-@c -*-texinfo-*-
+@c -*- coding: latin-1; mode: texinfo; -*-
@c This file is part of lilypond.tely
@node Introduction
@chapter Introduction
-LilyPond is a system for formatting music prettily. This chapter
-discusses the backgrounds of LilyPond. It explains the problem of
-printing music with computers, and our approach to solving those
-problems.
-
@menu
* Engraving::
ink. An image was formed by pressing paper to the plate. The
stamping and cutting was completely done by hand. Making a correction
was cumbersome, if possible at all, so the engraving had to be perfect
-in one go. Engraving was a highly specialized skill, a craftsman had
-to complete around ten years of practical training before he could be
-a master engraver.
+in one go. Engraving was a highly specialized skill; a craftsman had
+to complete around five years of training before earning the title of
+master engraver, and another five years of experience were
+necessary to become truly skilled.
Nowadays, all newly printed music is produced with computers. This
-has obvious advantages; prints are cheaper to make, editorial work can
-be delivered by email. Unfortunately, the pervasive use of computers
-has also decreased the graphical quality of scores. Computer
-printouts have a bland, mechanical look, which makes them unpleasant
-to play from.
+has obvious advantages; prints are cheaper to make, and editorial work
+can be delivered by email. Unfortunately, the pervasive use of
+computers has also decreased the graphical quality of scores.
+Computer printouts have a bland, mechanical look, which makes them
+unpleasant to play from.
@c introduce illustrating aspects of engraving, font...
spot which fragment is which?
@cindex optical spacing
-@lilypond[quote,noindent]
-\score {
- \notes {
- \override Staff.NoteSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.6
- c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 |
- \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4 | \bar "||"
- \override Staff.NoteSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
- \override Staff.StaffSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
- \stemBoth c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 |
- \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4 |
- }
- \paper { raggedright = ##t }
+@lilypond[quote,noindent,fragment]
+{
+ \override Staff.NoteSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.6
+ c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 |
+ \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4 | \bar "||"
+ \override Staff.NoteSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
+ \override Staff.StaffSpacing #'stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
+ \stemNeutral c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 |
+ \stemDown b'4 e''4 a'4 e''4 |
}
@end lilypond
@cindex typography
Musicians are usually more absorbed with performing than with studying
-the looks of piece of music; nitpicking about typographical details
+the looks of piece of music, so nitpicking about typographical details
may seem academical. But it is not. In larger pieces with monotonous
rhythms, spacing corrections lead to subtle variations in the layout
of every line, giving each one a distinct visual signature. Without
-this signature all lines would look the same, they become like a
-labyrinth. If the musician looks away once or has a lapse in his
-concentration, he will be lost on the page.
-@c he/she
+this signature all lines would look the same, and they become like a
+labyrinth. If a musician looks away once or has a lapse in
+concentration, they might lose their place on the page.
Similarly, the strong visual look of bold symbols on heavy staff lines
stands out better when music is far away from reader, for example, if
This is a common characteristic of typography. Layout should be
pretty, not only for its own sake, but especially because it helps the
-reader in his task. For performance material like sheet music, this is
+reader in her task. For performance material like sheet music, this is
of double importance: musicians have a limited amount of attention. The
less attention they need for reading, the more they can focus on
playing itself. In other words, better typography translates to better
performances.
-Hopefully, these examples also demonstrate that music typography is an
-art that is subtle and complex, and to produce it requires
-considerable expertise, which musicians usually do not have. LilyPond
-is our effort to bring the graphical excellence of hand-engraved music
-to the computer age, and make it available to normal musicians. We
-have tuned our algorithms, font-designs, and program settings to
-produce prints that match the quality of the old editions we love to
-see and love to play from.
+These examples demonstrate that music typography is an art that is
+subtle and complex, and that producing it requires considerable
+expertise, which musicians usually do not have. LilyPond is our
+effort to bring the graphical excellence of hand-engraved music to the
+computer age, and make it available to normal musicians. We have
+tuned our algorithms, font-designs, and program settings to produce
+prints that match the quality of the old editions we love to see and
+love to play from.
write a program to take over their jobs?
The answer is: we cannot. Typography relies on human judgment of
-appearance, so people cannot be replaced ultimately. However, much of
+appearance, so people cannot be replaced completely. However, much of
the dull work can be automated. If LilyPond solves most of the common
situations correctly, this will be a huge improvement over existing
software. The remaining cases can be tuned by hand. Over the course
notation works.
@end itemize
-These problems have been addressed by integrating the GUILE
-interpreter for the Scheme programming language and rewriting parts of
-LilyPond in Scheme. The new, flexible formatting is built around the
+These problems have been addressed by integrating an interpreter for
+the Scheme programming language and rewriting parts of LilyPond in
+Scheme. The current formatting architecture is built around the
notion of graphical objects, described by Scheme variables and
functions. This architecture encompasses formatting rules,
typographical style and individual formatting decisions. The user has
have all directions down (or left). The second chord has all
directions up (right).
-@lilypond[quote,raggedright,relative=1]
+@lilypond[quote,raggedright,relative=1,fragment]
\new Score \with {
- \override SpacingSpanner #'spacing-increment = #3
- \override TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
- } {
- \stemDown <e g b>4_>-\arpeggio
- \override Arpeggio #'direction = #RIGHT
- \stemUp <e g b>4^>-\arpeggio
+ \override SpacingSpanner #'spacing-increment = #3
+ \override TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
+} {
+ \stemDown <e g b>4_>-\arpeggio
+ \override Arpeggio #'direction = #RIGHT
+ \stemUp <e g b>4^>-\arpeggio
}
@end lilypond
+@noindent
The process of formatting a score consists of reading and writing the
-variables of graphical objects.
-
-Some variables have a preset value. For example, the thickness of many
-lines---a characteristic of typographical style---are preset
-variables. Changing them gives a different typographical impression.
+variables of graphical objects. Some variables have a preset value. For
+example, the thickness of many lines -- a characteristic of typographical
+style -- is a variable with a preset value. You are free to alter this
+value, giving your score a different typographical impression.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-fragment = \notes {
- \clef bass f8 as8
- c'4-~ c'16 as g f e16 g bes c' des'4
+fragment = {
+ \clef bass f8 as8
+ c'4-~ c'16 as g f e16 g bes c' des'4
}
-\score {
- <<
- \new Staff \fragment
- \new Staff \with {
+<<
+ \new Staff \fragment
+ \new Staff \with {
\override Beam #'thickness = #0.3
\override Stem #'thickness = #0.5
\override Bar #'thickness = #3.6
\override Tie #'thickness = #2.2
\override StaffSymbol #'thickness = #3.0
\override Tie #'extra-offset = #'(0 . 0.3)
- } \fragment
- >>
-}
+ }
+ \fragment
+>>
@end lilypond
Formatting rules are also preset variables: each object has variables
-containing procedures. These procedures perform the actual formatting,
-and by substituting different ones, we can change behavior. In the
-following example, the rule which note head objects use to produce
-their symbol is changed during the music fragment.
-
+containing procedures. These procedures perform the actual
+formatting, and by substituting different ones, we can change the
+appearance of objects. In the following example, the rule which note
+head objects use to produce their symbol is changed during the music
+fragment.
+
+@c FIXME: this example has errors:
+@c programming error: Grob `NoteHead' has no interface for property `text'
+@c Continuing; crossing fingers
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
#(define (mc-squared grob orig current)
(let ((interfaces (ly:grob-property grob 'interfaces))
((-2) (make-smaller-markup (make-bold-markup "2")))
(else (make-simple-markup "bla")))))))))
-\score {
- \notes \context Voice \relative c' {
- \stemUp
- \set autoBeaming = ##f
- \time 2/4
- <d f g>4
- \once \override NoteHead #'print-function = #Note_head::brew_ez_stencil
- <d f g>
- \once \override NoteHead #'style = #'cross
- <d f g>
- \applyoutput #mc-squared
- <d f g>
- <<
+\new Voice \relative c' {
+ \stemUp
+ \set autoBeaming = ##f
+ \time 2/4
+ <d f g>4
+ \once \override NoteHead #'print-function = #Note_head::brew_ez_stencil
+ <d f g>
+ \once \override NoteHead #'style = #'cross
+ <d f g>
+ \applyoutput #mc-squared
+ <d f g>
+ <<
{ d8[ es-( fis^^ g] fis2-) }
\repeat unfold 5 { \applyoutput #mc-squared s8 }
- >>
- }
+ >>
}
@end lilypond
@cindex engraving
@cindex typography
-The formatting process in LilyPond decides where to place
+The formatting process decides where to place
symbols. However, this can only be done once it is decided @emph{what}
symbols should be printed, in other words what notation to use.
Common music notation is a system of recording music that has evolved
-over the past 1000 years. The form that is now in common use, dates
+over the past 1000 years. The form that is now in common use dates
from the early renaissance. Although the basic form (i.e., note heads on a
5-line staff) has not changed, the details still change to express the
innovations of contemporary notation. Hence, it encompasses some 500
monstrous counterpoint for large orchestras.
How can we get a grip on such a many-headed beast, and force it into
-the confines of a computer program? We have broken up the problem of
-notation (as opposed to engraving, i.e., typography) into digestible
-and programmable chunks: every type of symbol is handled by a separate
-module, a so-called plug-in. Each plug-in is completely modular and
-independent, so each can be developed and improved separately. People
-who translate musical ideas to graphic symbols are called copyists or
-engravers, so by analogy, each plug-in is called @code{engraver}.
+the confines of a computer program? Our solution is break up the
+problem of notation (as opposed to engraving, i.e., typography) into
+digestible and programmable chunks: every type of symbol is handled by
+a separate module, a so-called plug-in. Each plug-in is completely
+modular and independent, so each can be developed and improved
+separately. Such plug-ins are called @code{engraver}, by analogy with
+craftsmen who translate musical ideas to graphic symbols.
In the following example, we see how we start out with a plug-in for
note heads, the @code{Note_heads_engraver}.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score {
- \topVoice
- \paper {
- \context {
- \VoiceContext
+ \topVoice
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Voice
\remove "Stem_engraver"
\remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
\remove "Slur_engraver"
\remove "Script_engraver"
\remove "Beam_engraver"
\remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
- }
- \context {
- \StaffContext
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
\remove "Accidental_engraver"
\remove "Key_engraver"
\remove "Clef_engraver"
\remove "Time_signature_engraver"
\remove "Staff_symbol_engraver"
\consists "Pitch_squash_engraver"
- }
- }
+ }
+}
}
@end lilypond
Then a @code{Staff_symbol_engraver} adds the staff
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score {
\topVoice
- \paper {
+ \layout {
\context {
- \VoiceContext
+ \Voice
\remove "Stem_engraver"
\remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
\remove "Slur_engraver"
\remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
}
\context {
- \StaffContext
+ \Staff
\remove "Accidental_engraver"
\remove "Key_engraver"
\remove "Clef_engraver"
the @code{Clef_engraver} defines a reference point for the staff
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score {
\topVoice
- \paper {
+ \layout {
\context {
- \VoiceContext
+ \Voice
\remove "Stem_engraver"
\remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
\remove "Slur_engraver"
\remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
}
\context {
- \StaffContext
+ \Staff
\remove "Accidental_engraver"
\remove "Key_engraver"
\remove "Bar_engraver"
and the @code{Stem_engraver} adds stems.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score {
\topVoice
- \paper {
+ \layout {
\context {
- \VoiceContext
+ \Voice
\remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
\remove "Slur_engraver"
\remove "Script_engraver"
\remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
}
\context {
- \StaffContext
+ \Staff
\remove "Accidental_engraver"
\remove "Key_engraver"
\remove "Bar_engraver"
The @code{Stem_engraver} is notified of any note head coming along.
Every time one (or more, for a chord) note head is seen, a stem
-object is created and connected to the note head.
-By adding engravers for beams, slurs, accents, accidentals, bar lines,
+object is created and connected to the note head. By adding
+engravers for beams, slurs, accents, accidentals, bar lines,
time signature, and key signature, we get a complete piece of
notation.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score { \topVoice }
@end lilypond
polyphony? In polyphonic notation, many voices can share a staff.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
-\score { \context Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >> }
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+\new Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >>
@end lilypond
-In this situation, the accidentals and staff are shared, but the
-stems, slurs, beams, etc., are private to each voice. Hence, engravers
-should be grouped. The engravers for note heads, stems, slurs, etc., go
-into a group called ``Voice context,'' while the engravers for key,
-accidental, bar, etc., go into a group called ``Staff context.'' In the
-case of polyphony, a single Staff context contains more than one Voice
-context. In polyphonic notation, many voices can share a staff.
-Similarly, more Staff contexts can be put into a single Score context.
+In this situation, the accidentals and staff are shared, but the stems,
+slurs, beams, etc., are private to each voice. Hence, engravers should
+be grouped. The engravers for note heads, stems, slurs, etc., go into a
+group called `Voice context,' while the engravers for key, accidental,
+bar, etc., go into a group called `Staff context.' In the case of
+polyphony, a single Staff context contains more than one Voice context.
+Similarly, more Staff contexts can be put into a single Score
+context. The Score context is the top level notation context.
+
+@seealso
+
+Program reference: @internalsref{Contexts}.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\include "engraver-example.lyinc"
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
\score {
- <<
- \new Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >>
- \new Staff << \pah \\ \hoom >>
- >>
+ <<
+ \new Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >>
+ \new Staff << \pah \\ \hoom >>
+ >>
}
@end lilypond
The syntax is also the user-interface for LilyPond, hence it is easy
to type
+
@example
c'4 d'8
@end example
+
@noindent
a quarter note C1 (middle C) and an eighth note D1 (D above middle C)
+
@lilypond[quote,fragment]
c'4 d'8
@end lilypond
@end lilypond
@noindent
-Chords can be constructed with < and > enclosing the notes
+Chords can be constructed with @code{<<} and @code{>>} enclosing the notes
+@c < > is not a music expression,
+@c so we use <<>> iso. <> to drive home the point of
+@c expressions. Don't change this back --hwn.
@example
-<c d e>4
+<<c4 d4 e4>>
@end example
+
@lilypond[quote,fragment,relative=1]
-\new Voice { <c d e>4 }
+\new Voice { <<c4 d4 e>> }
@end lilypond
@noindent
@code{@{@tie{}@dots{}@tie{}@}}
@example
-@{ <c d e>4 f4 @}
+@{ f4 <<c4 d4 e4>> @}
@end example
-@lilypond[quote,relative=1]
-\new Voice { <c d e>4 f4 }
+@lilypond[quote,relative=1,fragment]
+{ f4 <<c d e4>> }
@end lilypond
-@noindent
-The above is an expression also, and thus it may be combined again with
-another simultaneous expression (a half note) using <<, @code{\\}, and >>
+@noindent
+The above is also an expression, and so it may be combined
+again with another simultaneous expression (a half note) using <<,
+@code{\\}, and >>
@example
-<< g2 \\ @{ <c d e>4 f4 @} >>
+<< g2 \\ @{ f4 <<c4 d4 e4>> @} >>
@end example
+
@lilypond[quote,fragment,relative=2]
-\new Voice { << g2 \\ { <c d e>4 f4 } >> }
+\new Voice { << g2 \\ { f4 <<c d e>> } >> }
@end lilypond
Such recursive structures can be specified neatly and formally in a
most. They are partly a matter of taste, and also subject of much
discussion. Although discussions on taste do have their merit, they
are not very productive. In the larger picture of LilyPond, the
-importance of input syntax is small: inventing neat syntax is easy,
+importance of input syntax is small: inventing neat syntax is easy, while
writing decent formatting code is much harder. This is also
illustrated by the line-counts for the respective components: parsing
-and representation take up less than 10% of the code.
+and representation take up less than 10% of the source code.
@node Example applications
work, the program can now be used to perform useful tasks. The
simplest application is printing notes.
-@lilypond[quote,relative=1]
+@lilypond[quote,relative=1,fragment]
\time 2/4 c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2
@end lilypond
By adding chord names and lyrics we obtain a lead sheet.
@lilypond[quote,raggedright]
-\score {
- <<
- \context ChordNames \chords { c2 c f2 c }
- \new Staff \notes \relative c' { \time 2/4 c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2 }
- \context Lyrics \lyrics { twin4 kle twin kle lit tle star2 }
- >>
-}
+<<
+ \chords { c2 c f2 c }
+ \new Staff \relative c' { \time 2/4 c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2 }
+ \new Lyrics \lyricmode { twin4 kle twin kle lit tle star2 }
+>>
@end lilypond
Polyphonic notation and piano music can also be printed. The following
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
+in the resulting PDF or HTML output files. This makes it easy
to mix music and text in documents.
The
@end ifhtml
@emph{@ref{Tutorial}}
-gives a gentle introduction to typesetting music.
-First time users should start here.
+gives a gentle introduction to typesetting music. First time
+users should start here.
+
+@item
+@ifhtml
+The
+@end ifhtml
+@emph{@ref{Example templates}}
+provides templates of LilyPond pieces. Just cut and paste a
+template into a file, add notes, and you're done!
@item
@ifhtml
@ifhtml
The chapter
@end ifhtml
-@emph{@ref{Invoking LilyPond}} shows how to run LilyPond and its helper
+@emph{@ref{Running LilyPond}} shows how to run LilyPond and its helper
programs.
@item
@ifhtml
The
@end ifhtml
-@emph{@ref{lilypond-book manual}}
-explains the details behind creating documents with in-line music
+@emph{@ref{Integrating text and music}}
+explains the details behind creating documents with in-line music
examples (like this manual).
@item
@emph{@ref{Converting from other formats}}
explains how to run the conversion programs. These programs
are supplied with the LilyPond package, and convert a variety of music
-formats to the @code{.ly} format. In addition, this section explains
+formats to the @code{.ly} format. In addition, this section explains
how to upgrade input files from previous versions of LilyPond.
@item
The
@end ifhtml
@emph{@ref{Literature list}}
-contains a set of useful reference books, for those who wish to know
-more on notation and engraving.
+contains a set of useful reference books for those who wish to know
+more on notation and engraving.
@end itemize
Once you are an experienced user, you can use the manual as reference:
available directly to the user. For example, all variables that
control thickness values, distances, etc., can be changed in input
files. There are a huge number of formatting options, and all of them
-are described in the generated documentation. Each section of the
+are described in this document. Each section of the
notation manual has a @b{See also} subsection, which refers to the
the generated documentation. In the HTML document, these subsections
have clickable links.
-@item
-Templates
-@ifhtml
-(available @uref{../../../input/template/out-www/collated-files.html,here})
-@end ifhtml
-
-After you have gone through the tutorial, you should be able to write
-input files. In practice, writing files from scratch turns out to be
-intimidating. To give you a head start, we have collected a number of
-often-used formats in example files; simply copy the template and add
-notes in the appropriate places.
-
@item
Various input examples
@ifhtml
@item
The regression tests
@ifhtml
-(available @uref{../../../input/regression/out-www/collated-files.html,here})
+(available @uref{../../../../input/regression/out-www/collated-files.html,here})
@end ifhtml
This collection of files tests each notation and engraving feature of
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
+@file{lilypond-2.3.14/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
projects / lilypond.git / blobdiff