Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Am 20.12.2013 08:33, schrieb Simon Bailey: is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music?;) Well, it _does_ occur in real music, as you have shown us. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 20.12.2013 08:33, schrieb Simon Bailey: is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music?;) Well, it _does_ occur in real music, as you have shown us. The smiley would appear to indicate he has been indulging in a bit of facetiousness directed against canned responses. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 20.12.2013 08:33, schrieb Simon Bailey: is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music?;) Well, it _does_ occur in real music, as you have shown us. The smiley would appear to indicate he has been indulging in a bit of facetiousness directed against canned responses. yes, this was a comment made with tongue firmly in cheek. :) the original version delivered by the composer did not have cross-staff beams and rests under the tuplet beams in both hands. i feel that my notation is less complex for the player, but not being a pianist, i'm not sure if it would be considered the correct way to do it. if not, i'm open to suggestions on how better to notate this section. i haven't consulted gould on the matter yet, but will do so this evening. all that aside -- the tuplet brackets do not work very well by default for this case, so my original question still remains: bug or extreme border case? regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Am 20.12.2013 10:29, schrieb Simon Bailey: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote: Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org mailto:u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am20.12.2013 08 tel:20.12.2013%2008:33, schrieb Simon Bailey: is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music?;) Well, it _does_ occur in real music, as you have shown us. The smiley would appear to indicate he has been indulging in a bit of facetiousness directed against canned responses. yes, this was a comment made with tongue firmly in cheek. :) the original version delivered by the composer did not have cross-staff beams and rests under the tuplet beams in both hands. i feel that my notation is less complex for the player, but not being a pianist, i'm not sure if it would be considered the correct way to do it. if not, i'm open to suggestions on how better to notate this section. i haven't consulted gould on the matter yet, but will do so this evening. As a pianist I'd say this notation is perfectly clear. I'm even quite sure that it's a very common notation for such distributed repetitions (but I don't have my scores at home, so I can't check). But maybe looking at some IMSLP scores of Liszt studies might be even better than looking up Gould ;-) all that aside -- the tuplet brackets do not work very well by default for this case, so my original question still remains: bug or extreme border case? I would say LilyPond should handle this automatically, so I'd vote for bug. Actually one of my first messages to lilypond-user was about a very similar problem with cross staff tuplets (typesetting a few measures by Ferneyhough). Fortunately in my case the answer would you please try out with the development version fixed it - from that moment on I never used stable versions anymore ... :-) Urs regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ 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: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Simon Bailey si...@bailey.at writes: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:55 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 20.12.2013 08:33, schrieb Simon Bailey: is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music?;) Well, it _does_ occur in real music, as you have shown us. The smiley would appear to indicate he has been indulging in a bit of facetiousness directed against canned responses. yes, this was a comment made with tongue firmly in cheek. :) the original version delivered by the composer did not have cross-staff beams and rests under the tuplet beams in both hands. i feel that my notation is less complex for the player, but not being a pianist, i'm not sure if it would be considered the correct way to do it. if not, i'm open to suggestions on how better to notate this section. i haven't consulted gould on the matter yet, but will do so this evening. all that aside -- the tuplet brackets do not work very well by default for this case, so my original question still remains: bug or extreme border case? I don't see why it cannot be both. An extreme border case should only be able to show bad results when the bad results correspond to one possible interpretation of the input. The extremeness of the circumstances might play into the priority with which a fix is sought. It does not change whether something is a bug or not. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
At 08:33 on 20 Dec 2013, Simon Bailey wrote:
i've also included the tweaked output in not-ugly-tuplets.png. this was
fixed by using the following tweak/untweak combination before the
strange sextuplets:
staffChangeSextupletTweak = {
\override TupletBracket.bracket-visibility = ##t
\override TupletBracket.positions = #'(-20 . -20)
\tupletDown
}
In my opinion the tweaked tuplet brackets are too far from the
bass noteheads (particularly in bar 13). In situations like this I've
always had to adjust the positions for each instance.
is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which
doesn't occur in real music? ;)
Yes, it's a bug, the cause of which was discussed recently in this
thread:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/56456
--
Mark Knoop
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: ...SNIPSNAP... notation is less complex for the player, but not being a pianist, i'm not sure if it would be considered the correct way to do it. if not, i'm open to suggestions on how better to notate this section. i haven't consulted gould on the matter yet, but will do so this evening. As a pianist I'd say this notation is perfectly clear. I'm even quite sure that it's a very common notation for such distributed repetitions (but I don't have my scores at home, so I can't check). But maybe looking at some IMSLP scores of Liszt studies might be even better than looking up Gould ;-) that was a good tip -- turned up the amazing cross-staff beams attached... :D (i'll have to try this with lilypond...). I would say LilyPond should handle this automatically, so I'd vote for bug. mark knoop just confirmed this has already been discussed on the -devel list. regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Am 20.12.2013 10:55, schrieb Simon Bailey: that was a good tip -- turned up the amazing cross-staff beams attached... :D Please do ... ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Am 20.12.2013 10:55, schrieb Simon Bailey: that was a good tip -- turned up the amazing cross-staff beams attached... :D Please do ... yeah, i just realised that. and that the screeny is too big for the list: http://simon.bailey.at/random/liszt-cross-staff.png regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Mark Knoop m...@opus11.net wrote: In my opinion the tweaked tuplet brackets are too far from the bass noteheads (particularly in bar 13). In situations like this I've always had to adjust the positions for each instance. agreed, this is not quite yet the final print version -- the #'(-20 . -20) was just a quick and dirty number to get them out of the staff in order to be able to see what else i was doing in the notation. :) (after i originally turned the brackets on to be able to find the tuplet numbers) is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which doesn't occur in real music? ;) Yes, it's a bug, the cause of which was discussed recently in this thread: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/56456 thx for the link, interesting read. regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
Mark Knoop m...@opus11.net writes:
At 08:33 on 20 Dec 2013, Simon Bailey wrote:
i've also included the tweaked output in not-ugly-tuplets.png. this was
fixed by using the following tweak/untweak combination before the
strange sextuplets:
staffChangeSextupletTweak = {
\override TupletBracket.bracket-visibility = ##t
\override TupletBracket.positions = #'(-20 . -20)
\tupletDown
}
In my opinion the tweaked tuplet brackets are too far from the
bass noteheads (particularly in bar 13). In situations like this I've
always had to adjust the positions for each instance.
is this a bug or just unexpected behaviour on a border-case which
doesn't occur in real music? ;)
Yes, it's a bug, the cause of which was discussed recently in this
thread:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.devel/56456
Not really: what's discussed in that thread is what happens when the
bracket-visibility is #f. In that case, the tuplet number is placed as
if there were a bracket, and since that bracket is placed quite far from
the beam in cross-staff situations, the result is awful.
In the current thread, however, the brackets are visible, and the
results are still awful, and exactly because the brackets themselves are
placed ridiculously.
Even if the issue in this thread would be fixed, the tuplet numbers in
the references thread would be misplaced.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fwd: autochange and tuplet brackets
Am 20.12.2013 11:00, schrieb Simon Bailey: On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org mailto:u...@openlilylib.org wrote: Am 20.12.2013 10 tel:20.12.2013%2010:55, schrieb Simon Bailey: that was a good tip -- turned up the amazing cross-staff beams attached... :D Please do ... yeah, i just realised that. and that the screeny is too big for the list: http://simon.bailey.at/random/liszt-cross-staff.png Ah, yes, that's the sort of stuff I had in mind. Although it doesn't involve (printed) tuplets. Musically the example is interestingly uncharacteristic (no clear motivic item in two whole systems!). But let me guess: Is this from Mazeppa? Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:05 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote: Not really: what's discussed in that thread is what happens when the bracket-visibility is #f. In that case, the tuplet number is placed as if there were a bracket, and since that bracket is placed quite far from the beam in cross-staff situations, the result is awful. In the current thread, however, the brackets are visible, and the results are still awful, and exactly because the brackets themselves are placed ridiculously. Even if the issue in this thread would be fixed, the tuplet numbers in the references thread would be misplaced. they probably are related -- the only reason i turned the tuplet brackets on in this case was because i originally couldn't find the tuplet numbers on a very cursory inspection when typesetting this piece. turning the brackets on enabled me to find the numbers and i left them on because i couldn't think of a good place to put the numbers. if you turn the brackets off in this case, then numbers are still in weird places. -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
yeah, i just realised that. and that the screeny is too big for the list: http://simon.bailey.at/random/liszt-cross-staff.png Ah, yes, that's the sort of stuff I had in mind. Although it doesn't involve (printed) tuplets. Musically the example is interestingly uncharacteristic (no clear motivic item in two whole systems!). But let me guess: Is this from Mazeppa? Yes, and interestingly in this edition the rfz in the second system is misplaced. It should be on the LH d' d'' octave. -- Mark Knoop ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: autochange and tuplet brackets
On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Mark Knoop m...@opus11.net wrote: Yes, and interestingly in this edition the rfz in the second system is misplaced. It should be on the LH d' d'' octave. interesting. there are four versions on IMSLP. two breitkopf härtel (the screenshot is from the first edition 1852). both these editions have the rfz on cis'' cis''' in the RH. the version by Edition Peters has it in brackets on the LH d' d'' and the final version by Edition Musica/Bärenreiter has it below the staff on the LH d' d''. regards, sb -- Do not meddle in the affairs of trombonists, for they are subtle and quick to anger. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
