Re: Dynamics over-lapping with bar-lines
I've now had a chance to experiment further with this, and to try the suggestions you have made, which were very helpful. For Dynamic-Text objects, the self-alignment-X = #-1 appears to align the left edge of the dynamic with the left edge of the note; self-alignment-X = #1 aligns the right edge of the dynamic with the right edge of the note. Presumably the default value of 0 aligns the centre of the dynamic mark with the centre of the note. None of this is terribly helpful if one wants consistent, sensible placing of dynamics! However, combining self-alignment-X = #-1 with a small negative value for X-offset gives the kind of result I want: that is, dynamic marks should have their left-edges consistently aligned very slightly to the left of the beginning (i.e. the left-edge) of the first note to which they apply. Using the two variables already mentioned, I can get a consistent, sensible placing for dynamics of different widths, such as f and . However, there is an irritating anomaly, which is that a dynamic in a Dynamics context is not placed in the same horizontal position as one attached to a note in a Staff context. I find that X-offset values of -1 in a Staff context and -0.3 in a Dynamics context produce similar (and, to me, satisfactory) results to each other. How weird is that! I also experimented with setting DynamicText.extra-spacing-width to '(0 . 0). With the default values of the other variables this is not a good solution to the problem of dynamic/bar-line collisions, because it produces an unwanted gap between the bar-line and the first note of the bar if the dynamic mark is a wide one. And with self-alignment-X = #-1 and a small value for X-offset these collisions are probably not going to arise very often, if at all. Thanks again for all your help. David On Tue, 2014-02-04 at 10:45 -0500, Hwaen Ch'uqi wrote: Greetings David, generally I prefer the left edge of dynamics to be related to the note position. But I should like it to be a little further to the left than the value of -1 gives. That is a bit of a problem, because the value required for a dynamic such as 'f' will be different from that needed by a wider marking such as ''. Is there perhaps a way of specifying where the left edge of the dynamic should be in relation to the note? For instance, I might like all dynamics to appear about half a note-head's width before the left edge of the note-head itself. It is going to get very tedious having continually to specify different self-alignment-X values when there are, say, alternating 'p' and 'mf' markings. Have you tried using decimal numbers with self-alignment-X, as in numbers between -1 and 0? I am guessing that this will produce what you want. If I understand things correctly, the self-alignment-X property, at least in this instance, is calculating relative to the note. The DynamicText entry of the Internals Reference (Section 3.1.39) also give X-offset as another changeable property. It will also move the dynamic text horizontally, though I am not clear what is its X-parent. If you have not yet done it, I would highly recommend looking at Chapter 4 (and especially sections 4.6 and 4.7) of the Learning Manual, which will give you an invaluable introduction to tweaking the output. In particular, you might be interested in 4.7.2 and 4.7.3, where it is shown how you can minimize typing of tweaks by using variables and stylesheets. Also, considering that LilyPond is generally so good at avoiding collisions, I have been surprised to find that it seems to have no objection to printing dynamics and bar-lines on top of one another. Is there no way to tell it to avoid these collisions? I would have expected avoidance to be the default, with an override to allow collisions if that is what is wanted in a particular case. But the default appears to be that bar-lines and dynamics pay no regard for each other. Why the default is, I cannot say. But according to the same entry in the IR, the extra-spacing-width property is set to #'(+inf.0 . -inf.0) by default, which I believe means that, in LilyPond's calculations, the object takes no horizontal space. Changing the elements within the parentheses to actual numbers should force LilyPond to give it a horizontal value and thus to place other objects with recognition of that value. This is my understanding; if I am speaking amiss, please, anyone, feel free to correct me. I hope this helps. Hwaen Ch'uqi ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamics over-lapping with bar-lines
Greetings David, generally I prefer the left edge of dynamics to be related to the note position. But I should like it to be a little further to the left than the value of -1 gives. That is a bit of a problem, because the value required for a dynamic such as 'f' will be different from that needed by a wider marking such as ''. Is there perhaps a way of specifying where the left edge of the dynamic should be in relation to the note? For instance, I might like all dynamics to appear about half a note-head's width before the left edge of the note-head itself. It is going to get very tedious having continually to specify different self-alignment-X values when there are, say, alternating 'p' and 'mf' markings. Have you tried using decimal numbers with self-alignment-X, as in numbers between -1 and 0? I am guessing that this will produce what you want. If I understand things correctly, the self-alignment-X property, at least in this instance, is calculating relative to the note. The DynamicText entry of the Internals Reference (Section 3.1.39) also give X-offset as another changeable property. It will also move the dynamic text horizontally, though I am not clear what is its X-parent. If you have not yet done it, I would highly recommend looking at Chapter 4 (and especially sections 4.6 and 4.7) of the Learning Manual, which will give you an invaluable introduction to tweaking the output. In particular, you might be interested in 4.7.2 and 4.7.3, where it is shown how you can minimize typing of tweaks by using variables and stylesheets. Also, considering that LilyPond is generally so good at avoiding collisions, I have been surprised to find that it seems to have no objection to printing dynamics and bar-lines on top of one another. Is there no way to tell it to avoid these collisions? I would have expected avoidance to be the default, with an override to allow collisions if that is what is wanted in a particular case. But the default appears to be that bar-lines and dynamics pay no regard for each other. Why the default is, I cannot say. But according to the same entry in the IR, the extra-spacing-width property is set to #'(+inf.0 . -inf.0) by default, which I believe means that, in LilyPond's calculations, the object takes no horizontal space. Changing the elements within the parentheses to actual numbers should force LilyPond to give it a horizontal value and thus to place other objects with recognition of that value. This is my understanding; if I am speaking amiss, please, anyone, feel free to correct me. I hope this helps. Hwaen Ch'uqi ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamics over-lapping with bar-lines
Greetings David, Following the problem I was having with dynamics in a flute part and a piano part not lining up, on the advice of the list I upgraded my LilyPond from v2.14.2 to 2.18.0. Problem of non-alignment solved. But I still find that dynamics often contact or even cross a bar-line. In the flute part of this piece it does not matter, of course, because the bar-line does not extend beyond the stave. But in the piano part it does matter. The problem is the same whether the dynamic marks are added in a Staff context or in a separate Dynamics context. How do I tell LilyPond not to superimpose dynamics and bar-lines? David Now that you have successfully upgraded to LilyPond 2.18.0, the command which I earlier gave you should work - namely, \override Staff.DynamicText.self-alignment-X = #-1 If your dynamics are in a Dynamics context rather than a Staff context, then change Staff in the above command to Dynamics. The default horizontal position for DynamicText is #0, or centered. #1 right-aligns the dynamics; #-1 left-aligns them. Other numbers, whether between or outside of these bounds, will work as well. I hope this helps. Please take care. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Dynamics over-lapping with bar-lines
Thanks for your reply - it solves the problem of bar-line/dynamic collisions (or rather, it side-steps the problem). Actually it also begins to answer what might well have been my next question, because generally I prefer the left edge of dynamics to be related to the note position. But I should like it to be a little further to the left than the value of -1 gives. That is a bit of a problem, because the value required for a dynamic such as 'f' will be different from that needed by a wider marking such as ''. Is there perhaps a way of specifying where the left edge of the dynamic should be in relation to the note? For instance, I might like all dynamics to appear about half a note-head's width before the left edge of the note-head itself. It is going to get very tedious having continually to specify different self-alignment-X values when there are, say, alternating 'p' and 'mf' markings. Also, considering that LilyPond is generally so good at avoiding collisions, I have been surprised to find that it seems to have no objection to printing dynamics and bar-lines on top of one another. Is there no way to tell it to avoid these collisions? I would have expected avoidance to be the default, with an override to allow collisions if that is what is wanted in a particular case. But the default appears to be that bar-lines and dynamics pay no regard for each other. Am I missing something here? David On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 03:04 -0500, Hwaen Ch'uqi wrote: Greetings David, Following the problem I was having with dynamics in a flute part and a piano part not lining up, on the advice of the list I upgraded my LilyPond from v2.14.2 to 2.18.0. Problem of non-alignment solved. But I still find that dynamics often contact or even cross a bar-line. In the flute part of this piece it does not matter, of course, because the bar-line does not extend beyond the stave. But in the piano part it does matter. The problem is the same whether the dynamic marks are added in a Staff context or in a separate Dynamics context. How do I tell LilyPond not to superimpose dynamics and bar-lines? David Now that you have successfully upgraded to LilyPond 2.18.0, the command which I earlier gave you should work - namely, \override Staff.DynamicText.self-alignment-X = #-1 If your dynamics are in a Dynamics context rather than a Staff context, then change Staff in the above command to Dynamics. The default horizontal position for DynamicText is #0, or centered. #1 right-aligns the dynamics; #-1 left-aligns them. Other numbers, whether between or outside of these bounds, will work as well. I hope this helps. Please take care. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Dynamics over-lapping with bar-lines
Following the problem I was having with dynamics in a flute part and a piano part not lining up, on the advice of the list I upgraded my LilyPond from v2.14.2 to 2.18.0. Problem of non-alignment solved. But I still find that dynamics often contact or even cross a bar-line. In the flute part of this piece it does not matter, of course, because the bar-line does not extend beyond the stave. But in the piano part it does matter. The problem is the same whether the dynamic marks are added in a Staff context or in a separate Dynamics context. How do I tell LilyPond not to superimpose dynamics and bar-lines? David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
