Re: How to get a single notation of clefs, keys, or others?
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 01:21:04PM +0800, 胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng wrote: > For your other question, here's a script. Create a file feta.ly, and >copy the following lines into it. See the log file after compiling, and >you'll get a full list of music glyphs (some are punctuations and numbers) >in feta fonts: >%% I got this at the beginning of last year, >%% so I don't know whether it works on 2.12 or 2.13 >\version "2.10.0" >#(map ly:message (ly:otf-glyph-list (ly:font-load "emmentaler-20"))) >full list here in case of a compilation failure: The glyphs are also listed in the documentation. This is the 2.13 docs, but I'm sure it's also in the 2.12 docs. http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/user/lilypond/The-Feta-font#The-Feta-font -- Cameron Horsburgh Blog: http://spiritcry.wordpress.com/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: default margins
I know this topic has been silent for two weeks, but I just came across this "table of sizes" in my copy of Ted Ross's "The Art of Music Engraving and Processing". Might as well arm ourselves with as much information as we can get, right? - Mark <>___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius
Jay Anderson wrote Monday, April 06, 2009 2:50 AM On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Werner LEMBERG wrote: as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond, I will veto changes like this that introduce inconsistent whitespace handling in the syntax. Please come up with something different. I think the idea to use (for example) & as a place holder is much more sane. OK. Then I vote for a letter like `q' as a repeater for chords. `&' is a bit cumbersome to type. I think I would also prefer an alphabetic character also. Note and rest names only include these characters already so for consistency's sake this new 'repeat note' should also. Also after thinking about it a bit '&' and similar characters would make some scores look even more like line noise: 4 &2->\f &4 4 q2->\f q4 The 'q' version to my eyes is a bit easier to read. As I do little note entry myself I don't have a view on the merits of q vs &, but there is another issue to consider. If the base chord being repeated contains tweaks, fingering, etc, are these to be repeated too? Trevor ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius
>> Well, the advantage of a non-letter char is that it's less easy to >> confuse it with a note... That being said, we already have `r', >> meaning "rest" and `s' meaning "skip"... But what does `q' mean? >> :-) > > I guess it could mean "quote" -- as in quote the previous object. Well, I rather thought of ch -> q, as in `qord' :-) Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Avoiding slur collision with other voice
Trevor Daniels wrote: > The 'slurs' in the hand-written score look as if they are > really triplet indicators, with the '3' omitted from the > later ones. Trevor is right to discriminate between slurs and tuplet indicators. Ted Ross (1970) discusses the use of the small slur but makes clear that it must be small enough to avoid confusing it with a slur (see attached png). On the other hand, Kurt Stone (1980) writes: Square brackets, rather than slurs, should be used for unbeamed triplets, etc., to avoid ambiguities. Slurs will thus only indicate phrasing or refer to other typical slur functions such as bowing. It is true that the small tuplet slur was at one time commonplace even among the great publishing houses, but I find the modern practice preferable. Perhaps LilyPond could implement a tuplet slur as an alternative to the bracket, provided it's small enough? Would anybody want that? It seems kind of low-priority to me. - Mark <>___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius
> As I do little note entry myself I don't have a view on the merits > of q vs &, but there is another issue to consider. If the base > chord being repeated contains tweaks, fingering, etc, are these to > be repeated too? I don't know. It depends on the implementation possibilities whether everything within < ... > can be assigned to a placeholder, or whether only note events can be handled this way. We could explicitly forbit tweaks in case this causes problems. Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: default midi velocity
On Sun, Apr 05, 2009 at 11:04:09PM +0200, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
> diff -ur lilypond-2.13.0.orig/lily/midi-item.cc
> lilypond-2.13.0/lily/midi-item.cc
> --- lilypond-2.13.0.orig/lily/midi-item.cc2009-04-05 21:11:25.0
> +0200
> +++ lilypond-2.13.0/lily/midi-item.cc 2009-04-05 21:17:43.0 +0200
> @@ -169,7 +169,8 @@
> Midi_note::Midi_note (Audio_note *a)
> {
>audio_ = a;
> - dynamic_byte_ = 0x7f;
> + dynamic_byte_ = 0x5a;
> + // dynamic_byte_ = 0x7f;
> }
In lily/midi-item.cc I saw this:
Midi_note_off::Midi_note_off (Midi_note *n)
: Midi_note (n->audio_)
{
on_ = n;
channel_ = n->channel_;
// Anybody who hears any difference, or knows how this works?
// 0 should definitely be avoided, notes stick on some sound cards.
// 64 is supposed to be neutral
aftertouch_byte_ = 64;
}
I can try to answer the question in the // comment lines.
As I told you earlier, Midi Note Off message are not used very often in
the MIDI world. A more widely spread message is to use Midi Note On
messages with a velocity value=0 to end notes.
Note Off Velocity is something special. The idea is to registrate not
only how hard a key (I'm talking about a MIDI keyboard now) is hit, but
also how fast it is released at the end of a note. I have only once seen
a synthesizer that made use of this feature. It was an old AKAI
synthesizer that used Note Off Velocity to control the Envelope
Generator's release parameter of a Strings patch. In other words: If you
released the keys quickly, the sound would stop directly. If
you you released the keys slowly, the sound would fade-out
slowly after the key was released. It required some practicing to make
this work properly though. For most synths/soundcards/soundmodules
Note-Off is identical to Note-On with velocity=0.
I propose to change Lilypond's current behaviour to let it use Note-On
messages with velocity=0 instead of Note-Off messages with velocity=64.
I have attached a patch that changes this. The code can be even more
simplified I think. ( The Note-Off code is now identical to the Note-On
code, only the velocity value differs: 90=ON 00=OFF ). But I'm afraid to
break something if I change too much lines of code. Maybe someone else
who is more familiar with the code in mid-item.cc can think about it.
Patch attached for those who want to try.
--
Martin Tarenskeen
diff -ur lilypond-2.13.0.orig/lily/midi-item.cc
lilypond-2.13.0/lily/midi-item.cc
--- lilypond-2.13.0.orig/lily/midi-item.cc 2009-04-05 21:11:25.0
+0200
+++ lilypond-2.13.0/lily/midi-item.cc 2009-04-06 09:24:09.0 +0200
@@ -169,7 +169,8 @@
Midi_note::Midi_note (Audio_note *a)
{
audio_ = a;
- dynamic_byte_ = 0x7f;
+ dynamic_byte_ = 0x5a;
+ // dynamic_byte_ = 0x7f;
}
@@ -229,13 +230,14 @@
// 0 should definitely be avoided, notes stick on some sound cards.
// 64 is supposed to be neutral
- aftertouch_byte_ = 64;
+ // proposed patch: use note_on with velocity=0 instead of note_off
+ aftertouch_byte_ = 0;
}
string
Midi_note_off::to_string () const
{
- Byte status_byte = (char) (0x80 + channel_);
+ Byte status_byte = (char) (0x90 + channel_); //use note_on velocity=0
string str = ::to_string ((char)status_byte);
str += ::to_string ((char) (get_semitone_pitch () + Midi_note::c0_pitch_));
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: How to get a single notation of clifs, keys, or others?
The corresponding information is included in the "Application Usage" part of the documentation for version 2.12 and later, see http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/Documentation/user/lilypond-program/Alternate-methods-of-mixing-text-and-music#Inserting-LilyPond-output-into-other-programs /Mats Wei-Wei Guo wrote: Hi Carl, Mats has answered my first question. Thanks for your reply. Which version of LilyPond are you using? I couldn't find a section 14.11 in any of the current documentation. I'm using version 2.12.1. I only find section 14.11 in user document of version 2.10. Here is the link: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.10/Documentation/user/lilypond/Inserting-LilyPond-output-into-other-programs For a PNG file, the command in the link should be changed to: lilypond -dbackend=eps -dno-gs-load-fonts -dinclude-eps-fonts --png myfile.ly Best wishes, Wei-Wei ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- = Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing School of Electrical Engineering Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: mats.bengts...@ee.kth.se WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe = ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius
2009/4/6 Trevor Daniels : >> The 'q' version to my eyes is a bit easier to read. > > As I do little note entry myself I don't have a view > on the merits of q vs &, but there is another issue to > consider. If the base chord being repeated contains > tweaks, fingering, etc, are these to be repeated too? That's an interesting question. I think it would be wiser to repeat only the notes (the only other thing that could have to be repeated would be staccato dots, for instance, but this can be handled through Scheme functions). Werner: on an AZERTY french keyboard, you don't need to press shift to type "&", that is why I proposed it in the first place :-) That being said, `q' for [kord] makes sense to me (though in a geeky way), so I withdraw my question :) Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Avoiding slur collision with other voice
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Montag, 6. April 2009 09:38:42 Mark Polesky wrote: > Trevor Daniels wrote: > > The 'slurs' in the hand-written score look as if they are > > really triplet indicators, with the '3' omitted from the > > later ones. > > Trevor is right to discriminate between slurs and tuplet > indicators. Ted Ross (1970) discusses the use of the > small slur but makes clear that it must be small enough > to avoid confusing it with a slur (see attached png). [...] > Perhaps LilyPond could implement a tuplet slur as an > alternative to the bracket, provided it's small enough? > Would anybody want that? Yes, I would need it for MusicXML support. See the ‘23b-Tuplets-Styles.ly’ test case on http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/input/regression/musicxml/collated-files.html#t_g23-_002e_002e_002e-Triplets-Tuplets Cheers, Reinhold - -- - -- Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/ * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFJ2chuTqjEwhXvPN0RAmGzAKCYtDgZbiCFxeyWXYEVRsmpXX+zIACeIMuI clDsa945QHhSoZfm9QMdVX0= =iL+m -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Quarter-tone notation with arrows
Kees van den Doel wrote: > Unfortunately Western notation doesn't work like that. Accidentals > (microtonal or not) operate on the 7 > diatonic pitches, not on 12 semitones. I think you think the "arrow" somehow > alters > already altered notes (like Bb), but the alteration operates on the diatonic > notes, > so there can be no difference between natural-quarterflat and > flat-quartersharp, but > C# and Db are distinct. It's trivial (and intuitive, from a reader's point of view) to add an up- or down-arrow to a note/accidental to raise or lower its pitch by a quarter-tone. Whether this violates some theoretical ideal of how Western notation 'should' work seems to me to be not very important -- the notation _can_ be used in this way and it's expressively useful to do so. (I can come up with plenty of other examples where it would be preferable to alternatives, and plenty of other examples of breaches of notational correctness that are more intuitive and easy to understand than the strictly-correct notation.) Whether Lilypond (or other notation software) easily permits this use of notation is another matter ... :-) -- Joe ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
In message <49d996bb.9090...@ultrasw.com>, Paul Scott writes Ian Hulin wrote: Hi all, O.K here goes, I've pruned some bits out where we were getting into acoustics, and tweaked a few bits. Cheer Ian Hulin (snip) Transposing instruments are named according to the fundamental (known on some brass instruments as the pedal) note. On a woodwind instrument this is normally the note obtained with all holes covered without over-blowing or use of speaker keys. On a brass instrument it the note obtained with most relaxed embouchure and the slide extended fully That should be not extended at all for trombone (1st position). or all valves open. True. ??? What do you mean by an "open" valve? To me it means the valve is depressed and the associated tubing is brought into play, which it shouldn't be. It's probably best said as something like "with the instrument in its shortest configuration, eg the slide in 1st position or the valves not depressed". The other point that should be made is that the octave above the pedal note is notated as middle C in the treble clef. I was unaware, however, that the bass clarinet transposed in bass clef! And I seem to remember some American parts that appeared to have the trombone part transposed in bass clef too - that piece rapidly got ditched so I know precious little about it. That might be an American convention ... I'll try again later :-) Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - anth...@thewolery.demon.co.uk ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
wol, On 6 Apr 2009, at 12:23, Anthony W. Youngman wrote: Transposing instruments are named according to the fundamental (known on some brass instruments as the pedal) note. On a woodwind instrument this is normally the note obtained with all holes covered without over-blowing or use of speaker keys. On a brass instrument it the note obtained with most relaxed embouchure and the slide extended fully That should be not extended at all for trombone (1st position). or all valves open. True. ??? What do you mean by an "open" valve? To me it means the valve is depressed and the associated tubing is brought into play, which it shouldn't be. It's probably best said as something like "with the instrument in its shortest configuration, eg the slide in 1st position or the valves not depressed". the fundamental note of a brass instrument is the lowest note of the overtone series which is produced at the shortest configuration. however, middle C is notated as the first overtone, which sounds an octave higher. The other point that should be made is that the octave above the pedal note is notated as middle C in the treble clef. I was unaware, however, that the bass clarinet transposed in bass clef! And I seem to remember some American parts that appeared to have the trombone part transposed in bass clef too - that piece rapidly got ditched so I know precious little about it. That might be an American convention ... this happens in dutch symphonic wind music a lot as well. the trombone parts are supplied in Bb treble-clef (transposed), Bb bass-clef (transposed) and C bass-clef (concert pitch). i've only ever seen it in dutch published music, i'm not sure exactly where it comes from, but it's horribly confusing when the librarian doesn't know the difference... ;) a useful fact for Bb transposing instruments usually notated in bass clef (trombones, euphonia, etc.) is that the treble-clef transposed part can be read almost exactly as if it were notated in concert-pitch tenor-clef (add 2 flats and pay careful attention to the accidentals). fairly random piece of information, but it helps me whenever i run across treble-clef b-flat parts. regards, sb -- Simon Bailey Devoted bass trombonist +43 699 190 631 25 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
Paul Scott wrote: > There are also orchestral bass clarinet parts written in bass clef so > that the transposition is a second rather than a ninth. The really nice parts are the ones written like this for bass clarinet _in A_, so you have to read the bass clef and transpose at the same time... ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
On Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Anthony W. Youngman wrote: > > What do you mean by an "open" valve? To me it means the valve is > depressed and the associated tubing is brought into play, which it > shouldn't be. It's probably best said as something like "with the > instrument in its shortest configuration, eg the slide in 1st position > or the valves not depressed". This is a wise idea. I frequently use (and hear) 'open' to mean 'not depressed', although as you rightly point out depressing the valves actually opens it. To further confuse matters, it's not uncommon (in my circles, at least) to refer to the first position on a trombone as 'closed.' This corresponds to 'fully open' on a valve instrument. If this thread has proven anything, it's that brass instruments do not make sense and their players should be treated with the utmost respect and suspicion. -- Cameron Horsburgh Blog: http://spiritcry.wordpress.com/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Quarter-tone notation with arrows
Graham Breed wrote: > If there's some intuitive reason for choosing different logical > equivalents, perhaps that should be reflected in different pitch > alterations anyway. This was certainly one thought going through my head. Though it's not something I write myself, I was also thinking somewhat of Ben Johnston's notation for just intonation, where each successive addition to the accidentals (up/down arrows, 13 or upside-down 13, + or -) represents a successive refinement of the pitch. This second case might well be best dealt with via 'tweaks' instead of accidentals in the conventional case. > The idea is you can only have one set of quartertone symbols at a time, > but you can use a \tweak or \override to switch between sets. I have > proof of concept examples for pure/mixed Sagittal. > > The cheating looks fine until you want to do transpositions. > Transposing C up-a-quartertone up by the same quartertone won't give C > sharp, for example. If you think it should that's an indication you're > treating quartertones equally, of course. That's an interesting point. It hadn't occurred to me that this might be an issue -- I don't think I will be using quarter-tone transpositions in my own writing any time soon -- but I'll do a couple of experiments to see if I can get my cheat to deal with this possibility. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
Op zondag 05-04-2009 om 18:13 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Han-Wen Nienhuys: > as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond, I will veto changes > like this that introduce inconsistent whitespace handling in the > syntax. What was the problem with this again? It is not so much inconsistent whitepace, it's the absence or presence of whitespace. That's quite a difference. We have that already c 4 4 == c4 4 != c44 % first ws significance BAD, second GOOD? ^ ^ I'm quite certain there is a good argument for not not making such changes--in fact I remember proposing this change about a decade ago and you talking me out of it :-) --but I don't remember the reason. It would be good for the archives too: a good reason may even hold it back should the veto ever fail ;-) Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:23 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
>> as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond, I will veto changes
>> like this that introduce inconsistent whitespace handling in the
>> syntax.
>
> What was the problem with this again? It is not so much inconsistent
> whitepace, it's the absence or presence of whitespace. That's
> quite a difference. We have that already
>
> c 4 4 == c4 4 != c44 % first ws significance BAD, second GOOD?
> ^ ^
This is actually a lexicographic difference: the input of lilypond is
a stream of tokens (ints, keywords, strings, etc.), and we have a
grammar specified in terms of these tokens.
There are also two technical reasons why this might is a bad idea.
When you introduce a change like this, it often means that the parser
has to signal back to the lexer, to interpret
c4 => PITCH=c , INT=4
and with space
c 4 => PITCH=c, INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH=4
this is difficult to get right, since parser actions happen somewhat
unpredictably due to lookahead.
Secondly, if you do this, you now have an extra way
(INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH) to denote a number, on top of
bare_unsigned:
UNSIGNED {
$$ = $1;
}
| DIGIT {
$$ = $1;
}
;
(remember: digits are already special due to constructions such as
c4-5), with all the extra difficulties of constructing a grammar
without ambiguities.
>From a user perspective, I also don't see how this makes sense in
corner cases. For example:
c'=, ,4
c4- 4
(note space between commas and after - ) - is this a
INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH? In this case, probably not, right? (if it
would, it would be a parse error, since comma on itself does not mean
anything.)
So, INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH is a number preceded by a space.
Great! Now we have to keep track of all spaces in the lexer, to make
sure we catch all of the INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCHes.
Great! now \tempo 4 = 120 is actually taking a INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH
in its 3rd argument, just like c4 * 5 (the 5 is
INT_AFTER_SPACE_PITCH). Good luck with not creating ambiguities.
Remember how much fun TeX is, where you have to cover up newlines in
definitions with % (but only half of the time?) so you do not create
accidental spaces in macro expansions? This is the same thing, and I
think it is a bad idea.
For crying out loud, why is this so difficult to understand? Syntax
changes may be inspired by "would it not be nice if .. ", but this
mindset must then be discarded immediately to look whether you can
pull it off in the parser/lexer consistently. Then, after introducing
it, run a 100 pieces of mutopia through the new lexer, and check if
they are not breaking in unobvious ways.
The lilypond syntax is already way more convoluted than is good for
it, and especially if there is an easy way to avoid the problem (using
& or similar), I see no reason to make it even more convoluted.
> I'm quite certain there is a good argument for not not making such
> changes--in fact I remember proposing this change about a decade
> ago and you talking me out of it :-) --but I don't remember
> the reason.
>
> It would be good for the archives too: a good reason
> may even hold it back should the veto ever fail ;-)
>
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
Despite the fact that it would cause massive problems in parsing, a line like c4 4 4 4 is not quite readable for me. As lilypond is THE tool for typesetting beautiful scores, the source file should reflect the beauty. So I should be able to grasp the score at first sight, and in my opinion, a distinct "repeat the last expression"-sign would be the best solution. To join the discussion about the "best" character, here are my 2 cents: 1) personally, I would use the "%", but this is the comment sign and can't be used. (perhaps this would be even possible, but ... NO!) 2) the "&" has a similar role in regular expressions as it would have in lilypond but I think not everyone using lilypond is familiar with grep and sed. The argument that it needs 2 keystrokes on most keyboards is not that important, because is will be used mostly as a shortcut for longer terms, so I will not write c4 & & & , but c4 c c c whereas 4 & & & ist faster to type than < c e g>4 < c e g > < c e g > (and more readable, because otherwise I could just use the copy&paste function of my editor and forget about the rest) 3) why not use a "x" for eXpression, because the sign is meant not only to repeat "Qords", but everything reasonable? Marc ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
In message <7ba1cb89-6dd8-4258-aa23-32ba97b5f...@gmail.com>, Simon Bailey writes this happens in dutch symphonic wind music a lot as well. the trombone parts are supplied in Bb treble-clef (transposed), Bb bass-clef (transposed) and C bass-clef (concert pitch). i've only ever seen it in dutch published music, i'm not sure exactly where it comes from, but it's horribly confusing when the librarian doesn't know the difference... ;) That's good to know - I'll mention it in passing ... a useful fact for Bb transposing instruments usually notated in bass clef (trombones, euphonia, etc.) is that the treble-clef transposed part can be read almost exactly as if it were notated in concert-pitch tenor-clef (add 2 flats and pay careful attention to the accidentals). fairly random piece of information, but it helps me whenever i run across treble-clef b-flat parts. Yes - I use that trick a bit ... I prefer to try and read tenor clef as tenor because it makes the accidentals easier, but I see it pretty rarely so I usually start thinking treble and then switch as I get into it. You can pull the same trick with Eb parts too - if the music is written in Eb, add three flats to the key signature and read it as if it were bass clef. Cheers, Wol (who reads four clefs, treble in Bb, bass, tenor and treble in concert :-) -- Anthony W. Youngman - anth...@thewolery.demon.co.uk ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
shift lyrics closer to staff
Hi,
in the example from the documentation,
how do I get lyrics closer to the staff?
(I tried it using the commented line, but it didn't work)
\include "gregorian.ly"
\score {
<<
\new VaticanaVoice = "cantus" {
\[ c'\melisma c' \flexa a \]
\[ a \flexa \deminutum g\melismaEnd \]
f \divisioMinima
\[ f\melisma \pes a c' c' \pes d'\melismaEnd \]
c' \divisioMinima
\[ c'\melisma c' \flexa a \]
\[ a \flexa \deminutum g\melismaEnd \] f \divisioMinima
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "cantus" {
%\override LyricText #'Y-offset = #5
San- ctus, San- ctus, San- ctus
}
>>
}
--
Marek Klein
http://gregoriana.sk
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
I would avoid getting in this discussion before the feature is complete. Just call it \r (using an identifier or keyword), and see how it works in practice. When it is debugged, think of a character. The advantage of not using a letter a-z is that there are no backward compat problems with source files that use said character as identifier or unquoted string. On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 11:30 AM, Marc Hohl wrote: > To join the discussion about the "best" character, here are my 2 cents: > > 1) personally, I would use the "%", but this is the comment sign and can't > be used. > (perhaps this would be even possible, but ... NO!) > > 2) the "&" has a similar role in regular expressions as it would have in > lilypond > but I think not everyone using lilypond is familiar with grep and sed. > The argument that it needs 2 keystrokes on most keyboards is not that > important, > because is will be used mostly as a shortcut for longer terms, so I will > not write > c4 & & & , but c4 c c c > whereas 4 & & & ist faster to type than < c e g>4 < c e g > < c e g >> > (and more readable, because otherwise I could just use the copy&paste > function of > my editor and forget about the rest) > > 3) why not use a "x" for eXpression, because the sign is meant not only to > repeat > "Qords", but everything reasonable? > > Marc > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
In message <49da120a.7090...@hohlart.de>, Marc Hohl writes 1) personally, I would use the "%", but this is the comment sign and can't be used. (perhaps this would be even possible, but ... NO!) Oh my gosh, please, NOOO As Han-Wen has said, parsing is important. In another life I work with a language called DataBasic. What do you thing of the following line of code: REM: REM = REM(6, 4) ; REM This is an example of a horrendous line. Here we have REM used consecutively as (1) a label, (2) a variable, (3) a function, and (4) a language command. Now imagine how easy that is to lex/parse... because it IS legal syntax ! :-( Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - anth...@thewolery.demon.co.uk ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: chordname vertical spacing
On 05/04/2009, François Labadens wrote:
> I would like to have chord names nearer to the staff... How can I do that ?
I had the same problem. I'm now using the following setting in the
Staff below the chords:
\new Staff \with {\override VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-4 . 3)}
Sometimes I still use extra-offset. :-(
-Risto
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace
> 3) why not use a "x" for eXpression, because the sign is meant not > only to repeat "Qords", but everything reasonable? I don't object. A chord is then played 3x (3 times) more, so use of `x' is really justified. Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
Anthony W. Youngman schrieb: In message <49da120a.7090...@hohlart.de>, Marc Hohl writes 1) personally, I would use the "%", but this is the comment sign and can't be used. (perhaps this would be even possible, but ... NO!) Oh my gosh, please, NOOO As Han-Wen has said, parsing is important. In another life I work with a language called DataBasic. What do you thing of the following line of code: REM: REM = REM(6, 4) ; REM This is an example of a horrendous line. Here we have REM used consecutively as (1) a label, (2) a variable, (3) a function, and (4) a language command. Now imagine how easy that is to lex/parse... because it IS legal syntax ! :-( Cheers, Wol That's why I said NO! ;-) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Concert Pitch (a second try)
Paul Scott wrote: > For woodwinds this description is not at all practical partly for the > extension reason you mentioned below. Not counting the B foot on a > flute or the low A on many baritone saxes the only woodwind I know of > that has a C for its full length is the flute. Saxes and oboes start at > Bb. Clarinets in their lower register (no over-blowing or speaker key) > start at written E or Eb. A better might be a certain equivalent seven > finger on each of these instruments except for bassoon which could be > considered an F instrument (similar to an F recorder). Where woodwind instruments are concerned the principal focus is ease of fingering. For example, on modern Boehm clarinets the written C major scale is the only one that can be played across the whole basic compass of the instrument (that is, lower and upper registers) without ever having to simultaneously raise and lower fingers (unless you count crossing the register break). I think the same applies even to quite early, simple clarinets, with the exception of the top C which is a forked fingering. Indeed, on early clarinets, which don't have a very sophisticated fingering system, the number of keys that can be played in _at all_ with any reliability is very small (which is why clarinets have so many transposing variants). ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
grace notes after repeat bar
I'm running Lilypond 12 on a Mac, using an external editor (TextMate), which
generally works
quite well. But I play trombone, and must create parts and scores involving
sliding into
notes. Lilypond produces some bizarre output. The example below illustrates
the ugly output my
innocence led me into when I print a score. (Print the first example to
see.)
The lilypond docs address this under grace notes.
Grace note synchronization can also lead to surprises. Staff notation, such
as key signatures,
bar lines, etc., are also synchronized. Take care when you mix staves with
grace notes and
staves without, for example,
\relative c'' {
<< \new Staff { e4 \bar "|:" \grace c16 d4 }
\new Staff { c4 \bar "|:" d4 } >>
}
The "solution" is to include skips in all other parts, for example:
\relative c'' {
<< \new Staff { e4 \bar "|:" \grace c16 d4 }
\new Staff { c4 \bar "|:" \grace s16 d4 } >>
}
This seems a little less than ideal (read "I consider it a bug"). One must
alter one part to
accommodate characteristics of another part. Is there a way to avoid this
problem which doesn't
involve putting stuff into a part which (arguably, I guess) isn't really
present in that part?
A scoop might do the job, but isn't defined in Lilypond. I've seen them
presented, though, and
will go searching for how to draw them if that's the answer.
Lewy
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: grace notes after repeat bar
Am 06.04.2009 um 22:26 schrieb Lewis Overton:
…
Grace note synchronization can also lead to surprises. Staff
notation, such as key signatures,
bar lines, etc., are also synchronized. Take care when you mix
staves with grace notes and
staves without, for example,
…
The "solution" is to include skips in all other parts, for example:
…
This seems a little less than ideal (read "I consider it a bug").
One must alter one part to
accommodate characteristics of another part. Is there a way to
avoid this problem which doesn't
involve putting stuff into a part which (arguably, I guess) isn't
really present in that part?
While not a solution in the sense of what you're looking for, I find
that a separate variable that can be added to all of the other parts
containing appropriate grace skips useful i.e.,
skips = { s1*32 \grace s8 s1*18 \grace s8 }
James E. Bailey
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
Why not use an empty pair of braces, which at the moment are just ignored by the parser, to dignify chord repetition: <> gives 3<> gives c <> gives c - ie <> ignored as now if preceding element is not a chord Can be typed pretty rapidly too: hold down right shift with your little finger and <> fall under the index and middle fingers. Nick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
custom keysignature help
I'm trying to figure out what the character in the custom key
signature is, and it's not working for me. I've tried copying and
pasting from the manual, but it's not working for. I get these errors:
GNU LilyPond 2.12.2
»Vol 1.ly« wird verarbeitet
Analysieren...
Vol 1.ly:571:51: Fehler: GUILE signalisierte einen Fehler für den
hier beginnenden Ausdruck
\set Staff.keySignature = #
`(((0 . 3) . ,SHARP)
Vol 1.ly:571:52: Fehler: syntax error, unexpected '('
\set Staff.keySignature = #`
(((0 . 3) . ,SHARP)
Vol 1.ly:577:51: Fehler: GUILE signalisierte einen Fehler für den
hier beginnenden Ausdruck
\set Staff.keySignature = #
`(((0 . 3) . ,SHARP)
Vol 1.ly:577:52: Fehler: syntax error, unexpected '('
\set Staff.keySignature = #`
(((0 . 3) . ,SHARP)
Vol 1.ly:568:8: Fehler: Fehler gefunden, musikalischer Ausdruck wird
ignoriert
\new PianoStaff \with { instrumentName = \markup \bold 7 } <<
Fehler: gescheiterte Dateien: "Vol 1.ly"
Vol 1.ly:577:53: Unknown # object: #\`
Vol 1.ly:585:65: Unknown # object: #\-
James E. Bailey
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Repeating subtltle with bookparts
Is it intended that a title or subtitle in the main header should be
repeated in each bookpart that doesn't redefine the title or subtitle,
because that's what I see:
%=
\version "2.12.2"
\paper {
ragged-bottom = ##t
ragged-last-bottom = ##t
}
\header {
title = "Main Title"
subtitle = "Main Subtitle"
}
\markup \null
\bookpart {
\header {
title = "Piece One"
composer = "Person One"
}
\relative c' { \time 4/4 c d e f g a g f e }
}
\bookpart {
\header {
title = "Piece Two"
composer = "Person Two"
}
\relative c' { \time 5/4 c d e f g a g f e }
}
\bookpart {
\header {
title = "Piece Three"
composer = "Person Three"
}
\relative c' { \time 3/4 c d e f g a g f e }
}
%=
"Main Subtitle" appears in each bookpart. If I change each bookpart to use
subtitle instead of title, then "Main Title" appears in each part.
Nick
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: TimeSignature with white border?
This one is a little better.
- Mark
\version "2.13.0"
#(define (whiteout-clef-stil grob)
(let* ((x-pad 0.3)
(this-stil (ly:clef::print grob))
(stil-x-ext (ly:stencil-extent this-stil 0))
(stil-y-ext (ly:stencil-extent this-stil 1))
(box-x-ext (cons (- (car stil-x-ext) x-pad)
(+ (cdr stil-x-ext) x-pad)))
(box-y-ext stil-y-ext)
(box-w (- (cdr box-x-ext) (car box-x-ext)))
(box-h (- (cdr box-y-ext) (car box-y-ext)))
)
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
(ly:stencil-add
(ly:make-stencil
(list 'embedded-ps
(ly:format
(string-append "gsave\n"
"currentpoint translate\n"
"1 setgray\n"
"~a ~a ~a ~a rectfill\n"
"grestore\n")
(car box-x-ext)
(car box-y-ext)
box-w
box-h))
stil-x-ext
stil-y-ext)
this-stil
#(define (whiteout-time-signature-stil grob)
(let* ((x-pad 1)
(this-stil (ly:time-signature::print grob))
(stil-x-ext (ly:stencil-extent this-stil 0))
(stil-y-ext (ly:stencil-extent this-stil 1))
(box-x-ext (cons (- (car stil-x-ext) x-pad)
(+ (cdr stil-x-ext) x-pad)))
(box-y-ext stil-y-ext)
(box-w (- (cdr box-x-ext) (car box-x-ext)))
(box-h (- (cdr box-y-ext) (car box-y-ext)))
)
(ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
(ly:stencil-add
(ly:make-stencil
(list 'embedded-ps
(ly:format
(string-append "gsave\n"
"currentpoint translate\n"
"1 setgray\n"
"~a ~a ~a ~a rectfill\n"
"grestore\n")
(car box-x-ext)
(car box-y-ext)
box-w
box-h))
stil-x-ext
stil-y-ext)
this-stil
whiteoutClefs = {
\override Slur #'layer = #-2
\override Staff.Clef #'avoid-slur = ##f
\override Staff.Clef #'layer = #-1
\override Staff.Clef #'stencil = #whiteout-clef-stil
}
normalClefs = {
\revert Slur #'layer
\revert Staff.Clef #'avoid-slur
\revert Staff.Clef #'layer
\revert Staff.Clef #'stencil
}
whiteoutTimeSignatures = {
\override Slur #'layer = #-2
\override Tie #'layer = #-2
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'avoid-slur = ##f
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'layer = #-1
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil =
#whiteout-time-signature-stil
}
normalTimeSignatures = {
\revert Slur #'layer
\revert Tie #'layer
\revert Staff.TimeSignature #'avoid-slur
\revert Staff.TimeSignature #'layer
\revert Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil
}
\markup "whiteoutClefs:"
{
\whiteoutClefs
\clef bass e2. d4(
\clef treble c''4) c''2.
}
\markup "whiteoutTimeSignatures:"
{
\whiteoutTimeSignatures
c''2. b'4^"(tie)"~
\time 3/4 b'2 f'4^"(slur)"(
\time 2/4 b'2)
}
\markup "both:"
{
\whiteoutClefs
\whiteoutTimeSignatures
\clef bass d2. d4(
\clef treble \time 3/4 e'4) e'2
}<>___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: my articles and astroturfng LWN
Here's the Saraband from essay in Finale 2008, which is only one version of Finale behind the current one. I put it together while contemplating Graham's grand web project. Andrew On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Graham Percival > wrote: > >> As for LilyPond vs. Sibelius: if we do it, we should do it >> objectively. One thing we might do in the new website is to have >> examples of notation from the latest software (lilypond stable, >> finale 20XY, sibelius 20AB, etc) and point out flaws in the >> default output. We could then point out the ease (or not!) of >> fixing said problems. > > It would be nice to update the finale 2003 comparison on lilypond.org; > I hear Finale has improved since, but so has the lilypond output. > > > -- > Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > Finale 2008a - [Sarabande.MUS].pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
How to input keysignature or timesignature in \markup?
Dear all, I need to input music symbols in my learning notes. Although \musicglyph helps a lot, I still have no idea how to input some music symbols, such as a short piece of pure staff, timesignature, keysignature, and so on. Could you give me any suggestions? Thanks in advance! Best wishes, Wei-Wei ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: TimeSignature with white border?
Mark, This one is a little better. You rock -- thanks! Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Quarter-tone notation with arrows
> Kees van den Doel wrote: > > Unfortunately Western notation doesn't work like that. > Accidentals (microtonal or not) operate on the 7 > > diatonic pitches, not on 12 semitones. I think you think the > "arrow" somehow alters > > already altered notes (like Bb), but the alteration operates > on the diatonic notes, > > so there can be no difference between natural-quarterflat and > flat-quartersharp, but > > C# and Db are distinct. > > It's trivial (and intuitive, from a reader's point of view) to > add an > up- or down-arrow to a note/accidental to raise or lower its > pitch by a > quarter-tone. Whether this violates some theoretical ideal > of how > Western notation 'should' work seems to me to be not very > important -- > the notation _can_ be used in this way and it's expressively > useful to > do so. (I can come up with plenty of other examples where > it would be > preferable to alternatives, and plenty of other examples of > breaches of > notational correctness that are more intuitive and easy to understand > than the strictly-correct notation.) > > Whether Lilypond (or other notation software) easily permits > this use of > notation is another matter ... :-) I agree it makes total sense to have an "accidental_level2" which make additional microtonal alterations to the 12 "diatonic pitches and their equally tempered "accidental_level1" alterations (b and #)", but there is only one level of accidental in Lilypond, as it adheres to the strict Western notation principles of diatonic pitches modified by an accidental. If your microtonal accidentals are approximate it makes logical sense to me that B_natural_downarrow and B_flat_uparrow should be assigned slightly different pitches, for they will not sound the same anyways. Just as Bb and A# are not the same pitches in all but one tuning. Kees ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lyrics and aftergrace
Dear community,
I have a problem with lyrics and aftergrace.
In the following snippet, the lyrics don't align to the music as expected.
global = { \key d \major \time 6/8 }
melodie = \relative c'' { \global \afterGrace cis2.\trill{ b16 [ cis] } d4 }
text = \lyricmode { Lied im Grund. }
\version "2.12.0"
\score {
<<
\new Voice = "eins" {
\autoBeamOff
\melodie
}
\new Lyrics \lyricsto "eins" \text
>>
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Repeating subtltle with bookparts
2009/4/7 Nick Payne
> Is it intended that a title or subtitle in the main header should be
> repeated in each bookpart that doesn't redefine the title or subtitle,
> because that's what I see:
>
>
> "Main Subtitle" appears in each bookpart. If I change each bookpart to use
> subtitle instead of title, then "Main Title" appears in each part.
>
> Nick
>
>
Hi, you can remove titles by setting them to false:
\header {
subtitle = ##f
}
<
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.12/Documentation/user/lilypond/Creating-titles#Creating-titles
>
--
Marek Klein
http://gregoriana.sk
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: significance of whitespace [WAS: LilyPond, Finale and Sibelius]
> Can be typed pretty rapidly too: hold down right shift with your little > finger and <> fall under the index and middle fingers. ..not everyone uses us keyboard ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
