lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Efficient transposition


From: Urs Liska
Subject: Re: Efficient transposition
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 00:22:14 +0100
User-agent: K-9 Mail for Android


Colin Tennyson <address@hidden> schrieb:
>I have created my first LilyPond file, using Frescobaldi. 
>(LilyPond 2.18, Frescobaldi 2.0.12)
>
>It's a madrigal by Verdelot, 4 voices, titled  Dormend'un giorn'a baia
>
>I've  transposed it down a minor third. My question is: is the way I
>coded
>the transposition the most efficient one?
>
>I uploaded the file.
>Dormend__a_minor.ly
><http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/file/n156730/Dormend__a_minor.ly>
> 
>
>As instructed in the LilyPond manuals I separated the content and the
>structure. There is a variable 'sopranonotes', a variable
>'sopranowords',
>etc. and those are inserted in the structure.
>
>Now, of course I want the original and the transposed version both
>available, with the file remaining a single file. I don't want to
>create a
>situation where I have two versions, the original and the transposed
>version, and having to update both of them if the conductor asks for,
>say, a
>different text placement.
>
>Currently the 4 voices are transposed individually. So if I want do
>undo/redo the transposition I have to comment out the transposition in
>4
>separate places. 
>Is there a way to use built-in LilyPond functionality so that there is
>a
>_single_ point in the code for setting the transposition?
>
>I tried embracing the entire score part of the source in a  
>\transpose a fs { ... }
>but the parser didn't accept that.
>
>
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Efficient-transposition-tp156730.html
>Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>_______________________________________________
>lilypond-user mailing list
>address@hidden
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

I don't know if that will be very clear to you but unfortunately I can't 
describe it better or more verbose right now.

When I have this situation (and I have it regularly as I'm engraving 
classical/romantic song) I do something like:

File a: music definition
vocals = \relative ...

File b: translation adaptor
vocals = \transpose g e \vocals

File c: score definition
using \vocals

My main file includes the other files.
Of course you have to do this for all parts, but the "adaptor" file redefines 
all variables.
Now when I have to add another transposition I add another adaptor file and 
include it in my main file.
Over time the main file contains a number of different include directives for 
the transposition adaptors, and I can choose which one to use by commenting out 
the others.

HTH
Urs
-- 
Urs Liska
openlilylib.org



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]