analysis someone announced just recently and which I unfortunately don't find right now. Urs I think here you're starting to cross the line from editors/tools (things that help you use and work with LilyPond) into more of a Gallery (things that people have done with LilyPond). Scale Matcher is an interesting, This is what someone has done with LilyPond (similar to Pondings). The difference between it and Lilybin is that Lilybin is an online editing environment that compiles whatever the user wants. Scale Matcher only does one thing through a user interface. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond editing environments
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Would a section Online Tools better be placed between the full-fledged editors (Frescobaldi/Denemo) and Text editors or after the Text editors. I think we could consider not only score editors but also tools like - http://scalematcher.adamspiers.org/ or - a tool for harmonic analysis someone announced just recently and which I unfortunately don't find right now. Urs I think here you're starting to cross the line from editors/tools (things that help you use and work with LilyPond) into more of a Gallery (things that people have done with LilyPond). Scale Matcher is an interesting, This is what someone has done with LilyPond (similar to Pondings). The difference between it and Lilybin is that Lilybin is an online editing environment that compiles whatever the user wants. Scale Matcher only does one thing through a user interface. To clarify on this point, I would separate Gallery items into a separate page from anything related to installing/using LilyPond. This is fairly normal and I would want to maintain a clear distinction between things that let you work with LilyPond to do what *you* want, and things that either (a) have no functional use (e.g., postings of LilyPond-engraved works), or (b) are limited-scope utilities (such as Scale Matcher), particularly in the latter case so that someone doesn't go to the site mistakenly thinking they can use it to do x (in spite of clear disclaimers to the contrary). Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Website Work
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Am 08.12.2013 23:23, schrieb Federico Bruni: 2013/12/6 Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com These problems should be recorded in our tracker. So far I've seen 2 issues/feature requests: 1. improve SEO 2. associate a different color scheme to each manual I've added them: https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3714 https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3715 Two more I noticed: 1) Distinguish between internal and external links? Should be fairly easy through CSS. 2) Actually you're not really seeing on which page you're on because the only reference is a very small highlighting of the active menu item. I suggest to automatically place the @node name as a @heading on top of each website page. Urs I have something in development for #2 on Federico's list. I've parsed through enough of the texi2html script that I was able to insert CSS classes into the body tag that will allow me to color code each manual. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Website Work
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote: I have something in development for #2 on Federico's list. I've parsed through enough of the texi2html script that I was able to insert CSS classes into the body tag that will allow me to color code each manual. One thing that is very strange that I've noticed in working on this is that if I modify Documentation/lilypond-texi2html.init (which impacts virtually every part of the website) and build the documentation, nothing happens, but if I change one of the stylesheets (which is a superficial thing that does not, to my knowledge, impact the building of any other file), the entire documentation gets rebuilt. This is backwards. When I've been working on the lilypond-texi2html.init file, I've been having to go in and touch one of the manual pages (usually changes.tely, since it's probably the smallest and easiest to build) to get it to recompile that manual so I can see what my changes did. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond Website Work
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.comwrote: 2013/12/6 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: A suggestion from my colleague: for a long time he kept confusing LM and NR, and he said that it would be nice if (for example) they had different color schemes so that one will know where to look at things (hmm, i remember seeing it in the blue manual...). Learning - Green book Using - White book Notation - Blue book Extending - Red book Internals - Black book A complete color _scheme_ might be distracting, but it may make sense to have a title or side bar or other obvious always on-screen element color-coded. +1 Okay, so I have a patch set ready to go with this. The only differences are that the Usage book is yellow, the Internals book is purple, and I made the Contributor's Guide black. Where should I submit the patches for review? I've tried reading the Contributor's Guide and I come up with about 3 or 4 different methods, and this sort of work is kind of in a no-man's land anyway. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: A thought on Windows Experience
On Dec 8, 2013 11:02 PM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 9, 2013 11:52 AM, Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com wrote: Mr. Harkins, Two or three hops are not too much for anyone that reads and follows directions. Then you have more faith than I in general usage patterns on the internet. (As in, you still think people read and follow directions online.) The easier approach might be to consolidate program downloads on one page. Two column format, offering LP downloads on the left side, text edit helps on the right. The chance of a new user downloading Frescobaldi or another tool is increased, however slightly. The odds of a user getting to a desired page decreases dramatically with each additional click required. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: A thought on Windows Experience
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 1:12 AM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: Carl's two-column approach is pretty much what I had in mind. Although, he suggests this would be only a slight improvement. I think it could be more than that. Suppose we introduce the downloads with a couple of paragraphs across the top: ~~ IMPORTANT: A complete working environment for LilyPond consists of two components: LilyPond itself, and a music editor. If you have installed only one of these, then you're not experiencing LilyPond's full power. NEW USERS: After installing LilyPond for your operating system, review the editors in the right-hand column and install one of them. Use the editor as your primary LilyPond interface. ~~ I didn't intend my statement to be intended as my thinking it is only a slight improvement. I meant primarily that regardless of however slight it *might* be, it is an improvement, nonetheless. The page flow I usually see is something like: Front page -- Download page. We have most of that. I think we need to find some way to make the front-ends like Frescobaldi and Denemo clearly visible on the downloads page. Go ahead and put in the disclaimer that these aren't maintained by the LP project itself (just to try to stave off confusion). The question that remains in my mind is whether it is more beneficial to redirect to the project site (to get specific install instructions) or to hotlink the install binaries. It's been awhile since I've installed an LP front-end to remember whether there are particular installation things that have to happen outside of download and run (I know there is for Frescobaldi for Mac, as has been discussed numerous times on this list). Perhaps coordinate with the people on the respective projects to arrange for a download link that always provides the latest stable version? As I'm beginning to learn my way around the website source files, I'd be willing to help out in implementing whatever is decided, once I get to a good spot on the rest of my list for site formatting. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: engraving comparisons and other promotional materials
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.comwrote: 2013/12/6 Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com: In particular, I would say that anything used should be incontrovertibly in the public domain (i.e., the older, the better). This is just impossible with comparisons like these ones - the finale/sibelius engravings cannot be old enough to be in public domain. Indeed. However, if someone can make new engravings from music that is in public domain and release or license them to the project, that's a different story. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: on marketing
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Richard Shann rich...@rshann.plus.comwrote: On Sat, 2013-12-07 at 18:11 +0100, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 07/12/13 18:07, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: Beethoven's 104 Piano Sonatas That would be 32 :-) But 104 separate movements in total ... Is that because MuseScore cannot handle scores with several movements, I wonder. Contrast that with a LilyPond score with multiple movements, appendices, table of contents ... I generated a few scores with all that via Denemo a while back. But still people carry on using MuseScore. Richard Richard, I use MuseScore for quick and dirty composition work...I'm not trying to make it pretty, I'm just trying to get it on a page and be able to directly manipulate it. I've done that with Finale when I've had some version of it installed on my computer. I can do that with MuseScore. I tried a couple of times to do it with Denemo and really didn't have a good experience. Part of it is the very menu-centric approach (too cluttered), but in general, it just wasn't intuitive to me as a GUI. MuseScore does well enough for what I do with it. I think that initial experience with Denemo can be very overwhelming, particularly if we're talking about someone coming from a Finale-like experience. I've used Finale and a broad selection of other music tools (both composition and production), and Denemo was just...different. MuseScore is different from Finale, but it's alike enough to be a much shallower learning curve. To bring us back to Marketing, it's well and good to talk about all the things that LilyPond or Denemo or Frescobaldi can do that Finale and/or Sibelius can't. However, if we're looking at convincing people to switch from Finale and/or Sibelius to the LilyPond sphere of influence, we have to be able to show them that everything Finale can do, LilyPond can do, and can do as well, if not better. Urs put together a good example of this when he demonstrated the ease of constructing the rhythm patterns from the theory book. But admittedly, that's a high-level/obscure case that a lot of people, frankly, won't see as being applicable to their use case. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond Website Work
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: My recommendations would be: 1. Use a consistent URL for the latest stable version of LilyPond documentation. That way web searches and other pages across the web link to the latest version instead of ancient versions of the documentation. Unfortunately, this is not possible. The released stable version is currently 2.16. However, it seems that a number of packagers are significantly behind this, using 2.14. We can't link to a single stable version when there are 2 or more. I think the suggestion is basically (until 2.18 is released) to use the .htaccess file to redirect http://lilypond.org/doc/stable -- http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16 http://lilypond.org/doc/dev -- http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17 When 2.18 is released, then the .htaccess file is modified to redirect http://lilypond.org/doc/stable -- http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16 Since this would be defined on the .htaccess, should be transparent to the user and requires no duplication of files. If you want to get really picky, there are still things I've seen using 2.12. I don't know that means we have keep track of what versions are packaged with what. After all, if someone posts something here that doesn't use 2.16 or 2.17, almost uniformly, it will be strongly suggested to that individual that they ought to update to the latest. 2. On old or unstable documentation include a link to the equivalent page in the stable version of the documentation. Generally, this does work - replacing the version number in the URL brings up an older version of the manual. If it is a 404, it must be that this page did not exist in the old version. If you're using an outdated version, it might make sense to download the appropriate PDF manuals. I believe the suggestion is to go in the other direction---if the search happens to drop you into an older version, provide a link to the most recent. The problem here, I think, is technical. Short of .htaccess or some other server-side wrapper (similar to what many free web hosting providers do) that will put a banner saying, This is not the latest version. Click here to go to..., because of the nature of updating the website, I don't know how practical this is, to go through and recompile all the prior versions of documentation to provide convenient links. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: A thought on Windows Experience
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 7:10 AM, Phil Burfitt phil.burf...@talktalk.netwrote: From: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 11:16 AM * why are you out-sourcing tracking (google analytics)? I suppose that when that was decided upon, there may have been no good free alternatives to Google Analytics. But now there is for example Piwik - we're using it for the blog, and i think it's good. Paul, do you think it would be a good fit for lilypond.org? best, Janek AWstats? Webalizer? Just about every web hosting server out there has one or both of these. Here is the question that gets to your question: what are the server-side capabilities of the LilyPond web server? I think one of the issues is that some of these require backend capabilities that may or may not be available. Also, is the code for those compatible where they can be included as part of the project (if that's an issue)? My question: does the lilypond server have PHP capability? If so, I can look at putting together a basic traffic/analytics package. But that's somewhat a down the road issue. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: engraving comparisons and other promotional materials
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 12:42 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Shane Brandes sh...@grayskies.net writes: The U.S. has the concept of fair use see 17 U.S.C. § 107 But we want LilyPond to be distributable in more than just the U.S.A. Indeed. I am not a legal expert by any stretch (I've just read a lot of stuff on copyright law, between this project and some other related interests of mine). In particular, I would say that anything used should be incontrovertibly in the public domain (i.e., the older, the better). 1) While many jurisdictions recognize the rule of shortest term, this is not a guarantee, particularly if there is a specific agreement between two countries. For instance, I think the U.S. and Germany have a bilateral agreement that says each handles copyright according to its own laws, regardless of the country of origin. 2) As David has implied, Fair Use varies widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, if it exists at all in a jurisdiction. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond Website Work (was: A thought on Windows Experience)
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:00 AM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: A side comment, picking up on a comment in the Windows experience thread: I hope the new site will avoid any hooks to Google analytics or other APIs. I'm behind the Great Firewall of China, and I see frequently how Google dependencies cause page loading times to balloon, while the browser waits for blocked connections to time out. This is one of the rare times when I can complain about that problem *before* the problem gets built into yet another website :-) hjh This is one of a number of targets of what I would like to eventually work through, particularly: 1) No external server dependencies. This includes jQuery, external analytics, web font services, or any such things. Each of these are additional calls that make things take longer. I've mentioned on the previous thread that if the server has the capability, I would, at some point, like to look into an internal analytics system. 2) No extraneous file loads. While there will be a separate CSS file (as there is now), I want to eventually eliminate any image file that does not contribute to content. The first victim of this will be the gradient images used for the header and navigation backgrounds. CSS gradients can be coded for fewer bytes and one less server request, with graceful degradation if CSS3 is not available on a browser. Regarding #2, this does not necessarily mean no images. I think we actually need *more* images. However, I think the images that we do have need to be content (examples of music, etc.), not window-dressing. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: A thought on Windows Experience
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: Our server is provided on a goodwill basis, and so we would not want to use any scripting that might load it. I was thinking that was the case. This would be a script that would append all the request headers to a text file on the server, then load the static page and get out of the way. Don't know if that makes a difference, but I completely understand. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: engraving comparisons and other promotional materials
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: So any extension announced after the death of an author should not apply to the works of an author who labored under different assumptions when creating the work. +1 Indeed. That said, if a work is in the public domain, it's in the public domain. So while works created in the U.S. in the 1930s (which would have entered public domain 75 years after creation, if I recall correctly) have had their term extended with the U.S. adopting parts of the Berne Convention, the U.S. Congress cannot go back and grab works created in the 1910s which have passed into public domain. Granted, there could be a major upheaval of copyright that makes this happen, but the chances of this happening at this point seem to be minimal. On the other hand, the major media corporations (Disney being Exhibit A of this issue), may persuade governments to make it so that copyright keeps extending and works *never* pass into public domain. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: engraving comparisons and other promotional materials
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:47 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 10:30 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: So any extension announced after the death of an author should not apply to the works of an author who labored under different assumptions when creating the work. +1 Indeed. That said, if a work is in the public domain, it's in the public domain. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_European_Union#Duration_of_protection [...] This provision had the effect of restoring the copyrights in certain works which had entered the public domain in countries with shorter copyright terms.[23] Well, that just defies common logic. But that's government and bureaucracy for you. I think my original parenthetical statement---older is better---applies here. It would be much harder to restore copyright all the way back to Canon in D, the Brandenburg Concertos, or Moonlight Sonata, would it not? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond Website Work (was: A thought on Windows Experience)
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: Well, yes, as CPU load. I remain of the view that this is not a good use of time - there are other things that will be of greater value for less effort. Remember, you'll not be doing this by editing HTML, but the texi2HTML control files. From looking at the git repo, I was under the impression that changing the background image of the header would be handled by a CSS file, which appears to exist as a monolithic css file in the repo. So that would be a direct edit. That's why the facelift is item #1 on my list, because it requires the least technical knowledge to make happen. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: A thought on Windows Experience
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 1:42 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: Where do I sign up and what do I need to know about the way the current site works? I cannot write a single line of C++, my Scheme skills are meager at best (limited mostly to taking existing code and tweaking parameters), and I've only looked into MetaFont enough to send a patch to Janek to review to refine the shape note parameters to deal with unsightly MI and SO noteheads. (speaking of which, Janek... :) ). But I can do web development. One thing you have to realize that much of the content is created programmatically with a uniform look and feel. So much is contained in style sheets, and most of the rest is basically hand-written fragments combined by procedures. Which, in comparison to the popular HTML authoring tools generating oodles of garbage that fortunately nobody peruses closely, exactly entails the workflows that would have been used for something out of the eighties knocked up on a dos machine. So if you are versed with modern tools for web development, you may easily be frustrated at just how little possibility there is for employing them as you are used to do. There are modern tools for web development? Seriously, though, except when I've been using a package like WordPress, I've pretty much been hand coding websites for the last dozen years or so, partly because of popular HTML authoring tools generating oodles of garbage that fortunately nobody peruses closely. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
LilyPond Website Work (was: A thought on Windows Experience)
Branching this discussion into its own topic On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Phil Burfitt phil.burf...@talktalk.netwrote: Tim McNamara wrote: If you think that Lilypond's web page needs a facelift, then volunteer to roll up your sleeves and help change it... Werner Lemberg wrote: Do you want to work on that? We don't have a specialist who really likes to dive into the nifty HTML and Java issues while creating the contents via the texinfo format so that the PDF stays in sync with the HTML and info output. Tim and Werner, I would love to, and have considered a few times in the past. Unfortunately I do not have the time, have no experience of texinfo, and would probably have to ditch it within the coming year due to future plans anyway. I don't know how the current system is setup, but I don't see the need for nifty HTML. A separation of content and presentation, with clean, simple, hand coded (s)html pages (as noted by others...html authoring tools clutter the code - usually with info needed by the authoring tool itself) . Extensive use of divs, the usual webpage furniture where needed (menus, crumblines, buttons, etc), a few graphics, style sheets, and little else. Definitely no client-side scripting, and content for dynamic pages (and static pages if you want) provided by server-side includes. It seems child's play to me, but David's comments leave me wondering how entangled the current setup may be. Having dived into the git repo and page source a little, here is what I see as the road map to improving the look of the LilyPond website, with an eye toward getting the most benefit the fastest. 1) Review the CSS of both the website and the documentation. These are simply CSS files that don't need any compiling or reconfiguring. The eyesore for me is the documentation, and it would be nice to start to move the two into more of a seamless experience (where there's not an obvious change in the look beyond the documentation being documentation with a side frame for navigation. 2) Look at updating the images. One of the things that has come to mind on this point is updating the LilyPond icon/logo. If we want to compare looks to other software packages, take a look at those in comparison (or in comparison to about 75% or more of the well-known commercial programs overall. I'm currently working on a logo design using Inkscape/SVG as the source, which will have the advantage of being text-based and thus well-integrated into git (if, for whatever reason, we would want to think about changing it in the future. I realize that change would impact potentially the build process if there's any icon creation going on. 3) Consider different structural issues. This, I think, is where we really start to get into questions about texinfo and how that is compiled into the static web pages. Such changes may require us going back to #1 above, but I think a lot of the changes at this level may or may not have a tangible benefit in marketing LilyPond. The real impact is going to be on #1 and to an extent, #2, which provides the user the initial impression of how modern or friendly LilyPond is. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond Website Work (was: A thought on Windows Experience)
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote: On 12/5/13 9:43 AM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com wrote: 1) Review the CSS of both the website and the documentation. These are simply CSS files that don't need any compiling or reconfiguring. The eyesore for me is the documentation, and it would be nice to start to move the two into more of a seamless experience (where there's not an obvious change in the look beyond the documentation being documentation with a side frame for navigation. Personally, I prefer the obvious change in look, because I like to know when I'm in the documentation. But that's just *my* opinion; others may agree with you. Thanks, Carl S. Having worked for two corporations that have fairly extensive (and stringent) visual identity and branding guidelines (colors, typeface, formatting, etc.), I've learned that there are ways to make an obvious change between two things while still making them look like they go together. At a minimum, unless we do a complete overhaul of our documentation system, the navigation sidebar is going to be an obvious indication that we've gone to another system. There are other things, such as header bars (as we have), that by their presence will indicate a different system, but the basic design can be similar or the same. That being said, you may be right, and perhaps we need some additional distinction between the two. *But,* I do feel like the stylesheet on the documentation needs to be reviewed and updated, regardless. Cheers, Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: A thought on Windows Experience
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:09 PM, Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net wrote: On Dec 4, 2013, at 6:18 PM, Phil Burfitt phil.burf...@talktalk.net wrote: I also think lilypond's website is terrible. It looks like something out of the eighties knocked up on a dos machine. By comparison, take a look at the home pages of musescore, finale and sibelius. All things considered, I'd rather focus Lilypond's meager resources to software that creates beautifully engraved sheet music. The printed output of Lilypond is vastly superior (and more readable by musicians) than MuseScore, Finale or Sibelius. I'm always amazed at how crappy Finale output looks, in particular. If you think that Lilypond's web page needs a facelift, then volunteer to roll up your sleeves and help change it by writing text blocks, creating better HTML, creating better graphics, etc. There is no well-funded corporation behind Lilypond, just a bunch of dedicated and amazingly talented volunteer programmers. Where do I sign up and what do I need to know about the way the current site works? I cannot write a single line of C++, my Scheme skills are meager at best (limited mostly to taking existing code and tweaking parameters), and I've only looked into MetaFont enough to send a patch to Janek to review to refine the shape note parameters to deal with unsightly MI and SO noteheads. (speaking of which, Janek... :) ). But I can do web development. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: promoting LilyPond
On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Garrett McGilvray garrett.mcgilv...@icloud.com wrote: Now, to focus on a different point: the question as to whether a truly fair comparison can be made only by professionals. I have no doubt that an experienced professional in Finale (and I've ignored Sibelius because I've never used it, so I have no opinion) could produce a better score than the best that I can do in LilyPond. But I don't think each one's merit could be totally measured based on what one is able to achieve with the greatest skill and effort given at tweaks. I am fairly confident that if a person tried an experiment to make a sample score in Finale that looked like LilyPond's default output, he could nearly well achieve an identical look. He would alter stem, line, slur thickness. He could manually position each note to line up with LilyPond. He could develop a font that copycats LilyPond's default. In the end, the two results would be identical, and based on final output alone, the two options would therefore be judged comparable. Of course, default LilyPond is not the target goal, but my point is that it is not just about what one can do if he applies skill and time to tweaking output. I know that beautiful results can be had from either program with much tweaking on both sides, but default output should be at least part of the comparison. Then we come to the fact that there are very many people who use either of these programs who are not professionals, or even professionals who do not have the time to tweak every score to perfection. In my case, I am very much aware of many of the tools to tweak just about everything in Finale. However, first, I don't want to have to fight with spacing at the minute level, and secondly, as I was trained to read the music, not write it, I won't know the finer rules of when and where I should override Finale's default. On the one hand, I look at Finale's default output, and on the whole I feel like it looks as it should. But then I look at LilyPond's output and see, Oh yeah, that does look more correct. That's the best someone like me can do without knowing rules of engraving. So in my circumstance, a comparison of what a professional can do is irrelevant. I need to know rather what *I* can do or what I have time to do in one program or another. So my own comparison of my own work in one versus my own work in the other is exceedingly relevant and fair in helping me decide which is right for me. That is especially true since I am a hobbyist doing my own work for my own use. I'm the only one who needs to be pleased in that case. And all of this is just to explain a comment I made about what aspect of LilyPond appealed to me that made me give it a second chance. That seemed to be the point of a thread about promoting LilyPond. Regarding what it takes to make a score look right, I have some rather direct comparison between LP and Finale. When it comes to something as relatively-simple as an SATB hymn, my friends who use Finale have to do a number of things beyond note entry: * They constantly have to go back and fix horizontal note offsets anytime they make a change to notes so that the treble and bass clef notes line up vertically. * Because they work with shaped notes (and a custom shape note font at that), they have to do all sorts of tricks with stem lengths to avoid gaps between some of the noteheads and the base of the stem. * Any number of other manual tweaks for slurs and ties and such things. The bottom line is that I can transcribe a hymn note for note using direct text input into an LP template and fix any entry errors in the space of 20-30 minutes, with few, if any, of the problems my Finale counterparts encounter. The only manual tweak I use in the music is an override for the part combiner when I want three notes on a stem (such as a tenor and two bass notes, which happens rarely in the hymns I transcribe, and almost never in my own compositions). Everything else is handled by layout-block overrides, which are stored as a template. By comparison, one person (who does semi-professional Finale work and is quite proficient with Finale, from what I've seen) spends 2-3 times that time to get similar results. The only major defect I tend to see in my output, relative to the same hymn in Finale, is lyric spacing, particularly horizontal spacing. There are two features which, if they do not exist, would make the LP settings much better: 1. Horizontal spacing priority for lyrics rather than note durations. In other words, can we tell the horizontal spacing engine to space lyric anchor points more or less equally rather than strictly going by note durations? The big issue is when there are significant differences in note durations, such as when a half note appears in the midst of eighth notes. This creates a huge gap in the spacing. This is particularly ugly at the ends of lines, since it leaves a huge gap at the end of
Re: Supporting my work on LilyPond financially
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:31 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: SoundsFromSound soundsfromso...@gmail.com writes: The biggest complaint I've heard from many of my peers (when it comes to possibly switching from Finale/Sibelius) is that LilyPond looks like way too much work and Text input?? That makes absolutely no sense for music. You're not writing a book! It's a score!. Well, I'd argue that a mouse makes absolutely no sense for music input. A practised typist can write several hundred words per minute and keep this up for quite a long time. Input the same amount of information with a mouse, and you'll have Repetitive Strain Injury in no time at all. I don't know about several hundred words per minute (is that even physically possible?), but the last time I took a secretarial test, I rated around 70-75 wpm. For transcription work, I use direct text input exclusively. It is faster and more intuitive than either point-and-click mouse entry or (computer) keyboard entry in point-and-click programs (the latter because I don't have to think about relative intervals). For composition and arranging, I sometimes directly input into LP, but I also use MuseScore to play with the notes (pun intended). When I am finished, I will manually retype the finished parts into my LP template. If I am composing away from the computer, I will frequently compose using LP syntax. By this point, I can look at LP code for SATB parts and more or less hear what it's supposed to sound like, check for objectionable parallels, etc., as well as if I were looking at traditional music notation. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Supporting my work on LilyPond financially
On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 9:09 AM, Henning Hraban Ramm lilypon...@fiee.netwrote: I guess „we“ have a chance in combination with TeX, i.e. at universities etc. where TeX is in broad use, since the approach and needed expertise is similar. Good luck with that, at least if my university was any indication of things. The only users of (La)TeX was the mathematics department (and then, really only the professors---I learned LaTeX and wrote basically all my math papers using it, but I know of few other students who did...they opted to use the formula editor in Microsoft Word, which, admittedly, got better with Office 2007, but I digress). The math department and the music department don't talk to each other. Almost literally. Larger universities may have broader LaTeX support and better collaboration, but that's what I've seen. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: improving LilyPond useability
On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Phil Burfitt phil.burf...@talktalk.netwrote: - Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:11 PM Wouldn't it be far better after installing lilypond, to present the user with a cut down tutorial and usage instructions in a read-me file, and two desktop icons/shortcuts...one for this read-me file, and the other for invoking lilypond without arguments, which would then throw out a usage message? Given that the vast majority of computer users are on windows machines (for better or worse), I wonder just how many new users (and therefore potential contributers) confronted with this situation, have _not_ sought help, and have just given up. Phil. The thing that has always confused me on LP is that when I install it on a Mac, I get a LilyPond app with an icon that I can click on and open up a LP editor with built-in compiler (at least, this is what the user experiences). In Windows, I don't get the same thing. I think the Lilypond vs. Lilypad is a user expectation issue. If, as a Windows user, I install Lilypond, I want to open a program called Lilypond, and I want it to be called Lilypond. Just like if I go to a website, I'd like the base URL to remain whatever I typed in unless there's a good reason for it. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Another time model (related to the usability thread)
On Dec 2, 2013 9:40 PM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: Keith OHara k-ohara5a5a at oco.net writes: Of course specifying time in terms of durations is more convenient than specifying absolute time, or we would need to change every following note when we insert a few measures. Assuming that durations and absolute time are the only two options. I'm not making that assumption. I don't know what the solution would look like (yet), but I think any solution would involve a higher-level representation than LilyPond code currently expresses well. It does come up often that we want to say full-measure-rest until the next key-change or skip until the next rehearsal mark or sometimes even drone D until the double-bar If we had an easy way to enter a duration of until-X, then ability to place the next note X comes naturally. Sometimes 'X' is the end of the entire piece. Would that ease the difficulties mentioned above ? It might, if such a function would conform the full-bar rests to the time signatures (which may be in another parallel expression). This still depends on some external marker. If it could handle something like ... until the next rehearsal mark - 4 bars, that could help somewhat, but it wouldn't help every case. Suppose I need to insert a bar, 2 bars before that rehearsal mark. Then I have to change the function invocation to next rehearsal mark - 5 bars. Error prone. Basically the only way is to do as much as you can by hand, compile the PDF, and then track down the mistakes. As I see it, the main problem is that there is no reliable way in LilyPond to know the absolute time of any music expression. Within a music expression, you know the time relative to the start of the expression. But you can use the same music variable at 2, 3 or 10 different absolute time points -- and you can make another score using the same variable (in an include file) that places the variable at time points that are different from the first score. Inserting a bar at m25 in one score, and inserting a different bar at m33 of the second score, would make a complete hash out of the variable's source code in the include file. The level of complexity involved to ask Frescobaldi or another editor to do this is nightmarish to consider. The editor would have to divide -- automatically -- variables into sub-variables, and somehow associate the automatically-generated variables with one and only one score. I don't think it's worth it (assuming it's even possible -- and I have serious doubts about that). That's why I said I think LilyPond's input structure might be too low-level for this use case. The LilyPond language is clumsy at expressing this macro-level of bar-and-meter structure -- clumsy, because it requires redundancy in the manual input. And I'm not sure that it's worth messing around with the LP language itself, because it expresses the information required to engrave a score quite well. It doesn't express the information required to /edit/ the score conveniently. If there were an alternate input language that /does/ express editing information more straightforwardly, this language could write LP code for engraving -- similar to the way that FAUST (Functional AUdio STream language) expresses DSP algorithms at a high level and writes C++ for them, or Emacs/org-mode exports its own markup syntax to LaTeX, HTML, Markdown etc. I think that low-level vs. high-level is the key. GUIs can throw in behind-the-scenes data structures to handle things like adding arbitrary measures. Or they can use a format like MusicXML to store things natively at the measure level, then convert/update the LP representation as needed. You really can't do that using LP directly without a serious refactoring of the usual way people define parts and music, at least if I'm understanding things correctly. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Supporting my work on LilyPond financially
On Dec 1, 2013 1:47 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de writes: I personally don't understand why LP is not common at music universities but that's probably a chicken-or-the-egg thing and the lack of large scale marketing. But this would also need official contacts in the LP team who are responsible and can represent LP towards these institutions. Convert three musicians you know to using LilyPond. If you go I couldn't get _him_ or _her_ to use it, then how to pitch LilyPond to someone you don't even have contact with? Think about _why_ you could not get a friend of yours to use it. What would need to happen so that you could? Have you tried? What did you learn when doing so? Here are the problems I run into: (1) most musicians/composers/institutions are already using something. This means that the first hurdle is overcoming the inertia of I already have x, why should I switch? Which leads to (2) even if I can demonstrate that LP overcomes the technical difficulties of another notation program, people are going to be reluctant to switch because of the perceived difficulty of learning LP syntax or working without the UI bells and whistles of Finale, etc. They will also say, Well, it's not *that* bad of a problem. I frequently advocate the simplicity of setting SATB hymns in LP to the hymn writers and composers of my personal acquaintance (using the template I've mentioned on other threads). My standard response whenever they talk about a workaround for a provlem in Finale is, Or you could just use Lilypond. They acknowledge that LP would probably make their work much easier, but too many are too invested in Finale at this point to make the switch. The major hurdle LP faces is that others were there first. History generally bears this out. 20+ years ago, WordPerfect was *the* word processor for MS-DOS, and with good reason. It could run circles around Microsoft Word. What led to its downfall was that as programs started to migrate to Windows, MS Word launched a Windows version several months before WordPerfect could. By the time WP for Windows came out, people had already gone to Word. The sad part of this example is that WP was, even as late as the mid-00s, a superior product, particularly for business use. LP came out in the midst of other packages that already existed. As a result, it is fighting for marketshare in a relatively mature market. Granted, it is possible to overcome this hurdle, as Google Chrome seems to be doing in the Browser Wars, but it takes something special for that to happen. In the case of Firefox and Chrome, that something was IE's truly abysmal performance in the IE 6-8 years. Finale and Sibelius may have issues, but I don't think they've reached that level for the average user. Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: what do you use ragged-bottom for?
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote: On 11/16/13 10:38 AM, Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com wrote: Mr. O'Hara: My use of the ragged bottom is very particular. I use Lilypond to set piano scores for viewing on a tablet (easy page turning!). In a set of variations, some (if not all) of the variations might not be long enough to fill the page, and two consecutive variations would be too much. Each variation is started on a new page. Without the ragged-bottom the distance between the staves is stretched to occupy the entire length of the page. From page to page this change in distance confuses my eye. With the ragged-bottom the distance between staves is consistent and my eye tracks comfortably. Another solution may exist. This is the one that I found and use. If your variations are only one page long, you could achieve the same effect with ragged-last-bottom. Keith is asking about ragged-bottom, which applies to every page of the score. Thanks, Carl I have a similar application to Mark's. I use LilyPond to prepare slides for projecting hymns. I found at one point that if I do not use ragged-bottom, then if a section of music requires one system per slide (such as when each voice has its own lyrics), then a flush bottom will stretch the system vertically to fill the space, which is not visually pleasing, nor is it ideal for the people singing. This may be a function of something else, but that's the association I found. Carl Peterson ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Treble clef
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: I don't have a clue what that actually is, but the things very much look like a tenor (C) clef imposed over the treble clef. Urs I agree. I suspect the meaning of the symbol is to indicate that the line indicated by the C clef (in between the two halves) is the C above middle C (the C clef indicating the line represents middle C, the G clef indicating the raised octave). Carl P. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: notation reference query
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 1:18 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Hayden Smith haydenpi...@gmail.com writes: I cannot make inference based on the image provided in the notation reference itself and wondered where script-chart.ly might be located which would contain a complete list of articulations. In the LilyPond directory hierarchy, it is in Documentation/included/script-chart.ly No idea whether it will be helpful for you, but I'm not sure what would be helpful. -- David Kastrup Given that this is the second time in recent memory that this specific issue has come up, probably what would be helpful is if the reference tables were not presented as monolithic output images but as text-based tables with individual images for each item being referenced. I am not familiar enough with the documentation side of development to know how easy this would be to implement. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: And now for something completely different.
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:52 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Peter Bjuhr peterbj...@gmail.com writes: On 11/01/2013 07:53 PM, David Kastrup wrote: Can you guess what the output of saving and running the following file will be? Is the surprising output related to this? If an included file is given a name which is the same as one in LilyPond's installation files, LilyPond's file from the installation files takes precedence. http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/including-lilypond-files Only by analogy. LilyPond is not at fault for _this_ one. I was thinking that whatever the function may or may not do, there will be a \version warning if the file is run as-is by itself. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Evenly spacing lyrics
All, Is there a way to tell LilyPond to try to space lyrics evenly, as opposed to spacing notes roughly proportionally? I'm working with an SATB hymn sheet where there are dotted half notes and quarter notes and eighth notes all together, and the normal spacing engine that gives more space to longer notes is causing the lyrics to look badly spaced, particularly on less dense lines (I manual line break to keep lyrical phrases on one line). see example1.jpg, attached. I figured out that I could get fairly even lyrical spacing (or rather, fairly even note spacing), by setting the shortest note duration arbitrarily small, as in: \override SpacingSpanner.base-shortest-duration = #(ly:make-moment 1/128) However, the problem is that it makes the space between the bar line and the following note rather small and the space between the bar line and the preceding note larger, as in example2.jpg. Is there a compromise? A way to get the notes to space evenly regardless of duration, but still have the notes appear centered between the bars? Thanks, Carl attachment: example1.jpgattachment: example2.jpg___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Work around note head bug.
\ah = \set shapeNoteStyles = #'#(doThin reThin miThin faThin sol laThin
tiThin)
Use \ah wherever you would use \aikenHeads.
In my documents, since I *only* use Aiken heads, I do this:
\layout {
\context {
\Voice
shapeNoteStyles = #'#(doThin reThin miThin faThin sol laThin tiThin)
}
}
Thus, every voice uses them by default.
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Garrett McGilvray
garrett.mcgilv...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear users,
There is a bug in the Mac version where the Re half-note in \aikenHeads
renders as a quarter note in 2.16, and the problem just swaps for the whole
note in 2.17. This has been reported to the bug list, but I'm wondering how
to work around it in the mean time. Here is a minimal version of what I'm
trying to fix:
\version 2.16.2
\relative e' {
\aikenHeads
\key d \major
e a 2\fermata
}
On Mac Lilypond 2.16 that E comes out a quarter note. To override the note
head, I'm thinking notehead.s0re is the one I want (from this
listhttp://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/the-feta-font).
I've been trying to sort it out myself, but is still new to me. I'm
thinking of using \tweak #'glyph-name = , but I'm apparently not putting
the string value in correctly. I was hoping to find out the proper format
for a string from the 4.2.3 Types of
Propertieshttp://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/learning/types-of-properties
chart,
but I don't see strings on that list. So maybe my problem is just not
putting the string in correctly. I've done some hunting, and I think I
found some examples that do it this way: #string. Is that right?
Any solution would be appreciated, whether a bit of code to automatically
fix \aikenHeads 2nd interval half note in each instance, or whether just a
\tweak that I can put in manually each time. So far, it's not but one or
two instances in each piece, which I could manage without it being
automatic. Any additional learning about entering string values in
\override and \tweak would also be helpful.
-Garrett
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lyrics to hymn - new user
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Eduardo Silva eduardo.su...@hotmail.comwrote:
Hi, Carl. I like your sample. What do you do to make the verses left
aligned (and possibly shifted) at the start of a new system? Do you do it
manually? I know one could do it fairly easy if at the start of every new
verse in the lyrics one could put the directive to align the syllable to
the left.
I'm looking forward to learning more about your workflow with typesetting
hymns, if you ever share it, especially your customized part-combine.
Cheers,
Eduardo
Someone on the list (I can't remember who, precisely) wrote a macro that
allows one to left-align all the lyric syllables at an arbitrary musical
point. It looks at all the syllables at that point, figures out the longest
one (as typeset), centers it, and left aligns all the other syllables
relative to the longest one. Search the archive for \tagIt (that's the name
of the macro that was created) and you should get close to it. You need
2.17.something to use, since it uses David's friendlier way of referring to
properties (Something.something, instead of Something #'something), but it
can be translated to pre 2.17 references (I did this when I first used it,
since I was using 2.16 at the time.
This is one of the reasons for the barCheck voice. I use it to specify
where to align syllables, so that I don't have to clutter my lyrics or
assume that the line begins at a certain point. For the example I posted,
this is the \barCheckVerse definition:
barCheckVerse = {
\time 3/4 \key d \major \partial 4
\tagIt s4 s2. s2 s4 s2. s2 \bar \break
\tagIt s4 s2. s2 s4 s2. s2 \bar \break \spb
\tagIt s4 s2. s2 s4 s2. s2 \bar \break
\tagIt s4 s2. s2 s4 s2. s2 \bar |.
}
the \spb macro allows me to define an page break if I am outputting to a
slide layout. In my global include, it is defined as { }, but in my slide
layout header, it is defined as { \pageBreak }.
I am attaching my altered part-combiner.scm file. The essential difference
is that the parameter that defines how large an interval between two voices
is before it separates them (in automatic mode) is reversed so that instead
of breaking intervals greater than an octave (or whatever it was set to),
it breaks intervals less than a third. I have some tweaks that I didn't
include in my sample to manipulate slurs so that by default, slurs are
doubled (for when voices combine), but are single slurs in the correct
direction when the voices separate.
When I find time, I'll work on creating a clean git repository to house the
basic template/framework I've developed.
Carl
part-combiner.scm
Description: Binary data
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lyrics to hymn - new user
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 5:55 PM, Garrett McGilvray
garrett.mcgilv...@gmail.com wrote:
On Oct 12, 2013, at 10:25 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com
wrote:
So this would be your basic setup:
\score {
\new Staff = top {
\new Voice = sopVerse { } % voice for verse melody and combined
alto
\new Voice = altoVerse { } % voice for verse alto lines that
require separate stem, such as days on line 2
\new Voice = sopChorus { } % voice for chorus melody and combined
alto
\new Voice = altoChorus { } % voice for chorus alto lines that
require separate stem, particularly gently home at end
}
\new Staff = bottom {
\new Voice = tenVerse { } % voice for verse tenor lines requiring
separate stems
\new Voice = bassVerse { } % voice for verse bass and combined
tenor stems
\new Voice = tenChorus { } % voice for chorus tenor lines
requiring separate stems
\new Voice = bassChorus { } % voice for chorus bass and
combined tenor stems
}
}
You'll then associate your lyrics with the proper voices.
Oh dear, I did some testing yesterday, and I thought I had it figured out
following Carl's model above, but today I tried adding lyrics, and I get an
error: programming error: Moment is not increasing. Aborting
interpretation. I have tried to make a sample following the model above,
and for simplicity's sake I have brought it down to a single clef. Try this
and it will work beautifully (I'm on 2.16.2 and Mac OS 10.8.5) :
\version 2.16.2
sopVerse = \relative c' {
\time 3/4
\voiceOne
c4^Verses c d c e
}
altoVerse = \relative c' {
\voiceTwo
c4 s2
}
sopChorus = \relative f' {
\voiceOne
f4^Chorus f g f a
}
altoChorus = \relative f' {
\voiceTwo
f4 s2
}
\score {
\new Staff = top \relative c' {
\new Voice = sopVerse { \sopVerse }
\new Voice = altoVerse { \altoVerse }
% \new Lyrics \lyricsto sopVerse { one two three }
\new Voice = sopChorus { \sopChorus }
\new Voice = altoChorus { \altoChorus }
% \new Lyrics \lyricsto sopChorus { four five six }
}
}
That works like you would expect, but uncomment the two \new Lyrics
lines and it will cause the error. Is there something wrong with the way it
is laid out? I tried really hard to mimic Carl's model, and I can't find
that I'm missing anything.
Here is what one of the score blocks looks like from one of my
compositions. This includes the part combining and a custom Voice context
that I use to preserve the individual voices for lyrics, but hide them on
the staff. As a side note, I do not know how this will work if the chorus
starts on the same system as the verse ends. As a rule, I *always* start
the chorus on a new system. The barCheck variables are how I define my
key/time signatures, special bars, line breaks, etc. There are multiple
reasons I do it this way instead of integrating in one or all of the voices.
\score {
\new Staff = top
{ \clef treble \partcombine { \sNotes \sNotesChorus }
{ \aNotes \aNotesChorus } }
{ \new PartVoice = sVoice \sNotes
\new PartVoice = sVoiceChorus \sNotesChorus }
{ \new PartVoice = aVoice \aNotes
\new PartVoice = aVoiceChorus \aNotesChorus }
\new Voice { \barCheckVerse \barCheckChorus }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sVoice { \set stanza = 1. \verseA }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sVoice { \set stanza = 2. \verseB }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sVoice { \set stanza = 3. \verseC }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sVoiceChorus { \chorus }
\new Staff = bottom
{ \clef bass \partcombine { \tNotes \tNotesChorus }
{ \bNotes \bNotesChorus } }
{ \new PartVoice = tVoice \tNotes
\new PartVoice = tVoiceChorus \tNotesChorus }
{ \new PartVoice = bVoice \bNotes
\new PartVoice = bVoiceChorus \bNotesChorus }
\new Voice { \barCheckVerse \barCheckChorus }
\layout {
\context {
\Staff
printPartCombineTexts = ##f
\accepts PartVoice
}
\context {
\Voice
\name PartVoice
\alias Voice
\remove Dots_engraver
\remove Script_engraver
\remove Drum_notes_engraver
\remove New_fingering_engraver
\remove Rest_engraver
\remove Multi_measure_rest_engraver
\override Slur #'transparent = ##t
\override Tie #'transparent = ##t
\override NoteColumn #'ignore-collision = ##t
\hideNotes
\remove Dynamic_engraver
\remove New_dynamic_engraver
}
}
}
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lyrics to hymn - new user
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Garrett McGilvray garrett.mcgilv...@gmail.com wrote: And thanks also to the several who gave their thoughts to whether I should reply to all. This is indeed a very helpful community of people. I'm coming from a background in occasional usage of Finale, and although it seems weird to move away from the real thing (a very expensive app I paid for) for this free and text-based solution, the truth is that I'm finding that the results are just better and require a lot less fighting to get right, and all that thanks to a community of people who are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. Thanks to all: those who program, support, and contribute to LilyPond and Frescobaldi, and to the community of helpful users. Regarding a lot less fighting to get right, I am acquainted with a number of people who have been involved in publishing hymnals with shape notes. I constantly see them talking about all the work arounds to make shape note stems work correctly, to get the spacing right, etc., etc. My comment is always, Or you could just use LilyPond. In talking with one person who does a lot of hymn setting in Finale. He says it takes him at least an hour to set a hymn and get it right and fix all the quirks of Finale. With my template system, most hymns take me 1/2 an hour at most, and probably 85% of that is music input, 10% of it is linking the template files together, and 5% of that is fixing input errors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Automatic generation of scores skeletons
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Johan Vromans jvrom...@squirrel.nl wrote: Jacques Menu jacques.m...@epfl.ch writes: After struggling with irregular bars, I've been working on a Python3 tool that transforms a spec such as: [...] into a ready-to-compile Lilypond source file. Very interesting. It reminds me of something I considered a while ago: a kind of meta-staff where the structure of the score is described (time/tempo, repeats, special \bar's, and so on). These would then apply to all the staffs automatically. The rationale is that while a LilyPond score consists of horizontal staffs, it is in fact structured vertically and sometimes it has advantages to treat it as such. For example, using pseudo-LP: This is a variant on the technique I use in my own templating system for SATB hymns. I have one LP file where I define the actual music. In addition to each voice part, I also define a meta-voice that contains the information about key, time signature, bars, etc., that is applied as an additional voice on each staff. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lyrics to hymn - new user
On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Garrett McGilvray
garrett.mcgilv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Carl,
I am so very grateful for your help. I have taken some time to study your
answer and do some practicing. I'm sorry to say that I'm still stuck. Where
I am getting confused is how to make a partial line (such as a note here or
there in the Voice altoVerse) come in and out next to a continuous
running line (as the mixed soprano/alto Voice sopVerse). Here's what I
tried that I thought made sense, although it also seemed like doing it the
hard way. In any case, it did not work:
Then I tried to plug in my variable to a score block after your model, but
I didn't have any luck. I figure somehow I'm not using the variable right.
Do you have a hymn you have done that you wouldn't mind sending the file so
I could study it? Or perhaps the hacked version is different so it wouldn't
work on my end?
The hacked version allows me to define the individual part lines and then
throw then together with an automatic part combiner and some hidden voices
to allow for associating the lyrics voices. The only thing the hacked
version does is make sure the part combining is done correctly, as is
typically seen in _Praise for the Lord_ and a few other related hymnals.
To your specific issue, what you would do is use skips to get the notes
where they need to be. For instance, if you were to define variables
outside the score block for the parts,
sopVerse = { c' g'4 c' f' c' e' \stemUp d' c'2 \stemNeutral c' g' }
altoVerse = { \stemDown s2. c'4 c'2 s2 }
This would have three beats chorded, then two sets of notes separated, then
the last stack chorded.
P.S.: nice scan from Wiegand's _Praise for the Lord_
Good catch! So was that a Google search or are you familiar with that
hymnal? I was really excited that you recognized it. I think it's my
favorite of the current hymnals.
It's in my collection, along with Howard's _Songs of Faith and Praise_
(which I'm not a huge fan of) and a few other current Church of Christ
hymnals. That it used shaped notes caught my attention. From there, the
lyric font was a dead giveaway. I agree that PFTL is a quality collection.
I've only used it in worship a couple of times while visiting other
congregations.
Thanks again for your kind help.
np
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lyrics to hymn - new user
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM, Garrett McGilvray
garrett.mcgilv...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi folks,
The short version of the question (I think) is this: how do you set a
multi-measure rest when manually specifying lyric duration?
--
If the short version isn't sufficient, here is what I am trying to solve:
I've hit a brick wall trying to figure out how to layout my lyrics for a
hymn. The arrangement is fairly common, where everyone sings the same line
for each of the stanzas, but there are split parts in the chorus. I
attached a picture of the hymn so you can see what I mean more clearly:
I had in mind setting almost all of the lyrics to the women voice
(soprano alto), and then manually entering the duration for only the
lower part of the chorus (where the basses start their soli in the chorus).
However, that's the part where I would need to know how to put a
multi-measure rest so that that line won't begin during the verses. Or is
there a better way?
I have a template I use for my hymn writing that allows me to deal with
this fairly easily, but it relies in part on a hacked version of LilyPond.
The basic answer is that you ideally need two sequential sets of voice
contexts, one for the verse, one for the chorus. So this would be your
basic setup:
\score {
\new Staff = top {
\new Voice = sopVerse { } % voice for verse melody and combined
alto
\new Voice = altoVerse { } % voice for verse alto lines that
require separate stem, such as days on line 2
\new Voice = sopChorus { } % voice for chorus melody and combined
alto
\new Voice = altoChorus { } % voice for chorus alto lines that
require separate stem, particularly gently home at end
}
\new Staff = bottom {
\new Voice = tenVerse { } % voice for verse tenor lines requiring
separate stems
\new Voice = bassVerse { } % voice for verse bass and combined
tenor stems
\new Voice = tenChorus { } % voice for chorus tenor lines
requiring separate stems
\new Voice = bassChorus { } % voice for chorus bass and combined
tenor stems
}
}
You'll then associate your lyrics with the proper voices. Since the tenor
requires no separate lyrics (the final gently home can be attached to the
altoChorus voice), the mmr is not a huge issue here. You may need to do
some manual positioning to put it up high enough.
Cheers,
Carl
P.S.: nice scan from Wiegand's _Praise for the Lord_
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi all, I have no idea how your email system would figure out just what mail Tim had been replying to. The information is just not there in the headers. Apple Mail uses the Subject (as text), and I imagine there are other applications that do the same. This of course leads to any number of frustrations, including re: re: test not being threaded with re: test, and mail from completely different conversations (with the same subject line) being threaded together. Cheers, Kieren. David, Gmail is just that smart. It primarily uses the subject line, though I think it pays attention to some other things, as I can't recall having the problem Kieren describes. I think Gmail also looks for similarities in the body of the message. It has some awareness of how the body of a message is structured, as it commonly hides signature blocks (including the lilypond-user mailing list block) Regarding the actual subject matter, my previously-voiced frustration is that the individual messages are *not* set up to reply to the list by default. As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. My preference is for both to do so. This is perhaps the only mailing list I've been on where that is not the case. The rest of you may have different experiences, but that is mine. Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:20 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Tim Roberts t...@probo.com writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: How does it make it harder? As I said, replying to a digest makes no sense with regard to message threading anyway. Of course it makes sense. I just did it, and your mailer is almost certainly showing you the proper threading, isn't it? No, it isn't. Wrong References: header apparently (most definitely not pointing to the Message-Id: header of the article you are replying to). It's not possible to go to the parent article, and it is not possible to recall the entire thread from the server. Both are possible with proper replies. Maybe you think that the Subject header is all that is needed for proper threading, but of course it would not allow for the topical sort a proper thread display needs to do. Funny thing...it showed up in my email system properly threaded. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: I'm certain Gmail will also be able to figure out the mail you are replying to without referring to any header at all as long as any Gmail user has not yet deleted it (and probably even afterwards). But for a normal mail server/client setup not relying on a universal freely associating data kraken on the server end, one needs to have information as specific as a Message Id in order to do reliable queries. My understanding is that Gmail does not cross reference messages from multiple accounts to figure out threading. I'll also issue a mea culpa of my own. When you mentioned threading, I was not thinking in the sense of a tree. I was only considering the idea of a conversation, understanding which messages belong together. To my knowledge, Gmail does not attempt to figure out who is replying to whom, but uses a chronological sequencing. Regarding the actual subject matter, my previously-voiced frustration is that the individual messages are *not* set up to reply to the list by default. Don't use Reply to sender if you don't want to reply to the sender. (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way minimize effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires extra mouse-clicks. As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less than sane side. I have no idea what the digest does or doesn't do. I am replying to your prior statement, Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should not even point to the list? As Tim pointed out, the non-digest messages do not and your proposal would be logically consistent with that. I am simply stating a preference for the reply-to of both to do so. I don't see how this is on the less-than-sane side. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:48 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Not sure about that. The information usually is available in the headers, and as far as I can tell, Gmail does preserve and maintain it as well. So unless someone breaks the chain, it would seem like a poor choice not to actually use it. It may pass on the headers just fine, but as far as how the information is used for what I see, probably not as much. Don't use Reply to sender if you don't want to reply to the sender. (1) 99% of the time, if I'm replying to a message, I'm intending to reply to the list. Defaults are usually selected to in some way minimize effort, which brings me to (2), I'm lazy. Reply all requires extra mouse-clicks. Poor choice of user interface then. Perhaps poor for me personally, but it is likely based on having a minimalist user interface and realizing that most people only reply to messages. It also discourages the delightful idiots who insist on replying all to a mass mailing (when the original sender didn't have the decency or know-how to stick the recipient names in the bcc). As a matter of consistency, I think both the individual messages and the digest should reply to the list, or neither. Do you mean to imply that the digest _does_ add an explicit Reply-To: header and it goes to the list? That would indeed be on the less than sane side. I have no idea what the digest does or doesn't do. I am replying to your prior statement, Maybe the reply-to header of the digest should not even point to the list? As Tim pointed out, the non-digest messages do not and your proposal would be logically consistent with that. Not really. I was suggesting _adding_ a Reply-To header, but one that does not go back to the list. I am simply stating a preference for the reply-to of both to do so. As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking the message threading. This is a question of whether it makes sense from the human side or the computer side. From the computer side, certainly. However, adding a reply-to target doesn't fix that. If someone's going to reply from the digest, they're going to reply from the digest. It's a question of whether we force them to add the list address to the to box. From the human side, I have no problem understanding the message threading if someone has properly removed the parts of the digest they aren't responding to and have replaced the digest subject line with the one from the actual conversation. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mea máxima culpa
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Evan Driscoll edrisc...@wisc.edu wrote: On 9/12/2013 2:03 PM, Carl Peterson wrote: It also discourages the delightful idiots who insist on replying all to a mass mailing (when the original sender didn't have the decency or know-how to stick the recipient names in the bcc). Personally I never really got that argument. I almost always reply all to discussions like that. Why? The following two assumptions: 1) If the original sender CC'd someone, it's because they thought that person would be interested in the contents. 2) If someone is interested in an email, there's a good chance they'll be interested in follow-up emails. I definitely pay attention to who I keep on the CC list and will remove people if I have reason to believe the followup is a lot less relevant for them, but that's my general rule of thumb. Maybe it's just because I don't get enough emails, but I get *way* more annoyed when it seems like I've been dropped from a mail thread that was relevant to me then I do when I get extra emails that are *not* relevant. Personally, I don't see the reason for BCC besides a CYA move. There are multiple reasons for using BCC. 1) If the email is a report of some kind, but is not intended for discussion, then the BCC allows the people who are interested in the report to receive the report, and makes it so that queries go back to the sender, who can choose what to do with that query. 2) If a person is one of those who sends stuff to everyone in their mailing list (shudders), then it means that if the person didn't want to receive it in the first place, they don't have to deal with the responses that result. 3) It respects the privacy of individuals. It is, unfortunately, not uncommon for people who are on one mailing list to use the recipient addresses to seed the recipient list of their own mailing list. 4) As a follow-up to #3 (and tangentially related to your use case), there may be times when a person needs to know but their identity cannot, for various reasons, be revealed to others. This is similar to what David posted (I just saw his reply come through) about donor reports. Donors can't be anonymous if everyone sees that they're donating. Many who send out frequent (legitimate) mass emails are having to utilize third-party list services, as more and more mail servers and clients are filtering the bulk recipient lists out as spam. Thus, the need for BCC is lessening (to being principally a preventative measure), but the need still exists. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Question about autocompile bash script
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 5:22 AM, immanuel litzroth ilitzr...@gmail.comwrote:
If there were some kind of make-dep for lilypond it could even generate
these dependencies
automaticaly, like it happens for C (the compiler generates dependencies
when passed the
correct flags). This should not be too hard to brew up?
Immanuel
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Jacques Menu jacques.m...@tvtmail.chwrote:
Hello Carl,
An approach could be to create a makefile containing:
- the rules to compile LP files to PDF (fixed part);
- the dependencies among LP files reflecting the presence of
\include in them (variable part).
Producing the makefile could be done by a script when your dropbox
changes, and you could then call make to compile whatever needs to be.
JM
Le 10 sept. 2013 à 10:04:54, ArnoldTheresius arnold.we...@siemens.com
a écrit :
I allready made a C program for Windows, which does a limited 'follow
the
\include files' to examine the file dates. Finally it starts lilypond
(command line) if one of the source files found is newer than the
resulting
PDF, otherwise it prompts for the question 'compile or not?'.
This program is limited to
- only files (source and result) in the current working directory are
examined
- the \include command must be the only one in the line (white space
only
allowed at the left), exactly one space to the string start ''
character
- \include commands inside a comment block ( '%{' to '%}' ) will be
examined, too.
Unfortunately, this program is specialized for my use. I did try (but
not
complete) to implement some special features. There is very little
documentation in the source code.
Only if you have some experiance in C programming the source code can
help -
but an experianced C programmer might be faster to build his own
'ly-newer'
command line program form scratch than by extending my program.
Feel free to ask for the C source code, if you are still interested.
These are along the lines of what I was thinking of. I don't have any
experience with C. My programming experience as of late is in PHP. So I
gave some thought last night to using it to read the files and trace the
\include dependencies. I haven't had a chance to put any code down, but
I'll probably take a look at that option.
The thing that was undesirable on the makefile idea in general is that
having to maintain a makefile seems like an unnecessary redundancy. That
is, not only do I have to reference these files in the actual LilyPond
sources, but also make sure that I add the dependency information to this
other file. This seems like it would lead to synchronization issues if I
change which file I use in the .ly file, but not the makefile.
What I'm considering from the dynamic makefile angle (which I hadn't
considered prior to this discussion) is to have a trigger on all the
subfolders that will pass the file name to php, which will follow the known
dependency paths (music and lyrics to setting, setting to target format) to
build a list of files which need to be recompiled. I suppose I could call
lilypond from the php code, but I could also theoretically have it
construct the makefile. This would overcome the possible race condition
that exists if I use cascading monitors on each folder (for example, if I
update a global file, every final output file would need to be recompiled,
but if I use a touch command to trigger updates, I think some would be
missed.
The other advantage with PHP is that hopefully and eventually, this is
going to go to a database-driven workflow using PHP, where definitions are
all going to database entries to be generated on the fly as anything is
updated.
Regards,
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Overall (global) resizing difficulties
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.comwrote:
Thanks Carl! Should the myStaffSize be inside a #() or unspecified?
It is outside a Scheme context, so:
\paper {
myStaffSize = #22
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Overall (global) resizing difficulties
See David Kastrup's answer. You have to change the one in the font tree as
well.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.comwrote:
I am getting no response with this method. Things are still odd...
HOWEVER! When I changed to the default Text Font (eliminating the modified
font tree), I got a normal response... So perhaps it is a bug? Or am I
missing something?
IC,
Josh
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Carl Peterson
carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks Carl! Should the myStaffSize be inside a #() or unspecified?
It is outside a Scheme context, so:
\paper {
myStaffSize = #22
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Overall (global) resizing difficulties
Replying to group since I forgot to the first time...
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote:
I use #(set-global-staff-size __) at the top oc the document and
myStaffSize = #__ in the paper block. Usually I have to play with the two
to find the right combination of staff size and symbol size. Not sure if
it's strictly necessary to do both, but since I define custom fonts for my
documents, I seem to remember both being required for that.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com
wrote:
Unfortunately, I've tried to find where it stops doing this, but I cannot
provide a small snippet. I'm not sure where it happens... I am happy to
forward the attached .ly file for you to fiddle with.
I'm sorry I can't specify a tiny example. I've tried and am getting a
little frustrated (maybe fresh eyes would help).
IC,
Josh
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote:
**
Could you attach the problematic code, please?
--
Phil Holmes
- Original Message -
*From:* Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.com
*To:* Mailinglist lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
*Sent:* Tuesday, September 10, 2013 6:49 AM
*Subject:* Overall (global) resizing difficulties
Has anyone encountered overall resizing issues when using:
\layout {
#(layout-set-staff-size 15)
}
I have tried to use this to scale back several more involved scores
(SATB+Organ accompaniment), but if I go any less that '16' for the staff
size, my notes, time signatures, words, and clefs stop shrinking.
This isn't so much a problem with snippets; I recreated it with simple
things, and they didn't come out with the same problem.
See attached for a visual.
IC,
Josh
--
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notehead of harmonic whole note too narrow
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: - Original Message - From: Owain Sutton ow...@owainsutton.co.uk It strikes me more as an issue of horizontal alignment than notehead size. For comparison, here's an example published by Boosey Hawkes (Britten violin concerto): http://i.imgur.com/fiAgr6B.jpg Thanks. I'll update the tracker with this. That example is inconsistent...in the penultimate measure, one harmonic looks to be center-aligned, another looks to be left-aligned, and in the preceding two measures, harmonics are left-aligned, consistent with the LP example. To me it looks like more space is needed inside the notehead. There is not as much contrast in the line widths in the scanned example as in the LP example. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Question about autocompile bash script
Question for those who are familiar with linux bash shell scripting... I have a script running on my linux box that uses inotifywait to monitor a folder and compile any changed lilypond files. The folder is tied to my dropbox account, so I can upload files to dropbox from any computer and have the PDF and MIDI files within a few seconds, as if I were directly on the computer (and without the need for an ssh connection). Here is the script: inotifywait -m -e attrib,create ../output | while read dir ev file; do lilypond --output=../files/ $file done This was adapted from a script I found online for this purpose. I use the output parameter to send the files to another folder so that the files (particularly the .ps file, in my experience) doesn't trigger the compiler and I don't have to mess with regex filters. The question I have is whether it is possible to set up a similar script to trace a file's inclusion in other lilypond files and then compile whenever an upstream file is loaded. My template/framework for hymn settings uses discrete levels of file inclusions. * For each hymn, I have a lyrics file and a music file, which define variables for those things, as well as provide the applicable header information (composer attribution in music file, poet attribution in lyrics file, for example, stored as variables). * The lyrics and music files are both included into a setting file (for the unique combination of lyrics and music). As part of this settings file, I also create variables that define the treble and bass clefs for the music output (eventually, this step will be done using a separate file as well, but for now, this works). * The setting file is included in an output file, which calls the layout-specific headers and \layout block (though right now, all layouts use the same block), and calls the music and lyrics to build the actual score(s) (multiple scores if outputting to the slide/beamer layout, where each verse is its own score). This is the file that is eventually compiled. So here's what I'm trying to figure out... 1) If I upload a new lyrics or music file to the folders bearing those names, check the settings folder for any file that includes the changed file. 2) If such a file is found (typically, there is only one, but as this project develops, there could be multiple matches), search the output folder for a file that includes the changed settings file. 3) If such a file is found (right now, there are three different layouts under consideration), compile that file. One thought I had was cascading inotifywait triggers. The one on the output file remains, but then, add one to the settings folder that changes a trivial attribute (modified date, for instance) of any output files (which would trigger the output file script). Do the same thing for the music and lyrics folders to change the date on the settings folders. The lyrics music settings and output folders are all at the same directory level. Any thoughts or has anyone already figured this out? Thanks, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: point and click
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 8:04 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: The links do no harm. If at any point of time file size is a problem for any given person, he can reduce it himself. I have a problem with this statement. If they do no harm, why then does the Usage file say: *Note:* You should always turn off point and click in any LilyPond files to be distributed to avoid including path information about your computer in the .pdf file, which can pose a security risk And this is in the Usage file! So what we have is a significant portion (whether it's a majority or not) who are exposing themselves to a potential security risk, and don't even know it, because after all, does an average user who isn't doing something outside a typical piece of sheet music read the usage file? And I had to specifically search for this reference to dig it out, knowing it was there. I understand how the links can be useful in a limited set of circumstances, but I would tend to think that the default would be to turn them off, if it's significant enough that the documentation says should always. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: Anacrusis
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.comwrote: Hello: ** ** A partial measure contains 1 and 1/16 beat. How is that notated in the command “\partial?” ** Try \partial 16*17 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Anacrusis
On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote: On Sat, Sep 7, 2013 at 11:28 PM, Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com wrote: Hello: ** ** A partial measure contains 1 and 1/16 beat. How is that notated in the command “\partial?” ** Try \partial 16*17 *sigh*. Disregard my nonsense. I was thinking of something else. You're probably going to have to look at tweaking the time administration properties to trigger a bar when you want it. See http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/special-rhythmic-concerns#time-administration. There might be a more direct way, but that's what comes to mind now that I've actually thought about it. Cadenza might also work here. Basically, declare a partial measure (\partial 4), then before you get to the end of the quarter note anacrusis, tell LilyPond to back up the measure position a 16th note using the commands in the linked section. Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 4:53 AM, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net wrote: I have to my right hand Hymns and Modern, New Standard and behind me Songs of Praise, New Standard. Both of these use separate voices for Sop and Alto; Tenor and Bass. I strongly believe this is the best way of setting 4 part voice - merging the notes into chords is just wrong, IMHO - it can confuse which voice is singing which part. What happens when the voices cross? FWIW Elaine Gould agrees with me: Ideally each voice takes separate stems. This rule is only broken in her view where space is limited. Ultimately, for what I'm doing, right or wrong is irrelevant. Much like those who are creating custom style sheets to match Henle or Breitkopf or even (cringe) Finale or Sibelius, it doesn't really matter what my sensibilities are or to large degree the way *I* think it ought to be...this is the way it is, and I decide how closely I want to match to it. The fact is that for my target audience, combined stems are the norm, which the noted exceptions of rhythmic differences, small intervals, or crossed voices (see below). I have made some decisions on some things that are not as universal in context. For instance, some hymnals I use point all stems away from the lyrics except when there are separated voices on the staff (and one has to face in each direction. I've decided against that change, for technical reasons as much as musical correctness. Some hymnals (the same ones) also do not beam flagged notes unless the notes are for the same syllable (in which case, the beam serves as the slur). I have adopted this change. Regarding the confusion, etc.: I can think of only one song in our standard repertoire when voices cross. Regardless, this is irrelevant as the default behavior of the part combiner to separate crossed voices is preserved. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: Some hymnals (the same ones) also do not beam flagged notes unless the notes are for the same syllable (in which case, the beam serves as the slur). I have adopted this change. You'll find that switching autobeaming off will make lyric syllables synchronize to beaming. Yes. The template I'm using is actually fairly robust. I've moved as many of the tweaks and customizations (such as autobeaming and shaped notes) to the layout block as possible, even to the point of creating aliased contexts to allow for alternate lyrics and for hidden voices so that each part can be a \lyricsto target. At this point, it can probably handle setting at least 90% of our repertoire, assuming that lyrics and parts are defined correctly. For instance, soprano verse and soprano chorus are given different (hidden) voices. Since I always manually break the music into systems, the chorus always starts on a new line, so any spacing issues from this approach to lyrics are mitigated. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 12:59 PM, David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.comwrote: In practical terms, Carl's and my hymn books may in fact be considered correct, because in many churches and/or church-music traditions, the congregation is expected to sing in unison most of the time, the choir in SATB if there is a choir, and there will (almost invariably) be an organist/keyboard player. It may be that the notation chosen is a compromise to minimize inconvenience for everyone, according to how much they use the notation and how closely they read it - i.e. all those notes are primarily for the keyboard, and a choir will have little trouble reading four-part keyboard music. This might not be the case in traditions where the custom is for everyone to sing SATB without instruments. Actually, I fit into this last category :). All of our music is sung congregationally, with full SATB harmony (though portions of some songs are written to be sung in unison, or with only a couple of parts), without instruments. That being said, the original reasoning may have been adapted from hymnals that use keyboard reductions. The current reasoning (other than that's the way we've always done it, and the hymnals I've looked at span some 100 years), is that all the extra stems get in the way of reading the music. This is the same motivation behind pointing stems away from the lyrics, so that there's less noise between the words and the notes. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:33 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote: This probably means that if it bothers me enough, I'm going to have to go back into the part-combiner.scm file and dissect it. While my hands are in the patient, I might as well figure out how to get it to combine tied and slurred notes (such as on a suspension). The code for both is probably in the same general vicinity. The question is whether it bothers me enough, or if I'm willing to either put up with the individual tweaks or letting the current default output be what it is. So getting back to this, I had somewhat a stroke of inspiration, but I can't find in the documentation whether this is possible. Is it possible to define a global context for all voice ones and all voice twos? In other words, the thought I had (and I'm thinking about the CSS ability to define both element and id-level properties) is to set double-slurs as the default at the \layout block level, then specify single slurs for the named split voices. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.comwrote: So getting back to this, I had somewhat a stroke of inspiration, but I can't find in the documentation whether this is possible. Is it possible to define a global context for all voice ones and all voice twos? In other words, the thought I had (and I'm thinking about the CSS ability to define both element and id-level properties) is to set double-slurs as the default at the \layout block level, then specify single slurs for the named split voices. Answered my own question. Yes, it is possible. What I did to accomplish this was use doubleSlurs = ##t in the Voice context layout block. Then, I explicitly created Voice = one and Voice = two with doubleSlurs = ##f and slurs in the correct directions. Beautiful, and no Scheme manipulation required. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com wrote: Karl and Carl (and other choral typesetters), I've added a new context to the source code called NullVoice which is designed exactly for this purpose. It's not yet available as a release, but you can get it by replacing your installed copy of ly/engraver-init.ly with: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blob_plain;f=ly/engraver-init.ly;hb=df8a24 The documentation is not yet online, but if you can read through the texinfo code, you can learn about it here: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commitdiff;h=2537ec#patch2 I'd actually appreciate if you and the other choral typesetters test this out now, in case I've missed something, or if you have any suggestions for improvement. I will take a look at it at in the near future. I looked at the source and it looks like it will work for what I'm doing. However, right now I'm working through some other things and don't want to completely work through that and this at the same time since the two would be intertwined. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Double slurs on automatic part combining
I am using the automatic part combiner in preparing SATB hymn sheets. The issue I have is that when the notes are chorded by the apc, if there is a slur (in both parts), only one slur is printed (as is seen in the documentation for automatic part combining). In virtually all the examples I've seen, in these cases, there is a double slur. I realize that I could probably go in and use the double slur setting manually, but one of the purposes of what I'm doing is to allow a person to input each of the four voice parts separately and not have to worry about how the parts are going to interact when combined. Is there a way to have double slurs whenever the parts are chorded and single slurs when separate, without specifying any tweaks within the parts themselves? Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:44 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes:
I am using the automatic part combiner in preparing SATB hymn sheets. The
issue I have is that when the notes are chorded by the apc, if there is a
slur (in both parts), only one slur is printed (as is seen in the
documentation for automatic part combining).
Why would you use the part combiner? I know SATB as basically
\new ChoirStaff
\new Staff { \clef treble { \soprano } \\ { \alto } }
\new Staff { \clef bass { \tenor } \\ { \bass } }
That depends. Virtually without exception, every hymnal I have used in
church or have in my library uses joined stems except when there are
different melodies or the notes are separated by less than a diatonic third
(this has required some rewriting of the part combiner scheme file
to accommodate these style rules).
namely _without_ joining stems. At any rate, if you want soprano/alto
to retain upwards/downwards slurs, just write ^( and _( explicitly
(\slurUp/\slurDown is not strong enough).
I will take a look at the modifiers. I'm so used to using \slurUp and
\slurDown I forgot ^ and _ can be used for that. The goal of the template
system I'm working on is to require practically no tweaks/overrides/etc.
that do not impact the actual musical performance, to potentially allow
non-Lilypond people to help with only a rudimentary knowledge of notation
syntax.
Thanks,
Carl
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:11 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Well, this is probably going nowhere fast, but it's moderately amusing that it seems to do something: Agreed on both counts. This probably means that if it bothers me enough, I'm going to have to go back into the part-combiner.scm file and dissect it. While my hands are in the patient, I might as well figure out how to get it to combine tied and slurred notes (such as on a suspension). The code for both is probably in the same general vicinity. The question is whether it bothers me enough, or if I'm willing to either put up with the individual tweaks or letting the current default output be what it is. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Drawing a hexagon with a number inside
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Rachael Thomas Carlson rachael.thomas.carl...@gmail.com wrote: I hate to use Arial but the publishing house that I am emulating uses only proprietary fonts. There are a few non-proprietary fonts that emulate Arial much the same way that Arial emulates Helvetica (can be confused by casual observer, but obvious to those who know what to look for). Liberation Sans does a fairly serviceable job, if I recall correctly. I think I used it a couple of times in place of Arial recently. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tie placement in voiceTwo
On Sep 1, 2013 6:01 AM, Peter Bjuhr peterbj...@gmail.com wrote: As David points out the original example is uncommon both regarding ties and slurs. I like to add another example which represent a more common use of ties. As you can see from the ly-file I first use a tie, then a slur, then a double dot. I think that you could get away with the second as a tie, mostly because it uncommon to slur notes of the same pitch. But I don't think it is preferred practise to use it this way. The double dot could be used, but in contemporary notation I think a tie is preferred. The case in my experience where I could see such a notation being practiced is in vocal music where there are multiple verses and some verses have more syllables than others. Thus, the notes would be present as required for all the syllables that are sung at one point or another, but then ties and slurs are inserted to accommodate the verses with fewer syllables. It is not so much an issue in my own work since I do not autobeam, but I could probably find in my collection of hymnals a few examples of this being done. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: How to add the number of repetitions above a bar
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Gilberto Agostinho gilbertohasn...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello everyone, I am working with a score in Lilypond that has a lot of repetitions, where basically every bar has to be repeated a certain number of times. I would like to be able to write the number of repeats above every bar, similar to the score below (which was not created in Lilypond): http://i.stack.imgur.com/GLzuk.jpg It would be great to be able to have some brackets above the bar and also to have the 3x centralized, just like in the example above. So far, the only (temporary) solution I was able to come up with in Lilypond was to add repeat bars and then simply write 3x above the first note of every bar (since I could not have it centralized on the bar either). It does not look very good, but gets the job done. This temporary solution looks like this: http://i.stack.imgur.com/jcCh2.jpg Do you have any suggestions of how to make this last example look more similar to the first in Lilypond? Thanks a lot! Take care, Gilberto Off hand, I would suggest looking up analysis brackets in the Notation Reference. I don't recall at the moment how those work with text, but it will get you something approaching the brackets you're looking for. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Vertically centering lyrics between two staves?
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Ted Walther tederi...@gmail.com wrote: Now, someone posted another alternative; I could mark the musical notes of the refrain as a separate voice, and tie the chorus lyrics to that. Well and good; I wasn't aware that voices could be sequential. After all, staves in a score can only be in parallel. So, having done that, is there a way to tell the Lyrics attached to the chorus Voice that they should vertically center themselves? Alternately, why not allow sequential staves in a score? Especially if it began at the last barline of the previous score, instead of requiring a line-break. This may be of help in your issue: http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=503 I don't deal with this in the template I posted because I virtually always insert a line break between verse and chorus, so it's a moot point for me. But perhaps the above snippet will be useful. Cheers, Carl Ted ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Vertically centering lyrics between two staves?
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Ted Walther tederi...@gmail.com wrote: Another problem with that snippet is the amount to drop. With a good centering command, it is centered. But if I alter the font size, etc, the amount of raising and dropping needed to center the lyrics will alter. How can I predict that without a lot of kludgy code? Again, I'm generating lilypond code from templates. I can compensate for some complexity, but the simpler the better. Ted On 20 August 2013 14:47, Ted Walther tederi...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you Carl. Interesting example. For the hymns I do, that might work for the first couple bars, but then I'll have to predict where the linebreak will be and revert it at that point. I'm using a template system to auto-generate the lilypond code, so having to insert a counter-acting command at an unpredictable spot in the lyrics will be rather annoying. Are there any Lilypond developers still active on the list who might be interested in doing a sponsored modification that would allow two staves to be pasted together within a score. Alternatively, allowing two scores to be pasted together on the same line, since scores already follow one another sequentially inside a book? Ted I am also using a template system. Right now, the system is composed of nested include files (one for the lyrics, one for the music, another to put the two together in combination, another to apply a layout, etc.), but eventually it will be database-driven, with an outside script generating the LP code to run. The idea is to allow end users to mix and match compatible texts and tunes. Since the template system is explicitly designed for output to multiple formats (print and screen) AND because I am endeavoring to keep phrases intact on a line (which is absolutely critical for usability on slides), I do not leave line breaks to chance. I have explicit line breaks in all my scores. This is why your issue isn't a factor for me, since a chorus/refrain theoretically should always begin a new phrase (and thus, can be shunted to a new line). Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Vertically centering lyrics between two staves?
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Eluze elu...@gmail.com wrote: Ted Walther wrote Another problem with that snippet is the amount to drop. With a good centering command, it is centered. But if I alter the font size, etc, the amount of raising and dropping needed to center the lyrics will alter. How can I predict that without a lot of kludgy code? Again, I'm generating lilypond code from templates. I can compensate for some complexity, but the simpler the better. it would be easier to talk about a real example - can you provide a scan or similar of what you'd like to get!? thanks Eluze See the refrain in http://www.hymnary.org/page/fetch/WASH1957/264/low for an example of what Ted's talking about. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: new to lilypond
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.comwrote: Greetings, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com 20 August 2013 12:31 AM I'll be bold and disagree. G-flat is ges in Dutch (3 characters) and gf in English (2 characters). If you're typesetting a piece in D-flat major, the 33% redundancy for every black-key note in Dutch will add up quickly. Avoid D flat major. :-) Or write in C and use a \transpose command, which is what I typically do in that situation. compose-unknown-contact.jpg___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Refrain Hymn Setting
My approach to handling parts for hymn settings is to define the music for
the verses and chorus independently and then apply nested simultaneous and
sequential voices. So, for instance,
\score {
\new Staff = top {
\new Voice = sopRef { \sopRefrainNotes } \new Voice = altRef {
\altRefrainNotes }
\new Voice = sopVrs { \sopVerseNotes } \new Voice = altVrs {
\altVerseNotes }
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sopRef { \refrainLyrics }
\new Lyrics \lyricsto sopVrs { \verseLyrics }
\new Staff = bottom {
\new Voice = tenRef { \tenRefrainNotes } \new Voice = basRef {
\basRefrainNotes }
\new Voice = tenVrs { \tenVerseNotes } \new Voice = basVrs {
\basVerseNotes }
}
}
What this does is define the music in the score block according to the hymn
structure. This is a simplified version of the score block I actually use
for my hymn settings. I have an extra layer of complexity because I define
bars, breaks, rehearsal marks (CHORUS, D.C. al Fine, etc.) in a
separate voice and I use the part combiner functions with these individual
voices hidden so that I can still hook lyrics on them.
Cheers,
Carl
On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Joshua Nichols josh.d.nich...@gmail.comwrote:
Here's the problem:
I would like to format for a refrain at the beginning of a hymn.
I'm unsure of the manuals (both snippet and notation) when it comes to
this, because it doesn't show 4 part harmony (independent voices) in the
examples. I'm not sure what to do.
Here's the parsing error message:
126:50 http://0: error: unknown escaped string: `\verse'
\new Voice = soprano { \voiceOne \refrain
\verse }
C:/Documents and Settings/josh/Desktop/Men Rest U Souls.ly:126:50http://1:
error: syntax error, unexpected STRING
\new Voice = soprano { \voiceOne \refrain
\verse }
C:/Documents and Settings/josh/Desktop/Men Rest U Souls.ly:124:2http://2:
error: errors found, ignoring music expression
\new ChoirStaff
fatal error: failed files: C:/Documents and Settings/josh/Desktop/Men
Rest U Souls.ly
Exited with return code 1.
and attached is the full file.
How would I setup a hymn to include a refrain in the beginning?
Sincerely,
Josh
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamics, spacers, and partcombine used at once.
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Dominic dominicirv...@gmail.com wrote: So my question is, how can I get the dynamics to align themselves 'correctly', i.e. as they would be if they were directly attached to the notes. Putting the dynamics in a Dynamics context is not really an option, since that will make them align themselves on one line, and I want the dynamics and hairpins to be snugly under the notes each time. Any ideas? I am aware that existing 'issues' exist to do with dynamic positioning, but many of them claim to be 'fixed' - yet they apparently are not. What if you use rests or real notes instead of spacers and then hide the notes and turn off the appropriate engravers so that the notes themselves neither print nor impact the spacing of the score, but the dynamics are attached to notes? Haven't tried this, but I use this technique with partcombine to attach lyrics. Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MIDI keyboard
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Richard Shann richard.sh...@virgin.netwrote: here is your problem. You are hoping that the timing of your keypress could be interpreted and a duration of note estimated from it. Such systems have been tried many times, and are offered by programs that don't care if you succeed or not, as long as you buy the program. They don't work because of the subtleties of timing, rests and notation (consider, 1/4 note tied to 1/8 note is the same duration as dotted 1/4 note). Well, I would like to be proved wrong; the moment you hear of a way of doing it I promise I will implement it in Denemo: everything is there just waiting for someone to invent the algorithm. Richard, ICBW, but I think that *usually*, 4. vs 4~8 depends on the context and the time signature. For instance, I was told to break and tie notes if they cross the midline of a duple or quadruple measure (so c4 c4. c8 c4 would be written as c4 c4~c8 c8 c4 in 4/4 and c8 d e4 f8 g as c8 d e~e f g in 6/8), but there are others that are largely stylistic (such as whether to break a quarter note if it crosses any beat at all). One option would be to have a MIDI-entry mode and notate based on actual durations (i.e., notate a 4. if that was what was played), then present it to the user to review with a popup of some sort to allow for alternate notations (e.g., show c4~c8 or c8~c4 [depending on where the beat is] as an alternate to c4.) before entering into the score proper. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Setting automatic beam behavior
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.comwrote: Hello: In a single voice (RightOnly.ly), setting automatic beam behavior produces the desired notation. When the left hand is added (Both.ly) the commands – identical in both files – do not take effect. Must I do something to the left hand? In the right hand? Thank you for your kind attention. Mark Mark It looks like you're only defining the behavior for the right hand, but not the left hand? I can't compile right now to see what you're looking at, but that was the thing that stuck out to me. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: SMuFL
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 5:46 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes: On 10/08/13 7:10 PM, David Kastrup wrote: Of course, people are free to do whatever they want with their own time and efforts. But if you do it out of a feeling of contributing to LilyPond, it may be worth looking quite closer before investing a lot of effort. You might also be disappointed in the lack of uptake by the LilyPond websites, manuals and other resources for proprietary font support. But as Urs points out, LaTex and so on do not have this problem. I recommend you reread what Urs write: TeXlive does not distribute support files for non-free fonts. Now it is not really because it would be a problem, but rather because it does not help the project, and you can't test that kind of stuff anyway without acquiring proprietary software. There is the fontspec package, primarily used with XeLaTeX, the purpose of which is to allow one to use any font in a LaTeX document, including proprietary fonts (whether you call the ability to use proprietary fonts intentional or incidental is likely one of those dreaded semantic distinctions). I think we're getting hung up on the fact that SMuFL is being promulgated by a corporate entity and the only implementation of SMuFL is produced by that corporate entity (and that most of the musical font work is being done by other corporate entities releasing them under proprietary licenses). Having a standard and being interoperable with that standard makes it easier for *any* font designer to build fonts for LilyPond and for any software package to use LilyPond fonts, whether the font or program happens to be open source or proprietary. I have a question. Does LilyPond currently have a set of documented standards to tell prospective font designers *explicitly* (1) how to set up their fonts for them to be referenced by LilyPond (glyph names), and (2) the metrics necessary to make their fonts work with LilyPond? One of the barriers I see to a lot of extensibility in this area is that even though LilyPond is open source, it is not exactly clear (and maybe I'm just not looking in the right place) what one is to do to build on to it. I was digging into the notehead file to fix an issue with some of the shaped noteheads and on a couple of the things I was looking at, it was very much a guess and check and hope nothing breaks. I realize that the default answer to my question (if no such documentation exists) is, Well, if it matters that much to you, get your hands dirty and do something about it. And you're probably right, but someone not already familiar with how the fonts work writing documentation to how the fonts work sounds a bit, well, counterintuitive. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: SMuFL
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Am 09.08.2013 15:11, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt: Of course I don't know that either, but I see a few steps: 1) Modify the mapping of glyphs to Unicode numbers I think that would be very simple, just a matter of remapping them in a suitable application. If LilyPond really accesses the glyphs by their names this wouldn't even imply any internal changes. But then, if we intended to allow LilyPond to use other SMuFL-compliant fonts, there *would* be internal changes, as we would have to have, at a minimum, a mapping table to convert glyph names to codepoints. The broader question for me is how many Feta glyphs *aren't* in the SMuFL standard and how many SMuFL/Unicode codepoints aren't already represented in Feta. Since they're looking for feedback, we may be able to contribute to the community by providing such a list of glyphs that may need to be added to the standard. 2) Adapt anchors and (perhaps) scaling If I understand the SMuFL specification correctly it also specifies where the anchors should be set in the glyphs. I don't know what this would mean in terms of development. Maybe it's 'just' a matter of updating the glyphs and one setting in LilyPond for each glyph. But it could also be that one would have to re-define the glyph positioning in LilyPond at a deeper level, with all kinds of possible side-effects ... I read through/skimmed the SMuFL standard. The basic design concept/scale is a 1em high five-line staff. Pretty much anything that is positioned relative to a pitch is drawn so that the line y=0 in the glyph's coordinate system corresponds to the reference pitch. Flags have the attachment point as the origin. Generally all glyphs have x=0 at the leftmost edge. I don't know how that necessarily translates for our purposes, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: SMuFL
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 12:21 AM, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote: The SMuFL standard is just a specification cooked up by Steinberg for the new program. It's been possible for them to consider this since they are architecting the program from scratch. But it's a step away and outside of the hugely important work the Unicode Consortium have been doing for decades. I disagree, and I think that you are completely missing the purpose of SMuFL: It collects *glyphs* which are used somewhere, and which people need somehow. Compare this to the Adobe Glyph Collections like `Adobe-Korea1-2' or `Adobe-GB1-5'. As they write on smufl.org: The goal of SMuFL is to establish a new standard glyph mapping for musical symbols that is optimised for OpenType fonts and that can be adopted by a variety of software vendors and font designers, for the benefit of all users of music notation software. Unicode is a *character* standard, mainly to *exchange* information. It is *not* related to glyphs, or to fonts. The SMuFL team correctly maps the glyphs to the Private Area of Unicode, and they don't suggest the inclusion of any of those entities into the Unicode standard. Whether SmuFL is centered on Steinberg's new program is basically completely irrelevant. I'm quite sure that they are willing to add glyphs which Lilypond needs and which aren't covered yet. Not that this is really necessary, as far as I can see... Werner The distinction I'm seeing is that the Unicode Standard and SMuFL are two layers of standardization. What I see is that Unicode tells us what the glyphs mean, (so that we use the same code point in the font to refer to the same thing). SMuFL, on the other hand, tells us how to draw and scale those glyphs so that they can be handled the same way regardless of the actual font. The concern I have on SMuFL is that it is an as-of-yet immature standard without broad support outside of Steinberg. If we start working on SMuFL specifically, will the SMuFL standard look the same when we get done as it does now? Will it be a futile effort because the SMuFL standard dies from lack of interest/acceptance? Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Maybe bug? Lyrics on a tied note at end of system
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 10:38 AM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: On Aug 4, 2013 5:30 PM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote: maybe it's as Phil stated in his answer: singers expect the lyric text to start with the note and do not follow other/foreign aesthetic styles Classical or jazz singers? I can't speak particularly for either classical or jazz singers (though I did a bit of both in my university years). My own arena of semi-expertise is hymnals, and I typically see lyrics centered under the starting note of a melisma/tie. The closest I see to a full left-align is perhaps a fractional alignment, something that in our alignment system would be a -0.9 or -0.8, so that the syllable extends out into the melisma, but still has the uneven/centered look of regular syllables. Seeing a column of flush-left syllables in the middle of a line of lyrics when there are 3-5 verses just looks *bad*, even if it is technically correct. Maybe not so much of a problem in through-composed or single verse lyrics, but the difference is glaringly obvious with multiple verses. On a related matter, thanks for reminding me about the lyricsMelismaAlignment tweak. I'll probably be putting that into my template. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Maybe bug? Lyrics on a tied note at end of system
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 5:10 PM, David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.comwrote: James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com writes: On Aug 5, 2013 2:59 PM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote: I appreciate the thought, but I'm not quite interested in that particular flavor of Kool-aid. I'll go with my eye on this. I don't like how it looks, and I get something that is easier to read by fussing with the line breaks. I'm satisfied with that -- the attached *does* look perfect to me. Looks good to me too. If I was going to quibble I would say the over-all horizontal spacing might be a bit tight - but maybe the whole score looks good just as it is, and having a tight spot here is worth it. Maybe drifting off topic... I just skimmed through a thick volume of the vocal works with piano by R. Strauss (mostly from Universal Edition and other good German-speaking publishers of that time). I didn't find any tied-note examples that would help - but what I did find was impressively wide spacing during the voice part, and a big easy-to-read text font. In some of the songs, the piano introductions or interludes have very compressed horizontal spacing, but as soon as the voice enters, BOOM! luxuriously wide spacing. That has to help with issues like this. (Also you're clearly correct that this anticipatory-tie situation just doesn't happen that often in older music.) These scores look right overall, with perhaps an impression of let's waste some paper and make it perfect. :) Baerenreiter's (or Schott's?) early-80's setting of Schubert songs - tight musical spacing with a small thin-ish text font. Looks very good but the text might get hard to read if the singer's eyes aren't in good shape. Again, the overall look is consistent with itself, even though it's quite different from the above. Instead of sacrificing paper (as above), they sacrificed some text readability. Peters's well-known old print of the songs of Schumann (and their Schubert scores look about the same) (no date given, but the editor died in the 1930s) - the music is fairly tightly spaced, and the lyric font is dark and perhaps compressed horizontally. Very easy to read IMO, but maybe I'm just used to that style. This one looks right/consistent to me as well. In particular, the lyrics are easy to read, while visually harmonizing with the music - the blackness of the text and the blackness of the notes are subjectively about even, making it easier to shift my glance from one to the other without needing to re-focus. (- I think. I'm not an optometrist.) The sacrifice here is that the whole thing can turn out too tight, crammed onto the page. I guess if I was printing a very large collection of short songs I might settle for cramped spacing as well. BUT (for example) if I were to take the big, wide-open text font from the Strauss score and use it in the 1980s Schubert score, I suspect the words wouldn't even fit in the lines. Each publisher found an effective working setup that looks good, but they each solved the problems in different ways. I'm curious...did you happen to notice any examples where the engraver chose to split the measure that might be indicative of an approach? If I were to have done something like this for a hymnal/songbook, I would have split the measure and would have kept the entire lyrical phrase on a single system. Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Maybe bug? Lyrics on a tied note at end of system
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:55 PM, David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.comwrote: Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: I'm curious...did you happen to notice any examples where the engraver chose to split the measure that might be indicative of an approach? If I were to have done something like this for a hymnal/songbook, I would have split the measure and would have kept the entire lyrical phrase on a single system. I haven't found any examples with ties exactly as we've been discussing. It seems styles or opinions have changed over time or varied between publishers. For a good possible example, I turned to the old Peters score of Schubert's Ständchen (Horch, horch, die Lerch') - nearly every line of text begins with an upbeat - and the engraver kept each bar intact. In the same volume, the beginning of Das Wandern (first song of Die schöne Müllerin) has the piano introduction and the single word Das on the first line, and the end of the last page has (looking a bit lonely) the first word of the next verse and a segno. However, in the 1988 Baerenreiter/Henle set of Schubert songs, vol 7, the engraver seems quite willing to break bars in exactly the way I think you mean - for example, in Irdisches Glück the piano introduction finishes on beat three-and-a-half, and the singer's eighth note is on the next line, where you and I both know it belongs. :) In the same vein, the middle of the verse of that song has a new theme that starts on beat two-and-three-quarters, and the page break is comfortably set at that point in the bar. But then only a few pages further on in the book, in Am Fenster, a similar thing might have been done but was not done - there are widowed eighth notes on several lines. It seems to me that breaking bars in vocal music has never been consistently practiced by any good publisher except for the publishers of well-made hymn books, who seem to have done it as a matter of course. If they ARE being consistent, then they must have run into more important reasons why NOT to break the bars, in those other songs; and I don't know what those reasons are. My understanding of the engraving process and its rules is sketchy at best. Actually, it's not uncommon for hymnal publishers NOT to give due consideration to the lyrics, well-made or not. I'm looking at one right now where the upbeat of a phrase is kept with the measure. I think the only relatively-consistent rule is not to break a word across two lines unless there's no way to avoid it (and I happened to turn right to a song that proved me wrong, imagine that). There was a hymnal published last year that *did* prioritize lyrics over music, to the point where it did a quantized version of LP's ragged-right for shorter lines (so that the lyric spacing doesn't become extreme). By quantized, I mean that there were about three or four system-widths that were used, depending on the natural spacing of the line (number of syllables). I've given examples from that book in previous posts. Of the hymnals I've seen, I consider it perhaps one of the best examples of setting, even above engraved hymnals (which often squeezed notes and lyrics in much tighter than they should have in order to save paper...not uncommon to be lucky just to get all the words on the same line as the notes, and forget about getting the words under the sung note). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Anyone using a tablet for lily?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:21 AM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain da...@druid.net wrote: On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:39:16 -0600 i...@soundand.com wrote: Is anyone using a tablet to run lilypond and if so which one? I was thinking about getting a tablet but why run Lilypond on it? Build your PDFs elsewhere and just use the tablet to display them. That way you don't limit your choices and can get the tablet best suited to your needs which, I assume, is displaying charts on stage. You want clear, large, fast, ability to lookup or arrange set lists, etc. Adding Lilypond to the list of requirements may mean getting something less ideal for your real purpose. Of course, once you choose one, if it also runs LP then bonus. I don't know about the original poster, but my interest in being able to run LP on my tablet is on-the-go composition. What I would be interested in is a WYSIWYG editor that would be able to take down notes and output a basic ly file, perhaps to Dropbox. I don't want all the bells and whistles, but just the ability to quickly jot down things that come to mind while I'm away from my desktop and not have to reinput them when I get home. So basic staff/voice/lyrics stuff, since that's just going to be dropped into my existing template/stylesheet when I get home. There are some point-and-click editors for Android (which is what I use), but I don't know of any that interact with LP (note that it would not need to *run* LP, just output source). So basically a stripped-down version of MuseScore or Denemo that works on Android. Cheers, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
