Re: Placing a section name at the start of a staff

[David Wright]

On Thu 12 May 2016 at 16:45:23 (+0100), Anthonys Lists wrote:
> On 10/05/2016 01:05, David Wright wrote:
> >On Mon 09 May 2016 at 16:52:44 (+0100), Wols Lists wrote:
> >Reading the manual saves you having to remember everything.
> >Read 3.2 Titles and headers.
> 
> Very helpful, thanks. I do, however, have a slight problem with that ...
> I have a custom bookTitleMarkup ... edited in a rather "monkey see,
> monkey do" kind of way. That said, it should work pretty much as the
> standard version does.
> 
> >>>>My other approach to doing this sort of thing is "\stopStaff
> >>>>\cadenzaOn ... \cadenzaOff \startStaff" but will this suppress
> >>>>things like key signature etc at the start of the line? My initial
> >>>>experiments in that respect haven't worked, although it seems
> >>>>obvious to me why. But I don't want to carry on down that route if
> >>>>it's going to turn into a rabbit's warren of tweaks and fixes to get
> >>>>right.
> >>>Without an example of whay you've done, I wouldn't like to comment.
> >>>It seems more complicated.
> >>I use it to put text in the middle of a piece usually - some scores

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> >>break the part and put the word "Coda" in the middle, or in my most
> >>recent case, "extended cadenza". I just expect if I try it at the start
> >>of a piece, it's likely to collide with a lot of the stuff lilypond
> >>"just does" for you.
> >Well, if you've actually done it, then it should be simple to do again
> >for the new case, ie the start of a piece.
> >
> >Or is it that you just want somebody to do it for you and then report
> >back on what they find?
> 
> No - I was hoping somebody HAD ALREADY done it, and could say "this is
> what worked for me". I've been down enough rabbit holes trying to get
> lily to do what I want, and I was hoping somebody might save me a few
> trips down the garden path ...

I thought you said you had (marked above).

> And I DID search the lsr, with no joy.

> >>>>How do other people deal with section names? Especially, how do you
> >>>>do it like the score I'm copying - at the start of the line ...
> >>>I don't know what the score you're copying looks like. I think we've
> >>>been here before...
> >>>
> >>I'm not a visual person - I tend to describe things as text ... I was
> >>hoping someone who's done something similar would chime in - I would
> >>expect them to recognise the description if they have. I don't like
> >>repurposing stuff meant to be used otherwise - lily normally expects the
> >>section name to be *above* the score part, as part of the header, iirc.
> >What sort of reasoning is that? If you repurpose something
> >successfully and report back on it, there's a chance that your case
> >will be folded into the software. It may even happen that a
> >generalisation is discovered that had been originally missed. †
> >
> >>And the instrument name normally doesn't change several times per part
> >>... :-) so if I put the section name in the instrument variable I'm not
> >>expecting it work exactly as I would like ... and it'll probably come
> >>with unwanted surprises.
> >Use the short name; that can be changed on the fly. I use it when the
> >number of staves changes so that singers know which line is theirs.
[...]
> >† 2) A picture is worth a thousand words.
> >
> Q. Why do some people much prefer the radio over the TV?
> A. Because the pictures are so much better!

Not when you're trying to *copy* something!

> I'm one of those people. That said, if I want other people to help me,
> then it behoves me to meet them on *their* terms, not mine, so ... scan
> attached - the publisher's copyright is 1949 and the composer died long
> before that, so although it's still in copyright (just), I doubt it'll
> get me into trouble :-)
> 
> And it shows in part why I'm an inveterate moaner about lily ... I want
> it to be a good program but this part is just so typical of my stuff and
> lily (by default) screws up so much of it. I don't want to have to
> *keep* digging into lily's internals just to modify its defaults to mine
> ... (you can see here why bookTitleMarkup has been customised... :-)

Most of the things you're doing in that score are in this example
which is a bit of NM cobbled together with some mangled headers.
What you *will* have to work at is the vertical spacing as it's all
very compressed. It looks as if the staves are uniformly spaced so
at worst you can fix the spacing manually with a repeated series of

\overrideProperty Score.NonMusicalPaperColumn.line-break-system-details 
#'((Y-offset . 9))
s1 * N

Why moan? The whole point here is that LP doesn't produce your score
by default, and thank goodness for that. It's fit for its purpose
(though the aspect ratio surprised me) but not exactly beautiful.
So modifying LP's defaults is exactly what you want to do. By
modifying the defaults intelligently, you can factor the greatest
number of decisions out of your scores and into your header files.
Thus the following can be used to print an Anglican chant in my
house style in any key.

\version "2.19.32"
rightside = "William Morley (c1680–1731)"
\include "Psalmbits.lily"
keysig = { \key d \minor }
Atreble = \relative { d'1 d2 e f1 f1 e2 a c b a1 }
Btreble = \relative { a'1 c2 g a1 f1 a2 d d cs d1 }
Aalto = \relative { a1 d2 cs d1 a1 c2 e e2. d4 c1 }
Balto = \relative { f'1 g2 e f1 a,1 d2 f e e f1 }
Atenor = \relative { f1 f2 a a1 d1 a2 c a gs a1 }
Btenor = \relative { c'1 c2 c c1 d1 a2 a a a a1 }
Abass = \relative { d1 d2 a d1 d1 c2 a e' e a,1 }
Bbass = \relative { f1 e2 c f1 d1 f2 d a' a, d1 }
\include "Doublechant.lily"

Cheers,
David.

cue.ly
Description: Text Data

cue.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document