Re: [Tex-music] Is this now obsolete?

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
2016-01-16 22:58 GMT+02:00 Don Simons : > Dirk Laurie wrote >> >> The M-Tx manual has since time immemorial contained this paragraph, which >> I have a strong mind to delete. >> >> "You can tune the appearance of the rest by appending a signed integer to >> the word, e.g. rm19+18. Roughly speaking,

Re: [Tex-music] Sibelius to PMX

2016-01-16 Thread Don Simons
Dirk Laurie wrote > 2016-01-17 0:10 GMT+02:00 Don Simons : > > > Is it possible? > > Possible, yes. Possible by open-source tools, no (as yet). > > Sibelius can export to MusicXML, and Dieter can convert that to PMX. Yeah, I got that by googling. I do have a pdf of the score. Is there freeware

Re: [Tex-music] Sibelius to PMX

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
2016-01-17 0:10 GMT+02:00 Don Simons : > Is it possible? Possible, yes. Possible by open-source tools, no (as yet). Sibelius can export to MusicXML, and Dieter can convert that to PMX. --- TeX-music@tug.org mailing list If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archiv

Re: [Tex-music] wrong height of brace and shift of rest

2016-01-16 Thread Don Simons
Simon Dreher wrote > > The second problem is the shifted full-bar rest in the top voice in the first > bar. > It seems that the vertical shift uses the wrong size. > Definitely a PMX issue, which arises when a vertical shift is used in a smaller-size staff. In the pasted example (which som

[Tex-music] wrong height of brace and shift of rest

2016-01-16 Thread Simon Dreher
Hi, in the attached piece the square brace grouping the choir is too large. It seems to have to do something with the different sizes of the staves. The second problem is the shifted full-bar rest in the top voice in the first bar. It seems that the vertical shift uses the wrong size. Best regar

[Tex-music] Sibelius to PMX

2016-01-16 Thread Don Simons
Is it possible? --Don Simons --- TeX-music@tug.org mailing list If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music

Re: [Tex-music] Is this now obsolete?

2016-01-16 Thread Don Simons
Dirk Laurie wrote > > The M-Tx manual has since time immemorial contained this paragraph, which > I have a strong mind to delete. > > "You can tune the appearance of the rest by appending a signed integer to > the word, e.g. rm19+18. Roughly speaking, this moves the front end of the > rest to the

Re: [Tex-music] Google's PDF viewer sucks

2016-01-16 Thread Don Simons
> Pierre Coulon wrote > > On Sat, 16 Jan 2016, Dirk Laurie wrote: > > > Never judge the quality of a PDF file made by MusiXTeX by viewing it > > directly from GMail. > > What does GMail bring useful, besides this topic? :-) > I was under the impression that if you use gmail as your main email,

Re: [Tex-music] M-Tx 0.61a

2016-01-16 Thread Bob Tennent
>|I have pushed to >| >| https://github.com/dlaurie/M-Tx >| >|a version that exploits the improved multibar rests in MusiXTeX >|and PMX This is also available as a zip archive from WIMA. On request, I can upload a CTAN-style archive with a TDS-compliant archive m-tx.tds.zip, executables co

Re: [Tex-music] Google's PDF viewer sucks

2016-01-16 Thread Jean-Pierre Coulon
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016, Dirk Laurie wrote: Never judge the quality of a PDF file made by MusiXTeX by viewing it directly from GMail. What does GMail bring useful, besides this topic? :-) Jean-Pierre Coulon --- TeX-music@tug.org mailing list If you want to unsubscribe

[Tex-music] Is this now obsolete?

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
The M-Tx manual has since time immemorial contained this paragraph, which I have a strong mind to delete. "You can tune the appearance of the rest by appending a signed integer to the word, e.g. rm19+18. Roughly speaking, this moves the front end of the rest to the right by 18 points. Since multib

[Tex-music] Google's PDF viewer sucks

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
You probably know the truth of the subject line already. But just in case it slipped your mind for a moment, as it did mine: Never judge the quality of a PDF file made by MusiXTeX by viewing it directly from GMail. --- TeX-music@tug.org mailing list If you want to unsub

Re: [Tex-music] M-Tx 0.61a

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
2016-01-16 11:29 GMT+02:00 Dirk Laurie : > I have pushed to >https://github.com/dlaurie/M-Tx > a version that exploits the improved multibar rests in MusiXTeX > and PMX, resulting in a net code saving of about 45 lines. Thanks > Bob and Don! > > If you already have a cloned repository, 'git pul

Re: [Tex-music] M-Tx 0.61a

2016-01-16 Thread Christian Mondrup
Dirk Laurie wrote: I have pushed to https://github.com/dlaurie/M-Tx a version that exploits the improved multibar rests in MusiXTeX and PMX, resulting in a net code saving of about 45 lines. Thanks Bob and Don! If you already have a cloned repository, 'git pull` is all you need. This is not

Re: [Tex-music] PMX 2.72

2016-01-16 Thread Bob Tennent
>|I append a file nominally intended to test the new multibar rests. >|I've removed all M-Tx dependence, replacing it by inputting >|musixlyr. The problem is: >| >|~~~ >|Overfull \hbox (1.22258pt too wide) in paragraph at lines 45--59 >|~~~ >| >|If I comment out the inputting of musixlyr:

[Tex-music] M-Tx 0.61a

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
I have pushed to https://github.com/dlaurie/M-Tx a version that exploits the improved multibar rests in MusiXTeX and PMX, resulting in a net code saving of about 45 lines. Thanks Bob and Don! If you already have a cloned repository, 'git pull` is all you need. This is not yet a release, only a

Re: [Tex-music] PMX 2.72

2016-01-16 Thread Dirk Laurie
2016-01-11 22:46 GMT+02:00 : > Here are links to the new version of PMX: > > http://icking-music-archive.org/software/pmx/pmx272.zip > > http://icking-music-archive.org/software/pmx/pmx.zip ... > All testing on PMX 2.72 will be greatly appreciated. I append a file nominally intended to test the