date:20050203

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'll attempt to clarify again:
> transposition is something that allows midi to know how the music has 
> been transposed so that when you listen to a midi file, you hear what you 
> wrote, not what the transposed notes look like.

Okay. So the manual needs to say that. At the moment, the manual says that 
\transposition "should be used when music is entered".
> 
> transpose actually transposes the notes in the music.
> 
> so, if you want to transpose the following: relative c' { c4 d e f }, it 
> would look like this: transpose bes c' { relative c' { c4 d e f } }
> 
> to get appropriate-sounding midi playback, you would want something like 
> this:
> 
I'm not interested in midi. So \transpostion seems to be useless to me. The 
manual just says nothing about it :-(

And as for the workaround using "\transpose c bf" - well that's exactly that - 
a workaround. What the hell am I supposed to do when I'm coping with parts in 
Bf and D (trumpet), Bf and Ef (Cornet), Bb, Eb and C (Bass), Bb, C, Eb and G 
(Trombone) etc etc etc? My poor brain can't cope ... Even worse, what about the 
example in the manual, when I need to cope with D and G *in* *the* *same* 
*part*! (Horn).

What I *thought* \transposition did, and what the manual implies it does do, 
was convert parts to concert pitch as they were input.

If this were the case, then we don't need to give a damn about pitch and midi - 
it'll just come out right anyway. And we don't need to worry about getting 
confused over which part is transposed in which key - they are all internally 
in C.

So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in the manual 
or in the implementation of \transposition. And imho the bug should be in the 
implementation - by changing the implementation we don't change the current 
functionality as seen by the user, but we do make the manual correct, and we 
make the behaviour of \transposition both more consistent and more powerful.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

Oops ... my bad here ... I've just seen the sentence about MIDI output and how 
it doesn't affect printing.

But I would still respectfully suggest that it *should* affect printing, it 
seems to me we have here a generic solution being applied over-narrowly to a 
specific problem.

Let's say I want to enter a Bb part in Bb. If I understand things correctly, I 
now correct the MIDI output to true pitch by using a \transposition statement 
in the note *input* section, but I correct the printed output to true pitch by 
using a \transpose statement in the *output* section. That doesn't make sense 
to me :-(

> So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in the manual 
> or in the implementation of transposition. And imho the bug should be in the 
> implementation - by changing the implementation we don't change the current 
> functionality as seen by the user, but we do make the manual correct, and we 
> make the behaviour of transposition both more consistent and more powerful.
> 
> Cheers,
> Wol
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Can't use numbers

It's already described clearly at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Organizing-larger-pieces.html
However, it would be reasonable to have also a section in the main part 
of the manual that describes all details about the syntax of .ly files,
where this information would be a natural part.

   /Mats
Graham Percival wrote:
Yes, if it isn't already noted.  I'm not certain.
Could you look into it?  I have a lot of university work right now.  Could
you find the section in the manual where this info should be added,
and suggest a few sentences that would clarify this issue?
Cheers,
- Graham, Documentation Editor.
On 30-Jan-05, at 10:36 PM, J L wrote:
Then would it be worthwhile to make a note of that in the manual?
From: Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: J L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Can't use numbers
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:20:03 -0700
J L wrote:
Is it true that LilyPond doesn't like music variables with a number 
in the name? If I did:

voice1 = {  somemusic  }
and used that later, LilyPond would complain?

Yes.  Some of us use roman numerals to get around this.
Paul Scott
_
Check out news, entertainment and more @  http://xtra.co.nz/broadband

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to hide pedal markings in the engraving?

I've been using LilyPond almost since its first version, but I had no
idea that pedal marks made any difference to the MIDI output.
You learn something new every day. ;-)
Anyway, you could make two separate \score{...}, one for the
printed output and another for the MIDI output. To save some
typing, you might find the \tag and related commands useful,
see 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Different-editions-from-one-source.html

   /Mats
Aron Fay wrote:
I'm probably one of the newest members to this, so please be 
patient.

I want to submit a work to mutopia, so I've been entering music
from a very old manuscript (for piano).  No pedal markings exist 
in the original.  But, I'd like to add pedal markings, for the 
purpose of making a reasonable midi output.

I'm using a format similair to the "center dynamic" template
in the tutorial.  I've defined separate variables for the upper, 
lower, dynamics, and pedal content.  Eg:

  \context PianoStaff
  <<
\context Staff = "up" \upper
\context Dynamics = "dynamics" \dynamics
\context Staff = "down" \lower 
\context Dynamics = "pedal" \pedal
  >>
  \layout {
% ...
  }

How can I surpress engraving of the pedal markings, but keep 
them in for midi?

Thanks,
aron

--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

I don't really understand what you mean by input and output sections.
You can do any any of the following:
music={c d e f}
\score{
  \transpose c bes \music
}
music=\transpose c bes {c d e f}
\score{
  \music
}
\score{
  \transpose c bes {c d e f}
}
as well as
\music={\transposition bes c d e f}
\score{
  \music
}
\music={c d e f}
\score{
  {\transposition bes \music}
}
As far as I understand, the point of \transposition is that you can make
a printed version of the music and a MIDI version of the same music
without having to make two separate \score{...} sections (one with
\transpose and one without). In other words, \transposition solves
a completely different problem than \transpose. Of course, if this is
unclear in the documentation, it should be improved.
   /Mats
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oops ... my bad here ... I've just seen the sentence about MIDI output and how 
it doesn't affect printing.
But I would still respectfully suggest that it *should* affect printing, it 
seems to me we have here a generic solution being applied over-narrowly to a 
specific problem.
Let's say I want to enter a Bb part in Bb. If I understand things correctly, I 
now correct the MIDI output to true pitch by using a \transposition statement 
in the note *input* section, but I correct the printed output to true pitch by 
using a \transpose statement in the *output* section. That doesn't make sense 
to me :-(

So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in the manual 
or in the implementation of transposition. And imho the bug should be in the 
implementation - by changing the implementation we don't change the current 
functionality as seen by the user, but we do make the manual correct, and we 
make the behaviour of transposition both more consistent and more powerful.
Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to hide pedal markings in the engraving?

2005-02-03 Thread Ralph Little

> How can I surpress engraving of the pedal markings, but keep 
> them in for midi?

I think that answer to your question is to remove the
Piano_pedal_engraver from Staff.
The syntax for this depends on your version.
What version are you using?

In 2.4, something like:

\context {
\Staff
\remove "Piano_pedal_engraver"
...

  }

...should do it, I think.
Afraid I can't test this where I am. :(

Regards,
Ralph


--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.tribaldata.co.uk
...or see what I do in my spare time:
www.skelmanthorpeband.org
--

"Man who shoot off mouth... expect to lose face." 

-
Tribal Data Solutions has moved, please visit our website for more details 
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk. 
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and are sent on the basis of 
our copyright, e-mail and security policy which can be inspected by visiting 
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk/policies.asp.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete this 
message. Thank you.
---



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: MIDI and repeat


Michael Kallas wrote:
Hi,
Chris Sawer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 31.01.05 18:57:00:
On 31 Jan 2005, at 15:57, Michael Kallas wrote:

I also have problems playing MIDI files:
Repetitions don't work which sounds extremely bad with
alternatives (the second one is played directly after the first one).
Have a look at the section called "Repeats and MIDI" in the manual. The  
version for Lily 2.4.2 is online at:
Ok, I did not read that section as it's not mentioned in "6 Sound".
Anyway it's not what I expected at all and I'd suggest making 
\unfoldrepeats the standard behavior for MIDI interpretation.
That would be more convenient than coding the music block twice
(with twice as much possibilities to make errors etc.)
Of course you don't enter the full music twice, just use identifiers,
see 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Organizing-larger-pieces.html

Regarding your request that unfoldrepeats is the default behaviour, you
should bear in mind that the support for MIDI output from LilyPond has
mainly been intended for proof "reading" scores while you enter the
music. The main hackers of LilyPond have never had the ambition to
be able to produce hight quality MIDI output.
   /Mats
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to hide pedal markings in the engraving?

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I've been using LilyPond almost since its first version, but I had no
> idea that pedal marks made any difference to the MIDI output.
> You learn something new every day. ;-)

Well... me too :-)

I'd use \tag for this purpose. Much easier than mucking about with
performers and engravers.

-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As far as I understand, the point of \transposition is that you can make
> a printed version of the music and a MIDI version of the same music
> without having to make two separate \score{...} sections (one with
> \transpose and one without). In other words, \transposition solves
> a completely different problem than \transpose. Of course, if this is
> unclear in the documentation, it should be improved.

It's slightly hairier. Classical brass parts, esp. Horn and Clarinet
parts, tend to change transpositions during a piece. You cannot
capture that with a \score and \transpose.

-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in
> the manual or in the implementation of \transposition. And imho the
> bug should be in the implementation - by changing the implementation

Can I respectfully mention that I still don't understand what you're
trying to achieve?  What do you want to see in the notation, what do
you want to hear in MIDI, and what do you want to enter in .ly ?

-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

2005-02-03 Thread D Josiah Boothby

I'm not interested in midi. So \transpostion seems to be useless to me. The
manual just says nothing about it :-(
I agree that the manual should probably be more clear here. I have an 
example that I would be happy to add which clarifies one of your next 
questions.

And as for the workaround using "\transpose c bf" - well that's exactly that
- a workaround. What the hell am I supposed to do when I'm coping with
parts in Bf and D (trumpet), Bf and Ef (Cornet), Bb, Eb and C (Bass),
Bb, C, Eb and G (Trombone) etc etc etc? My poor brain can't cope ... Even
worse, what about the example in the manual, when I need to cope with D
and G *in* *the* *same* *part*! (Horn).
So, from D to Bb (trumpet) you would have something like this:
DTrumpetNotes = \relative c'' { c2 d2 }
\transpose c e { %% <-- it's 2am, so i may be off, but i think this is the
 %% right degree of transposition
  \DTrumpetNotes
}
This example could be extended quite easily to the cornet, bass, trombone 
(transposing trombone! learn a new thing every day!); and if you're 
confused (as I might be) going from one key to another, you can always go 
through C, for example:

CTrumpetNotes = \transpose c d {
  \DTrumpetNotes
}
BbTrumpetNotes = \transpose c d {
  \CTrumpetNotes
}
And I'm sure this can be nested into itself more elegantly, but as I said, 
it's late on my end... I can't think that clearly.

The exception is for your horn part, which I would do like this:
DHornNotes = \relative c' { c1 }
CHornNotes = \relative c' { c1 }
FHornNotes = {
  \transpose c a, { \DHornNotes }
  \transpose c g, { \CHornNotes }
}
(though, i would just make the poor hornist transpose. serves them right 
for playing the silly instrument...:)

josiah

What I *thought* \transposition did, and what the manual implies it does do,
was convert parts to concert pitch as they were input.
If this were the case, then we don't need to give a damn about pitch and
midi - it'll just come out right anyway. And we don't need to worry 
about getting confused over which part is transposed in which key - 
they are all internally in C.

So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in the
manual or in the implementation of \transposition. And imho the bug 
should be in the implementation - by changing the implementation we 
don't change the current functionality as seen by the user, but we do 
make the manual correct, and we make the behaviour of \transposition 
both more consistent and more powerful.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> mainly been intended for proof "reading" scores while you enter the
> music. The main hackers of LilyPond have never had the ambition to
> be able to produce hight quality MIDI output.

Historically, that's been true. However, we found that there is some
interest in better MIDI output.

Getting the MIDI backend to quality level of the notation backend is a
task I'd happily pursue, if sufficient funds are raised.  I already
have a pledge for EUR 750, but that is not enough.  My rough estimate
is that I could do it for EUR 3500.

So, if you are interested in getting

 a better MIDI backend

with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in and

 Donate money

to support this effort.

-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   [EMAIL PROTECTED]   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

convert-ly with lily2.4.2

2005-02-03 Thread Jean-marc LEGRAND





Hi list !

I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.

I've got 2 pb :

1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no error 
message.

2. when I make convert-ly -e fichier.ly, I have à fichier.ly updated but a new 
fichier.ly~ which I
have to erase manually.

Any help ?

Regards



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

convert-ly with lily2.4.2

2005-02-03 Thread Jean-marc LEGRAND





Hi again.

I've tried convert-ly *.ly in my folder, and it has converted all my .ly.

Great, but it is not what is writen in lily manual, or am I wrong ?
- Réacheminé par Jean-marc LEGRAND/CRS/FR/RM/Corp le 03/02/2005 13:34 -
   
  Jean-marc LEGRAND
   Pour :lilypond-user@gnu.org
  03/02/2005 13:09 cc :
   Objet :   convert-ly with 
lily2.4.2
   



Hi list !

I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.

I've got 2 pb :

1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no error 
message.

2. when I make convert-ly -e fichier.ly, I have à fichier.ly updated but a new 
fichier.ly~ which I
have to erase manually.

Any help ?

Regards




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either in
> > the manual or in the implementation of transposition. And imho the
> > bug should be in the implementation - by changing the implementation
> 
> Can I respectfully mention that I still don't understand what you're
> trying to achieve?  What do you want to see in the notation, what do
> you want to hear in MIDI, and what do you want to enter in .ly ?
> 
Okay. I'll try and explain. But I think I've worked out what's going on, and 
why (not saying I agree with it, though).

Transposition works the way it does because certain instruments (the Horn in 
particular) sometimes change pitch while playing. (Horns swap a crook, trumpets 
and clarinets swap instruments.) This, obviously, is a nightmare for lilypond 
if you're trying to output both a score and a soundtrack.

I'm coming at it from a very different angle. I don't give a damn about MIDI, 
and I'm using lilypond as a music-typesetting program (which, indeed, I thought 
it was). And I play an instrument which, in a different way, is as unusual as 
the horn changing pitch half-way through a piece. Depending on the whim of the 
composer (well, not quite), music for me can be written in C or in Bb. When I'm 
looking at my .ly files, I can't say "that's the trombone, therefore those 
notes are concert pitch". When I saw the \transpose directive, I missed the bit 
about "midi only", and thought "great - I can enter the notes in Bb, and that 
will tell lilypond how to convert it to C".

I *really* *don't* *want* to have half my music with a "\transpose bf c" 
directive in it, and the other half with "\transpose c bf" in it. The current 
option is to transpose all the Bb parts in my head as I enter them (or work out 
how to get that editor to do it for me). It'd be nice if lily could do it for 
me.

So I'm coming at it from the point of view that "lily is a typesetter", I have 
multiple parts in multiple transpositions, and I really do not want the hassle 
of having to remember which parts are in which transpositions - I want 
everything internal to lily to be in C.

Now bear in mind I'm a programmer by trade, and I missed the warning about 
"midi only" :-) It really seems inconsistent to me for \transposition to 
convert one form of output (sound) to concert pitch, while not converting the 
other (paper).

Basically, the fly in the ointment is those damn instruments that change 
transposition mid-piece :-) Either we enter the notes transposed, and have 
hacks to cope with outputting midi at concert pitch, or we enter the notes at 
concert pitch, and have hacks to cope with outputting music as a playable part.

Coupled with the fact that a concert-pitch score makes finding accidental 
misprints much easier (intentional double-entendre), I would much rather think 
in concert pitch, and transpose transposing instruments on output. I also think 
the current implementation of \transposition is inconsistent (yes I know - now 
I understand, I think the reasons are very sensible...)

So. I understand the "why". I don't really think it's right, but the 
alternative is just as bad. Can we add a property that says "apply 
transposition to printed output" or "transpose notes according to transposition 
on input" (either implementation would work)? And where do I start looking if I 
want to encode this myself? Not having got to grips with lily internals 
properly yet, I'd be inclined to adjust notes by instrumentTransposition as the 
parser reads them, but I don't know how viable an approach that is.

Cheers,
Wol

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)

2005-02-03 Thread Christ van Willegen

Hi list, Han-Wen,

> with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in and
> 
>  Donate money
> 
> to support this effort.

I'll chip in, and let you know in a private mail how much...

I have type-set scores for my choir with Lilypond, using the Midi output to
generate CDs and MP3s so ppl can study at home, when they don't play
an instrument themselves. Having an easy way to generate different mixes
for the different voices would be a nice option to have (+6dB sopranos, -6dB
the other voices, so that the sopranos can hear their voice 'over' the other
voices).

Cheers!

Christ van Willegen


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

How to show lyrics BELOW the score?

2005-02-03 Thread Massimiliano Pernatsch

Hello everybody.

I'm just new to Lilypond, but even after reading the tutorials and
online material I have some questions I could not find a solution yet.

I made a simple score with chords added bt \chords and lyrics added by
\addlyrics, and they both show up ABOVE the score, which isn't very
good looking.

How can I have the lyrics show BELOW the score and the chords stay
above, like a regular score should be?

Thank you all for your attention.

Max


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

[no subject]

2005-02-03 Thread Ralph Little

Hi,
I guess that's true.
However, if Aron's \pedal definition contains things other than pedal
markings, then I would think it would be more fiddly to have to go
through and tag all of the pedal markings in \pedal.
In this case, unless I've missed something, attacking the engraver setup
might involve less work.

Cheers,
Ralph


Han-Wen writes..
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I've been using LilyPond almost since its first version, but I had
no
> > idea that pedal marks made any difference to the MIDI output.
> > You learn something new every day. ;-)
> 
> Well... me too :-)
> 
> I'd use \tag for this purpose. Much easier than mucking about with
> performers and engravers.


--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.tribaldata.co.uk
...or see what I do in my spare time:
www.skelmanthorpeband.org
--

"Man who shoot off mouth... expect to lose face." 

-
Tribal Data Solutions has moved, please visit our website for more details 
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk. 
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and are sent on the basis of 
our copyright, e-mail and security policy which can be inspected by visiting 
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk/policies.asp.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete this 
message. Thank you.
---



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

You should definitely not remove any .ly~ file until you have made sure
that the updated file gives the expected results, since the .ly~
contains a copy of your original file (before the conversion) and since
convert-ly is not always fool-proof.
It seems that the formulation in the manual has already been changed in
the version for LilyPond 2.5. Take a look at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.5/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Invoking-convert_002dly.html
and send a comment to the mailing list if you have suggestions for
further clarifications.
   /Mats
Jean-marc LEGRAND wrote:

Hi again.
I've tried convert-ly *.ly in my folder, and it has converted all my .ly.
Great, but it is not what is writen in lily manual, or am I wrong ?
- Réacheminé par Jean-marc LEGRAND/CRS/FR/RM/Corp le 03/02/2005 13:34 -
   
  Jean-marc LEGRAND
   Pour :lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  03/02/2005 13:09 cc :
   Objet :   convert-ly with lily2.4.2 
   


Hi list !
I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.
I've got 2 pb :
1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no error 
message.
2. when I make convert-ly -e fichier.ly, I have à fichier.ly updated but a new 
fichier.ly~ which I
have to erase manually.
Any help ?
Regards

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 
Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: How to show lyrics BELOW the score?

It's always easier to answer a question like this if you send a copy
of what you tried. Also, never forget to mention what version of
LilyPond you are using to avoid getting irrelevant answers.
The short answer is that things appear in the printed score in the
same order as they appear in the \score{...} section of your .ly file.
Also, I recommend that you take a look at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Single-staff.html
and
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Setting-simple-songs.html
for more examples and information.
/Mats
Massimiliano Pernatsch wrote:
Hello everybody.
I'm just new to Lilypond, but even after reading the tutorials and
online material I have some questions I could not find a solution yet.
I made a simple score with chords added bt \chords and lyrics added by
\addlyrics, and they both show up ABOVE the score, which isn't very
good looking.
How can I have the lyrics show BELOW the score and the chords stay
above, like a regular score should be?
Thank you all for your attention.
Max
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RÃ©f. : Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

2005-02-03 Thread Jean-marc LEGRAND

Thanks for your answer.

Maybe 2 suggestions :

first, there's a little mistake in doc 2.5 :
"It uses \version statements in the input files to detect the old version 
number. In most cases, to
upgrade your input file it is sufficient to run
covert-ly -e myfile.ly" .

secondly, it should be written, to my mind, that convert-ly *.ly converts all 
the files of the
current folder.

Regards

  Mats Bengtsson   
  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]Pour :Jean-marc LEGRAND 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
  3.kth.se>cc :  lilypond-user@gnu.org
   Objet :   Re: convert-ly with 
lily2.4.2
  03/02/2005 16:12 

You should definitely not remove any .ly~ file until you have made sure
that the updated file gives the expected results, since the .ly~
contains a copy of your original file (before the conversion) and since
convert-ly is not always fool-proof.

It seems that the formulation in the manual has already been changed in
the version for LilyPond 2.5. Take a look at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.5/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Invoking-convert_002dly.html
and send a comment to the mailing list if you have suggestions for
further clarifications.

/Mats

Jean-marc LEGRAND wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi again.
>
> I've tried convert-ly *.ly in my folder, and it has converted all my .ly.
>
> Great, but it is not what is writen in lily manual, or am I wrong ?
> - Réacheminé par Jean-marc LEGRAND/CRS/FR/RM/Corp le 03/02/2005 13:34 
> -
>

>   Jean-marc LEGRAND

>Pour :lilypond-user@gnu.org

>   03/02/2005 13:09 cc :

>Objet :   convert-ly with 
> lily2.4.2

>

>
>
>
> Hi list !
>
> I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.
>
> I've got 2 pb :
>
> 1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no error 
> message.
>
> 2. when I make convert-ly -e fichier.ly, I have à fichier.ly updated but a 
> new fichier.ly~ which I
> have to erase manually.
>
> Any help ?
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

--
=
 Mats Bengtsson
 Signal Processing
 Signals, Sensors and Systems
 Royal Institute of Technology
 SE-100 44  STOCKHOLM
 Sweden
 Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
 Fax:   (+46) 8 790 7260
 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Who wants better MIDI output? (was: MIDI and repeat)

2005-02-03 Thread David Raleigh Arnold

On Thursday 03 February 2005 07:51 am, Christ van Willegen wrote:
> Hi list, Han-Wen,
>
> > with natural sounding performance, then you're welcome to chip in
> > and
> >
> >  Donate money
> >
> > to support this effort.
>
> I'll chip in, and let you know in a private mail how much...
>
> I have type-set scores for my choir with Lilypond, using the Midi
> output to generate CDs and MP3s so ppl can study at home, when they
> don't play an instrument themselves. Having an easy way to generate
> different mixes for the different voices would be a nice option to
> have (+6dB sopranos, -6dB the other voices, so that the sopranos can
> hear their voice 'over' the other voices).

Try midi2mg, which comes with midge, and do it with midge.

It is GNU.  A bit of integration would be very welcome.  daveA  

-- 
The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the
instrument consist in "Dynamic Guitar Technique".  I promise miracles.
Get it at:  http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html
daveA David Raleigh Arnold  dra..at..openguitar.com



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

2005-02-03 Thread David Raleigh Arnold

On Thursday 03 February 2005 07:09 am, Jean-marc LEGRAND wrote:
> Hi list !
>
> I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.
>
> I've got 2 pb :
>
> 1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no
> error message.
>
What happens when you enter this part?:

$ find . -name '*.ly' -print

If you do get a listing, try a newer syntax:

$ convert-ly -e $(find . -name '*.ly' -print)

If you don't get a listing, look up your "find" command to see what
you need to do to get one. Are you using bash?  The DOS "find" command
is very different from the bash version.

I am assuming that you have command substitution on XP.  The `` or $()
makes the output of the find command inside look like a list of files
to convert-ly.  daveA

-- 
The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the
instrument consist in "Dynamic Guitar Technique".  I promise miracles.
Get it at:  http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html
daveA David Raleigh Arnold  dra..at..openguitar.com

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

2005-02-03 Thread David Raleigh Arnold

On Thursday 03 February 2005 07:42 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > > So - can I respectfully suggest we have a big bug here - either
> > > in the manual or in the implementation of transposition. And imho
> > > the bug should be in the implementation - by changing the
> > > implementation
> >
> > Can I respectfully mention that I still don't understand what
> > you're trying to achieve?  What do you want to see in the notation,
> > what do you want to hear in MIDI, and what do you want to enter in
> > .ly ?
>
> Okay. I'll try and explain. But I think I've worked out what's going
> on, and why (not saying I agree with it, though).
>
> Transposition works the way it does because certain instruments (the
> Horn in particular) sometimes change pitch while playing. (Horns swap
> a crook, trumpets and clarinets swap instruments.) This, obviously,
> is a nightmare for lilypond if you're trying to output both a score
> and a soundtrack.
>
> I'm coming at it from a very different angle. I don't give a damn
> about MIDI, and I'm using lilypond as a music-typesetting program
> (which, indeed, I thought it was). And I play an instrument which, in
> a different way, is as unusual as the horn changing pitch half-way
> through a piece. Depending on the whim of the composer (well, not
> quite), music for me can be written in C or in Bb. When I'm looking
> at my .ly files, I can't say "that's the trombone, therefore those
> notes are concert pitch". When I saw the \transpose directive, I
> missed the bit about "midi only", and thought "great - I can enter
> the notes in Bb, and that will tell lilypond how to convert it to C".
>
> I *really* *don't* *want* to have half my music with a "\transpose bf
> c" directive in it, and the other half with "\transpose c bf" in it.
> The current option is to transpose all the Bb parts in my head as I
> enter them (or work out how to get that editor to do it for me). It'd
> be nice if lily could do it for me.
>
> So I'm coming at it from the point of view that "lily is a
> typesetter", I have multiple parts in multiple transpositions, and I
> really do not want the hassle of having to remember which parts are
> in which transpositions - I want everything internal to lily to be in
> C.
>
> Now bear in mind I'm a programmer by trade, and I missed the warning
> about "midi only" :-) It really seems inconsistent to me for
> \transposition to convert one form of output (sound) to concert
> pitch, while not converting the other (paper).
>
> Basically, the fly in the ointment is those damn instruments that
> change transposition mid-piece :-) Either we enter the notes
> transposed, and have hacks to cope with outputting midi at concert
> pitch, or we enter the notes at concert pitch, and have hacks to cope
> with outputting music as a playable part.
>
> Coupled with the fact that a concert-pitch score makes finding
> accidental misprints much easier (intentional double-entendre), I
> would much rather think in concert pitch, and transpose transposing
> instruments on output. I also think the current implementation of
> \transposition is inconsistent (yes I know - now I understand, I
> think the reasons are very sensible...)
>
> So. I understand the "why". I don't really think it's right, but the
> alternative is just as bad. Can we add a property that says "apply
> transposition to printed output" or "transpose notes according to
> transposition on input" (either implementation would work)? And where
> do I start looking if I want to encode this myself? Not having got to
> grips with lily internals properly yet, I'd be inclined to adjust
> notes by instrumentTransposition as the parser reads them, but I
> don't know how viable an approach that is.
>
> Cheers,
> Wol

What's missing is an editing tool.  Lilypond code would be required
to make something that did languages, etc., or a transposer would have 
been
written by now.

The simpler task of filling in missing chromatics on the basis of the
key signature has been done at least twice.  daveA

-- 
The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the
instrument consist in "Dynamic Guitar Technique".  I promise miracles.
Get it at:  http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html
daveA David Raleigh Arnold  dra..at..openguitar.com



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

2005-02-03 Thread Paul Scott

Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 

As far as I understand, the point of \transposition is that you can make
a printed version of the music and a MIDI version of the same music
without having to make two separate \score{...} sections (one with
\transpose and one without). In other words, \transposition solves
a completely different problem than \transpose. Of course, if this is
unclear in the documentation, it should be improved.
   

It's slightly hairier. Classical brass parts, esp. Horn and Clarinet
parts, tend to change transpositions during a piece. You cannot
capture that with a \score and \transpose.
 

Do you mean and keep the midi working correctly?  Otherwise I just have 
the A and Bb clarinet, for example, parts in separate (as many as it 
takes) definitions which I combine with appropriate "transpose"s in the 
score block.  I am a woodwind doubler and can handle all kinds of 
variations with just "transpose"s in the score block.

Right now I don't have working midi so I just trust my very experienced 
eye for that.

Paul

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

How to hide pedal markings in the engraving?

2005-02-03 Thread Aron Fay

I'm probably one of the newest members to this, so please be 
patient.

I want to submit a work to mutopia, so I've been entering music
from a very old manuscript (for piano).  No pedal markings exist 
in the original.  But, I'd like to add pedal markings, for the 
purpose of making a reasonable midi output.

I'm using a format similair to the "center dynamic" template
in the tutorial.  I've defined separate variables for the upper, 
lower, dynamics, and pedal content.  Eg:

  \context PianoStaff
  <<
\context Staff = "up" \upper
\context Dynamics = "dynamics" \dynamics
\context Staff = "down" \lower 
\context Dynamics = "pedal" \pedal
  >>
  \layout {
% ...
  }

How can I surpress engraving of the pedal markings, but keep 
them in for midi?

Thanks,
aron


-- 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

Don't talk nonsense! convert-ly can only be run from the
cygwin command prompt, not from the DOS command prompt.
Also, as has already been noted in previous emails,
convert-ly -e *.ly
will work just as well as the command including find that
was mentioned in older version of the manual.

   /Mats


Citerar David Raleigh Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On Thursday 03 February 2005 07:09 am, Jean-marc LEGRAND wrote:
> > Hi list !
> >
> > I've just moved to 2.4.2 on XP, and I'm converting all my files.
> >
> > I've got 2 pb :
> >
> > 1.  convert-ly -e `find . -name '*.ly' -print` doesn't work, and no
> > error message.
> >
> What happens when you enter this part?:
>
> $ find . -name '*.ly' -print
>
> If you do get a listing, try a newer syntax:
>
> $ convert-ly -e $(find . -name '*.ly' -print)
>
> If you don't get a listing, look up your "find" command to see what
> you need to do to get one. Are you using bash?  The DOS "find" command
> is very different from the bash version.
>
> I am assuming that you have command substitution on XP.  The `` or $()
> makes the output of the find command inside look like a list of files
> to convert-ly.  daveA
>
> --
> The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the
> instrument consist in "Dynamic Guitar Technique".  I promise miracles.
> Get it at:  http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html
> daveA David Raleigh Arnold  dra..at..openguitar.com
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

2005-02-03 Thread Laura Conrad

> "Mats" == Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Mats> Also, as has already been noted in previous emails,
Mats> convert-ly -e *.ly
Mats> will work just as well as the command including find that
Mats> was mentioned in older version of the manual.

For files in only one directory.  If you have a directory tree with
.ly files in lots of branches, the find command works better.


-- 
Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097  fax: (501) 641-5011
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: convert-ly with lily2.4.2

Of course! I realized just when I had pressed "Send" that I
was talking nonsense myself!  :-)

   /Mats

Citerar Laura Conrad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> > "Mats" == Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Mats> Also, as has already been noted in previous emails,
> Mats> convert-ly -e *.ly
> Mats> will work just as well as the command including find that
> Mats> was mentioned in older version of the manual.
>
> For files in only one directory.  If you have a directory tree with
> .ly files in lots of branches, the find command works better.
>
>
> --
> Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
> (617) 661-8097fax: (501) 641-5011
> 233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139
>
>
>



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Breve Notation

2005-02-03 Thread Michael Kallas

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Peter Leschev wrote:
| Hi!
|
|We're in need of being able produce music with the following
| type of breve:
|
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Breve_notation.png
|(The one on the left, the one with 2 parallel vertical lines on
| each side).
Maybe here is what you want:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/input/test/out-www/collated-files.html
It's in the ancient-font.ly
Bye
Michael
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCAqMzQggFxokHT60RAhGKAJ9Se9piZfuWTEiT/8zIHMrkbBQGfwCfZe5U
H9oCsU404sbxDtHBxaaqADg=
=TLku
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Any info on using LilyPond (and other cygwin apps) from the XP command line?

2005-02-03 Thread Michiel Lange

As to which group to ask, is hard to put a finger on in my opinion. It 
is one of the drawbacks of mailinglists... if you're following more than 
one, and especially if one or more generates quite a bit of traffic, it 
becomes hard to keep track. Pesonally I would prefer forums as opposed 
to mailing lists, altough forums have their own drawbacks... Maybe 
newsgroups would be a thing to consider?

Anyway, your questions regarding running lilypond:
It seems that your installation of cygwin or lilypond within cygwin did 
not run completely perfect. You could try to re-install cygwin and the 
lilypond package.
That will probably fix your problem.

Josh Don wrote:
Any info on using LilyPond (and other cygwin apps) from the windows 
command line?
 
Mats said...
You cannot run lilypond from a Windows command prompt, you have to run
it from the Cygwin command prompt, which you open by clicking on the
"Cygwin" icon or start menu item.
 
I thought it was ok, because "C:\cygwin\bin\lilypond.exe -h" worked.
but then "C:\cygwin\bin\lilypond.exe C:\t.ly" returned that "dlopen" thing
So, how do I run the Cygwin command prompt from a Windows command prompt?
 
I realise these things aren't LilyPond issues, which group would be best
to post them to?
 
P.S.
Double-clicking and LilyPond does work I deleted C:\CYGWIN to 
uninstall, so I did read that, but I only just read/realised that the 
installer is also the uninstaller.
 
While re-installing cygwin I got this other Error Message
in a popup dialog...
--
mfw.exe
This application failed to start because cygX11-6.dll was not found.
Reinstalling the application may fix this problem.
--
I was "Reinstalling the application", what is that about?


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' 
 


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
 


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative

2005-02-03 Thread D Josiah Boothby

In regards to the Horn and other instruments for which transpositions 
can change during the course of a piece, I should mention that the 
Lilypond way is much easier to deal with than, for instance, the Finale 
way (at least up until Finale 2001, the last version that I used 
regularly). Granted, the similarity in name between \transpose and 
\transposition is a little confusing, so a way to sort them out could be 
to remember that "transpose" is a verb: we apply a specific 
transpositional operation on the notes attached to it; where 
"transposition" is a noun, indicating how something is to be heard, 
relative to how it is written, so this makes sense in the context of midi 
realization.

\transpose can be used to transpose a motive, or a large section of a 
piece. This is a very helpful tool (thanks, Han-Wen and Jan!), and doesn't 
rely on a specific transpositional tradition so much as it is merely a 
tool to transpose notes from the originally typed form to a different 
place, such as sounding pitch, or a pleasant transposition for a musician 
to read.

I hope this is helpful.
Josiah
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Can't use numbers

2005-02-03 Thread joe ferguson

As a programmer by profession (but now retired) and a musical amateur by 
avocation, I tend to look at Lilypond as a programming language. 

When learning a new language I tend to look for two things at the very 
beginning:  The Lexical tokens, and the Syntax.

I have pretty well scoped out the syntax works out, but I have yet to 
see a complete reference to the lexical tokens.  The organization of the 
manual is such that, if you know what you want to do as a musician, you 
look up/search for what you believe to be the appropriate musical 
terminolgy and you then (you hope) find an example showing the 
appropriate notation. 

What I'd like to see is the reverse, organized in ASCII collating 
sequence, that says, e.g., that "// separates voices in polyphonic 
music", then gives a brief example (or links to an existing example.)  
This is particularly efficient when studying examples, such as from the 
mutopia project.

With respect to syntax, a good reference section in the user manual 
would be valuable, although I've got that pretty well figured out by 
now.  The biggest remaining problem I have as a newbie, though, is 
comprehending the proper order of the various functions, understanding 
scoping rules, and other poorly documented information.  I tend to leave 
a local copy of the lilypond.html manual up in a browser window to allow 
quick reference using the search feature (I use Mozilla 1.7.5 currently.)

Mats Bengtsson wrote:
It's already described clearly at
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.4/Documentation/user/out-www/lilypond/Organizing-larger-pieces.html 

However, it would be reasonable to have also a section in the main 
part of the manual that describes all details about the syntax of .ly 
files,
where this information would be a natural part.

   /Mats
Graham Percival wrote:
Yes, if it isn't already noted.  I'm not certain.
Could you look into it?  I have a lot of university work right now.  
Could
you find the section in the manual where this info should be added,
and suggest a few sentences that would clarify this issue?

Cheers,
- Graham, Documentation Editor.
On 30-Jan-05, at 10:36 PM, J L wrote:
Then would it be worthwhile to make a note of that in the manual?
From: Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: J L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Can't use numbers
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:20:03 -0700
J L wrote:
Is it true that LilyPond doesn't like music variables with a 
number in the name? If I did:

voice1 = {  somemusic  }
and used that later, LilyPond would complain?

Yes.  Some of us use roman numerals to get around this.
Paul Scott
_
Check out news, entertainment and more @  http://xtra.co.nz/broadband

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

--
Joe Ferguson

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Can't use numbers

2005-02-03 Thread J L

Actually, after a quick check, I've found the following line in Organizing 
Larger Pieces (2.5.10 docs)?

"The name of an identifier should have alphabetic characters only; no 
numbers, underscores or dashes. The assignment should be outside of running 
music."

Aligorith
From: Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: J L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Can't use numbers
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 23:58:04 -0800
Yes, if it isn't already noted.  I'm not certain.
Could you look into it?  I have a lot of university work right now.  Could
you find the section in the manual where this info should be added,
and suggest a few sentences that would clarify this issue?
Cheers,
- Graham, Documentation Editor.
On 30-Jan-05, at 10:36 PM, J L wrote:
Then would it be worthwhile to make a note of that in the manual?
From: Paul Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: J L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Can't use numbers
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 23:20:03 -0700
J L wrote:
Is it true that LilyPond doesn't like music variables with a number in 
the name? If I did:

voice1 = {  somemusic  }
and used that later, LilyPond would complain?
Yes.  Some of us use roman numerals to get around this.
Paul Scott
_
Check out news, entertainment and more @  http://xtra.co.nz/broadband

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

_
Surf the net and talk on the phone with Xtra JetStream @  
http://xtra.co.nz/jetstream


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

FW: Re: Breve Notation

2005-02-03 Thread Michael Kallas

Michael Kallas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 03.02.05 23:27:34:
> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Forget what I wrote, must have been looking through dirty glasses, sorry!
> (The notation I saw was a square breve with 2 vertical notes)
> 
> Bye
> Michael
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> 
> iD8DBQFCAqVOQggFxokHT60RAlnMAKCIqdHA7ttS+Dmy0nUwKH5E8kwwpACgpPL8
> lLOVn0hvbXFOC8eAGmftwW8=
> =9Wwx
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-

Sorry, only replied to myself. Late night sucks.
Bye
Michael



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Any info on using LilyPond (and other cygwin apps) from the XP command line?

2005-02-03 Thread Josh Don

Any info on using LilyPond (and other cygwin apps) from the windows command line?
 

Mats said...
You cannot run lilypond from a Windows command prompt, you have to runit from the Cygwin command prompt, which you open by clicking on the"Cygwin" icon or start menu item.
 
I thought it was ok, because "C:\cygwin\bin\lilypond.exe -h" worked.
but then "C:\cygwin\bin\lilypond.exe C:\t.ly" returned that "dlopen" thing
So, how do I run the Cygwin command prompt from a Windows command prompt?
 
I realise these things aren't LilyPond issues, which group would be bestto post them to?
 
P.S.
Double-clicking and LilyPond does work I deleted C:\CYGWIN to uninstall, so I did read that, but I only just read/realised that the installer is also the uninstaller.
 
While re-installing cygwin I got this other Error Messagein a popup dialog...
--mfw.exeThis application failed to start because cygX11-6.dll was not found.Reinstalling the application may fix this problem.--
I was "Reinstalling the application", what is that about?

		Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: transpose, transposition, and relative