Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

pkx166h
@Phil @Benko

I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have,
hopefully, picked the correct note styles now.

Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just
for the Gregorian clefs?

https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C

This is a 300kb PDF of the Ancient Clefs as they will appear in the
notation appendix.


https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (left):

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#oldcode1484
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1484:
@lilypond[line-width=3\cm,notime,ragged-right,relative=1]
On 2017/09/12 14:47:04, pkx166h wrote:
> Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely
File Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely#newcode1542
Documentation/notation/notation-appendices.itely:1542: @code{\clef
varpercussion}
On 2017/09/12 14:47:04, pkx166h wrote:
> Note to self - this @item needs to be an @tab

Done.

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

Werner LEMBERG

> https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C

This link doesn't work (`Invalid PDF structure').


    Werner

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

pkx166h
In reply to this post by pkx166h
On 2017/09/24 14:27:05, pkx166h wrote:
> @Phil @Benko

> I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have,
> hopefully, picked the correct note styles now.

> Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just
for the
> Gregorian clefs?

https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/RohlvM7Gcj5G0yy (new link)

> This is a 300kb PDF of the Ancient Clefs as they will appear in the
notation
> appendix.

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

lemzwerg
In reply to this post by pkx166h
> Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest
> of the examples or just for the Gregorian clefs?

Red four-line staves should be probably used for Gregorian only.
However, I'm not an expert, so maybe others have a more educated
opinion.

Two other problems.

* For Hufnagel clefs you should also use Hufnagel note heads.

* The hufnagel-do-fa clef doesn't make sense for four lines.  Either set
this clef one line lower, or use a five-line staff, cf.


http://www.schoyencollection.com/media/djcatalog2/images/hufnagel-notation-5-line-staff-ms-1589_f.jpg

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

Jean-Charles Malahieude-2
In reply to this post by pkx166h
On 2017/09/24 14:20:08, pkx166h wrote:
> Corrected the Note styles. Added more formatting changes.

Would you mind formatting the "Standard clefs" as well, which would then
"group" G, C and F-clefs and have a more pleasant layout?

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

benko.pal
In reply to this post by pkx166h
Hello James,

> I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and have,
> hopefully, picked the correct note styles now.
>
> Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or just
> for the Gregorian clefs?

Just for the Gregorian clefs.  Mensural clefs, as the C-clefs witness,
assume five line staves.

> https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C

The modified link is almost perfect, just two nits to pick:
- hufnagel-do-fa is misaligned (both the c and f should be on line, as
if hufnagel-do3-fa1) -- this may be a bug elsewhere.
- petrucci-f5 is duplicated.

Thanks,
Pal

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

pkx166h
In reply to this post by pkx166h
On 2017/09/24 14:52:07, lemzwerg wrote:
> > Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest
> > of the examples or just for the Gregorian clefs?

> Red four-line staves should be probably used for Gregorian only.
However, I'm
> not an expert, so maybe others have a more educated opinion.

> Two other problems.

> * For Hufnagel clefs you should also use Hufnagel note heads.

Thanks, now done, these are not documented (at least I could not find
them) in the NR.


> * The hufnagel-do-fa clef doesn't make sense for four lines.  Either
set this
> clef one line lower, or use a five-line staff, cf.

5 lines it is. Thanks.




http://www.schoyencollection.com/media/djcatalog2/images/hufnagel-notation-5-line-staff-ms-1589_f.jpg



https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

pkx166h
In reply to this post by pkx166h
On 2017/09/24 18:02:11, benko.pal wrote:
> Hello James,

> > I took a bit of time to educate myself with Ancient notation and
have,
> > hopefully, picked the correct note styles now.
> >
> > Should I use the red 4-line-staff for the rest of the examples or
just
> > for the Gregorian clefs?

> Just for the Gregorian clefs.  Mensural clefs, as the C-clefs witness,
> assume five line staves.

> > https://cloud.woelkli.com/s/dBGXat0NEGVoy5C

> The modified link is almost perfect, just two nits to pick:
> - hufnagel-do-fa is misaligned (both the c and f should be on line, as
> if hufnagel-do3-fa1) -- this may be a bug elsewhere.

Well I wonder if it is because I used 4 lines - I have now used, as per
Werner's suggestion, used 5 lines. See if this works.

> - petrucci-f5 is duplicated.

Oh yes. Fixed. Thanks.


> Thanks,
> Pal



https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: NR: Update Clef styles Appendix (issue 324420043 by pkx166h@gmail.com)

pkx166h
In reply to this post by pkx166h
On 2017/09/24 15:34:15, Jean-Charles wrote:
> On 2017/09/24 14:20:08, pkx166h wrote:
> > Corrected the Note styles. Added more formatting changes.

> Would you mind formatting the "Standard clefs" as well, which would
then "group"
> G, C and F-clefs and have a more pleasant layout?

Pas de problème!

https://codereview.appspot.com/324420043/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel