Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi David, On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 10:47 AM, David Sumbler wrote: > Thanks to all for your consideration of the problem I have been having > in placing a dynamic at the end of a bar. > > Stephen's 2 solutions are quite effective in some cases, but so far as I > can see cannot be made to work when there is a single note (e.g. a > semibreve) which has to carry the hairpin. > > The solution using \afterGrace is not dissimilar (or so it seems to me) > to David's original suggestion of using a parallel music expression with > spacer rests to position the final dynamic. > > The trouble is, that these are all in one sense work-arounds, and might > give problems where the music in question is to be used in both a score > and parts. Of course, this difficulty can easily be got around by using > tags to create 2 different versions, one for the score and one for the > part. > > Why do I refer to all of these as work-arounds? It is because none of > them actually directly achieves what we want. Whether it is my dynamic > at the end of a bar (which some people seem to consider unorthodox, > though I disagree) or a pair of grace-notes after a trill, we know where > the item should appear: it is just before the barline (or the following > note, if it is not at the end of a bar). All the work-arounds fake this > by placing the object in relation to a note or rest which occurs near > the end of the bar, and then if necessary adjusting the horizontal > offset. And, so far as I can see, we cam only find the correct values > by trial and error. Even then we might have to change them because of > later editing. > > There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this. But it would be > nice if we could just place the object where we actually want it, i.e. > in relation to the bar-line, and know that that is where it is going to > appear no matter what might happen with the spacing of the bar during > editing or compilation. > > The approach I suggested is of course faking what you want, . Dynamics are attached to notes, spacers by LilyPond's convention, so I introduce a combination of spacers to allow me to attach a dynamic to a spacer which will get the dynamic in the right spot. Given LilyPond's spacing routines, this placement will probably require tweaking. The only alternative to placing the dynamic using spacers and SimultaneousMusic I see would be to create an alternate routine for typesetting such a combination. In the case of a hairpin with dynamic on a single, untied note, both would be attached to the note (rather than one to s1*0 as you do above--which could suggest a multi-strand approach), but the hairpin's length and the dynamic's X-offset from its parent would be calculated in relation to each other. David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
this one centers it
Long =
#(define-music-function
(parser location str dyn)
(number? string?)
#{
-\markup
{
\halign #-1
\rotate #180
\combine
\draw-line #`(,str . 0.7)
\draw-line #`(,str . -0.7)
\vcenter
\dynamic $dyn
}
#}
)
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 "f"
}
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 "p"
}
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 ""
}
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Stephen MacNeil
wrote:
> it works on one note and an none - i added dynamic markup for you
>
>
> Long =
>
>
> #(define-music-function
>
>
> (parser location str dyn)
>
>
> (number? string?)
>
>
> #{
>
>
> -\markup
>
>
> {
>
>
> \halign #-1
>
>
> \rotate #180
>
>
> \combine
>
>
> \draw-line #`(,str . 0.7)
>
>
> \draw-line #`(,str . -0.7)
>
>
> \dynamic $dyn
>
> }
>
>
> #}
>
>
> )
>
>
> {
>
>
> c''4_\Long #-15.5 "f"
>
>
> }
>
>
> {
>
>
> c''4_\Long #-15.5 "p"
>
>
> }
>
> {
>
>
> c''4_\Long #-15.5 ""
>
>
> }
>
>
> Stephen
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:47 AM, David Sumbler wrote:
>
>> Thanks to all for your consideration of the problem I have been having
>> in placing a dynamic at the end of a bar.
>>
>> Stephen's 2 solutions are quite effective in some cases, but so far as I
>> can see cannot be made to work when there is a single note (e.g. a
>> semibreve) which has to carry the hairpin.
>>
>> The solution using \afterGrace is not dissimilar (or so it seems to me)
>> to David's original suggestion of using a parallel music expression with
>> spacer rests to position the final dynamic.
>>
>> The trouble is, that these are all in one sense work-arounds, and might
>> give problems where the music in question is to be used in both a score
>> and parts. Of course, this difficulty can easily be got around by using
>> tags to create 2 different versions, one for the score and one for the
>> part.
>>
>> Why do I refer to all of these as work-arounds? It is because none of
>> them actually directly achieves what we want. Whether it is my dynamic
>> at the end of a bar (which some people seem to consider unorthodox,
>> though I disagree) or a pair of grace-notes after a trill, we know where
>> the item should appear: it is just before the barline (or the following
>> note, if it is not at the end of a bar). All the work-arounds fake this
>> by placing the object in relation to a note or rest which occurs near
>> the end of the bar, and then if necessary adjusting the horizontal
>> offset. And, so far as I can see, we cam only find the correct values
>> by trial and error. Even then we might have to change them because of
>> later editing.
>>
>> There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this. But it would be
>> nice if we could just place the object where we actually want it, i.e.
>> in relation to the bar-line, and know that that is where it is going to
>> appear no matter what might happen with the spacing of the bar during
>> editing or compilation.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
it works on one note and an none - i added dynamic markup for you
Long =
#(define-music-function
(parser location str dyn)
(number? string?)
#{
-\markup
{
\halign #-1
\rotate #180
\combine
\draw-line #`(,str . 0.7)
\draw-line #`(,str . -0.7)
\dynamic $dyn
}
#}
)
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 "f"
}
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 "p"
}
{
c''4_\Long #-15.5 ""
}
Stephen
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:47 AM, David Sumbler wrote:
> Thanks to all for your consideration of the problem I have been having
> in placing a dynamic at the end of a bar.
>
> Stephen's 2 solutions are quite effective in some cases, but so far as I
> can see cannot be made to work when there is a single note (e.g. a
> semibreve) which has to carry the hairpin.
>
> The solution using \afterGrace is not dissimilar (or so it seems to me)
> to David's original suggestion of using a parallel music expression with
> spacer rests to position the final dynamic.
>
> The trouble is, that these are all in one sense work-arounds, and might
> give problems where the music in question is to be used in both a score
> and parts. Of course, this difficulty can easily be got around by using
> tags to create 2 different versions, one for the score and one for the
> part.
>
> Why do I refer to all of these as work-arounds? It is because none of
> them actually directly achieves what we want. Whether it is my dynamic
> at the end of a bar (which some people seem to consider unorthodox,
> though I disagree) or a pair of grace-notes after a trill, we know where
> the item should appear: it is just before the barline (or the following
> note, if it is not at the end of a bar). All the work-arounds fake this
> by placing the object in relation to a note or rest which occurs near
> the end of the bar, and then if necessary adjusting the horizontal
> offset. And, so far as I can see, we cam only find the correct values
> by trial and error. Even then we might have to change them because of
> later editing.
>
> There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this. But it would be
> nice if we could just place the object where we actually want it, i.e.
> in relation to the bar-line, and know that that is where it is going to
> appear no matter what might happen with the spacing of the bar during
> editing or compilation.
>
> David
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Thanks to all for your consideration of the problem I have been having in placing a dynamic at the end of a bar. Stephen's 2 solutions are quite effective in some cases, but so far as I can see cannot be made to work when there is a single note (e.g. a semibreve) which has to carry the hairpin. The solution using \afterGrace is not dissimilar (or so it seems to me) to David's original suggestion of using a parallel music expression with spacer rests to position the final dynamic. The trouble is, that these are all in one sense work-arounds, and might give problems where the music in question is to be used in both a score and parts. Of course, this difficulty can easily be got around by using tags to create 2 different versions, one for the score and one for the part. Why do I refer to all of these as work-arounds? It is because none of them actually directly achieves what we want. Whether it is my dynamic at the end of a bar (which some people seem to consider unorthodox, though I disagree) or a pair of grace-notes after a trill, we know where the item should appear: it is just before the barline (or the following note, if it is not at the end of a bar). All the work-arounds fake this by placing the object in relation to a note or rest which occurs near the end of the bar, and then if necessary adjusting the horizontal offset. And, so far as I can see, we cam only find the correct values by trial and error. Even then we might have to change them because of later editing. There is absolutely nothing at all wrong with this. But it would be nice if we could just place the object where we actually want it, i.e. in relation to the bar-line, and know that that is where it is going to appear no matter what might happen with the spacing of the bar during editing or compilation. David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi david Can you tell me where this is located in the lilypond directory. what file etc. or where one could get the information on line ie where you got it! Thanks Stephen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Arrastres: function scheme question - Built from ideas of Simon and David -- Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Thank you for that Stephen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Arrastres: function scheme question - Built from ideas of Simon and David -- Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hello Stephen,
Changing :
\once \override NoteHead.extra-spacing-width = #`(,len . 1)
to :
\once \override NoteHead.extra-spacing-width = #`(,(- len) . 1)
allows a positive number instead.
JM
> Le 31 mai 2015 à 02:47, Stephen MacNeil a écrit :
>
> the second didn't work correctly so i changed it
>
> \version "2.18.2"
> Fraction = #(cons 6 8)
> Arrastres =
> #(define-music-function (parser location len main grace) (number? ly:music?
> ly:music?)
> (_i "Create @var{grace} note(s) after a @var{main} music _expression_.")
> (let ((main-length (ly:music-length main))
> (fraction (ly:parser-lookup parser 'Fraction)))
> (make-simultaneous-music
> (list
> main
> (make-sequential-music
> (list
>
> (make-music 'SkipMusic
> 'duration (ly:make-duration
> 0 0
> (* (ly:moment-main-numerator main-length)
> (car fraction))
> (* (ly:moment-main-denominator main-length)
> (cdr fraction
> #{
> \once \override Flag.stroke-style = #"grace"
> \once \override NoteHead.extra-spacing-width = #`(,len . 1)
> #}
> (make-music
> 'GraceMusic
> 'element grace)))
> #{
> \glissando
> #}
>
> \relative c' { \time 2/4 dis16 fis dis b c a g \Arrastres #-3 fis c' |
> 2~ q4 s4 |}
>
>
>
> but now it needs a negative number
>
> stephen
>
> ___
> 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:Arrastres: function scheme question - Built from ideas of Simon and David -- Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
the second didn't work correctly so i changed it
\version "2.18.2"
Fraction = #(cons 6 8)
Arrastres =
#(define-music-function (parser location len main grace) (number? ly:music?
ly:music?)
(_i "Create @var{grace} note(s) after a @var{main} music _expression_.")
(let ((main-length (ly:music-length main))
(fraction (ly:parser-lookup parser 'Fraction)))
(make-simultaneous-music
(list
main
(make-sequential-music
(list
(make-music 'SkipMusic
'duration (ly:make-duration
0 0
(* (ly:moment-main-numerator main-length)
(car fraction))
(* (ly:moment-main-denominator main-length)
(cdr fraction
#{
\once \override Flag.stroke-style = #"grace"
\once \override NoteHead.extra-spacing-width = #`(,len . 1)
#}
(make-music
'GraceMusic
'element grace)))
#{
\glissando
#}
\relative c' { \time 2/4 dis16 fis dis b c a g \Arrastres #-3 fis c' |
2~ q4 s4 |}
but now it needs a negative number
stephen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Arrastres: function scheme question - Built from ideas of Simon and David -- Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
I used the first snippet posted by Simon for an Arrastres function. Then I
noticed Davids post for afterGrace so I tried my hand at that.
Both work but I have a few questions.
In the first posted by simon I did it my typical way. And it works like all
my other functions. Typically I use modified lily functions like bendAfter
(one of my favorite to use). In all cases I can't figure out how to add the
command in the function. So although it works it could be better.
Here is the code
%%%
\version "2.18.2"
Arrastres =
#(define-music-function
(parser location len
mus note)
(number?
ly:music? ly:music?)
#{
\afterGrace
$mus
{
\once \override Flag.stroke-style = #"grace"
\once \override NoteHead.extra-spacing-width = #`(,len . 1)
s1*0 \stemUp $note
}
#})
mus = \relative c' {
\time 2/4
\key g \major
\stemDown dis16 fis dis b c a g \Arrastres #-3 fis \glissando c'8|
2
}
\score {
\mus
}
%%
My question is where do I add \glissando in the function so I don't have to
write it everytime.
The second modified from the snippet posted by David afterGrace works great
and I even got it so i don't need \glissando. But again I have questions.
Here is the code
%
\version "2.18.2"
Fraction = #(cons 6 8)
Arrastres =
#(define-music-function (parser location len main grace) (number? ly:music?
ly:music?)
(_i "Create @var{grace} note(s) after a @var{main} music _expression_.")
(let ((main-length (ly:music-length main))
(fraction (ly:parser-lookup parser 'Fraction)))
(make-simultaneous-music
(list
main
(make-sequential-music
(list
(make-music 'SkipMusic
'duration (ly:make-duration
0 len
(* (ly:moment-main-numerator main-length)
(car fraction))
(* (ly:moment-main-denominator main-length)
(cdr fraction
#{
\once \override Flag.stroke-style = #"grace"
#}
(make-music
'GraceMusic
'element grace)))
#{
\glissando
#}
\relative c' {c \Arrastres #6 c e8 e}
%%%
well where to begin...
first why is Fraction = #(cons 6 8) and not Fraction = #(cons 1 1) or 2 2
etc. 6 8 seams rather small. Is it so in some cases there is not to much
space?
second
'duration (ly:make-duration
0 len
was set 0 0 ... again why. I assume the first number is notes occupied? and
the second distance. Why 0 on the second. and isn't this just a recap of
Fraction = #(cons 6 8)? or is one gliss length and the other note distance
(both having the same effect -- so make one 0 )-- i assume.
Thanks
Stephen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Am 28.05.2015 um 22:45 schrieb David Nalesnik: Hi Simon, On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Simon Albrecht mailto:simon.albre...@mail.de>> wrote: This sounds like a usecase for \afterGrace. I cooked up a music function for that, which works quite fine. Does that help you? This is nice. I should point out that \afterGrace places the grace notes using SimultaneousMusic and skips. :-) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi Simon,
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Simon Albrecht
wrote:
This sounds like a usecase for \afterGrace. I cooked up a music function
> for that, which works quite fine. Does that help you?
>
>
This is nice. I should point out that \afterGrace places the grace notes
using SimultaneousMusic and skips. Here's the definition:
afterGraceFraction = #(cons 6 8)
afterGrace =
#(define-music-function (parser location main grace) (ly:music? ly:music?)
(_i "Create @var{grace} note(s) after a @var{main} music expression.")
(let ((main-length (ly:music-length main))
(fraction (ly:parser-lookup parser 'afterGraceFraction)))
(make-simultaneous-music
(list
main
(make-sequential-music
(list
(make-music 'SkipMusic
'duration (ly:make-duration
0 0
(* (ly:moment-main-numerator main-length)
(car fraction))
(* (ly:moment-main-denominator main-length)
(cdr fraction
(make-music 'GraceMusic
'element grace)))
%%
DN
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
I like that! I would add
\once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'1
looks nicer to my eyes
afterDynamic =
#(define-music-function
(parser location mus dyn)
(ly:music? ly:music?)
#{
\afterGrace
$mus
{ \once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'1 s4 $dyn }
#})
mus = {
c'1
\afterDynamic { c'1\p-\tweak minimum-length 6 \< } \f
c'1
}
\score {
\mus
}
Stephen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hello David,
Am 28.05.2015 um 00:17 schrieb David Sumbler:
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 16:52 -0500, David Nalesnik wrote:
Hi David,
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 3:03 PM, David Sumbler
wrote:
>
But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is
actually
fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because
one
method implies that a note is not really the length that it
appears to
be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually
belong to
another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality.
Actually, I think I was a little imprecise talking about attaching the
dynamics to a new voice here. I created SimultaneousMusic, rather
than another Voice context. Note that this is done commonly enough by
users parameterizing their input: one variable is used to store the
notes, and another to store the dynamics.
Simon also made this point - which I accept.
(This is not to say that there isn't some hackery at work here :) )
Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the
length of
the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance.
We know
exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be
immediately
before the bar-line.
Yes, but what of more complex examples, where a composer indicates a
number of inflections on a single note? There are a number of
examples of that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uav-OYUJ7BQ
(including a simple one at the very beginning). How else could you
notate these cases without the simultaneous music approach?
True, but in these cases we actually want the dynamics to be at
particular points within a bar, so the simultaneous music approach is
logical. In my case, I want the dynamic to appear at the end of the bar
- this, of course is the same moment in time as the start of the next
bar+, but is not the same point on paper. The simultaneous music
approach, however, requires us to pretend that we want the dynamic at
some arbitrary moment just before the end of the bar. And the choice of
that moment will vary, depending on how busy the music is on other
staves in the same bar. It might also mean that we have to use one
value for the score and another for the individual part - yet, in
reality, we just want the dynamic to appear immediately before the
bar-line regardless of what is happening elsewhere in the ensemble.
This sounds like a usecase for \afterGrace. I cooked up a music function
for that, which works quite fine. Does that help you?
Regards, Simon
\version "2.19.20"
afterDynamic =
#(define-music-function
(parser location mus dyn)
(ly:music? ly:music?)
#{
\afterGrace
$mus
{ s4 $dyn }
#})
mus = {
c'1
\afterDynamic { c'1\p-\tweak minimum-length 10 \< } \f
c'1
}
\score {
\mus
}___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Mats Bengtsson
wrote:
As has already been discussed, the question is what the musical meaning of
> such a notation would be. Certainly, I can think of printed music, not to
> mention hand-written manuscripts, where dynamic marks are placed far from
> the note they are intended to match, but it won't help the musician.
> If you can show that this notation is established and has a specific
> meaning, then it might be interesting to add support in LilyPond.
> Otherwise,
> you will have to live with the more or less clumsy workarounds.
>
I've seen it fairly frequently. This sort of effect is also notated like
so:
{
c''1~\p\<
c''16\f r8. r4 r2
}
Basically, we are trying to indicate a note lasting a whole note, which
ends at a certain dynamic. The above notation is imprecise, of course, but
at least it helps guard against the tendency of instrumentalists to cut
notes short :)
DN
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
David Sumbler aeolia.co.uk> writes: > > I often use 's1*0\!' to end a hairpin just before a barline. Is that needed? If you end it on the first note of the next bar, it should be typeset to end just before the barline, see http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes#Selected-Snippets-32 > > But how can a get a dynamic mark (e.g. 'ff') to appear at the end of a > bar? In the following example, the first hairpin behaves as I want. > The second one ends with a dynamic, but the new dynamic appears at the > start of the following bar, even though it is attached to an item which > occurs on the barline. As has already been discussed, the question is what the musical meaning of such a notation would be. Certainly, I can think of printed music, not to mention hand-written manuscripts, where dynamic marks are placed far from the note they are intended to match, but it won't help the musician. If you can show that this notation is established and has a specific meaning, then it might be interesting to add support in LilyPond. Otherwise, you will have to live with the more or less clumsy workarounds. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 16:52 -0500, David Nalesnik wrote: > Hi David, > > On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 3:03 PM, David Sumbler > wrote: > > > But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is > actually > fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because > one > method implies that a note is not really the length that it > appears to > be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually > belong to > another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality. > > > Actually, I think I was a little imprecise talking about attaching the > dynamics to a new voice here. I created SimultaneousMusic, rather > than another Voice context. Note that this is done commonly enough by > users parameterizing their input: one variable is used to store the > notes, and another to store the dynamics. Simon also made this point - which I accept. > (This is not to say that there isn't some hackery at work here :) ) > > Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the > length of > the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. > We know > exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be > immediately > before the bar-line. > > > Yes, but what of more complex examples, where a composer indicates a > number of inflections on a single note? There are a number of > examples of that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uav-OYUJ7BQ > (including a simple one at the very beginning). How else could you > notate these cases without the simultaneous music approach? True, but in these cases we actually want the dynamics to be at particular points within a bar, so the simultaneous music approach is logical. In my case, I want the dynamic to appear at the end of the bar - this, of course is the same moment in time as the start of the next bar+, but is not the same point on paper. The simultaneous music approach, however, requires us to pretend that we want the dynamic at some arbitrary moment just before the end of the bar. And the choice of that moment will vary, depending on how busy the music is on other staves in the same bar. It might also mean that we have to use one value for the score and another for the individual part - yet, in reality, we just want the dynamic to appear immediately before the bar-line regardless of what is happening elsewhere in the ensemble. David David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 22:14 +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "David Sumbler" > > > But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is actually > > fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because one > > method implies that a note is not really the length that it appears to > > be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually belong to > > another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality. > > > > Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the length of > > the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. We know > > exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be immediately > > before the bar-line. > > > > Perhaps at some stage the Lilypond developers could look at the > > possibility of having a method of adding a dynamic (or text) for cases > > like this, so that it is automatically right-aligned to a note or rest. > > Additionally, if the note or rest comes immediately after a barline, > > then the dynamic/text should be right-aligned to the barline itself. I > > would suggest that a suitable input method would be to use a slash (/) > > instead of or as well as the usual backslash (\). > > > > I am not criticising Lilypond, which is magnificent. But it does seem > > unfortunate that at the moment there is no way of directly inputting a > > perfectly normal, if not particularly common, bit of standard notation. > > > I'm sorry, but you've lost me on this. What, musically, is the difference > between a dynamic at the end of a bar, and the same dynamic at the start of > the next bar. As I performer, I can't distinguish. Well, I suppose that the difference logically and musically is none, if the note is followed by a rest. But what if it is followed by another note? In the example I gave there was a note lasting for one bar followed by a one bar rest. You are suggesting, it seems, that it would be all the same if the dynamic indicating the level which we want the crescendo to reach were attached to the rest in the next bar. In theory you are correct, but (a) I do not recall ever having seen this notation in the 62 years I have been playing music, and (b) it is illogical to apply a dynamic to a silence, although I admit that this objection is somewhat academic. However, I think that most performers would think that it looks wrong and it is therefore possibly a little confusing. Now consider an instance where, instead of a rest in the 2nd bar, we have another note which needs to be played in a similar manner to the first. In other words, we have 2 (or more) 1-bar notes, each of which starts at the same level (e.g. piano) and "crescendoes" to forte, say. Each note needs a separate hairpin, with an 'f' marking at the end and, with the possible exception of the 1st note, a 'p' marking at the start of the note. We would probably also put the word 'subito' or 'sub.' after the 'p' on the 2nd note. In this case the 'f' *must* come at the end of one bar and the 'p' at the start of the next. Having both at the start of the next bar would mean something quite different: we would be indicating a 'fp' accent on the second note. (And if we put 'fp sub.', not only will it make no difference but it will cause the performers to wonder what on earth the composer meant by it.) In the particular case I was dealing with, there is a time change at the barline. Having a time signature increasing the distance between the end of one bar and the start of the next would have made idiosyncratic placing of a dynamic at the start of the next bar (which only contains a whole bar rest) look even more weird than it would otherwise. And supposing that there is a line-break, or even a page-break at this point? That would look even more peculiar. In conventional music I have never seen a dynamic applied to a rest, so far as I can remember. In any case, this is all rather academic: the convention, in my experience, is that the destination dynamic in these cases is printed before the barline. I don't think anyone would think that notating music in an unconventional manner because the software makes it easier to do it that way is a good idea. David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi David, On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 3:03 PM, David Sumbler wrote: > > > > But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is actually > fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because one > method implies that a note is not really the length that it appears to > be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually belong to > another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality. > Actually, I think I was a little imprecise talking about attaching the dynamics to a new voice here. I created SimultaneousMusic, rather than another Voice context. Note that this is done commonly enough by users parameterizing their input: one variable is used to store the notes, and another to store the dynamics. (This is not to say that there isn't some hackery at work here :) ) > Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the length of > the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. We know > exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be immediately > before the bar-line. > Yes, but what of more complex examples, where a composer indicates a number of inflections on a single note? There are a number of examples of that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uav-OYUJ7BQ (including a simple one at the very beginning). How else could you notate these cases without the simultaneous music approach? Best, David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Am 27.05.2015 um 22:03 schrieb David Sumbler: But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is actually fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because one method implies that a note is not really the length that it appears to be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually belong to another, silent voice. No, it doesn’t. They are in separate parallel music expressions, one of which contains only skips and dynamics and the other contains everything else. But since there is no \new Voice (or \\ as a shorthand) here, both are read into one voice and one _stream of events_. Neither of these is true in reality. Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the length of the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. We know exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be immediately before the bar-line. Perhaps at some stage the Lilypond developers could look at the possibility of having a method of adding a dynamic (or text) for cases like this, so that it is automatically right-aligned to a note or rest. Additionally, if the note or rest comes immediately after a barline, then the dynamic/text should be right-aligned to the barline itself. I would suggest that a suitable input method would be to use a slash (/) instead of or as well as the usual backslash (\). I am not criticising Lilypond, which is magnificent. But it does seem unfortunate that at the moment there is no way of directly inputting a perfectly normal, if not particularly common, bit of standard notation. I think the point here is very fundamental: Lilypond input language is designed to represent musical content. So while we are used (as all or most people not using Lilypond have been) to just graphically placing a dynamic sign using pen and paper or a WYSIWYG notation program, Lilypond follows an entirely different approach. Which especially in this case is a problem. (And perhaps it will emerge not to be a dilemma). So, until we’ve found a better solution matching the principles of Lilypond _and_ providing the traditional ‘inexact’, intuitive dynamics placement, we’ll go with the methods sketched by David. Regards, Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi david
I think the hairpin alignment is with the DynamicText which aligns under
the note. So by moving the text the hairpin follows.
\once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'x
So you could do
{
c''4\< \once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'1.1 c''2.\ff |
R1 |
}
However in the first \! although ends the Hairpin can not be moved (that I
know of).
Two solutions i see.
1. create a hairpin
Long =
#(define-music-function
(parser location str)
(number?)
#{
-\markup
{
\halign #-1
\rotate #180
\combine
\draw-line #`(,str . 0.7)
\draw-line #`(,str . -0.7)
}
#}
)
{
c''4_\Long #-7.5
c''2. |
R1 |
c''4\< \once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'1.1 c''2.\ff |
R1 |
}
2. create an invisible dynamic
inv = #(make-dynamic-script "")
{
c''4\<
\once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'5.1
c''2.\inv |
R1 |
c''4\<
\once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #'1.1
c''2.\ff |
R1 |
}
HTH
Stephen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
- Original Message - From: "David Sumbler" But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is actually fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because one method implies that a note is not really the length that it appears to be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually belong to another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality. Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the length of the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. We know exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be immediately before the bar-line. Perhaps at some stage the Lilypond developers could look at the possibility of having a method of adding a dynamic (or text) for cases like this, so that it is automatically right-aligned to a note or rest. Additionally, if the note or rest comes immediately after a barline, then the dynamic/text should be right-aligned to the barline itself. I would suggest that a suitable input method would be to use a slash (/) instead of or as well as the usual backslash (\). I am not criticising Lilypond, which is magnificent. But it does seem unfortunate that at the moment there is no way of directly inputting a perfectly normal, if not particularly common, bit of standard notation. I'm sorry, but you've lost me on this. What, musically, is the difference between a dynamic at the end of a bar, and the same dynamic at the start of the next bar. As I performer, I can't distinguish. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 12:47 -0500, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:32 AM, David Sumbler
> wrote:
> I often use 's1*0\!' to end a hairpin just before a barline.
>
> But how can a get a dynamic mark (e.g. 'ff') to appear at the
> end of a
> bar? In the following example, the first hairpin behaves as I
> want.
> The second one ends with a dynamic, but the new dynamic
> appears at the
> start of the following bar, even though it is attached to an
> item which
> occurs on the barline.
>
>
> It occurs at the first moment of the new measure, not *on* the
> barline.
>
>
> Somehow you need to get the dynamic within the measure you want it.
> You could do this by scaling durations:
>
>
> \version "2.18.0"
>
>
> {
> c''4\< c''2. s1*0\! |
> R1 |
> c''4\< c''2.*2/3 s2.*1/3\ff |
> R1 |
> }
>
>
> or (cleaner, I think) by attaching the dynamics to a separate voice:
>
>
> {
> c''4\< c''2. s1*0\! |
> R1 |
> <<
> { c''4 c''2.| }
> { s2.\< s4\ff | }
> >>
> R1 |
> }
>
>
> Hope this helps!
>
It certainly helps a lot - thanks. The second is, to me, the neater
solution, and after a bit of trial and error I have things looking
reasonable.
But both of these are "work-arounds" for something which is actually
fairly normal musical notation. They are work-arounds because one
method implies that a note is not really the length that it appears to
be, and the other method implies that the dynamics actually belong to
another, silent voice. Neither of these is true in reality.
Ideally one shouldn't have to use trial and error, varying the length of
the second invisible rest, to get an acceptable appearance. We know
exactly where the final dynamic should go: it should be immediately
before the bar-line.
Perhaps at some stage the Lilypond developers could look at the
possibility of having a method of adding a dynamic (or text) for cases
like this, so that it is automatically right-aligned to a note or rest.
Additionally, if the note or rest comes immediately after a barline,
then the dynamic/text should be right-aligned to the barline itself. I
would suggest that a suitable input method would be to use a slash (/)
instead of or as well as the usual backslash (\).
I am not criticising Lilypond, which is magnificent. But it does seem
unfortunate that at the moment there is no way of directly inputting a
perfectly normal, if not particularly common, bit of standard notation.
David
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
Hi David,
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:32 AM, David Sumbler wrote:
> I often use 's1*0\!' to end a hairpin just before a barline.
>
> But how can a get a dynamic mark (e.g. 'ff') to appear at the end of a
> bar? In the following example, the first hairpin behaves as I want.
> The second one ends with a dynamic, but the new dynamic appears at the
> start of the following bar, even though it is attached to an item which
> occurs on the barline.
>
It occurs at the first moment of the new measure, not *on* the barline.
Somehow you need to get the dynamic within the measure you want it. You
could do this by scaling durations:
\version "2.18.0"
{
c''4\< c''2. s1*0\! |
R1 |
c''4\< c''2.*2/3 s2.*1/3\ff |
R1 |
}
or (cleaner, I think) by attaching the dynamics to a separate voice:
{
c''4\< c''2. s1*0\! |
R1 |
<<
{ c''4 c''2.| }
{ s2.\< s4\ff | }
>>
R1 |
}
Hope this helps!
DN
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Dynamic mark at the end of a bar
I often use 's1*0\!' to end a hairpin just before a barline.
But how can a get a dynamic mark (e.g. 'ff') to appear at the end of a
bar? In the following example, the first hairpin behaves as I want.
The second one ends with a dynamic, but the new dynamic appears at the
start of the following bar, even though it is attached to an item which
occurs on the barline.
\version "2.18.0"
{
c''4\< c''2. s1*0\! |
R1 |
c''4\< c''2. s1*0\ff |
R1 |
}
David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
