Weird error message
Hi!
I removed some %{ and %} and tried to compile the whole piece I made, but I
received this weird message as an error :
/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/../share/lilypond/current/ly/init.ly:37:1:
ERREUR : GUILE a signal'e une erreur pour l'expression d'ebutant ici
#
(if (or (pair? toplevel-scores) output-empty-score-list)
/Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/../share/lilypond/current/ly/init.ly:37:5:
ERREUR : syntax error, unexpected '(', expecting '='
#(if
(or (pair? toplevel-scores) output-empty-score-list)
erreur de programmation : Parsed object should be dead: static
scm_unused_struct* Prob::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)
poursuite ; croisons les doigts
erreur de programmation : Parsed object should be dead: static
scm_unused_struct* Context_def::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)
poursuite ; croisons les doigts
ERREUR : erreur sur les fichiers :
"/Users/Frederic/Desktop/Ebats_atomiques.ly"
Wrong type argument in position 1: ()
_
What is that supposed to mean?
Regards,
Frederic
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Time for compiling with 2.11.12
Hi! I tried to compile with the new development version. It takes 44 seconds for 4 pages of music for alto, double bass and piano. But there is two things to notice : 1- I am using JEdit with LilyPondTool, might add some seconds. 2- I ask for a MIDI file, which is the longest process of the piece compiling (about 20 seconds) Without the MIDI file, the compiling time goes from 20 to 48 seconds (why such difference?) Frederic ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Usability Question
Hi! For the compiling time, I am surprised that sometimes it takes almost a minute to compile only 3 pages of music for alto, double bass and piano! The fastest is 30 seconds. I am using LilyPond 2.11.11 on a MacBook Intel Core Duo with 512 Mb. For the interface, the best thing for a text entry based interface is that the format and the offset you put on the notes and other symbols will stay the same if you don't change the code in that part of the piece. That is the most annoying with the WYSIWYG interface of Sibelius. Even the beam format might change if you add a note in the measure! And I am not talking about the quality of the font. The stems fall a little besides the notehead and off the beams. It shows in printing. The Feta font is A LOT better. But Sibelius is excellent for its intuitive interface. The entering of most notes and symbols and, most important, the change of position of the symbols is far more easy to do than in LilyPond. For example, entering tempo indications and text spanners in Sibelius is a piece of cake, while working with LilyPond needs good programming skills to do the same, especially if you want it at the place you want it. Thanks to LilyPondTool, moving some symbols (but unfortunately not all) are a little easier. But a GUI interface would be great to see immediately the changes of position of some symbols on the score. This topic had been already discussed in an article on LilyPond by Han-Wenn. LilyPondTool does that partially for some symbols, but not for everything. I am not a programmer. I can't start to program myself to make an interface. But I may suggest some clues for design. It may be possible to have the best of both worlds : text and graphic inputs. Remember WordPerfect? One of the reasons for its success in the 80/90s was the option to enter relatively WYSIWIGly the text (remember the different colors to say Bold or Italic, brrr!) but to be able to SEE the code underneath the format and change it. Maybe it would be a way to design an interface for LilyPond : to be able to enter code by GUI or text. Also, if ever a team want to start to work on this thing, I suggest to look at Berlioz, an almost unknown notation program designed solely for engraving. Here is the site : www.berlioz.tm.fr (only in French) The font is not as inviting as LilyPond (but it is nicely lighter in some ways), but the quality of the layout of notes and the design of slurs is amazing. The way it is designed make it possible to do everything you want without much tweaking and unorthodox ways to bypass the program standards. It is divided in three procedures. The last procedure is almost like an SVG editor where you can move and place everything you want. But one problem about this program is its price : over 600 euros!! If a parallel team could work for an interface which would use the code of Lilypond for engraving but would be easy for a non-programmer to use, many more people would gain interest to it. The text entry alone is allright, but gets very complicated when you want to use all the possibilities of LilyPond to do elaborate scores. I would have give up if it wasn't for LilyPondTool to remind me of the format of the tweaks. That are my big two cents. Regards, Frederic Chiasson ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Beamed eighth notes and tuplets as tempo indication
Yes, exactly! Even if the amount of code necessary to do that is kind of scary. Thanks! Frédéric 2007/1/14, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: You mean something like http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=204 ? /Mats Frédéric Chiasson wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to know if it is possible to write beamed eighth notes > and tuplets as tempo indications. I would like to write the following : > > ←(tuplet) = (3 beamed eighth notes) → > > Also, is it possible to write articulations with the notes? > > Thanks, > > Frédéric > > > >___ >lilypond-user mailing list >lilypond-user@gnu.org >http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > > -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Chordal polyphony - suggestion
Like Tomas, I would very much like to be able to tie notes from two or
more voices, to the single note or chord following (or preceding) those
momentary or temporary voices.
It is possible to do this with the actual code. Karl gave me this trick.
To make two voices look like they are in the same chord, put \stemUp
or \stemDown (depending on the situation) to one of the voices, then
put \stemDown (or \stemUp) to separate them again. The stems of both
voices are perfectly merged, so it looks like a single voice chord.
Here is an example :
\version "2.11.11"
\relative c''
{
2
<<
{
%this note is with the chord
\stemDown g'2~ |
%this one is in a separate voice
\stemUp g2~
%this one is with the chord again
\stemDown g2
} \\
{
2~ |
4
2
}
>>
2 %don't need to use \stemUp or \stemDown again, since the voice
outside
% the << >> is a different voice than the voices inside.
% (See Section 6.3.3 - Basic Polyphony, in the User's manual)
}
Maybe not "ethical" but the result is perfect!
Cheers,
Frédéric Chiasson
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Beamed eighth notes and tuplets as tempo indication
Hi, I would like to know if it is possible to write beamed eighth notes and tuplets as tempo indications. I would like to write the following : ←(tuplet) = (3 beamed eighth notes) → Also, is it possible to write articulations with the notes? Thanks, Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: make ties between notes from different voices
Thanks a lot! It works with \stemDown. I get a warning saying that there is
too much note collision, that they will be ignored, but the fis's stem is
aligned perfectly with the other notes's. I just add a \stemUp afterwards to
get exactly what I want.
Thanks again,
Frédéric
version "2.11.9"
\layout {
raggedright = ##t
indent = 0
}
global = { \clef treble \time 3/4 }
top = \relative c'' { \stemDown fis4~ \stemUp fis e fis }
bot = \relative c'' { 4~ 2. }
\score {
\new Staff {
\global
r2 << \top \\ \bot >>
}
}
2007/1/9, Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
That is what I did since I couldn't tie the first "fis" with the second
when I was putting the first "fis" in the same voice as the "a" and "c"
underneath. But is there a way to make the first fis look as if it was in
the same chord?
Thanks for your help,
Frédéric
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: make ties between notes from different voices
That is what I did since I couldn't tie the first "fis" with the second when I was putting the first "fis" in the same voice as the "a" and "c" underneath. But is there a way to make the first fis look as if it was in the same chord? Thanks for your help, Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Multi-page SVG file
Hi! I just worked with Graham to be able to use my score in SVG in Inkscape. A one-page LilyPond score in SVG works well with Inkscape, but a multi-page score in SVG does not. Does anyone know enough about SVG and/or Inkscape to tell me how can I manipulate a multi-page score in SVG with Inkscape or an another program? Thanks, Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
make ties between notes from different voices
Hi!
I'd like to know how to put ties between a chord from a single voice
separating to the same notes but in two differents voice contexts in
polyphony.
With this example, the ties does not appear, without any warning though.
Frédéric
P.S. I also tried 4~, but the ties still don't appear.
__
\version "2.11.9"
\relative c''
{
\time 3/4
r2 4
<<
{fis'4 e fis} \\
{2.}
>>
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Reading Lilypond SVG files with Inkscape on Mac
I tried : mkdir ~/.fonts mkdir /.fonts But both don't make the fonts appear in Inkscape. In Gimp though, the symbols appear. Any other ideas? Frédéric (Mac OS X.4.8) 2007/1/8, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Frédéric Chiasson wrote: > Hello! > > I tried to open a SVG file from LilyPond in Inkscape. Since there was > no ~/.fonts directory to copy the OTF fonts into, I copied them in > those two directories : > Why not make the directory yourself? mkdir ~/.fonts /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reading Lilypond SVG files with Inkscape on Mac
Hello! I tried to open a SVG file from LilyPond in Inkscape. Since there was no ~/.fonts directory to copy the OTF fonts into, I copied them in those two directories : /Library/Fonts /Applications/Inkscape.app/Contents/Resources/fonts But it didn't work, did I miss something? Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
SVG file as an output
Hi again, i'm trying to get a SVG file as an output so I can modify it with Inkscape. For this, I am typing : lilypond --format=svg but it doesn't work. What is the right option for this? Thanks again, Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Arrows in markup text
Hi, Using : LilyPond 2.11.9 on Mac OS X.4.8 I would like to put a markup text as : (left arrow) (quarter note) = (dotted quarter note) (right arrow), for making Carter-like "rythmic modulations". I don't know how to put arrows. Putting the arrow from the Mac text character set doesn't work. I looked at the "arrow-head" markup command, but I need a full arrow and I don't know which values the variables "axis" and "direction" can take (what are the constant values' syntax). What is the easiest way to do that? Thanks, Frédéric ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
My point when I started this topic was not to change the whole definition of
the \times function. In fact, I think the function works quite well as it
is. I was mostly talking about improving the "interface" - i.e. the words
and the syntax we use to call the functions - to make it more intuitive,
especially for a non-programmer. The \times function was an example among
other. I was proposing to change it to \tuplet x:y, simply because it is
closer to the musicians' language (tuplet), and it reflects more the result
we see and we would write manually (3:2 or 7:5, even if we have 6
sixteenth-notes for the 7:5 in contemporary music).
In fact, if we forget a few little bugs, LilyPond is already VERY powerful
and versatile. The point is not much to improve its features (even if it is
important), but to improve - even maybe rethink - its code entry. Some
symbols, most of the basics in fact, work very well (the notes names (a b
c), the durations (4., 8, 16, \breve), \stemUp, \cadenzaOn, the fantastic
*x/y function, etc.). But the syntax gets hard when getting in
kind-of-Scheme syntax for every tweak, and it changes a lot!
For example, we can write :
\override Voice.Stem #'transparent = ##t
#'(set-global-staff-size 13)
\set fontSize = #14
\override Voice.NoteHead #'stencil = (ly:make-textscript) (?) (which is a
function, why not simply a font character?)
And I am sure to make mistakes!
Just to make functions with a more constant syntax would be a great help for
us, simple users. Like making functions with \ most of the time (inspired by
LaTeX) :
\transparent{Voice.Stem}
\globalStaffSize{13}
\fontSize{14}
\setStencil{Voice.NoteHead, cross} (or even better, \setNotehead{cross} )
or any other syntax, but the thing is to make it constant.
The inconstant syntax to make anything a little outside the ordinary is, in
my humble opinion, the most time wasting feature of LilyPond. The problem is
that we always need to refer to the manual to find the way to write the
tweak, then we always forget how to do it for another score, since all the
tweaks we use have a different syntax.
Also, when doing this, the point would be to keep the names of the functions
as close to the musical terms and to the musical written symbols.
But a little program editor like the LilyPondTool in jEdit makes it much
easier indeed! Maybe that is the solution to the sometimes too complex
syntax of LilyPond.
Also, thanks for the changes in micro-intervals symbols, especially the db
for -eseh!
Frédéric
Note, importantly, that, with the present tuplet syntax, lily handles
all tuplets -- *including broken ones* -- correctly out of the box.
This sort of thing brings Finale and Sibelius screaming to their
knees. (This seems to be an extension of the fact that lily gets one
thing *exceedingly* correct: the duration model of musical time. Out
of the box you can also specify time signatures like 6/15, 5/28, 3/10
and so on, all of which bring other musical notation programs -- with
the the notable exception of SCORE -- to a crashing standstill. Or at
least the last time I bothered to check.)
I've been watching the tuplet discussion with some hesitation. I think
chaning \times to \tuplet is a great idea for the reason that started
the thread: \times is too close to \time. But it seems to me that most
of the suggestions following that initial suggestion begin to confuse
the essential time-scaling function of tuplet brackets (which is their
absolutely core purpose, both in the common practice and now) and
other graphical aspects of the notation such as beaming, grouping (and
even accentuation). Beaming and grouping are terribly important, of
course, but I think that it's best to leave their specification out of
the core tuplet syntax.
More important is to fix the fact that
\times { c8 d e f }
will currently by default print with only a 4 in the tuplet bracket,
which is mathematically wrong; the denominator 5 must appear.
--
Trevor Bača
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
When I started this topic, the point was to suggest a more intuitive syntax, which is closer to the musicians' language and the output on the score. That is why I proposed \tuplet (closer to musicians's language) and "3:2" (closer to the output of the score). In my opinion, I though this function was working very well the way it was. For the syntax topic, I would also suggest to standardize the tweak entries. At this moment, we can have for example : \override Voice.Textscript #'padding = #3 (a number) \override Voice.Stem #'stencil = #ly:stem::print (a function) #(set-global-staff-size 13) \set fontSize = #2 This diversity of syntax is hard to understand and very hard to remember for a non-programmer. Maybe we could replace them by "\" functions?? By the way, happy new year to everyone! Frédéric 2007/1/5, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: [EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu: >> I think changing \times to \tuplet is a great idea for the reason that >> started the thread: \times is too close to \time. > > That I really don't get. LilyPond is written in *English*. There is a the other, perhaps more valid reason, is that \tuplet more closely matches the purpose than \times. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen LilyPond Software Design -- Code for Music Notation http://www.lilypond-design.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Off-Topic: Orchestration Aid
Ouch! Normally (you must know that), composers use orchestration treatises - books - for that. I don't know about a software giving this kind of advice. I know Sibelius change the color of the notehead when the instrument is off-bounds, but that's all. For fingerings and instrumentation (the science of composing for instruments separately), I suggest the Blatter orchestration treatise, or beginner instrument methods. Maybe the Adler might be good too to have a gradual introduction to orchestration. But for great advice for orchestration and instrumentation, I suggest definitely the Koechlin's "Traité de l'orchestration". It has plenty of great ideas for orchestral writing. But there are some problems : it is so badly organised - you might need to look at many chapters to understand a single topic - and it is written only in French. But for a software? I really don't know. Maybe you could develop this! Regards, Frédéric Chiasson 2006/12/30, Mehmet Okonsar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Does anyone in the list knows some helper software for instrumentation topics, instruments ranges, fingerboard positions on strings etc.. Please forgive the off-topic intrusion and reply to me personally if you wish so.. [EMAIL PROTECTED] thanks -- Mehmet Okonsar, pianist-composer-conductor www.okonsar.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Setting staff size?
Weird, it is supposed to reduce the font size (it works in my files). But I know that for a single staff, you must use two commands to reduce the note font and the spaces between the staff lines : fontSize = #-3 \override StaffSymbol #'staff-space = #(magstep -3) Hope that will help, Frédéric 2006/12/30, Bertalan Fodor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: #(set-global-staff-size 11) doesn't reduce the font size. Is it a bug? Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
The markup functions don't work with changed fonts
Hello,
Using : LilyPond 2.11.4, Mac OS X 10.4.8
I think I have found a bug. When using changed fonts with the function
make-pango-font-tree, the functions \italic and \bold don't work anymore.
What do you think?
Frédéric
The input code :
\version "2.11.4"
\paper{
#(define fonts (make-pango-font-tree "Times New Roman"
"Helvetica"
"Courier" (/ 20 20)))
ragged-right = ##t
}
\relative {
c^\markup {\italic "Italic?"} d^\markup{ \bold "Bold?" }
}
Untitled.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Might it be possible to use
\tuplet 3:2 {x x x}
for the usual operation, and if we want to have many tuplets of the same
kind, to use
\tuplet 3:2 { {x x x} {y y y} {z z z} }
Might resolve the clarity problems.
Frédéric
2006/12/22, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] escreveu:
> Since the duration would be the second of three arguments, it could not
be
> optional, but that's not a problem.
>
> I think (?) this would have the side effect that \tuplet 3:2 2. would
> be the same as \tuplet 6:4 2. or \tuplet 9:6 2., which would mean
> that it would always be OK (even if not required) to express the ratio
> in reduced form (3:2 here).
1. We want to cut back on optional constructs
2. \tuplet 6:4 2. { .. } is a lot of numbers. Not very readable IMO.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
No parenthesises
Hello,
I tried for the first time to use parenthesises on notes but it doesn't
work. Am I doing something wrong?
\version "2.11.3"
\relative c'{
\parenthesize b1
}
Frédéric
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Yes, that makes sense.
Frédéric
2006/12/21, John Mandereau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
> But to avoid repeating \tuplet functions for long passages with the
> same tuplets, we could admit that kind of syntax :
>
> \tuplet 3:2 {c8 d e f g a b c d e d c b a g f e d}
>
> without having one long bracket going through all the notes. But I
> understand that you don't want to change that for programming issues.
It is not possible to determine whether "long" tuplets should be
splitted or not; how then would you determine whether
\tuplet 3:2 {c4 c8 c c4}
should be printed as
|- 3 |
__
| | | |
| | | |
X X X X
or as
|- 3 -| |- 3 -|
| |\ |\ |
| | | |
X X X X
?
In your example,
\set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)
can already save from typing \tuplet (\times today) a lot of times.
Cheers,
--
John Mandereau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: boxed extra rehersal mark
You can use : \set Score.markFormatter = #format-mark-box-letters to put boxes around letters Frédéric 2006/12/20, Neuro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Excuse me, I am almost newbie... I have a quick small question here: How do you mark a extra "boxed" rehersal mark such as "A1" ? My script goes like this: \mark \default%% supposse this is "boxed A" \mark "A1"%% supposse this is A1, bu I prefer "boxed A1" \mark "A2"%% supposse this is A2 ... \mark "A3"%% supposse this is A3 ... \mark \default%% supposse this is "boxed B" thank you very much Neuro [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Good! Frédéric 2006/12/20, Kress, Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Ok. Based on what everyone has been saying and seeming to come to an agreement on, here's the details of the changes that we are proposing be made. 1. \times is replaced by \tuplet since tuplet makes more musical sense and convert-ly can easily be updated to make the change. Because of convert-ly, there's not a real reason (other than the status quo people are used to) to keep \times around. 2. The first argument to \tuplet may be either a ratio (more understandable to musicians) or a division (as is currently supported). The punctuation between the two numbers marks what it is. A single number will not be supported. 3. The second argument remains an arbitrary musical expression. There is no reason to force the expression to contain only the "proper" duration of notes since LP is already built to engrave this situation properly. 4. By default, a single number will be engraved in the tuplet bracket. There is already the text property of the TupletNumber object that can be tweaked to get the ratio printed if one so desires. In other words, no changes need to be made to LP in how the single number vs. ratio engraving is done; LP already does it right. That's all we seem to be talking about. A minor syntactic change that adds clarity and flexibility without making anything (except maybe the parser) more complicated. I think this captures the consensus of the discussion. If we're agreed, we can find out what the price tag will be... Stephen 2006-12-20, 15:33:08 The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your computer. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
« Although I like the idea of accepting both \tuplet 3:2 and \tuplet 2/3,
I don't like the notion of having \tuplet and \times. I suppose we
could keep \times as an old command and remove it from the manual to
avoid confusion... but that seems silly. Either eliminate \times, or
don't bother introducing \tuplet.
Cheers,
- Graham
»
I agree totally to that Graham. Also, the advanced users can make the
semantic differences between the real meaning of "tuplet" and the effect
produced with #setTupletSpannerDuration or whatever.
Indeed, `\times 3' is problematic, but `\tuplet 3' sounds clear to me.
>> Additionally, I suggest that `\tuplet 3' prints the `3' above the
>> group, while `\tuplet 3:2' prints `3:2' (which some composers prefer).
>>
>>> You *could* keep \times and *add* the keyword \tuplet with the
>>> syntax \tuplet m:n {sequence-of-notes},
>>>
>>
>> Actually, I would prefer this too.
>>
> Yes! \times is shorter than \tuplet to type.
Wow, you are that slow at typing? :))
Seriously, the problem to change \times for \tuplet is to break an habit for
many users. But since LilyPond has changed a lot since its beginnings and
convert-ly can easily make the conversion, why not!
But I'm not keen to admit typing \tuplet 3 to have a "3" over the notes and
\tuplet 3:2 to have "3:2". What about wanting a 7:8 but only print "7" when
the standard for 7 is "7:4"? Also, that situation would surely add a lot of
code! That would also happen for using only \tuplet without arguments.
But to avoid repeating \tuplet functions for long passages with the same
tuplets, we could admit that kind of syntax :
\tuplet 3:2 {c8 d e f g a b c d e d c b a g f e d}
without having one long bracket going through all the notes. But I
understand that you don't want to change that for programming issues.
Better keep 3:2 and 2/3. And if you want a function for triplets, just type
"triplet = \tuplet 3:2" and it's done.
And I definitely don't want \times #'(2 . 3) This pseudo-Scheme syntax is
very hard to understand for the beginner, especially the " ' " ! The least
Scheme syntax necessary, the better!
Greetings,
Frédéric
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Might be an idea, but why should we keep two functions making the same
function?
Does it cost that much on functionality to use two differents syntax in the
same function?
Frédéric
2006/12/19, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Jonathan Henkelman escreveu:
> Erik Sandberg gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I think these changes sound scary, it is an additional hack in the
parser
>> machinery. I think it would be cleaner if \times could be changed to a
> proper
>> music function, e.g. as
>> \tuplet 2 3 {...}
>> This would remove rules from the parser instead of adding them.
>>
>> (Hm, my suggestion is not really in line with this discussion; I can
agree
>> that \tuplet 2 3 would be easier to confuse with "3:2" than \tuplet 2/3
is).
>>
>
> I think Eriks point is actually well founded. The discussion started
with my
> discussion of trying to trim down the grammer complexity. Adding syntax
is not
> really in that direction.
>
> That being said, \tuplet 2 3 {...} is rather confusing. I can live with
Another option:
- add \tuplet 3:2 {.. }
- replace \times 2/3 by \times #'(2 . 3) ; this can be implemented with
a standard music function
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: Constructive Criticism and a Question
-- Forwarded message --
From: Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 déc. 2006 17:45
Subject: Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, I prefer to keep the punctuation ":" and "/" to avoid confusion.
Frédéric
2006/12/19, Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >:
On Tuesday 19 December 2006 10:57, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Werner LEMBERG escreveu:
> >> I suppose you could add the command \times 3:2 {a b c} to do exactly
> >> the same as \times 2/3 {a b c} [...]
> >
> > If at all, then
> >
> > \tuplet 3:2 {...}
>
> I don't mind changing \times to \tuplet, and agree that the confusion
with
> \time is a bad thing. We could make \tuplet accept 3:2 2/3 and 3.
>
> Since it is a change that can be accomodated with convert-ly, we
wouldn't
> even need a major version bump for it.
I think these changes sound scary, it is an additional hack in the parser
machinery. I think it would be cleaner if \times could be changed to a
proper
music function, e.g. as
\tuplet 2 3 {...}
This would remove rules from the parser instead of adding them.
(Hm, my suggestion is not really in line with this discussion; I can agree
that \tuplet 2 3 would be easier to confuse with "3:2" than \tuplet 2/3
is).
--
Erik
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
I tried the function and I don't see any incoherence using \tuplet instead
of \times in this situation. Maybe I don't understand the point well.
For me, I wouldn't mid at all to replace entirely the \times function by a
\tuplet function, giving both options of using a fraction (2/3) or the
engraved ratio (3:2).
Frédéric
2006/12/19, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>>> \tuplet 3:2 {...}
>>>
>>>
>> One minor detail is that the name isn't exactly appropriate when you
>> do
>> \set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)
>> \times 2/3 {c8 d e f e d e f g f e d }
>>
>
> Well, in that case just stay with \times.
>
>
I thought the proposal was to completely get rid of \times and replace it
by \tuplet (which I think is a good idea). Just wanted to see if anybody
had any bright idea on a command name that's accurate also in this
special case.
/Mats
> Werner
>
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Maybe, but it is more that it is "7:8" that would be engraved, and not
"7/8". So it is alright to separate both options.
2006/12/19, Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> Werner LEMBERG escreveu:
>
>>> I suppose you could add the command \times 3:2 {a b c} to do exactly
>>> the same as \times 2/3 {a b c} [...]
>>>
>> If at all, then
>>
>> \tuplet 3:2 {...}
>>
>
> I don't mind changing \times to \tuplet, and agree that the confusion
with
> \time is a bad thing. We could make \tuplet accept 3:2 2/3 and 3.
>
Is it relevant that ':' and '/' actually both mean divide?
Paul Scott
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Yeah, that would be a good solution satisfying everyone.
Frédéric
2006/12/18, Kress, Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
You could compromise and use "2/3" to indicate current fractional time the
way it works now, but support using "3:2" to be more "musically intuitive".
I.e., the separator denotes the meaning; '/' for raw division and ":" for
ratio. Not knowing how the parser works, it could even be done by the
parser itself, automatically converting "3:2" to "2/3"...
This also has the virtue of not breaking existing files.
Stephen
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
behalf of David Rogers
Sent: Mon 12/18/2006 3:48 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Carl Youngblood wrote:
>There are also places where 3/2 is necessary with the current way of
>doing things. For example, I was just doing a piece in 12/8 time
>where triplets are the norm and I needed to do eighth notes with a
>two feel. In this case I had to use \times 3/2 { c8 c } etc. I
>guess in this case you're saying it would be more intuitive to do
>2/3? I really don't mind the way things are now. It's a syntax that
>has to be learned anyway, and once you learn it, it seems about the
>same effort either way.
The way the syntax is now, is (in musical terms) the opposite of what's
printed. Having the syntax match the print is likely to be easier to learn
for at least the majority, if not everyone. (The way the syntax is now, it
makes mathematical sense; which is nice - but I don't think it serves a
practical purpose.)
David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
2006-12-18, 16:52:20
The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may
be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your computer.
2006-12-18, 16:24:45
The information contained in this e-mail message and any attachments may
be privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please notify the sender
immediately by replying to this e-mail and delete the message and any
attachments from your computer.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
To answer Carl, yes! To put 2 notes instead of 3, I would put "2:3", which
means "2 instead of 3" or "2 for 3". As David Rogers said, it fits what is
printed, or what would be printed if the whole ratio was there.
Also, is there a reason why the function wasn't named simply \tuplet ?
Frédéric
2006/12/18, David Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Carl Youngblood wrote:
>There are also places where 3/2 is necessary with the current way of
>doing things. For example, I was just doing a piece in 12/8 time
>where triplets are the norm and I needed to do eighth notes with a
>two feel. In this case I had to use \times 3/2 { c8 c } etc. I
>guess in this case you're saying it would be more intuitive to do
>2/3? I really don't mind the way things are now. It's a syntax that
>has to be learned anyway, and once you learn it, it seems about the
>same effort either way.
The way the syntax is now, is (in musical terms) the opposite of what's
printed. Having the syntax match the print is likely to be easier to learn
for at least the majority, if not everyone. (The way the syntax is now, it
makes mathematical sense; which is nice - but I don't think it serves a
practical purpose.)
David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question
Jonathan «puts the finger» on an interesting topic. While most of the basic commands for note entry are quite intuitive (and that's a good thing!), there are some commands that the syntax seems counter-intuitive for a composer or a simple musician. For example, the command \times. Normally, we only write one number for tuplets, but in contemporary music, it is common to write a ratio to clarify the actual duration of the tuplet. For a triplet, we can write "3", but we can also write "3 : 2" over the note. It says "3 notes in the duration of 2" (I know most of you know that, but it is to explain the syntax. Also my English syntax might be bad). It is useful to make the difference between "7 : 8" and "7 : 4", for example. Some contemporary composers even write "7 : (quarter note figure)" to say "7 notes in a quarter note duration" But the \times function demands for a triplet to write "2/3". I know it might seem logical to ask for the fraction of the note. But in fact, for a composer, it is far more intuitive to write "3/2" or even better, "3:2" than "2/3" for a triplet. Writing "2/3" for a 3:2 tuplet is not a big problem, but what about 10:7? Also, for simple note entry, I think you should put MORE freedom for the possible order to write all the symbols. For example you want to put a eighth note at c# one octave higher, you want to make an octave check and make sure the sharp appears. We could write it in many ways cis'!=''8 cis'!8='' c8is!'='' cis8'=''! cis'8!='' etc. But LilyPond accepts only one way of writing it ... and I don't remember which one! And I didn't find any syntax rule about the exact order of the commands in the user manual. To put a syntax rule in the user manual would be good, but to make the compiler more flexible would be even better. Finally, it would be a good thing to revise the grammar of the functions in LilyPond by composers and musicians who are NOT programmers to make the LilyPond language more intuitive, so the learning curve would be less steep. That would be a great thing to do for an eventual LilyPond 3.0. And I would be willing to give some of my free time for that! Regards, Frédéric Chiasson 2006/12/18, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Jonathan Henkelman wrote: > > Ay - I hear you there. I have been considering taking on this project, and I > still need to figure out if I have time before I get myself in over my head > and unable to keep up with the commitment others might have made to me. A > couple of questions I have been pondering in this regard: > > 1) Since I am fairly new to Lilypond, are there folks out there that would be > willing to aid me in the likely event of confusion (I assume this group will > do). > Of course! > 2) If/when inconsistencies in the language turn up - as I'm sure they will - > is there an interest amoung the programmers to correct these? > Since the parser is implemented using lex and bison, there shouldn't be any formal inconsistencies. At second thought, larger and larger parts of the syntax is now implemented as Scheme functions, but they too have a formal syntax check. However, I'm sure you can find lots of language constructs that are confusing. Note that the syntax and semantics has evolved over the years and still is. Many of these changes have in my opinion made the syntax more consequent and simpler. > 3) A complaint I have seen both commonly on this archive and also on > the "todo" list of the co-ordinators for lilypond, is to try and make the > learning curve a bit less steep. One logical outcome of a document of this > type is that it can be used to "clean up" the language - i.e. fulfilling this > last goal. Is there any interest on the part of the programmers/organizers to > undertake this task should I ever get this doc completed. I envision a > process whereby the basic notation of lilypond stays the same (obviously), but: > > - perhaps some command forms would be dropped, > - perhaps users would be forced into less freedom in the syntax > This is one concern I have raised a couple of times. There are lots of optional constructs, which often confuses new users. They certainly save some typing and perhaps lower the initial threshold a bit for new users. However, I think the reduced number of key strokes only is significant in small test examples (which is what the main developers mostly do, and myself and other who help on the mailing list) but not in any real world typesetting. > - perhaps come commands would be morphed to fit into a framework that more > closely matches other commands. > - any changes would idealy be changeable in input scripts
Re: How to use ^markup in a scheme function?
Thanks for the later answer, that is what i'm using and it works.
For the Lilypond code with the Scheme code, I just want to execute the
Lilypond code, so I should write :
(define-music-function (variables)
(let ((music #{ LilyPond code #}))
( (make-music music)
other Scheme code )))
?
Fred
2006/12/16, Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Friday 15 December 2006 22:07, Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
> Then, well, who can help me??
>
> Frédéric
>
> 2006/12/15, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I'm certainly not any expert in Scheme coding for LilyPond. Please
> > always keep the discussion on the mailing list, for the
> > benefit of yourself since you get access to the collected
> > expertise on the list and for the benefit of others who experience
> > similar problems.
> >
> >/Mats
> >
> > Quoting Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > Thanks, at last I understood how to do it?
> > >
> > > One problem left, I copied the code displayed for "\once \override
> > > TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy" to put it in the code of the Slash
> > > function. The code is compiled without errors, but there is no
offset
> > > produced. Why? Do I use the right prefixes for xy?
> > >
> > > Also it is possible to use both LilyPond and Scheme code like this?
> > > (define-music-function (variables)
> > > #{
> > >LilyPond code
> > > #}
> > > (Scheme code))
I think #{ #} simply produces a Music tree, so you can probably do
(define-music-function (variables)
(let ((music #{ LilyPond code #}))
(Scheme code using music)))
BTW, wouldn't it be possible to just do something like:
#{
\once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy
<< $note
\skip 1*0^\markup{\musicglyph #"flags.ugrace"}
>>
#})
(that should work in most cases AFAICS)
--
Erik
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: How to use ^markup in a scheme function?
Then, well, who can help me??
Frédéric
2006/12/15, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm certainly not any expert in Scheme coding for LilyPond. Please
always keep the discussion on the mailing list, for the
benefit of yourself since you get access to the collected
expertise on the list and for the benefit of others who experience
similar problems.
/Mats
Quoting Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Thanks, at last I understood how to do it?
>
> One problem left, I copied the code displayed for "\once \override
> TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy" to put it in the code of the Slash
> function. The code is compiled without errors, but there is no offset
> produced. Why? Do I use the right prefixes for xy?
>
> Also it is possible to use both LilyPond and Scheme code like this?
> (define-music-function (variables)
> #{
>LilyPond code
> #}
> (Scheme code))
>
> Thanks for all the help,
>
> Fred
>
> P.S. The code for the function :
>
> Slash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy note)
>(pair? ly:music?)
>"Return a note with a slash at offset (x . y)"
>(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom
'element
> (make-music 'OverrideProperty 'pop-first #t
>'grob-property-path (list (quote extra-offset))
>'grob-value
> 'xy
>'once #t 'symbol 'TextScript))
>(let ((new-note (ly:music-deep-copy note)))
>(set! (ly:music-property new-note 'elements)
> (cons (make-music 'TextScriptEvent
> 'direction 1 'text
>(markup #:line
>(#:musicglyph "flags.ugrace")))
> (ly:music-property new-note 'elements)))
>new-note))
>
>
>
> \version "2.11.1"
>
> \relative {
> \Slash #'(1.2 . -3.2) c4
> }
>
>
> 2006/12/15, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> The reason is exactly the same as the reason that you cannot do
>> mynote = c
>> \score{{\mynote ^"text" }}
>> See the section on "Adding articulation to notes (example)" for more
>> information on how to solve the problem.
>>
>>/Mats
>>
>> Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I tried to program a function to put a slash at a given offset on a
>> > note, but the line with the ^\markup doesn't work.
>> >
>> > Here is the code :
>> >
>> > Slash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy note)
>> > (pair? ly:music?)
>> > #{
>> > \once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy
>> > $note ^\markup{\musicglyph #"flags.ugrace"}
>> > #})
>> >
>> >
>> > \version " 2.11.1"
>> >
>> > \relative {
>> > \Slash #'(1.1 . -3.2) c4
>> > }
>> >
>> >
>> > Here are the errors :
>> >
>> > :3:45: ERREUR : syntax error, unexpected '^'
>> > \lilyvartmpd
>> > ^\markup{\musicglyph #"
>> > flags.ugrace"}
>> > :3:54: ERREUR : cha^ine d''echappement inconnue (Unknown
>> > escape string): << \musicglyph >>
>> > \lilyvartmpd ^\markup{
>> > \musicglyph #"
>> > flags.ugrace"}
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Frédéric
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ___
>> > lilypond-user mailing list
>> > lilypond-user@gnu.org
>> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>> >
>>
>> --
>> =
>> Mats Bengtsson
>> Signal Processing
>> Signals, Sensors and Systems
>> Royal Institute of Technology
>> SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
>> Sweden
>> Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
>> Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
>> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
>> =
>>
>>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: How to use ^markup in a scheme function?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 déc. 2006 15:31
Subject: Re: How to use ^markup in a scheme function?
To: Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm certainly not any expert in Scheme coding for LilyPond. Please
always keep the discussion on the mailing list, for the
benefit of yourself since you get access to the collected
expertise on the list and for the benefit of others who experience
similar problems.
/Mats
Quoting Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Thanks, at last I understood how to do it?
One problem left, I copied the code displayed for "\once \override
TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy" to put it in the code of the Slash
function. The code is compiled without errors, but there is no offset
produced. Why? Do I use the right prefixes for xy?
Also it is possible to use both LilyPond and Scheme code like this?
(define-music-function (variables)
#{
LilyPond code
#}
(Scheme code))
Thanks for all the help,
Fred
P.S. The code for the function :
Slash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy note)
(pair? ly:music?)
"Return a note with a slash at offset (x . y)"
(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'OverrideProperty 'pop-first #t
'grob-property-path (list (quote extra-offset))
'grob-value
'xy
'once #t 'symbol 'TextScript))
(let ((new-note (ly:music-deep-copy note)))
(set! (ly:music-property new-note 'elements)
(cons (make-music 'TextScriptEvent
'direction 1 'text
(markup #:line
(#:musicglyph "flags.ugrace")))
(ly:music-property new-note 'elements)))
new-note))
\version "2.11.1"
\relative {
\Slash #'(1.2 . -3.2) c4
}
2006/12/15, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
The reason is exactly the same as the reason that you cannot do
mynote = c
\score{{\mynote ^"text" }}
See the section on "Adding articulation to notes (example)" for more
information on how to solve the problem.
/Mats
Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I tried to program a function to put a slash at a given offset on a
> note, but the line with the ^\markup doesn't work.
>
> Here is the code :
>
> Slash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy note)
> (pair? ly:music?)
> #{
> \once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy
> $note ^\markup{\musicglyph #"flags.ugrace"}
> #})
>
>
> \version " 2.11.1"
>
> \relative {
> \Slash #'(1.1 . -3.2) c4
> }
>
>
> Here are the errors :
>
> :3:45: ERREUR : syntax error, unexpected '^'
> \lilyvartmpd
> ^\markup{\musicglyph #"
> flags.ugrace"}
> :3:54: ERREUR : cha^ine d''echappement inconnue (Unknown
> escape string): << \musicglyph >>
> \lilyvartmpd ^\markup{
> \musicglyph #"
> flags.ugrace"}
>
> Thanks,
>
> Frédéric
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
How to use ^\markup in a scheme function?
Hi,
I tried to program a function to put a slash at a given offset on a note,
but the line with the ^\markup doesn't work.
Here is the code :
Slash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy note)
(pair? ly:music?)
#{
\once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy
$note ^\markup{\musicglyph #"flags.ugrace"}
#})
\version "2.11.1"
\relative {
\Slash #'(1.1 . -3.2) c4
}
Here are the errors :
:3:45: ERREUR : syntax error, unexpected '^'
\lilyvartmpd
^\markup{\musicglyph #"
flags.ugrace"}
:3:54: ERREUR : cha^ine d''echappement inconnue (Unknown escape
string): << \musicglyph >>
\lilyvartmpd ^\markup{
\musicglyph #"
flags.ugrace"}
Thanks,
Frédéric
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Make-pango-font-tree doesn't work with set-global-staff size
Hi!
I would like to know what is going wrong with this code. I tried to change
the fonts but it doesn't work. But if I remove the set-global-staff-size
function, the fonts changed as I wanted. Is this a bug or there is something
with the make-pango-font-tree that I don't know?
I'm working on Mac OS 10.4.8
Thanks,
Frédéric
The code :
\version "2.11.1"
\paper
{
#(set-default-paper-size "letter")
#(define fonts (make-pango-font-tree "Times"
"Helvetica"
"Courier"
(/ 16 20)))
}
\header
{
title = "Titre"
composer = "Compositeur"
}
\new Score
{
#(set-global-staff-size 16)
\relative c'
{ c8^\markup{"Times?" \sans "Helvetica?" \typewriter "Courier?"}
d e f g a b c }
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: markup height measured from staff?
Hi, Is it also possible to make a \markup at a specified distance frome the notehead? I have asked this question already but nobody seemed able to answer me. Frédéric 2006/12/9, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Use the staff-padding property to specify the distance from the staff. However, even if you set the padding property to zero, LilyPond will not let the note head collide with the text (unless you attach it to spacing note in a separate Voice context). /Mats Quoting Monk Panteleimon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Hello! >> >>> I would like to create a custom \markup command that puts a letter >>> at a specified distance from the staff rather than from a note. > > On 12/09/2005 01:51:26 PM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: >> What about putting an invisible note in a separate voice, at a known >> position (e.g., top line of the staff), and attaching the \markup to >> that? >> > > Thank you. > That would be good if the markup where used once or twice in a score, > but this is for "ison" or drone notes that are used in Byzantine Chant. > They are often noted by a letter above the staff which appears only > when the note changes.This happens at irregular intervals, like chord > changes although generally less regular and less frequent. If I just > attach them to the notes, this gives an uneven appearance in places > where the changes are closer together, and I'm trying to avoid tweaking > them all with #'extra-offset until they sort of look even. > > The markup I'm looking for should be something that acts visually more > or less like lilypond's chord-letters but has no midi output. I would > just use the chords if it weren't for the midi output and the fact that > I can't (afaik) visually format the chords. > > Fr. P > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Put a slash on acciaccatura beamed eighth notes
While waiting for your answer, I tried to put the slash in a crude manual
way with extra-offset, like this :
Slash = \markup {\musicglyph #"flags.ugrace"} % must use ^
PlaceSlash = #(define-music-function (parser location xy) (pair?)
#{
\once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #$xy
#})
\version "2.11.1"
\relative {
\PlaceSlash #'(1.1 . -3.2) c^\Slash
}
It works, although you must calculate the offset for each situation and you
must use two functions for one action. How could you program a function so
when you type for example :
c8\Slash #'(1.1 . -3.2)
you get the same result. Also, is there a way to start the offset from the
base of the stem, so you can have a constant value for the slash offset?
That kind of offset would be also useful to put other symbol on the stem,
like an "x" on the stem (over the notehead), which can mean "slap tongue" in
modern saxophone writing.
Also, if you know the file where the slash is put with stroke-style =
"grace", please tell me so I can try to to put code for beamed notes with my
basic programming skills.
Thanks,
Frédéric
2006/12/8, Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Sorry for not answering to everyone
-- Forwarded message --
From: Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Date: 8 déc. 2006 15:21
Subject: Re: Put a slash on acciaccatura beamed eighth notes
To: Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Good, let's try it then. So in which file is the code and the missing
support. In which langage should I program for this?
2006/12/8, Mats Bengtsson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I would like to know if anyone has found a way to put a slash on
> > beamed eighth notes in acciaccatura? With the \acciaccatura function,
> > the slash appears on single notes, but not on beamed notes. The ideal
> > engraving would be a slash at the start of the beam, like in Berio's
> > Sequenza IXb for alto saxophone (attachment too large for sending)
> >
> > I have compared the codes of "\acciaccatura c8" and "\acciaccatura {
> > c8[ d8]}" with \displayMusic. The code requesting the slash is the
> same :
> > ...
>
>
> > No change for the beamed eighth notes, although the slash doesn't
> > appear. No difference either in ly/grace- init.ly <http://init.ly >.
> > Does anyone know where the denial of this request for beamed notes is
> > programmed? How can I change it?
>
> The problem isn't that the request is denied, but that the
> support for slashes through beams never has been implemented.
> In the mailing list archives, you can find that this question has
> popped up a number of times and you can also find some tricks
> to fake the slash. However, it would be great if you could take
> a look and make a proper implementation.
>
>/Mats
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: Put a slash on acciaccatura beamed eighth notes
Sorry for not answering to everyone
-- Forwarded message --
From: Frédéric Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 8 déc. 2006 15:21
Subject: Re: Put a slash on acciaccatura beamed eighth notes
To: Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Good, let's try it then. So in which file is the code and the missing
support. In which langage should I program for this?
2006/12/8, Mats Bengtsson < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I would like to know if anyone has found a way to put a slash on
> beamed eighth notes in acciaccatura? With the \acciaccatura function,
> the slash appears on single notes, but not on beamed notes. The ideal
> engraving would be a slash at the start of the beam, like in Berio's
> Sequenza IXb for alto saxophone (attachment too large for sending)
>
> I have compared the codes of "\acciaccatura c8" and "\acciaccatura {
> c8[ d8]}" with \displayMusic. The code requesting the slash is the same
:
> ...
> No change for the beamed eighth notes, although the slash doesn't
> appear. No difference either in ly/grace- init.ly <http://init.ly>.
> Does anyone know where the denial of this request for beamed notes is
> programmed? How can I change it?
The problem isn't that the request is denied, but that the
support for slashes through beams never has been implemented.
In the mailing list archives, you can find that this question has
popped up a number of times and you can also find some tricks
to fake the slash. However, it would be great if you could take
a look and make a proper implementation.
/Mats
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Put a slash on acciaccatura beamed eighth notes
Hello everyone,
I would like to know if anyone has found a way to put a slash on beamed
eighth notes in acciaccatura? With the \acciaccatura function, the slash
appears on single notes, but not on beamed notes. The ideal engraving would
be a slash at the start of the beam, like in Berio's Sequenza IXb for alto
saxophone (attachment too large for sending)
I have compared the codes of "\acciaccatura c8" and "\acciaccatura { c8[
d8]}" with \displayMusic. The code requesting the slash is the same :
(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'OverrideProperty 'pop-first #t
'grob-property-path (list (quote stroke-style)) 'grob-value "grace" 'symbol
'Stem
and later...
(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'RevertProperty 'grob-property-path (list
(quote stroke-style)) 'symbol 'Stem))
No change for the beamed eighth notes, although the slash doesn't appear. No
difference either in ly/grace- init.ly. Does anyone know where the denial of
this request for beamed notes is programmed? How can I change it?
The complete Scheme procedures for both codes :
;\acciaccatura c8
(make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music 'GraceMusic 'element
(make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music
'EventChord 'elements
(list
(make-music 'SkipEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 0 0 0 1))
(make-music 'SlurEvent 'span-direction -1)))
(make-music
'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'OverrideProperty 'pop-first #t 'grob-property-path
(list (quote stroke-style))
'grob-value "grace" 'symbol 'Stem
(make-music 'EventChord 'elements
(list (make-music
'NoteEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 3 0 1 1) 'pitch (ly:make-pitch -1 0
0
(make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music
'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'RevertProperty 'grob-property-path (list (quote stroke-style))
'symbol 'Stem))
(make-music
'EventChord 'elements
(list
(make-music 'SkipEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 0 0 0 1))
(make-music 'SlurEvent 'span-direction 1))
;\acciaccatura {c8[ d8]}
(make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music 'GraceMusic 'element
(make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list (make-music 'SequentialMusic
'elements
(list
(make-music 'EventChord 'elements
(list (make-music 'SkipEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 0 0 0 1))
(make-music 'SlurEvent 'span-direction -1)))
(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'OverrideProperty 'pop-first #t 'grob-property-path
(list (quote stroke-style))
'grob-value "grace" 'symbol 'Stem
(make-music
'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list
(make-music 'EventChord 'elements
(list (make-music 'NoteEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 3 0 1 1) 'pitch
(ly:make-pitch -1 0 0))
(make-music 'BeamEvent 'span-direction -1)))
(make-music 'EventChord 'elements
(list (make-music 'NoteEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 3 0 1 1) 'pitch
(ly:make-pitch -1 1 0))
(make-music 'BeamEvent 'span-direction 1)
(make-music
'SequentialMusic 'elements
(list
(make-music 'ContextSpeccedMusic 'context-type 'Bottom 'element
(make-music 'RevertProperty 'grob-property-path (list (quote stroke-style))
'symbol 'Stem))
(make-music 'EventChord 'elements
(list (make-music 'SkipEvent 'duration (ly:make-duration 0 0 0 1))
(make-music 'SlurEvent 'span-direction 1))
Regards,
Frédéric Chiasson
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Well, I never tried jEdit on Mac. But I tried it on PC and the LilypondTool didn't work out and I had so many problems that I discarded it after a week. Maybe I should give it a second shot. It migth work better on Mac OS. Thanks for the comments, Frédéric 2006/12/7, Bertalan Fodor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Often one can gain productivity by fitting his way of work to the editor :-) Bert > So what's wrong with jEdit? Nothing, if it fits the way you work. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond and editors
Hi everyone, On the same subject, I would like to propose an improvement for the Lilypond editor on Mac OS (mine is 10.4). It would be really nice if we could point and click on an error message and the code creating the error would be highlighted. Or, an easier thing to program, a line and character counter in the editor would be great, since the error messages give the line number where the bug is. It would be a great improvement. By the way, is there any editor having LilyPond tool other than jEdit? Thanks, Frédéric Chiasson 2006/12/7, Andreas v. Heydwolff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: confrey wrote: > Hi everybody, > I know some text editors have a support for lilypond; I'd like to know > what's a fine editor for lilypond, and if it is possible to customize > gedit (sintax highlighting and statement recognition adn completation). > bye > confrey kate with colored syntax (downloadable somewhere), utf-encoding, command line window for compiling, code snippet and session saving. "Rocks." Andreas v.H. (sorry for PM) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lily doc in french ?
John Mandereau ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) has already started a french translation of the tutorial, which appears automatically if the site detects your computer uses french. You can contact him using the french user forum : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Frédéric Chiasson 2006/11/21, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: You need a TeX installation and on top of that you need a fresh version of texinfo, to be able to get the HTML version. However, it's probably tricky to process the documentation using the Makefiles in the LilyPond source code directory structure, without building also the software (which involves a number of other dependencies). See my reply to the original question of this thread for a hint on who can provide more information. /Mats Quoting Ole Hesprich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Mats Bengtsson wrote: > >> The documentation is written using texinfo + lilypond-book and is >> included in the source code of LilyPond. > > > Any hint to what is needed do compile it? LaTeX? And what's about a > change-log of the documentation files? > > Ole > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Selling music engraved by Lilypond
Thanks for the quick answers! And yes, I will keep the tag, it is least I can do to encourage such a wonderful project!However is it possible to change the alignment, the size, the font or any other characteristic of the tagline (while keeping it noticeable!) ? Is it the same as using \override on TextScript? Fred2006/11/15, Joseph Wakeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Frédéric Chiasson wrote:> I just saw a message about the tagline "Engraved by Lilypond" and I was> wondering if it is legal to sell our own partitions of our own> compositions engraved with Lilypond? Is there any limitation you put > against a «commercial» use (for now, it is really «on the side» but> still...)?Lilypond is distributed under the GNU General Public License. Underthese terms there is *no way* to restrict you in this manner. "The act of running the Program is not restricted, and the output fromthe Program is covered only if its contents constitute a work based onthe Program (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that is true depends on what the Program does." -- from section 0 of the GPL."You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exerciseof the rights granted herein." -- from section 6.The wider philosophical scope for this can be seen in the Free Softwaredefinition at http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html . "Freedom 0"is "The freedom to run the program, for any purpose."You are not even obliged to keep the "Engraved by Lilypond" tag line,although obviously it is nice and polite to do so. :-) -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Selling music engraved by Lilypond
Hi,I just saw a message about the tagline "Engraved by Lilypond" and I was wondering if it is legal to sell our own partitions of our own compositions engraved with Lilypond? Is there any limitation you put against a «commercial» use (for now, it is really «on the side» but still...)? Frédéric Chiasson ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: acciaccatura slash on beamed eighth notes
Okay, I think I will do it manually for each case, since I really don't have any notion of Scheme programming.Is there any comprehensive tutorial for beginners in Scheme somewhere on Internet?Thanks for your answers, Frédéric2006/11/7, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Please always keep the discussion on the mailing list, for thebenefit of yourself since you get access to the collectedexpertise on the list and for the benefit of others who experiencesimilar problems. Feel free to quote my answer below if you wish. The offset is relative to the normal position of the text script.The horizontal position shouldn't be a problem, but for thevertical position, LilyPond tries to keep a minimum distanceboth to the closest note head/stem and to the stave, so when the beam falls within the stave you will need special treatmentfor every beam position.If you are willing to do some Scheme hacking, then the bestsolution is probably to replace the standard print function for Beam with one that internally calls the default functionand then adds the slash. /MatsFrédéric Chiasson wrote:> Thanks for the tip,>> I have made it using \once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(x . y) >> Is there a way to calculate the offset from the tip of the stem, or at> least the notehead, so I can use the same values for x and y, for each> of the many gracenote groups used in my pieces? >> Frédéric>>> 2006/11/7, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>:>> There is no direct support for such slashed beams in LilyPond, but> if you> search the mailing list archives, you should find some tricks that> people > have used as a workaround. Basically, what you can do is to add a> slash> as a text script and then move it around to the desired position.>>/Mats>> Frédéric Chiasson wrote: > > Hello,> >> > I am trying to transcribe one of my own compositions on Lilypond> > 2.9.28. I need to have slash beamed gracenotes. I didn't find> any way > > to do it on the mailing list. Did I miss something?> >> > The slashed beamed gracenote groups are quite common in contemporary> > music. I can give you some scanned examples if you need. > >> > Thanks for your answers,> >> > Frédéric Chiasson> >> >> > >> > ___> > lilypond-user mailing list> > lilypond-user@gnu.org lilypond-user@gnu.org>> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user> < http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user>> >>> --> => Mats Bengtsson> Signal Processing > Signals, Sensors and Systems> Royal Institute of Technology> SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM> Sweden> Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463> Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>> WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe <http://www.s3.kth.se/%7Emabe>> =>> --=Mats BengtssonSignal ProcessingSignals, Sensors and SystemsRoyal Institute of TechnologySE-100 44 STOCKHOLM SwedenPhone: (+46) 8 790 8463Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe= ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
acciaccatura slash on beamed eighth notes
Hello,I am trying to transcribe one of my own compositions on Lilypond 2.9.28. I need to have slash beamed gracenotes. I didn't find any way to do it on the mailing list. Did I miss something?The slashed beamed gracenote groups are quite common in contemporary music. I can give you some scanned examples if you need. Thanks for your answers,Frédéric Chiasson ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
