Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 06:53, Graham Percival wrote: On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 04:36:48PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote: This gankino horo snip is typeset as (2+2)+(2+1)+(2+2), again not wrong, but scores use the styles 4+3+4 or (2+2)+3+(2+2). (Hitting the same 2+1 problem.) What, like this? I thin

help with tuplets

Anyone can help me with decoding of this music?: Is this correct transcription?: {\times 2/3 {e8 e d} \times 2/3 {e4 f8} \times 4/5 {g16 a c b g} r8 g \times 2/3 {d'8 c b} \times 3/2 {a4 g8} f4 \times 3/2 {g8 f e} \times 2/3 {d4 c8} }

Re: help with tuplets

At 10:21 on 20 Oct 2008, Marek Klein wrote: > Is the fraction 3/2 correct for the groups with number 2 over it? > Musicaly, I would like better 1/2... Or? The 2s in the original make no sense, and look as though they should be 3s (triplets). But perhaps with some more context they might mean somet

Re: help with tuplets

It is one voice sacred song on slovak text from Eugen Suchon (1908 - 1993) - slovak composer and university professor of composition; one of his late compositions. 2008/10/20 Mark Knoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > At 10:21 on 20 Oct 2008, Marek Klein wrote: > > Is the fraction 3/2 correct for the group

Re: elegant compound time signatures

Hans I'm not familiar with the whole rhythmic requirement but this seems to reproduce the second bar of the snippet correctly. Unfortunately subdivideBeams still must be turned on/off manually if the (2+2) pattern is required. The key is setting the beatLength to 8 rather than the 16 derived

Re: elegant compound time signatures

Trevor: a top-post in this case makes the thread really bloody confusing to read. (I know this email compounds the problem, but I've given up on this thread) Hans: at the risk of sounding grumpy, did you try compiling my example? I believe it does everything you want. Trevor again: at the risk

Re: elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival wrote: > Hans: at the risk of sounding grumpy, did you try compiling my > example? I believe it does everything you want. One thing your snippet doesn't display -- time signatures of the form, 3+3+2 8 Is this possible? The other alternative time signature form is something li

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 11:21, Graham Percival wrote: Hans: at the risk of sounding grumpy, did you try compiling my example? I believe it does everything you want. Yes, I think it was clear from my reply. I mentioned that although writing in each measure \unset subdivideBeams \unset beatL

Re: elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival Monday, October 20, 2008 10:21 AM Trevor: a top-post in this case makes the thread really bloody confusing to read. (I know this email compounds the problem, but I've given up on this thread) Perhaps. But having to scroll down looking for additions can be equally annoying.

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:36:20PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote: > On 20 Oct 2008, at 11:21, Graham Percival wrote: > >> Hans: at the risk of sounding grumpy, did you try compiling my >> example? I believe it does everything you want. > > Yes, I think it was clear from my reply. I mentioned that althou

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 10:49, Trevor Daniels wrote: I'm not familiar with the whole rhythmic requirement but this seems to reproduce the second bar of the snippet correctly. Unfortunately subdivideBeams still must be turned on/off manually if the (2+2) pattern is required. The key is setting

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:34:35PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote: > Graham Percival wrote: > > Hans: at the risk of sounding grumpy, did you try compiling my > > example? I believe it does everything you want. > > One thing your snippet doesn't display -- time signatures of the form, > > 3+3+2 >

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:41:22 +0100 "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So (being more positive) do you or anyone have a real example > when #(override-beam...) stuff is essential, i.e., when > beamGrouping doesn't work? That would be a useful addition > to the manual, or alternatively

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 13:15, Graham Percival wrote: I managed to get this working without individual tweaks. It's messy, but once it's all set up, you can write any number of bars and get the 2_2, 3, 4 beaming. If you want the final 4 to be a 2_2 as well, it should be obvious how to make that h

Re: elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival wrote: >> One thing your snippet doesn't display -- time signatures of the form, >> >> 3+3+2 >> 8 >> >> Is this possible? > > Yes, see the very first message in this thread! Forgive me, that was badly phrased. What I was really meaning to ask was if you could add this second ca

help with tuplets

Anyone can help me with decoding of this music?: Is this correct transcription?: {\times 2/3 {e8 e d} \times 2/3 {e4 f8} \times 4/5 {g16 a c b g} r8 g \times 2/3 {d'8 c b} \times 3/2 {a4 g8} f4 \times 3/2 {g8 f e} \times 2/3 {d4 c8} }

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 12:53, Graham Percival wrote: The second problem is that LilyPond beamings varies quite a bit from version to version, so sprinkling, so this solution may not be stable. This shouldn't be a problem if you set up the overrides correctly, and as long as there aren't any reg

truly elegant compound time signatures

Dear all, I am pleased to re-announce that I am an idiot. Please ignore the previous message about "elegant" compound time signatures; the attached file is *much* better. - arbitrary time signatures, with arbitrary compound-ness. - more aesthetically pleasing graphical display, including less

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 02:16:56PM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote: > > On 20 Oct 2008, at 13:15, Graham Percival wrote: > >> treat it like the "global" voice that many people use for >> rehearsal marks and the like. > > Thank you, I saw it, though I find hard to understand what the second > bracelet gro

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 02:23:25PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote: > I don't think I have the second email you sent ... ? I only have emails > with the same subject as this mail. Whoops! I forgot to set up my lilypond-user alias, so I tried to send that email to a non-existant mailing list. Sent

Re: elegant compound time signatures

I managed to get this working without individual tweaks. It's messy, but once it's all set up, you can write any number of bars and get the 2_2, 3, 4 beaming. If you want the final 4 to be a 2_2 as well, it should be obvious how to make that happen. Just add a \repeat unfold around the second v

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 15:01, Graham Percival wrote: ... I find hard to understand what the second bracelet group does: { \set subdivideBeams = ##t \set beatLength = #(ly:make-moment 1 8) s4 \unset subdivideBeams \unset beatLength s8. s4 } This gives you the single beam between the 2nd and 3

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival wrote: > I am pleased to re-announce that I am an idiot. Please ignore the > previous message about "elegant" compound time signatures; the > attached file is *much* better. I'm afraid I get horrible horrible errors with the files you attached :-( The resulting output has no time

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 15:00, Graham Percival wrote: I am pleased to re-announce that I am an idiot. Ahem... Please ignore the previous message about "elegant" compound time signatures; the attached file is *much* better. - arbitrary time signatures, with arbitrary compound-ness. - more aesthe

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

If you delete the % comments from the scheme bit it runs without errors. The markups are nice but they make the notes slide over to the right. Jon Hans Aberg wrote: On 20 Oct 2008, at 15:00, Graham Percival wrote: I am pleased to re-announce that I am an idiot. Ahem... Please ignore

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 03:18:17PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote: > Graham Percival wrote: > > I am pleased to re-announce that I am an idiot. Please ignore the > > previous message about "elegant" compound time signatures; the > > attached file is *much* better. > > I'm afraid I get horrible horr

Re: elegant compound time signatures

On 20 Oct 2008, at 12:53, Graham Percival wrote: There is a need of a more general beaming pattern selection scheme. To be picky, this is a problem about subdivided beams, not the main beams. From what I can see, one needs to create a general trees structure, as generated by "+" and parent

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival wrote: > Mao, I added the comments just before sending the file, and forgot > that scheme used a different symbol for comments. > > The attached file fixes this. Very nice! A couple of comments: first (I guess you know this) the bracketed (3+3+2) etc. markup should surely not aff

Re: help with tuplets

I agree with Mark (Knoop). > The 2s in the original make no sense, and > look as though they should be 3s (triplets). I wonder, perhaps the composer just meant 3 eighth notes (as if there duplet brackets were removed entirely). Is there 1) a time signature, or 2) a recurring meter delineated

Re: overhead projection of lilypond scores

** Reply to note from "Trevor Daniels" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:22:00 +0100 Thanks to those who offered advice last week! I almost got to the point of incorporating lily into Sunday's PPT, but it was not quite good enough this time. Trevor's snippets were very useful: colouring a

Re: overhead projection of lilypond scores

Not sure if you'll like this suggestion or not, but I created a yellow-on-blue score image by creating a cropped png with transparent background (all the score stuff turned yellow of course), then used the Open-Office Presentation program to put the image on a slide and then change the backgrou

Drum parts and horizontal beams

Hi everybody. I'm trying to write a drum part, but I'm not able to obtain perfectly orizontal beams. For example when I write two eight notes, one of snare drum (corresponding to a c') and the other of bass drum (e), their connection beam is oblique. I would like to obtain the snare drum stem lon

Re: Drum parts and horizontal beams

Add this code inside each \new DrumVoice block: \override Beam #'damping = #+inf.0 So a whole block looks like this: \new DrumVoice { \override Beam #'damping = #+inf.0 \stemUp cymc8 \repeat unfold 10 hhho cymc } Jon canduc wrote: Hi everybody. I'm trying to w

Re: help with tuplets

For what it's worth, you can change the tuplet number with this command: \override TupletNumber #'text = "2" Here's the example: \version "2.11.62-1" duplet = \once \override TupletNumber #'text = "2" \new Staff \with { \remove Time_signatu

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 04:04:50PM +0200, Joseph Wakeling wrote: > Graham Percival wrote: > > Mao, I added the comments just before sending the file, and forgot > > that scheme used a different symbol for comments. > > > > The attached file fixes this. > > Very nice! A couple of comments: first

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

2008/10/20 Joseph Wakeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Very nice! A couple of comments: first (I guess you know this) the > bracketed (3+3+2) etc. markup should surely not affect the horizontal > music spacing as it does. Is there anything that can be done? \with-dimensions #''(0 . 0) #'(0 . 0) for

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

Graham Percival wrote: > It's not markup. I've changed the way the time signature is > displayed. The parenthesis is part of the time signature. Sorry, that was my bad phrasing (again). I understood perfectly well what it was -- if it wasn't part of the time signature, the spacing wouldn't have

Re: truly elegant compound time signatures

Neil Puttock wrote: > 2008/10/20 Joseph Wakeling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Very nice! A couple of comments: first (I guess you know this) the >> bracketed (3+3+2) etc. markup should surely not affect the horizontal >> music spacing as it does. Is there anything that can be done? > > \with-dimen