Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

On 27/05/2016 07:16, Michael Hendry wrote: Other mysteries (to me!) may also be explained in a similar way: Why aren’t trumpets and clarinets made a bit shorter, so that they don’t have to have transposed parts? Well, they DON'T need transposed parts. You just need to learn a different mapping

Re: OT: high-precision tuner app

On 23/05/2016 18:38, N. Andrew Walsh wrote: it's very common to describe a pitch with something like "C# -49.52c" where the latter part is a deviation in cents from a standard reference pitch (which can also be set as "A440" or some other tuning pitch [which is sometimes necessary when dealing

Fwd: Re: Placing a section name at the start of a staff

Resending yet again because the list kept rejecting large attachments ... Forwarded Message Subject:Re: Placing a section name at the start of a staff Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 21:27:26 +0100 From: Anthonys Lists To: lilypond-user@gnu.org On 10/05/2016 01:05

Re: sorry for the spam

On 10/05/2016 20:55, Federico Bruni wrote: The message was sent from nabble, so I guess that someone stole the password to log in there (not your gmail password). Try updating the password on nabble.com Does nabble hide (or partially obscure) email addresses like google groups does? If not,

Re: sorry for the spam

On 10/05/2016 19:05, MarcM wrote: I am sorry but i am not sending those messages. Someone accessed my gmail account, took the contacts and is spoofing my email address. I received an email of insults from Cynthia Karl which really is not necessary. I secured my gmail account but it's apparently

Re: Placing a section name at the start of a staff

On 10/05/2016 17:45, Stephen MacNeil wrote: >>Thank you very much. It's close, but will need a little tweaking. Your example is right-justified against the left margin, whereas I want it >>starting at the left margin, and pushing the staff to the right remove indent \paper { %indent = 0 %

Re: Placing a section name at the start of a staff

On 09/05/2016 04:11, Stephen MacNeil wrote: Actually I just noticed \halign -- that's not needed I copied it from another one where it was needed so those examples should just read \set Staff.instrumentName = \markup { \box \fontsize #5 \pad-around #.5 \bold "B"} etc. Thank you very muc

Placing a section name at the start of a staff

Basically, I want to do pretty much what "instrument name" does in a score - I want to put the name of the section in front of the start of the staff. The problem is, as always, when you use a feature for what it's not intended for, you can get unexpected side effects. I've got four sections, s

Re: Choice of pitch input mode

On 29/04/2016 12:58, Matt Hood wrote: Hi all, I’ve got a non-technical question regarding mode of pitch input. What does everyone prefer? Relative, absolute, or a mix of both? Relative. Every time. Alhough I'm sure other people will disagree with me :-) I’ve always stuck to relative, but I

Re: Replying to posts

On 28/04/2016 15:18, Johan Vromans wrote: On Thu, 28 Apr 2016 13:43:34 +0100 Steve Downes wrote: 4) it doesn't go out of date due to format change Although not related to email per se, this is the strongest argument to always use the simplest data format that can represent the information.

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 27/04/2016 01:04, Carl Sorensen wrote: On 4/26/16 3:56 PM, "Thomas Morley" wrote: 2016-04-26 2:21 GMT+02:00 Wols Lists : On 25/04/16 05:31, David Wright wrote: (I still don't know what you're trying to accomplish [...]) The problem here is the thread has drifted quite a lot. Sorry, Davi

Re: Replying to posts

On 27/04/2016 12:35, N. Andrew Walsh wrote: With all due respect, considerate is as considerate does. Shouting and screaming because you use some obscure tool that doesn't work the way 99% of the internet messaging tools in use work, and expect people to be accommodating of you,

Re: Guitar bend error

On 24/04/2016 16:13, Stephen MacNeil wrote: Add a line break before bar 25 r4 r8 e' g2 | \break % gradual bend on g2 towards a | % BAR 25 \bendGrace g8( a2) g2( | % gradual bend on g2 towards a | \bendGrace g8 a4 g8) e g2( | % gradual bend on g2 towards a | Or, if it's a longer piece and

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 24/04/2016 03:13, David Wright wrote: On Sat 23 Apr 2016 at 11:25:05 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote: On 22/04/16 19:36, David Wright wrote: On Fri 22 Apr 2016 at 15:47:59 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote: On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: David K wrote: Hm? How could you even have a

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 23/04/2016 12:23, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, if I use "extra-spacing-width" (which iirc works fine with multi-measure-rests), as soon as I have another part which actually has some notes in the first bar of the MMR, that first bar will be the same width as the markup so that then looks

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 16:55, David Kastrup wrote: >The first fermata prints fine. The second fermata prints "programming >error: Object is not a markup." in the log and doesn't print. So >that's another bug tracked down in my piece, That's_explicitly_ what \fermataMarkup is for. If people consulted th

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:49, Paul Scott wrote: I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest happens >in the part, not in the full score — but one wants not to have to use >multiple \tag constructs just to handle this issue. Me too. I asked a long time ago and got the idea that I was

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Wol: Scan through the thread starting at and see if anything there helps. Good luck, Kieren. Just scanned it - unfortunately I'm using \markup on an s, rather than \mark, for m

Re: Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

On 22/04/2016 14:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote: David K wrote: >Hm? How could you even have a compressed multi-measure rest when there >is anything like an "8-bar phrase" in parallel? >That sounds like a problem that cannot occur. I assume Wol (like me) has the problem where the compressed rest h

Re: Termination of variable definitions

On 19/04/2016 21:55, Johannes Waldmann wrote: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-04/msg00465.html ... But it's recursive. what does that mean? - J.W. Recursion: See "Recursion". To take the violin example, violin = \new Staff { \relative { a'4 b c b } } "violin

Multi-measure rests and mark collisions ...

My usual bugbear ... :-( I have a couple of instances where I have a rehearsal mark, a tempo mark, and a tune name all wanting to be over the same barline (this is an arrangement, where there are several tunes and each is identified where it occurs). So I have something along the lines of <

Re: Lilypond error behaviour

On 18/04/2016 22:01, Sharon Rosner wrote: Lilypond would expectedly complain about line 2, then proceed to put together the PDF file and finally exit with a “fatal error”. The PDF File would include 2 scores, so that means right after encountering the syntax error on line 2, it continued to cor

Re: Best Practices for file structures, score and parts

On 02/10/2015 08:58, N. Andrew Walsh wrote: do I enter the transposing instruments into the score in concert pitch or transposed? Can Frescobaldi (my editor of choice) take an entire Voice and transpose it into concert pitch after I've edited, or should I enter the content in concert pitch (tra

Re: Repeat with alternatives

On 02/10/2015 07:24, Johan Vromans wrote: On Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:41:21 +0100 Anthonys Lists wrote: Anyways, I think we've all missed the OPs problem. As he phrased it, I understand he wants {fixed part 1} {alternative 1} {alternative 2} {fixed part 2} repeat I'm not familiar wi

Re: Repeat with alternatives

On 01/10/2015 18:40, Tim McNamara wrote: On Sep 30, 2015, at 8:22 AM, s.p.korzil...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Sir / Madam, I’m trying to write a piece that has repeats with alternatives. It seems that “\repeat volta 2” is the way to go with supplying the alternatives in “\alternative”. However, t

Re: License of code posted to this list

On 09/05/2015 22:06, David Bellows wrote: I'm not sure so this maybe wrong. But AFAIK copyright for content posted to the list is by default with the author and has no license by itself. So I think you can't assume it's PD. This sounds correct as well. Does just making the code available to th

Putting text IN the staff

Simple problem, I can't find the solution ... :-) Basically, what I want is "\StaffOff ...text... \StaffOn". So, thinking treble clef, the text would be centred on the "b" line. Markup, however, seems to want to be above or below the staff, and that's it. How do I force it IN the staff, or

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 00:35, Thomas Morley wrote: Oh - and how do I get Score.VoltaBracket.shorten-pair to affect only the >*second* bracket? Do I stick it between the two alternatives? I know when I >tried something like that last time, it wouldn't even compile ... \alternative { { R2*2 } { \onc

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 26/04/2015 22:02, Anthonys Lists wrote: And, I'm not quite sure of what it was before, but having changed "Take 2nd to D.S." to a rehearsal mark as you suggest, what do I get? STAIRCASING MARKUP AGAIN as it collides with the volta spanner! The text is supposed to be to

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 26/04/2015 22:02, Anthonys Lists wrote: As you suggested, I changed "Allegretto con moto" to a metronome mark (that's \tempo, right?) Instant result? STAIRCASING MARKUP AGAIN :-( wtf do I adjust now? The documentation is great at telling you HOW to change things, but not WH

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 01:28, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, Hi Kieren, Thomas So I'm now having another go, and it's just blown up again !!! :-( It seems to me that there is too much "addressing one issue", when my big problem is conflicting solutions! In other words, the solution to one problem

Re: Creating LilyPond Object Models

On 26/04/2015 17:08, Urs Liska wrote: Hi Paul, I don't know if that's in any way related to our talk yesterday or if it has exclusively been triggered by Carl starting it. But this is very much a skeleton of what I was talking about! It would be absolutely great if you could pour that into a t

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 01:28, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, It seems to me that there is too much "addressing one issue", when my big problem is conflicting solutions! In other words, the solution to one problem promptly screws up the solution to another! You need to apply the solution correctly to

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 01:08, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, How do I justify markup against a note? How about \once \override TextScript.self-alignment-X = #RIGHT ? That's what Thomas has kindly suggested. Except it's not working for me - his example works fine, my cut-n-paste doesn't ... what giv

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 00:44, Thomas Morley wrote: Thanks. That looks great EXCEPT I can't get it to work for me :-( I run your example, and it's bang on. I try to do the same in my part, and it don't work :-( You've got a rehearsal mark, followed by a right-aligned text markup. I copy your right-ali

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 00:35, Thomas Morley wrote: And please, this is_not_ a tiny example! You would significantly increase your chance to get help from the list if you'd try to reduce it to tiny examples only showing_one_ problem. I do appreciate that you don't want to look through too much code. BUT

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 25/04/2015 00:00, Anthonys Lists wrote: On 24/04/2015 23:48, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, Hope this helps! It has! So now I hope you see that Lilypond is *EXCELLENT* at handling collisions, if you simply correctly instruct her to do so. =) Cheers, Kieren

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 24/04/2015 23:48, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, Hope this helps! It has! So now I hope you see that Lilypond is *EXCELLENT* at handling collisions, if you simply correctly instruct her to do so. =) Cheers, Kieren. :-) Yup. It's just finding out how

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

Hi, as mentioned by others your example is not very useful. Actually it puzzles me, I have _no_ idea about the intended output. Nevertheless, you happily mix different things all the time: TextScript and RehearsalMark. They have different usecases and different default settings. Anyway you co

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 24/04/2015 22:30, Carl Sorensen wrote: On 4/24/15 2:00 PM, "Anthonys Lists" wrote: On 24/04/2015 20:23, Simon Albrecht wrote: Please give us (code, eventually output) examples, else it¹s difficult to get your point. Yours, Simon pdf and relevant lily code attached. I kno

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 24/04/2015 22:32, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, As mentioned by others, actual code samples will be much better than abstract complaints, if a solution is what you’re looking for. If squeezing notes closer causes markup to collide and staircase, that's VERY painful to me. Does this not

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

nderstanding what it was doing ...) Cheers, Wol Am 24.04.2015 um 18:09 schrieb Anthonys Lists: You can tell I've looked at the relevant section of the manual ... But I have two problems bugging me at the moment, and it's related to a problem I have in general with lilypond - it tries

Re: Fixing overlapping notation

On 24/04/2015 20:54, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Hi Wol, I have in general with lilypond - it tries to avoid collsions by separating stuff vertically. How do I tell it to push them apart *horizontally* I have often asked about devising (and paying for) an automated system for this. Unfortunately,

Fixing overlapping notation

You can tell I've looked at the relevant section of the manual ... But I have two problems bugging me at the moment, and it's related to a problem I have in general with lilypond - it tries to avoid collsions by separating stuff vertically. How do I tell it to push them apart *horizontally*. T

Re: mutopia's shortcomings

On 24/04/2015 12:42, Gilles wrote: Even if not everyone will agree on "the" standard layout, I feel that it is extremely important to define one, with the maximum flexibility. The problem arises, of course, when there are existing, conflicting, standards. There IS a standard out there, to w

Re: short Musikmesse minutes

On 20/03/2014 10:30, Urs Liska wrote: I think that LilyPond's main strength is transformative use: different page formats, different media, different transpositions, individual variations. Yes, and I have/had the impression that it _is_ possible now to promote this feature. Of course I don't e

Re: A thought on Windows Experience

On 05/12/2013 02:09, Tim McNamara wrote: Powerful software and simple software are usually mutually exclusive. Compare Word, Pages and LaTeX, for example. Pages is more elegant but can do a small fraction of what Word can do. Word can't do a lot of things that LaTeX can. Word is aimed at peo

Re: A thought on Windows Experience

On 09/12/2013 06:12, James Harkins wrote: My flippant response makes it sound like any reasonably intelligent person would find the right information fairly quickly, casting the problem in terms of user carelessness. That was a misstatement. My point is that reasonably intelligent, reasonably c

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 23:46, David Kastrup wrote: That wasn't what the lawsuit was about. It was not even what Oracle claimed the lawsuit to be about. The issue was the reimplementation of Java classes, not the_use_ of Java classes. Yes. But the only thing that Oracle could sue over was the use of t

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 23:37, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/02/2013 11:57 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote: On 02/04/2013 22:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: Indeed, and a consequence of distributing a "covered work" under GPL-incompatible terms is that you lose the permissions granted

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 23:31, David Kastrup wrote: Anthonys Lists writes: If they DID relicence it, then it is copyrightable Nonsense. An explicit license can be given for things not actually requiring a license for particular uses under current legal standards. It is a pledge "if you follow

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 23:28, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/03/2013 12:01 AM, Anthonys Lists wrote: But as I understand it, the lawsuit as actually sued said "apis are copyright" and you would have needed a licence to use the apis - to use Oracle's Java. That's exactly in

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 22:31, David Kastrup wrote: Anthonys Lists writes: Indeed, this legal claim (that using functions creates a derivative work) is exactly the claim that Oracle tried with Android and Java, and they came a royal cropper with it. "exactly" in the meaning of "quite

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 22:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/02/2013 11:28 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote: A derivative work is whatever the LAW says it is (whatever that is :-). NO open source licence defines the term "derivative work", although they may give their own interpretation of what

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 22:34, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/02/2013 11:17 PM, Anthonys Lists wrote: So as long as Google stuck to using interfaces that the kernel devs explicitly published to user space, then using those header files EXPLICITLY does NOT create a derivative work, and therefore the

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 22:01, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/02/2013 09:50 PM, Tim McNamara wrote: OK, now let's consider a specific example. Here's a bit of C code that generates 100 random numbers and calculates their sum. /

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 18:47, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: When you add to that the fact that the particular case we're concerned with involves copyleft licensing which gives a particular and precise definition to what is considered a "derivative work", it really doesn't seem to me possible to just writ

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 15:19, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 04/02/2013 03:52 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >The main difference is "work as a whole" vs "mere aggregation". If you >include some file as a form of invoking its documented interface, you >form no new combined work. Indeed, which if I recall

Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

On 02/04/2013 15:04, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: On 03/30/2013 01:02 AM, Alexander Kobel wrote: On the other hand, user C /should/ be allowed to distribute source code under whatever license he wants to /as long as he doesn't ship the GPL libraries with it./ It's useless without them, but an

Re: \relative proposal: putting absolute pitches anywhere within \relative block using @-sign

On 13/03/2013 19:24, nothingwaver...@gmail.com wrote: Here's the idea. 1. Define absolute octave syntax with the @-sign (let it be a mnemonic for _A_bsolute) to be the syntax for temporarily specifying an ABSOLUTE PITCH within a \relative block, such that the next pitch, if it doesn't use the

Re: Idle curiousity about ancient Lily-lore

On 10/03/2013 17:35, David Kastrup wrote: I have a hard time imagining what you'd be writing after \relative if you can't even remember the name of middle C. Without knowing at least_one_ absolute pitch, anchoring \relative will be a challenge. I simply crib the start of everything from previou