Re: How to get a polymeter with time signature 89888449/5199909 against 742739/45045

2016-11-07 Thread Urs Liska
Am 07.11.2016 um 10:49 schrieb mclaren: > Yes, I think you're right that an svg file is superior to a png file. In the > svg file, all the objects are resolution-independent. So the score and its > components can be scaled arbitrarily without raterizing degradation. > > It's remarkably easy to

Re: How to get a polymeter with time signature 89888449/5199909 against 742739/45045

2016-11-07 Thread mclaren
Yes, I think you're right that an svg file is superior to a png file. In the svg file, all the objects are resolution-independent. So the score and its components can be scaled arbitrarily without raterizing degradation. It's remarkably easy to enter these kinds of scores using a MIDI sequencer,

Re: How to get a polymeter with time signature 89888449/5199909 against 742739/45045

2016-11-06 Thread David Bellows
> So we can simply photoshop the barlines in and photoshop the entire score by > entering 4 measures or so at time and separately engraving 'em, then assembling the entire score by hand. Not ideal perhaps, but a whole lot easier than any other way of doing it I know of. No idea if this would be

How to get a polymeter with time signature 89888449/5199909 against 742739/45045

2016-11-06 Thread mclaren
Lilypond crashes with the familiar error code if we enter those time signatures directly. But there is a workaround, and it involves approximating both meters with smaller rational fractions, then deleting the actual meter used and engraving the real time signature by hand on both staves. Then we