intractable collision of arpeggio and rest
Running Lilypond 2.16.0 -
1. In the following 8 bar snippet, I am arpeggiating across the middle
and upper voices. The arpeggio is colliding with the rest that's in the
middle voice. I've tried about 9 ways and I cannot get the arpeggio in
the right place. It needs to make room for that rest. Nothing works. Any
ideas?
2. Also, is there any way to close the distance between the arpeggio and
the notes to which it's applied? Seems like an awfully big gap; I'd like
to lose about 30% of it.
3. Is this there any way to get more distance between the "instrument"
line and the beginning of the score# It looks crowded to me.
Thanks for the help!
\version "2.16.0"
% (is Lilypond current version - checked 2013.05.12)
% template version 2013.05.15
\include "articulate.ly" % use the articulate.ly script (affects midi
file - activates midi repeats, better articulation, etc.).
\include "_fingering-variables.ly" % variables needed to manage LH & RH
fingering efficiently
%{NOTES -
*ToDos for this piece:
*
*
%}
#(set-global-staff-size 20) % 20 is said to be standard for most scores
date = #(strftime "%Y.%m.%d" (localtime (current-time))) % define a
variable to hold the formatted date
#(define RH rightHandFinger) %assigns value to RH
\header {
% <* centered top *>
%dedication="dedication" %centered above title, top of page one
title = "Sarabande to Purcell's Minuet" %centered below dedication
%subtitle = "subtitle" %centered below title
subsubtitle = \markup { "(2013.04.25) - version" \date } %centered below
subtitle - used as both composition date and ascension number for the
coposition.
%piece = "(piece)" %{ useful only with multi-piece set given Opus
number; set flush left below meter %}
instrument = "Classic Guitar" %{ centered below the subsubtitle, and at
the top of pages (other than the first page). %}
% <* flush right *>
composer = \markup \center-column {"Tom Cloyd"} %flush right
%arranger = \markup \center-column { \italic "arranged by" \normal-text
"Tom Cloyd"} %flush right
%opus = "{opus}" %flush right below arranger
% <* centered, bottom of page *>
copyright = "©2013 Tom Cloyd - t...@tomcloyd.com" %centered at the bottom
of the first page
tagline = \markup { \small "score set with Lilipond
(http://lilypond.org/web/)"} % centered at the bottom of the last pages
}
\paper {
#(set-default-paper-size "letter" 'portrait)
system-system-spacing #'padding = #5 % controls padding within systems
ragged-last-bottom = ##t % turns off vertical justify
left-margin = 0.6\in
line-width = 7\in % works better than specifying R-margin
bottom-margin = 1.4\in % needed for good printing with Okular
top-margin = 1\in
}
global = {
\clef "treble_8"
\key a \minor
\time 3/4
\tempo "Allegretto" 4=90 %{ metronome marking will be in parentheses, if
accompanied by verbal tempo marking; or just precede it with empty
parentheses to obtain metron. marking in parens. %}
}
% * VOICE ONE
melody = \relative c {
\voiceOne
\global
\sfol %LH fingering placement - normally, place it OUTSIDE of chord
construct to keep this from having effect
\ssnou %string number placement
\ssfor %RH fingering placement - must always be in chord construct
\override Score.NonMusicalPaperColumn #'padding = #1.1
\partial 4 b'4 |
\repeat volta 2 { c c |
e2 d4 |
e e\arpeggio g |
2 ^"CIII - - - - -" g4 |
% * m 5 = = = =
e d c |
g' f e |
%\break
2. |
}
}
% * VOICE THREE ===
% used only when there are three parts
alto = \relative c {
\voiceThree
\stemDown
\sfol %LH fingering placement
\ssfor %RH fingering placement
\ssnol %string number placement
\partial 4 s4 |
\repeat volta 2 { f4\rest 2 |
\once \override Voice.Rest #'X-offset = #2.5 c4\rest a2 |
\once \override Voice.Rest #'X-offset = #2.5 c4\rest #'extra-offset #'(4 . 0)-2>2\arpeggio |
\once \override Voice.Rest #'X-offset = #2.5 c4\rest
2 |
% * m 5 = = = =
f,4\rest c2 |
\once \override Voice.Rest #'X-offset = #3 c4\rest c2 |
\once \override Voice.Rest #'X-offset = #3 b'4\rest a c |
}
}
% * VOICE TWO
bass = \relative c {
\voiceTwo
\sfol %LH fingering placement - down is the default
\ssfor %RH fingering placement
\ssnod %string number placement
\partial 4 s4 |
\repeat volta 2 { a2. |
|
g |
f |
% * m 5 = = = =
g, |
|
a,2 e4 |
}
}
structure = {
\new Staff = "guitar" \with { \consists "Span_arpeggio_engraver" }
<<
%\set Staff.instrumentName="Classical Guitar" %puts name to left of line one
\set Staff.midiInstrument="acoustic guitar (nylon)"
\set Staff.connectArpeggios = ##t
\context Voice = "melody" \melody
\context Voice = "alto" \alto
\context Voice = "bass" \bass
>>
}
\score {
\structure
\layout {
indent = 0.0\cm % remove indent on first staff
}
}
\score {
\unfoldRep
Re: intractable collision of arpeggio and rest
Am 22.05.2013 08:59, schrieb Tom Cloyd: Running Lilypond 2.16.0 - 1. In the following 8 bar snippet, I am arpeggiating across the middle and upper voices. The arpeggio is colliding with the rest that's in the middle voice. I've tried about 9 ways and I cannot get the arpeggio in the right place. It needs to make room for that rest. Nothing works. Any ideas? The problem here with your file is that it cannot be compiled ... [...] \include "_fingering-variables.ly" % variables needed to manage LH & RH fingering efficiently ... because this file is missing. Generally, it is a good idea to try to boil the file down to the essential parts, one or two measures that show the problem should be sufficient. Longer files/attachmens seem to scare potential helpers away. Marc ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: intractable collision of arpeggio and rest
Marc Hohl writes: > Am 22.05.2013 08:59, schrieb Tom Cloyd: >> Running Lilypond 2.16.0 - >> >> 1. In the following 8 bar snippet, I am arpeggiating across the middle >> and upper voices. The arpeggio is colliding with the rest that's in the >> middle voice. I've tried about 9 ways and I cannot get the arpeggio in >> the right place. It needs to make room for that rest. Nothing works. Any >> ideas? > > The problem here with your file is that it cannot be compiled ... > [...] >> \include "_fingering-variables.ly" % variables needed to manage LH & RH >> fingering efficiently > > ... because this file is missing. > > Generally, it is a good idea to try to boil the file down to the > essential parts, one or two measures that show the problem should be > sufficient. Longer files/attachmens seem to scare potential helpers > away. It's just a matter of efficiency. To find the problem, you need to boil down the code to the essential part anyway. Not doing this in advance is only efficient if the expected number of helpers is below 1 or if their time is to be valued less than that of the person having the problem. But making it easy for people to help also makes it more satisfying for them, so it is also an advantage for the long term. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: intractable collision of arpeggio and rest
On 22 May 2013, at 10:06 , David Kastrup wrote: It's just a matter of efficiency. To find the problem, you need to boil down the code to the essential part anyway. Not doing this in advance is only efficient if the expected number of helpers is below 1 or if their time is to be valued less than that of the person having the problem. But making it easy for people to help also makes it more satisfying for them, so it is also an advantage for the long term. AND: boiling down the problem makes sure there IS a problem. Sometimes a problem you experience goes away when boiling down, so when you compile at stages in between you'll might find what caused the problem itself. And (ideally) that process mostly happens before you put it on the list. Boiling down then also gives any helper the assurance you looked at the problem yourself seriously. Regards, Wim. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
Dear Helge, Helge Kruse wrote: No. I think you misspelled MS with a special character '$' and I can find any reason for that. Is this intentionally or really a typo? Let's not be cynical about this: It was fully intentional, but could arguably be described as a somewhat adolescent and dated joke. Since it seems to cause offence, I have changed the "$" to a less controversial "S". The shared runtime libraries are the main part of the "MS VC++ 2008 Redistributable Package". I would favor "runtime" over "module" if place is an issue since the latter is over-generalized and with little information. It contains a hyperlink to the actual thing, for Bill Gates' sake! :) But there you go, I have replaced "module" with "runtime" as you suggested. Yes, but you placed [lilybin] at the the Frescobaldi sub topic. Ok, you probably didn't wanted to add a complete slide for lilybin. But I would try separate it a bit, e.g with a blank line. I am starting to find this discussion rather entertaining :) But I think I have found what I believe to be a structurally /and/ typographically sound solution for this "problem" (it never seemed to be one before announcing the slides here). All the above edits are reflected in the now updated the archive with the slides and examples at http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2013/download/lilypond_lac2013.tgz luis jure wrote: anyway, i didn't bring this up, the discussion began with the use of the term in florian's presentation (by the way, i found the presentation very good). Ah, music to my ears, luis, thanks! :) Best, flo.H ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
Hi all, David Kastrup wrote: [...] it is hard to find Florian at fault for since he is working with the terminology employed by LilyPond. luis jure wrote: [...] the inconsistent use of the terms "note" and "pitch" in florian's presentation (which, as you said, was just the consequence of using lilypond's terminology, not florian's fault, of course). So now that we have - to my relief - established that I'm not to blame for anything :) may I suggest the following: Although I am tempted to leave things as they are (to get new Lilyponders used to the note/pitch inconsistency as early as possible), I have changed the "pitches" on page 20 of my slides to "notes". Reasoning: * Let's at least be consistent within this single document * However, I'm too lazy re-do the figure on page 13 * So "notes" it is :) I have updated the archive with the slides and examples at http://lac.linuxaudio.org/2013/download/lilypond_lac2013.tgz As important as these terminology discussions are for the continued development of Lilypond, I think it is worth reminding ourselves that during the actual workshop, this did not seem to cause any confusion whatsoever. So is the idea to simply include a link to the above .tgz archive at http://lilypond.org/publications , or would it be preferable to host a copy on lilypond.org itself? And who would be in charge of either process? Best, flo.H ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
partcombine and bendAfter don't always play nicely
Hi folks,
I seem to have run into a problem that has been reported once before:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2010-03/msg00263.html
Consider this file:
%%%
\version "2.16.2"
First={f'2\bendAfter #-5 }
Second={d'2\bendAfter #-5 }
\score{
<<
\new Staff
%\First % ex. 1 Bend typeset
%\Second % ex. 2 Bend typeset
\partcombine \First \Second % ex. 3 Bends not typeset
%\partcombine \Second \First % ex. 4 Bends typeset
>>
}
%%%
If I typeset parts First or Second individually (examples 1 and 2) without
using the partcombiner the falls are typeset as expected. Similarly, if I
use the partcombiner such that the notes don't share a stem (example 4) the
falls are typeset.
However, if I use the partcombiner so that a stem shared (example 3), the
falls are not typeset. This isn't simply an issue with the stem
though---the problem persists if I use whole notes.
Is this a bug in LilyPond or just the user?
--
Cameron Horsburgh
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Left align first word of lyrics
Hi On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:41 PM, David Nalesnik wrote: > Hi Gregory, > > Here's another version which will automatically find the longest syllable. > You can tag any one of the lyric syllables at a given timestep. > > Noticed a problem. Corrected file attached. --David lyrics-alignment2.ly Description: Binary data ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Cross staff/cross voice arpeggio colliding with previous note
In this excerpt from a piece I'm typesetting, the first two arpeggios are
fine, but the third collides with the previous note in the right hand's
upper voice. Is there a way to avoid the collision?
\version "2.16.2"
global = {
\key as \major
\time 6/8
}
rightOne = \relative c'' {
\global
bes16\arpeggio( g' bes f g\arpeggio c, bes4.)\arpeggio
}
rightTwo = \relative c' {
\global
d4\arpeggio es8\arpeggio f16\arpeggio g bes f g bes,
}
left = \relative c {
\global
4\arpeggio 8\arpeggio 4.\arpeggio
}
\score {
\new PianoStaff
<<
\set PianoStaff.connectArpeggios = ##t
\new Staff = "right" \with {\consists "Span_arpeggio_engraver"} <<
\rightOne \\ \rightTwo >>
\new Staff = "left" { \clef bass \left }
>>
}
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Cross-staff-cross-voice-arpeggio-colliding-with-previous-note-tp146197.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Left align first word of lyrics
I'm not in a position to test this at the moment, but just for
confirmation, will this work with an arbitrary number of tagged syllables
through a Lyrics context?
ex:
tagIt = \once \override Lyrics.LyricText #'tagged = ##t
\new Lyrics \lyricsto A {
\tagIt This is the first phrase in my song. \break
\tagIt This is an -- oth -- er phrase to sing. \break
\tagIt This is a third phrase in my song. \break
\tagIt This is the last phrase in my song.
}
Cheers,
Carl
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:02 AM, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:41 PM, David Nalesnik
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Gregory,
>>
>> Here's another version which will automatically find the longest
>> syllable. You can tag any one of the lyric syllables at a given timestep.
>>
>>
> Noticed a problem. Corrected file attached.
>
> --David
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Left align first word of lyrics
Hi Carl,
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:36 AM, Carl Peterson wrote:
> I'm not in a position to test this at the moment, but just for
> confirmation, will this work with an arbitrary number of tagged syllables
> through a Lyrics context?
>
> ex:
>
> tagIt = \once \override Lyrics.LyricText #'tagged = ##t
>
Thank you for adding this shortcut.
>
> \new Lyrics \lyricsto A {
> \tagIt This is the first phrase in my song. \break
> \tagIt This is an -- oth -- er phrase to sing. \break
> \tagIt This is a third phrase in my song. \break
> \tagIt This is the last phrase in my song.
> }
>
> Cheers,
> Carl
>
Yes, you can use it as much as you like. (In fact, you could remove the
\once in your definition of `tagIt' and have it apply to every syllable.)
--David
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fatal bug in strftime?
David,
Thanks. Hardly worth the effort! I think I'll just try to ignore my allergy to
leading zeroes in dates. Or not do any engraving 1-9 of the month.
I'm no LISP expert, apart from knowing that it stands for Lots of Irritating
Surplus Parentheses.
Best regards,
Peter
mailto:lilyp...@ptoye.com
www.ptoye.com
-
Monday, May 13, 2013, 2:39:51 PM, you wrote:
Hi Peter,
> When I try to use the %e format to get rid of leading zeros in the date,
> lilypond crashes out.
As a workaround, you could just use %d and check for a leading zero, replacing
it with a space. Something like this:
\header {
title = "title"
composer = "no-one"
tagline = \markup {
Engraved
\simple #(let ((date (strftime "%d/%m/%Y" (localtime (current-time)
(if (string-prefix? "0" date)
(string-append " " (string-drop date 1))
date))
with \with-url #"http://lilypond.org/";
\line { LilyPond \simple #(lilypond-version) (http://lilypond.org/) }
}
}
{ c d e f }
Modifications would have to be made if you want the day in other than the
leading position.
Anyway, hope this helps.
-David___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Fatal bug in strftime?
Peter, On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:07 AM, Peter Toye wrote: > David, > > Thanks. Hardly worth the effort! I think I'll just try to ignore my > allergy to leading zeroes in dates. Or not do any engraving 1-9 of the > month. > But the work is done--all you need to do is copy and paste what I've given you. If you're working with a template, add it to that. -David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Left align first word of lyrics
Well, comparing the lengths of strings is a bit shortsighted, as all four-letter words don't occupy the same space... Revised to work with stencil sizes, as David Kastrup suggests earlier in this thread. Argh. lyrics-alignment2.ly Description: Binary data ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Cross staff/cross voice arpeggio colliding with previous note
Michael Rivers wrote > In this excerpt from a piece I'm typesetting, the first two arpeggios are > fine, but the third collides with the previous note in the right hand's > upper voice. Is there a way to avoid the collision? if you search for /generalized-offsetter/ in this list you'll find a nice solution! Eluze -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Cross-staff-cross-voice-arpeggio-colliding-with-previous-note-tp146197p146203.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Cross staff/cross voice arpeggio colliding with previous note
Michael Rivers gmail.com> writes: > In this excerpt from a piece I'm typesetting, the first two arpeggios are > fine, but the third collides with the previous note in the right hand's > upper voice. Is there a way to avoid the collision? > When you need more space between notes, you can use extra-spacing-... Just before the note in the upper voice, ask for more space to its left \once \override NoteHead #'extra-spacing-width = #'(-2 . 0) It looks like LilyPond does not notice that the arpeggio needs to move left for the lower-staff accidental, when choosing note-spacing. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
2013/5/22 Florian Hollerweger > Let's not be cynical about this: It was fully intentional, > Sorry to sound cynical. Now I looked up the M$ thingy in urbandictionary. I wasn't aware of this, just thougt it was a typo. I am starting to find this discussion rather entertaining :) > At least better than boring or annoying. ;) > But I think I have found what I believe to be a structurally /and/ > typographically sound solution for this "problem" (it never seemed to be > one before announcing the slides here). > I didn't think about problems with the slides. I just added ideas to improve this Lilypond presentation. > luis jure wrote: > >> anyway, i didn't bring this up, the discussion began with the use of the >> term in florian's presentation (by the way, i found the presentation very >> good). >> > > Agreed, the presentation is good. My comments are only nitpickings. Regards Helge ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Files from Lilypond workshop @ LAC 2013
Hi, Helge Kruse wrote: Sorry to sound cynical. Now I looked up the M$ thingy in urbandictionary. I wasn't aware of this, just thougt it was a typo. Oh, wow, I guess now I'm the one to appear cynical :) I didn't think about problems with the slides. I just added ideas to improve this Lilypond presentation. Agreed, the presentation is good. My comments are only nitpickings. Thanks for the kind words, and for your suggestions on how to improve the slides. Sorry for running somewhat out of patience, but I have been trying for quite a while to bring this year's LAC adventure to an agreeable end. As a result, I was probably a bit less open to ideas for changes than normally. Gute Nacht, flo.H ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Help With Repeated Note in a Chant
Dear All,
Greetings from Jakarta, Indonesia. This is the first time I post to the
list. I would like to typeset the chants here (as presented in The Hymnal
1982 of ECUSA):
https://www.riteseries.org/low_res/S/S109/S109_watermark.gif
I've succeeded in removing the staff lines, adding the \divisioMinima etc.,
but I couldn't find a way to typeset the long block for the repeated note.
Could someone help me? Thank you kindly.
This is what I have so far:
\begin{lilypond}
\include "gregorian.ly"
\new Staff \with {
\remove "Clef_engraver"
\remove "Time_signature_engraver"
alignAboveContext = #"main"
\override StaffSymbol #'line-count = #2
}
\relative c' { \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((0 . 7) . ,FLAT)) \override
Staff.Stem #'transparent = ##t g' a b \divisioMinima}
\addlyrics {
Lo -- rem ip
}
best,
Emil
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
