@c -*-texinfo-*- @node Introduction @chapter Introduction LilyPond is a program to print sheet music. If you have used notation programs before, then the way to use this program might be surprising at first sight: in order to print music you have to enter musical codes in a file. Then you run the program on the file, and the music is produced without any further intervention. For example, something like this: @lilypond[fragment,verbatim, relative 1, intertext="produces this: "] \key c \minor r8 c16 b c8 g as c16 b c8 d | g,4 @end lilypond @cindex encoding music Encoding music using letters and digits may appear strange, intimidating or even clumsy at first. Nevertheless, when you take the effort to learn the codes and the program you will find that it is easier than it seems. Entering music can be done quickly, and you never have to remember how you made the program do something complicated: it is all in the input code, and you only have to read the file to see how it works. Moreover, you are rewarded with very nicely looking output. In this chapter, we will explain the reasoning behind this unusual design, and how this approach affects you as a user. @menu * Batch processing:: * Music engraving:: * Computerized typography :: * Music representation:: * Example applications:: * About this manual:: @end menu @node Batch processing @section Batch processing @cindex GUI @cindex Batch @cindex UNIX LilyPond is a @emph{batch} program. To use it, one enters commands in a file, and runs the program on that file. The output is produced without requiring any further interaction. When we started developing LilyPond, we were still studying at the university. We were interested in music notation, not as publishers or musicians, but as programmers and scientists. We wanted to figure to what extent formatting sheet music could be automated. Back then GUIs were not as ubiquitous as they are today, and we were immersed in the UNIX operating system, where it is very common to use compilers to achieve computing tasks. So, our computerized music engraving experiment took on the form of a compiler. @ignore @cindex free software @cindex sharing software You can freely use, modify and redistribute LilyPond. This choice was also motivated by our academic background. In the scientific community it has always been a tradition to share knowledge, also if that knowledge was packaged as software. One of the most visible groups that stimulated this philosophy, was the Free Software Foundation, whose popular GNU project aimed to replace closed and proprietary computing solutions with free (as in ``Libre'') variants. We jumped on that bandwagon, and released LilyPond as free software. That is the reason that you can get LilyPond at no cost and without any strings attached. @end ignore @node Music engraving @section Music engraving @cindex engraving @cindex typography Making sheet music may seem trivial at first (``you print 5 lines, and then put in the notes at different heights''), @emph{music engraving}, i.e. professional music typography, is in another ballpark. The term `music engraving' derives from the traditional process of music printing. Only a few decades ago, sheet music was made by cutting and stamping the music into zinc or pewter plates, mirrored. The plate would be inked, and the depressions caused by the cutting and stamping would hold ink. An image was formed by pressing paper to the plate. Stamping and cutting was completely done by hand. Making corrections was cumbersome, so engraving had to be done correctly in one go. As you can imagine this was a highly specialized skill, much more so than the traditional process of printing books. @cindex craftsmanship @cindex master In the traditional German craftsmanship six years of full-time training, more than any other craft, were required before a student could call himself a master of the art. After that many more years of practical experience were needed to become an established music engraver. Even today, with the use of high-speed computers and advanced software, music requires lots of manual fine tuning before it is acceptable for publication. When we wanted to write a computer program to create music typography, we encountered the first problem: there were no sets of musical symbols available: either they were not available freely, or they did not look well to our taste. Not let down, we decided to try font design ourselves. We created a font of musical symbols, relying on nice printouts of hand-engraved music. The experience helped develop a typographical taste, and it made us appreciate subtle design details. Without that experience, we would not have realized the shortcomings of the fonts were that we admired at first. @lilypond[noindent] #(define magfact 3.0) \score { \notes { as'2 r4 } \paper { raggedright = ##t \translator { \ScoreContext AccidentalPlacement \override #'right-padding = #3.0 StaffSymbol \override #'transparent = ##t Clef \override #'transparent = ##t TimeSignature \override #'transparent = ##t Accidental \override #'font-magnification = #magfact Rest \override #'font-magnification = #magfact NoteHead \override #'font-magnification = #magfact Stem \override #'transparent = ##t } } } @end lilypond @cindex musical symbols @cindex font @cindex blackness @cindex balance The figure above shows a few notable glyphs. For example, the vertical stem of the flat symbol should be brushed slightly, i.e. becoming wider at the top. the half-notehead is not elliptic but slightly diamond shaped. Fine endings, such as the one on the bottom of the quarter rest, should not end in sharp points, but rather in rounded shapes. Taken together, the blackness of the font must be carefully tuned together with the thickness of lines, beams and slurs to give a strong yet balanced overall impression. Producing a strong and balanced look is the real challenge of music engraving. It is a recurring theme with many variations. In spacing, strength and balance are in layout that is `heavy' enough---without big gaps of space--- and without big clusters of black. The distribution of space should reflect the character of the music. Spacing is an example of a subtlety of formatting music. The distances between notes should reflect the durations between notes, but adhering with mathematical precision to the duration will lead to a poor result. Shown here is an example of a motive, printed twice. It is printed using exact mathematical spacing, and with some corrections. Can you spot which fragment is which? @cindex optical spacing @lilypond[noindent] \score { \notes { \property Staff.NoteSpacing \set #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.6 c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 | \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4| \stemBoth \property Staff.NoteSpacing \override #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0 \property Staff.StaffSpacing \override #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0 c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 | \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4| } \paper { raggedright = ##t } } @end lilypond @cindex regular rhythms @cindex regular spacing The fragment that was printed uses only quarter notes: notes that are played in a constant rhythm. The spacing should reflect that. Unfortunately, the eye deceives us a little: the eye not only notices the distance between note heads, but also between consecutive stems. As a result, the notes of a up-stem/down-stem combination should be put farther apart, and the notes of a down-up combination should be put closer together, all depending on the combined vertical positions of the notes. The first two measures are printed with this correction, the last two measures without. The notes in the last two measures form down-stem/up-stems clumps of notes. @node Computerized typography @section Computerized typography The example in the previous section is one illustration of how subtle music engraving can be is a subtle. Producing good engraving requires skill and knowledge. It was our challenge to see if we could put typographical knowledge into a computer program. Capturing that knowledge has two aspects: first, it has to be acquired. Then, it has to be encoded in data-structures and algorithms. As the previous example shows, there is a lot of subtlety involved in music engraving, and unfortunately, only a small fraction of these tiny details are documented. One reason for the time that it takes to become a master engraver, is that all these details must be learned either from experience or from other engravers: as an engraver gets older and wiser, he will be able to produce better and more complex pieces. A similar situation is present when putting typography into computer programs. It is not possible to come up with a final solution for a problem at the first try. Instead, we start out with simple solution that might cover 75% of the cases, and gradually refine that solution over the course of months or years, so that 90 or 95 % of the cases are handled. This has an important implication for the design of the program. During development, almost every piece of formatting code must be considered as temporary. When the need arises, is to be replaced a solution that will cover even more cases. A clean way to accomplish this, is a ``plug-in'' architecture: an architecture where new pieces of code can be inserted in the program dynamically. In such a program, a new solution can be developed along-side the existing code. It can be perfected separately until it is better than the existing solution, at which point, the new solution is switched on by default, and the old one is removed. Until that time, users must have a way to deal with imperfections: these 25%, 10% or 5% of the cases that are not handled automatically. In these cases, a user must be able to override formatting decisions. A way to accomplish this, is to store decisions in generic variables, and let the user manipulate these variables. For example, consider the following fragment of notation. @lilypond \score { \notes { g'4-\f g4 } \paper { raggedright = ##t } } @end lilypond @noindent The position of the forte symbol is slightly awkward, because it is next to the low note, whereas dynamics should be below notes in general. This may be remedied by inserting extra space between the high note and the `f', as shown in this example @lilypond \score { \notes { \once\property Voice. DynamicLineSpanner \override #'padding = #4.0 g'4-\f g4 } \paper { raggedright = ##t } } @end lilypond This was achieved with the input statement @example \property Voice. DynamicLineSpanner \override #'padding = #4.0 @end example which increases the amount of space (@code{padding}) between the note and the dynamic symbol to 4.0 (which is measured in staff space, so 4.0 equals the height of a staff). Both design aspects, a plug-in architecture, and formatting variables, are built on top of GUILE, an interpreter for the programming language Scheme, which is a member of the LISP family. Variables are stored as Scheme objects, and attached to graphical objects such as note heads and stems. The variables are a means to adjust formatting details in individual cases, but they are used in a more general manner. Consider the case of a publisher that is not satisfied with the in the default layout, and wants heavier stems. Normally, they are @code{1.3} times the thickness of staff lines, but suppose that their editions require them to be twice the thickness of the staff lines. The same mechanism can be used to adjust a setting globally. By issuing @example \property Score.Stem \override #'thickness = #2.0 @end example the entire piece is formatted with thick stems: @lilypond \score { \notes { \property Score.Stem \override #'thickness = #2.0 \once\property Voice. DynamicLineSpanner \override #'padding = #4.0 g'4-\f g4 } \paper { raggedright = ##t } } @end lilypond @noindent In effect, by setting these variables, users can define their own layout styles. ``Plug-ins'' are also implemented using Scheme. A formatting ``plug-in'' takes the form of a function written in Scheme (or a C++ function made available as a Scheme function), and it is also stored in a variable. For example, the placement of the forte symbol in the example above is calculated by the function @code{Side_position_interface::aligned_side}. If we want to replace this function by a more advanced one, we could issue @example \property Voice.DynamicLineSpanner \override #'Y-offset-callbacks = #`(,gee-whiz-gadget) @end example @noindent Now, the formatting process will trigger a call to our new @code{gee-whiz-gadget} function when the position of the f symbol has to be determined. The full scope of this functionality certainly is intimidating, but there is no need to fear: normally, it is not necessary to define style-sheets or rewrite formatting functions. In fact, LilyPond gets a lot of formatting right automatically, so adjusting individual layout situations is not needed very often at all. @node Music representation @section Music representation One of the big questions when writing batch programs, is what kind of input the program should expect. Many music notation programs offer a graphical interface that shows notation, and allow you to enter the music by placing notes on a staff. From our point of view, this design is a form of cheating. After all, the core message of a piece of music notation simply is the music itself. If you start by offering notation to the user, you have already skipped one conversion, even if it is implicit. If we want to generate music notation from something else, then the obvious candidate for the source is the music itself. On paper this theory sounds very good. In practice, it opens a can of worms. What really @emph{is} music? Many philosophical treatises must have been written on the subject. Instead of losing ourselves in philosophical arguments over the essence of music, we have reversed the question to yield a more practical approach. Our assumption is that the printed score contains all of the music of piece. We build a program that uses some input format to produce such a score. Over the course of time, the program evolves. While this happens, we can remove more and more elements of the input format: as the program improves, it can fill in irrelevant details of the input by itself. At some (hypothetical) point, the program is finished: there is no possibility to remove any more elements from the syntax. What we have left is by definition exactly the musical meaning of the score. There are also more practical concerns. Our users have to key in the music into the file directly, so the input format should have a friendly syntax. As programmers and scientists, we want a clean formal definition. After all, producing music notation is a difficult problem, and in the scientific world, problems can only be solved if they are well-specified. Moreover, formally defined formats are easier to write programs for. These ideas shaped our music representation: it is a compact format that can easily be typed by hand. It complex musical constructs from simple entities like notes and rests, in much the same way that one builds complex formulas from simple expressions such as numbers and mathematical operators. @node Example applications @section Example applications As programmers and hedonists we enjoy beauty in code, and code that produces beautiful typeset music, but nevertheless this program can applied to do useful things. In this section, we show a few small examples of what is possible. The simplest application is printing notes. @lilypond[relative=1] \time 2/4 c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2 @end lilypond To these notes, chord names and lyrics may be added, yielding a lead sheet. @lilypond[raggedright] \score { < \context ChordNames \chords { c2 c f2 c } \notes \relative c' { \time 2/4 c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2 } \context Lyrics \lyrics { twin4 kle twin kle lit tle star2 } > } @end lilypond The following example combines some more exotic uses of notation @lilypondfile{screech-boink.ly} The fragments shown above have all been written by hand, but that is not a requirement. Since the formatting engine is mostly automatic, it can serve as an output means for other programs that manipulate music. It can also be used to convert databases of musical fragments to images for use on websites on multimedia presentations. This manual also shows an application: the input format is plain text, and can therefore be easily embedded in other text-based formats, such as La@TeX{}, HTML or in the case of this manual, Texinfo. By means of a special program, the input fragments can be replaced by music images in the resulting PostScript or HTML output files. This makes it easy to mix music and text in documents. @node About this manual @section About this manual The manual is divided into the following chapters @itemize @bullet @item @ifhtml The @end ifhtml @emph{@ref{Tutorial}} gives a gentle introduction into typesetting music. First time users should start here. @item @ifhtml The @end ifhtml @emph{@ref{Notation manual}} discusses topics grouped by notation construct. @item @ifhtml The @end ifhtml @emph{@ref{Technical manual}} @c discusses the general design of the program, and how to extend functionality. @item @ifhtml The chapter @end ifhtml @emph{@ref{Invoking LilyPond}} explains how to run LilyPond and its helper programs. @end itemize Once you are experienced, you can simply use the manual as reference: there is an extensive index@footnote{If you are looking for something, and you cannot find it by using the index, that is considered a bug. In that case, please file a bug report.}, but the document is also available in @ifnothtml a big HTML page, @end ifnothtml @ifhtml @uref{../lilypond.html, a big HTML page} @end ifhtml which can be searched easily using the search facility of a web browser. @cindex search in manual @cindex using the manual @c TODO: advise to buy a book on notation? If you are not familiar with music notation, or music terminology (especially if you are a foreigner), then it is advisable to consult the glossary as well. The glossary explains musical terms, and includes translations to various languages. It is a @ifhtml @uref{../glossary.html,separate document} @end ifhtml @ifnothtml separate document, available in HTML and PDF and can be printed as well. @end ifnothtml @cindex idiom @cindex jargon @cindex terminology @cindex foreign languages @cindex language This manual is not complete without a number of other documents. They are not available in print, but should be included with the documentation package for your platform @itemize @bullet @item Generated internal documentation. @ifhtml available @uref{../lilypond-internals/lilypond-internals.html,here} @end ifhtml Almost all formatting functionality that is used internally, is available directly to the user. For example, all variables that control thicknesses, distances, etc, can be changed in input files. There are a huge number of formatting options, and it would be impossible to describe them all in a hand-written manual. The generated internal documentation is a heavily crosslinked HTML document, produced directly from the formatting definitions used. It documents the nit-gritty details of each and every LilyPond class, object and function. Each section of the reference manual has a @b{See also} subsection, with links (in the HTML document, at least) to the generated documentation. @item Templates @ifhtml (available @uref{../../../input/templates/out-www/collated-files.html,here}) @end ifhtml When you have gone through the tutorial, in theory you are able to start writing input files. In practice, writing files from scratch turns out to be intimidating. To give a headstart, we have collected a number of often-used formats in example files. These files can be used as a start, by copying the template, and adding notes in the appropriate places. @item Various input examples @ifhtml available @uref{../../../input/test/out-www/collated-files.html,here} @end ifhtml @cindex snippets These small files show various tips and tricks, and are available as a big HTML document, with pictures and explanatory texts included. @item The regression test @ifhtml available @uref{../../../input/regression/out-www/collated-files.html,here} @end ifhtml We strive to test each feature in one test file. This collection of is primarily to help us debug problems, but it can be instructive to see how we excercise the program. The format is like the input examples. @end itemize The location of the documentation files that are mentioned here can vary from system to system. On occasion, this manual refers to initialization and example files. Throughout this manual, we refer to input files relative to the top-directory of the source archive. For example, @file{input/test/bla.ly} may refer to the file @file{lilypond-1.7.19/input/test/bla.ly}. On binary packages for the Unix platform, the documentation and examples can typically be found somewhere below @file{/usr/share/doc/lilypond/}. Initialization files, for example @file{scm/lily.scm}, or @file{ly/engraver-init.ly}, are usually found in the directory @file{/usr/share/lilypond/}. @cindex adjusting output @cindex variables @cindex properties @cindex lilypond-internals @cindex internal documentation @cindex Scheme @cindex extending lilypond @cindex bugreport @cindex index Finally, this and all other manuals, are available online both as PDF files for print and HTML files for browsing. They are available from the web site, which can be found at @uref{http://www.lilypond.org/}. @cindex website @cindex URL