LSR on v2.18

2014-03-09 Thread Pierre Perol-Schneider
Dear all, It is my great pleasure to announce that the LSR now runs with v.2.18. Have fun ! ~Pierre ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: LSR on v2.18

2014-03-09 Thread Phil Holmes
- Original Message - From: Pierre Perol-Schneider To: lilypond-user Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 4:04 PM Subject: LSR on v2.18 Dear all, It is my great pleasure to announce that the LSR now runs with v.2.18. Have fun ! ~Pierre Wow! Respect. Thanks for all your hard work. This

Re: LSR on v2.18

2014-03-09 Thread Pierre Perol-Schneider
2014-03-09 17:15 GMT+01:00 Phil Holmes : > Wow! Respect. Thanks for all your hard work. > > This is not directed specifically at you - you've done an amazing job > already - but there's presumably a further task that would be beneficial - > getting rid of most of the snippets/new by updating th

Re: [Frescobaldi] ANN: Frescobaldi 2.0.14

2014-03-09 Thread Paul Morris
On Mar 6, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Wilbert Berendsen wrote: > To celebrate my 43rd birthday, Frescobaldi 2.0.14 has been released in the > wild! Congratulations on releasing the new version and happy belated birthday! -Paul ___ lilypond-user mailing list

Ambitus - emphasizing pitch

2014-03-09 Thread Mátyás Seress
Hi all, the following is my question: how can I make it happen, that in the ambitus the pitches are emphasized, like when you write "c!" instead of "c". Because right now the ambitus engraver supposes that the key is known. Can you show me in this little example what I have to modify? \version "

Re: LSR on v2.18

2014-03-09 Thread Ralph Palmer
On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Pierre Perol-Schneider < pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2014-03-09 17:15 GMT+01:00 Phil Holmes : > > > >> Wow! Respect. Thanks for all your hard work. >> >> This is not directed specifically at you - you've done an amazing job >> already - but there's

many bars with the same chrod

2014-03-09 Thread Xavier Noria
Hi, I am transcribing "Rabbits In The Pea Patch", by Maceo Parker, for personal study: Maceo Parker – Rabbits In The Pea Patch In this theme Maceo improvises over one chord, and after 32 bars or something it goes up one, and after another

Re: many bars with the same chrod

2014-03-09 Thread efaulk
I’d use “\set chordChanges = ##t” to keep from printing the extra chords and to avoid the N.C. you get if the chord is omitted. Ed Sent from Windows Mail From: Xavier Noria Sent: ‎Sunday‎, ‎March‎ ‎9‎, ‎2014 ‎3‎:‎07‎ ‎PM To: lilypond-user Hi, I am transcribing "Rabbits In The Pe

Re: many bars with the same chrod

2014-03-09 Thread Johan Vromans
Xavier Noria writes: > How would you write the harmony here? I tried to get the first intro bar > blank, then A7 (in E flat) in the second bar, and then I guess I'd leave > the next bars empty meaning the A7 is implicit. No, you must repeat the chords for every bar. Use \set chordChanges = ##t

Re: many bars with the same chrod

2014-03-09 Thread Xavier Noria
Playing with it. Is there a way to say A1:7*32, similar to the notation for multiple rests? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Double bar line suppresses following repeat bar line

2014-03-09 Thread Patrick or Cynthia Karl
The following snippet: \version "2.18.0" music = \relative b' { \repeat volta 2 { \repeat unfold 3 { c4 c c c } } \alternative { { c1 } { g1 } } % \bar "||" \break \repeat volta 2 { \repeat unfold 5 { a4 a a a } } } \score { \new Staff \music \

Re: Ambitus - emphasizing pitch

2014-03-09 Thread Thomas Morley
2014-03-09 20:03 GMT+01:00 Mátyás Seress : > Hi all, > > the following is my question: how can I make it happen, that in the ambitus > the pitches are emphasized, like when you write "c!" instead of "c". Because > right now the ambitus engraver supposes that the key is known. Hi, try: \version

Re: Double bar line suppresses following repeat bar line

2014-03-09 Thread Thomas Morley
2014-03-09 21:57 GMT+01:00 Patrick or Cynthia Karl : > The following snippet: > > \version "2.18.0" > > music = \relative b' { >\repeat volta 2 { \repeat unfold 3 { c4 c c c } } >\alternative { > { c1 } > { g1 } >} > > % \bar "||" Use \bar ".|:-||" instead -> http://

Re: many bars with the same chrod

2014-03-09 Thread Xavier Noria
Ah, this seems to do what I need: \version "2.18.0" harmony = \chordmode { R1*4 a1*4:7 b1*4:7 } solo = \relative c'' { r1 | r1 | r1 | a1 | \break a1 | a1 | a1 | a1 | \break b1 | b1 | b1 | b1 \bar ".." } \score { << \new ChordNames { \harmony } \solo >> } __

Re: Double bar line suppresses following repeat bar line

2014-03-09 Thread Trevor Daniels
Patrick or Cynthia Karl wrote Sunday, March 09, 2014 8:57 PM > The following snippet: > [snippet] > places a simple single bar line at the end of the 2nd alternative. My client > wishes it to be a double bar line instead. I can do that by uncommenting the > "\bar "||" line, but that has the

Re: Double bar line suppresses following repeat bar line

2014-03-09 Thread Thomas Morley
2014-03-09 22:28 GMT+01:00 Trevor Daniels : > You'll need to define an appropriate bartype and code it at the appropriate > place, like this: > > \defineBarLine "||.|:" #'("||" ".|:" "") No need for that, ".|:-||" is predefined already. Cheers, Harm _

Sorta Proportional

2014-03-09 Thread PMA
I gather from output that under "\set Score.proportionalNotationDuration = #(ly:make-moment )" LilyPond's handling of _rests_ and _spaces_ is (in different ways) not in sync with its handling of _notes_. This is all per version 2.12.3, I'm embarrassed to say. But has that scenario changed since?

Re: LSR on v2.18

2014-03-09 Thread Paul Morris
Schneidy wrote > It is my great pleasure to announce that the LSR now runs with v.2.18. Congratulations Pierre! Thanks for all your hard work doing the upgrade. It is going to be really great to have the LSR back at current stable. -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.106

Re: Optional arguments

2014-03-09 Thread Paul Morris
David Kastrup wrote > The "once one optional argument is skipped" semantics was required to > get things like \key and \mark work in a sensible manner when converted > to functions from builtin syntax constructs. Ok, thanks for the explanations. -Paul -- View this message in context: http://l