Re: Possibly silly question but…
That’s quite an honour - thanks! Though for myself I’d have to rank many other posts higher, mainly ones in which someone creates a brilliant/elegant solution to a problem. Leaving a blank space in what’s normally the clef area tends to make it look as if something is missing; the three letters do fill the gap. And (I hadn’t thought of this part) I suspect that the frequent use of all-caps italic is intended to make the thing look more like a “proper clef” - the treble and bass clefs are curly and usually have contrasting stroke width - and if that’s the reasoning, then some kind of “copperplate” style would be a better fit than the edged-pen style I’ve sometimes seen. BUT - “Proper clefs” are functional, and T A B isn’t. Since a guitar-tab staff represents strings, I’d suggest that a real proper guitar tab clef could be something that shows what tuning is being used. But maybe that’s problematic for other reasons, and I can’t even play guitar, so I’ll be quiet now. David R Andrew Bernard writes: Hello David, I feel compelled to say this is the best post I have ever seen on this list, on any topic! Marvellous. As an aside, I find the TAB symbol just particularly dreadful. But I often wonder why tablature even needs it - surely it is obvious that what follows is tab, and it does not indicate relative pitch. Well, I am not a guitarist. Andrew On 28/11/2020 1:27 pm, David Rogers wrote: If those letters were human, they’d each be wearing a fancy red dress. And also a fancy blue dress at the same time, with a big metallic-gold sash. And they’d have their hair in ringlets, and pinned in their hair they’d each have two peonies in full bloom. And every time you played the guitar, they would sing, in Spanish and Ukrainian and Igbo, each one singing all three languages at once, with different lyrics. And it would be strangely glorious, and for this you would be the envy of all your friends. Until you discovered that along with the dresses and the hair and the flowers, they’re vain and egotistical, constantly preening and showing off and trying to outdo each other, and once they start singing they won’t shut up. So it’s probably a good thing they’re just letters. :)
Re: Possibly silly question but…
That’s quite an honour - thanks! Though for myself I’d have to rank many other posts higher, mainly ones in which someone creates a brilliant/elegant solution to a problem. Leaving a blank space in what’s normally the clef area tends to make it look as if something is missing; the three letters do fill the gap. And (I hadn’t thought of this part) I suspect that the frequent use of all-caps italic is intended to make the thing look more like a “proper clef” - the treble and bass clefs are curly and usually have contrasting stroke width - and if that’s the reasoning, then some kind of “copperplate” style would be a better fit than the edged-pen style I’ve sometimes seen. BUT - “Proper clefs” are functional, and T A B isn’t. Since a guitar-tab staff represents strings, I’d suggest that a real proper guitar tab clef could be something that shows what tuning is being used. But maybe that’s problematic for other reasons, and I can’t even play guitar, so I’ll be quiet now. David RAndrew Bernard writes: Hello David, I feel compelled to say this is the best post I have ever seen on this list, on any topic! Marvellous. As an aside, I find the TAB symbol just particularly dreadful. But I often wonder why tablature even needs it - surely it is obvious that what follows is tab, and it does not indicate relative pitch. Well, I am not a guitarist. Andrew On 28/11/2020 1:27 pm, David Rogers wrote: If those letters were human, they’d each be wearing a fancy red dress. And also a fancy blue dress at the same time, with a big metallic-gold sash. And they’d have their hair in ringlets, and pinned in their hair they’d each have two peonies in full bloom. And every time you played the guitar, they would sing, in Spanish and Ukrainian and Igbo, each one singing all three languages at once, with different lyrics. And it would be strangely glorious, and for this you would be the envy of all your friends. Until you discovered that along with the dresses and the hair and the flowers, they’re vain and egotistical, constantly preening and showing off and trying to outdo each other, and once they start singing they won’t shut up. So it’s probably a good thing they’re just letters. :) -- David Rogers
Re: Possibly silly question but…
"Hugh S. Myers" writes: Mine (which I'm open to any and all not liking ) looks like image If those letters were human, they’d each be wearing a fancy red dress. And also a fancy blue dress at the same time, with a big metallic-gold sash. And they’d have their hair in ringlets, and pinned in their hair they’d each have two peonies in full bloom. And every time you played the guitar, they would sing, in Spanish and Ukrainian and Igbo, each one singing all three languages at once, with different lyrics. And it would be strangely glorious, and for this you would be the envy of all your friends. Until you discovered that along with the dresses and the hair and the flowers, they’re vain and egotistical, constantly preening and showing off and trying to outdo each other, and once they start singing they won’t shut up. So it’s probably a good thing they’re just letters. :) -- David Rogers
Re: Possibly silly question but…
"Hugh S. Myers" writes: Close or not close. I'm the major audience, so all that matters is do I like it! That said, I'm a 'serif' kinda guy, so I'd have to agree to disagree about Helvetica ;) I lost track of this discussion - did you end up with a TAB graphic that you like? I’m a serif guy too, just not an all-caps-chancery-italic-printed-vertically guy. :) (Thousands of guitar players disagree with me on this one, so I don’t stand a chance.) As long as the score says what you meant, and the players (which might mean just you so far) aren’t complaining or confused, then nobody can say you didn’t do your job. But making it look great certainly has its benefits. -- David Rogers
Re: Possibly silly question but…
"Hugh S. Myers" writes: I've been working on a very small piece of LaTex (with musixtex) code to create scale tablature. I'm using a clef based on fracture gothic but in comparison, it is a little heavy for my taste and I'd like to either duplicate the Lilypond TAB clef or similar. Hence my question. If it is based on a font, which one? If not I'll continue to examine similar fonts in my collection. I've no idea what you mean by 'the real question', but this is pretty much it… Do you need a real duplicate, or just close? The general style of font you’d be looking for is a chancery italic, for example TeX Gyre Chorus or something along those lines. IMO that style - I just mean the idea of using vertically-set all-caps chancery italic, I’m not blaming any certain font - is ugly as can be, but it IS what seems to get used most of the time and therefore what people have come to expect. If I had my own choice to make it look better, I’d pick a very boring bold sans-serif like bold Helvetica or whatever, but that’s not what people are used to. -- David Rogers
Re: \unfoldRepeats
Aaron Hill writes: On 2020-10-29 2:35 pm, David Kastrup wrote: David Nalesnik writes: Hi Andrew, On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 5:03 PM Andrew Bernard wrote: Hi David, But it would be great in the future to have more and better MIDI support. I no longer regard it as a small feature on the side, but something I really need. For now, I will stick to outputting my New Complexity School scores - which Dorico has trouble with! :-) I think an important step in the process would be to make the MIDI backend somehow accessible from Scheme. Then the power users would be all over it. Indeed. And a unifying concept covering both grobs and MIDI objects (mobs?) might even pave a way to iterative generation of time-based MusicXML (xobs?) or Braille (bobs?) or other renditions of the musical content. Mobs... 樂 Could we get LilyPond to output a Minecraft world populated with appropriate redstone and noteblocks? Somehow I’m now imagining a Lilypond Toys Output Module that builds (literally!) a representation of my score out of Lego, Meccano, Tinkertoys, Slinky, popsicle sticks, pipe cleaners, etc, choosing the materials by some kind of algorithm. And any elements of a score that involve extra Scheme code or tweaks, it will build from papier-mâché. Consider it an alternative definition of “object-oriented”. :) -- David Rogers
Re: \unfoldRepeats
Andrew Bernard writes: Hi David, That's one view, but I have been using LilyPond for professional engraving for years and I am now moving into MIDI for generation of MIDI as the principal end output, for film scores and so on. That's a valid musical compositional use case. The engraved score is _not_ always the principal object. … I agree that an engraved score is not always each person’s principal aim. But it doesn’t follow that every piece of software ought to be the right one for every possible aim; Firefox’s double-entry bookkeeping is atrocious, and writing novels in Photoshop is way harder than it needs to be. :) Nor does it follow that all music composition software developers need a worldwide agreement on which use-cases must be covered. I don’t think there’s an unlimited number of people with both the skill and the desire to work on the main structure of Lilypond, and to me it makes more sense for them to intentionally neglect a secondary function than to hold back or limit a primary one. -- David Rogers
Re: \unfoldRepeats
David Kastrup writes: Marc Shepherd writes: According to the documentation, the default behavior of the MIDI block is not to “unfold” repeats (other than those that are explicitly \repeat unfold). If you want repeats unfolded inside of a MIDI block, you have to requote the music within the MIDI block, nested inside of an \unfoldRepeats block. Any idea why that was chosen as the default behavior? When composers write a repeat, they usually expect it to be performed. I would have thought that automatically unfolding would be the more logical default. The MIDI output of LilyPond is mainly intended for "proofhearing", not as a performance; it has been fairly recently only that attempts to take into account articulation marks (which are seminal for a performance) have been added. As such, unfolding repeats makes the material longer without adding more information. I started this reply with one idea, and have already changed my mind. I *was* going to say that the small size of MIDI files means there’s less reason to discuss wasted space. But now I think the bigger issue is the other thing you talked about: there’s a sort of unofficial division between MIDI files as just a quick way of allowing the notes to be heard (sort of a musical proof-of-concept), and MIDI files as carefully-orchestrated performances worth listening to in themselves. I think the fact that a person is using Lilypond means they want a properly-printed score, and making the effort to print a nice score implies a planned live performance. Which (in my mind) allows Lilypond’s MIDI into the “mere proof of concept” category. OK, after three tries, now I know my own opinion: If it would take “real work” to make unfolded repeats for MIDI, then I’d wish that time and effort had been spent on other Lilypond issues instead. And if working on MIDI would turn into a distraction, or would “open a can of worms”, then IMO it wouldn’t be worth it. There certainly is software out there for creating artistically-orchestrated MIDI. -- David Rogers
Re: architecture document?
Tom Sgouros writes: Hello all: I've recently started using Lilypond and so far it's great. I don't think I'm saying anything surprising by observing what seems to be a close family resemblance to TeX. Did it start out as TeX macros and diverge? I wonder if there is a document out there that might talk about the design choices made in putting Lilypond together that might compare and contrast it with TeX? Lessons learned? Thank you, -Tom My opinion is a silly one without any facts or evidence: For projects, there might exist a level of difficulty-plus-complexity-plus-diversity-plus-peculiarity beyond which, *in practice*, every successful solution for that project must necessarily be peculiar, difficult, diverse, and complex, and the people who complete it will invariably turn out to be diverse, complex, difficult, and peculiar. And: For such a project or its solution or its people, every attempt to reduce the overall magnitude of one of those twelve characteristics (e.g. complexity of the project, difficulty of the solution, etc) will also cause unpredictable increases among the other eleven characteristics, unless each of them is correctly anticipated and successfully mitigated. And sometimes despite the mitigation, too. Or maybe: Extrapolation works better when it’s applied to one graph at a time. :) -- David R
Re: How to insert a simple "rit."?
Hello all
I certainly remember having this same question or confusion. The
fact that there is a specific \cresc led me to believe that there
ought to be a specific \rit as well. May I suggest that a new
Subsection 1.3.4 "Other expressive marks" be added to the Notation
manual, simply explaining that "rit." and friends don't need
individual commands, and should be dealt with as text markup, with
a link to Section 1.8?
"Rit." *IS* an "expressive mark" just as much as "cresc." is,
after all, and the fact that it isn't mentioned in Section 1.3
tends to make it look as if Lilypond just isn't capable of "rit."
- which of course seems strange. A person who's at the stage of
trying to find out how to put a "rit." into their score is
unlikely to know that they need to look in Section 1.8.
Thanks
David R
Kenneth Wolcott writes:
Thank you! It worked! I added "\bold".
Ken
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 8:00 PM Hwaen Ch'uqi
wrote:
Greetings Ken,
Not exactly sure what you mean by "simple." I just insert a
markup
where I wish the rit. to begin, as in
_\markup \italic "rit."
HTH,
Hwaen Ch'uqi
On 7/5/20, Kenneth Wolcott wrote:
> Hi;
>
> Looks like I must be missing something obvious in the
> lilypond docs
> (2.20.2)...
>
> How to insert a "rit."?
>
> I saw the following in the "Hiding the extender line for text
> dynamics"
> snippet.
>
> \relative c'' {
> \override DynamicTextSpanner.style = #'none
> \crescTextCresc
> c1\< | d | b | c\!
> }
>
> Obviously snippet pertains to dynamics; is there something
> similar for
> tempo adjustments?
Re: Pedal cautionary after a line break (current status and improvements)
I should point out my own mistake: Breitkopf & Härtel did a great deal of very good work, and (from a pianist's point of view anyway) they don't belong in the same paragraph as PWM or Kalmus. -- David Rogers
Re: Pedal cautionary after a line break (current status and improvements)
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: Paolo, A quick examination of pieces in my collection showed that the following editions did not use brackets for the pedal, rather Ped. * was used. Paragon, Fryderyka Chopin Institute, Breitkopf & Hartel, and Edwin F. Kalmus. Unfortunately for the current discussion, these are (by Lilypond's own standards) some of the truly run-of-the-mill publishers, if they manage to achieve even that standard. That edition of Chopin does carry the name of a former celebrity on the cover, it's true; he may have been an excellent man (I can't say), but his music-publishing efforts were second-rate at best. (It's clear he was only lending his name for the celebrity cachet anyway; all the PWM Chopin books have the decency to name the real editors at least, and Paderewski wasn't among them.) Bad editing, bad printing, substandard paper, brittle glue that only holds the book together long enough to get it home... well, you can't say they were inconsistent. :) I guess my position as a pianist is that while Paolo seems to be mistaken about software politics, musically he's correct. There's no musical justification for claiming that Lilypond's sloppy and inconsistent handling of piano pedalling is acceptable. (There's also no social/political justification for claiming that that fact obliges any particular person or group to fix it at any particular time.) -- David Rogers
Re: Pedal cautionary after a line break (current status and improvements)
Paolo Prete writes: On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 6:00 PM Jean Abou Samra wrote: So, in order to produce a concrete result, at least the point 2) should be accepted / understood. This is what I tried to do, but the thread seems to go in the opposite way. This is why I think that opening a ticket would be unuseful for now and I did not open it. But if you think it could be useful, be free (of course) to open it ... This is precisely the heart of the question. LilyPond development is (mostly) not driven by the importance of issues but rather by pleasure and interest. Which means that you just need one person willing to spend time on piano pedals − and skilled enough for that − regardless of the issue's weight. That can happen now, or in months or in years, who knows. In the most extreme cases, issues can be resolved a decade after they were reported. Look at the one David Stephen Grant fixed just two weeks ago: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/1722 https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/119 This is why issues are so essential. They help organize work on a long time frame. By the way, the Type::Enhancement label expresses no judgement about wether the issue is a major one. It's to be understood as opposed to Type::Defect: this ticket is about an enhancement because the current output is consistent and there is no crash. I opened https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6005 . I would not proceed in this way. The lack of a cautionary pedal on a bracket could be seen as an enhancement only in a self-referential context, which doesn't make sense to me. A proper way to proceed is to check what modern professional engravers do with it, and check as a consequence if Lilypond is coherent with them (-> common practice) AFAIK nobody uses a bracket without a starting word in professional engraving, it would have too many bad side effects. And opening an issue as an enhancement IMHO will weaken the urgency of fixing this. Best, P Certainly you're right that it's an "enhancement" only in a self-referential context. But that was already the meaning of Jean's message; when you decide to use *any* complex software that's developed by volunteers, you must accept that this same self-referential point of view is going to prevail. It's just part of the way humans are. The main exception is when someone is bothered by an irritating defect that he cares about, in some software that he cares about; he refuses to accept that the situation might stay this way, and finally he gets so impatient or angry that he learns the necessary programming language and fixes the problem himself. (Who knows? That example might be you!) There's an old joke: When free software is defective, the users are entitled to a full refund. :) -- David Rogers
Re: command request
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes: Karlin, Thank you for your reply and suggestion. The piano piece has a long cadenza (unmetered). After the cadenza ends the next measure (metered) starts on what appears to be the second beat. Mark I'd instead be looking for better/cleaner ways of declaring to Lilypond that the cadenza is unmetered, and/or clarifying the structure of what's before and after it, in the hope of preventing the problem in the first place. -- David Rogers
Re: mea máxima culpa
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: As I said, replies from a digest rarely make sense because of breaking the message threading. This is true, or at least I'm willing to take it as true - but if a digest exists, then it would be very strange and frustrating to try to disallow replying to it. Otherwise, if a digest subscriber wanted to reply to something, he'd have to travel backwards in time and subscribe himself to the individual messages instead, in time to catch the one he was interested in. :) So - cancel the digest? Or accept that replies will continue to come from it. I can't see any possible choice other than those two. People should remember to do the right thing every time, and people should be required to use mail client software that not only does the right thing but also steadfastly refuses to do the wrong thing. But people are not going to change like that unless Mr Kastrup makes a personal visit to each of their homes - and maybe not even then. :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond and ConTeXt
Henning Hraban Ramm lilypon...@fiee.net writes: Am 2013-09-06 um 23:12 schrieb David Rogers davidandrewrog...@gmail.com: Hello There have been several methods in the history of LilyPond for integrating LilyPond scores with ConTeXt documents (ConTeXt is a newer more-flexible system somewhat analogous to LaTeX). Right now, which is the best choice for putting ConTeXt and LilyPond together? (Your answer might be Don't bother, just use LaTeX, if you have a good reason for saying that.) Hi David, I’m the one behind the previous lilypond module for ConTeXt and the current LilyPond filter suggestion. For me, it works great (besides the usual layout problems with TeX). I guess the matter is, what are you planning to do? I’m typesetting songbooks. I'd like to be able to make a teaching book for piano students - short pieces with comments and explanations in between, with the ability to have section or chapter headings and other types of headings as well, and easy control over page-breaking (both within the music and between the pieces) would be nice. Shouldn't be more difficult than a songbook, I would think - perhaps even less, because there are fewer lines of lyrics. -- Thanks David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: 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'm in the same situation if I need to transcribe any hymns (which I usually don't need but whatever) - customary trumps correct. Caution: wild assumptions in the following paragraph. :) 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. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
LilyPond and ConTeXt
Hello There have been several methods in the history of LilyPond for integrating LilyPond scores with ConTeXt documents (ConTeXt is a newer more-flexible system somewhat analogous to LaTeX). Right now, which is the best choice for putting ConTeXt and LilyPond together? (Your answer might be Don't bother, just use LaTeX, if you have a good reason for saying that.) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Feta font modifications by Janek
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes: [wearing the FreeType maintainer hat] Howver, my opinion is that we don't *need* Multiple Masters in general. What we really need is an option to select a stylistic variant which contains a set of finely tuned glyphs representing a certain style, and OpenType provides the perfect means for that, namely up to 20 stylistic sets (features `ss01' to `ss20'). I agree with this line of thought; from my point of view, the ability to slightly morph a font in a controlled way in a particular dimension or set of dimensions is technologically brilliant but not of sufficient practical use for Lilypond. It doesn't allow for style changes, only dimension changes. In fact the whole practical use of multiple masters was *to keep the style exactly the same*, while just tweaking the width (or the boldness, the degree of slant, whatever dimensions were built in by the font designers). I'm afraid in Lilypond's context a multiple-master font would turn out to be a time-consuming toy that only its individual designer would ever really make much use of. What people would really make use of would be the ability to select *a different font altogether*, one that had a starkly different style - including for example significant tweaks to the spacing algorithm, differently-shaped rests, different relations of stem thickness to note size to staff size, different dynamics font, brand-new clefs, the works. (And, in an ideal situation, such a font would be able to be part of an integrated over-all style template, such as the one under construction by Kieren. My sense is that he's already going in just the right direction, and simply lacks time and tools.) At this point in history, there are quite a few recognized and popular visual styles for typesetting music. The attraction is being able to use this style _or_ that style; being able to create an intermediate compromise style between any two of them is IMO a solution in search of a problem. There are (were?) situations where multiple-masters are useful. But music isn't one of them IMO. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Double slurs on automatic part combining
Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 9:44 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
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).
As another data point, the small cross-section of Canadian hymn books
easily available to me (ranging from the 1910s to the 1990s) mostly
agree with what Carl is seeing; the only hymn book I have that prints
everything (except obvious keyboard chords) with separate stems is the
one from before 1920, which was printed in movable type. All the others
merge the stems at all times, except for unisons, seconds, and anything
that would otherwise be ambiguous.
--
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [slightly OT] polymeter (was Re: chopin example)
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: This thread reminded me that I wanted to let you all see the first few pages of a recent commission, which ended up requiring polymetrics across line breaks, etc. I love the way it turned out, and I can't imagine how difficult it would be to engrave in something other than Lilypond. =) A. I like the music, thanks for showing it; B. It's both very nice looking AND very clear and easy to read. I'd certainly be happy (when asked to play something) to receive a score as lovely as that one. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: explicit 7 on a half diminished 7
Derek Klinge schilke...@gmail.com writes:
For the life of me I cannot figure this out.
I would like the following example to explicitly include the 7. Is
there a way to change the way it handles half diminished 7ths?
EXAMPLE
\chords {
c4:7.9- c:7.9-/g
\set slashChordSeparator = \markup { over }
\break
c4:7.9- c:7.9-/g
}
On my machine, using Lilypond version 2.17.22, and copying your code
exactly, I get explicit 7 everywhere; all four examples have
C7b9
(plus /G for one of them, and plus over G for another one)
... or did you mean your request in a different way?
(By the way - Is a Schilke 60 for trombone or tuba?)
--
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re:
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes: Or do you mean bends? Glissandi? Key change, even? Could you maybe send (or point to) an example? It seems unclear what you mean with crescente/calante in harmonics (as opposed to dynamics) ... I believe that the intended meaning is Here are the notes of the harmonic series that can be played on the horn. The notes marked with a plus tend to sound sharp, and the notes marked with a minus tend to sound flat. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: frescobaldi on mac
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes: That brings me to my question: I've worked through Phillippe's recipe faithfully (I think). Now, when I try to launch frescobaldi on the Terminal, I get an error message ImportError: No module named sip Does anyone know what's the problem there? According to the person who packaged it for Arch Linux, sip is A tool that makes it easy to create Python bindings for C and C++ libraries. On my system, the dependencies relating to sip go as follows: frescobaldi needs python2-poppler-qt; python2-poppler-qt needs python2-pyqt4; python2-pyqt4 needs python2-sip; python2-sip needs sip and python2. ... there are other dependencies for some of these things of course, but I think those are the relevant ones in the situation. Hopefully the situation is at least analogous for you... -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: (fwd)
Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl writes: ... writing LilyPond code directly is in fact easier and much faster than ... fixing errors. Especially this. Most of the export and import processes end up with some errors, and being forced to find and solve machine-made errors (maybe obscure ones) is not easy if you're not used to Lilypond in the first place. It can be hard to get Lilypond to do a perfect job with (for example) a long and complicated opera or symphony. But to get Lilypond to do a good job on some fairly simple music is almost certainly easier than learning how to fix export/import problems. You don't need to read the entire documentation before you begin. It's laid out so that if you want to do something simple, your problems will mostly be solved after reading only part way - you can save the rest of the studying for later, if you end up needing it. And as you get used to the manual, you become more comfortable with knowing where whatever thing you need today can probably be found. Also, about the documentation - the Snippets section will often have a pre-made solution to your problem. (When someone has a hard time figuring out how to do something in Lilypond, and then they get it right, they put it up as a snippet so that everyone else can just use that, instead of wasting their time discovering the solution over again.) If you want to do something that's musically fairly normal, and it seems to be turning out a bit more difficult than it should, then it's possible that someone else has already run into the same problem, solved it, and created a snippet out of it. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: tuplet beams
Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com writes: Andrew, Thank you for your reply. I know that I could manually beam and that would suitably work for a few measures. The piece, Chopin Black Key Etude, has 83 measures like this. Some “set it and forget it” global command would be most helpful. Someone has done that piece already; perhaps you could minimize your work load by borrowing from them, or even simply using their copy (please disregard if you've already seen this and decided you couldn't use it for some reason): http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/piece-info.cgi?id=926 -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: MIDI keyboard
Richard Shann richard.sh...@virgin.net writes: You could have played the entire piece in by the time you have set about looking for mistakes in the automatic entry systems. Richard: I think playing the piece in is what Johan is asking for, and is exactly what you're saying is a bad idea. I don't think what Denemo offers can in any sense be called playing it in. Entering it by typing on the keyboard is more accurate. Even if I use a musical keyboard, the Denemo method is typing, not playing. It may be the best method - but playing is the wrong word. I've played from a score made by a minor broadway composer from one of the software systems you're saying doesn't work well (i.e. he really did play his piece into the computer, in real time, from a midi piano keyboard). I agree, it was silly and very hard to read because of all the rhythmic errors - but it was ten years ago and I haven't seen any such scores lately. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Text in front of Staves
k...@kalegood.com writes: I see that lilypond supports a cool-looking No. glyph, which is great. Unless I'm mistaken, it's not Lilypond giving that cool-looking glyph, it's the font they were using. The Unicode designation for that glyph is U+2116 Numero Sign Some fonts have it, others don't. Or you might do tricks with a capital N and a small o to make a sign like that yourself, if necessary. To get it to appear in your score, just paste it in - here's one: № (I hope the one I just pasted for you is able to survive its trip across the internet.) :) If not, use your system's special-character-finding utility (or similar utility inside a word-processing program) to find the numero sign. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: SMuFL
Klaus Föhl klaus.fo...@uni-giessen.de writes: Hello, When changing font in text processing, you switch to a different font, and most time that's it. Relative placement is taken care of by the provided font metrics. In music notation there is a font, but at least within Lilipond objects like staves are draws not using glyphs from fonts but more primitive graphics objects. So I feel one should also change the layout of quite a few graphical objects when switching fonts. I wonder whether one would call that layout or style. In the current SMuFL paper (Version 0.4) there are some options: use complete notes as provided, or assemble from notehead, stem and flag ? is there some guidance how to match stem height to flag for best visual appearance ? use complete brackets, or assemble (and combine with a non-font line) ? What line thickness to go with U+E003 / U+E004 ? ? Should there be a vertical line in the font with such thickness ? use the staves (with the line thickness as provided) or draw lines While Scoring programs should draw their own staff lines using primitives ? does the font tell you what the line thickness should be ? So how to package this ancillary information to go with a font? This question has been a problem essentially forever, even from before computers - clefs and brackets are often engraved separately from notes, etc. Some computer music typesetting software has essentially declared Everything we print is a character in a font, even staff lines. Other software has gone in other directions. In the context of good typesetting, the answer is It doesn't really matter, just do the best most efficient job possible. I think, in the context of Lilypond, the best answer is Package the information in such a way that the creator of a new Lilypond font will be able to understand what he needs to do without having to navigate Lilypond internals or know how the typesetting works. Or, to put it another way, the document How to Create a Lilypond Music Font should ideally be short, and able to be understood and successfully applied by someone who knows fonts but doesn't know Lilypond. Right now, such a font person tries to make a Lilypond font, gets quite some way into the work, and finds these few lines buried in the documentation: Step 893: Re-write Lilypond to accommodate what you've created in the preceding 892 steps. This step is left as an exercise for the reader. Step 894: If you are religious, you should take some time to pray now. Even if you're not religious, praying is still recommended, just in case. Step 895: I thought that might happen. Too bad. Oh well, go back to Step 1 and let's try to see what went wrong. :) I have no illusion that making a font for Lilypond should be easy. I _do_ have the illusion that it ought to be a clearly-defined task.* If, in Lilypond's case, Font means more than it does in other situations (for example, if for Lilypond a font designer must provide a lot of additional measurements or extra glyphs), well, so be it. As long as he's told what the requirements are, and how to ensure that his new font will actually work. * - It's easy to see that the history of Lilypond development might have meant that at one time there was a lot of pressure to get it working and very little pressure or desire to get it ready for different music fonts. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: SMuFL
Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com writes: Emmentaler is, in effect, proprietary, although free. I disagree. I think so poorly documented that in practice almost no one can understand how it works still can't qualify as in effect proprietary. It just qualifies as needing a huge amount of work; work that there is absolutely no one on earth who BOTH wants to do it and already knows how. I guess that leaves three possibilities for Emmentaler: - Someone who doesn't really want to (but is fully capable of) writing two very specific major pieces of documentation - Successfully Using Emmentaler Outside of Lilypond and Jarlsberg: A Start-to-Finish Guide to Creating New Drop-In Replacements for Emmentaler - decides to spend time writing them anyway. - Or: Someone who wants to write those docs but has no idea how, spends an inordinate amount of time and energy learning it by himself. - Or: Everyone waits to see what will happen. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Henle piano template
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hi Urs (et al.), I'm probably biased but I find the appearance of the 'old' score infinitely superior. Immediately, one notices [in the newer version] what a poor choice it is to have the triplet number (over the middle of the triplet) above, as it is easily confused with the fingering number immediately to its right. in general, we are more interested in the inspiration by state of the art plate engraving rather than state of the art computer engraving, since LilyPond wants to be a frontrunner in computer engraving. Agreed — I will always be aiming for that with these stylesheets. Well, that's a bit like making a Bauhaus impression by picking the right tapestry: the main responsibility lies with the placement and spacing algorithms, and the stylesheets then have to combine with them into a coherent whole with a consistent look that avoids making the algorithms fall apart. So the stylesheets are sort of coevolving with the algorithms responsible for the _work_ part of our look. I admit that I don't really understand any of what you just said, David. Maybe I'm about to say almost the same thing, or the opposite, or unrelated - I can't quite tell. Some very significant reasons IMO that the old Henle score looks Henle: - the notehead shapes - the stem thickness (to my eyes, thinner relative to noteheads than LP) - the notehead size relative to staff size (Henle's noteheads are subjectively fat or slightly over-sized compared to LP; just my opinion, I didn't measure. Maybe it's tight spacing fooling my eyes...) - the staff-space relative to page size (relatively large I think) - the default-staff-staff-spacing (relatively smaller than LP default, I think) - the horizontal spacing algorithms (a big one IMO, doesn't sound easy) - the clef styles ... and if I wanted to make my score look Henle, I would think at least some of those things would have to be first on the list. They might be regarded as just cosmetic, but this whole exercise is about the cosmetic, isn't it? For example, without the Henle notehead shapes/sizes, staff-space adjustments, and stem thicknesses, I think everything else in a Henle template will (should!) look off until they are brought in. Am I totally off track? -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Henle piano template
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 06.08.2013 19:46, schrieb David Rogers: Some very significant reasons IMO that the old Henle score looks Henle: - the notehead shapes - the stem thickness (to my eyes, thinner relative to noteheads than LP) - the notehead size relative to staff size (Henle's noteheads are subjectively fat or slightly over-sized compared to LP; just my opinion, I didn't measure. Maybe it's tight spacing fooling my eyes...) - the staff-space relative to page size (relatively large I think) - the default-staff-staff-spacing (relatively smaller than LP default, I think) - the horizontal spacing algorithms (a big one IMO, doesn't sound easy) - the clef styles ... and if I wanted to make my score look Henle, I would think at least some of those things would have to be first on the list. They might be regarded as just cosmetic, but this whole exercise is about the cosmetic, isn't it? For example, without the Henle notehead shapes/sizes, staff-space adjustments, and stem thicknesses, I think everything else in a Henle template will (should!) look off until they are brought in. Am I totally off track? Not totally off track, I'd say. It's all correct what you write. But did you actually compile Kieren's files and have a look at them? I find them fascinatingly close in their general appearance (not counting of course a number of details that still have to be tweaked). It looks so Henle-like that I can't really imagine how one would tweak LilyPond to mimick the scores of other publishers ... I just printed it and compared them side-by-side at the piano. Unfortunately I have to guess a little bit about absolute sizes, because I don't have any paper in the house except Letter size. With all due respect for Kieren's skill and work, which I cannot hope even to match let alone improve on, I really believe (taking the stated goals of Kieren's project literally) that only detail tweaks have so far been accomplished, and the general basic appearance is still very very LilyPond. What I notice is stuff that (to me) sounds like a mixture of easy things and difficult things: - The whole notation font needs to be replaced with a Henle-look-alike. At the very least, LP's notehead size is much too small for Henle; but everything else (quarter rests, fermatas, sharps flats, and clefs stand out in this example) looks very LilyPond as well. - The staff lines, ledger lines, and note stems need to be lightened a lot. - The beams may need to be darkened. (Or maybe they already match, after lightening the staff lines and stems.) - Slurs need to be thinner at the ends and thicker in the middle. - The accidentals need to be significantly closer to their noteheads. (I'm on version 2.17.22 - did something change? I'm getting excessive white-space between each accidental and its note, in this template.) - Staccato dots in this Henle Beethoven score are horizontally aligned with the notehead, even when printed on the stem side of the note. - Two or three of the items above may affect the horizontal spacing, which might then have to be tweaked again. - If one is really in a mood to go crazy, is there a freely-available text font that looks like Bodoni? (Hmm... a bit of a theme there - just about everything in the Henle score has higher contrast between thick and thin than is shown in the LilyPond score.) I guess part of the question is how far it's worth going in pursuit of this. It seems to me that the really hard parts can unfortunately be the parts that count, when talking about appearance. -- David R ___ 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
It seems to me that when scores are set with lots of white space, the rules are followed meticulously (and that this is why computer-generated scores began by being set much too loosely on the page - it's easier to follow spacing rules when you have lots of room to do so). As scores are set tighter on the page (I mean as a variable, not as a historical trend), then it can become necessary to break more rules in order to fit everything in. Lyric spacing is IME generally the first thing to go out the window in that case. Isolated, your example looks perfect to me. I think what's making it look ugly to you is probably that it makes the spacing suddenly wider in an otherwise fairly-tight score. I see several possibilities for you (not listed in any order): - Pretend you like it this way - Increase the horizontal spacing of the whole score - Choose a much narrower lyric font - Print the same lyric font a lot smaller [might be hard to read] - Put a line break nearby, to prevent line break right there - Change the syllable alignment for that note [I don't like this choice; the singer can't read it very well] My opinion: because you've been studying this problem for a while now, Lilypond's default probably looks worse to you than it really is. -- David R ___ 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
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. What I take from looking at these scores is that to set primarily-vocal music really well, it's necessary to spend time before you start, making sure that your text font, your over-all horizontal spacing, and your notation font all work together to automatically give a good-looking result most of the time; and remembering that if you change any one of those you'll likely have to change the others to match it. It seems to me that Lilypond's beginnings were based purely on instrumental music, that Lilypond's lyrics were (and are) sort of an uncomfortable add-on with very limited flexibility (compared to how musically-flexible Lilypond is), and that the kind of extensive thought and experimentation with challenging vocal scores that the old publishers obviously put into their choices has not been done yet with Lilypond; so finding workable proportions to accommodate text, notes, and horizontal spacing is to some extent left up to each user. I think Lilypond's default text font is a very reasonable choice from a (free-) software point of view but only a fair-to-OK choice from a lyrics point of view. This is probably because fonts that are excellent from a lyrics point of view are non-free or hard-to-find or both. (In general, in my experience, lyric fonts for classical music are very traditional-looking according to late 19th-century expectations, able to be tightly spaced, perhaps horizontally somewhat compressed, and - very importantly - use lots of ink. The jazz-style fonts with their thick lines are certainly better for any lyric than spidery elegant light-coloured fonts would be.) If it was possible to compress and blacken Knuth's Computer Modern but keep it looking good, that would be on the right track at least. (That font seems to be in the right general style category, but it's much too light and airy for lyrics. The small-size variants of Computer Modern are blacker, but they're also wider and spaced looser, and that's the opposite of what seems to be needed here.) And copying
Re: Henle piano template
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hello all, I have found some images of Henle's Moonlight Sonata. Old edition: http://www.ackermanmusic.co.uk/img/P/412339_1.jpg And the new one (from 2013): http://www.di-arezzo.com/multimedia/images/henle/part/hn1062.jpg Same publishing house, but so many differences :) Is there a preferred one for our purposes here? From 2013 does not sound like plate engraving. Henle apparently did their last plate engraving in about 2000, and were supposedly one of the last hold-outs when most others had been using computers for a while. So, when talking about the big respected publishing houses: Anything from before 1985-1990 is almost sure to be plate-engraved; anything after 2000 is almost sure to be computer-engraved; for music from between those approximate dates, you'd have to take a look to find out. (According to the maker of SCORE, Schott was the first well-known publisher to use his software, 1990.) -- David R ___ 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
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. -- David R ___ 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
James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com writes: I ran into the attached spacing problem while typesetting a lead sheet. I can't make a minimal example right this second; will try in the next couple of days. When a tied note has a lyric syllable, LP (2.16.1) left aligns the syllable to the note, on the assumption that tied-to note column will occupy horizontal space and give the syllable space to extend to the right of the note under which it appears. Makes sense -- that's a good refinement. However, the same thing happens at the end of a system, forcing the note column far to the left of where I would expect it to appear. I searched the bug tracker but didn't see anything relevant. I may be a philistine, but to me it looks ideal the way it is in the jpg file. What improvement do you mean to make? -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: anyone got lilypond 2.16.2 to work on Windows Vista?
Robert Honoré robert.hon...@gmail.com writes: It usually does once I change the version string. I had sent the one that worked with my previous installation of lilypond (2.12.3). Usually, when I do an upgrade, I would change the version string once I get the error message when I attempt to process it. That is usually the first hint I get that the syntax I have in my old *.ly files might need to be checked. The file I sent (serial-1.ly) is my test file. It has only one line of random music, so that it serves as the subject of a quick test. My current problem is that I can't even get lilypond to go to the point where it tells me that the file was found and it has begun processing, far less to tell me that the version string is too old (see my previous post with the command line session log). If I could get lilypond to tell me that, I would consider it progress. Robert: It seems to me that you are working very hard to outsmart Lilypond, doing tricks that should theoretically work if... some particular obscure unreliable condition is met. At the risk of sounding dismissive, I'll say: why not just read the manual and follow the instructions? They work quite well as printed - there's no need to resort to extracurricular tricks to make sure Lilypond is working. One bad part about Lilypond is that you do have to follow the instructions and intentions of the people who programmed it. When they say do it this way, there is nearly always the implication ... because no other way will work, or at least no other way gives any guarantee. Another bad part is simply that Lilypond is quite a large collection of code; unless you wrote a large chunk of that code yourself, it's safe to assume that you don't know how it ought to work except by being told - either by those who *have* written large chunks of it, or by those who use it on a daily basis and have become very familiar with it. Occasionally things do change - make sure you're reading the manuals and instructions for the Lilypond version you're really using, and not simply hoping that outdated methods will still (by chance) work. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: optional transposition triggered by an external file?
Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de writes:
Hello list,
for my current project I have some scores located in
individual files:
A.ly
B.ly
C.ly
which can be compiled independently, and a latex file
containing calls like this
\lilypondfile{A.ly}
[... some text ...]
\lilypondfile{B.ly}
[... even more text ...]
\lilypondfile{C.ly}
This works fine.
Now I want to include an appendix for transposing instruments
(Saxophone in e flat etc.) where all the files are transposed
accordingly.
Now my (probably way too complicated and crude) idea sounds like this:
I need a way to define an optional variable that controls (if defined)
the transposition so I can say, for example:
\begin{appendix}
\chapter{For Bb instruments}
\begin{lilypond}
#(define transposeTo d)
\include{A.ly}
\end{lilypond}
\begin{lilypond}
#(define transposeTo d)
\include{B.ly}
\end{lilypond}
...
\end{appendix}
I've never tried this. Is it even possible to define things in the latex
file that are then parsed by Lilypond? If it is possible, perhaps adding
a special line inside each of A.ly, B.ly, and C.ly, which contains
\transpose C \transposeTo . That looks to me [if it was going to work at
all] as if your .ly files would then refuse to work if you ever forgot
to define \transposeTo in your latex file - but maybe it's worth it.
--
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: change the key signature
Givaldo de Cidra givaldodeci...@gmail.com writes: Could you help me with a code in lilypond? I have a musical example it was necessary to change the key signature. I made the change with the code below: \ set Staff.keySignature '= # (((1. 0.), SHARP) ((1. 3.), natural)) Placing a hash in C and makes the natural inf F Solved for a moment, but now I think it would be better that instead of NATURAL was one natural sign of caution ... I would take into the key signature a C sharp and natural sign in brackets. Is this possible? I just want to make sure I understand your question: Are you only looking for a way to get brackets around the natural, in the key signature you already have? -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: stylesheets, defaults, and other in-Pond-erables
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hello all, I'm hoping to break out a series of stylesheets (or stylesheet sets): instrument (e.g., violin) solo piano solo piano + vocal piano + solo instrument organ solo instrumental ensemble (e.g., piano quartet) chorus a cappella orchestra orchestra + chorus I've found lovely examples of piano + vocal, organ solo, chorus + piano reduction, orchestra, and orchestra + chorus in my library. (Most are Bärenreiter, so I'm sticking close to Lilypond's inspirational roots…) So now I really need a benchmark for instrument solo, piano solo, piano + solo instrument, instrumental ensemble, and chorus a cappella. (I have some scores in my library, of course, but none of them are stunning enough to consider using as a benchmark.) Still not quite understanding the request... The bits of Boulez's third piano sonata published by Universal are certainly an engraver's tour de force; long passages of grace notes with a new dynamic mark for each individual note, acrobatically-drawn slurs snaking across staves, two types of pedal at once, multiple layers of markup (both text and symbol), vertically-typeset names for snippets of music, tiny crescendo marks drawn at angles between individual notes, finicky pedal markings - oh well, you get the point. A sample is included in a UE compilation published 1968 called Styles in 20th Century Piano Music (along with other music, all well-engraved, but IMO Universal is almost never as pretty as Baerenreiter.) If you want to make use of this blue book and don't find a copy easily, just send me your postal address and I'll mail it to you. Or email you a page or two scanned, if that's acceptable practice. If instead the request is more like What's the over-all look of the canonical example of a plain piano solo score, I think you're unlikely to go wrong with Henle's print of the Beethoven sonatas done in the 1950s. The problem, though, is that there are so many possible ways to mess up a piano score by adding special markings and such, and Beethoven didn't live long enough to make use of them all. :) I don't think stunning is always good. Being stunned sometimes comes from obtrusive shapes that call too much attention to themselves. I think a big part of getting piano music right in Lilypond is ability to know when to use chords, when to use separate voices, and when to use polyphony, and having convenient and logical means for switching midstream. I'm sure that some of my favourable impressions of some of the nicest-looking scores come from generally-non-varying items such as notehead shape, markup font, proportion of notehead size to staff size, proportion of staff size to paper size, and so on. Also the hand-engraver's ability to identify visually and logically what goes with what and make subtle improvements to the inter-note spacing. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: stylesheets, defaults, and other in-Pond-erables
I've found a piano score that seems, to my eyes, both more friendly and more beautiful than Henle's Beethoven sonatas: the Chopin Nocturnes from Wiener Urtext, catalogue UT 50065 from 1980. If this turns out to have been computer-generated, then I'll just have to hang my head in shame. :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: stylesheets, defaults, and other in-Pond-erables
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hello all, I'm going full-bore on getting some of my scores re-engraved in the next month or so. (They tend to be cram-engraved under pressure for the premiere, and then never returned to due to the next commission on the docket…) As a result, I'm hoping to break out a series of stylesheets (or stylesheet sets): instrument (e.g., violin) solo piano solo piano + vocal piano + solo instrument organ solo instrumental ensemble (e.g., piano quartet) chorus a cappella orchestra orchestra + chorus I would love for the fruits of my labour to benefit the Lilypond community, in the sense that some of the overrides might become defaults, and the other files might be presented as a package of easily-included templates/files distributed with (or nearby) the application/binary/docs. To that end, I'm hoping to get suggestions about particular scores in the above categories which the Lilypond community would consider benchmarks. We used to claim to use Barenreiter as the benchmark, so I suppose that might be the place to start? Any references would be greatly appreciated. What kinds of things would it be helpful to make sure such benchmark scores include? Is this simply a call for the best-looking scores in existence, for each category, or is there more to it than that? (For example, is it helpful to have music that's difficult for Lilypond to set, or would that just be a distraction?) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Appoggiatura or not appoggiatura?
John Kliewe kli...@yahoo.com writes:
Many thanks to the lilypond-user group for their advice on measure #47
of the Chopin Nocturne #3 (Op 9 No 3). Urs' article on voices was
particularly helpful.
My next challenge appeared in measure #69. This is working for me :
\version 2.16.0
\relative c'
{ \clef treble
\time 6/8
\key b \major
ais'4.\p \once \override Slur #'stencil = ##f \appoggiatura {b8[\( ais
gisis ais]}
{dis4 b8}
\new Voice
{\stemUp
\once \override TupletBracket #'bracket-visibility = ##f
\once \override TupletNumber #'stencil = ##f
\times 1/2
{dis8 \teeny d cis c}
\normalsize b8}
\oneVoice
ais4 gis8\)
}
At first I assumed that both tuplets were appoggiatura, but I couldn't
get that to work. I also tried cue notes, but merging the head of a
cue note with a full-size note head was no good either. So my final
version (above) treats the first tuplet as an appoggiatura, but the
second is a new voice in a smaller font.
I'm delighted with the results. But I do wonder if anyone in the group
thinks I may have missed a better approach?
Not better, but another possible way:
\version 2.16.0
\relative c'
{ \clef treble
\time 6/8
\key b \major
ais'4.\p \once \override Slur #'stencil = ##f \appoggiatura {b8[\( ais
gisis ais]}
{dis4 b8}
\new Voice
{\stemUp
{ dis8*1/2[ \teeny d cis c}
\normalsize b8]}
\oneVoice
ais4 gis8\)
}
--
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Running Lilypond from Fraise
Jacques Menu jacques.m...@tvtmail.ch writes: Hello, Don't know Fraise, but if that may help : you menu entry should run: /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/lilypond be that textually placed there or in shell script of yours. I neglected this point in my hasty instructions; when you use the terminal command lilypond MyNewPiece.ly , it probably should be /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/lilypond MyNewPiece.ly instead, so that the system can find what you mean by lilypond. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Running Lilypond from Fraise
Philippe de Rochambeau phi...@free.fr writes: Hello, could someone please explain how to run Lilypond from Fraise? I haven't used Fraise. I did use Smultron a little bit a long time ago. There may be an elegant way, eliminating the use of the terminal emulator and making steps 2 through 4 of my description obsolete; there is definitely a non-elegant way that will always work with any text editor, and here it is: 1. Type your Lilypond file in Fraise, or any text editor that saves as plain text. Make sure it is saved with .ly at the end of the name, such as MyNewPiece.ly - also make sure that there are no spaces in the name of your piece, no spaces in the name of the folder it's in, and no spaces in any of the names of any of the folders that contain that folder. If you want the visual effect of spaces, you can always use underscore characters like My_New_Piece.ly . 2. Open Terminal (it's in the Utilities folder, inside of Applications). In your terminal window, type the following and press Enter afterwards: cd ~/Documents/LilypondScores (that is, type cd, then a space, and then the name of whatever folder you have put your piece in - your pieces can go anywhere you like, as long as there are no spaces in any folder names and as long as you can remember what folder they're in. The special character ~ is used in terminal commands as an abbreviation for My own home folder, and folders always have a slash between their names.) 3. Just to make sure you're in the right folder, type the following and press Enter afterwards: ls (This will list everything in the folder - all that matters is that the name of your piece is one of the things in the list) 4. Type the following (using the real name of your piece, obviously) and press Enter afterwards: lilypond MyNewPiece.ly (This command will cause the terminal to display Lilypond's messages, along with any errors that occur. If errors occur, it's either because Lilypond isn't installed correctly or because there was a typing mistake in your piece.) 5. Assuming it worked, there will now be MyNewPiece.pdf in the same folder with MyNewPiece.ly. Go and open that to see the results. ___ The elegant method of using Fraise would be to eliminate my steps 2 through 4, by adding a Lilypond command into Fraise itself so that you don't need to use Terminal. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Running Lilypond from Fraise
Hi again Philippe... If (when) Frescobaldi becomes easy to install on a Mac, definitely use it instead of Fraise - because Frescobaldi is made for Lilypond, it provides a lot of nice functions that Fraise will never have. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: ... for some reason XeLaTeX/fontspec isn't willing to use the bold version of my chosen tt font (Inconsolata) - so the listings were without syntax highlighting. I have already done a workaround (by using the default tt font). Inconsolata originally had no bold. A bold weight has been added - do you have the newest version? http://code.google.com/p/googlefontdirectory/source/browse/ofl/inconsolata/ -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Request for feedback on 'lobbying' paper
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Peter Wannemacher pe...@scriptureoftheweek.com writes: == You wrote on page 4: Editor independent There isn’t a inseparable unit between editing and processing a docu- It is common to write: There isn't an inseparable unit And not between but rather of editing and processing. Or even Editing a document and processing it are not an inseparable unit. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Newbie problems
Peter Toye lilyp...@ptoye.com writes: Thank you all very much for your help. It's not the most intuitive user interface (or should that be language?), and I've only been trying it out for a few hours, so I'm coming up with all sorts of silly issues. One problem I'm having is that it's not easy to find things in the documentation. As with all language systems,. you spend an awful lot of time searching. Part of this problem is simply the way Lilypond is. With some software, the manual is only where you go when you run into trouble, and most of the time you expect to work without the manual. With Lilypond - well, let's say you should reserve a permanent space on your screen for the Lilypond manual, for the next several months. :) It isn't a fault, it's just the kind of program Lilypond is; because there are no pictures on the screen to show you what to do, every time you want to do a new thing, you have to look it up. The more you use the manual, the more you see how the manual works. You get to know where a certain kind of information is going to be, so it doesn't take as long to find it. Learning Lilypond really comes down to Learning the Lilypond manual, in some important sense. In short: The Lilypond manual isn't a helpful auxiliary guide, it's the essential instructions for making it work. Without it, we would all just sit there staring at a blank screen. In jest: Lilypond is a program for turning the Lilypond manual into music. :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Newbie problems
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: When using Emacs, C-h i is just two keystrokes away. No need to reserve additional space for the info manual. You're right - I didn't think of that, because I didn't have Emacs when I started using Lilypond. I still haven't made the switch, though I would prefer to. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Newbie problems
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: It would likely be worth it to have an Emacs window open just for reading the documentation... (... Good point; I'll reserve a space for it on my desktop...) :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Question about left-aligning syllables at beginning of lines
Carl Peterson carlopeter...@gmail.com writes: As I mentioned in another thread, I'm working on a hymnal/psalter project and ideally would like to justify both the left and right edges of each line of lyrics. I'm willing to settle for the left edge, if the right edge is too cumbersome to do. I manually right-justified the last syllables on one psalm, but hard right justification doesn't look good since it puts the right edge under the notehead. My concern with fractional right justification is that if it is proportional (setting the alignment to #0.5 justifies halfway between center and right, relative to the width of the syllable), I'll still end up with a ragged line. Carl - the syllables in the sample that you posted appear to all be vowel-centered, not right-justified. Have you tried the vowel-centered lyrics modification that some people are using? It works quite well for me. The left-justified first syllable of the stanza would still be a problem to solve, but maybe this will help with everything else. Maybe I'm misunderstanding and your right-justified last syllables are coming from a different source. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: call for italian users: translation of feathered beams and other terms
Davide Liessi dal...@gmail.com writes: direct I can't understand this glossary entry, since there isn't enough context. I don't think it is specifically a musical term, and I couldn't find occurrences of direct in NR with a different meaning from the usual, literal, common one. Why is direct in the glossary? Why is it related to custos? Direct (noun) is sometimes used as a synonym for custos. If the common usage in Italian is custos, then I think the synonym is not necessary except in case of awareness when translating from other languages. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with lilypond-mode in emacs
Ralph Palmer palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com writes: Greetings - I'm running LilyPond 2.16.2 under Windows 7, SP1. I've copied the *.el files from lilypond\..\site-lisp to \emacs\emacs-24.3\site-lisp and I've set the PATH and HOME variables so that I think emacs is finding lilypond-mode.el, but when I open emacs and type M-x lilypond-mode, I get [no match]. When I drag-and-drop an .ly file onto the open emacs buffer, I get Symbol's function definition is void: lilypond-mode. In your emacs init file (mine on Linux is called .emacs, yours may have a different name - the main startup file for Emacs, in any case), I believe you need to have something like the following (replacing what's between the quote marks with the correct information of course): (add-to-list 'load-path Directory where the *.el files are) That line tells Emacs where to search, to find the Lilypond information it needs. Maybe you have this already - if you do, make sure it's still correct (you said you had moved the *.el files, so you'd have to change this line to match the new location). -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: default margins and lilypond-book
Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de writes: And is your intention to keep the lilypond source inside the LaTeX document? If that's not explicitely wanted you may have a look at my musicexamples' package. Overview: http://www.openlilylib.org/?/musicexamples/ The links to the project page and download on SourceForge is currently broken, but the manual and the sample document are there. Urs, this is extremely helpful, thank you! I'd never seen it. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: conversion factor for \pt
Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes: Best I can say: It works. Though, in german I'd call this Fischertechnik (don't know if it's understandable outside Germany, otoh, there's an english wikipedia-article about it ...) North American writers use Tinkertoy to mean the same thing. :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: \relative is not the best way of entering complicated music
Sarah k Alawami marri...@gmail.com writes:
Is there a way to memorize or through pattern recognition how many '
and , symbols it takes to jump octaves? besides writing down a few
notes and going to the tuneful site to listen to see if I messed up?
as that's what I've been doing and it yeps but it slows me down a
lot. and we don't' really want that.
When using \relative every note is the closest possible one unless you
change it. This comes from traditional-style melody in which wide leaps
are uncommon, and most melodies move by step or by small intervals. In
those stereotypical old-fashioned melodies, you rarely have to use ' or
, signs.
This means that watching your music for leaps of a fifth or more is all
you have to do most of the time. If there is a leap of a fourth or smaller,
do nothing. A fifth down (or as much as an eleventh down) gets a , sign;
a fifth up (or as much as an eleventh up) gets a ' sign.
Examples:
{e b} % a fourth down
{e b,} % an eleventh down
{e b,,} % an eighteenth down
{e b'} % a fifth up
{e b''} % a twelfth up
--
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Tying rest notes incorrectly ties succeeding normal notes?
Parham Fazelzadeh par...@hil.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp writes: Yeah, it doesn't make sense to tie rests, you are right about that. But the behaviour was still unexpected, and unwanted, I would say. In general, with LilyPond, unexpected input creates unexpected output. Often, if you input something that doesn't make sense, LP tries very hard to force it to make sense - to do what you might have meant. If bad input was simply ignored, then it would also be harder for you to find the problem afterward - so it's actually a good thing that bad input creates a messy score. (Putting a tie between rests is an input mistake, plain and simple. Don't do that. Problem solved.) :) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: 4-Drum Conga Notation in LilyPond
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Eric Pancer epan...@gmail.com writes: On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote: Is C6 considered 0? Well, here I'm the one who is confused. I never heard C6 and the others you mention below. Apologies. C5 is known as middle C. It isn't. You are confusing this with its big brother C4. C6 is the C in the third space of treble clef. etc.. That's C5. C6 is already high soprano turf. Perhaps we are better off with Helmholtz notation after all. It turns out that the correct number for C4, C5, and so on can be found by counting the number of Cs on a standard 88-key piano, starting from the low end and starting with 1. Is this an accident, or is this the origin of that numbering system? (I'm assuming that the three leftover keys lower than the lowest C on the piano are numbered zero?) I suspect but can't remember with certainty, that MIDI uses this numbering system incorrectly, and I think that might be the source of the confusion here. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: looking for a style guide
Xavier Noria f...@hashref.com writes: Is there any style guide for scores online? For example, I don't know if I should break the groups of four eight notes in the sample in pairs... would like to get the picture about these basic things. LilyPond users are lucky. Most of the time, in music that isn't (to use an academic term) crazy and weird, LilyPond just does it right and you don't have to worry. If in doubt with things like beams and stems, leave it as is, because it is probably at least acceptable. Every musical style has its own set of expectations. When tweaking for easier reading, make sure to look at it through the eyes of an experienced musician in this style as much as you can. Whatever the style is, take your guidance from well-known and well-regarded old scores in that style whenever you can. Good scores that were made before computers became widespread are almost always the best how-to that you can get. -- David Rogers ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond cheat sheat
Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de writes: ... I added an *English version*, which should make it readable for a wider community. Most of the text consists of Lilypond commands, though. There are some places where I am not sure if I found the correct translation. http://arsantiqua-karlsruhe.de/images/pdf/LilypondCheatsheet_en.pdf The English translation looks fine; I can't find anything to disagree with. Two tiny changes, not important: In the Input Syntax section, near Comments, und didn't get translated. In the Notes section: English spells Octave with a c. What a nice job you have done! -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Adding a clef mid-measure
soundsfromsound soundsfromso...@gmail.com writes: On a side note, is there any one way that everyone agrees is the best way to import MusicXML into Lilypond with the cleanest, most accurate conversion results? Yes, absolutely there is. 1. Print the score (not the file, print the musical score) using the other program. 2. Type a fresh Lilypond file while looking at that score. Cleanest and most accurate, by far. Not the fastest, unfortunately. :) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: how to call these notes?
Stefan Thomas kontrapunktste...@gmail.com writes: Are You sure that is an Urtext and not a kind of later arrangement of this piece? 2012/10/17 Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com The Harvard Concise is not in my possession. I do have a copy of Haydn's Keyboard Concerto No. 11 in D. The acciaccatura (small eight notes with diagonal stroke tied to the principal note) appears multiple times in the first and third movements. This concerto was published in 1782. Even some (most?) of the so-called Urtext editions modernize the notation. It's necessary to see Haydn's handwriting to know for sure. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: how to call these notes?
Appoggiatura is a term in composition for a particular kind of note that doesn't belong to the harmony. Acciaccatura (crushed) is a playing technique that composers can request. Neither one is really the name of this little note. The little note isn't stroked OUT, because stroked out would mean disregard. It does have a stroke through it, just the word out is not the best. Appoggiaturas are very often notated with the little note *with* the stroke through it, especially in older scores. (Appoggiaturas don't have strokes through them is a modern rule that very often doesn't apply.) Acciaccaturas have the stroke-through notation almost all the time. I have heard, but have no reference to back it up, that the stroke through an 8th-note stem was once simply another way to write a sixteenth note. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: how to call these notes?
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Owain Sutton ow...@owainsutton.co.uk wrote: I've always taken 'acciaccatura' and 'grace note' to be synonyms. I think that's probably correct. Which means that grace note would not be the best name for this notation either. I jokingly propose Lnwl. (Little note with line) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: how to call these notes?
I don't have any of the engraving manuals - what is this note called in those books? It would probably be better to go along with the industry standard name, even if that name turns out not to be perfect. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: slur to 2 alternatives
ole m...@oleschmidt.info writes: thanks, but than my example look like this (see attached .jpg) That jpg is interesting. I would never have chosen to print it the way they did, and I think it can and should be done differently. (But still interesting to try for that result if you want.) -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: F-flat Key Signature
keith Luke kkll...@gmail.com writes: Does anyone know why the flats appear our of order when the key signature is F-flat? I'm really only summarizing what's been said: that it's probably already correct, that it's probably a bad idea to use it, and that the score is truly unreadable with the size mismatch between the staff and the things that are on it. I'd vote for E major in this section. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: F-flat Key Signature
Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de writes: But F flat _is_ different from E, especially in its relationship to other, 'normal' keys. F flat has a quite simple relation to G flat that might happen in real music. So I'm happy that LilyPond offers to explicitely write it down instead of refusing to do things, _she_ considers useless. Even if I'd probably never use it ... I don't think Lilypond should have its behaviour changed at all over this issue. I think the composer simply needs to change his mind about printing in F-flat major. I know he has composed in F-flat major, and I do NOT think he needs to change the composition itself - but I think compromising the printed copy by showing it in E major is the (not strictly correct but far more practical) way to ask the musicians to play the composition. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac lion
fabio gabbianelli fabiogabbiane...@hotmail.it writes: anyone knows if lilypond 2.16 or 2.17 works with osx 10.7? it could work through jEdit ? I don't see any news about a version of LilyPondTool for 2.16 or later. But maybe I just wasn't paying attention. (LilyPondTool is the best way to use jEdit with Lilypond). Its latest version appears to be 2.14. I have used LilyPondTool, and it is very good. If you already use jEdit for a lot of other things, you might want to wait for a new version of LilyPondTool. But if you don't use jEdit for your other work, then you can also try Frescobaldi. It is (in my opinion) just as good or maybe even better, and has a newer version available. Both of these projects are listed at http://lilypond.org/easier-editing.html . -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac lion
flup2 phili...@philmassart.net writes: Hello, No problem with 2.16 or 2.17 on a Mac with Lion or Mountain Lion, either with its own interface, or through command line, JEdit, Frescobaldi etc. (knowing that JEdit simply calls the command line of LilyPond). The previous problem of LilyPond on Mac only concerned the built-in interface; there was no problem with command line, JEdit or Frescobaldi. Just for my own clarification: Does LilyPondTool work with the latest version of Lilypond? Or are you only saying that jEdit the editor works fine? -- Thanks David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mixed piano bracket style
james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com writes: I have been looking at this documentation for so long, that I just don't understand it anymore. Is it possible to get a line on the text pedal notation? There are so many contexts and engravers for the piano pedals, that I just don't see how to add a line to it. Do you mean like what I've mocked up below? Ped ___| -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: exact placement rules for volta brackets?
On Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:55:09 +0200 Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Hello all, I am just about rewriting the bar line user interface and stumbled across a serious problem: with my new approach, the valta brackets are displaced. For developing a fix, I need to know how this is properly done. Gould doesn't say much about the details, and this is the only reference I have. For the moment, the center of the volta hook is placed over the left edge of the thick bar line, see the attached picture. This looks a bit weird, I think. Any hints/references/improvements? I just looked at some hand-made piano scores and a vocal score, some older and some newer, from Baerenreiter, Breitkopf, and Schott. With thick bar lines and volta brackets, results are not precisely all the same. I wasn't able to tell if this was inconsistency or a rule I couldn't perceive - I suspect just a bit of inconsistency. However, the large majority of them were as follows: Left sides of brackets over thick bar lines were placed so that the left edges of the two lines matched. Right sides of brackets over thick bar lines were placed so that the right edges of the two lines matched. In other words, a. Place the red guide line just as you have it now, touching the bar line, on the outside edge relative to the bracket. b. Make the volta bracket just touch the guide line, not centre on it. The vast majority of volta brackets at thin (normal) bar lines are centred on the bar line. Whether thick bar lines or thin, these particular hand-engravers appear to have allowed themselves a bit more flexibility about volta bracket positioning in those places where two brackets were close to touching, as in your picture. Those are the places of least consistency of alignment, at least in the scores I happened to have near the top of the pile. Probably it's just harder to get them aligned perfectly when there's less room to work. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Attaca markup
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:50:12 -0700 Daniel E. Moctezuma democtez...@gmail.com wrote: Also, after an attaca indication should the bar numbers reset or continue counting? I take attacca to mean Go straight on, even though it's a new piece. Having the bar numbers continue would mean to me This is not a new piece. So, to have attacca AND continuing bar numbers would look like a contradiction to me. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [for Italian users] how to translate spanner?
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:56:03 -0400 John Link johnl...@nyc.rr.com wrote: Well, male water sheep is not Italian. Don't mind me. I had a rough rehearsal today and I'm in a weird mood, trying to make a joke with the Italian translation (via google translate) of the British meaning of spanner. I was in joke-land as well. Male water sheep was apparently an instruction-manual translation result, from English into some other language, for hydraulic ram. :) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [for Italian users] how to translate spanner?
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 13:03:24 +0100 Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote: A spanner implies bridging between two equivalent end points. An extender would imply something already exists and is just made longer. A direction is often implied - the road was extended from A to B. Therefore, in the musical situation, both senses are correct and/or useful - depending on whether you look at the indication that is extended, or the music that it spans. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: [for Italian users] how to translate spanner?
On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 09:19:28 -0300 Felipe Castro fef...@gmail.com wrote: 2012/8/24, Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net: Han-Wen, instead of spanner, in English, would you use extender? I'm not asking to change, just wondering if both words are equivalent in this case. Replying as a native English speaker. No, I don't believe I would. An extender would be something that makes something extend - i.e. makes it longer. A spanner (in this context) is something that spans. So we could call a bridge a river spanner (although I don't believe anyone ever actually would). Ok, thanks. Just one more doubt: what about that extender-engraver thing, does it have something to do with dynamic spanners, text spanners, line spanners, volta spanners, etc? Or is that in a completely different context? There is a message to be translated, that uses explicitly the word extender (unterminated extender). So, for the case of Portuguese, for example, translating spanner with extensor would make colide both cases, so that spanner ~= extender. Hmm. You're right. The word spanner describes what the extender does to the underlying music - like what a bridge does to a river. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: subito dynamic after hairpin
On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 20:50:29 +1200 wjm mooney...@aim.com wrote: You wrote:- + Hi, I am trying to make a decrescendo end in a subito dynamic for the next note. . +++ Given that sfz is equal to subito-forzando (see http://piano.about.com/od/termsrelatingtodynamics/g/GL_subito.htm) That page at piano.about.com is incorrect (and silly). sfz is not equal to subito forzando; it seems that the English-speaking about.com writers weren't sure what any of these words meant, and decided that instead of simply checking an Italian dictionary, they would make something up. In fact, sforzando is an ordinary and legitimate word, not an abbreviation for anything else, and in fact the word subito is rarely (probably never) represented in scores by a single letter s - too vague. (sub. gets used fairly often, but perhaps even more often the word is spelled out.) It's sad that people (this is directed at the about.com hacks, not at you) see fit to publish made-up definitions of words they don't know. My criticism of the clueless irresponsible writers of that page has no bearing on the value of what you have contributed to the Lilypond discussion. While your discovery is (through no fault of yours) probably not useful in this particular situation, I hope it proves useful for other purposes. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Can I modify sizes in pango-font-tree?
Hi all
I'm using the following recommended code, which works properly with any
font I've tried:
\version 2.14.2
\paper {
myStaffSize = #20
#(define fonts
(make-pango-font-tree fontname-1
fontname-2
fontname-3
(/ myStaffSize 20)))
}
... but some of the fonts I'd like to use are out of proportion with
each other, so that (for example) I have to call one of them \tiny to
make it look like the normal size of the other two. Is there a way to
scale fonts in the tree so that in the score they will all match when
set at normal size?
I've searched the documentation on fonts, and found only the code above,
which works fine; except perhaps that it doesn't have this feature. I
also glanced at /usr/share/lilypond/2.14.2/scm/font.scm , but didn't
know how to read it or whether it contained anything useful for me.
--
Thanks
David R
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 22:58:57 +0200 james james.lilyp...@googlemail.com wrote: Honestly, what's most important to me is where the sharps/flats in the key signature are placed. Looking at the PDF example, I can't understand which line is supposed to be the good one. They both look wrong to me. When I read music, I want the key signature to be always in the stereotypical (correct) place, and I don't see a reason (in this particular music) for wanting to have it like either of those example lines. I could understand (though not agree with) wanting to have the key signature always in the same range as the notes that are going to be printed in that line, but both examples go against that. Therefore, my question... What is the intention behind wanting to put the key signatures in a different place? How is it supposed to help the person reading it? -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: clef change confuses manual key signature
On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 23:47:52 +0200 Reinhold Kainhofer reinh...@fam.tuwien.ac.at wrote: Some old handwritings have e.g. the f sharp in the keysignature not at the top line, but between the lowest and second-lowest line. If you want to create an authentic reprint of the autograph, you might also want to preserve the way the keysignature was printed... You're right; I didn't think of those. But is that what's happening in this situation? -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Ledger line visibility issue
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:58:41 +0100 Peter Gentry peter.gen...@sunscales.co.uk wrote: I have a score with many repeated beamed quavers and semi-quavers on ledger lines. The default layout is difficult to read as ledger lines and the staff produce an almost hypnotic effect which confuses the reader. This resuluts in loss of concentration and rythmic stumbles. I would like to space these beamed notes out to provide white space between the notes. However all my attempts to make changes (apart from set-global-staff-size) have failed even when the syntax is accepted there is no change in the printed score. I am finding the syntax difficult to grasp so I hope this is not a trivial problem that I should be able to solve for myself - any help would be gratefully recieved. Are you saying that you want to add some horizontal space to keep ledger lines from merging with each other? -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Ledger line visibility issue
On Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:58:41 +0100 Peter Gentry peter.gen...@sunscales.co.uk wrote: ... all my attempts to make changes (apart from set-global-staff-size) have failed even when the syntax is accepted I missed this part of your post the first time. Lilypond's silence does not always indicate that your syntax was accepted. Sometimes it only means that an appropriate method of giving you an error message has not been found. It would be nice if all unrecognized and/or ignored commands generated an error or warning of some kind, but that is currently not happening. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: What’s wrong with this snippet?
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 15:05:41 +1000 Vaughan McAlley vaug...@mcalley.net.au wrote: This is a slight variation on: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/snippets/vocal-music#single-staff-template-with-notes-and-lyrics I’m trying to apply the idea from Skips in lyric mode[1], so that the lyrics start in the second bar, but the \skip only skips to the next note. The number after \skip has to be there for consistency, but in lyrics that number is a mere place-holder. You have to put another \skip (+number) for every skipped note in the lyrics. In the usual practical situation, where the lyrics are for a singer, it doesn't make common sense to have entire bars (or even entire beats) that both have notes *and* don't have lyrics. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: NR 4.1.6: blank-last-page-force and penalty values
On Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:28:30 +1000 Joe Neeman joenee...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com wrote: NR 4.1.6, \paper variable for page breaking http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/**Documentation/notation/other-_** 005cpaper-variables#_**005cpaper-variables-for-page-**breakinghttp://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation/other-_005cpaper-variables#_005cpaper-variables-for-page-breaking I'd like to force the add of a blank page in case the number of pages in a book is odd. I guess I should use blank-last-page-force. I had a look at ly/paper-defaults-init.ly to see the default values and I see that penalty values are numbers. Default value of blank-last-page-force is 0, so I guess that as I increase the number it's more likely to get the blank page. No, lilypond will never put a blank page at the end. You could probably achieve that in a pdf editor. pdftk will do the job of adding a page anywhere in a PDF quite easily, but it won't actually create a page, even a blank one. If you keep a blank PDF page of the correct size then you can add it to any score that needs it. Maybe there are other programs that will do this job in fewer steps or with less effort, but the following command will add your score and your blank page together to form a single new PDF: pdftk my_score.pdf my_blank_page.pdf output my_new_score.pdf Also, the definition is not very clear, because it doesn't say explicitly what it actually does.. you have to guess it: ### blank-last-page-force The penalty for ending the score on an odd-numbered page. ### If you make blank-last-page-force large and use ly:page-turn-breaking, then lilypond will be unlikely to produce a score where the last page is odd-numbered. Instead, it will adjust the spacing in order to use one page more or fewer. It seems to me that blank-last-page-force, when used as intended, is actually forcing NO blank last page, by making sure some music is on that last even-numbered page. Do I have the correct idea (more or less)? -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: bracket notehead
On Sun, 05 Aug 2012 00:59:32 +0200
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
That's because parentheses aren't brackets.
() parentheses
[] brackets
{} curly brackets, occasionally braces
angle brackets
Absolutely true, from a specialist point of view - but in common usage
(imprecise, yes, even sloppy; but customary, and therefore not wrong)
those are all simply called brackets. This fact is a painful one for
anybody trying to document anything where the difference matters. I
don't think there's a way around the problem except for occasionally
having the conversation that just happened.
It's also fairly usual to call [] square brackets, presumably
because in common usage brackets usually means ().
(I just went and looked in my little Oxford dictionary from the 1970s -
they specifically included all four types in their definition of the
word bracket.)
Maybe the English language will change, now that computers are common
enough for the different types of brackets to matter to more people
than they once did.
--
David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Brazen feature request
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 13:30:19 +0200
Gilles gilles.thiba...@free.fr wrote:
The request is for six commands (NOT markups, but actual music
commands that affect the MIDI output and so on):
\segno
\fine
\tocoda
\coda
\dacapo
\dalsegno
Using the functions described here :
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=542
i think you will be able quickly to achieve your goal without all this
commands.
... [snipped Gilles's code, an example that musically accomplishes
segno and coda]
It works. However, my goal is not primarily about the output, but
about the simple-looking, easy-to-type, easy-to-read commands. The
output itself has already been possible for a long time AFAIK.
\repeat volta 2 {some music} makes sense. Your example works beautifully
but does not make sense. [to me.]
From the responses so far, it appears that I might as well have asked
for a unicorn, so I'll be quiet now. :)
--
David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Brazen feature request
Hi all I don't have any money to contribute, nor any coding capability, so this is not a serious request in anything but tone of voice. :( It's extremely likely that this request is an obvious one, and that it's been requested in exactly this way many times, and has never been done because of implementation difficulties. When I look in the mail archive, I see several discussions of the cosmetics of what I'm asking about, but not about the function. Maybe I haven't read the archive closely enough. The request is for six commands (NOT markups, but actual music commands that affect the MIDI output and so on): \segno \fine \tocoda \coda \dacapo \dalsegno It appears to me that the effect of a \dacapo or a \dalsegno would be like retroactively (re?)-applying the existing Lilypond command \repeat volta 2 to an earlier part of the music; the precise extent of that earlier part being delineated by the \segno (if present) and the \fine. I think the \tocoda command would have to be ignored one or more times until we were passing that point in the piece for the last time, and would then have to cause the parser to switch streams of music to the \coda. I don't know if existing \repeat functionality would be helpful. As a (mere) side-effect, each of these commands would cause a markup to appear in the score. Maybe the fact that some scores have these features in more than one place, or in different and/or incompatible ways, makes the parser (or the brain) explode. I guess if this request is a bad idea, then it's good to find out that fact. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond syntax
Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net writes:
Some weeks back there was some discussion of the Lilypond
syntax, I made some suggestions and was asked to write up a
sample .ly file with the ideas I had in mind. Basically my
notion was to separate content (notes and chords) from form
(number of bars, repeats, codas, rehearsal marks, etc.) in how
things are coded into .ly files. I've been playing around with
that some and here is a sample .ly file with some of those
ideas. They may be terrible ideas, they may be impractical,
they might require a total rewrite of Lilypond to implement,
etc. I think like a musician, not a programmer, after all. To
me the form is the container of the music and it makes sense to
specify the form first and then place the music within it.
Others may see this very differently.
The file is four bars of Interplay by Bill Evans with four
parts.
Hi Tim
Thanks for doing this work.
I think I like some of the concepts you have here - just some
added questions and ideas.
\version 2.17.1
\paper {
#(set-paper-size letter) indent = 0.0 ragged-last = ##f
}
\header {
title = Interplay subtitle = composer = Bill Evans
meter = Medium Blues copyright = Copyright TRO 1963, 1956
Folkways Music Publishers, Inc
}
% The idea is to separate musical content from the structure of
the form of % the song, thinking of the structure as a container
for the music expressions.
% This is the first four bars of Interplay by Bill Evans
\form {
\number-of-bars = 4 % should barchecking be the default
behavior? \bars-per-line = 4 % default would be to let
Lilypond calculate this \StaffGroup { \number-of-voices = 5 {
% voices rendered in numeric order
\Voice.1 = harmony \Voice.2 = trumpet \set
Staff.instrumentName = #T \Voice.3 = alto \set
Staff.instrumentName = #A \Voice.4 = guitar \set
Staff.instrumentName = #G \Voice.5 = bass \set
Staff.instrumentName = #B } \print-full-score = ##t
\print-separate-scores = ##f
}
\time 4/4
What about situations where different voices have different time
signatures? It's not seen every day, but even Bach did it.
\bar |: = 1 \bar :| = 4
}
My main comment here is about the notation of repeats. Instead of
the users dictating which signs to print, I think it would make
more sense for us to dictate which sections of the music to repeat
and how many times, and let Lilypond fill in the appropriate signs
in the appropriate places. Composers can sometimes be neglectful
regarding which sign ought to go where. However, they don't
usually forget if it's the verse or the chorus that needs
repeating. :) This is the same logic by which we type e'2 instead
of typing treble clef 4th space white-in-the-middle-with-a-stem
- Lilypond's usual expectation is for the user to provide the
musical meaning, and for Lilypond to provide the signs. (I would
even go further on my little logic kick, and replace \bar |.
with \endPiece, \bar |: with \beginRepeat (or with
\beginRepeat542x if playing multiple times), replace \bar ||
with \endSection, and so on.)
Here's a fake syntax for nested repeat, and nested repeat with 1st
and 2nd endings; my default is to not repeat more than once, but
the 4x tacked onto one command means play four times. The
NestedZero and NestedOne are showing how many levels of repeats
deep we currently are, so that the nesting doesn't get mixed
up. When writing short simple pieces this would be easy enough for
a person to keep track of - but in something with a lot of pages
and/or a more complicated structure, maybe the user would get
mixed up about which level of nesting they're at - so maybe this
little idea is no good anyway. (Note: I guess NestedZero should be
a default, just to save typing.)
___
a4 a a a e'1 f4 f e d e1 \beginRepeatedSectionNestedZero a4 c b2
c4 d e2 \beginRepeatedSectionNestedOne4x e2 d c1
\endRepeatedSectionNestedOne a4 a e'2 f4 e d2 c1 b a
\endRepeatedSectionNestedZero
a4 a a a e'1 f4 f e d e1 \beginRepeatedSectionNestedZero a4 c b2
c4 d e2 \beginRepeatedSectionNestedOne4x e2 d c1
\endRepeatedSectionNestedOne a4 a e'2 f4 e d2 c1 b
\1stEndingNestedZero e1 \2ndEndingNestedZero a1
\endRepeatedSectionNestedZero e'1 e a~a \endPiece
___
In general, I think it's looking like pretty hard work finding
enough things to abstract out of the music and put into a \form
block.
How often is a pre-printed form for a particular piece superior,
for the pencil-pushing composer, to some blank staff paper? I can
see convenience in keeping blank scores for some strictly limited
forms, such as 12-bar blues - but who really needs a template for
12-bar blues? [answering my own question - perhaps a student who's
learning it]. And at the other end of the size spectrum, on a
symphony or opera or
Re: tunefl and other web services
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: PS concerning the girl, she's pretty indeed, but some of the /priests/ using Lily might have a problem with that :) I'm not a priest. However, I still don't like the picture. I don't mean that I disapprove, I mean that I don't think it looks good enough to be used as advertising. To be (possibly a little too) blunt, the fact that it's obviously not a professional job of makeup, wardrobe, and photography is a major part of that. But essentially, from my point of view, (and to be even more unpleasantly blunt) if software needs a picture of a pretty girl to sell it when in fact it's already free, then there must be something wrong with the software - or with the salesman. I don't think that's the best possible impression Lilypond can give. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: playing instructions cause page numbers on wrong places
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 16:15:02 +0200 Stefan Thomas kontrapunktste...@gmail.com wrote: Dear community, the very nice code, I've copied in the attached file anweisungen.ly does some things I don't like but I don't know how to change it: the page-numbers are at the bottom, not at the head off the page. The copyright is not printed. In anweisungen.ly the page numbers are written in a section called footer - that means the bottom of the page. You will need to change that to header somehow, if you want them at the top. The word copyright does not seem to appear anywhere in the file anweisungen.ly - is it supposed to be added in separately? Read through the anweisungen file in a more literal logical kind of way, and you will probably see why things are not quite going the way you meant them to. There is no magic in there. :) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Appreciation / Financial support
Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net writes: Why is it like this? Because the focus of Lilypond has been, to a great degree, to create something that enables users to produce beautiful sheet music. That is the raison d'être of Lilypond. The main focus has not been on user friendliness and easy useability. As a result, a total of zero of the dozen or so musicians/composers I have tried to turn on to Lilypond have taken it up. They downloaded it, saw it is impossibly difficult, and went to something else. BTW, most of these are people with doctorates, medical degrees, MBAs, etc. They are computer savvy and they are not dumb. The user interface (like it or not, the *syntax* is the user interface- the text editor chosen by the user is not the user interface for Lilypond) is too beginner-unfriendly. Now, maybe that's OK- it may not be necessary to reach millions of users; maybe it's OK to focus on the users who will persevere through the steep learning curve and obscure commands and sometimes difficult syntax. Maybe it's OK to focus first and foremost on great output. But it might be OK to focus on making Lilypond easier to learn and use for non-programmers. Indeed, I think that this is part of what David is talking about working towards. That's the impression I get as well. I think a part of the difficulty is that in this situation it is absolutely necessary for those creating the core code of Lilypond to program it backwards - to write their code according to what users want to *type*, and _not_ according to the end result that those users want to *accomplish*. Coding according to what your users want to type must be a ridiculously inefficient and irritating way for a programmer to have to work. It's unfortunately also the only way Lilypond can suffice for more than a few people. David Kastrup gave a good example of this earlier, showing how the midi block has been changed over time. To a programmer, the current easy-to-use Lilypond syntax for obtaining midi output is (apparently) an illogical kludge. Needless to say, it doesn't look that way to a non-programmer. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Scheme syntax vs. other languages
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: People use more Scheme than they probably realize, and getting Scheme help by devs tends to work mostly unspectacularly. [unspectacular often means not very good. I think you must be using unspectacular to mean it just happens, without too much trouble.] That's really not something one can take for granted in general concerning extension languages. That does not mean that it can't be improved. But it is easy to underestimate how much work it would take to arrive at net gains from a language/architecture switch. I don't think that the situation is in a state that starting from scratch would make a lot of sense. Especially since you (and others) are getting a lot of work done right now - I think it would be a shame to interfere with that. -- David R ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Possible multiple bugs, any way around?
Sami sami.ami...@gmail.com writes: ... however the \bar at the beginning of the music seems to be a problematic issue also. Normally, \bar |: at the very beginning is redundant and should be left out. Music with no \bar |: anywhere is always understood to go back to the beginning. [but maybe this isn't really the beginning?] -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing
GRAEME F ST CLAIR graeme_st_cl...@atlanticbb.net writes: What directives, commands, instructions etc should I be looking at to put a little more air into its appearance? This may sound mean, but read the manual - it's all in there. When you get to know the manual you know not only the answer to these questions but where to look for the answers to the inevitable next questions. In contrast to many programs where all they can do is what's visible in the menus, and questions about such programs are rare and often not too bright, in Lilypond you can't see ANYTHING, questions by all users (including experts) are frequent and often intelligent, and to get the least little thing done you probably have to consult the documentation. A lot of work (not by me) has gone into that huge manual, and you need to know it inside out to be a great user of Lilypond. To be an ordinary everyday user of lilypond, you essentially need to have (approximately, sort of) memorized the table of contents so you know where to look for things without taking forever to find them - but not memorized the whole manual of course! :) If you get into Lilypond you will have about eighty more questions by the end of the month. You might as well start in now with the manual, since it's pretty much guaranteed that seventy-eight of the answers are in there. :) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: slightly offtopic,
Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com writes: 2011/10/25 ole m...@oleschmidt.info: Option+a did the trick (I'am on Mac OS X using Jedit with LilypondTool), very easy... If you newly discovered that, how could you have written it in your email in the first place? (If the mail client is set for UTF-8 but the editor is not... or if someone has the feeling This is Lilypond; I'll have to find hard ways of doing everything...) :) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: slightly offtopic
Ole Schmidt m...@oleschmidt.info writes: Hi, Can anyone point me in the right direction, I need a little circle above the letter (norwegian...) like this: å (see also attached screenshot if it is not displayed correctly) Whats do I have to enter, I can not found the utf-code that fits the description in the manual... Two things: 1. Make sure your Lilypond file, and your text editor's preferences, are set to use UTF-8 encoding. (Not ISO-8859-anything, not ASCII, not others.) 2. Just type the character you want, as you did in your email above. Copy paste should work fine if the text is coming from another source - but make sure in copying pasting that no unwanted other characters get in. In Lilypond it should not be necessary to type the codes. (However, if you are in some situation where it's necessary, there shouldn't be anything wrong with typing the codes either.) -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Disappearing hyphens (endashes) in lyrics
Mats Bengtsson mats.bengts...@ee.kth.se writes: Christ van Willegen cvwillegen at gmail.com writes: On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 03:26, David Rogers davidandrewrogers at gmail.com wrote: This will alert the singer, at the time they need to know, this is only half of the word. In your proposal, if another voice (or the accompaniment) has a lot of notes, the dash could end up in the middle of nowhere, even potentially on the next line. It does not indicate 'this is half a word' in his case, but 'this is a parenthesis', so i would lessen the confusion (I think!). I did forget about the kind of dash, but my point is still the same. I don't agree with giving the dash to an invisible note, because of the potential it creates for the dash to be in the middle of nowhere, where the singer might miss it or might read it as a printing error. If evenly spaced between the syllables turns out to mean two staffs of the piano's sixteenth notes later or sixty millimetres away from the nearest word then the meaning is lost. Attach it to the syllable, adding two, three, even six spaces if you want. Or attach it to the following syllable and right-align that syllable, if that works better. But in the context of lyrics, punctuation IMO must attach to the words (even if with the addition of some spaces) or else it will be easily ignored or misinterpreted. Lonely punctuation has a high likelihood of being interpreted as part of a stray dynamic spanner line, a misplaced tenuto or staccato, or as random garbage. -- David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Vowel with Umlaut
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: GRAEME F ST CLAIR graeme_st_cl...@atlanticbb.net writes: Well, I plowtered (Scottish word) around with jEdit, but didn't get much where, so I recovered a Windows Emacs from backup, that I'd never got round to trying, installed it and got exactly nowhere with that either - like vi, It's a Unix thang, I wouldn't understand... Recovering a Windows Emacs from backup is probably not the best idea since it is under furious development (surprisingly so for a 30 year old piece of software) and a lot of focus is on making it less of a Unix thang. If you want to give it a fair try, you should install a reasonably current version. It won't be easier to understand, but you'll be able to do a lot even without understanding. Are you married? :) I'm using Emacs now, and have been for only a few months. The first few days I was more or less lost, but just as David Kastrup says, I've been able to do what I need without really understanding very much. I tried Emacs a few years ago and got nowhere, and the newer versions are (in my opinion) MUCH better for a person who's new to it. After getting over the fact that everything looks a bit funny, and that there are so many possible options for its operation that no individual person could know what all those settings do (but further knowing that you only set the ones you need for yourself, and leave the rest alone) it's quite possible for an emacs newbie to get his work done very effectively. That is, if he's not married... :) From the point of view of a raw newbie like me, the newer versions of Emacs seem to have settings commands that are easier to use, and the Emacs display doesn't look as funny as it used to (able to make use of the same fonts as other applications do, etc). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
