postscript printers for lilypond

[karl]

 I'm looking for a new printer since the old one was fried by the
lighting (i.e. the thunder thing, not light in the room).

So far the printers I looked at excels at glossy printouts, but for
sheet music I want matte blacks, as matte as possible to reduce glaring.
And I want it to handle the postscript that "lilypond --ps" emits, yes
I really do want postscript for printing, pdf is fine for viewing 
onscreen. And it has to be able to handle A3 and duplex/tumble also and
hopefully up to 240g/m².

It seems that colour lasers are all glossy and some b/w one too.
Inkjet, e.g. HP pagewide and WF-C8190DTW are superbly matte but their
blacks don't cover the area (there are small white dots all over) and
the edges are irregular, not sharp. The Kyocera TASKalfa is superbly
sharp but the blacks gives glare in the wrong light (as it always are)
and it don't handle lilyponds postscript.

Any suggestions ?

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden



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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Karl,

Can I ask why you don't use matte paper?

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

Re: parser location inTab

[David Kastrup]

Gack McShite  writes:

> I will stipulate that the version for the file was not necessarily a
> match for the syntax.  It was 2.14.0, your example was 2.12.0.

Just because I did not remember when the change happened and did not
bother looking it up.  Aaron checked and it was somewhere in the 2.15
line.

> Not my generator, so I don't know how that version was chosen other
> than current at the time.  Obviously had I known that the syntax
> changed from 2.12, I wouldn't be here annoying you fine folks.

Sigh.  It worked before, it didn't work afterwards, failing with syntax
errors.  Concluding from this that the syntax didn't change would not be
my first thought.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: Emacs lilypond mode formatting and indenting

[David Kastrup]

Andrew Bernard  writes:

> Thanks David!
>
> Interestingly, the following line appears in the lilypond mode elisp:
>
> lilypond-mode.el:;;; Inspired on auctex

I think it's about keybindings for running stuff and possibly initial
process handling, not so much about the parsing/indentation.  And AUCTeX
saw a whole lot more development after that comment was written.

Make no mistake: some of its process/viewer handling would also be a
good idea for LilyPond, but a whole lot of AUCTeX functionality just
doesn't map all that well, and that particularly concerns the
parsing/highlighting/indentation.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[David Kastrup]

k...@aspodata.se writes:

>  I'm looking for a new printer since the old one was fried by the
> lighting (i.e. the thunder thing, not light in the room).

That doesn't help at all regarding your question, but the thunder thing
is called "lightning" unlike the light in the room.

> It seems that colour lasers are all glossy and some b/w one too.
> Inkjet, e.g. HP pagewide and WF-C8190DTW are superbly matte but their
> blacks don't cover the area (there are small white dots all over) and
> the edges are irregular, not sharp. The Kyocera TASKalfa is superbly
> sharp but the blacks gives glare in the wrong light (as it always are)
> and it don't handle lilyponds postscript.

"it don't handle lilyponds postscript" according to which test?  I just
recently removed a Ghostscriptism (using max/mix operators) that would
have made regular PostScript interpreters barf.  Maybe that's fixed in
master now?

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Karlin High]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 6:01 AM David Kastrup  wrote:
> I just recently removed a Ghostscriptism (using max/mix operators) that would
> have made regular PostScript interpreters barf.  Maybe that's fixed in
> master now?

>From past posts, I think Karl's workflow involves further editing to
the PostScript that LilyPond produces. So LilyPond's output won't be
the "last word" for printing as it would be for most other users.

Karl, what make and model was your surge-damaged printer? It will be
easier to recommend another printer if we know what product families
worked well in the past. There's even a slim chance that replacing a
circuit board could get the old one going again.
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Karlin High]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 5:16 AM Andrew Bernard  wrote:
> Can I ask why you don't use matte paper?

In my experience, paper types make a much bigger difference for inkjet
printers than for lasers. Ink going INTO the paper versus toner going
ON the paper. As Karl notes, some laser printers will produce a glossy
finish even on plain paper. That's actually a selling point for many
people. I had hardly ever considered that it would be undesirable for
some use cases, but here we have one.

A printer requirement for A3 size, 240 gsm (sizes like Tabloid,
Ledger, 11x17 and ~90 lb basis weight) AND duplex-print is going to
narrow the field rather sharply. Many models can't duplex heavier
weights of paper. Add the matte-finish, sharpness, and PostScript
compatibility requirements, and I predict there will not be an
overwhelming number of choices.
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Johan Vromans]

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 12:32:05 -0600, Karlin High 
wrote:

> and PostScript compatibility requirements

I'm still wondering why this is a hard requirement. AFAIK, drivers like
ghostscript produce excellent prints on all sorts of printers.

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Johan Vromans  writes:

> On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 12:32:05 -0600, Karlin High 
> wrote:
>
>> and PostScript compatibility requirements
>
> I'm still wondering why this is a hard requirement. AFAIK, drivers
> like ghostscript produce excellent prints on all sorts of printers.

Printer producers pay Adobe less money for a PostScript implementation
than a user will pay for the original PostScript fonts alone.

That's one conceivable reason.

-- 
David Kastrup

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

Re: How do you add this staff group bracket?

[Reggie]

Aaron Hill wrote
> On 2019-01-26 6:08 am, Reggie wrote:
>> Hi. I tried to look here and attempt adding delimiter code but no 
>> matter what
>> I do I cannot show a brace or bracket or anything to put my two oboes
>> together for the duration of the 2 staves on a few pages. Then it 
>> should go
>> back to normal grouping in code. Can you please tell me how I am wrong? 
>> How
>> can I have a brace grouping for my oboes but then go back to normal 
>> right
>> after the end of the two?
>> 
>> [ . . . ]
>> 
>> \score {
>>   <<
>> \new StaffGroup <<
>>   \scoreAFluteIPart
>>   \scoreAFluteIIPart
>>   \scoreAOboePart
>>   \scoreABassoonPart
>> >>
>> \new StaffGroup <<
>>   \scoreATrumpetCPart
>>   \scoreATrombonePart
>> >>
>> \new StaffGroup <<
>>   \scoreAViolinIPart
>>   \scoreAViolinIIPart
>>   \scoreAViolaPart
>>   \scoreACelloPart
>>   \scoreAContrabassPart
>> >>
>>   >>
>>   \layout { }
>> }
> 
> I believe you need to put \scoreAOboePart in its own nested StaffGroup:
> 
> 
> \new StaffGroup <<
>\scoreAFluteIPart
>\scoreAFluteIIPart
>\new StaffGroup << \scoreAOboePart >>
>\scoreABassoonPart
>>> 
> 
> 
> That should show a bracket only when the secondary oboe part appears, 
> otherwise the bracket for that group will be hidden when there is just 
> the one staff.
> 
> -- Aaron Hill
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list

> lilypond-user@

> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Aaron how can I place an instrument name like Oboes in the middle of the
staffgroup you just helped me create in my score? I tried including the
engraver but the name only appears at the beginning of the SCORE, not only
at the two oboe staffs. Can you tell me how to put a center instrument there
in group please?



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Karl,

Spaeking as a former IT Consultant, the first thing one generally needs to
know before being able to help a client is your projected budget. Otherwise
it's hard to know if you want a Heidelberg press or a desktop inkjet. Let
us know.

I am unable to understand why you need to print PostScript direct. Can you
elaborate? The entire professional graphic arts and print industry uses
PDF. Adobe InDesign that I use for books has a variety of varying quality
PDF outputs, up to very high quality print. It's not usual to output
PostScript any more (in fact, I cant even find it in the menus).
Furthermore PDF is PostScript internally. not some different printer
language like the old HP printers used etc.

Can you elaborate more so we can understand what it is exactly that you are
doing?

As a quick comment. Epson make photo printers for high end photographic use
that have specialised sets of black inks to give very great greyscale
capabilities. You may want to look into these. Many artists still
concentrate on black and white printing as a fine art, and are pretty fussy
about blacks!

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Karlin High]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 6:03 PM Andrew Bernard  wrote:
> Epson make photo printers for high end photographic use that have specialised 
> sets of black inks to give very great greyscale capabilities.

And I have a Canon PRO-100 that has eight different ink cartridges.
Including Black, Gray, and Light Gray. I wonder, though... photo
printing and sharp text have different priorities. What inkjet printer
is going to give razor-sharp staff lines, etc without using special
paper?
-- 
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Folks,

The Epson P800 has nine tanks (oneupmanship!) including a _matte black_ ink
tank, and an eight channel printhead. Resolution is up to 2880 x 1400 dpi,
so I can't see how there could be a problem printing sharp lines.

Not double sided, but unless the OP tells us more about his budget, one
could always print the other side manually like we plebeians do.

Not an advertisement, purely for reference:

https://epson.com/For-Work/Printers/Large-Format/Epson-SureColor-P800-Printer/p/SCP800SE

The above is based on my belief that the requirement for a PostScript only
printer is a furphy. I am willing to be enlightened!

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[David Wright]

On Mon 28 Jan 2019 at 12:35:31 (+1100), Andrew Bernard wrote:
> The Epson P800 has nine tanks (oneupmanship!) including a _matte black_ ink
> tank, and an eight channel printhead. Resolution is up to 2880 x 1400 dpi,
> so I can't see how there could be a problem printing sharp lines.
> 
> Not double sided, but unless the OP tells us more about his budget, one
> could always print the other side manually like we plebeians do.
> 
> Not an advertisement, purely for reference:
> 
> https://epson.com/For-Work/Printers/Large-Format/Epson-SureColor-P800-Printer/p/SCP800SE
> 
> The above is based on my belief that the requirement for a PostScript only
> printer is a furphy. I am willing to be enlightened!

AIUI for run-of-the-mill printing like most of us do, a PS capability
is a waste of money. Besides, most of the music I have typeset has
been printed in greater numbers on other people's printers: nowadays
it would be unusual to distribute in any other format.

But for specialist printing on an in-house printer of the highest
quality, you really do need PS. Remember how, years ago, photocopies
were not quite the same size or aspect ratio as the original, or
were slightly skewed? Well, most modern printers have similar
infelicities, and serious printers can compensate for this.
It's essential if you really care about dimensional stability,
which of course most of us don't. As for colour, that's way
outside my ken.

I couldn't afford to replenish the ink on the printer above, let
alone purchase it. I can barely afford it on my own. So price
probably isn't the main criterion here. But it would be interesting
to hear about the OP's reasons and use case.

Cheers,
David.

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

Re: postscript printers for lilypond

[Carl Sorensen]

I am fortunate to work at a university that regularly puts high-volume office 
copiers on surplus.  It’s relatively easy to find a high-quality, high-volume 
printer with postscript that handles A3 duplexing for less than $500.  Is the 
printer new?  No.  But it’s rated for tens of thousands of copies per month, 
and I am not likely to use tens of thousands of copies during the several years 
I have the printer.

It’s larger than most desktop printers, but the paper handling, finishing, and 
other capacities are exceptional.  I tend to look for Sharp multifunction 
copiers; we have a fair number of them so they are generally available.  But I 
do need to make sure that the postscript option is installed – having a service 
tech install postscript costs more than the printer.

Carl

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

Re: set-global-staff-size undoes define fonts

[Martin Neubauer]

On 27/01/2019 04:52, David F. wrote:
> I can specify the font for my score to use with #(define fonts … ), but 
> calling #(set-global-staff-size) undoes the font definition.
> 
> In the snippet below, Times New Roman will be used as the font for the whole 
> document.  But if line 6 is uncommented, the font reverts to the default of 
> New Century Schoolbook.  (These fonts are easily distinguished by the letter 
> Q—hence the title.)
> 
> Any suggestion on how I can both set the font to TNR and set the staff size 
> (in that order)?
Why do you insist on the order, anyway? If you don't, I think the
solution would be quite obvious.

> 
> ===
> \version "2.19"
> 
> \paper {
> #(define fonts (make-pango-font-tree "Times New Roman" "" "" 1))
> }
> % #(set-global-staff-size 20)
> 
> \header {
> title = "QQQ"
> }
> 
> \relative c' {
>   c c c c
> }
> ===
> 
> Thanks,
> David
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
-- 
Those are my principles. If you don't like them, I have others.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: set-global-staff-size undoes define fonts

[David F.]

On Jan 27, 2019, at 9:09 PM, Martin Neubauer  wrote:

> On 27/01/2019 04:52, David F. wrote:
>> I can specify the font for my score to use with #(define fonts … ), but 
>> calling #(set-global-staff-size) undoes the font definition.
>> 
>> In the snippet below, Times New Roman will be used as the font for the whole 
>> document.  But if line 6 is uncommented, the font reverts to the default of 
>> New Century Schoolbook.  (These fonts are easily distinguished by the letter 
>> Q—hence the title.)
>> 
>> Any suggestion on how I can both set the font to TNR and set the staff size 
>> (in that order)?
> Why do you insist on the order, anyway? If you don't, I think the
> solution would be quite obvious.

Because I engrave hymns in several different styles, e.g. 4:3 slides, 16:9 
slides, hymnal-style, etc.  I have a .ly file with all the base or common 
styles and then I override whatever is appropriate for specific styles.  In 
this case, I want the font to be the same for all styles (so it gets declared 
first).  But slides have a larger text size, so I want to override the font 
size specifically for engraving slides, so it gets declared later.

As a workaround to the trouble I’m having (because there is a bug in either 
Lilypond or my understanding) I’m currently re-declaring the font change after 
I call set-global-staff-size.  Which means I now have duplication in my style 
declarations.

David


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

Frescobaldi slowed down [WAS: Re: Emacs lilypond mode formatting and indenting]

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno dom 27 gen 2019 alle 1:58, Andrew Bernard 
 ha scritto:
But since an upgrade to Debian 9 and as the complexity of my current 
score increases, F. has slowed down to a molasses like rate and has 
sadly become unusable.


Are you sure that it was caused by an upgrade to Debian 9? Did you 
upgrade Frescobaldi as well? How did you install Frescobaldi?


Perhaps Frescobaldi is becoming slow only when you work on very big 
scores or files that includes several large files? See this issue:






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

Re: Frescobaldi slowed down [WAS: Re: Emacs lilypond mode formatting and indenting]

[Urs Liska]

Am 28.01.19 um 07:51 schrieb Federico Bruni:
Il giorno dom 27 gen 2019 alle 1:58, Andrew Bernard 
 ha scritto:
But since an upgrade to Debian 9 and as the complexity of my current 
score increases, F. has slowed down to a molasses like rate and has 
sadly become unusable.


Are you sure that it was caused by an upgrade to Debian 9? Did you 
upgrade Frescobaldi as well? How did you install Frescobaldi?


Perhaps Frescobaldi is becoming slow only when you work on very big 
scores or files that includes several large files? See this issue:





I would also think that this problem is *not* related to a change in the 
Linux distribution but *only* to the complexity and size of the input 
files. The issue Federico links to is exactly the problem.


Fixing this issue should be comparably low-hanging fruit, especially 
with some new code providing better control over external background 
jobs. So maybe tackling *this* would give you earlier results ;-)


Urs


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

Re: set-global-staff-size undoes define fonts

[Michael Gerdau]

>>> On 27/01/2019 04:52, David F. wrote:
>>> I can specify the font for my score to use with #(define fonts … ), but 
>>> calling #(set-global-staff-size) undoes the font definition.

I seem to recall that’s documented somewhere but I can’t find where.

>> Why do you insist on the order, anyway? If you don't, I think the
>> solution would be quite obvious.
> 
> Because I engrave hymns in several different styles, e.g. 4:3 slides, 16:9 
> slides, hymnal-style, etc.  I have a .ly file with all the base or common 
> styles and then I override whatever is appropriate for specific styles.  In 
> this case, I want the font to be the same for all styles (so it gets declared 
> first).  But slides have a larger text size, so I want to override the font 
> size specifically for engraving slides, so it gets declared later.

That does not make sense in the general meaning of things. There’s no reason 
other than your preferred order of definitions that prevents you from setting 
size first and do the font definitions afterwards.

> As a workaround to the trouble I’m having (because there is a bug in either 
> Lilypond or my understanding)

It is my understanding there’s a bug in your understanding 😊

Kind regards,
Michael
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Frescobaldi slowed down [WAS: Re: Emacs lilypond mode formatting and indenting]

[Andrew Bernard]

Hello Federico,

Thanks for the input. Current score is only ten pages of string quartet
music. Complex yes, but not vast. It suddenly stated after a Debian 9
update.

I love Frescobaldi, but the very sluggish response now of the text editor
is unusable, and I have had to abandon it for Emacs. Emacs is great, but
the indentation is abysmal, and just messes up really quickly. Caught
between two unsatisfactory worlds now. I think I am going to have to take
on the monumental task or rewriting from scratch the lilypond mode
indenting and formatting engine. If I can achieve anything in that area, it
may be a good side effect of this Frescobaldi problem.

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

Re: Frescobaldi slowed down [WAS: Re: Emacs lilypond mode formatting and indenting]

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Urs,

I split my score into files only ten pages long to avoid the issue to begin
with, but it suddenly started happening. Perhaps some Debian 9 Python
change?

Andrew


On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 at 18:01, Urs Liska  wrote:

>
> Am 28.01.19 um 07:51 schrieb Federico Bruni:
> > Il giorno dom 27 gen 2019 alle 1:58, Andrew Bernard
> >  ha scritto:
> >> But since an upgrade to Debian 9 and as the complexity of my current
> >> score increases, F. has slowed down to a molasses like rate and has
> >> sadly become unusable.
> >
> > Are you sure that it was caused by an upgrade to Debian 9? Did you
> > upgrade Frescobaldi as well? How did you install Frescobaldi?
> >
> > Perhaps Frescobaldi is becoming slow only when you work on very big
> > scores or files that includes several large files? See this issue:
> > 
> >
>
> I would also think that this problem is *not* related to a change in the
> Linux distribution but *only* to the complexity and size of the input
> files. The issue Federico links to is exactly the problem.
>
> Fixing this issue should be comparably low-hanging fruit, especially
> with some new code providing better control over external background
> jobs. So maybe tackling *this* would give you earlier results ;-)
>
> Urs
>
>
> ___
> 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