Vertically Repositioning \tempo Output
Hi List -- One of my several \tempo commands is printing its line too far above the staff. My attempts to affect its Y-offset (with \markup, \offset or \tweak) have failed. Could someone please point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance, Peter A
Color for Articulations?
Dear LP Gurus, My piano score in progress has 3 voices. As these voices are to become somewhat conflated, I've assigned each a unique color for its noteheads, stems, flags, and slurs. All of this works fine. However, I can't find a way to change color default for its ARTICULATIONS (the "\tenuto" or "--"). Have I missed something? Thanks in advance for your consideration! Regards, Peter A
Re: Spacing for s4
My apologies, Simon. Just now registered your first request. Will reform. On 12/05/2016 03:42 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote: I don’t understand why you keep going off-list with this. Best, Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing for s4
On 12/04/2016 11:50 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote: ... Until I reread the manual I had forgotten that spacer rests are really called "invisible rests", which exactly describes what they do. Perhaps we should change the documentation to have most of the text read "invisible rest". Well, to my mind, that phrase only ambiguously describes what they do. Because there are two visual issues here: whether & what the glyph is; and whether space - to be filled or left empty - is being made for it. "Invisible rest" doesn't settle both of these. Come to think of it, "*spacer rest*" instead actually comes closer -- assuming anyway somewhere a strict definition. P ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing for s4
Hear hear!
P
On 12/03/2016 10:19 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi all,
Or perhaps have a distinction between things like { s4 } and { c4\rest } ?
I think we should distinguish between “skips” [which take up no space,
horizontal or vertical], “spacers” [which take up space, but are invisible],
and visible objects (like rests, notes, etc).
My suggestion:
s4 for skips
sp4 (or similar) for spacers
c4, c4\rest, etc. for visible objects
Right now, I have the syntactic sugar \ignoreH, \ignoreV, and \ignore (both H
and V) which I put in front of objects when I want to adjust their effect on
spacing — but it would be nice to have a built-in and less verbose way of doing
the same thing.
Thoughts?
Kieren.
Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing for s4
On 12/03/2016 06:26 AM, David Kastrup wrote: Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> writes: On 03.12.2016 02:36, PMA wrote: The score setup already calls for proportional notation. I think it would be a valid request to have s-rests take up the respective space with proportional spacing. I don't think s rests should mess with the spacing of other notes. So their spacing should not be "proportional" in LilyPond terms but rather proportional with respect to the next "real" note columns. Trivially if there is a note at the same time as the s it should just align to that. So basically my idea would be to have the responsible engraver record the closest Note/Rest columns and then place the s column in respect to those and their timing and positioning. Bonus for figuring out how to deal with grace time... Would you mind sending a concise request, with a small example, to bug-lilyp...@gnu.org? With such a simple solution (my using 'r' instead & setting rests to transparent), I'm not inclined to pursue the issue. I do wonder, though, if spacers are not to make space (for themselves, so of course nudging the next event rightward), why they are called "spacers" at all. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing for s4
On 12/02/2016 08:36 PM, PMA wrote: On 12/02/2016 07:08 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote: On 02.12.2016 23:39, PMA wrote: Hi All! I notice that the spacer command (e.g., "s4"), though always accounting rightly for the TIME it commandeers (here a quarter-note's worth), does not always insert ACTUAL HORIZONTAL SPACE in the score. How can I ensure that it'll do that too? (I.e., what score-setup spec would have disabled it?) Since there is no visible output for s-rests, they don’t technically _need_ to take up space. Some ideas: – Adjust line breaks or use the paper variables system-count, page-count to achieve generally looser spacing. – Try proportional notation. Both should be easily found in the docs. HTH, Simon Hi Simon! If they NEVER visibly output horizontal space (the amount that rests instead would take up), I wouldn't be wondering. Anyway... The score setup already calls for proportional notation. I'll pursue your other leads now. Thanks, Pete Got it! -- \override Rest.transparent = ##t Looks dory-hunky. Thanks again! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing for s4
On 12/02/2016 07:08 PM, Simon Albrecht wrote: On 02.12.2016 23:39, PMA wrote: Hi All! I notice that the spacer command (e.g., "s4"), though always accounting rightly for the TIME it commandeers (here a quarter-note's worth), does not always insert ACTUAL HORIZONTAL SPACE in the score. How can I ensure that it'll do that too? (I.e., what score-setup spec would have disabled it?) Since there is no visible output for s-rests, they don’t technically _need_ to take up space. Some ideas: – Adjust line breaks or use the paper variables system-count, page-count to achieve generally looser spacing. – Try proportional notation. Both should be easily found in the docs. HTH, Simon Hi Simon! If they NEVER visibly output horizontal space (the amount that rests instead would take up), I wouldn't be wondering. Anyway... The score setup already calls for proportional notation. I'll pursue your other leads now. Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Bad-Schemer syndrome
Oops. Ignore the Subject line here, and the whole
lower message. I forgot to erase them. Mea culpa!
On 12/02/2016 05:39 PM, PMA wrote:
Hi All!
I notice that the spacer command (e.g., "s4"), though
always accounting rightly for the TIME it commandeers
(here a quarter-note's worth), does not always insert
ACTUAL HORIZONTAL SPACE in the score.
How can I ensure that it'll do that too? (I.e., what
score-setup spec would have disabled it?)
Thanks,
Pete
On 11/03/2016 03:41 PM, PMA wrote:
Hi LP Gurus!
I have a score (see "Original" below) full of note events
like "gs 3", whose duration is MEANT always to be realized
as *one triplet half-note*.
Original = { gs 3 a 3g 2 a 3 }
Replaced = { \TR gs\TR a g 2 \TR a }
So, I'm trying to concoct a function that, for any event
of original duration '3', will input the pitch name only
(reading from "Replaced") and embed that string in the
command "\tuplet 3/2 2".
TR =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (?)
#{
\tuplet 3/2 offset 2
#})
But I'm stymied trying to whittle its Scheme, especially
re two questions: what variable type will work for the
the define-line ending "(?)" - "string" doesn't; and
what extra syntax might the "\tuplet..." command need to
handle the "offset" in its innards?
Hope this is clear.
Thanks in advance.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Bad-Schemer syndrome
Hi All!
I notice that the spacer command (e.g., "s4"), though
always accounting rightly for the TIME it commandeers
(here a quarter-note's worth), does not always insert
ACTUAL HORIZONTAL SPACE in the score.
How can I ensure that it'll do that too? (I.e., what
score-setup spec would have disabled it?)
Thanks,
Pete
On 11/03/2016 03:41 PM, PMA wrote:
Hi LP Gurus!
I have a score (see "Original" below) full of note events
like "gs 3", whose duration is MEANT always to be realized
as *one triplet half-note*.
Original = { gs 3 a 3g 2 a 3 }
Replaced = { \TR gs\TR a g 2 \TR a }
So, I'm trying to concoct a function that, for any event
of original duration '3', will input the pitch name only
(reading from "Replaced") and embed that string in the
command "\tuplet 3/2 2".
TR =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (?)
#{
\tuplet 3/2 offset 2
#})
But I'm stymied trying to whittle its Scheme, especially
re two questions: what variable type will work for the
the define-line ending "(?)" - "string" doesn't; and
what extra syntax might the "\tuplet..." command need to
handle the "offset" in its innards?
Hope this is clear.
Thanks in advance.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Bad-Schemer syndrome
Hi LP Gurus!
I have a score (see "Original" below) full of note events
like "gs 3", whose duration is MEANT always to be realized
as *one triplet half-note*.
Original = { gs 3 a 3g 2 a 3 }
Replaced = { \TR gs\TR a g 2 \TR a }
So, I'm trying to concoct a function that, for any event
of original duration '3', will input the pitch name only
(reading from "Replaced") and embed that string in the
command "\tuplet 3/2 2".
TR =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (?)
#{
\tuplet 3/2 offset 2
#})
But I'm stymied trying to whittle its Scheme, especially
re two questions: what variable type will work for the
the define-line ending "(?)" - "string" doesn't; and
what extra syntax might the "\tuplet..." command need to
handle the "offset" in its innards?
Hope this is clear.
Thanks in advance.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Please help enable fussy \tempo output
Hi All again! I would like to alter the output of LY's \tempo command, specifically within its "( = )" assignment. Here's my original -- \tempo \markup \sans "Blah blah" 1 = 50 which o'course outputs a black whole-note glyph with both the "= 50" and the parentheses in TimesRoman font. I want to alter the output so that - the glyph is instead a STEMLESS RED QUARTER-NOTE, and - the parentheses and the "= 50" are also in \sans font. Would someone please throw me a clue how to do that? Thanks in advance. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Please help with Lilypond calling Scheme
Oh dear. *NEVER MIND*. I just now got it working.
Thanks anyway!
Pete
On 09/20/2016 01:12 PM, PMA wrote:
Hi Lilypond Gurus!
I need help, when you can spare the time, to get an already-
working Lilypond music function to call my just-added Scheme
routine.
This Scheme procedure works when called directly from Guile:
entering "(colorNote -1)" get output "red".
(define (colorNote n)
(cond ((eq? (- n) 1) 'red )
((eq? (- n) 2) 'blue)))
But in trying to evoke the procedure, the following Lilypond
function hits two snags: it apparently doesn't see colorNote
at all, and even if it did, it still would not convert the
returned "red" to "#red". (I've omitted irrelevant lines.)
FS =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (number?)
#{
\override NoteHead.font-size = #offset % This line works.
%\override NoteHead.color = #red % This line worked.
\override NoteHead.color = #(colorNote #offset) % *ERRORS*.
#})
I suspect that a fix here is easy. But it's beyond my naive
struggles. I'd appreciate any suggestions.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Please help with Lilypond calling Scheme
Hi Lilypond Gurus!
I need help, when you can spare the time, to get an already-
working Lilypond music function to call my just-added Scheme
routine.
This Scheme procedure works when called directly from Guile:
entering "(colorNote -1)" get output "red".
(define (colorNote n)
(cond ((eq? (- n) 1) 'red )
((eq? (- n) 2) 'blue)))
But in trying to evoke the procedure, the following Lilypond
function hits two snags: it apparently doesn't see colorNote
at all, and even if it did, it still would not convert the
returned "red" to "#red". (I've omitted irrelevant lines.)
FS =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (number?)
#{
\override NoteHead.font-size = #offset % This line works.
%\override NoteHead.color = #red % This line worked.
\override NoteHead.color = #(colorNote #offset) % *ERRORS*.
#})
I suspect that a fix here is easy. But it's beyond my naive
struggles. I'd appreciate any suggestions.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: 2.18.2 - Thoughts so far
Hear, hear! Ivan Kuznetsov wrote: Do yourself a serious favor and learn vi ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OT: Beauty of programming languages
PMA wrote: PMA wrote: Martin Tarenskeen wrote: This thread makes me wonder: what's the average age of LilyPond users and developers? My average age is 75. Better answer -- My age is 75. I've been using Lilypond for ca 5 years, without an editor (other than VI), and entirely for original compositions. My .ly files usually exist initially as output from the J prog. language. A single movement may well have 2 final .ly files -- one optimized for the score, the other optimized for MIDI output (in turn further edited via Rosegarden). P.S. I upload all results to IMSLP, upon copyright registration. People have been so forthcoming on this thread, I feel like expanding my entry background-wise a little. I was a pianist in academia for decades, focussed most especially on the late works of F. Busoni. My commitment to composition came late -- along with an interest in programming, as the ideas that caught my fancy begged hard for algorithmic carrying-out. I learned in order: BASIC, Forth (had a one- year fling as a computer games geek), Pascal, C, and APL. This last hooked me, and I've toddled after it into J. Re IMSLP, I'd recommend it to anybody not bent on fame & fortune via publication. IMSLP posts scores & audio, offers several levels of Creative Commons copyright, and accomodates revisions. Last I heard, they were considering offering bound hardcopy output for a modest fee upon request. That was maybe a year ago, so I don't know if it's come true. Cheers! Pete Oops, forgot: was 16-year UNIX SysAdmin for the federal judiciary. Reckon that covers it. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OT: Beauty of programming languages
PMA wrote: Martin Tarenskeen wrote: This thread makes me wonder: what's the average age of LilyPond users and developers? My average age is 75. Better answer -- My age is 75. I've been using Lilypond for ca 5 years, without an editor (other than VI), and entirely for original compositions. My .ly files usually exist initially as output from the J prog. language. A single movement may well have 2 final .ly files -- one optimized for the score, the other optimized for MIDI output (in turn further edited via Rosegarden). P.S. I upload all results to IMSLP, upon copyright registration. People have been so forthcoming on this thread, I feel like expanding my entry background-wise a little. I was a pianist in academia for decades, focussed most especially on the late works of F. Busoni. My commitment to composition came late -- along with an interest in programming, as the ideas that caught my fancy begged hard for algorithmic carrying-out. I learned in order: BASIC, Forth (had a one- year fling as a computer games geek), Pascal, C, and APL. This last hooked me, and I've toddled after it into J. Re IMSLP, I'd recommend it to anybody not bent on fame & fortune via publication. IMSLP posts scores & audio, offers several levels of Creative Commons copyright, and accomodates revisions. Last I heard, they were considering offering bound hardcopy output for a modest fee upon request. That was maybe a year ago, so I don't know if it's come true. Cheers! Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OT: Beauty of programming languages
PMA wrote: PMA wrote: Martin Tarenskeen wrote: This thread makes me wonder: what's the average age of LilyPond users and developers? My average age is 75. Better answer -- My age is 75. I've been using Lilypond for ca 5 years, without an editor (other than VI), and entirely for original compositions. My .ly files usually exist initially as output from the J prog. language. A single movement may well have 2 final .ly files -- one optimized for the score, the other optimized for MIDI output (in turn further edited via Rosegarden). - Pete P.S. I upload all results to IMSLP, upon copyright registration. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OT: Beauty of programming languages
PMA wrote: Martin Tarenskeen wrote: This thread makes me wonder: what's the average age of LilyPond users and developers? My average age is 75. Better answer -- My age is 75. I've been using Lilypond for ca 5 years, without an editor (other than VI), and entirely for original compositions. My .ly files usually exist initially as output from the J prog. language. A single movement may well have 2 final .ly files -- one optimized for the score, the other optimized for MIDI output (in turn further edited via Rosegarden). - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Gallery of Interesting Music Notation
Trevor Daniels wrote: ... in the Learning Manual: http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/learning/real-music-example Should the LH upper 'D' not be an E-flat? - PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OT: Beauty of programming languages
Michael Gerdau wrote: Anybody remembering APL ? APL was my main lang. for decades, as is now its superset/descendant, J. I've got weary trying to tell anybody why. But the curious might take a peek at http://www.jsoftware.com/ Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Mutable and immutable
Andrew Bernard wrote: Greetings All, Since immutable as an adjective applied to an object in most programming languages, and in normal English usage means unchanging over time, or unable to be changed, how is it that the value of immutable objects can then be changed with \override and \revert? From the Technical Glossary: An immutable object is one whose state cannot be modified after creation, in contrast to a mutable object, which can be modified after creation. In LilyPond, immutable or shared properties define the default style and behavior of grobs. They are shared between many objects. In apparent contradiction to the name, they can be changed using \override and \revert. I fail to understand this entry. Surely the name must therefore be ‘shared’ or ‘default’’ or similar? How can such a contradiction persist, with no explanation given? In some Scheme code I am writing I am trying to change the line style of a TextSpanner: (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'style 'dotted-line) But the value remains unchanged after the call, with no error. Is ‘style’ an immutable property? Can it only be changed using \override, and not directly in Scheme? I cannot speak for others, but I find the distinction between mutable and immutable in lilypond to be rather unrigorous and downright strange – and therefore completely confusing. I am sure it is important in the architecture of the application, but the terms are of no help to somebody learning the language, unless there are expanded notes on what the essence of the meaning is. Andrew FWIW, I think of \override and \revert as _extreme_ measures appropriate and necessary for altering a Constant, as opposed to the routine measure (mere re-assignment) sufficient to alter a Variable. But then, I'm from a generation trained in Pascal. - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Slur across staves?
Joram wrote: Hi Pete, Will pursue -- hope the \shapell fussing doesn't carry me away To avoid frustration: The command is \shapeII with two upper case I’s (like in Iceland) and not \shapell with lower case l’s (like in low). Cheers, Joram O! (Thanks, Joram) P ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Slur across staves?
Hi List. I have in piano staff a 6/8 bar of single 8ths, with the first three in bass clef and the second three in treble. I'd like all six notes under _one_ slur (whether snaky- shaped or not). Is this somehow feasible? Thanks in advance for any thoughts. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Slur across staves?
tisimst wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Simon Albrecht-2 [via Lilypond]
ml-node+s1069038n17817...@n5.nabble.com wrote:
Am 25.06.2015 um 00:34 schrieb PMA:
Hi List.
I have in piano staff a 6/8 bar of single 8ths, with the
first three in bass clef and the second three in treble.
I'd like all six notes under _one_ slur (whether snaky-
shaped or not).
Is this somehow feasible?
Yes, as long as the notes are in one voice. A voice may change between
staves using the \change Staff command, which you will find documented.
For a snaky-shaped slur you may want to have a look at
https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/tree/master/notation-snippets/shaping-bezier-curves,
namely the \shapeII function.
HTH, Simon
You beat me to it, Simon ;-)
Pete, here's an example of using \change Staff:
music = { c8[ ( e g \change Staff = top c' e' g'] ) }
\new Staff = top {
\clef treble
\time 6/8
s1.
}
\new Staff = bottom {
\clef bass
\time 6/8
\music
}
- Abraham
Simon Abraham,
*Thank you*
Will pursue -- hope the \shapell fussing doesn't carry me away
- Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Haydn bug fix
Abraham, Why do you point to Haydn's Hob. XVI:37? Is it that Peters' (Köhler Ed.) handling of this particular work was especially remarkable -- and so has specifically inspired your font? - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Haydn bug fix
tisimst wrote: Peter, On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 9:57 AM, PMA-2 [via Lilypond] ml-node+s1069038n17571...@n5.nabble.com wrote: Which Haydn Sonata is this? - Pete Keyboard Sonata in D major, Hob. XVI:37 No. 50 (Joseph Haydn) Here's the IMSLP link http://imslp.org/wiki/Keyboard_Sonata_in_D_major,_Hob.XVI:37_(Haydn,_Joseph) . - Abraham Thanks Abraham. Seems I'm illiterate enough to me amazed. Beautiful score, too (yours)! - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fibbing
Hi List. I need to lie to Lily about an end-of-page time signature change. So that even tho she means to tick on in 3/4, she will now _say_ 6/8 instead -- for a new belated 6/8 page I want to stick in. Is there a convenient trick for doing this? (If not, nevermind, I'm just trying to avoid the extra file-chopping.) Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Haydn bug fix
Which Haydn Sonata is this? - Pete tisimst wrote All Haydn users, I just discovered that I had a little bug in the font that messes up the spacing when using the \tied-lyric markup function (i.e., it introduced too much space between the tied text). This has been fixed and an updated set of fonts (v1.1) has been uploaded to fonts.openlilylib.org. Oh, and I also uploaded a recently engraved score snippet from a Haydn Sonata that you've just got to see that showcases the font. It's on the Haydn font pagehttp://fonts.openlilylib.org/haydn/ . - Abraham -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Haydn-bug-fix-tp175619p175623.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Creating LilyPond Object Models
On the piano I can play/think in voices or not. Sorry, I've lost track as to who wrote that. But just in case -- one might consider the (single-musician) pianist accompanying a (4-voiced) sunday school hymn. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: What is the problem with \relative? (Was: Do we really offer the future?)
Calixte Faure wrote: I learned music in French (native French) and was at the beginning a little bit confused with 2 4 8 16 etc. because we say white, black, hooked, double-hooked, triple-, etc. . At least you weren't trapped in hemi-demi-semi-quavers! - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Do we really offer the future?
Am 22.04.2015 um 14:30 schrieb Kieren MacMillan: We try to explain this away by saying that LP is an engraving tool, not a composition tool, but -- if we're really serious about making LP more attractive to the average user of notation software, this is too glib. In using LilyPond for all my compositions, I regard it as emphatically _not_ a composition tool, but an engraver only. (Likewise re its front ends.) Most compositional issues I work out in a general-purpose language (mine is J but, y'know, whatever) with translation routines to output LP code. 'Sed' does most intermediate editing (usually to adjust to broad cosmetic changes), before some inevitable final 'vi' fussing by hand. So major compositional changes -- the ones we're calling structural here -- are implemented at that first (gen.purp.prog.lang) level, tossing LP not much to trip over then or fail to carry through. My point, then: Why stuff a complicated-enough engraving program with (compositional) issues that by nature demand more abstract handling? But then, not everyone is an algo-comp nut. (I am, but only re process, with results usually for piano.) - Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Do we really offer the future?
Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Pete, So major compositional changes -- the ones we're calling structural here -- are implemented at that first (gen.purp.prog.lang) level, tossing LP not much to trip over then or fail to carry through. My point, then: Why stuff a complicated-enough engraving program with (compositional) issues that by nature demand more abstract handling? Here are two real-world examples, drawn from my own recent life. ... In both scenarios, the prospect of editing and rewriting is quite daunting, given the structure of the Lilypond code and its identified limitations in this area. Call it a “compositional” issue if you want… but post-hoc manipulation/ modification of large [and thus code-heavy] scores are a fact of life, and the easier we can make it for [power-?]users to modify existing large scores, the better IMO. And expecting users to implement and learn a complicated extra toolchain is not the right answer. Cheers, Kieren. Hi Kieren. I have no quibble with what you're saying, except to note that the issues I've called 'compositional' here aren't the sort that you were dealing with. Let's restate my point -- Given a compositional issue that _is_ resolvable early programmatically and on its own -- not left for eventual conflation with scoring issues -- then (provided you're a Happy Programmer), do! Maybe only I needed the advice. Cheers++, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
Andrew Bernard wrote: Yes, it is quite muddy! I just took a look at the Guile 2.0 reference manual. Generally they use procedure but the book also uses the term function interchangeably further on inside, so I suppose it does not matter so much! No doubt the book is written by a large team of authors. An argument for using one single term is that by using two terms, it implies the possibility that they refer to two different things, which is not the case (hence the confusion about returning a value or not). Andrew ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hear hear! I recall that J-language and BASH folks call every procedure a function, return-value or no. (BASH code says function; J just says ':'). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
Wols Lists wrote: On 18/04/15 22:11, PMA wrote: Aha. So the improper-er their code got, the tougher time compilers had trying to -- as Martin says -- throw it out. All told, is there now any real need _not_ to use the terms function and procedure interchangeably? That is, any real need to try to enforce such a distinction? The terms are conflated, everybody knows, and there's no problem. (No response expected -- at this point I'm just ranting.) Except to me, the terms function and procedure are NOT the same thing :-) A function has a return value, a subroutine does not. A procedure can be either. Cheers, Wol And that seems rightly to summarize common usage -- in people speech, anyway. Maybe, if you're a new programming language, survival will hinge more on your _exception_ to common usage. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
Jacques Menu wrote: Hello, Yes, historically a disctinction was made between the « sub-programs » that return a value and those that don’t, but the Scheme docs seem to use the terms function and procedure interchangeably. In C++, everything is a function : a procedure is merely a function that returns a value of the « void » type, i.e. no value. JM Le 18 avr. 2015 à 18:33, David Nalesnikdavid.nales...@gmail.com a écrit : On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.orgmailto:u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Hi all, I just stumbled over a terminology issue: are procedure and function synonyms in Scheme or do they refer to different things? From my earliest experiences with programming I'd recall the difference to be that functions return a value and procedures don't. But that's clearly not the case in Scheme. Any enlightenment available? Well, I'm guilty of using them interchangeably... Anyway, maybe the following will help -- or add to the confusion :) http://stackoverflow.com/questions/721090/what-is-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-procedurehttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/721090/what-is-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-procedure DN ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hi List -- AFAIK, of our major ancestor languages, only Pascal insisted on a literal working function-vs-procedure distinction. Did Wirth ever defend this insistence (as more than a track-keeping enforcer re value-outputting vs non-value-outputting code)? PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
J Martin Rushton wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 18/04/15 20:41, PMA wrote: PMA wrote: Jacques Menu wrote: Hello, Yes, historically a disctinction was made between the « sub-programs » that return a value and those that don’t, but the Scheme docs seem to use the terms function and procedure interchangeably. In C++, everything is a function : a procedure is merely a function that returns a value of the « void » type, i.e. no value. JM Le 18 avr. 2015 à 18:33, David Nalesnikdavid.nales...@gmail.com a écrit : On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.orgmailto:u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Hi all, I just stumbled over a terminology issue: are procedure and function synonyms in Scheme or do they refer to different things? From my earliest experiences with programming I'd recall the difference to be that functions return a value and procedures don't. But that's clearly not the case in Scheme. Any enlightenment available? Well, I'm guilty of using them interchangeably... Anyway, maybe the following will help -- or add to the confusion :) http://stackoverflow.com/questions/721090/what-is-the-difference-be tween-a-function-and-a-procedurehttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/7210 90/what-is-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-procedure DN ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hi List -- AFAIK, of our major ancestor languages, only Pascal insisted on a literal working function-vs-procedure distinction. Did Wirth ever defend this insistence (as more than a track-keeping enforcer re value-outputting vs non-value-outputting code)? PMA P.S. Did he intend a function to embody purely a single mathematical function (one too fussy to be a command primitive), or were the innards to be open to other code as well? And if the latter, did he consider that a growing incorporation of such code might well smush the boundaries of his original func-vs-proc distinction (which, clearly, hasn't caught on)? PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user FORTRAN also insists on the distinction (at least officially). In FORTRAN you CALL procedures as a single statement whereas you simply use functions in an expression. If you try to mix them the compiler _ought_ to throw the syntax out. Likewise BASIC distinguishes between GOSUB and invoking a function in an expression. Consider writing a procedure to perform a task. If this is invoked as a function then what is the return value? It might be anything that was left in the register used to pass the value back; worse, if returning by reference then you could be interpreting random data as an address! Modern compilers often trap this by zeroing the return value, but you can't rely on it. You also need to keep in mind that the syntax checking of 2 3 GLs was not as extensive as modern languages like C/C++. Pascal, in particular, was designed as a single pass language so that cards or tape could be read in, passed sequentially through the compiler and the object code stored to tape. In the 1970s even mainframes often only had 128 KiB of memory. Saving a few machine instructions may seem trivial today, but major programs were often only kibibytes in length in the 1960s. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVMrutAAoJEAF3yXsqtyBlzUoQAJI6tW8DRAdVttjEE6Vod5q5 mmzOLCYnHx9JLHx5iaUwrwaNInYE50tHeEm9ik477L1YeLEAryM9gGt/Rv1L9D8c A4t32nmC2VsjR381Pgf6gND1SlElq9DBP0QZ9cO0acwVJIXto19LvlghfD5O3wR6 m1JCSbiZKsgJqjbw9IdqNiYNo+nB6838ZuAGxjIe/xrxmdYkddP7ROquCk2KMZF2 zkwI2KSV1fONQZSmtsPdVzkqw1HecG4j5Dz7X9V3CxADg80f6S9WAewth8fhyBS6 pDcM7A3nLNTLaQSXObBiEFeiGrC8xEEeqBc5IgDXm+qBnNL8fQvLPhZdA0BbQ8cT 1DPUB6BWWXguL3jy5Uwdj7z3id5E8Zb6P/abkxo6gSaD7ksT/05IBKRUnyc2NSVx NmE1I3FiQGbBhXa0M+WclYK2541/kJ/EbUajLoxbqeX5r0/UxqI6uJjJlazRF9f/ O6uXrYX6eDmDUhbg6BDxLOLVFuMtUMaJmLbF1iASPgEPh8ADpihqXfRYMeHJ+n+G U7rpb83k2rFkv8R/+eLM5FYeLEgF6eOD8nzQeLoB4UVr4q+jGmZ5nahLuDFI6jua 2lA8jYnWVi+DOh1K0texBg6cQzmormKsEWtltKZjt3g32tP3yuGZ/iqFmx8Jwfqt Lcx1P+avbZYIPY1G/WPR =0L+q -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Martin, Thank you for this! (And obviously after 40+ years, I have forgotten my BASIC.) PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
Wols Lists wrote: On 18/04/15 19:56, PMA wrote: AFAIK, of our major ancestor languages, only Pascal insisted on a literal working function-vs-procedure distinction. Did Wirth ever defend this insistence (as more than a track-keeping enforcer re value-outputting vs non-value-outputting code)? Actually, so did Fortran, I believe. Note my earlier comment that a function was defined as having a return value with no side effects. That then permits aggressive compiler optimisation - if a function is repeatedly called with the same argument, the compiler can stash the result of the first call away, and replace subsequent calls with a lookup table. (And given that Fortran was meant to be fast and maths-like, that behaviour was actually very sensible ... :-) But because programmers were bad at writing proper functions, this caused too many bugs and I think it just became accepted that functions have side effects and such optimisation was not a good idea. Cheers, Wol ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Aha. So the improper-er their code got, the tougher time compilers had trying to -- as Martin says -- throw it out. All told, is there now any real need _not_ to use the terms function and procedure interchangeably? That is, any real need to try to enforce such a distinction? The terms are conflated, everybody knows, and there's no problem. (No response expected -- at this point I'm just ranting.) PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: procedure vs. function
PMA wrote: Jacques Menu wrote: Hello, Yes, historically a disctinction was made between the « sub-programs » that return a value and those that don’t, but the Scheme docs seem to use the terms function and procedure interchangeably. In C++, everything is a function : a procedure is merely a function that returns a value of the « void » type, i.e. no value. JM Le 18 avr. 2015 à 18:33, David Nalesnikdavid.nales...@gmail.com a écrit : On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.orgmailto:u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Hi all, I just stumbled over a terminology issue: are procedure and function synonyms in Scheme or do they refer to different things? From my earliest experiences with programming I'd recall the difference to be that functions return a value and procedures don't. But that's clearly not the case in Scheme. Any enlightenment available? Well, I'm guilty of using them interchangeably... Anyway, maybe the following will help -- or add to the confusion :) http://stackoverflow.com/questions/721090/what-is-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-procedurehttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/721090/what-is-the-difference-between-a-function-and-a-procedure DN ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hi List -- AFAIK, of our major ancestor languages, only Pascal insisted on a literal working function-vs-procedure distinction. Did Wirth ever defend this insistence (as more than a track-keeping enforcer re value-outputting vs non-value-outputting code)? PMA P.S. Did he intend a function to embody purely a single mathematical function (one too fussy to be a command primitive), or were the innards to be open to other code as well? And if the latter, did he consider that a growing incorporation of such code might well smush the boundaries of his original func-vs-proc distinction (which, clearly, hasn't caught on)? PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Trying to replicate an obscure pedal marking from a ~1919 score...
Kieren MacMillan wrote: You can have the pedal line be a line drawing of Grumpy Cat if you want. ;) As a 6-year-old budding pianist I thought, seriously, that the Ped. must be a cocker spaniel. (Our best friends had one.) If I had to read this as a pedalling direction, well, fair enough. But I recall asking my dad, Why did they write a cocker spaniel to make me put the pedal down? Thanks for the memory! Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Force auto-beaming?
Pierre Perol-Schneider wrote: Hi Peter, how about a tiny example ? Cheers, Pierre Hi Pierre, Ok, I'll whittle down a big one (to remove home-grown non-culprit conditions you'd otherwise have to wonder about) and send the still-botching Tiny. All I want, really, is a command that says to the auto- beaming gremlin, Force this, even under \cadenzaOn with some barlines crammed in -- ALWAYS -- period! So that a beam will break _only_ for a non-beamable note or for a rest. Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Reduce vertical space between \score's?
PMA wrote: PMA wrote: Abraham Lee wrote: On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Pete, Trouble is, the vertical space between \score's is too big. This was not so in the original version (2.12.3), but is now after my upgrade to version 2.18.2. Is it possible to reduce LP-1.18.2's default value for the vertical space between \score blocks? Have you thoroughly read http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables#list-of-flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables ?? If so, what are your questions, specifically? Hope this helps! Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user If the vertical spacing is really your question, then you'll find this helpful (with the description in the link that Kieren provided. Regards, Abraham Thanks Abraham Kieren! My issue was, How can I reduce the vertical space between the last (actually the only) system of a \score and the top (only) system of the next. After scrounging in paper-defaults-init.ly as suggested, I found what I needed to tease: params for score-markup-spacing. Now my between-score spaces have the needed reduction! For the record, extra fuss was forced by documentation var names NOT matching those in paper-defaults-init.ly. That latter lists: But the doc page lists: between-system-spacing markup-system-spacing between-scores-system-spacing* score-markup-spacing* after-title-spacing score-system-spacing before-title-spacing system-system-spacing between-title-spacing markup-markup-spacing top-system-spacing last-bottom-spacing top-title-spacing top-system-spacing bottom-system-spacing top-markup-spacing * The Left var's param-set here turned out to work with the Right varname. But I suspect this same-line matchup was due to luck. Maybe those Right names -- improvements, I reckon -- could get due mention in the init file. Thanks again for steering me! Pete Uh-oh. No, the result is _no_ different. My eyes must be tired. I'll experiment more tomorrow. P Hi Abraham Kieren! Editing an example to send you, and sniffing more in the LP docs, I happened to trip over #(set-global-staff-size 20) . When I told my score to reduce that default by 1, the vertical-space problem evaporated. So my original question -- How reduce space between same-page \score's? -- is moot, at least for this time around. Thanks, tho, for your responses. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Force auto-beaming?
Hi List. I have a \cadenzaOn score with many notes, occasional rests, and no barlines. I want beaming imposed for all consecutive (flagged) notes, interruptible only by rests. That was LP 2.12's default auto-beam behavior, but 2.18 in this context (tho with \set Staff.autoBeaming = ##t) only writes flags. Is there an override to force auto-beaming? Thanks in advance. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reduce vertical space between \score's?
Hi List. An *.ly of mine has four 1-system \score's on each page, rather than one 4-system \score, because each system's Score.proportionalNotationDuration...make-moment... setting is different (and \score accepts only one such setting). Trouble is, the vertical space between \score's is too big. This was not so in the original version (2.12.3), but is now after my upgrade to version 2.18.2. Is it possible to reduce LP-1.18.2's default value for the vertical space between \score blocks? Thanks in advance for any thoughts. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Reduce vertical space between \score's?
P.S. I should ask alternatively: Is there a way that proportionalNotationDuration...make-moment... can be reset _per system_ (assuming now a multi- system \score)? PMA wrote: Hi List. An *.ly of mine has four 1-system \score's on each page, rather than one 4-system \score, because each system's Score.proportionalNotationDuration...make-moment... setting is different (and \score accepts only one such setting). Trouble is, the vertical space between \score's is too big. This was not so in the original version (2.12.3), but is now after my upgrade to version 2.18.2. Is it possible to reduce LP-1.18.2's default value for the vertical space between \score blocks? Thanks in advance for any thoughts. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Reduce vertical space between \score's?
Abraham Lee wrote: On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Pete, Trouble is, the vertical space between \score's is too big. This was not so in the original version (2.12.3), but is now after my upgrade to version 2.18.2. Is it possible to reduce LP-1.18.2's default value for the vertical space between \score blocks? Have you thoroughly read http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables#list-of-flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables ?? If so, what are your questions, specifically? Hope this helps! Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user If the vertical spacing is really your question, then you'll find this helpful (with the description in the link that Kieren provided. Regards, Abraham Thanks Abraham Kieren! My issue was, How can I reduce the vertical space between the last (actually the only) system of a \score and the top (only) system of the next. After scrounging in paper-defaults-init.ly as suggested, I found what I needed to tease: params for score-markup-spacing. Now my between-score spaces have the needed reduction! For the record, extra fuss was forced by documentation var names NOT matching those in paper-defaults-init.ly. That latter lists: But the doc page lists: between-system-spacing markup-system-spacing between-scores-system-spacing* score-markup-spacing* after-title-spacing score-system-spacing before-title-spacingsystem-system-spacing between-title-spacing markup-markup-spacing top-system-spacing last-bottom-spacing top-title-spacing top-system-spacing bottom-system-spacing top-markup-spacing * The Left var's param-set here turned out to work with the Right varname. But I suspect this same-line matchup was due to luck. Maybe those Right names -- improvements, I reckon -- could get due mention in the init file. Thanks again for steering me! Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Reduce vertical space between \score's?
PMA wrote: Abraham Lee wrote: On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Pete, Trouble is, the vertical space between \score's is too big. This was not so in the original version (2.12.3), but is now after my upgrade to version 2.18.2. Is it possible to reduce LP-1.18.2's default value for the vertical space between \score blocks? Have you thoroughly read http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables#list-of-flexible-vertical-spacing-paper-variables ?? If so, what are your questions, specifically? Hope this helps! Kieren. ___ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: http://www.kierenmacmillan.info email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user If the vertical spacing is really your question, then you'll find this helpful (with the description in the link that Kieren provided. Regards, Abraham Thanks Abraham Kieren! My issue was, How can I reduce the vertical space between the last (actually the only) system of a \score and the top (only) system of the next. After scrounging in paper-defaults-init.ly as suggested, I found what I needed to tease: params for score-markup-spacing. Now my between-score spaces have the needed reduction! For the record, extra fuss was forced by documentation var names NOT matching those in paper-defaults-init.ly. That latter lists: But the doc page lists: between-system-spacing markup-system-spacing between-scores-system-spacing* score-markup-spacing* after-title-spacing score-system-spacing before-title-spacing system-system-spacing between-title-spacing markup-markup-spacing top-system-spacing last-bottom-spacing top-title-spacing top-system-spacing bottom-system-spacing top-markup-spacing * The Left var's param-set here turned out to work with the Right varname. But I suspect this same-line matchup was due to luck. Maybe those Right names -- improvements, I reckon -- could get due mention in the init file. Thanks again for steering me! Pete Uh-oh. No, the result is _no_ different. My eyes must be tired. I'll experiment more tomorrow. P ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Retrograde and inversion clefs
guoguocuozuoduo wrote: Hi all, I am working on a piece that uses reversed and inverted clefs which indicate retrograde and inversion. The reversed clef is placed at the end of a line to indicate retrograde; the inverted clef is placed before the main clef to indicate inversion. How can I achieve this in Lilypond? Any help would be much appreciated. Attached is a picture to demonstrate what I would like to achieve. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user How is inversion working here (assuming an inverted C-clef could look inverted)? Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proportional-Notation Durations
PMA wrote: Thomas Morley wrote: 2014-07-09 0:24 GMT+02:00 PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu: Hi List. I'm looking for a LilyPond way to specify note duration in a Proportional Notation context using exactly _one_ stemless notehead type. Perhaps the first option is a mid-level horizontal line extending distance-X from the notehead. (The space following would indicate silence.) But I want ask: has anyone done this instead with the _hairpin_ -- attached to a note-head via pitch params, tapered to a param-specified length, and filled? If not, or in any case, any other ideas? Thanks in advance for your time. Pete Hi Pete, do you mean something like: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-12/msg00145.html ? Somewhere on my computer I've an updated version, if the link shows what you're looking for. Cheers, Harm Hi Harm. Not quite. Attached is a mockup (c/o xfig) of what I have in mind: a stemless notehead, to be placed on the staff according to its LP pitch-name; and a filled hairpin for the duration, placed vertically along with the head, but with its horizontal length calculated by LilyPond from the score's note-value spec. (Wouldn't that be nice?) Cheers, Pete hairpin_dur.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proportional-Notation Durations
Mike Solomon wrote: On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:08 PM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: PMA wrote: Thomas Morley wrote: 2014-07-09 0:24 GMT+02:00 PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu: Hi List. I'm looking for a LilyPond way to specify note duration in a Proportional Notation context using exactly _one_ stemless notehead type. Perhaps the first option is a mid-level horizontal line extending distance-X from the notehead. (The space following would indicate silence.) But I want ask: has anyone done this instead with the _hairpin_ -- attached to a note-head via pitch params, tapered to a param-specified length, and filled? I’ve seen this done with glissandi. It is possible with any spanner, but glissandi are easier in that they are already associated with note heads. Cheers, MS Thanks Mike. Yes, I have a glissandi example, and the layout overall looks good. But a glissando heads off towards the next _pitch_ -- i.e., not just horizontally to the Right 'til Dur-time runs out, which is what I want. I could insert an invisible repeated pitch, I suppose, to fool a gliss into this direction. But I'd rather not have to, especially with the extra metrical fuss required. BTW, the context for such stuff would be perpetual \cadenzaOn, with \bar | crammed in whenever a simultaneity is imminent. Is it worth it, Petee? Who knows? Regards, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
New LilyPond on Ancient Debian?
Hi List. My Debian version is Squeeze (oldstable), with default LilyPond at version 2.12.3-7. Has any of you successfully upgraded LP to version 2.18.0-1 on that system? Thanks, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Updating a score from version 1.4
I'm thinking this implies that convert-ly is best used incrementally by LP version, with no intermediate upgrading omitted. So, with original code at Ver 'A' and my destination Ver 'E', then for best results I'd install Versions B, C, D and run all four convert-ly's (A-B; B-C; C-D; D-E)? Is this right -- that convert-ly is meant to be applied cumulatively? Regards, Pete Colin Campbell wrote: On 14-07-17 10:52 AM, Larry Kent wrote: Thanks, James, David, and Hwaen. Convert-ly doesn't handle version 1.4 very well, not surprising. The current project I'm working on is a very short piece, so I may just start over with this one. Long-term, however, it would be nice to find somewhere that a user can grab an old version, install it in a separate folder and work on an old edition. Would it work if you were to install an intermediate version of LilyPond, perhaps 2.8.0 and use the convert-ly from that version to get you part way, then run convert-ly from your current version to finish the job? This is untested, but may be a more general solution than simply recoding from scratch. In principle, it's nearly always worth the effort to bring an old score up to current levels when you are revising it, although as you imply, it may not be useful for a minor revision or two. Cheers, Colin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Updating a score from version 1.4
David Harm, Thank you! I let my unresolved fuzziness on this issue (and a memory of messy cumulative system upgrades) keep me from attempting a 'convert-ly' _EVER_. Now I stand -- well, sit -- corrected, and am ready to at least _try_. Pete David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: I'm thinking this implies that convert-ly is best used incrementally by LP version, with no intermediate upgrading omitted. So, with original code at Ver 'A' and my destination Ver 'E', then for best results I'd install Versions B, C, D and run all four convert-ly's (A-B; B-C; C-D; D-E)? Is this right -- that convert-ly is meant to be applied cumulatively? No. convert-ly is an application that has rules for each conversion, and while newer versions tend to add just rules at the end, there have been several instances where old rules have been corrected. So you never have anything to gain from running older versions of convert-ly. However, if you have some older version of LilyPond around, it may make the conversion easier by using a current convert-ly but telling it to stop at your older version of LilyPond. Then you fix stuff manually until everything works again (the old rules are really spotty, and there were some rather drastic syntax changes in those times), and then continue converting to the current version. In case the old rules messed stuff up, cleaning up before applying the next batch of conversions might conceivably result in less work and/or fewer followup errors, or at least better manageable work. So there may be some point in not converting all-in-one-go. But even if you stop in the middle, there is no point in doing it with any but the newest convert-ly. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: List defect?
Simon Albrecht wrote: Hello, now there definitely seems to be something wrong with mail delivery on the list. Agreed. I had reported similar trouble with other forums' email, but now only LilyPond's hasn't returned to normal. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proportional-Notation Durations
Thomas Morley wrote: 2014-07-09 0:24 GMT+02:00 PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu: Hi List. I'm looking for a LilyPond way to specify note duration in a Proportional Notation context using exactly _one_ stemless notehead type. Perhaps the first option is a mid-level horizontal line extending distance-X from the notehead. (The space following would indicate silence.) But I want ask: has anyone done this instead with the _hairpin_ -- attached to a note-head via pitch params, tapered to a param-specified length, and filled? If not, or in any case, any other ideas? Thanks in advance for your time. Pete Hi Pete, do you mean something like: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-12/msg00145.html ? Somewhere on my computer I've an updated version, if the link shows what you're looking for. Cheers, Harm Hi Yerself, Harm! I will give this a shot. (Better update to 2.18 first - I've been still treading water in 2.12.3). Thanks! Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: List defect?
I've no idea, and don't see it as clearly a defect _of the list_. Over the past few days I've had emails straggling in a day- or-so late from _several_ forums. Richard Shann wrote: On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 14:53 +0200, Simon Albrecht wrote: Hello, now there definitely seems to be something wrong with mail delivery on the list. I too have been receiving the emails on the list in haphazard order over the past few days. What else I've noticed (over a month or so) is complaints from the postmaster of this list about excessive bounces - I don't get this from other lists. Richard Some people already reported they were not receiving some posts at all. With me, some posts pop up another time two days or so after they were originally sent (including my own). Do any of you know what might be going on? And where to eventually report this buggy behaviour? Yours, Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Proportional-Notation Durations
Hi List. I'm looking for a LilyPond way to specify note duration in a Proportional Notation context using exactly _one_ stemless notehead type. Perhaps the first option is a mid-level horizontal line extending distance-X from the notehead. (The space following would indicate silence.) But I want ask: has anyone done this instead with the _hairpin_ -- attached to a note-head via pitch params, tapered to a param-specified length, and filled? If not, or in any case, any other ideas? Thanks in advance for your time. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Sorta Proportional
I gather from output that under \set Score.proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment N1 N2) LilyPond's handling of _rests_ and _spaces_ is (in different ways) not in sync with its handling of _notes_. This is all per version 2.12.3, I'm embarrassed to say. But has that scenario changed since? PMA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Move Page Numbers?
Thomas Morley wrote:
how about:
...
#(define folio-offset '(
...
#(define-markup-command (place-folio layout props folio) (markup?)
...
\paper {
...
HTH,
Harm
Working beautifully (THd).
Thanks Harm!
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Move Page Numbers?
Hi List. Most of my current score's page numbers need shifting a little, both vertically and horizontally. Can \override ... #'extra-offset = #'( ... . ...) or something similar be aimed at PageNumber (instead of, say, DynamicText) to shift them? I could, I know, force the issue, page-numbering via markup text from a lucky note on each page. But it'd be nice to avoid such a kludge. Regards, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Move Page Numbers?
Thomas Morley wrote:
2014-02-05 PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu:
Hi List.
Most of my current score's page numbers need
shifting a little, both vertically and horizontally.
Can \override ... #'extra-offset = #'( ... . ...)
or something similar be aimed at PageNumber
(instead of, say, DynamicText) to shift them?
I could, I know, force the issue, page-numbering
via markup text from a lucky note on each page.
But it'd be nice to avoid such a kludge.
Regards,
Pete
Hi,
how about:
\version 2.18.0
%% After an idea by Torsten Haemmerle
%% http://www.lilypondforum.de/index.php?topic=1393.msg7673#msg7673
#(set-default-paper-size a6)
%% Define your generell settings for odd/even page-numbers
%% Exceptions for certain pages are possible, too.
#(define folio-offset '(
;; general
(odd . (-2 . 1))
(even . (-2 . 1))
;; exceptions for page 3 and 4
(3 . (-1 . -1))
(4 . (-3 . -4))
))
#(define-markup-command (place-folio layout props folio) (markup?)
(let* ((page-number (chain-assoc-get 'page:page-number props))
(general-off
(if (odd? page-number)
(assoc-get 'odd folio-offset '(0 . 0))
(assoc-get 'even folio-offset '(0 . 0
(page-off (assoc-get page-number folio-offset '(0 . 0)))
(offs
(cons
(+ (car general-off) (car page-off))
(+ (cdr general-off) (cdr page-off
(m (interpret-markup layout props folio))
(x-ext (ly:stencil-extent m X))
(y-ext (ly:stencil-extent m Y)))
(interpret-markup layout props
(markup
;#:box ;; uncomment for testing
#:with-dimensions x-ext y-ext
#:line (#:translate offs folio)
\paper {
indent = 0
ragged-right = ##f
oddHeaderMarkup =
\markup \fill-line {
\place-folio \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string \null
}
evenHeaderMarkup =
\markup \fill-line {
\null \place-folio \fromproperty #'page:page-number-string
}
}
{ \repeat unfold 10 { s1 \pageBreak } }
HTH,
Harm
Exceptions, eh? Cool. Will read more tomorrow. Thanks!
P
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Rest skipped in MIDI when music starts with it
My hack around this is to begin (each part) with
some arbitrary pitch/duration at _zero_ Velocity
(with the Rest just following, of course).
This has suited my purposes, though I expect it
might invite trouble for others.
Pete
Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
On Sun, 12 Jan 2014, Eluze wrote:
Martin Tarenskeen wrote
Hi,
When, using Lilypond 2.19.0, if my score starts with a rest, the
resulting
MIDI file does NOT start with a rest.
%minimal example
\score {
\version 2.19.0
\relative c' {
R1 | c d e f | R1 | f e d c |
}
\midi {}
}
%end of example
Result: The MIDI file starts without a rest in the first bar.
The rest in the 3rd bar behaves normally.
Is this a bug, or intentional?
I can't reproduce that - could it be your midi player is wrong?
You're right. It's my midiplayer, timidity, that doesn't count the
first rest.
When I use rosegarden or midi2ly I can see the rest is simply there.
Nothing wrong with lilypond.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond Cheat Sheet 2.18
Thank you, Joram! P Noeck wrote: Hi all, as promised after the release of 2.16, I update my Lilypond cheat sheets for each stable version. After 2.18 came out recently, here is the corresponding version of my cheat sheet in three languages: English: http://joramberger.de/files/lilypond_sheet_2.18_en.pdf German: http://joramberger.de/files/lilypond_sheet_2.18_de.pdf French*: http://joramberger.de/files/lilypond_sheet_2.18_fr.pdf I hope it makes life easier for you and others. Cheers, Joram * The French translation is probably rather poorly done by me. Corrections and other comments to all language versions are welcome! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond 2.18.0 released
Congrats, David et al! If I download lilypond-2.18.0-1.linux-x86.sh to my Debian Squeeze box (hoping to make it work there), will that file execute on its own? In any case, will its execution disable/replace my 2.12.3 (already happily running)? Thanks Happy New Year Paranoid P David Kastrup wrote: Some of you might have seen this on the lilypond-announce list, but I repeat it here since not everybody may read the announce list. The big announcement to all the non-LilyPond lists will happen in a few days if we don't get major complaints. Here it goes: We are proud to announce the release of GNU LilyPond 2.18.0 - the new stable release. LilyPond is a music engraving program devoted to producing the highest-quality sheet music possible. It brings the aesthetics of traditionally engraved music to computer printouts. Among the numerous improvements and changes, the following might be most visible: * Many items are now positioned using their actual outline rather than a rectangular bounding box. This greatly reduces the occurrence of unsightly large gaps. * Sets and overrides can now use a simpler syntax * Triplets with a given group length can now be written using a more user-friendly syntax A full list of noteworthy new features is given in: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/changes/index.html Great thanks go to the large number of LilyPond enthusiasts whose financial backing enabled one core developer, David Kastrup, to focus exclusively on LilyPond during the entire development cycle. LilyPond 2.18 has been brought to you by Main Developers: Bertrand Bordage, Trevor Daniels, Colin Hall, Phil Holmes, Ian Hulin, Reinhold Kainhofer, David Kastrup, Jonathan Kulp, Werner Lemberg, John Mandereau, Patrick McCarty, Joe Neeman, Han-Wen Nienhuys, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, Graham Percival, Mark Polesky, Neil Puttock, Mike Solomon, Carl Sorensen, Francisco Vila, Valentin Villenave, Janek Warchol Core Contributors: Aleksandr Andreev, Frédéric Bron, Torsten Hämmerle, Marc Hohl, James Lowe, Andrew Main, Thomas Morley, David Nalesnik, Keith OHara, Benko Pál, Anders Pilegaard, Julien Rioux, Johannes Rohrer, Adam Spiers, Heikki Tauriainen Documentation Writers: Frédéric Bron, Federico Bruni, Colin Campbell, Urs Liska, James Lowe, Thomas Morley, Jean-Charles Malahieude, Guy Stalnaker, Martin Tarenskeen, Arnold Theresius, Rodolfo Zitellini Bug Squad: Colin Campbell, Eluze, Marc Hohl, Phil Holmes, Marek Klein, Ralph Palmer Support Team: Colin Campbell, Eluze, Marc Hohl, Marek Klein, Kieren MacMillan, Urs Liska, Ralph Palmer Translators: Federico Bruni, Luca Rossetto Casel, Felipe Castro, Pavel Fric, Jean-Charles Malahieude, Till Paala, Yoshiki Sawada and numerous other contributors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond 2.18.0 released
Tom Cloyd wrote: PP: As someone who is forever bewildered by Ly's download page (because no where else am I downloading a script instead of an installation module - I live a sheltered life!), allow me to assist: 1. On the unix download page - http://lilypond.org/unix.html - scroll down just a bit and you see install and uninstall instructions. To install - Thanks Tom! On my system the left edge of that page is lopped off a bit. You've shown me that the loss amounts to only two chars -- not, say, nine. So, I'm cool with the text now. Once I create the home dir, move the .sh into there, cd in and run it, will _both_ versions be available: 2.18 via just lilypond (as 2.12 was), and 2.12 via its exec's fullpath? Whatever the invocations, I want to ensure that 2.18 will not disturb 2.12's ability to run (by, say, updating shared intermediate files). Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Very strange beaming example
Hemiola -- per half bar, over ca 100 bars. Urs Liska wrote: David Kastrupd...@gnu.org schrieb: Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.org writes: Has anybody seen this before? There are probably similar measures before and/or after. It's sort of a polyrhythm: 6 notes are one phrase starting with a small interval, but the underlying rhythm is in groups of four. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: stylesheet file structure
Urs Liska wrote: Am 15.12.2013 15:19, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: Exactly the other way around. Barenreiter_organ_classical_part_landscape_legal.ly Barenreiter is most significant, e.g. for sorting. Actually, for me “organ” is the most significant for sorting! =) But I appreciate your point. Would it make sense to have the _user_ determine sort order (and the program then to concoct matching filename stumps)? Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: stylesheet file structure
Alex Loomis wrote: If they were to use the keys like Urs suggested then internal sort order wouldn't matter, so, to the user, it would seem like it is user-determined. Oh -- sorry, I should have realized he was covering this. On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 10:42 AM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: Urs Liska wrote: Am 15.12.2013 15:19, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: Exactly the other way around. Barenreiter_organ_classical_part_landscape_legal.ly Barenreiter is most significant, e.g. for sorting. Actually, for me “organ” is the most significant for sorting! =) But I appreciate your point. Would it make sense to have the _user_ determine sort order (and the program then to concoct matching filename stumps)? Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Other programming languages LilyPond
Urs Liska wrote: Answer him that ... As LP input files are plain you can use _any_ programming language to modify ... or even generate LilyPond input files. This is a nod to Urs's word _any_. All my scores are made via LP. But each LP input file is made by a program I've written either in J (descendant superset of APL) or in good old BASH -- roughly as far apart as programming languages get. This isn't meant to plug for J, which needs to be -- I gather -- either loved unconditionally or ignored. Cheers, P ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Other programming languages LilyPond
Curt wrote: On Dec 2, 2013, at 2:11 PM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: ...All my scores are made via LP. But each LP input file is made by a program I've written either in J (descendant superset of APL) or in good old BASH -- roughly as far apart as programming languages get. Ha - I'd love to hear more about this. What kind of work are you doing that involves using J in this manner? ... Curt I program in J almost exclusively, since the pursuit of my brainstorms (music-bound or not) tends to favor handy ad-hoc number crunching. That is J's manner. Using it for music, I make .ly the output format, as anyone might from whatever preferred language. So, except as a free-floating take on J, I'm not sure where the Ha comes in. Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proposed horizontal spacing adjustment [was Re: film score example]
PMA wrote: David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: Jim Long wrote: I suppose that, by extension, this means that a factor of #0.0 means the layout would have no spacing at all, and all glyphs would be engraved over the top of each other in one big blob, and a factor of #-1.0 would mean that the glyphs are engraved normally, but spaced right-to-left. For the sake of reasonableness/sanity, perhaps Lily might just disallow factors or perhaps even= 0, unless someone can make a compelling use case for non-positive spacing factors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Unless we'd prefer to make0 expand, 0 contract, and =0 change nothing). And to get right-to-left, you then set the value to i*pi. And bottom-to-top is i*pi/2. I presume this reveals my thought as clueless. Then whoever designed font-size must be equally clueless. Apparently the parameter _must_ function as a factor. Sorry. Don't see how this follows. I was just making some mathematically inspired fun but it was not really relevant. I was thinking only that, if I'm to expand something by a factor of 1.1 (and so feed #1.1 to a resizing function), then I'd like, for contracting instead by the same factor, to feed the function the same _absolute_ value, negated o'course so the function will know the difference -- assuming it'll interpret the '-' value as Multiply by 0.9 (and knows to treat an input '0' as a '1'). But maybe this sort of tidiness is a quirk -- or a crutch for the mathematically naive, which I'm afraid I am. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user P.S. I suppose I'd prefer params 0.1 -0.1 (rather than 1.1 -1.1) to indicate expanding|contracting by a tenth. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proposed horizontal spacing adjustment [was Re: film score example]
Jim Long wrote: I suppose that, by extension, this means that a factor of #0.0 means the layout would have no spacing at all, and all glyphs would be engraved over the top of each other in one big blob, and a factor of #-1.0 would mean that the glyphs are engraved normally, but spaced right-to-left. For the sake of reasonableness/sanity, perhaps Lily might just disallow factors or perhaps even= 0, unless someone can make a compelling use case for non-positive spacing factors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Unless we'd prefer to make 0 expand, 0 contract, and =0 change nothing). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proposed horizontal spacing adjustment [was Re: film score example]
David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: Jim Long wrote: I suppose that, by extension, this means that a factor of #0.0 means the layout would have no spacing at all, and all glyphs would be engraved over the top of each other in one big blob, and a factor of #-1.0 would mean that the glyphs are engraved normally, but spaced right-to-left. For the sake of reasonableness/sanity, perhaps Lily might just disallow factors or perhaps even= 0, unless someone can make a compelling use case for non-positive spacing factors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Unless we'd prefer to make0 expand, 0 contract, and =0 change nothing). And to get right-to-left, you then set the value to i*pi. And bottom-to-top is i*pi/2. I presume this reveals my thought as clueless. Apparently the parameter _must_ function as a factor. Sorry. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Proposed horizontal spacing adjustment [was Re: film score example]
David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: Jim Long wrote: I suppose that, by extension, this means that a factor of #0.0 means the layout would have no spacing at all, and all glyphs would be engraved over the top of each other in one big blob, and a factor of #-1.0 would mean that the glyphs are engraved normally, but spaced right-to-left. For the sake of reasonableness/sanity, perhaps Lily might just disallow factors or perhaps even= 0, unless someone can make a compelling use case for non-positive spacing factors. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Unless we'd prefer to make0 expand, 0 contract, and =0 change nothing). And to get right-to-left, you then set the value to i*pi. And bottom-to-top is i*pi/2. I presume this reveals my thought as clueless. Then whoever designed font-size must be equally clueless. Apparently the parameter _must_ function as a factor. Sorry. Don't see how this follows. I was just making some mathematically inspired fun but it was not really relevant. I was thinking only that, if I'm to expand something by a factor of 1.1 (and so feed #1.1 to a resizing function), then I'd like, for contracting instead by the same factor, to feed the function the same _absolute_ value, negated o'course so the function will know the difference -- assuming it'll interpret the '-' value as Multiply by 0.9 (and knows to treat an input '0' as a '1'). But maybe this sort of tidiness is a quirk -- or a crutch for the mathematically naive, which I'm afraid I am. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Henle piano template
Urs Liska wrote: Am 29.07.2013 20:04, schrieb PMA: Urs Liska wrote: No, these don't, but I think that fingerings in itself _do_ belong in there, and if the original ones from Henle are copyrighted ... It seems to me that the only fingerings properly belonging in an Urtext ed are those of the composer. If he / she supplied none, then _none_. But I think what we are aiming at here is a reproduction of a given score/edition, in the current case Henle's Edition of Beethoven op. 10/3. Whether an Urtext edition should or should not contain editorial fingerings - or whatever editorial decisions you might to name - isn't the question at hand. This is a complex issue which would probably have been answered quite differently if you ask it 1950, 1980 or today. I really vote for working towards the 'style', at least at the moment. And for that the fingering style of Henle's edition should be part of the challenge, especially as good engraving of fingerings isn't trivial. Urs True, the question at hand had not invited my remark. It had, tho, stirred up my old impression that Henle's use of fingerings by... reduces their Urtext claim to falsehood. Perhaps I'd have interpreted the term less strictly, had I not as a pianist counted on blank space to scribble in _my_ fingerings. PA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Henle piano template
Urs Liska wrote: Urtext is a fiction anyway in 95% of the cases. What would you consider Urtext when you have a manuscript, a fair copy, an original edition controlled by the composer, a personal copy of the OE with corrections, and another, later manuscript with other readings than the OE or the corrected copy? Or (as is often the case with Chopin for example) if you have an original edition and several copies of that edition with different additions by the composer (for example embellishments for different pupils)? Fair enough, except that with fingerings by somebody centuries after a composer's death, the term Urtext just hits like a slap -- as though the term original meant, oh, anything. Perfect is beside the point. I think there can't be such a thing like a perfect edition. ... Perhaps I'd have interpreted the term less strictly, had I not as a pianist counted on blank space to scribble in _my_ fingerings. That's true. I have more and more got used to not write any fingerings at all (I usually find them simply distracting). And the less fingerings the editors printed the less black spots I have to 'mute' mentally. When I pick a copy from the time with my first piano teacher I'm usually shocked: He let me copy his fingerings, and that means that in complicated passages I have fingerings attached to nearly all notes! I really can't play from these scores anymore. I was quite surprised when I had a Bach score at the piano that I found it quite difficult, but after erasing all the pencil fingerings I could practically play it from sight again. A hefty argument for printing _no_ fingerings -- except to report the composer's suggestions, for whatever insight these might convey (hand-differences in this regard notwithstanding). PA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate (new version)
David, Thank you for this review. I wish I'd seen it 40 yrs ago, when a latest LISP book -- showcasing recursion as an iterator(?!) -- led me to throw my lot with APL instead. Music-programming-wise, of course, the joke's on me, as so relatively few computing musicians went this way. Pete David Kastrup wrote: Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 11.06.2013 15:11, schrieb Janek Warchoł: 2013/6/11 Urs Liskau...@openlilylib.org: Don't feel dumb - i don't know how to get along with scheme either ;) (yet) After all, I'm still wondering what benefits Scheme offers. I find it extremely reluctant to be understood (that's what it feels: Scheme tries to avoid being understood), and I would like to have some benefits that outweigh that effort. And so far I can't see them. [This is a question for the conaisseurs out there] It integrates nicely into LilyPond's syntax since it has almost no syntax of its own and is almost effortless to cross into and out of. It offers scoped variables and closures which also integrate nicely with LilyPond and make it easy to program reusable code without side effects. It has a reasonable set of data structures with automated memory management. Code and data structures have simple, straightforward text representations. As one corollary, it has a powerful structure-preserving macro system that can do a more thorough and reliable job at generating code than the C++ macro preprocessor and template mechanism combined, at about 0.5% of its complexity. As an interpretative language, it makes it easy to extend LilyPond's functionality on the fly without needing recompilation. A LISP family language with low-level underpinnings is what has created the Emacs universe, arguably the longest-lived and most-extended editor platform ever. Most other languages have a human-readable program syntax, which a lexer divides into lexical units and a parser recognizes and binds into computer-readable parse trees. LISP/Scheme has lexical units but no parser. Instead it has a reader which directly reads symbols and data structures, most commonly lists. The absence of an intermediate human-readable program representation is what most people consider an initial challenge: basically, you directly enter your parse trees into the computer. The lack of an intermediate syntactic layer is what makes generation, analysis, and transformation of programs easy and powerful. One consequence is that there is no difference between statements and expressions. The C redundancy of if/else with ?/: is absent as the computer's concepts of either are the same and they are not cast into different syntax depending on the use pattern. If you quantify the time it takes for the frequency of surprising new realizations about the language drops by half, the time for C++ is measured in years, for Scheme in weeks. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond blog! who wants to join?
... Let's say the rule is as follows: anything that is a valid and interesting blog post will be accepted. So you just have to wrap the information you want to give into a blogpost form. For example, imagine that you want to announce Lily 2.17.1 release. Instead of writing something like: We are proud to announce the release of GNU LilyPond 2.17.1. This release contains the following improvements: - bug 235234 was fixed, - feature foobar was added, - objects use skylines instead of boxes for calculating collisions. whis is boring, write something like this: After several months of intense development, an important improvement is implemented in the newly released LilyPond 2.17.1: the program no longer treats objects as if they were rectangles, but uses skylines to approximate their shapes. Thanks to this feature, things that used to look like this: ugly image now look like this: nice image There are several other improvements in this version - you can see a full list herelink. FWIW, I'd go for the boring one. PA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond blog! who wants to join?
LilyGilder[ok, nevermind] SoundsFromSound wrote: Across The Pond From Across The Pond Across the LilyPond From Across The (Lily)Pond etc ...just brainstorming. - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Re-LilyPond-blog-who-wants-to-join-tp146533p146543.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Online course that may help getting acquainted with Scheme
Urs Liska wrote: Hi, there is a free online course starting on Coursera.org, dealing with Introduction to Systematic Program Design: https://www.coursera.org/course/programdesign It is primarily intended for people without prior programming experience, but is said to be valuable for people who already have some knowledge. I'm mentioning it here because they use Racketas the introductory programming language, which happens to be a very close relative to Scheme. And from the first impressions I can imagine that this could be useful for some LilyPonders seeking a gentle way to get into the strange way of thinking in Scheme. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user This link feeds me a Loading twirly-twirly signal forever. Are you all getting the same? Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Online course that may help getting acquainted with Scheme
PMA wrote: Urs Liska wrote: Hi, there is a free online course starting on Coursera.org, dealing with Introduction to Systematic Program Design: https://www.coursera.org/course/programdesign It is primarily intended for people without prior programming experience, but is said to be valuable for people who already have some knowledge. I'm mentioning it here because they use Racketas the introductory programming language, which happens to be a very close relative to Scheme. And from the first impressions I can imagine that this could be useful for some LilyPonders seeking a gentle way to get into the strange way of thinking in Scheme. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user This link feeds me a Loading twirly-twirly signal forever. Are you all getting the same? Pete Oops, it just came through. Please forgive my fuss. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
luis jure wrote: on 2013-05-21 at 13:18 David Kastrup wrote: It would seem that you associate the term pitch with physical frequency. no, it's not me, it's the standard meaning of the term as used in music theory, psychoacoustics, musical acoustics, music cognition, and all the disciplines i know that deal with music and/or the perception of sound. it also seems to be the standard meaning in dictionaries and encyclopedias. BTW, its cleat that pitch is NOT physical frequency, but a perceptual sensation (dependent mainly on the fundamental frequency of an acoustic signal). That is not how LilyPond uses the term fair enough, although honestly i don't see how it could be convenient to use an established term with a definite meaning to denote something else. imagine that, like florian, you're introducing lilypond to people with solid background in music theory (composers, musicologists, whatever). i can imagine that using the term pitch to mean something other than pitch is going to cause confusion. A note is more than a pitch: it has duration, articulations, etc. fair enough, the term note has a less definite meaning, and can denote different things depending on the use. i'd rather not comment on the possible meanings of the term in the english language, and how it's similar or different form the german Note or Ton or the spanish nota. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user I think a serious go at terminological precision would note the distinction: pitch vs pitch-class. PA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
David Kastrup wrote: It's not as much a matter of being correct, but rather of how this term is employed within LilyPond and its documentation. LilyPond also uses event in a meaning that contrary to common usage does not include birthday celebrations. Event, of course, has been in common _musical_ usage ever since non-focussed-pitch occurrences overstretched the note concept. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Thank you -- Hear! Hear!
I've had the same experience (short of realizing). Pete Dr. med. Kai Lautenschläger wrote: Hello List, I just want to let you know, that I continue to be _very_ thankful for all the great ideas, patient explanations and profound help I draw from this list! The amount of time most of you invest in this is truly heroic! I have been telling this to many music-friends of mine and realised, that it's you, that should here it. So, here we go: Thank you very very much for all your help! Best regards, Kai ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OFF-TOPIC: Changing Education Paradigms [Re: Advocating non-free softwares]
bobr...@centrum.is wrote: An optimist believes that we are living in the best of all conceivable worlds. A pessimist _knows_ it. -- David Kastrup NICE! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Yes! Got me wondering -- How might one fit the realist in here (without loss of pithitude)? PA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OFF-TOPIC: Changing Education Paradigms [Re: Advocating non-free softwares]
Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Peter, An optimist believes that we are living in the best of all conceivable worlds. A pessimist _knows_ it. Yes! Got me wondering -- How might one fit the realist in here (without loss of pithitude)? I thought the same thing… What I came up with is this: An optimist believes that we are living in the best of all conceivable worlds. A pessimist _knows_ it. A realist lives in this world. All the best, Kieren. Aha! Better than mine -- won't even tell. All likewise, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: OFF-TOPIC: Changing Education Paradigms [Re: Advocating non-free softwares]
PMA wrote: Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Peter, An optimist believes that we are living in the best of all conceivable worlds. A pessimist _knows_ it. Yes! Got me wondering -- How might one fit the realist in here (without loss of pithitude)? I thought the same thing… What I came up with is this: An optimist believes that we are living in the best of all conceivable worlds. A pessimist _knows_ it. A realist lives in this world. All the best, Kieren. Aha! Better than mine -- won't even tell. All likewise, Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Or maybe, A realist is just living. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Parameterizing a LilyPond function
David Kastrup wrote: PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes: David David, Thank you Both! I'm using the one-param version, as in this score my X Y offsets always match. But on exec -- uh oh -- Scheme is yelling: string:2:65: error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression beginning here \once \override Glissando #(quote (bound-details left Y)) = # offset Unbound variable: offset Hmm. The invocation, BTW, was \glissmove #1.3 Just in case, better tell you my LP Version is still 2.13.32. If I must upgrade Right Now, well then ok, but I'd almost prefer a cyanide pill. That's an unstable version from more than two years ago. This is a combination that does not exactly make a lot of sense since unstable versions are likely to contain short-lived bugs and features. If upgrading is a horror for you, you should only be using stable versions. Using unstable versions makes sense only when you are planning on frequent updates. Gotcha! Thanks. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Parameterizing a LilyPond function
Hi List.
I would like to alter this function...
glissmove = {
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details left Y) = #1.3
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details right Y) = #1.3
}
to accept its 1.3 or whatever as an input parameter instead.
I see docs on parameterizing Scheme functions, but not on
doing this in LilyPond directly -- LP's param handing syntax.
Have I overlooked something obvious?
Thanks in advance.
Pete
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Parameterizing a LilyPond function
David David,
Thank you Both!
I'm using the one-param version, as in this score my X Y offsets
always match.
But on exec -- uh oh -- Scheme is yelling:
string:2:65: error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression
beginning here
\once \override Glissando #(quote (bound-details left Y)) = #
offset
Unbound variable: offset
Hmm. The invocation, BTW, was \glissmove #1.3
Just in case, better tell you my LP Version is still 2.13.32.
If I must upgrade Right Now, well then ok, but I'd almost prefer a
cyanide pill.
Pete
David Kastrup wrote:
PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu writes:
Hi List.
I would like to alter this function...
glissmove = {
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details left Y) = #1.3
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details right Y) = #1.3
}
to accept its 1.3 or whatever as an input parameter instead.
I see docs on parameterizing Scheme functions, but not on
doing this in LilyPond directly -- LP's param handing syntax.
Have I overlooked something obvious?
It is not a function but a music constant. To make a function, write
glissmove =
#(define-music-function (parser location offset) (number?)
#{
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details left Y) = #offset
\once \override Glissando #'(bound-details right Y) = #offset
#})
Check the Extending LilyPond Guide for define-music-function.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Parameterizing a LilyPond function
You're right, man: working dory-hunky! I promise to upgrade *BTWN* projects. Thanks again, Pete David Nalesnik wrote: Hi Peter, On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:00 PM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: David David, Thank you Both! I'm using the one-param version, as in this score my X Y offsets always match. But on exec -- uh oh -- Scheme is yelling: string:2:65: error: GUILE signaled an error for the expression beginning here \once \override Glissando #(quote (bound-details left Y)) = # offset Unbound variable: offset Hmm. The invocation, BTW, was \glissmove #1.3 Just in case, better tell you my LP Version is still 2.13.32. If I must upgrade Right Now, well then ok, but I'd almost prefer a cyanide pill. There shouldn't be any _need_ here to upgrade, but there really have been a lot of improvements since the version you're using (including much greater power/flexibility/ease regarding music functions). I think you simply need to substitute $ for # in front of offset to make this work. -David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Ambitus-Bug
Keith OHara wrote: Knut PetersenKnut_Petersenat t-online.de writes: Have a look at the attached source and the png, the problem is obvious. The first appearance dictates which of the two enharmonic equivalents is chosen for the ambitus. Yes. The ambitus was formerly sorted in staff-position order, and there was a complaint a while back that if one has E-sharp and F-flat, the ambitus shows the E-sharp, so it was changed to pitch order. If one sets the actual tuning in LilyPond, so that she knows that E-sharp is a slightly higher pitch than F, she will make the ambitus consistently. Maybe not everyone agrees with me that E-sharp is a higher pitch than F. LilyPond's default concept of pitch uses 12 equal divisions of the octave, so the cases you show are ties. Maybe by default LilyPond could break the ties based on staff-position, which would be wrong to my way of thinking, but less surprising. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Might \naturalizeMusic specifically target Ambitus? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Fwd: Re: [Acma-l] Sibelius ProTools . . . Woes?
FYI -- Original Message Subject: Re: [Acma-l] Sibelius ProTools . . . Woes? Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:07:28 +0930 From: Robert Pawel Wolf robert.w...@adelaide.edu.au To: Kevin Austin kevin.aus...@videotron.ca CC: electroacoust...@concordia.ca, cec-confere...@googlegroups.com, ACMA acm...@list.waikato.ac.nz Try Lilypond Music Engraving software. It has some massive benefits: 1. Produces better looking scores than Sibelius (well..., this is my opinion and I am open for debate). 2. It is non-commercial. 3. It is 100% free. 4. It is stable. 5. Also works as a plug-in, so it is possible to integrate it with other software (if you do computer programming as well). You can find it here: http://lilypond.org/ Cheers, Robert Wolf On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 17:26 -0400, Kevin Austin wrote: http://www.sibeliususers.org Sibelius is in crisis! The world's leading music scoring software, Sibelius®, winner of the Queen's Innovation Award and OBE's for its creators the Finn brothers, is in crisis: this will be of real concern to all Sibelius users. This site aims to do something about it. On July 2nd Sibelius' parent company, Avid Technology announced the closure of Sibelius UK, the Finsbury Park home of the Sibelius development team. Avid claims this will make no difference either to Sibelius or to its technical support. As with ProTools, Avid's strategy is to send the coding and maintenance work offshore. Based on its latest published figures Avid is in financial trouble. Right after the most recent stockholders meeting, all the Avid board of directors sold significant shares of stock, clearly a co-ordinated sale. Simultaneously, several key executives resigned, including Vice President, CFO and CTO. Avid is short of cash and desperately trying to shore up its liquidity with reckless cost cutting. Finale and Logic? Kevin Acma-l Mailing List http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/acma-l ACMA Web site http://www.acma.asn.au/ Acma-l Mailing List http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/acma-l ACMA Web site http://www.acma.asn.au/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: horizontal shift
Dr. med. Kai Lautenschläger wrote: Hi List, is there any way to make lilypond shift the visible contents on a page to the _outer_ edge? It would be something like horizontal-shift, while that command within the \paper-block seems to shift the content to the right on _all_ pages (meaning even and odd ones). Did I miss something? otherwise, this feature would be a wish of mine for future development. best regards, Kai ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hear Hear! (I second the wish.) Pete ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond scores -- video editing software
Interesting! I do like these styles (per-system or continuous-line) for Mike's and Jay's audio entries. My audios, though, will be long -- Franck, Busoni, etc. -- and may, if displaying only very local score views at a time, hide the forrest for the trees. I'll experiment to see, probably, how much score YouTube's box can display *readably* at once Thanks all for the feedback. I'll look into kdenlive first, along with the LilyPond extensions. Peter Jay Anderson wrote: On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 8:58 AM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: I'm planning similar YouTube entries, i.e., music performances sync'd with their score-page turns. But this will be a first for me, and I see a hefty bunch of (Linux) softwares for video editing. If any of you has a favorite among those options (or among how-to docs), I'd appreciate hearing. I've done some similar videos which set the score in one continuous horizontal line: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rf4YZCjymos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnoBD_QSskE I haven't touched it in a couple months though. It was completely automated after entering beats into the score and audio. If you're interested I can try cleaning it up a bit. (I'm out for the weekend though so I won't be able to respond for a few days). I'd be interested to see how mike's scores would look in this format. -Jay ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: New LilyPond scores -- video editing software
Hi List. I'm planning similar YouTube entries, i.e., music performances sync'd with their score-page turns. But this will be a first for me, and I see a hefty bunch of (Linux) softwares for video editing. If any of you has a favorite among those options (or among how-to docs), I'd appreciate hearing. Thanks, Pete m...@apollinemike.com wrote: Hey all, I'm working on a project to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Debussy études by writing a series of 12 companion pieces - one per étude. My ensemble has recorded two of them and I've put them on YouTube w/ a video that moves through the LilyPond score in real time. You can check it out via our website: http://www.ensemble101.fr. The .ly files are freely available for those who want them (I'd have to do some cleanup first, tho!) and they're all under the Creative Commons license. Happy listening! ~Mike ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Bloody mao! Valentin, you tricked us!
Re: complement? -- This would depend on Why he'd have had kittens, and that in turn on whether he'd 'gotten' the joke. We couldn't tell whether he was amused or, you know, merely devastated. P Valentin Villenave wrote: On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:59 AM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: Indeed, Valentin! Our chiwawa JSB lives for that report and, seeing your joke, nearly had kittens. Thanks -- but this has to be the weirdest compliment no one has ever made to me. (Or is it a compliment? 0_o) Cheers, Valentin. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Bloody mao! Valentin, you tricked us!
Indeed, Valentin! Our chiwawa JSB lives for that report and, seeing your joke, nearly had kittens. Janek Warchoł wrote: Valentin, you sneaky bastard! Tried to deceive us, huh? But i see the new LilyPond Report announced on Lily website, mwahahahaha! http://news.lilynet.net/?The-LilyPond-Report-25lang=en Janek ;-) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Conversion to MIDI ?
Hi List. Please forgive a naive question. Is there such a thing as a WAV-to-MIDI or MP3-to-MIDI file format converter? My common sense is yelling, No way, Buster!, but it needs confirmation. Thanks in advance, P ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Conversion to MIDI ?
I sit flamboozled! Thanks, will look into this! (Yes, my system is Linux -- Debian Squeeze.) Brett McCoy wrote: On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 10:23 AM, PMApeterarmstr...@aya.yale.edu wrote: Hi List. Please forgive a naive question. Is there such a thing as a WAV-to-MIDI or MP3-to-MIDI file format converter? My common sense is yelling, No way, Buster!, but it needs confirmation. Intellisense: http://www.intelliscore.net/ Only runs on Windows though (they mention using VirtualBox if you are not running Windows) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
