>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 00:21:31 -0700 (MST)
> From: tisimst
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Reversing order of colliding noteheads?
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Michael,
>
&
In the following two-bar snippet, I used \voiceOne and \voiceTwo to
place Tenor and Lead vocal lines on a single staff. The Tenor has a
tied-over note, whose notehead collides at the beginning of the second
bar with the Lead note, one step away. LilyPond places the Lead note
inside of the Tenor tie
In similar situations, I like to create LilyPond variables whose values
are the notes only for each part, and a separate variable whose value is
the expressive marks that go on all parts together, including fermatas,
dynamic markings, ...
Then, I can create a full score with the expressive mar
There is a LilyWiki page for professionals at
http://wiki.lilynet.net/index.php/Professional_Toads
There is very little information there so far. Please join the Professional
Toads, and augment/change the pages to suit.
There is at least a list of a few professionals:
http://wiki.lilynet.net/
I have taken my discussion with Stefan Thomas regarding access to the
Feta font in XeTeX (an implementation of TeX and LaTeX that is
particularly friendly to importing fonts) off list. We'll try to post a
useful result later after we've banged things out.
If anyone would like to join the detailed
If you only need fairly conventional symbols, such as flats and sharps,
then finding the native LaTeX forms is your best bet. They are often
guessable (e.g., \flat), but they are often available only in math mode
(which is the case for \flat), so you have to write $\flat$ in regular
text, and you m
While we're in speculative mode, I'll mention a principle that might
affect a future release:
It looks like break-related items of all sorts, including
"break-visibility", should have more than the 3 categories of before
break, after break, and no break. Then might should distinguish levels
of bre
Robin,
Thanks very much. That's just what I was going to try to work out, and
you've done it all.
I'll think about whether this can be made into a nice set of definitions
for a file full of utilities to include. I can probably expand that
stencil so that it handles all the cases, and doesn't have
I am using "French" scores, with silent staves removed, even on the
first line (these pieces would have way too much stuff on the first line
otherwise). I would like for the first entry of a given staff (and, in
some cases, re-entry after a long silence) to carry time signature and
instrument names
6 +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
>
>> On 12 February 2010 17:54, Michael J. O'Donnell
>>
>
>
>>> I also need to merge whole-measure and multi-measure rests, which, alas,
>>> the snippet doesn't cover. I will poke into extending the
For those who would like to use it too, I append a complete utility file
that I use to copy in a file full of definitions with \includeIfAbsent,
skipping the copy if the file has already been copied in with
\includeIfAbsent. This utility file should be copied in with \include
(not \includeIfAbsent)
Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> On 12 February 2010 17:28, Michael J. O'Donnell
> wrote:
>
>
>> I am setting S-A-T-B choral music on two staves, S-A on treble and T-B
>> on bass. Most of the time, the two voices on a staff have the same
>> rests, which look much bette
I am setting S-A-T-B choral music on two staves, S-A on treble and T-B
on bass. Most of the time, the two voices on a staff have the same
rests, which look much better when they are merged. I haven't found a
command to do this automatically. I have been making a separate voice of
shared rests, and
em, but I can't find that either. Still hunting,
and of course ready to take any hint.
Michael J. O'Donnell wrote:
> I *think* that I have the essential solution to include a file exactly
> once, no matter how many times it is mentioned. That is, with the
> following definiti
This is both a warning and a fishing expedition for ideas that I might
have missed.
I am trying to use a style in which I define lots of individual numbers
as bookparts, sometimes produce them separately, sometimes combine them
(often with a choice of several variants for each number) into one boo
I *think* that I have the essential solution to include a file exactly
once, no matter how many times it is mentioned. That is, with the
following definition,
\includeIfAbsent "MyFile.ly"
should copy in MyFile.ly, just as though you had written
\include "MyFile.ly"
unless an inclusion (
There was enough interest that I whipped up a few pages on LilyPond Wiki
for the community of "LilyPond Professional Toads," interested in
professional use of LilyPond:
http://wiki.lilynet.net/index.php/Professional_Toads
I intend "professional" to be interpreted as broadly as you like. You
don't
Until sometime in the Middle Ages, "I" & "J" were variant ways to
write the same letter of the Latin alphabet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet#Medieval_and_later_developments
Mike O'D.
--
Message: 1
Date: Fr
I am pondering offering engraving services with LilyPond. I wonder if
there are people ready and willing to share information on the
possibility to make modest money this way.
I found one (slightly broken) thread in the archives:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2007-10/msg00482.ht
may have to fuss a bit
to make sure that the appropriate variables are accessible when needed.
I'll try to do this when I get back from a trip in a couple of weeks,
and I'll post my code.
Thanks,
Mike O'Donnell
Dmytro O. Redchuk wrote:
> У чт, 2010-01-21 у 11:47 -0600, Michael
d, but I hope that someone has already done it.
Thanks,
Mike O'Donnell
James Bailey wrote:
>
> On 21.01.2010, at 18:47, Michael J. O'Donnell wrote:
>
>> Is there a standard way to make sure that a file full of LilyPond style
>> definitions is included just once, no matte
Is there a standard way to make sure that a file full of LilyPond style
definitions is included just once, no matter how many times it is mentioned?
I searched the Web site, mail archives, and /usr/shar/lilypond for
"include once" and "include guard", to no avail. With the C
preprocessor, there is
I have used parallel voices with notes in one and other information in
another quite a bit recently. It can get quite hairy to keep the voices
in sync when you edit durations. That isn't so hard with a relatively
sparse sequence, such as time signatures, but I think there are two
better methods
Regarding your question 1, I have been working on pretty much the same
problem---to generate mensural and modern notation from one source
file. I have made some progress, but I wasn't quite ready to provide
something that others can use. If you want to check the progress, and
consider joining m
I might attack this myself some day, if it can really
be accomplished at the Scheme interface. I doubt that I will ever
penetrate the C++ substrate. At present, I don't understand the data
structures quite well enough, and I think a few more iterations of the
documentation are probably required
Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Clearly, this doesn't require tagging "every note with a different tag" — you
> simply tag the notes for different editions as you need them.
Perhaps I should have just answered this point directly. The problem is
that I don't know what the "different editions" will be. T
You are proposing very good solutions for the short term production of
scores. I am more concerned with the very long term management of the
information.
The object is to
1. have a file containing data entry from the MS which represents the
uncorrected manuscript, and which (almost) never needs t
Thanks for pointing out \tag. I've already read up, and experimented
with it. It doesn't solve the problem, because it requires that I
anticipate every possible correction when entering the data from the MS.
The only way to get useful coverage is to tag every note with a
different tag, which is too
I am experimenting with methods to enter notes from a manuscript and
produce several typeset scores, including at least
one that looks very much like the manuscript, for proof reading
another that is good for performance.
There will probably be other versions too.
Problem: the manuscript
I am trying to set the hand enscribed Bodleian MS Canon Misc 213
manuscript (don't ask why :-P ).
The notation is pretty much white mensural notation, but there are some
variations that I'm tackling one at a time.
I'm stuck on a form of ligature that uses the descending diagonal neume
to indicate
30 matches
Mail list logo
