Am 17.07.2008 um 07:10 schrieb George_:
hi guys
I was wondering if there were a way to make articulation 'stick' to a
notehead, no matter where it is? I use 2.11.49 on XP, and I have a
two-part
melody, the lower voice is to be played staccato, like so:
Am 17.07.2008 um 07:10 schrieb George_:
hi guys
I was wondering if there were a way to make articulation 'stick' to a
notehead, no matter where it is? I use 2.11.49 on XP, and I have a
two-part
melody, the lower voice is to be played staccato, like so:
Am 17.07.2008 um 00:28 schrieb Graham Percival:
I'm happy to announce the first draft of NR 1.3 Expressive!
Thanks go to Patrick. Please proofread this carefully; if you
find any mistakes, omissions, or anything that's unclear, please
post it here!
GDP website:
http://web.uvic.ca/~gperciva/
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:38:51 +0200
James E. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Should I help with the german translation? I haven't read any of the
other pre-release documentation, but it looks like the german
translation could use another volunteer.
I have nothing to do with the
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 15:28 -0700, Graham Percival wrote:
I'm happy to announce the first draft of NR 1.3 Expressive!
Looks very good, well done. A couple of suggestions:
1.3.1, Dynamics, Vertically aligning dynamics across multiple notes
This example doesn't seem to work - it just aligns the
On Wed, 2008-07-16 at 18:47 -0700, Graham Percival wrote:
I'm happy to announce the second public draft of NR 1.5
Simultaneous notes.
1.5.2 Multiple voices, Single-staff polyphony
Typo: s/avobe/above/
Given the number of emails on this list about slur, tie, etc problems
arising from using
NR 3 Input Syntax in GDP has been largely reorganised and several
subsections redrafted. Could you please review this for gross errors and
omissions before we get down to detailed formatting and wording.
The sections which have been substantially modified are:
NR 3.1 Input Structure
NR 3.3
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:17:31 +0100
Trevor Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NR 3.5 MIDI output
I think 3.5.7 is unnecessary. Just add , in any MIDI player which
supports pitch bending to the item in 3.5.2.
I'm not certain if we need a separate subsubsection for instrument
names. Why not merge
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:03:07 +0100
Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the number of emails on this list about slur, tie, etc problems
arising from using the { ... } \\ { ... } polyphony method,
would it perhaps be a good idea to at least include an example of the
right way to do it
Graham:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:03:07 +0100
Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the number of emails on this list about slur, tie, etc problems
arising from using the { ... } \\ { ... } polyphony method,
would it perhaps be a good idea to at least include an example of the
right
Thanks for the quick response!
Graham Percival wrote Thursday, July 17, 2008 9:37 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:17:31 +0100
Trevor Daniels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
NR 3.5 MIDI output
I think 3.5.7 is unnecessary. Just add , in any MIDI player which
supports pitch bending to the item in 3.5.2.
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:04:06 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Hammar) wrote:
Graham:
{ \voiceOne ... } \new Voice { \voiceTwo ... } \oneVoice
Is that really the right method? I thought that \\ *was* the
right method... in fact, isn't \\ exactly the same as what you
propose?
Graham Percival wrote Thursday, July 17, 2008 11:25 AM
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 11:04:06 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Hammar) wrote:
Graham:
{ \voiceOne ... } \new Voice { \voiceTwo ... } \oneVoice
Is that really the right method? I thought that \\ *was* the
right method... in
Just out of curiousity, is there way to do either the clef or the time
signature for real?
\version 2.11.52
{
\override Staff.Clef #'stencil = #ly:text-interface::print
\override Staff.Clef #'text = \markup {\musicglyph #clefs.G
\hspace #-1.7 \musicglyph #clefs.G}
\override
Karl Hammar wrote:
Graham:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:03:07 +0100
Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the number of emails on this list about slur, tie, etc problems
arising from using the { ... } \\ { ... } polyphony method,
would it perhaps be a good idea to at least include an example
Le 16 juil. 08 à 16:13, Eric Knapp a écrit :
The next issue in trying to extend Lilypond for my instrument is that
I want to change things in the Note based on the text in the
Fingering. Here's an example, this displayMusic call results in the
make-music call that is after it. I have code
Hello, Nicolas.
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:12 AM, Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean a FingeringEvent music expression, or a Fingering grob?
Once you have grobs, it's too late for modifying music expressions.
You can navigate down music expressions, but not up. But see below.
Le 17 juil. 08 à 16:16, Eric Knapp a écrit :
I am using this approach with good results. I know the music
expression I want to create. I just need to be able to catch music
expressions so that I can get the fingering number that the user
entered. Then I can create the correct note based on the
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks very good, well done.
Thanks!
1.3.1, Dynamics, Vertically aligning dynamics across multiple notes
This example doesn't seem to work - it just aligns the tops of the
dynamic marks. There is an LSR example
Hi all.
I have some problems with the snippet below.
First of all, there is a collision in the first bar between the tie and the
articulation (but I can easily solve it).
In the second bar, the tie starts at the end of the previous notehead and
finishes at the beginning of the following notehead,
On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 09:42 -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1.3.1, New dynamic marks
The first example on this page unfortunately cuts off the top of the
'f'.
This is a known issue:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 09:42 -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 12:47 AM, Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1.3.1, New dynamic marks
The first example on this page unfortunately cuts off the top of
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Marco Caliari [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all.
I have some problems with the snippet below.
First of all, there is a collision in the first bar between the tie and the
articulation (but I can easily solve it).
In the second bar, the tie starts at the end of
Am 17.07.2008 um 18:54 schrieb Marco Caliari:
Hi all.
Finally (and here I need your help), I would like to move the accent
articulation in the second last bar close to the c notehead (as in
the fourth
last bar), but \override Script #'Y-offset does not seem to work.
You need to set the
2008/7/17 Patrick McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The first three problems look like bugs to me. I don't know if they
have been reported yet or not. Valentin, do you know?
The collision has been reported.
The dot positioning isn't a bug; it's standard typesetting practice.
Consider the ambiguity
I'm trying to engrave a 4-part vocal piece that has a single line of
lyrics that is associated with one of the voices at a time. I've chosen
to use the Hymn-snippet.ly (see attachment) as the base for this job
though it had 4 stanzas so I did a bit of simple adaptation to make it
more suited
I see many examples with \context, or \new used in the same place. I've
read LM 3.1.1 for example which tells me that if I don't create
explicitly a \new Staff or \new Voice, they will be created
automatically, and goes on to refer to that as the implicit creation of
contexts. I often see
Daniel:
Karl Hammar wrote:
Graham:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:03:07 +0100
Mark Knoop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given the number of emails on this list about slur, tie, etc problems
arising from using the { ... } \\ { ... } polyphony method,
would it perhaps be a good idea to at least
Hi Jim,
2008/7/17 jimmy2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I still wish I knew how to force staves of a particular system to be closer.
I tried various commands which seemed like they should work, but with no
effect.
Have a look at the headword for NR 1.8 `Text'
Steven:
...
into the tenor voice. I've tried inserting the command \set
associatedVoice = #three one syllable before the point where the
voice association needs to change to tenor but what happens is simply
that the lyrics stop happening altogether (at that point). My thinking
...
2008/7/17 Karl Hammar [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ex1: { \A } \\ { \B }
creates TWO new voices, which get you into problems when doing \lyricsto,
where
Ex2: { \voiceOne \a } \new Voice { \voiceTwo \b } \oneVoice
only creates ONE new voice, \a belongs to the same voice as the surronding
music.
2008/7/17 Jim Cline [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi Neil,
thanks for the info! I had plowed through section 4.5.3 previously, but the
explicit example you mentioned looks like it will be more helpful--Jim
Unfortunately, that section is undermined by the formatting of the
examples, since every system
Am 17.07.2008 um 22:35 schrieb Patrick Horgan:
I see many examples with \context, or \new used in the same place.
I've read LM 3.1.1 for example which tells me that if I don't create
explicitly a \new Staff or \new Voice, they will be created
automatically, and goes on to refer to that
dear list,
i'm trying to resolve a tricky passage involving double stop glissandi
spanning several measures. i found a solution involving three different
voices. the difficult part is that due to music spacing, i need a line
break in middle of the glissando. this works well with parallel
E.Weehaeli writes:
it is only after a long search that I found an easy way to repeat a part of a
melody
- with an upbeat
- ending before the end of a measure
- having different durations in the alternatives
- without producing warnings in the log
\version 2.11.49
{
\repeat volta
35 matches
Mail list logo
