Great, thanks! I tried something like that, but never had the space between the offset amount and following _, which in retrospect makes sense but I didn't think of at the time. I also agree in that context just the X-offset version looks better and now I'm using that in one of the two places it appears, though at the other some additional "collisions".
I've got hopefully just one more question for my current project before I declare it good enough -- I can't get positioning tweaks to apply to either \tempo indications or rehearsal \marks. http://lilybin.com/vhf35h/15 shows that problem -- this one isn't really well-motived by the example and I just chose a random offset to show it not working (here I'm using X-offset but in context I probably want Y as well), but the output is the same whether the overrides are commented out or not. Evan On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 2:47 PM Aaron Hill <lilyp...@hillvisions.com> wrote: > On 2022-04-12 12:25 pm, Evan Driscoll wrote: > > http://lilybin.com/vhf35h/5 for example. > > > > I have a note that has two text decorations on it, c^"pizz"_"marc", as > > well > > as a dynamic \f. > > > > By default everything gets stacked (http://lilybin.com/vhf35h/6), but > > that > > gets really busy -- there's actually a tempo marking and rehearsal mark > > at > > that place as well. (I also left off \italic on the marc. but it's in > > my > > real version.) > > > > I can move the TextScript object*s* with *\once \override > > TextScript.extra-offset = #'(2.1 . 1.7)*, but that moves both. I'd like > > to > > get the 'marc' side by side with the \f obviously without moving the > > arco > > instruction. > > > > I suspect this has to do with \tweak in there somehow but I can't > > figure > > out the right incantation. > > You need to use the post-event form for \tweak. Consider: > > %%%% > marc = -\markup \italic "marc." > > \relative c' { > c4 > -\tweak extra-offset #'(2.1 . 1.7) _\marc > ^"arco" > \f > c c c > } > > \relative c' { > c4 > -\tweak X-offset #2 _\marc > ^"arco" > \f > c c c > } > %%%% > > NOTE: I think the X-offset tweak looks a little cleaner. > > > -- Aaron Hill >
