> > I respect your right to disagree.
> > Yet,1, 2, 3 stem up, 2, 4, 6 stem down? Not, as they say, rocket
> > science.
>
> Actually 1, 3, 5 stem up.
>
> So not rocket science, but tricky to remember :-)
Which kind of prooves the point I was trying to make :-)
Kind regards,
Michael
--
Michael
On 28 October 2016 at 11:25, Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
>
> Michael,
>
> I respect your right to disagree.
> Yet,1, 2, 3 stem up, 2, 4, 6 stem down? Not, as they say, rocket science.
>
> Mark
>
Actually 1, 3, 5 stem up.
So not rocket science, but tricky to remember :-)
Vaughan
> Fortunately, it was much easier than I feared it might be.
>
> Here's a revised version.
Now all examples look fine. Halleluja :-)
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-use
On 10/27/16 1:49 PM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
>>
>>Mhmm, 22b, and 24b are not correct IMHO: The lowest dot should be
>>above the ledger line, not below. Or am I missing something?
>
>Oh, yes. I missed those being low on my low-resolution monitor.
>
>Back to the drawing board on that part of the
Michael,
I respect your right to disagree.
Yet,1, 2, 3 stem up, 2, 4, 6 stem down? Not, as they say, rocket science.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Michael Gerdau [mailto:m...@qata.de]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 4:59 PM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Cc: Mark Stephen Mrotek ; 'David Kas
> If " Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging
> commands" would that not be the fault of those who do not read the manual?
I disagree.
The problem is not so much in reading the manual and doing it right
but in remembering things after not having used them for some time.
L
2016-10-27 13:40 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
>
> This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
>
> If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
>
> 1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
>
> while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
> bottom, assignment
On Oct 27, 2016, at 09:54 , David Kastrup wrote:
>
> << \context Voice = "1" \with \voiceThree ...
> \context Voice = "2" \with \voiceOne ...
> \context Voice = "3" \with \voiceTwo ...
> \context Voice = "4" \with \voiceFour ...
I’m not sure whether this thread has progressed beyond the ne
2016-10-27 19:06 GMT+02:00 holl...@hollandhopson.com
:
> I just ran into a problem that seems to be related to Devnull. The second
> ending time signature reverts to 3/4 time. If I comment out the Devnull line
> then the time signatures are as expected. Am I using Devnull in the wrong
> way? Is
David,
If " Generally users don't know the proper order of voice arranging
commands" would that not be the fault of those who do not read the manual?
Those who have created Lilypond have my sincere respect. Lilypond is totally
beyond my ken (FORTRAN was my Master's requirement for a foreign langua
Am 27. Oktober 2016 15:16:01 GMT-07:00, schrieb Noeck :
>
>
>Am 27.10.2016 um 23:38 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it
>should have been from the start.
>
>:)
>
>
>One more voice from someone who was part of the silent majority:
>
>I do not
Am 27.10.2016 um 23:38 schrieb David Kastrup:
> I am a radical conservative: I want to keep everything the way it should have
> been from the start.
:)
One more voice from someone who was part of the silent majority:
I do not use the << · \\ · >> construct, only explicit \voiceOne etc. so
I
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes:
> David,
>
> "If it ain't broke"
Well, in this case, I consider it broken. Generally users don't know
the proper order of voice arranging commands and of
<< ... \\ ... \\ . >>.
While I probably don't count as a frequent enough user, even I got the
order wr
David,
"If it ain't broke"
Mark
-Original Message-
From: David Kastrup [mailto:d...@gnu.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 2:39 PM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Changing voice order...
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes:
> David,
>
> Yes, in that or
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes:
> David,
>
> Yes, in that order - usually only three voice.
> This usually in "chord" that have a moving internal voice.
> Lilypond, as you stated, adjust the note columns and stem suitably.
> The only constant is change. The manual has been clearly written in the
>
On 10/27/16 1:21 PM, "werner.lemb...@gmx.de on behalf of Werner LEMBERG"
wrote:
>
>> Anyway, I've run through all the tests, and I think that the default
>> algorithm works exactly according to the Powell algorithm, as I
>> understand it.
>
>Mhmm, 22b, and 24b are not correct IMHO: The lowest d
David,
Yes, in that order - usually only three voice.
This usually in "chord" that have a moving internal voice.
Lilypond, as you stated, adjust the note columns and stem suitably.
The only constant is change. The manual has been clearly written in the
past.
I can follow directions. Let the majori
David,
Since starting Lilypond I have become accustomed to the order presented in
the manual (2.18.2) that states:
Voice 1: highest
Voice 2: lowest
Voice 3: second highest
Voice 4: second lowest
Voice 5: third highest
Voice 6: third lowest.
This arrangement is useful for my setting idiosyncratic
[Note that currently the descriptions are sometimes incorrect in the
tests.]
> Anyway, I've run through all the tests, and I think that the default
> algorithm works exactly according to the Powell algorithm, as I
> understand it.
Mhmm, 22b, and 24b are not correct IMHO: The lowest dot should b
On Thursday, October 27, 2016, Carl Sorensen-3 [via Lilypond] <
ml-node+s1069038n195779...@n5.nabble.com> wrote:
> OK, I got my preferred algorithm working right as the default positioning
> algorithm now.
>
> The algorithm puts dots for notes in spaces in the same space, and then
> tries to put d
"Mark Stephen Mrotek" writes:
> David,
>
> Since starting Lilypond I have become accustomed to the order presented in
> the manual (2.18.2) that states:
> Voice 1: highest
> Voice 2: lowest
> Voice 3: second highest
> Voice 4: second lowest
> Voice 5: third highest
> Voice 6: third lowest.
>
> Th
OK, I got my preferred algorithm working right as the default positioning
algorithm now.
The algorithm puts dots for notes in spaces in the same space, and then
tries to put dots for notes on lines in adjacent spaces, working its way
out until it finds a space or exceeds chords-dot-limit staff pos
I just ran into a problem that seems to be related to Devnull. The second
ending time signature reverts to 3/4 time. If I comment out the Devnull line
then the time signatures are as expected. Am I using Devnull in the wrong way?
Is this a bug?
Thanks,
Holland
\version "2.19.30"
global = {
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> Werner, that does not even make sense. [...]
>
> Ok, I completely misunderstood you, sorry.
Well, I wasn't being verbose enough anyway. The main problem I was
trying to address is \voiceTwo having really no inherent connection to
second voice beyond two voices. Admit
> Werner, that does not even make sense. [...]
Ok, I completely misunderstood you, sorry.
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lilyp...@maltemeyn.de writes:
> Am 2016-10-27 13:40, schrieb David Kastrup:
>> while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
>> bottom, assignments should be more like
>>
>> 1/2, 3/1/2, 3/1/2/4, 5/3/1/2/4, 5/3/1/2/4/6 ...
>>
>> namely keeping the small voice numbers for the i
David Kastrup writes:
> Werner LEMBERG writes:
>
This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top
On 10/27/16 6:18 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Urs Liska"
wrote:
>
>
>Am 27. Oktober 2016 04:40:14 GMT-07:00, schrieb David Kastrup
>:
>>
>>This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
>>
>>If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
>>
>>1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>>>This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
>>>
>>>If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
>>>
>>>1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
>>>
>>>while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
>>>bottom, assignments should
Am 2016-10-27 13:40, schrieb David Kastrup:
while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
bottom, assignments should be more like
1/2, 3/1/2, 3/1/2/4, 5/3/1/2/4, 5/3/1/2/4/6 ...
namely keeping the small voice numbers for the inner voices.
Are you sure? I always understoo
>>This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
>>
>>If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
>>
>>1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
>>
>>while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
>>bottom, assignments should be more like
>>
>>1/2, 3/1/2, 3/
Am 27. Oktober 2016 04:40:14 GMT-07:00, schrieb David Kastrup :
>
>This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
>
>If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
>
>1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
>
>while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
>
This concerns << ... \\ ... \\ ... ... >>
If we have more than one voice, voices are assigned in order:
1/2, 1/2/3, 1/2/3/4, 1/2/3/4/5, 1/2/3/4/5/6 ...
while the documentation is quite explicit that, ordered from top to
bottom, assignments should be more like
1/2, 3/1/2, 3/1/2/4, 5/3/1/2/4, 5/
> The possibility to set starting page-numbers for bookparts is
> frequently requested, but not yet done.
In that case it seems the documentation is a least misleading. Under
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/the-paper-block
it states that a \paper block can appear inside a \boo
34 matches
Mail list logo
