[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Better Midi, anyone?
From: |
Peter Chubb |
Subject: |
Re: Better Midi, anyone? |
Date: |
Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:08:05 +1100 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.9 (Goj~) APEL/10.7 MULE XEmacs/21.4 (patch 20) (Double Solitaire) (i486-linux-gnu) |
>>>>> "Graham" == Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
Graham> The above points are possibly with a macro: instead of simply
Graham> moltorit = \markup{ \italics molto rit }
The point is that for the Artemis competition we have to start with
unmodified Lilypond input. So we have to recognise, say
c'^"rit." or c'^"rall" etc., and convert to \tempo 4=60 or
whatever.
I think I can do that.
The hard dynamics one is that at present to notate a smooth
crescendo/decrescendo on a single note you have to do something like:
<< { c'1 } \\
{s16\pp \< s4. \! s16 \ff \s16 \> s4. \! s16 \pp } >>
because there's no appropriate language construct.
That creates a new voice, and attaches the dynamics to it instead
of to the note. To produce good midi output, you need to change this
to something like,
{ c16 \pp \< ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 \! ~ c16 \ff ~ c16 \>
~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 ~ c16 \! ~ c16 \pp }
and even that doesn't give as smooth a transition as one would like.
Any ideas?
--
Dr Peter Chubb http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au peterc AT gelato.unsw.edu.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia