Re: Making slurs more visible
On 11 Aug 2018, at 10:33, David Kastrup wrote: > "Galen Menzel" writes: > >> On 11 Aug 2018, at 1:23, Torsten Hämmerle wrote: >>> >>> This is just to explain how the penalty system works for finding the >>> optimum >>> solution among several possibilities, but of course the best way is >>> to say >>> "I definitely do not want ties shorter than min-length!" is simply >>> setting >>> Tie.details.min-length. >> >> Hi Thorsten — thanks for this excellent explanation! It definitely >> makes things clearer. To avoid unintended consequences of futzing I’ve >> ended up just briefly adjusting the ties as follows: >> >> \override Tie.details.min-length=#3 >> g4. g8~g g~g g >> \revert Tie.details.min-length >> >> Thanks for all the help! > > I'd recommend using \temporary \override here since then the \revert > will restore any preexisting value. That makes such a passage work > better as a "black box" for copy and/or in music functions. Great tip — thank you! Galen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Making slurs more visible
On 11 Aug 2018, at 1:23, Torsten Hämmerle wrote: This is just to explain how the penalty system works for finding the optimum solution among several possibilities, but of course the best way is to say "I definitely do not want ties shorter than min-length!" is simply setting Tie.details.min-length. Hi Thorsten — thanks for this excellent explanation! It definitely makes things clearer. To avoid unintended consequences of futzing I’ve ended up just briefly adjusting the ties as follows: \override Tie.details.min-length=#3 g4. g8~g g~g g \revert Tie.details.min-length Thanks for all the help! Best, Galen___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Making slurs more visible
On 11 Aug 2018, at 0:26, Malte Meyn wrote: I would not notate the left hand rhythm as 4. 8~ 8 8~ 8 8 but as 4. 8~ 8 4 8 That’s easier to read for the player. Thanks for pointing this out! You’re totally right — I’m not sure why I thought tied eighth notes would be appropriate here. Galen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Making slurs more visible
On 10 Aug 2018, at 16:08, David Nalesnik wrote: On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 6:05 PM Galen Menzel wrote: However, I’m a bit baffled as to how I could have found this setting. The tie internals page doesn’t list min-length as one of the members of tie’s details alist. Where is this setting documented? Thanks again! Galen You need to click on the various interface links at the bottom of the page to see all of the properties theoretically supported. Clicking on "tie-interface" takes you to http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/internals/tie_002dinterface where the property is listed. Ah, gotcha — thanks! Just so I understand, it seems that Tie.details.min-length cannot influence note spacing. What does it influence other than this specific case that I am asking about here? Thanks again, Galen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Making slurs more visible
On 10 Aug 2018, at 13:50, Torsten Hämmerle wrote: Galen Menzel wrote Is there a simple way to direct lilypond to use the larger ties here? Hi Galen, Yes, there are several ways: The most obvíous way is to use \override Tie.minimum-length = #... But this also affects the spacing of notes. If I get you correctly, you'd rather like to keep the spacing (without lyrics, it's even tighter), but you don't want the ties to become too short when slipping in between the noteheads. This can be achieved by playing around with one of the details properties: \override Tie.details.min-length = #... A sufficiently large value of details.min-length will prevent a tie from being squeezed into a too narrow gap between noteheads. Thanks, Torsten — this second approach is just what I need. However, I’m a bit baffled as to how I could have found this setting. The [tie internals page](http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/internals/tie) doesn’t list min-length as one of the members of tie’s `details` alist. Where is this setting documented? Thanks again! Galen___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Making slurs more visible
Hi all, I have a score in which the following measure renders nicely when only the piano line is given:  However, when the vocal line is also given, the slurs above the bass-clef g eighth notes become very hard to see:  Presumably the vocal line alters the spacing of the bass-clef notes, putting enough space between them that lilypond decides to use smaller ties that fit between the note heads, rather than larger ties that span the tops of the note heads. But in this case I find the smaller ties look worse. Is there a simple way to direct lilypond to use the larger ties here? Thanks! Galen___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Barcheck failure warnings for lyrics in parallel mode
On 9 Aug 2018, at 0:53, David Kastrup wrote:
"Galen Menzel" writes:
On 8 Aug 2018, at 14:10, David Kastrup wrote:
"Galen Menzel" writes:
So basically explicit bar markings and lyrics just don’t play
nicely
together?
And auto-length lyrics. If you give the lyric syllables explicit
durations and not use \lyricsto/\addlyrics but just set
associatedVoice
and \lyricmode appropriately, you can write bar checks into the
lyrics
perfectly well. Note that bar checks indicate that your lyrics
_are_
written to match a given rhythm at seminal points, so there is some
motivation to either put none of the rhythm into the lyrics (and let
them get autotimed using \addlyrics/lyricsto) or put all of it in
and
use explicit durations.
Ok, that makes sense. Looks like this is just a rough edge, where the
requirements of auto-length lyrics are in conflict with the
requirements of parallel notation. I’ll look into explicit duration
or
suppressing the warning.
You could just remove the bar checks from the lyrics selectively, like
lyrics_b = #(map-some-music (music-type-predicate 'bar-check)
lyrics_b)
However, that would not get you rid of the warnings because of music
with unequal length. The warnings are intended for locating problems:
removing them has its own problems. Have you considered specifying
your
lyrics with durations, like \lyricmode { one 2. two 4 } (spaces before
durations are optional)?
This is what I ended up doing. It’s a somewhat unsatisfying solution,
since it’s clearly something a machine could do. But it seemed to be
worth it in this case, since searching for lyrics are the easiest way to
jump to a bar without having to look up the bar number.
There seems to be a legitimate use case here for suppressing warnings
related to only one specific voice in a parallel-music expression. Is
there a way of doing this? If not, do you think the dev team would be
open to such a feature request?
Thanks!
Galen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Barcheck failure warnings for lyrics in parallel mode
On 8 Aug 2018, at 14:10, David Kastrup wrote: "Galen Menzel" writes: So basically explicit bar markings and lyrics just don’t play nicely together? And auto-length lyrics. If you give the lyric syllables explicit durations and not use \lyricsto/\addlyrics but just set associatedVoice and \lyricmode appropriately, you can write bar checks into the lyrics perfectly well. Note that bar checks indicate that your lyrics _are_ written to match a given rhythm at seminal points, so there is some motivation to either put none of the rhythm into the lyrics (and let them get autotimed using \addlyrics/lyricsto) or put all of it in and use explicit durations. Ok, that makes sense. Looks like this is just a rough edge, where the requirements of auto-length lyrics are in conflict with the requirements of parallel notation. I’ll look into explicit duration or suppressing the warning. Thanks again! Best, Galen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Barcheck failure warnings for lyrics in parallel mode
On 7 Aug 2018, at 14:53, David Wright wrote: On Tue 07 Aug 2018 at 12:30:03 (-0700), Galen Menzel wrote: Now, although `lyrics_c` is a silly way to write a lyric line, `lyrics_b` seems reasonable to me. Is there a better way to define a lyric line in a `parallelMusic` definition so that lilypond doesn’t complain? And if not, is there a way to suppress these barcheck failure warnings? From NR §1.2.5: Note that bar check marks in lyrics are evaluated at the musical moment when the syllable following the check mark is processed. If the lyrics are associated with the notes of a voice which has a rest at the beginning of a bar, then no syllable can be located at the start of that bar and a warning will be issued if a bar check mark is placed in the lyrics at that position. So basically explicit bar markings and lyrics just don’t play nicely together? Set the context property ignoreBarChecks might work. (I'm not a parallel music writer.) I’ll look into that. Thanks for the help! Best, Galen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Barcheck failure warnings for lyrics in parallel mode
Hi all,
I’m using 2.18.2.
The following code compiles with no issue and correctly places the
lyrics below the notes:
```
melody_a = { r2 a8 b8 r4 | r2 a8 b8 r4 }
lyrics_a = \lyricmode { one two three four }
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_a
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_a
>>
\layout { }
}
```
However, I prefer to write lines in parallel, as follows:
```
\parallelMusic #'(melody_b lyrics_b) {
% Bar 1
r2 a8 b8r4 |
\lyricmode {one two }|
% Bar 2
r2 a8b8r4 |
\lyricmode {three four } |
}
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_b
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_b
>>
}
```
This typesets correctly, but lilypond complains that the bars in the
parallel music don't have the same length, and issues a barcheck-failure
warning. My understanding is that this parallel line is basically
equivalent to defining `lyrics_b` as
```
lyrics_b = { \lyricmode { one two } | \lyricmode { three four } }
```
and indeed, if we create a non-parallel version with the lyrics defined
like this, lilypond also complains:
```
melody_c = { r2 a8 b8 r4 | r2 a8 b8 r4 }
lyrics_c = { \lyricmode { one two } | \lyricmode { three four } }
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_c
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_c
>>
\layout { }
}
```
Now, although `lyrics_c` is a silly way to write a lyric line,
`lyrics_b` seems reasonable to me. Is there a better way to define a
lyric line in a `parallelMusic` definition so that lilypond doesn’t
complain? And if not, is there a way to suppress these barcheck failure
warnings?
I’ve attached a small example that contains these three ways of
defining a lyric line.
I’d appreciate any advice here!
Best,
Galen%{
When compiling this example, lilypond emits barcheck-failure warnings
for the lyrics_b and lyrics_c lines.
%}
\language "english"
melody_a = { r2 a8 b8 r4 | r2 a8 b8 r4 }
lyrics_a = \lyricmode { one two three four }
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_a
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_a
>>
\layout { }
}
\parallelMusic #'(melody_b lyrics_b) {
% Bar 1
r2 a8 b8r4 |
\lyricmode {one two }|
% Bar 2
r2 a8b8r4 |
\lyricmode {three four } |
}
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_b
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_b
>>
}
melody_c = { r2 a8 b8 r4 | r2 a8 b8 r4 }
lyrics_c = { \lyricmode { one two } | \lyricmode { three four } }
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "melody" \relative c'' \melody_c
\new Lyrics \lyricsto melody \lyrics_c
>>
\layout { }
}
\version "2.18.2"
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
