version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

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

version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Eby Mani
version 2.18.2

With 4/2 time, Bar numbers are incorrectly printed when using full measure rests.

Even printing bar numbers for each measure is numbered incorrectly(attached sample).
\context {\Score \override BarNumber.break-visibility = #all-visible }

Is there a way to print them properly other than manually adding them ?.

Thanks,
eby

full-measure-rest.png (12K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Malte Meyn-3


Am 18.03.20 um 17:44 schrieb Eby Mani:
> With 4/2 time, Bar numbers are incorrectly printed when using full measure rests.
>
> Even printing bar numbers for each measure is numbered incorrectly(attached sample).
> \context {\Score \override BarNumber.break-visibility = #all-visible }
>
> Is there a way to print them properly other than manually adding them ?.

What other output do you expect?

IMO, LilyPond does everything correctly here. Bar numbers don’t count
whole notes but whole measures.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Torsten Hämmerle
In reply to this post by Eby Mani
Hi eby,

I don't get your point - all I can see is:
two full-measure rests, and after these two measures, the third measure,
consequently, is bar number 3.
Why should it be 5?

I you had provided your sample code, it'd probably be easier to understand
what you had in mind.
Is it about the breve rests?
Did your use R\breve or R1*2?  Still, a measure is a measure...

Cheers,
Torsten



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Eby Mani
@Malte Meyn, @Torsten

My understanding of "full measure rests" is, it covers the full measure based on the time signature. Thus R1 is sufficient for a measure that is in 4/2 time. But when using standard rests, r1*4 should be provided.

I have used R1*4 based on above assumptions for the first 4 bars in the example.

Thanks,
eby


On Wednesday, 18 March, 2020, 11:06:46 pm IST, Torsten Hämmerle <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi eby,

I don't get your point - all I can see is:
two full-measure rests, and after these two measures, the third measure,
consequently, is bar number 3.
Why should it be 5?

I you had provided your sample code, it'd probably be easier to understand
what you had in mind.
Is it about the breve rests?
Did your use R\breve or R1*2?  Still, a measure is a measure...

Cheers,
Torsten



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Michael Gerdau

> My understanding of "full measure rests" is, it covers the full measure based on the time signature. Thus R1 is sufficient for a measure that is in 4/2 time.

That understanding is wrong.

A full measure rest has a duration like normal rests, thus you will have to scale it according to your time signature.

There are many ways to achieve that. My personal favourite is using R1*<time signature>, e.g. R1*4/2 in your case.

To cover 4 bars you would write R1*4/2*4

HTH,
Michael
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Torsten Hämmerle
In reply to this post by Eby Mani
Eby Mani wrote
> My understanding of "full measure rests" is, it covers the full measure
> based on the time signature. Thus R1 is sufficient for a measure that is
> in 4/2 time.


Hi Ebi,

What you are saying is true (in most cases) for the graphical representation
in the output, but, as Michael pointed out, in LilyPond, the full measure
rests need to coded using their actual duration.

For example, a full measure rest in 3/4 has to be coded as R2., but it will
be printed as a semibreve full measure rest rather than a dotted minim rest.
A full measure rest in 2/4 has to be coded as R2, but it will be printed as
a semibreve full measure rest rather than a minim rest..

Just as an F sharp in the key of G major will be printed as an F (without
accidental, due to the general key signature), but it has nevertheless to be
coded as fis (or fs or whatever, depending on the input language).


When it comes to breve rests (as in your 4/2 example), the printed full
measure rest symbol, however, will usually be a breve rest according to
common standards (cf. Gould, "Behind Bars", and others).

All in all, LilyPond's output behaves according to common engraving
standards, but a full measure rest has to be coded using its actual
duration.
In general, one can say: LilyPond's input is focused on musical content, not
on its graphical representation.

The Documentation (Notation Reference) clearly states: /"The duration of
full-measure rests is identical to the duration notation used for notes."/

A similar case are multi-measure rests. In 4/4, 8 full-measure rests will
always be coded as R1*8, because that's the musical content, independent of
the intended graphical representation:
Whether the printed output shows a classical double-long rest symbol or a
just a contemporary "general rest bar" merely depends on the engraving
options - if you, for instance, use
  \override MultiMeasureRest.expand-limit = #5,
everything above 5 measures will be printed as a simple bar rather than
classical rest symbols.

HTH,
Torsten




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Eby Mani
Thank you all for correcting my understanding.

As Torsten explained, since in 4/4, full-measure rest is coded internally as R1*8 and likewise for other time signatures, wouldn't it be possible do code to treat full-measure rest as graphically and musically based on time signature as the name implies ?.

E.g.
something like r\fmr or \RF would place graphically and musically correct rest based on the time signature.
\RF*8 would cover 8 full measures based on the time signature.

Thanks,
eby
On Friday, 20 March, 2020, 04:46:15 am IST, Torsten Hämmerle <[hidden email]> wrote:


Eby Mani wrote
> My understanding of "full measure rests" is, it covers the full measure
> based on the time signature. Thus R1 is sufficient for a measure that is
> in 4/2 time.


Hi Ebi,

What you are saying is true (in most cases) for the graphical representation
in the output, but, as Michael pointed out, in LilyPond, the full measure
rests need to coded using their actual duration.

For example, a full measure rest in 3/4 has to be coded as R2., but it will
be printed as a semibreve full measure rest rather than a dotted minim rest.
A full measure rest in 2/4 has to be coded as R2, but it will be printed as
a semibreve full measure rest rather than a minim rest..

Just as an F sharp in the key of G major will be printed as an F (without
accidental, due to the general key signature), but it has nevertheless to be
coded as fis (or fs or whatever, depending on the input language).


When it comes to breve rests (as in your 4/2 example), the printed full
measure rest symbol, however, will usually be a breve rest according to
common standards (cf. Gould, "Behind Bars", and others).

All in all, LilyPond's output behaves according to common engraving
standards, but a full measure rest has to be coded using its actual
duration.
In general, one can say: LilyPond's input is focused on musical content, not
on its graphical representation.

The Documentation (Notation Reference) clearly states: /"The duration of
full-measure rests is identical to the duration notation used for notes."/

A similar case are multi-measure rests. In 4/4, 8 full-measure rests will
always be coded as R1*8, because that's the musical content, independent of
the intended graphical representation:
Whether the printed output shows a classical double-long rest symbol or a
just a contemporary "general rest bar" merely depends on the engraving
options - if you, for instance, use
  \override MultiMeasureRest.expand-limit = #5,
everything above 5 measures will be printed as a simple bar rather than
classical rest symbols.

HTH,
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: version 2.18.2 - incorrect bar numbers with full measure rests

Francisco Vila
El 25/3/20 a las 8:10, Eby Mani escribió:

> Thank you all for correcting my understanding.
>
> As Torsten explained, since in 4/4, full-measure rest is coded
> internally as R1*8 and likewise for other time signatures, wouldn't it
> be possible do code to treat full-measure rest as graphically and
> musically based on time signature as the name implies ?.
>
> E.g.
> something like r\fmr or \RF would place graphically and musically
> correct rest based on the time signature.
> \RF*8 would cover 8 full measures based on the time signature.

So actual timing would be context dependant. Another simultaneous
expression could change time signature and that would change durations
in this one.

This would be dangerous for those who expect a robust, hardwired
duration as usual in lilypond code. Code is not visual, for good or bad.

You can always use macros for this.
--
Francisco Vila, Ph.D. - Badajoz (Spain)
paconet.org , lilypond.es