On Wed, 2024-09-18 at 13:25 +0100, Timothy Lanfear wrote:
>
>
> On 18/09/2024 11:57, David Sumbler wrote:
>
> >
> > Thank you both for your help. I'm still struggling with one thing,
> > though. I want "D.C." at the end of the 'B' section, rather than
> > "D.C. al Fine". The best thing I have managed so far was to put
> > \jump "D.C." at the end, but of course that doesn't remove the
> > other marking. I have tried "\set Score.dalSegnoTextFormatter =
> > #format-dal-segno-text-brief" but that doesn't seem to make any
> > difference. Any suggestions?
> >
> >
>
> I'm not completely clear about what you are looking for, but maybe
> this will give you some ideas on how to proceed.
>
> \version "2.24.0"
>
> \layout {
> \context {
> \Score
> \override SectionLabel.direction = #DOWN
> \override SectionLabel.self-alignment-X = #RIGHT
> }
> \set Score.finalFineTextVisibility = ##t
> \set Score.fineText = \markup \larger "D. C. al fine"
> }
>
> {
> R1*4
> \sectionLabel \markup \italic "Fine"
> \section
> R1*4
> \fine
> }
>
This certainly produces the result I wanted. Here we appear to be
using "section" syntax as distinct from the "repeat" syntax used in
earlier suggestions. However it seems to me that somehow we are
abusing the system by using fineText to define not the "Fine" marking
itself, but actually the "D.C." marking. This surely can't be what one
is intended to do.
In my experience the form [music--Fine--music--D.C.] is about the most
common structure there is in written music, other than simple repeats.
And yet there doesn't seem to be an obvious or straightforward way of
producing this in the new syntax.
In the past, of course, I have added Fine and D.C. markings simply as
printed marks which Lilypond isn't expected to understand. Perhaps I
should simply go back to doing that, although of course it doesn't work
for midi output. Still, that doesn't really matter, since I only use
midi for checking the accuracy of my input.
--
David Sumbler <da...@aeolia.co.uk>
