Re: Re[2]: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

Hi All,
How about:

\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative {
  \key fs \minor
  \time 3/8
  <<
{ \voiceTwo fs'8
   \once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #2.4
   \once \override Accidental.X-extent = #'(1 . 0)
   \once \override Accidental.extra-offset = #'(3.3 . 0)
  fs! fs } \\ { \voiceOne gs8 fss gs }
  >>
}
%%% End %%%

Cheers,
Pierre

Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 00:07, Trevor  a écrit :

> Hi Knute
>
> Rather ugly, but I think this gets close to what you want:
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.21.0"
> \language "english"
> \relative {
> \key fs \minor
> \time 3/8
> << { gs'8*30/32[ fss8 s8*1/16 gs8] | } \\ { fs8*31/32[ fs8 s8*1/32 fs8] |
> } >>
> }
> %%% End %%%
>
> I've not investigated how to remove the unwanted natural.
>
> Trevor
>
> -- Original Message --
> From: "Knute Snortum" 
> To: "Mark Stephen Mrotek" 
> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Sent: 19/02/2020 22:32:42
> Subject: Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?
>
> Well, it works the same way in 2.18.2, so not a regression. I was
> hoping for something more like
>
> \once \override NoteHead.mergeNoteHeads = ##f
>
> And ideally the fss would be to the left of the fs. I'm having a heck
> of a time making that happen with force-hshifts.
>
> ---
> Knute Snortum
> (via Gmail)
>
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 11:31 AM Mark Stephen Mrotek
>  wrote:
>
>
> Knute,
>
> Don't know about a bug, yet this is a start (not too pretty),
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.19.84"
> \language "english"
>
> \relative {
> \key fs \minor
> \time 3/8
> << { gs'8
> \once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #2.2
> \once \override Accidental.X-extent = #'(1 . 0)
> \once \override Accidental.extra-offset = #'(3 . 0)
> fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
> }
> %%% End %%%
>
> Mark
>
> -Original Message-
> From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=
> ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Knute Snortum
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2020 11:01 AM
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?
>
> Consider this snippet:
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.19.84"
> \language "english"
>
> \relative {
> \key fs \minor
> \time 3/8
> << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
> }
> %%% End %%%
>
> Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs? Is this a bug? If not,
> how do I stop it from happening?
>
> ---
> Knute Snortum
> (via Gmail)
>
>
>

Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

Hi Knute,
I did not notice that it was from Chopin.
Please note that the original edition gathered that measure as one voice
(see:
http://imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fb/IMSLP334204-PMLP02306-Chopin,_Frederic-Nocturnes_Op_32_MSchlesinger_2500_BNF.pdf
)
Which could be:

%%% Start %%%
\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  \time 3/8
  8
  < \tweak X-offset #3
\tweak Accidental.X-extent #'(1 . 0)
\tweak Accidental.extra-offset #'(3.3 . 0)
fs!
\tweak X-offset #0 fss >
  
}

Much more readable, for me at least.
Sorry if this is a little OT...
Cheers,
Pierre

Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 20:01, Knute Snortum  a écrit :

> Consider this snippet:
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.19.84"
> \language "english"
>
> \relative {
>   \key fs \minor
>   \time 3/8
>   << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
> }
> %%% End %%%
>
> Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs?  Is this a bug?  If
> not, how do I stop it from happening?
>
> ---
> Knute Snortum
> (via Gmail)
>
>

RE: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Pierre,  

 

The Paderewski/Bronarski/Turczynski Edition has two voices – and a grace!

 

Mark

 

From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] 
On Behalf Of Pierre Perol-Schneider
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 4:07 AM
To: Knute Snortum 
Cc: lilypond-user 
Subject: Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

 

Hi Knute,

I did not notice that it was from Chopin.

Please note that the original edition gathered that measure as one voice (see: 
http://imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fb/IMSLP334204-PMLP02306-Chopin,_Frederic-Nocturnes_Op_32_MSchlesinger_2500_BNF.pdf)

Which could be:

 

%%% Start %%%
\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  \time 3/8
  8
  < \tweak X-offset #3
\tweak Accidental.X-extent #'(1 . 0)
\tweak Accidental.extra-offset #'(3.3 . 0)
fs!
\tweak X-offset #0 fss > 
  
}

 

Much more readable, for me at least.

Sorry if this is a little OT...

Cheers,

Pierre

 

Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 20:01, Knute Snortum mailto:ksnor...@gmail.com> > a écrit :

Consider this snippet:

%%% Start %%%
\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative {
  \key fs \minor
  \time 3/8
  << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
}
%%% End %%%

Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs?  Is this a bug?  If
not, how do I stop it from happening?

---
Knute Snortum
(via Gmail)

Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

Hi Mark,
I was not thinking about the aes maj. part.
See page 8.
Cheers,
Pierre

Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 15:43, Mark Stephen Mrotek  a
écrit :

> Pierre,
>
>
>
> The Paderewski/Bronarski/Turczynski Edition has two voices – and a grace!
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> *From:* lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=
> ca.rr@gnu.org] *On Behalf Of *Pierre Perol-Schneider
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 20, 2020 4:07 AM
> *To:* Knute Snortum 
> *Cc:* lilypond-user 
> *Subject:* Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?
>
>
>
> Hi Knute,
>
> I did not notice that it was from Chopin.
>
> Please note that the original edition gathered that measure as one voice
> (see:
> http://imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fb/IMSLP334204-PMLP02306-Chopin,_Frederic-Nocturnes_Op_32_MSchlesinger_2500_BNF.pdf
> )
>
> Which could be:
>
>
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.19.84"
> \language "english"
>
> \relative c' {
>   \key a \major
>   \time 3/8
>   8
>   < \tweak X-offset #3
> \tweak Accidental.X-extent #'(1 . 0)
> \tweak Accidental.extra-offset #'(3.3 . 0)
> fs!
> \tweak X-offset #0 fss >
>   
> }
>
>
>
> Much more readable, for me at least.
>
> Sorry if this is a little OT...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pierre
>
>
>
> Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 20:01, Knute Snortum  a
> écrit :
>
> Consider this snippet:
>
> %%% Start %%%
> \version "2.19.84"
> \language "english"
>
> \relative {
>   \key fs \minor
>   \time 3/8
>   << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
> }
> %%% End %%%
>
> Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs?  Is this a bug?  If
> not, how do I stop it from happening?
>
> ---
> Knute Snortum
> (via Gmail)
>
>

Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Knute Snortum]

Pierre, Mark, Trevor, thank you for your input!  One of your
suggestions should do the trick.  I just need to figure out with
edition I'm going to follow.  The source I'm working from has several
editions, bar by bar, side by side.  I'm not sure which, if any, is
the original.  There seems to be a split between the decision for two
voices and one.  I thought the two-voice solution was more readable,
but maybe not.

Here is the multi-bar page:

http://www.chopinonline.ac.uk/ocve/browse/barview?workid=6359&pageimageid=70170&barid=40

---
Knute Snortum
(via Gmail)

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 6:50 AM Pierre Perol-Schneider
 wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
> I was not thinking about the aes maj. part.
> See page 8.
> Cheers,
> Pierre
>
> Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 15:43, Mark Stephen Mrotek  a 
> écrit :
>>
>> Pierre,
>>
>>
>>
>> The Paderewski/Bronarski/Turczynski Edition has two voices – and a grace!
>>
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> From: lilypond-user 
>> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of 
>> Pierre Perol-Schneider
>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 4:07 AM
>> To: Knute Snortum 
>> Cc: lilypond-user 
>> Subject: Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Knute,
>>
>> I did not notice that it was from Chopin.
>>
>> Please note that the original edition gathered that measure as one voice 
>> (see: 
>> http://imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fb/IMSLP334204-PMLP02306-Chopin,_Frederic-Nocturnes_Op_32_MSchlesinger_2500_BNF.pdf)
>>
>> Which could be:
>>
>>
>>
>> %%% Start %%%
>> \version "2.19.84"
>> \language "english"
>>
>> \relative c' {
>>   \key a \major
>>   \time 3/8
>>   8
>>   < \tweak X-offset #3
>> \tweak Accidental.X-extent #'(1 . 0)
>> \tweak Accidental.extra-offset #'(3.3 . 0)
>> fs!
>> \tweak X-offset #0 fss >
>>   
>> }
>>
>>
>>
>> Much more readable, for me at least.
>>
>> Sorry if this is a little OT...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Pierre
>>
>>
>>
>> Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 20:01, Knute Snortum  a écrit :
>>
>> Consider this snippet:
>>
>> %%% Start %%%
>> \version "2.19.84"
>> \language "english"
>>
>> \relative {
>>   \key fs \minor
>>   \time 3/8
>>   << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
>> }
>> %%% End %%%
>>
>> Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs?  Is this a bug?  If
>> not, how do I stop it from happening?
>>
>> ---
>> Knute Snortum
>> (via Gmail)

RE: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Pierre,

 

Measure 39 of the Ab Nocturne, Op 32 No. 2, changes key to A major.

The figure in question is in measure 40.

That is what I presented.

 

Mar

 

From: Pierre Perol-Schneider [mailto:pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 6:51 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Cc: Knute Snortum ; lilypond-user 
Subject: Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

 

Hi Mark,

I was not thinking about the aes maj. part.

See page 8.

Cheers,

Pierre

 

Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 15:43, Mark Stephen Mrotek mailto:carsonm...@ca.rr.com> > a écrit :

Pierre,  

 

The Paderewski/Bronarski/Turczynski Edition has two voices – and a grace!

 

Mark

 

From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark 
 =ca.rr@gnu.org 
 ] On Behalf Of Pierre Perol-Schneider
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2020 4:07 AM
To: Knute Snortum mailto:ksnor...@gmail.com> >
Cc: lilypond-user mailto:lilypond-user@gnu.org> >
Subject: Re: Merging note heads with different pitches. Bug?

 

Hi Knute,

I did not notice that it was from Chopin.

Please note that the original edition gathered that measure as one voice (see: 
http://imslp.simssa.ca/files/imglnks/usimg/f/fb/IMSLP334204-PMLP02306-Chopin,_Frederic-Nocturnes_Op_32_MSchlesinger_2500_BNF.pdf)

Which could be:

 

%%% Start %%%
\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  \time 3/8
  8
  < \tweak X-offset #3
\tweak Accidental.X-extent #'(1 . 0)
\tweak Accidental.extra-offset #'(3.3 . 0)
fs!
\tweak X-offset #0 fss > 
  
}

 

Much more readable, for me at least.

Sorry if this is a little OT...

Cheers,

Pierre

 

Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 20:01, Knute Snortum mailto:ksnor...@gmail.com> > a écrit :

Consider this snippet:

%%% Start %%%
\version "2.19.84"
\language "english"

\relative {
  \key fs \minor
  \time 3/8
  << { gs'8 fss gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
}
%%% End %%%

Why does the fss note head get merged with the fs?  Is this a bug?  If
not, how do I stop it from happening?

---
Knute Snortum
(via Gmail)

double sharp

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Pierre,

 

My error!

The same pattern exists in measure 27 (Ab section).

 

Mar

Re: double sharp

[Pierre Perol-Schneider]

You're welcome Mark ;)

Le jeu. 20 févr. 2020 à 17:29, Mark Stephen Mrotek  a
écrit :

> Pierre,
>
>
>
> My error!
>
> The same pattern exists in measure 27 (Ab section).
>
>
>
> Mar
>

GSoC

[Urs Liska]

Just to let you know: GNU has been accepted as a GSoC mentoring
organization.

a)
This means that now people may visit 
https://lilypond.org/google-summer-of-code.html and look at our GSoC
project ideas. So if anythingg could be added (or fixed or removed)
there now would be the (latest) time to do so.

b)
If you know of any distribution channels for this information please
share https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/ 
https://www.gnu.org/software/soc-projects/ideas-2020.html and the link
from a)

Urs

LilyPond 2.19.84 installer on MacOS 10.15

[Hans Åberg]

I made a LilyPond 2.19.84 installer for use on MacOS 10.15 from MacPorts 
lilypond-devel, available on the link below. It installs in /opt/lilypond/, 
with the program in /opt/lilypond/bin/lilypond.

If you have already something installed in this directory, it may be prudent to 
remove it first. This can be done by the command
  sudo rm -r /opt/lilypond

https://web2.storegate.com/share/JPhrvtH

openLilyLib website

[Urs Liska]

Hi all,

as a starting point for a - hopefully - comprehensive documentation
effort I have finally updated https://openlilylib.org with a completely
new website, which I'd like to have some feedback about and
contributions for.

There are several parts to that effort, most of which are essentially
not started yet.

 * A general introduction website. This is basically complete and
   should finally give a proper introduction about what OLL "is" and
   how it can be made to work
 * Independent sub-sites for each OLL package. These have not been
   written at all, only the links to empty starting pages work without
   404 errors.
 * I've settled with MkDocs (https://www.mkdocs.org), which seems to
   provide what I need, especially a suitable way to hook into and
   extend to our needs.
 * Each sub-site is maintained in a separate Git repository and
   included as a Git submodule, so it should be straightforward to
   manage independent authoring of the documentation by the respective
   package maintainers.
 * There's a link to a contributor's guide, which is also essentially
   empty, except for an entry page.

What I have so far is an infrastructure for textual, Markdown-authored
manuals, although I have already created a plugin for LilyPond syntax
highlighting using python-ly (
https://github.com/uliska/markdown-lilypond/).

What I really *want* to have but have no idea so far how to achieve is
additional code/API documentation retrieved from the actual source
files. There should be a tool to retrieve that from comments (or actual
signatures?), resulting in either HTML or Markdown documentation that
can be automatically integrated in the "manual-style" documentation.

Best
Urs

Re: openLilyLib website

[Noeck]

Dear Urs,

it’s great that you found time for that. It looks nice and I think
MkDocs is a good choice (would have been my first choice, too).

While speaking about documentation, I very much like this approach:
https://www.divio.com/blog/documentation/

Some nitpicks from me:

- Should everyone see the "Edit this page" pencils?
   - Those links are broken for me
- If you descend into a package documentation, "Home" will not bring you
to openlilylib.org but to the page of the package. While that is
probably a consequence of your fourth bullet point, I find it confusing.
- Do you like the brown color?

>  * Each sub-site is maintained in a separate Git repository and
>included as a Git submodule, so it should be straightforward to
>manage independent authoring of the documentation by the respective
>package maintainers.

While this theoretically makes sense to separate the packages'
documentation, I would run from git submodule. But perhaps your use case
is easier than where my experience comes from and you can still change
that decision later in case it makes things easier.

> What I really *want* to have but have no idea so far how to achieve is
> additional code/API documentation retrieved from the actual source
> files. There should be a tool to retrieve that from comments (or actual
> signatures?),

What do you mean by signatures?
IMHO, this makes sense for "reference-type" documentation in addition to
other parts of the documentation (cf. link at the top).

Cheers,
Joram

Re: openLilyLib website

[Urs Liska]

Hi Joram,

thanks for the ffecback.

Am Donnerstag, den 20.02.2020, 23:33 +0100 schrieb Noeck:
> Dear Urs,
> 
> it’s great that you found time for that. It looks nice and I think
> MkDocs is a good choice (would have been my first choice, too).
> 
> While speaking about documentation, I very much like this approach:
> https://www.divio.com/blog/documentation/
> 

I'll definitely have a look, but only after replying ...

> Some nitpicks from me:
> 
> - Should everyone see the "Edit this page" pencils?

Yes. Everybody should be encouraged to join this project ...

>- Those links are broken for me

... which is of course only possible if the links aren't broken. (
https://github.com/openlilylib-documentation/main-site/issues/1)

> - If you descend into a package documentation, "Home" will not bring
> you
> to openlilylib.org but to the page of the package. While that is
> probably a consequence of your fourth bullet point, I find it
> confusing.

I'm not fully clear how to solve the underlying issue.
In fact "Home" brings you the the home page of the package while "Main
Book" brings you to the top of the whole site. I agree it may be
confusing. The thing is, this site is *not* an actual MkDocs site but a
nested set of MkDocs sites. This brings some additional potential for
more complex set-ups and separation of related sub-books, but it comes
at a cost with complexity.

> - Do you like the brown color?

I haven't given much thought on the colors yet. Each sub-book should
choose its individual color, and the theme has only a limited number of
preconfigured colors (
https://squidfunk.github.io/mkdocs-material/getting-started/#color-palette
). At one point I think we'll want to create a fork of the theme and
add more colors, maybe even with some aesthetic specificity. But that's
nothing that has to be decided at this point. (And I don't dislike that
brown ...).

> 
> >  * Each sub-site is maintained in a separate Git repository and
> >included as a Git submodule, so it should be straightforward to
> >manage independent authoring of the documentation by the
> > respective
> >package maintainers.
> 
> While this theoretically makes sense to separate the packages'
> documentation, I would run from git submodule. But perhaps your use
> case
> is easier than where my experience comes from and you can still
> change
> that decision later in case it makes things easier.

I don't have any significant experience with submodules. But while I
was always a bit worried about them I think this use case is pretty
safe because we're not talking about libraries some code depends on but
essentially they're independent chunks of content. If a submodule is
out of date or whatever simply that part of the site will look bad or
out of date.

> 
> > What I really *want* to have but have no idea so far how to achieve
> > is
> > additional code/API documentation retrieved from the actual source
> > files. There should be a tool to retrieve that from comments (or
> > actual
> > signatures?),
> 
> What do you mean by signatures?

AFAICT there are basically two types of source file documentation
systems: retrieving explicit documentation comments (aka docstrings) or
analyzing the defined classes and functions (i.e. their signatures). Or
a combination where the documentation software analyzes the function
signatures but takes comments for their explanations.

> IMHO, this makes sense for "reference-type" documentation in addition
> to
> other parts of the documentation (cf. link at the top).

As said I'll read up on this, but "reference-type" "in addition" sounds
pretty much exactly like what I have in mind.

Best
Urs

> 
> Cheers,
> Joram
> 

Re: double sharp

[Vaughan McAlley]

On Thu, 20 Feb 2020, 14:18 Mark Stephen Mrotek  wrote:

> Knute,
>
>
>
> As a performer the following would make more sense to me.
>
>
>
> %%% Start %%%
>
> \version "2.19.84"
>
> \language "english"
>
>
>
> \relative {
>
>   \key fs \minor
>
>   \time 3/8
>
>   << { gs'8 g gs } \\ { fs fs fs } >>
>
> }
>
> %%% End %%%
>
>
>
> Mark
>

Chopin knew what he meant (a leading note figure from gis). It's funny that
Chopin composed almost entirely for piano, but was perfectly happy to go
into double sharps and double flats, more than most 19th century composers.

Vaughan

midi via Scheme

[Lee Zipin]

I've got an 'include' file that renders a top-level script (separate file)
as a book comprising C, Bb and Eb parts.  The C part \score block contains
\midi { }, usually commented out unless I want to sanity-check a new script.

I've been trying to include or exclude it (instead of commenting it in or
out) via a definition in the top-level script, e.g.,

  includeMIDI = ##t

But I can't find a Scheme way to run MIDI, like

  #(if (defined? 'includeMIDI) (midi (tempo 4=150))); clearly BAD CODE

How to write that line? - to work properly in a \score block.

How do I find the Scheme method of calling an arbitrary LilyPond function?

Thanks for your time and help.

-- Lee

Re: midi via Scheme

[Aaron Hill]

On 2020-02-20 10:28 am, Lee Zipin wrote:

But I can't find a Scheme way to run MIDI, like

  #(if (defined? 'includeMIDI) (midi (tempo 4=150))); clearly BAD 
CODE


How to write that line? - to work properly in a \score block.



\version "2.19.84"

includeMIDI = ##t

\score {
  { b'4 }
  \layout {}
  #(if (and (defined? 'includeMIDI) includeMIDI)
#{ \midi { \tempo 4 = 150 } #} )
}



-- Aaron Hill

Re: [OT] Identification of a bagpipe embellishment?

[Sven Axelsson]

On Fri, 21 Feb 2020 at 07:30, Guo Brian  wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> Sorry for late reply, but the line containing the embellishment is as
> follows:
>
> The original score (notated a semitone higher) can be found here
> , on page
> 5.
>

OK. Yes, it is a misprint. This is a traditional dance tune called The
Devil in the Kitchen, apparently unattributed in the score.
Here's a transcription:
http://svenax.net/files/sheetmusic/strathspeys/devil_in_the_kitchen.pdf

-- 
Sven Axelsson
++[>++>+++>++>++
><-]>.+..>+.>+.<<-.>>+.>.<<.
+++.>-.<<++.>>.<++.>>>++..>>.<.