On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:18:19 +0200
Jacques Menu imj-muz...@bluewin.ch wrote:
Or maybe the user should start from the global architecture of the score
(number of systems, staves and bars, where the repeats/alternatives occur
and for how many times, where vertical spacing should be augmented, …)
That is indeed a clever way of manipulating the absolute mode good for
some things, but not terribly handy once you get into active keyboard
music as you would end up thinking like a drifting organ tuner.
Shane
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Federico
+1 to Keith's idea.
In fact, I remember first learning about \relative and being *amazed* that
it didn't work as described.
I'm mostly transcribing/re-engraving for solo violin, and most pieces stay
within a small 2-octave range. The \relative c'''{ ...} syntax was exactly
what I wanted.
Steve
Federico Bruni fedelogy at gmail.com writes:
2015-04-23 9:21 GMT+02:00 Martin Tarenskeen m.tarenskeen at zonnet.nl:
I often use LilyPond to quickly enter a very simple tune or small
pianosheet needing just a simple texteditor (Vim). I use \relative all the
time. c g c e g is soo much faster
(for user acceptance)
and file management (recommended at least for cooperation of multiple users)
ArnoldTheresius
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Do-we-really-offer-the-future-tp174675p175458.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
Am 23.04.2015 um 17:04 schrieb Gilles:
Hello.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:09:29 +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi all,
First of all:
I have _not_ asked the LilyPond team to spend any resources for
whatever.
First of all, nobody wrote that you did.
Well, let's say that perhaps your initial reply
Hi Kevin,
2015-04-24 6:49 GMT+02:00 Kevin Tough ke...@toughlife.org:
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 13:06 -0500, David Nalesnik wrote:
(Please take this as a plea for more help with the project! It is not
intended to downplay the efforts by the contributors to this thread.)
Hi David and others,
as
Am 27.04.2015 um 08:16 schrieb Michael Hendry:
See
https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
In that wish I asked if it is useful or just a personal use case.
So anybody who wants to use indented lines for such cases might add a
comment there (to upvote it).
I have added the
On 27 Apr 2015, at 00:18, Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org wrote:
Am 27.04.2015 um 01:12 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
Am 26.04.2015 um 23:53 schrieb Michael Hendry:
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:36, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
mailto:hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Do-we-really-offer-the-future-tp174675p175458.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman
2015-04-25 19:17 GMT+02:00 Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl:
It should be mentioned that Frescobaldi creates converts
{c'' d'' e'' f'' g''}
to old style \relative syntax like:
\relative c'' {c d e f g}
instead of the new syntax I like to use these days:
Hello folks,
Some remarks for what they're worth...
JM
--
LP is basically staff oriented, and we specify a linear sequence of notes and
the like for each staff.
The reactions on the « Do we really offer the future? » thread as well as many
questions that arose recently on this list show
2015-04-23 12:37 GMT+02:00 Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org:
Am 22.04.2015 um 22:58 schrieb Thomas Morley:
I don't think it's a problem to get new functionality into LilyPond,
_if_ it's coded properly.
Sometimes people are scared by a maybe too rough tone, though.
[...]
It *is* a problem,
2015-04-28 7:27 GMT+02:00 Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com:
I agree with Urs - in my opinion LilyPond is not developer-friendly
enough. Actually it's one of the reasons why I was away for so long -
the friction in the community caused me to loose some motivation to
work on LilyPond.
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 05:52:04 + (UTC)
Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
I wish the manual did not use the implicit \relative c'' {}
(sometimes \relative c' {} ) enclosing the examples. As soon as
the input gets complicated, \relative becomes difficult to figure out.
I've always
Michael Hendry hendry.michael at gmail.com writes:
I routinely put the bar checks at the _beginnings_ of the bars, thus...
| a4 b c d
| a8 b c d e f g a
| a16 b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b
That works very nicely.
When I had a measure that took more than one line of
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 07:16:42 -0700
H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
Am I the only one who puts bar checks at *both* the beginning and end of
a bar?
| a4 b c d |
| e f g a |
I do this very often, in particular with chords.
Now I happen to have a nice tool that can
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:16, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 06:15:13AM +, Keith OHara wrote:
Michael Hendry hendry.michael at gmail.com writes:
I routinely put the bar checks at the _beginnings_ of the bars,
thus...
| a4 b c d
| a8 b c d e f
Albrecht
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 9:31 AM
To: Michael Hendry; H. S. Teoh
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Do we really offer the future?
Am 26.04.2015 um 18:10 schrieb Michael Hendry:
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:16, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 06:15
On 2015-04-26 15:13, Simon Albrecht wrote:
If this is so easy for frescobaldi to have this converter
relative2absolute, and so usefull to have input files in absolute, why
not implant
(implement)
a commandline option to lily that would convert the
relative blocks founds to absolute?
Hi,
Am I the only one who puts bar checks at *both* the beginning and end of a
bar?
| a4 b c d |
| e f g a |
You’re the only one I’ve ever heard of doing so. =)
Exactly ½ of your bar checks are redundant, of course.
Cheers,
Kieren.
Kieren
Johan, What is this tool for chord charts?I'm working on this kind of thing, haven't found a good way to do this.Sent from XFINITY Connect Mobile App-- Original Message --From: Johan VromansTo: lilypond-user@gnu.orgSent: April 26, 2015 at 11:49 AMSubject: Re: Do we really offer the future
Am 26.04.2015 um 18:10 schrieb Michael Hendry:
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:16, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
mailto:hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 06:15:13AM +, Keith OHara wrote:
Michael Hendry hendry.michael at gmail.com http://gmail.com
writes:
I routinely put
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:23:26AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi,
Am I the only one who puts bar checks at *both* the beginning and end of a
bar?
| a4 b c d |
| e f g a |
You’re the only one I’ve ever heard of doing so. =)
Exactly ½ of your bar checks are
Il 26/04/15 09.58, Johan Vromans ha scritto:
I've always considered \relative as an operation that should be
applied as
close to the actual notes as possible. This gives the least suprises, if
any.
\relative c'' {
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff { \time 2/4 c4 e | g g, | }
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 06:15:13AM +, Keith OHara wrote:
Michael Hendry hendry.michael at gmail.com writes:
I routinely put the bar checks at the _beginnings_ of the bars,
thus...
| a4 b c d
| a8 b c d e f g a
| a16 b c d e f g a b c d e f g a b
That works
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:09:11 + (UTC)
dl.mcnam...@comcast.net wrote:
Johan,
What is this tool for chord charts?
I'm working on this kind of thing, haven't found a good way to do this.
http://johan.vromans.org/software/sw_playtab.html
Please note that the information on the site is
Hi all,
Why would you want to check each bar twice?
These bar checks are mostly for humans to ease reading of the code, not for
machine interpreting.
Does it double the time required?
And if so, what total amount of processing time is actually added (say, per 100
bar checks)?
Cheers,
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 09:58:33 +0200, Johan Vromans wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 05:52:04 + (UTC)
Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
I wish the manual did not use the implicit \relative c'' {}
(sometimes \relative c' {} ) enclosing the examples. As soon as
the input gets complicated,
Am 26.04.2015 um 14:37 schrieb Ali Cuota:
Hello,
If this is so easy for frescobaldi to have this converter
relative2absolute, and so usefull to have input files in absolute, why
not implant
(implement)
a commandline option to lily that would convert the
relative blocks founds to absolute?
Hello,
If this is so easy for frescobaldi to have this converter
relative2absolute, and so usefull to have input files in absolute, why
not implant a commandline option to lily that would convert the
relatibe blocks founds to absolute?
Francois
2015-04-26 5:12 GMT-05:00, Gilles
Dear Johan,
Il 26/04/15 09.58, Johan Vromans ha scritto:
I've always considered \relative as an operation that should be applied as
close to the actual notes as possible. This gives the least suprises, if
any.
\relative c'' {
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff { \time 2/4 c4 e | g g, |
it looks like you shortened \transpose not \relative but i like it I may
use it thanks
Stephen
octave =
#(define-music-function
(parser location octaves music)
(integer? ly:music?)
(_i Raise or lower @var{music} by a nubmer of @var{octaves}.)
(make-music 'TransposedMusic
'element
Am 26.04.2015 um 23:53 schrieb Michael Hendry:
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:36, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
mailto:hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:23:26AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi,
Am I the only one who puts bar checks at *both* the beginning and
end of a
Am 27.04.2015 um 01:12 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
Am 26.04.2015 um 23:53 schrieb Michael Hendry:
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:36, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
mailto:hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:23:26AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi,
Am I the only one who puts
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 12:47:02PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi all,
Why would you want to check each bar twice?
These bar checks are mostly for humans to ease reading of the code,
not for machine interpreting.
Does it double the time required?
And if so, what total amount of
On 26 Apr 2015, at 15:36, H. S. Teoh hst...@quickfur.ath.cx wrote:
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 10:23:26AM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi,
Am I the only one who puts bar checks at *both* the beginning and end of a
bar?
| a4 b c d |
| e f g a |
You’re the only one I’ve ever
Hi Mark,
Actually Lilypond does check the bar checks and notifies if an incorrect
number of beats (as stated in the \time) are in a measure.
I believe Simon knows that, and that he’s simply pointing out that the “extra”
(i.e., second and redundant) bar check in the OP’s code is only needed
Hi,
I didn't want to enter the absolute/relative discussion, but
now I have to add one advantage when entering notes in the relative mode:
In case of a wrong , or ' (or missing) all following notes are in the
wrong octave and I am more likely to spot the error.
Cheers,
Joram
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015, Ali Cuota wrote:
Hello,
solution is in the editors functionalities. If, let say Frescobaldi,
would offer a preprocessor to translate a block from relative to
absolute, this would be done. Relative is easy to write, absolute easy
to read, so why choose? Both is
: Saturday, April 25, 2015 4:12:20 PM
Subject: Re: What is the problem with \relative? (Was: Do we really offer
the future?)
Hello,
I am only a user and very thankfull, both for ly and for relative. I
would have had really thought much longer about ly if relative had not
be available. Now, I
Thanks, just found it. I will consider it for my future works.
Francois
2015-04-25 13:08 GMT-05:00, Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de:
Hi,
I didn't want to enter the absolute/relative discussion, but
now I have to add one advantage when entering notes in the relative mode:
In case of a wrong , or
Martin Tarenskeen m.tarenskeen at zonnet.nl writes:
I often use LilyPond to quickly enter a very simple tune or
small pianosheet needing just a simple texteditor (Vim). I use \relative
all the time. c g c e g is soo much faster and easier than c''' g''
c''' e''' g''' g'''.
If there were a
Am 25.04.2015 um 00:38 schrieb Thomas Morley:
Hi all,
I'm a little late to the party...
One very annoying thing about \relative is when you want to use
music-functions catching some music doing something with it.
Here the less complex function I could think of, returning different
results for
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 00:38:02 +0200
Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote:
repeat-note =
#(define-music-function (parser location music)(ly:music?)
(make-sequential-music (list music (ly:music-deep-copy music
\absolute { c'1 \repeat-note c'' }
\relative c' { c \repeat-note c'1
Hello,
I am only a user and very thankfull, both for ly and for relative. I
would have had really thought much longer about ly if relative had not
be available. Now, I understand the pro of absolute, and I think the
solution is in the editors functionalities. If, let say Frescobaldi,
would offer
Hi Kevin,
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Kevin Tough ke...@toughlife.org wrote:
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 13:06 -0500, David Nalesnik wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Thomas Morley
thomasmorle...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
in this long thread (and some
Hi David AND ALL OTHERS
Am 23.04.2015 um 20:06 schrieb David Nalesnik:
If you wish a lily-feature not yet available.
1. Look into our bug-tracker. Maybe there is an issue for it already.
You may want to comment there.
2. If not, mail to our bug-list requesting this feature.
Am 24.04.2015 um 00:58 schrieb Wols Lists:
And then in English we get thoroughly confused, because an American
whole note is an English semibreve or, literally, half note. And we
don't use numbers either, we have semibreve, minim, crotchet, quaver,
semiquaver, demisemiquaver, hemidemisemiquaver,
Hi Harm,
One very annoying thing about \relative is when you want to use
music-functions catching some music doing something with it.
Here the less complex function I could think of, returning different
results for absolute and relative.
Yes — another good reason I avoid \relative mode. =)
2015-04-23 3:41 GMT+02:00 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
Hi Gilles,
deprecate \relative, which I now avoid like the plague.
Why?
1. It doesn’t play well with reuse: both trivial reuse (i.e., cut-and-paste)
and more advanced (i.e., referenced in variables) require extra
Am 24.04.2015 um 14:30 schrieb Urs Liska:
could also be put on a Wiki page somewhere.
I put a rough collection of 'head lines' here:
https://github.com/joram-berger/snippets/wiki/recent-ideas-on-the-list
I hope it is editable by everyone. It is contains only what I remembered
from the last
Am 24.04.2015 um 23:36 schrieb Noeck:
Am 24.04.2015 um 14:30 schrieb Urs Liska:
could also be put on a Wiki page somewhere.
I put a rough collection of 'head lines' here:
https://github.com/joram-berger/snippets/wiki/recent-ideas-on-the-list
Thanks, that is what I meant.
I hope it is
+ I do think that your efforts are important for the future of LilyPond.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Hello.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:09:29 +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Hi all,
I had to leave this alone for a while, otherwise I wouldn't have been
able to reply calmly to a number of the first responses on this
thread. It's only lately that the discussion has reached a level of
constructivity that may
Hi Urs,
thanks a lot for all your efforts. I think you see the situation very
clearly and I hope you continue this way. I can't see what I could
contribute to that but in general you have my support for what you do.
Best,
Joram
___
lilypond-user
Hi Federico,
I see the first as less cluttered than the second (and another example of
music can appear much more cluttered than above example).
I see the second as containing more information encoded directly in the input,
and requiring less to be added by the user.
I don't like trying to
with LilyPond
scores.
Urs
ArnoldTheresius
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Do-we-really-offer-the-future-tp174675p175158.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
Two small thoughts also from me:
– I think the preference one will take also depends on musical style: a
piece of renaissance vocal music uses so few leaps greater than a fourth
that the advantage of relative in typing is huge and it’s
‘error-pronity’ small. On the other extreme, a piano
On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 19:36 +0200, Eyolf Østrem wrote:
On 23.04.2015 (10:04), H. S. Teoh wrote:
Besides, only powers of 2 are valid for durations, which wastes all the
other numbers in between. Unfortunately I don't have a good idea on how
to write durations without using digits
with publishers and
their concerns would be prime contributors to this conversation. I think
this would go a long way in unifying our efforts rather than debating
them.
- Abraham
View this message in context: Re: Do we really offer the future?
Sent from
On 23.04.2015 (10:04), H. S. Teoh wrote:
Besides, only powers of 2 are valid for durations, which wastes all the
other numbers in between. Unfortunately I don't have a good idea on how
to write durations without using digits either.
I started on a vim script to remap the keyboard as
Depends on how you type your files and read music, I guess. As a singer I
learned reading music relatively so it is more natural for me and i
exclusively use \relative mode. But I agree there are limitation like
Kieren second example with split voices: I always expect the note before
the split to
On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 03:35:59PM +0200, Federico Bruni wrote:
Hi Kieren
2015-04-23 14:40 GMT+02:00 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
personally I find lilypond code in \relative mode easier to read.
Really? I look at
\relative c,, { c4 g' a b e f' g' a, b,, c’
- Original Message -
From: Calixte Faure calixte.fa...@gmail.com
To: Noeck noeck.marb...@gmx.de
Cc: LilyPond Users lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 7:35:18 PM
Subject: Re: What is the problem with \relative? (Was: Do we really offer
the future?)
I learned
c5 d5 e5 f5 g5 f5 e5 d5 c5
All other things being equal, that *would* have been great.
That would save typing in some cases and would follow American and other
conventions. But c' etc. is just the natural way of calling the notes in
Dutch, German and many northern and eastern European
On 23.04.2015 (19:40), Richard Shann wrote:
Well, if you set up that mapping for Denemo you could get LilyPond's
beautiful typesetting too :)
The last time I tried, it wasn't possible in denemo, I think because the
keyboard shortcuts were tied to specific octaves, or something like that.
I've
Hi Joram,
c' etc. is just the natural way of calling the notes in
Dutch, German and many northern and eastern European languages
So here in Germany it is an advantage when teaching LilyPond to newcomes:
You write the notes just by their name: d' fis' a' d'' – as easy as that.
Interesting.
I learned music in French (native French) and was at the beginning a little
bit confused with 2 4 8 16 etc. because we say white, black, hooked,
double-hooked, triple-, etc. but after all it is logical with the
numbers.
I understood the choice of 2 4 8 16 during an exchange semester in Germany
Calixte Faure wrote:
I learned music in French (native French) and was at the beginning a little
bit confused with 2 4 8 16 etc. because we say white, black, hooked,
double-hooked, triple-, etc. .
At least you weren't trapped in hemi-demi-semi-quavers!
- Pete
Hi,
It makes me think that it was a wrong design decision in lilypond to use
' and , for octave indications and digits 1, 2, 4, 8, ... for durations.
If we had used digits for octave designations instead, absolute mode
would be much less painful to write, e.g.:
c5 d5 e5 f5 g5 f5 e5
Hi Simon,
– I think the preference one will take also depends on musical style: a piece
of renaissance vocal music uses so few leaps greater than a fourth that the
advantage of relative in typing is huge and it’s ‘error-pronity’ small. On
the other extreme, a piano piece by George Crumb
Am 24.04.2015 um 01:26 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi Gilles,
I have _not_ asked the LilyPond team to spend any resources for whatever.
First of all, nobody wrote that you did.
You wrote
What's for the LilyPond team in spending resources
trying to work around those self-inflicted
Hi Gilles,
I have _not_ asked the LilyPond team to spend any resources for whatever.
First of all, nobody wrote that you did.
You wrote
What's for the LilyPond team in spending resources
trying to work around those self-inflicted limitations?
That response fairly strongly implies that you
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 01:59:40 +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
Am 24.04.2015 um 01:26 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi Gilles,
I have _not_ asked the LilyPond team to spend any resources for
whatever.
First of all, nobody wrote that you did.
You wrote
What's for the LilyPond team in spending resources
.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Do-we-really-offer-the-future-tp174675p175158.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
2015-04-23 9:21 GMT+02:00 Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl:
I often use LilyPond to quickly enter a very simple tune or small
pianosheet needing just a simple texteditor (Vim). I use \relative all the
time. c g c e g is soo much faster and easier than c''' g'' c''' e''' g'''
g'''.
On Thu, 23 Apr 2015, Hwaen Ch'uqi wrote:
Greetings,
The reasons for one not using relative mode are clear, but it hardly
justifies calling for its deprecation. As a composer of primarily
piano music, it is an absolute lifesaver. And all to whom I have
introduced LilyPond, primarily pianists
Of course, it still doesn’t help one find a global variable
To be more precise: One can’t click on time signatures, spacer rests,
barlines, etc. If your global variable contains tempo marks, etc.
point-and-click finds it.
Joram
___
lilypond-user
Hi Urs,
Thank you again for your excellent efforts in this regard.
So finally I'm back at the beginning, namely my original post's question,
preparing a convincing set of facts, arguments and promises that help to
overcome the reservations with regard to b) and c) of the above list. I have
On 23 Apr 2015, at 01:48, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
wrote:
Hi Stephen (et al.)
anyway I tried a few examples and used %1a %2a etc for measures and used the
bar check (|) as an end
eg.
%1a
music |
This would be reliant on meticulous use of of the “%NNNa and
Hi all,
I had to leave this alone for a while, otherwise I wouldn't have been
able to reply calmly to a number of the first responses on this thread.
It's only lately that the discussion has reached a level of
constructivity that may be helpful. In the meantime the discussion has
split up to
Am 22.04.2015 um 22:58 schrieb Thomas Morley:
The main objective of openLilyLib (old and new) is providing a platform for
extending LilyPond without having to integrate everything in the core. This
is a) because not every extension should bloat the core and b) even when
something would fit
Calixte:
...
Or have a script/feature/tool that automatically counts measures : it would
be able to put bar numbers in comment,
...
You can try:
http://turkos.aspodata.se/git/musik/bin/addnum.pl
it works for me...
You're welcome to suggest changes.
Regards,
/Karl Hammar
Hi Federico,
If you structure your files in a way that causes relative mode to produce
side-effects, you can still enter in relative mode and then convert in
absolute mode when you've finished (Frescobaldi can do it).
I find it just as easy to enter code in absolute mode, so why should I go
Hi Martin,
personally I find lilypond code in \relative mode easier to read.
Really? I look at
\relative c,, { c4 g' a b e f' g' a, b,, c’ }
and I can’t immediately tell which octave the last c is in. Looking at
c,,4 g,, a,, b,, e, f g' a b,, c
it’s perfectly clear right away.
Hi Shane,
For God's sake don't deprecate \relative
Okay, “deprecation” is a bit strong. =)
But I don’t even tell newbies about it when I’m introducing them to Lilypond —
I tried that for a while, and found that overcoming the confusion not worth the
effort.
It is far faster to input
I
2015-04-23 14:45 GMT+02:00 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
It is far faster to input
I disagree: I find absolute mode far faster for input, and the benefit in
favour of absolute *increases* the moment I have to do any
cutting-and-pasting.
I must say that I've never tried
Hi Kieren
2015-04-23 14:40 GMT+02:00 Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
personally I find lilypond code in \relative mode easier to read.
Really? I look at
\relative c,, { c4 g' a b e f' g' a, b,, c’ }
and I can’t immediately tell which octave the last c is in. Looking
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 14:01 +0100, Richard Shann wrote:
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 08:31 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Richard,
Interesting, I didn't realize that this was a reason to use a front-end
to generate the LilyPond. With the Denemo front end it is Del,M to
delete a measure
On 23/04/15 20:35, Calixte Faure wrote:
I learned music in French (native French) and was at the beginning a
little bit confused with 2 4 8 16 etc. because we say white, black,
hooked, double-hooked, triple-, etc. but after all it is logical
with the numbers.
I understood the choice of 2 4 8
View this message in context: Re: Do we really offer the
future?
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 08:31 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Richard,
Interesting, I didn't realize that this was a reason to use a front-end
to generate the LilyPond. With the Denemo front end it is Del,M to
delete a measure in all the staffs.
Does that work even when the code is
Hi James,
I think there's one command in Finale that demonstrates a major obstacle to
widespread adoption of LilyPond: Delete Measure Stack. This is an extremely
common need when editing scores, and raw LilyPond code offers no clean,
easy way to do it.
+ 1 x 10^googol
This is such a good
Am 22.04.2015 um 14:30 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
We try to explain this away by saying that LP is an engraving tool,
not a composition tool, but -- if we're really serious about making LP
more attractive to the average user of notation software, this is too glib.
Agreed.
It will be
Hi Richard,
Interesting, I didn't realize that this was a reason to use a front-end
to generate the LilyPond. With the Denemo front end it is Del,M to
delete a measure in all the staffs.
Does that work even when the code is abstracted into one or more shared global
variables, etc.?
Or does
Am 22.04.2015 um 14:30 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
We try to explain this away by saying that LP is an engraving tool,
not a composition tool, but -- if we're really serious about making LP
more attractive to the average user of notation software, this is
too glib.
In using LilyPond for all my
Hi Pete,
So major compositional changes -- the ones we're
calling structural here -- are implemented at that
first (gen.purp.prog.lang) level, tossing LP not much
to trip over then or fail to carry through.
My point, then: Why stuff a complicated-enough
engraving program with
Am 22.04.2015 um 17:48 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi Pete,
So major compositional changes -- the ones we're
calling structural here -- are implemented at that
first (gen.purp.prog.lang) level, tossing LP not much
to trip over then or fail to carry through.
My point, then: Why stuff a
Am 22. April 2015 19:20:38 MESZ, schrieb Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca:
Hi Simon,
1. In 2013, I composed and engraved a piece with nearly 12,000
frames (57 staves x 208 measures). It contains two sections (of ~32 and
~16 measures) which were specifically added for That
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
