ottava signs

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

ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3
Hi list,

inspired by a discussion on notat.io [1] I started to make some
improvements to ottava signs, the first one about the texts [2], the
second one about dashed right edges [3] and a third one about vertical
alignment. IMO the criticism on LilyPond’s default 8va markup [4] is
legitimate. Should I change the default in issue 5559?

Cheers,
Malte

[1] https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522
[2] https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5559/
[3] https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5563/
[4] https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522&start=10#p6695 “I have
never seen such a large va in an octave sign, and I am pretty sure it is
non-standard, […]”

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

ottava_gould.png (57K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3


Am 29.09.19 um 10:28 schrieb Malte Meyn:
> and a third one about vertical
> alignment.

I’m not sure how a easily changeable vertical alignment should be done
best: The easiest solution I found would be to remove the line

text.align_to (Y_AXIS, CENTER);

from ottava-bracket.cc (line 179 in current master). This way using the
\general-align or \vcenter markup function the alignment can be done
while setting the ottavationMarkups. Only problem: \set-ting
Staff.ottavation to a simple string or not explicitely aligned markup
will lead to a bottom alignment instead of center and I don’t know
whether it would be possible to write a convert-ly rule that covers such
cases.

Another solution would be a simple grob property for that alignment.
First I thought one could simply use a direction like #UP, #CENTER,
#DOWN but that would not cover cases of ottava bassa if you want f. e.
top-aligned 8va and bottom-aligned 8ba.

Any thoughts on that?

Cheers,
Malte

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

Re: ottava signs

Kieren MacMillan
Hi Malte,

Love this initiative — my ottava markups are heavily tweaked (and hacked!) in order to get something acceptable.

> I’m not sure how a easily changeable vertical alignment should be done best: The easiest solution I found would be to remove the line
> text.align_to (Y_AXIS, CENTER);
> from ottava-bracket.cc (line 179 in current master). This way using the \general-align or \vcenter markup function the alignment can be done while setting the ottavationMarkups. Only problem: \set-ting Staff.ottavation to a simple string or not explicitely aligned markup will lead to a bottom alignment instead of center and I don’t know whether it would be possible to write a convert-ly rule that covers such cases.
>
> Another solution would be a simple grob property for that alignment. First I thought one could simply use a direction like #UP, #CENTER, #DOWN but that would not cover cases of ottava bassa if you want f. e. top-aligned 8va and bottom-aligned 8ba.
>
> Any thoughts on that?

Can it be a pair? (#UP . #UP) for top-aligned +s and -s, (#DOWN . #DOWN) for bottom-aligned +s and -s, and (#UP . #DOWN) for top-aligned +s and bottom-aligned -s, etc. (Note: It seems overkill, to me, to support e.g. 8va #UP and 15ma #DOWN, but that *would* be the most configurable…)

Best,
Kieren.
________________________________

Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: [hidden email]


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

Re: ottava signs

foxfanfare
Hi all,

For those interested, here's my current tweak for the ottava brackets:

\version "2.19.82"

% Ottava Brackets

  ottavaUp = {
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.stencil = #ly:line-spanner::print
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.bound-details =
      #`((left . ((Y . -0.2)
                  (padding . -0.25)
                  (text . ,#{ \markup "8" #})
                  (attach-dir . ,LEFT)
                  (stencil-align-dir-y . ,UP)
                  (stencil-offset . #'(-0.3 . 0))))
         (right-broken . ((text . #f)
                          (padding . 0.1)))
         (left-broken . ((Y . -0.2)
                         (padding . 1)
                         (attach-dir . ,RIGHT)
                         (stencil-offset . #'(-0.3 . 0))))
         (right . ((Y . -0.2)
                   (padding . -0.5)
                   (attach-dir . ,RIGHT)
                   (text . ,#{ \markup
                      \override #'(full-length . #f)
                      \override #'(on . 0.12)
                      \override #'(off . 0.35)
                      \override #'(thickness . 1.8)
                      \draw-dashed-line #'(0 . -1.5)
                    #}))))
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.left-bound-info =
       #ly:line-spanner::calc-left-bound-info-and-text
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.right-bound-info =
       #ly:line-spanner::calc-right-bound-info
    \ottava #1 }

  ottavaUpp = {
    \ottavaUp
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.bound-details.left.text = \markup
"15"
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.bound-details.left.padding = #-0.85
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.bound-details.left-broken.padding =
#0.45
    \ottava #2 }

  ottavaDown = {
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.stencil = #ly:line-spanner::print
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.bound-details =
      #`((left . ((Y . 0.2)
                  (padding . -0.5)
                  (text . ,#{ \markup "8" #})
                  (attach-dir . ,LEFT)
                  (stencil-align-dir-y . ,DOWN)
                  (stencil-offset . #'(-0.15 . 0))))
         (right-broken . ((text . #f)
                          (padding . 0.1)))
         (left-broken . ((Y . 0.2)
                         (padding . 1)
                         (attach-dir . ,RIGHT)
                         (stencil-offset . #'(-0.15 . 0))))
         (right . ((Y . 0.2)
                   (padding . -0.5)
                   (attach-dir . ,RIGHT)
                   (text . ,#{ \markup
                      \override #'(full-length . #f)
                      \override #'(on . 0.12)
                      \override #'(off . 0.35)
                      \override #'(thickness . 1.8)
                      \draw-dashed-line #'(0 . 1.5)
                    #}))))
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.left-bound-info =
       #ly:line-spanner::calc-left-bound-info-and-text
    \once \override Staff.OttavaBracket.right-bound-info =
       #ly:line-spanner::calc-right-bound-info
    \ottava #-1 }

%---------

\score {
  \new Staff
  \relative c'''' {
    \ottavaUp
    c c c c
    \ottavaUpp
    c' c c c
    \ottavaDown
    c,,,,, c c c
  }

}

\layout {

  \context {
  \Score
  \override OttavaBracket.style = #'dashed-line
  \override OttavaBracket.dash-fraction = #0.2
  \override OttavaBracket.dash-period = #0.5
  \override OttavaBracket.thickness = #1.5
  }
}

ottava.ly <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t5604/ottava.ly>  
ottava.pdf <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t5604/ottava.pdf>  

The next improvment I would like to make is use my definition with the
normal "ottava #1" instead of my shortcut...



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Dev-f88644.html

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

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3
Hi foxfanfare,

Am 29.09.19 um 18:43 schrieb foxfanfare:
> For those interested, here's my current tweak for the ottava brackets:
>
> […]
> ottava.ly <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t5604/ottava.ly>
> ottava.pdf <http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/t5604/ottava.pdf>

Hopefully, all of this will be possible without ly:line-spanner::print
and all those bound-details and bound-info overrides in a few days or
weeks ;)

> The next improvment I would like to make is use my definition with the
> normal "ottava #1" instead of my shortcut...

You won’t need those shortcuts anymore, just override some grob
properties of OttavaBracket and a context property called ottavaMarkups.

Any thoughts from your side on how to do vertical alignment best?

Cheers,
Malte

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

Re: ottava signs

Joram Berger
Dear Malte,

thanks for taking care about the ottava signs. I had workarounds for
these three issues and would like to comment on your patches so far:

1. ottava for arbitrary octavations (>2)
2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)
3. ottava text formatting (8 vs. 8va vs. 8^{va})


1. ottava for arbitrary octavations (>2)

This currently produces broken output:
{ \ottava #3 a }
The warning in your patch¹ addresses that and the patch extends the
default range up to ± 4 which seems enough (I am not sure how far the
…ma naming works correctly in italian). The code below does it for any
octavation.


2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)

Thanks for the dotted edges. Very much appreciated. Can they be
top-aligned above the staff and bottom-aligned below the staff? That’s
what I would prefer (cf. your question to foxfanfare in the last mail).


3. ottava text formatting

I like your patch¹ a lot. It is very close to what I used for a few
years now (code below). The code below shows how this workaround is
already possible with current versions by redefining \ottava. I've also
chosen a fontsize -2.

However, the reasoning in the SMuFL 1.3 specifications ("Implementation
notes") about "ma" vs. "mb" convinced me that 15mb does not make sense
and I’d suggest to use 15ma etc. as default setting.

I would even change the style to bold italic.

Cheers,
Joram



¹ https://codereview.appspot.com/568970043/patch/546980043/553000048
² SMuFL 1.3: https://www.w3.org/2019/03/smufl13/tables/octaves.html
(Btw, there are significant changes in naming since 1.0 which also hint
at what the authors consider good practice or nonsensical – see also
"Implementation notes".)



--- ottava.ly ----------------

% Redefinition of the ottava function with bold text and superscripts.
% This change includes the definition of shifts of more than 2 octaves.

ottava =
#(define-music-function (octave) (integer?)
   (_i "Set the octavation.")
   #{
     #(make-music 'OttavaMusic 'ottava-number octave)
     \set Staff.ottavation =
     #(if (< octave -1) #{ \markup \concat {
         #(number->string (+ 1 (* -7 octave)))
         \fontsize #-2 "ma" } #}
      (if (= octave -1) #{ \markup \concat { "8" \fontsize #-2 "va" } #}
      (if (= octave +0) #f
      (if (= octave +1) #{ \markup \concat { "8" \fontsize #-2
                           \translate-scaled #'(0 . 0.85) "va" } #}
                        #{ \markup \concat {
                          #(number->string (+ 1 (* 7 octave)))
                          \fontsize #-2
                          \translate-scaled #'(0 . 0.85) "ma" } #}
      ))))
   #})




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

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3


Am 01.10.19 um 23:13 schrieb Joram:
> 1. ottava for arbitrary octavations (>2)
>
> This currently produces broken output:
> { \ottava #3 a }
> The warning in your patch¹ addresses that and the patch extends the
> default range up to ± 4 which seems enough (I am not sure how far the
> …ma naming works correctly in italian). The code below does it for any
> octavation.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Off-topic comment (enclosed in %%%) first: Instead of using nested “if”s
you could use cond:

\set Staff.ottavation =
      #(cond
        ((= octave +0) #f)
        ((= octave -1) #{ \markup \concat { "8" \fontsize #-2 "va" } #})
        ((= octave +1) #{ \markup \concat {
          "8" \fontsize #-2
          \translate-scaled #'(0 . 0.85) "va"
          } #})
        ((< octave -1) #{ \markup \concat {
          #(number->string (+ 1 (* -7 octave)))
          \fontsize #-2 "ma"
          } #})
        (else #{ \markup \concat {
          #(number->string (+ 1 (* 7 octave)))
          \fontsize #-2
          \translate-scaled #'(0 . 0.85) "ma"
          } #}))
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

I’m not 100% sure about the italian either but I think it’s

        8th = ottava → 8va
        15th = quindicesima → 15ma
        22nd = ventiduesima → 22ma
        29th = ventinovesima → 29ma

Gould recommends 22da, perhaps for ventiseconda or something similar
inspired by english?

> 2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)
>
> Thanks for the dotted edges. Very much appreciated. Can they be
> top-aligned above the staff and bottom-aligned below the staff? That’s
> what I would prefer (cf. your question to foxfanfare in the last mail).

That’s what Gould recommends, yes. But I’m not sure how to implement
this: One could

a) use a single number/direction for “alta” ottavations and mirror it
for “bassa” → somehow inflexible and if you use a direction, it’s also
confusing.
b) use a pair of numbers/directions → looks complicated but IMO better
than a).
c) don’t have a grob property for that at all but just take the
“natural” alignment of the markup. You then would need to set everything
different from bottom-aligned by hand as in
        \set Staff.ottavation = \markup \general-align #Y #UP "15"

For cases a) and b) we would need a good name for that grob property.
Any ideas?
I find case c) the most elegant *iff* you don’t set ottavation by hand.
This would also need a good convert-ly rule for those who set it by hand
in the past.

> However, the reasoning in the SMuFL 1.3 specifications ("Implementation
> notes") about "ma" vs. "mb" convinced me that 15mb does not make sense
> and I’d suggest to use 15ma etc. as default setting.

Hm … Gould recommends 15ma and 22da (see above for 22ma vs. 22da) and
lists 8va, 8ba, 8va bassa as alternatives but not 8vb. I’ll search for
real-world engraved examples.

> I would even change the style to bold italic.

This has nothing to do with ottavationMarkups, you can \override
Staff.OttavaBracket.font-series = #'bold and it will show the desired
effect. But maybe we should make this the default, yes.

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

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3


Am 02.10.19 um 08:45 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>
>> However, the reasoning in the SMuFL 1.3 specifications ("Implementation
>> notes") about "ma" vs. "mb" convinced me that 15mb does not make sense
>> and I’d suggest to use 15ma etc. as default setting.
>
> Hm … Gould recommends 15ma and 22da (see above for 22ma vs. 22da) and
> lists 8va, 8ba, 8va bassa as alternatives but not 8vb. I’ll search for
> real-world engraved examples.

I went through my piano sheet music at home. Henle, Schott (new and old
editions), Boosey & Hawkes, Edition Sikorski, Durand, Editio Musica
Budapest, Edizioni Curci Milano, Universal Edition, Wiener Urtext
Edition (by Schott/UE) and Peters (new and old editions) all use “8”
without any “va”/“vb”/“ba”/“va bassa” additions.

The only “8va” (superscript va) I could find is in Gershwin’s Rhapsody
in Blue published by Alfred—and that edition uses “8” without va too.

Combining these findings with those by John Ruggero
(https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522) I’d vote for numbers only as
a default. I’ll make another patch set.

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

Re: ottava signs

Joram Berger
Dear Malte,

> … Instead of using nested “if”s you could use cond:

Thank you.

> I’m not 100% sure about the italian either but I think it’s
>
>     8th = ottava → 8va
>     15th = quindicesima → 15ma
>     22nd = ventiduesima → 22ma
>     29th = ventinovesima → 29ma

According to https://www.deepl.com/translator
https://italian.tolearnfree.com/free-italian-lessons/free-italian-exercise-47886.php
https://www.omniglot.com/language/numbers/italian.htm
(ok, not the best references, but consistent) it goes on with
-simo/-sima. Probably more constrained by the instruments than by the
italian language :)

trentaseiesimo
quarantatreesimo
cinquantesimo
cinquantasettesimo
sessantaquattresimo
settantunesimo
settantottesimo
ottantacinquesimo
novantaduesimo
novantanovesimo
centoseiesimo

>> 2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)
> That’s what Gould recommends, yes. But I’m not sure how to implement this: One could
>
> a) use a single number/direction for “alta” ottavations and mirror it for “bassa” → somehow inflexible and if you use a direction, it’s also confusing.
> b) use a pair of numbers/directions → looks complicated but IMO better than a).
> c) don’t have a grob property for that at all but just take the “natural” alignment of the markup. You then would need to set everything different from bottom-aligned by hand as in
>     \set Staff.ottavation = \markup \general-align #Y #UP "15"
>
> For cases a) and b) we would need a good name for that grob property. Any ideas?
> I find case c) the most elegant *iff* you don’t set ottavation by hand. This would also need a good convert-ly rule for those who set it by hand in the past.

IIUC, c) is too fragile as you don’t know what the user defines for his
markup. There are different vertical line positions in
https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522 and even though the bassa
variants are not listed, I guess a pair of numbers is the better,
because more flexible solution.

Here are some naming propositions just from the top of my head:

OttavaBracket.line-positions (plural hints at the pair of numbers)
OttavaBracket.label-positions
OttavaBracket.spanner-alignment
OttavaBracket.self-alignment
OttavaBracket.alignment-of-line-relative-to-label-when-raising-octaves¹ :)

¹
https://notat.io/download/file.php?id=2204&sid=ca4f821a2f70a7edbbba6aa46bc90f3a

>> However, the reasoning in the SMuFL 1.3 specifications ("Implementation
>> notes") about "ma" vs. "mb" convinced me that 15mb does not make sense
>> and I’d suggest to use 15ma etc. as default setting.
>
> Hm … Gould recommends 15ma and 22da (see above for 22ma vs. 22da) and lists 8va, 8ba, 8va bassa as alternatives but not 8vb. I’ll search for real-world engraved examples.

Well, which is consistent with the above resoning, isn’t it?
8va/15ma also for bassa. Alternatively, 8ba or 8va bassa. But not
8vb/15mb even if it exists.

>> I would even change the style to bold italic.
>
> This has nothing to do with ottavationMarkups, you can \override Staff.OttavaBracket.font-series = #'bold and it will show the desired effect. But maybe we should make this the default, yes.

Yes, "… by default" was missing in my sentence. Of course, it’s easy to
change as you say and I would not let the "bold italic by default"
decision interfere with the other good changes you propose.

> Combining these findings with those by John Ruggero
> (https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522) I’d vote for numbers only as
> a default. I’ll make another patch set.

+1 for numbers as default. That’s also what I found in scores (Schott,
Boosey & Hawkes) when I looked for it some time ago.

Will the new patch allow for easy way (without manually specifying all
the markups) to switch to suffixed numbers (8va etc.)?


Cheers,
Joram

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

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3


Am 02.10.19 um 11:27 schrieb Joram:

>>> 2. nice line spanners (top- or bottom-aligned, dotted etc.)
>> That’s what Gould recommends, yes. But I’m not sure how to implement this: One could
>>
>> a) use a single number/direction for “alta” ottavations and mirror it for “bassa” → somehow inflexible and if you use a direction, it’s also confusing.
>> b) use a pair of numbers/directions → looks complicated but IMO better than a).
>> c) don’t have a grob property for that at all but just take the “natural” alignment of the markup. You then would need to set everything different from bottom-aligned by hand as in
>>      \set Staff.ottavation = \markup \general-align #Y #UP "15"
>>
>> For cases a) and b) we would need a good name for that grob property. Any ideas?
>> I find case c) the most elegant *iff* you don’t set ottavation by hand. This would also need a good convert-ly rule for those who set it by hand in the past.
>
> IIUC, c) is too fragile as you don’t know what the user defines for his
> markup. There are different vertical line positions in
> https://notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=522 and even though the bassa
> variants are not listed, I guess a pair of numbers is the better,
> because more flexible solution.
>
> Here are some naming propositions just from the top of my head:
>
> OttavaBracket.line-positions (plural hints at the pair of numbers)
> OttavaBracket.label-positions
> OttavaBracket.spanner-alignment
> OttavaBracket.self-alignment

Plural is definitely good. I prefer ‘alignments’ over ‘positions’ but
‘label’ or ‘line’ over ‘spanner’ or ‘self’. How about
        OttavaBracket.label-alignments
? It’s plural and it would describe most exactly what is going on in the
code (at least the current master and the patch I have in mind): It’s
about alignment of the label, not absolute positions or alignment of the
line.
> Will the new patch allow for easy way (without manually specifying all
> the markups) to switch to suffixed numbers (8va etc.)?

Yes, that would be
        \set Staff.ottavationMarkups = #ottava-ordinals
See comment #8 on the Rietveld issue:
https://codereview.appspot.com/568970043/#msg8
However, I still have to change the #ottava-ordinals and
#ottava-simple-ordinals to use va/ma instead of vb/mb ;)

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

Re: ottava signs

Joram Berger
I’ve nothing more to add. That sounds all very nice.

Joram

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

Re: ottava signs

foxfanfare
In reply to this post by Malte Meyn-3
Malte Meyn-3 wrote
> Hi foxfanfare,
>
> Hopefully, all of this will be possible without ly:line-spanner::print
> and all those bound-details and bound-info overrides in a few days or
> weeks ;)
>
> You won’t need those shortcuts anymore, just override some grob
> properties of OttavaBracket and a context property called ottavaMarkups.

Hi Malte, this sounds really terrific, thank you very much for your work.
How could I test it or include your patch in my score presently? Should I
wait for a new release of lilypond (2.19.83)?


Malte Meyn-3 wrote
> Any thoughts from your side on how to do vertical alignment best?

I'm sorry, I don't understand what alignment you have in mind?



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Dev-f88644.html

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

Re: ottava signs

Malte Meyn-3


Am 11.10.19 um 15:13 schrieb foxfanfare:
> Hi Malte, this sounds really terrific, thank you very much for your work.
> How could I test it or include your patch in my score presently? Should I
> wait for a new release of lilypond (2.19.83)?

You could either compile LilyPond yourself or wait for the release of
2.21.0. But I have no idea when that will be … I don’t think that these
patches will be cherry-picked to 2.19.84.

For the dashed edges and easily changable vertical alignment you’ll need
changes in the C++ code so compiling/waiting for release is necessary.
The ottavationMarkups need only changes in scm/ly files:
https://codereview.appspot.com/568970043 (there is one little change in
a C++ file too but you won’t need that if you don’t use ottava at the
beginning of a piece *and* Ambitus_engraver).

> Malte Meyn-3 wrote
>> Any thoughts from your side on how to do vertical alignment best?
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand what alignment you have in mind?

My question was about the vertical alignment of the 8va
number/text/markup and the horizontal (dashed/dotted) line:

        8_____ or 8–––– or 8°°°°°°

This could be done (1) by defining the markups using \general-align and
then use the markup’s alignment (2) by defining one number/direction and
use a mirrored version for ottava bassa below the staff or (3) by using
a pair of numbers/directions.

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

Re: ottava signs

David Kastrup
Malte Meyn <[hidden email]> writes:

> Am 11.10.19 um 15:13 schrieb foxfanfare:
>> Hi Malte, this sounds really terrific, thank you very much for your work.
>> How could I test it or include your patch in my score presently? Should I
>> wait for a new release of lilypond (2.19.83)?
>
> You could either compile LilyPond yourself or wait for the release of
> 2.21.0. But I have no idea when that will be … I don’t think that
> these patches will be cherry-picked to 2.19.84.

A week ago I was at the burial of a good friend and orchestra member.
That was pretty distracting.  We currently have a hord of house guests
making it a bit tricky to focus.  While I tend to do most of my work at
night anyway, my sleep schedule is a bit messed up right now.

That being said, I should hope that the final cherry-picking phase for
2.19.85 can happen this weekend and I don't think it makes a lot of
sense to pull in anything but critical stuff into 2.20 after that.

--
David Kastrup

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

Re: ottava signs

foxfanfare
In reply to this post by Malte Meyn-3
Malte Meyn-3 wrote
> You could either compile LilyPond yourself or wait for the release of
> 2.21.0. But I have no idea when that will be … I don’t think that these
> patches will be cherry-picked to 2.19.84.

OK, but I don't understand, where do I find the latest sources to compile
from?


Malte Meyn-3 wrote
> My question was about the vertical alignment of the 8va
> number/text/markup and the horizontal (dashed/dotted) line:
>
> 8_____ or 8–––– or 8°°°°°°
>
> This could be done (1) by defining the markups using \general-align and
> then use the markup’s alignment (2) by defining one number/direction and
> use a mirrored version for ottava bassa below the staff or (3) by using
> a pair of numbers/directions.

I now understand. My opinion for that is definitively the 3rd option. Either
at the top of the "8" or just a little bit bellow is good practice for me,
as long as it's not too far from the top (that's at least how I configured
it in the example I posted with my code and what I think looks good!).



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Dev-f88644.html

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