A quick workaround:
\version "2.23.5"
global = {
\time 6/8
\tempo "Allegro"
}
goUp = { \change Staff = "right"
\stemDown
}
goDown = { \change Staff = "left"
\stemUp
}
right = \relative c'' {
\global
\once\override Fingering.cross-staff = ##f
8-2-4 \goDown \goUp
Le 05/01/2022 à 20:59, Michael Rivers a écrit :
The fingering here collides with the tempo. If the cross-staff beams
are commented out (all notes on the upper staff), the fingering
displays fine.
Is there a workaround? Am I doing something wrong?
\version "2.23.5"
global = {
The fingering here collides with the tempo. If the cross-staff beams are
commented out (all notes on the upper staff), the fingering displays fine.
Is there a workaround? Am I doing something wrong?
\version "2.23.5"
global = {
\time 6/8
\tempo "Allegro"
}
goUp = { \c
Samuel,
First remove the { } around the \change Staff commands.
Mark
From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org]
On Behalf Of Samuel Cederlund
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2017 5:22 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Tuplets and cross-staff beams
Am 11.09.2017 um 14:22 schrieb Samuel Cederlund:
Hello all,
I have a piece of code that causes lilypond to say Drawing systems...lilypond:
../flower/include/drul-array.hh:35: T& Drul_array::at(Direction) [with T =
double]: Assertion `d == 1 || d == -1' failed.
the code is as follows:
\tupl
Samuel Cederlund writes:
> Hello all,
> I have a piece of code that causes lilypond to say Drawing
> systems...lilypond: ../flower/include/drul-array.hh:35: T&
> Drul_array::at(Direction) [with T = double]: Assertion `d == 1 || d
> == -1' failed.
> the code is as follows:
> \tuplet 3/2 4 {
>
Hello all,
I have a piece of code that causes lilypond to say Drawing systems...lilypond:
../flower/include/drul-array.hh:35: T& Drul_array::at(Direction) [with T =
double]: Assertion `d == 1 || d == -1' failed.
the code is as follows:
\tuplet 3/2 4 {
8 { \change Staff = "upper" } cess'''8
- Original Message -
From: "Thomas Morley"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "LilyPond User Group"
Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 6:59 PM
Subject: Re: Making space for markup with cross-staff beams
2013/6/8 Phil Holmes :
- Original Message - From: &qu
2013/6/8 Phil Holmes :
> - Original Message - From: "Phil Holmes"
> To: "LilyPond User Group"
> Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 12:29 PM
> Subject: Making space for markup with cross-staff beams
>
>
>
>> As something of an exercise, I
38.n5.nabble.com/Making-space-for-markup-with-cross-staff-beams-tp146847p146857.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
As something of an exercise, I'm setting the Vaughan Williams song "let
beauty awake" in Lily. It's got lots of staff crossing. My current problem
is getting the stems and beams to avoid some markup. The attached image
illustrates the problem. I know I could move all the staves apart more to
Many thanks to all who replied.
2013/1/12 Keith OHara
> > > \once\override Rest #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(0 . 9)
> > > r8 gis!32\([ b dis gis!
> > > \change Staff=upper \times 4/6 { b dis gis! b dis gis!\)] }
> >
> > Is there a preferred way using some staff spacing instead of using sp
Noeck gmx.de> writes:
> > \once\override Rest #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(0 . 9)
> > r8 gis!32\([ b dis gis!
> > \change Staff=upper \times 4/6 { b dis gis! b dis gis!\)] }
>
> Is there a preferred way using some staff spacing instead of using space
> around a rest, that happens to be c
Am 12.01.2013 20:08, schrieb Keith OHara:
>> How can I extend the distance between the staffs to make place for
>> this beams construct?
>
> When I want extra space between staves for a few isolated cases, I find
> some object on the staff and ask LilyPond go make more space for it.
> Here, th
Helge Kruse gmx.net> writes:
> How can I connect the low and upper staffs beams?
Moving the manual beam indication ] to the end of the tuplet.
> How can I extend the distance between the staffs to make place for
> this beams construct?
When I want extra space between staves for a few isolated
Hello,
I want to typeset a score similar as the original. On the harp notes I find
sometimes Z-beams that have subdivsions. I managed to mimic this for the
first measure but failed for the second.
How can I connect the low and upper staffs beams?
How can I extend the distance between the staffs t
Hey, Pavel
On 1/13/12 21:47 , Pavel Roskin wrote:
\override StaffGrouper #'staff-staff-spacing #'minimum-distance = #12
Much better, thank you :)
ambs.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo
On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 21:11:40 +
Alberto Simões wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I managed to get a cross-staff beam, kneed beam, I think, with this
> code, and with the appearence in attach:
>
> d8[ cis a \change Staff = "lower" \stemUp g] |
>fis4 \change Staff = "upper"
You may get better replies
On Jan 13, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Alberto Simões wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I managed to get a cross-staff beam, kneed beam, I think, with this code, and
> with the appearence in attach:
>
> d8[ cis a \change Staff = "lower" \stemUp g] |
> fis4 \change Staff = "upper"
>
> To reduce stem collision I forc
Hello,
I managed to get a cross-staff beam, kneed beam, I think, with this
code, and with the appearence in attach:
d8[ cis a \change Staff = "lower" \stemUp g] |
fis4 \change Staff = "upper"
To reduce stem collision I forced the stemUp there, and the voice in the
lower beam has a stemDown
- Original Message -
From: "Valentin Villenave"
To: "Martin Tarenskeen"
Cc: "lilypond-user mailinglist"
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 11:14 AM
Subject: Re: cross-staff beams
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Martin Tarenskeen
wrote:
Please try t
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Martin Tarenskeen
wrote:
> Please try the following example, which is rendered less than optimal using
> 2.13.40. Do you agree Lilypond should be able to do better than this ? Is it
> worth a bug report ?
I think you need to be more specific as to what exactly Lily
Hi,
Please try the following example, which is rendered less than optimal
using 2.13.40. Do you agree Lilypond should be able to
do better than this ? Is it worth a bug report ?
%-8<-
\version "2.13.40"
upper = \relative c' {
\clef treble
\ti
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Neil Puttock wrote:
> There's a message in the deleted bug snippet harakiri-autoknee.ly
> which suggests there used to be a problem:
>
> Autoknee-ing triggers hara-kiri too early.
OK, since I can't decide whether to remove it or not, I've just added
it to the trac
2009/9/23 Mats Bengtsson :
> I haven't tracked down exactly what has changed, but I had to reduce the
> setting of the auto-knee-gap property of Beam from the default value 5.5 to
> \override Score.Beam #'auto-knee-gap = #4.75
> to get the kneed beam that was obtained in earlier versions.
> Regres
I can see the problem you report with version 2.12, but with the latest
2.13 version (compiled from todays GIT), it's even worse, since the beam
stays flat also if you don't have \RemoveEmptyStaffContext.
I haven't tracked down exactly what has changed, but I had to reduce the
setting of the aut
Hello,
In the following code, the beam goes between the staves when
\RemoveEmptyStaffContext is commented out but goes above the top
staff when it's used.
This means you have to explicitly state all the stem directions to
get the beam to go in the middle of the staves when using
\Remov
Valentin Villenave wrote Wednesday, January 07, 2009 12:21 AM
Greetings,
NR1.2.4 says:
Known issues and warnings
Automatically kneed cross-staff beams cannot be used together with
hidden staves.
Why?
The following piece of code works well (and if you uncomment the
last
line, an ugly #76
Greetings,
NR1.2.4 says:
Known issues and warnings
Automatically kneed cross-staff beams cannot be used together with
hidden staves.
Why?
The following piece of code works well (and if you uncomment the last
line, an ugly #76 collision happens)
\layout {
\context {
\Staff
\remove
Hi Neil,
thanks, the output looks o.k. with 2.11.42, so I guess I should
upgrade. I hope it doesn't break too much of my edited parts.
Yours,
Orm
Am 15 Mär schrieb Neil Puttock:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
>
> > Sure. The first attached file works, the second doe
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Orm Finnendahl wrote:
> Sure. The first attached file works, the second doesn't (and neither
> works with "DrumStaff" instead of "Staff"). Please try it out. Maybe
> my lilypond version is too dated (2.11.7)
Thanks.
There may well be an issue with version 2.1
Am Samstag, 15. März 2008 schrieb Trevor Bača:
> I don't know the real (ie, structual) answer. But here's the workaround for
> setting the system start brace to transparent:
Alternatively, simply set the systemStartDelimiter for your PianoStaff to
SystemStartBracket instead of the default brace,
Hi Neil,
Am 14 Mär schrieb Neil Puttock:
> Hi Orm,
>
> Would you mind posting a minimal example which demonstrates the
> problems you're having?
Sure. The first attached file works, the second doesn't (and neither
works with "DrumStaff" instead of "Staff"). Please try it out. Maybe
my lilypond v
On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 11:42 AM, Orm Finnendahl <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to typeset cross staff notes on a 12-staff percussion
> system.
>
> Defining the staff systems as "Staff" and the StaffGroup as
> "PianoStaff" works well. Trying the same with "ChoirStaff" and the
> i
Hi Orm,
Would you mind posting a minimal example which demonstrates the
problems you're having?
Here's a quick snippet I've knocked up using ChoirStaff and DrumStaff
which seems to be working fine:
\version "2.11.42"
\paper { ragged-right = ##t }
\score {
\new ChoirStaff { <<
Hi,
I'm trying to typeset cross staff notes on a 12-staff percussion
system.
Defining the staff systems as "Staff" and the StaffGroup as
"PianoStaff" works well. Trying the same with "ChoirStaff" and the
individual Staff systems as "DrumStaff" results in lots of errors and
the beams and staff lin
kneed
cross-staff beams and some clef changes.
These are the 'defects' in lilypond's typesetting:
- the small clefs take up unnecessary space when there are notes in that
measure before the clef change. E.g. measure 1 and 2. When the clef change is
the first thing to happen insid
..
for the sake of the archives..
thanks Mats
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: cross staff beams only in PianoStaff ?
Date: Sunday 22 October 2006 19:09
From: Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mehmet,
I guess you forgot to include a copy
hat's easy to fix. What kind of context
did you want to use?
/Mats
Quoting Mehmet Okonsar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I assume cross staff beams work only in a piano staff context?
> Am I right?
> (sigh..)
> --
> Mehmet O
ssume cross staff beams work only in a piano staff context?
Am I right?
(sigh..)
--
Mehmet Okonsar,
pianist-composer-conductor
www.okonsar.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/li
I assume cross staff beams work only in a piano staff context?
Am I right?
(sigh..)
--
Mehmet Okonsar,
pianist-composer-conductor
www.okonsar.com
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
41 matches
Mail list logo
