On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 6:03 PM, David Stocker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For what it's worth, remember that as documented on this forum, you
> shouldn't have to uninstall 2.10 on Ubuntu Studio before you install a newer
> version if you install in your home directory. The 'lilypond' command call
For what it's worth, remember that as documented on this forum, you
shouldn't have to uninstall 2.10 on Ubuntu Studio before you install a
newer version if you install in your home directory. The 'lilypond'
command calls LilyPond from the home directory before it looks for it
elsewhere. After t
2008/11/16 Jonathan Kulp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> There is a point in the development course from stable to next stable,
>> where people should move to the current development release and forget
>> the old one. These days too many people uses 2.10 and its old
>> documentation. If a new user wants to
Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> I imagine that the reason many people still start out with 2.10.33 (on
> Linux at least) is because 2.10.33 is the version in the repositories or
> is even pre-installed in the distro (e.g. Ubuntu Studio). For these
> cases there should perhaps be a warning about correct un-
> There is a point in the development course from stable to next stable,
> where people should move to the current development release and forget
> the old one. These days too many people uses 2.10 and its old
> documentation. If a new user wants to start using LilyPond, I
> undoubtedly send him t
After reading this thread, one thing is clear to me:
There is a point in the development course from stable to next stable,
where people should move to the current development release and forget
the old one. These days too many people uses 2.10 and its old
documentation. If a new user wants to sta
Ok, I got it now, I'll read the 2.11 Learning Manual from cover to
cover. My problem is I tend to skip the stuff that *apparently* doesn't
apply to what I am doing - anything that has multiple stafs like grand
stafs, or lyrics. And that's probably not a good thing, I know. So I'll
try to be a g
Jonathan Kulp wrote:
So I still don't know, "is it working yet?"!
Heheh, sorry for mentioning, yes it is working the way I expect it to.
Thankyou.
--
Chip
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:23:54PM -0700, chip wrote:
> Now I am looking through the 2.11 docs and searching (using my browsers
> Find function) for Syntax and File Syntax and finding lots of entries
> for Syntax but not File Syntax.
Oh bloody mao, here we go again.
Look here guys. I get ann
chip wrote:
Amazing how this whole conversation got so blown apart.
That happens sometimes...
melody=, song=, notes= . \relative .
\score {
\new Staff \melody, song, notes .whatever was above
\layout {}
\midi {}
}
My original question was about the transpose option a
Amazing how this whole conversation got so blown apart. Anyway, In one
other post Graham you mention you probably shouldn't have used the word
'bloody' with someone who doesn't know you, and you're probably correct.
I took it as a English version of f we Americans probably would've
used. Th
Graham Percival wrote:
In defense of Jonathan, his responses *were* accurate; they were
just too polite. I mean, they were accurate and looked accurate,
but it invited a discussion about file syntax. We've spent about
Thanks Graham. I just sent an email defending myself but it's nice to
ge
Graham Percival wrote:
If the initial response to his question was "read the 2.11 docs
about transposition and file syntax", the whole discussion would
have been over in 2 or 3 emails.
Please note the first lines of my initial response to Chip:
"For transposing from E-flat to concert pitch, s
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 01:12:56PM -0500, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Graham,
>
>> If the initial response to his question was "read the 2.11 docs
>> about transposition and file syntax", the whole discussion would
>> have been over in 2 or 3 emails.
>
> So rather than making this yet another pissing
Graham,
Would people rather get "rude + accurate" responses, or "warm +
fuzzy + not solving the problem" responses? I personally would
*much* rather get the former.
If the initial response to his question was "read the 2.11 docs
about transposition and file syntax", the whole discussion would
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 01:34:15PM +0100, james bailey wrote:
> 2008/11/16, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Read the bloody tutorial and LM 3. Particularly the "syntax of a
> > lilypond file".
>
> Seriously, Graham, if you can't be nice and fuzzy, don't respond.
In general I do that.
2008/11/16, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Read the bloody tutorial and LM 3. Particularly the "syntax of a
> lilypond file".
>
> Particularly^2, the "a \score contains a single music expression"
> part.
>
>
> - Graham
Seriously, Graham, if you can't be nice and fuzzy, don't respond.
Your example worked fine for me, Chip. Did you figure it out? (I went
to bed and missed all the fun.) If my minimal example wouldn't work then
you must have had a stray curly brace somewhere. What you want is to
put the transpose command in your score block here:
\new Staff \transpos
Yes, particularly for basic stuff like this. You might encounter
the occasional example that doesn't work in 2.10, but those will
be relatively rare. IIRC everything in the LM will apply to 2.10
as well.
- Graham
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:56:07PM -0700, chip wrote:
>So even though I am usi
So even though I am using 2.10.33 (latest stable I believe) I should be
looking at the 2.11 docs?
--
Chip
Graham Percival wrote:
Ah, I see the problem. You were looking at the 2.10 docs, which
are approximately a thousand hours older than the 2.11 docs. As
you might expect from 1,000 hours of
Ah, I see the problem. You were looking at the 2.10 docs, which
are approximately a thousand hours older than the 2.11 docs. As
you might expect from 1,000 hours of work, the 2.11 docs are much
easier to read.
- Graham
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:38:07PM -0700, chip wrote:
>I have read the b
I have read the bloody manuals, all of them. I finally found the part I
need in the part I skipped over because it didn't apply to my work - 3.4
An Orchestral Part. I found the code I needed to see by clicking on the
picture of the score fragment, then I saw that the \transpose was in
front of
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 10:04:47PM -0700, chip wrote:
> caused by this code -
>
> ... lots of stuff in the copy/pasted section below ...
> \bar "|."
> }
> \score {
>
chip wrote:
Thanks for your patience and help Jonathan, I'm trying your example
but keep getting errors thrown up at me during compile. I've included
my piece for you to look at. I've placed the \transpose line in
several different sections and can't get it to work.
Regards,
Chip
I should ha
Thanks for your patience and help Jonathan, I'm trying your example but
keep getting errors thrown up at me during compile. I've included my
piece for you to look at. I've placed the \transpose line in several
different sections and can't get it to work.
Regards,
Chip
=
Just connect one more dot and you're there...
notes = { \key c \major c d e f }
%% sax part
\relative c'' { \notes }
%% trombone part -- add the "\clef" command
%% and change it to \relative c' instead of relative c''
\transpose c es, { \relative c' { \clef "bass" \notes } }
Jon
chip w
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that is all there is to it. I
changed the clef to Bass and in doing so the notes change position on
the staff. I want to have the notes remain in the same positions on the
staff in bass clef as they are in treble clef. Only the key signature
should cha
Jonathan Kulp wrote:
For transposing from E-flat to concert pitch, see the docs on
transposition, here:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentation/user/lilypond-big-page#Transpose
To change it to bass clef, just use a command
\clef "bass"
The easiest way to put put music into a different
For transposing from E-flat to concert pitch, see the docs on
transposition, here:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.11/Documentation/user/lilypond-big-page#Transpose
To change it to bass clef, just use a command
\clef "bass"
The easiest way to put put music into a different clef/register is to
sto
I have a piece written for Eb Alto Sax and would like to transpose it to
Bass Clef Trombone. I've read a bunch of posts in the archives and am
now more confused than ever. It should be relatively easy, as the bass
clef bone should be able to read the notes as written, but just change
the key si
30 matches
Mail list logo
