Re: [OT] Printer with or without Postscript

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:07:27 -0500 David Wright wrote: > Does the PDF file you're viewing in evince look ok when you magnify it > on the screen? If so, what does method 2 produce when you print that > file? This should help isolate your problem. For the sake of clarity: I used an old problem tha

Fonts used for Lyrics (was: Serpent Publications)

> – Unfortunately, LilyPond’s default text font is quite wide, so perhaps > you might want to look for a narrower one. Personally, I very much like > the Alegreya font (which has a Sans version as well) from > . After reading this I gave Alegreya a try. It is fairly narrow

Re: Fonts used for Lyrics

Michael Gerdau writes: >> – Unfortunately, LilyPond’s default text font is quite wide, so perhaps >> you might want to look for a narrower one. Personally, I very much like >> the Alegreya font (which has a Sans version as well) from >> . > > After reading this I gave Ale

loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Hello, I’m trying to put together a bunch of syntactical sugar around octavation. (n.b. I am aware that there are open issues regarding octavation; even when those are solved, there will need to be some sugar.) I would like to have a single command which ends an octavation *and* places the “lo

Re: Syntax for multiple slurs per Voice?

Hi, I'm coming late to this discussion, but potentially *very* excited about what this might mean. Will the available of spanner IDs mean that a single voice will (eventually) be able to carry multiple *text spanners*??? This would be incredibly useful in my own scores (and probably also in the s

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hello, > > I’m trying to put together a bunch of syntactical sugar around > octavation. (n.b. I am aware that there are open issues regarding > octavation; even when those are solved, there will need to be some > sugar.) > > I would like to have a single command which e

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Hi David, > Can you create a better mockup here? \version "2.19.28" loco = \ottava #0 \markup "What I want:" theMusic = { \ottava #1 c'' d'' e'' f'' \loco r4 r r r g''^\markup "loco" } \score { \theMusic } locoII = { \ottava #0 <>^\markup "loco" } \markup "What I get:" theMusicII = { \ot

Re: multiple TextSpanners per voice

Hi, I'd like to add that I'm *incredibly* excited by this work. The ability to have multiple text spanners in a voice -- and to tweak each independently -- is something I've wanted in LilyPond for many years. (I responded to a different thread about this a touch too early only moments ago; apologi

Re: Syntax for multiple slurs per Voice?

Hi Trevor, On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Trevor Bača wrote: > Hi, > > I'm coming late to this discussion, but potentially *very* excited about > what this might mean. Will the available of spanner IDs mean that a single > voice will (eventually) be able to carry multiple *text spanners*??? >

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:03:37PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hello, > > I’m trying to put together a bunch of syntactical sugar around > octavation. (n.b. I am aware that there are open issues regarding > octavation; even when those are solved, there will need to be some > sugar.) > > I wo

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi David, > >> Can you create a better mockup here? > > \version "2.19.28" > > loco = \ottava #0 > > \markup "What I want:" > theMusic = { > \ottava #1 c'' d'' e'' f'' \loco r4 r r r g''^\markup "loco" > } > > \score { \theMusic } > > locoII = { \ottava #0 <>^\markup

Re: Syntax for multiple slurs per Voice?

Trevor Bača writes: > Hi, > > I'm coming late to this discussion, but potentially *very* excited > about what this might mean. Will the available of spanner IDs mean > that a single voice will (eventually) be able to carry multiple *text > spanners*??? Well, that was the motivation for renaming

Re: multiple TextSpanners per voice

Trevor Bača writes: > Hi, > > I'd like to add that I'm *incredibly* excited by this work. The ability to > have multiple text spanners in a voice -- and to tweak each independently > -- is something I've wanted in LilyPond for many years. (I responded to a > different thread about this a touch to

Re: Syntax for multiple slurs per Voice?

David Nalesnik writes: > Hi Trevor, > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Trevor Bača wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I'm coming late to this discussion, but potentially *very* excited about >> what this might mean. Will the available of spanner IDs mean that a single >> voice will (eventually) be able to

Re: multiple TextSpanners per voice

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:50 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Trevor Bača writes: > > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to add that I'm *incredibly* excited by this work. The ability > to > > have multiple text spanners in a voice -- and to tweak each independently > > -- is something I've wanted in LilyPond fo

independent time signatures

Hello, I'm trying to write a piece for two staves in independent time signatures. After consulting this post , I moved the timing translator and bar line engraver out of the score context and into the staff context. However, I'm still getting g

Re: independent time signatures

I'm not at a PC right now but I have the feeling that you should also consist these two items to the Lyrics context (which is probably created implicitly). HTH Urs Am 20. Oktober 2015 21:26:54 MESZ, schrieb Michael Collins : >Hello, > >I'm trying to write a piece for two staves in independent t

Re: multiple TextSpanners per voice

This is excellent. The combination of the engraver and the ID labeling work perfectly. I think it would be wonderful to consider including David's engraver in a coming public release. On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:28 PM, David Nalesnik wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:50 AM, David Kastrup

Re: independent time signatures

Quoting Michael Collins (mxcoll...@gmail.com): > I'm trying to write a piece for two staves in independent time signatures.  > After consulting this post, I moved the timing translator and bar line > engraver > out of the score context and into the staff context.  However, I'm still > getting garb

Re: independent time signatures

Am 20.10.2015 um 23:30 schrieb David Wright: > Quoting Michael Collins (mxcoll...@gmail.com): >> I'm trying to write a piece for two staves in independent time signatures. >> After consulting this post, I moved the timing translator and bar line >> engraver >> out of the score context and into

Re: independent time signatures

Michael Collins wrote > I'm trying to write a piece for two staves in independent time signatures. Michael, I'm totally confused by your score. They only thing I've been able to figure out is that there are 16 notes in each staff that I (ignorantly) assume are supposed to line up vertically with

Re: independent time signatures

On 21.10.2015 00:09, Urs Liska wrote: This is true, LilyPond can only make a line break when all staves are at the same moment in time. You can force mid-measure breaks with \bar "", but only at these points. Unless of course you remove the "Forbid_line_break_engraver" (from Voice) – a feature

Re:independent time signatures

Dear Michael, You are nearly here. I attached here a solution (only rhythm) of your score. In fact, if you use polymetrics, you should also multiply (even binary meters, c.f attachment). Hope this will help [sorry , for replying like this, since i have a digest of the list, i cannot figure

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Hi David, > With my suggestion of an additional music expression, this > would end up as > > \ottava #1 c'' d'' e'' f'' \locoIII { r4 r r r } g’' Hmmm… Maybe even more efficient [from a typing perspective] would be \ottava #1 { c'' d'' e'' f’’ r4 r r r g’’ } where the function is designed

Re: loco function which adds markup to the *next* musical moment

Kieren MacMillan writes: > Hi David, > >> With my suggestion of an additional music expression, this >> would end up as >> >> \ottava #1 c'' d'' e'' f'' \locoIII { r4 r r r } g’' > > Hmmm… Maybe even more efficient [from a typing perspective] would be > > \ottava #1 { c'' d'' e'' f’’ r4 r r