Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
Hi Kieren, the output has indeed only one dot. But at least here it puts the dot in the upper staff space (where the e'' is) and not next to the rest. Cheers, Joram ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
Hi Cynthia,
I guess the only way out is to rewrite the two voices so that one of them
issues hidden rests in the score, but the rests in the parts, via tags.
Not at all… I can think of about a half-dozen other ways to make that happen in
Lilypond.
This would be my preference, since it would be applied globally:
\version 2.19.15
#(define (rest-score r)
(let ((score 0)
(yoff (ly:grob-property-data r 'Y-offset))
(sp (ly:grob-property-data r 'staff-position)))
(if (number? yoff)
(set! score (+ score 2))
(if (eq? yoff 'calculation-in-progress)
(set! score (- score 3
(and (number? sp)
(= 0 2 sp)
(set! score (+ score 2))
(set! score (- score (abs (- 1 sp)
score))
#(define (merge-rests-on-positioning grob)
(let* ((can-merge #f)
(elts (ly:grob-object grob 'elements))
(num-elts (and (ly:grob-array? elts)
(ly:grob-array-length elts)))
(two-voice? (= num-elts 2)))
(if two-voice?
(let* ((v1-grob (ly:grob-array-ref elts 0))
(v2-grob (ly:grob-array-ref elts 1))
(v1-rest (ly:grob-object v1-grob 'rest))
(v2-rest (ly:grob-object v2-grob 'rest)))
(and
(ly:grob? v1-rest)
(ly:grob? v2-rest)
(let* ((v1-duration-log (ly:grob-property v1-rest 'duration-log))
(v2-duration-log (ly:grob-property v2-rest 'duration-log))
(v1-dot (ly:grob-object v1-rest 'dot))
(v2-dot (ly:grob-object v2-rest 'dot))
(v1-dot-count (and (ly:grob? v1-dot)
(ly:grob-property v1-dot 'dot-count -1)))
(v2-dot-count (and (ly:grob? v2-dot)
(ly:grob-property v2-dot 'dot-count -1
(set! can-merge
(and
(number? v1-duration-log)
(number? v2-duration-log)
(= v1-duration-log v2-duration-log)
(eq? v1-dot-count v2-dot-count)))
(if can-merge
;; keep the rest that looks best:
(let* ((keep-v1? (= (rest-score v1-rest)
(rest-score v2-rest)))
(rest-to-keep (if keep-v1? v1-rest v2-rest))
(dot-to-kill (if keep-v1? v2-dot v1-dot)))
;; uncomment if you're curious of which rest was chosen:
;;(ly:grob-set-property! v1-rest 'color green)
;;(ly:grob-set-property! v2-rest 'color blue)
(ly:grob-suicide! (if keep-v1? v2-rest v1-rest))
(if (ly:grob? dot-to-kill)
(ly:grob-suicide! dot-to-kill))
(ly:grob-set-property! rest-to-keep 'direction 0)
(ly:rest::y-offset-callback rest-to-keep)))
(if can-merge
#t
(ly:rest-collision::calc-positioning-done grob
Aa = \relative c'' { \oneVoice r2. }
Ab = \relative c'' { \oneVoice r2. }
\score {
\new Staff \with { \override RestCollision.positioning-done =
#merge-rests-on-positioning }
\time 3/4
\new Voice \Aa \\
\new Voice \Ab
}
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
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
On Feb 7, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
wrote:
Hi Cynthia,
In fact the output generated is just nonsensical. Two stacked augmentation
dots? That just doesn’t seem right.
No, it’s perfectly sensible, if you want (need) to make it visually explicit
that there are two voices at the same time — otherwise, how would the reader
know?
But I don’t want to make it visually that there are two voices here, I want to
make it visually explicit that there is a single voice. That’s why each voice
has issued the \oneVoice command before asserting the r2. And why is it only
rests and notes that have augmentation dots are affected in \oneVoice mode this
way? There is no way other than clashing note column warnings to tell that two
voices have each issued concurrent rests in \oneVoice mode. It’s just kind of
weird that augmentation dots get this special treatment.
I guess the only way out is to rewrite the two voices so that one of them
issues hidden rests in the score, but the rests in the parts, via tags.
Consider, for example, the following related snippet:
\version 2.19.15
\score {
\new Staff
\time 4/2
{ d''2 c''1. } \\
\new Voice { b'2 c''1. }
}
The reason this output makes sense is the same reason there are two stacked
augmentation dots in your rest example.
On Sun, Feb 08, 2015 at 12:03AM , Paul Scott wrote:
What kind of music are you trying to write?
Paul Scott
Concerto Op3 No12 by Francesco Manfredini.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Cynthia Karl pck...@mac.com wrote: But I don’t want to make it visually that there are two voices here, I want to make it visually explicit that there is a single voice. That’s why each voice has issued the \oneVoice command before asserting the r2. And why is it only rests and notes that have augmentation dots are affected in \oneVoice mode this way? There is no way other than clashing note column warnings to tell that two voices have each issued concurrent rests in \oneVoice mode. It’s just kind of weird that augmentation dots get this special treatment. I think you are misusing \oneVoice here; it isn't for merging things into a single voice, but rather for telling LilyPond that there is only one voice that it needs to position on the staff. If you are still `feeding' it two (or more) voices you will have to do some extra work to tell LilyPond what to do or you will get errors and/or unintended output. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
Am 08.02.2015 21:32, schrieb Kevin Barry: On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Cynthia Karl pck...@mac.com mailto:pck...@mac.com wrote: But I don't want to make it visually that there are two voices here, I want to make it visually explicit that there is a single voice. That's why each voice has issued the \oneVoice command before asserting the r2. And why is it only rests and notes that have augmentation dots are affected in \oneVoice mode this way? There is no way other than clashing note column warnings to tell that two voices have each issued concurrent rests in \oneVoice mode. It's just kind of weird that augmentation dots get this special treatment. I think you are misusing \oneVoice here; Indeed the name of the command makes perfectly clear that it's contradictory and nonsensical (and lily basically requires to be given sensible input) to write \oneVoice and have two voices all the same. Too much noise for such a basic misconception! Yours, Simon it isn't for merging things into a single voice, but rather for telling LilyPond that there is only one voice that it needs to position on the staff. If you are still `feeding' it two (or more) voices you will have to do some extra work to tell LilyPond what to do or you will get errors and/or unintended output. ___ 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: Problem with r2. in two voices
On Sat, Feb 07, 2015 at 08:49:52PM -0600, Cynthia Karl wrote: Message: 2 Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 18:24:30 -0800 From: Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com To: 'Cynthia Karl' pck...@mac.com, lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: RE: Problem with r2. in two voices Message-ID: 00c201d04346$5ef30160$1cd90420$@ca.rr.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cynthia, Actually there are two r2. rests, one in each voice. Replace one with s2. and it shall disappear. And then when I want to generate parts, what shall I do then? Tags? What kind of music are you trying to write? Paul Scott I guess what I’m saying is that the output of LP for my snippet is just wrong. Why doea that happen? It seems that what I have written shouldn’t generate the output that it does. In fact the output generated is just nonsensical. Two stacked augmentation dots? That just doesn’t seem right. ___ 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: Problem with r2. in two voices
Message: 2 Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 18:24:30 -0800 From: Mark Stephen Mrotek carsonm...@ca.rr.com To: 'Cynthia Karl' pck...@mac.com,lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: RE: Problem with r2. in two voices Message-ID: 00c201d04346$5ef30160$1cd90420$@ca.rr.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cynthia, Actually there are two r2. rests, one in each voice. Replace one with s2. and it shall disappear. And then when I want to generate parts, what shall I do then? Tags? I guess what I’m saying is that the output of LP for my snippet is just wrong. Why doea that happen? It seems that what I have written shouldn’t generate the output that it does. In fact the output generated is just nonsensical. Two stacked augmentation dots? That just doesn’t seem right. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
Hi Cynthia,
In fact the output generated is just nonsensical. Two stacked augmentation
dots? That just doesn’t seem right.
No, it’s perfectly sensible, if you want (need) to make it visually explicit
that there are two voices at the same time — otherwise, how would the reader
know?
Consider, for example, the following related snippet:
\version 2.19.15
\score {
\new Staff
\time 4/2
{ d''2 c''1. } \\
\new Voice { b'2 c''1. }
}
The reason this output makes sense is the same reason there are two stacked
augmentation dots in your rest example.
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
Re: Problem with r2. in two voices
On 8/02/15 12:46 PM, Cynthia Karl wrote:
I don’t understand two things about the following snippet:
\version 2.19.15
Aa = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
Ab = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
\score {
\new Staff
\time 3/4
\new Voice \Aa
\new Voice \Ab
\layout {}
}First, why does the r2. rest have a two augmentation dots? Is there
any way to fix that?
which produces:
Second, why does that snippet throw the following two warnings:
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
I see some information in the Notation Manual about Multimeasure Rest
direction, but that’s not involved here. There is, as best as I can
determine, anything about simple rest collision/direction in any of
the v2.19.15 documentation set. Furthermore, the lack of resolution of
rest collision doesn’t seem to lead to any problems.
The warnings explain the visual output - you are trying to put two
dotted rests in the same place at the same time. LP has managed to
separate the augmentation dots, but not the rests themselves.
But what is the aim of this snippet? Why do you have \oneVoice in your
definitions for Aa and Ab?
Using \voiceOne and \voiceTwo separates the rests:
\version 2.19.15
Aa = \relative c'' {\voiceOne r2. }
Ab = \relative c'' {\voiceTwo r2. }
\score {
\new Staff
\time 3/4
\new Voice \Aa
\new Voice \Ab
\layout {}
Is this what you were after?
Brett
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Problem with r2. in two voices
I don’t understand two things about the following snippet:
\version 2.19.15
Aa = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
Ab = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
\score {
\new Staff
\time 3/4
\new Voice \Aa
\new Voice \Ab
\layout {}
}First, why does the r2. rest have a two augmentation dots? Is there any way
to fix that?
which produces:
Second, why does that snippet throw the following two warnings:
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
I see some information in the Notation Manual about Multimeasure Rest
direction, but that’s not involved here. There is, as best as I can determine,
anything about simple rest collision/direction in any of the v2.19.15
documentation set. Furthermore, the lack of resolution of rest collision
doesn’t seem to lead to any problems.___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: Problem with r2. in two voices
Cynthia,
Actually there are two r2. rests, one in each voice. Replace one with s2. and
it shall disappear.
Mark
From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org
[mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of
Cynthia Karl
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2015 5:47 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Problem with r2. in two voices
I don’t understand two things about the following snippet:
\version 2.19.15
Aa = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
Ab = \relative c'' {\oneVoice r2. }
\score {
\new Staff
\time 3/4
\new Voice \Aa
\new Voice \Ab
\layout {}
}First, why does the r2. rest have a two augmentation dots? Is there any way
to fix that?
which produces:
Second, why does that snippet throw the following two warnings:
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
warning: cannot resolve rest collision: rest direction not set
\oneVoice
r2.
I see some information in the Notation Manual about Multimeasure Rest
direction, but that’s not involved here. There is, as best as I can determine,
anything about simple rest collision/direction in any of the v2.19.15
documentation set. Furthermore, the lack of resolution of rest collision
doesn’t seem to lead to any problems.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
