[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: staff section
From: |
Trevor Daniels |
Subject: |
RE: staff section |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Feb 2008 09:08:43 -0000 |
Hi Till
Might the tempo indication and metronome marks be better placed in the Rhythm
section? If you think so let me know, as I'm working on Rhythms right now.
Trevor D
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+t.daniels=treda.co.u
> address@hidden Behalf Of
> Till Rettig
> Sent: 24 February 2008 13:19
> To: lilypond-user Mailinglist
> Subject: GDP: staff section
>
>
> Hi GDP-helpers!
>
> I started now finally with the staff section of NR1.
> As with the repeat section, I would also suggest
> some new grouping.
> The order of the section is now the following:
>
> # 1.6 Staff notation
> * 1.6.1 Displaying staves
> o 1.6.1.1 System start delimiters
> o 1.6.1.2 Staff symbol
> o 1.6.1.3 Hiding staves
> * 1.6.2 Writing parts
> o 1.6.2.1 Metronome marks
> o 1.6.2.2 Instrument names
> o 1.6.2.3 Quoting other voices
> o 1.6.2.4 Formatting cue notes
>
> I was first wondering why "writing parts" is here
> at all, but I guess
> this should not be discussed too broad now,
> because it had been
> discuessed when we decided about the GDP chapter
> order. I was just
> thinking that "combining parts" and "writing
> parts" would be together
> something like a "orchestral" chapter -- even
> though you use it also in
> chamber music and the like. So I hope this
> grouping as it now is is
> intuitive enough to a new user that he figures
> out where to look for.
>
> The 1.6.1 section is really unevenly distributed
> over the three
> subsubsections, I was thinking of introducing a
> new subsection:
> modifying staves which would contain most of
> 6.1.1 and 6.1.2
> So the new section model could be:
>
> 1.6 Staff notation
> 1.6.1 Displaying/writing/setting staves
> 1.6.1.1 Initiating a new staff (short
> basics, also one sentence
> about \new and \context, here should also go the
> example about starting
> stopping additional staves)
> 1.6.1.2 Grouping staves (about system
> start delimiters
> (maybe: 1.6.1.3: Deeper nesting of staff groups)
> 1.6.2 Modifying staves
> 1.6.2.1 Staff symbol, (and how to modify
> the different parameters)
> 1.6.2.2 Ossia staves
> 1.6.2.3 Hiding staves
> 1.6.3 Writing parts
> ...
>
> I have concentrated for now on this part leaving
> the parts section
> alone, I want to come back to it only when the
> first part is in better
> condition.
> There are still some general questions for the
> parts section for which I
> would like to hear some feedback:
>
> -Why is the metronome mark described here? It
> applies as well to a whole
> score (where it would be agreedly on the top
> stave...), and I think it
> should go together with a general description on
> how to write tempo
> indications (and also with a workaround to align
> the indication with the
> key or the meter, not with the first note of the
> first bar). Where could
> this section go?
> It is currently discussed in text marks, 1.8.1.4,
> but meant to write
> rehearsal marks, not tempo indications.
>
> -I think it is actually almost a bug in lilypond
> that there is no easy
> way to center the beginning of a tempo
> indictation on the key symbol, so
> I think it is important to provide at least an
> workaround clearly marked
> as such for this purpose.
>
> -We see the parts section as the sections that
> explains everything
> general about single parts -- so in this sense
> the metronome mark
> belongs here and also the tempo indication. But
> to me (and my German
> ears) the section caption points at preparing
> parts for each instrument
> of a bigger score. So I think we should change
> this section's caption.
> Ideas?
>
> -To me there is a distinction between the two
> first subsubsections
> (metronome marks and instrument names) and the
> two last (quoting voices
> and cue notes): the first two I would see more
> generally apllying to
> staves for each instrument/voice, the two last
> are what I understand by
> the word "part", mainly concerned about the case
> where one has only
> one's own part and needs to get some context into
> it. So I could even
> imagine still a new subsection:
>
> 1.6.3 Additions to specific staves
> 1.6.3.1 tempo indication
> 1.6.3.2 metronome mark
> 1.6.3.3 instrument name
> 1.6.4 Adding context to a single part
> 1.6.4.1 quoting
> 1.6.4.2 cue notes
>
> But this is only a first thought.
>
> Greetings
> Till
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>