-------------------------
Monday, April 22, 2013, 8:18:56 PM, you wrote:
> Send lilypond-user mailing list submissions to
> address@hidden
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> address@hidden
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> address@hidden
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of lilypond-user digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re:How to get dynamics centred on a piano staff? (Urs Liska)
> 2. Re:Conditionally color all tweaked objects (David Kastrup)
> 3. Re:OFF TOPIC: Summary - lilypond-user Digest, Vol 125, Issue
> 96 (David R. Linn)
> 4. Re:Feta or Emmentaler (Francisco Vila)
> 5. publish music book (Jim Tisdall)
> 6. \set TabStaff.minimumFret Fails (Kale Good)
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 18:31:44 +0200
> From: Urs Liska <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: How to get dynamics centred on a piano staff?
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
> Am 22.04.2013 17:54, schrieb Peter Toye:
>> How to get dynamics centred on a piano staff? <Newbie alert>
>>
>> I'm trying to engrave some piano music where the dynamics don't belong
>> to either of the staffs, but refer to both staffs. If I put them in on
>> the RH staff, they're a bit high.
>>
>> Also, I have to use the << || >> construction a lot because there's a
>> mix of homophonic and polyphonic writing. I can't work out how to
>> start (say) a crescendo in the middle of a polyphonic section and
>> terminate it in a monophonic section, and vice-versa, as LP associates
>> the cresc with the voice, and then complains that it's not terminated.
>>
>> Is there an easy way to get round these issues?
> Here
> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes.html#dynamics
> you can find that you can place a dedicated Dynamics context between the
> staves of the piano.
> This basically is what you want, although depending on the nature of
> your material it may still not be completely satisfying out of the box.
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/attachments/20130422/21d77b96/attachment.html>
> ------------------------------
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:03:18 +0200
> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> To: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Conditionally color all tweaked objects
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>> Hi,
>>
>> is it possible somehow to hook into the engraving process and color all
>> grobs that have been manually tweaked?
>>
>> In my library I have a 'draft mode'. All my functions or shorthands that
>> tweak the positioning have a counterpart in draft mode. The draft mode
>> functions basically call the normal functions and add coloring to them.
>> This way I can compile a score in draft mode and immediately see where I
>> had to apply some manual interventions.
>>
>> While this is quite useful in the process of finishing a score (and also
>> to evaluate LilyPond's performance) it obviously only works with tweaks
>> applied through my custom functions. But it would only be _really_
>> useful if I could highlight _all_ manual interventions.
>> Of course it isn't a viable solution to write such functions for any
>> tweak I'm applying so I thought if it would be possible to do such a
>> thing in a more fundamental way.
> You could redefine \tweak but it is probably more reliable to use
> internals:
>> So would such a thing be possible, maybe in Scheme?
>> Or if that's not possible in Scheme would that be an interesting feature
>> request?
> This does not try to differentiate events into several grobs, so in this
> case, the whole note with stem and notehead will get colored even though
> just the notehead was tweaked. It is more cumbersome to pick out
> further details, so this is left as an exercise to the reader.
> On 04/22/13 11:40, David R. Linn wrote:
>> As a bit of administrivia: did anyone who reads the -user digest receive
>> lilypond-user Digest, Vol 125, Issue 96?
> For those interested, at least two people (the original reporter and I)
> did not receive this digest; at least a few other people *did* receive it.
> Thanks to those who replied to my initial question. I do not need
> further responses about successful receipt of that digest but feel free
> let me (address@hidden) know if you expected to receive the digest and did not.
> --
> David R. Linn - address@hidden - address@hidden
> ------------------------------
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 21:11:55 +0200
> From: Francisco Vila <address@hidden>
> To: Andrew Bernard <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: Re: Feta or Emmentaler
> Message-ID:
>
> <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 2013/4/22 Andrew Bernard <address@hidden>:
>> When one is writing about Lilypond, is the name of the standard font Feta or
>> Emmentaler? I am confused because (at v. 2.17.14) Appendix A.8 is titled The
>> Feta Font and then proceeds to enumerate the symbols available in the
>> Emmentaler font. I note the otf fonts on disk are called emmentaler.
>>
>> What is the proper name for the font?
> Read these threads and tell me whether it is of any help:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-05/msg00222.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2013-03/msg00651.html