solved Advanced practice with OM

[Stephane Boussuge]

Hi friends,

I've just posted a new video in video section, illustrating my way to use OM.

Here's the link:

 

And here's the scores attached to this post.

 

Best wishes to all and happy Opusmodusing !

Etude1Edit2.pdf Etude1.opmo Remap-velocity.lisp

rea-mark.lisp

[RST]

Looking forward to studying this!  Thank you, Stephane!!

[acrawnsley]

Really helpful. The articulation mapping used here is excellent, will definitely be playing around with this method.

[Stephane Boussuge]

just added the source code for missing function rea-mark.

[HenryT]

I tried to change rehearsal marks from numbers to letters. This is the advice from ChatGPT:

 

'reha is now put into right places, you can see it in omn, but there are no rehearsal marks in xml. Is there a bug with 'reha?

 

Thanks for help!

 

 

Näyttökuva 2024-09-27 kello 12.00.36.pdf

[Stephane Boussuge]

Doing the following test, I think maybe there's something wrong in rehearsal  marks excepted "reh" who seems to be the only working one.

We will check.

(setf test '((q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reha d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reha-b d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf rehn d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf rehn-8 d4 e4 f4)))
(ps 'gm :treble (list test))

 

[opmo]

Numerical:
starting number: reh+rehn-1 after reh

(setf test '((q c4 mf reh+rehn-1 d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)))
(ps 'gm :treble (list test))

 

Alphabetic:
starting letter: reh+reha-a after reh

(setf test '((q c4 mf reh+reha-a d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)
             (q c4 mf reh d4 e4 f4)))
(ps 'gm :treble (list test))

 

[Stephane Boussuge]

Ah thank you very much for the clarification !

 

[HenryT]

This works in simple examples, but when put into Stephane's Etude, inside rea-mark, rehearsal numbers or letters do not show up in the same measures with tempo markings, which, I presume, has been the intention. The displacement begins on number 4 or letter D. From that on rehearsal number or letter comes 1 measure before tempo marking.

 

First 'reh+reha-a and after that reh...reh... gives numbers, not letters.

First 'reh+reha-a and after that reh+reha...reh+reha... gives letters. Some places for letters remain empty.

 

So, in any case there is a basic problem of displacement of rehearsal marks and tempo markings to the same measure.

[Stephane Boussuge]

Yes, that's look logical. My function was made to deal only with basic reh.

Personnaly if I need more advanced edit of the marks, I do it in my score editor.

[HenryT]

Yes, everything goes eventually to Dorico, and numbers can be easily changed to letters. That's not a big deal.

 

But there remains an uncertanty: where does a new section begin? I have the impression that tempo markings are the decisive factor, and rehearsal number, if there is a difference, should be moved to the same measure with tempo marking. Is that right?

[Stephane Boussuge]

1 hour ago, HenryT said:

Yes, everything goes eventually to Dorico, and numbers can be easily changed to letters. That's not a big deal.

 

But there remains an uncertanty: where does a new section begin? I have the impression that tempo markings are the decisive factor, and rehearsal number, if there is a difference, should be moved to the same measure with tempo marking. Is that right?

Yes you are right, the tempo marking are the reference.

 

Best

 

Stephane

[HenryT]

Thank you for your answers! There are very interesting things happening in Etude. Makes one think differently!

 

Henry

[opmo]

I don't see any problems here.
Example with Alphabetic markings:

 

(setf mat 
      '((5q eb6 reh+reha-a 5e e6 pp ped bb6 ped -5h.)
        (5q e5 pp ped bb5 f -5h.)
        (7q e5 ppp ped 7e bb5 f ped e5 mp ped 7q f5 pp b5 ff - cs6 mf eb6 pp)
        (7q d5 pp reh - e5 ff eb5 f d5 mf cs5 ped =)
        (7q d6 f ped 7h cs6 ff 7q c6 mp 7q. cs6 pp ped c6 mp)
        (7q fs6 mf ped+reh g6 mp ped fs6 p ped g6 ped 7q. fs6 f g6 p)
        (7q fs6 f -7h 7q c6 pp 7q. fs6 mp g6 mf)))

(def-score reh-test
    (:key-signature 'chromatic
     :time-signature '(1 4)
     :tempo '((120 2) (88 1) (44 2) (88 1)))

  (ins :omn mat
         :channel 1
         :sound 'gm
         :program 'acoustic-grand-piano))

In Stephane Etude score the markings are placed as they should.

 

[HenryT]

I noticed that I had two versions of rea-mark, one in Extensions and other one added to the beginning of Etude score. I redownloaded everything (Etude, rea-mark and remap-velocity) and put rea-mark and remap-velocity into Extensions. Rea-mark is now set up like this (is this correct?).

 

Same problems as before...

rea-mark.lisp

[Stephane Boussuge]

You just need to have rea-mark function evaluated somewhere . If it is in your extension, it’s fine. I added it to the file just to help people if someone don’t know where to put the function. But naturally, if you want to modify this function, you should take care and evaluate the one you modified.

about the misalignment sometimes between marks and tempo changes, as i said before, the tempo changes are the master, so you can adjust things accordingly. It is also possible to add manually the rehearsal marks after the generation. But on Opusmodus side, rehearsal marks work’s fine.

If you want, we can do a (free) zoom video meeting tomorrow together to discuss this score.

[HenryT]

I understand. I now have only one instance of rea-mark, which is in extensions, and that's what I've been modifying. But it doesn't add reh+reha-a into the first measure. I'm getting only numbers, two of the numbers are missing, and in most cases rehearsal number comes one measure before the tempo-marking. Four rehearsal numbers are correctly placed. 

 

Is rea-mark set up right: on first line reh+reha-a, on next line reh? Like the example in earlier example?

[Stephane Boussuge]

My function was made to deal only with reh, not the other types because it adds complexity in the definition of the function and i just wanted to see where new iterations appears. Using other kind of rehearsal marks is possible manually or by defining a new function for that but i don’t have time for that actually. For my purposes, the simple function was sufficient.

[HenryT]

Ok, I was already used to the thought that I should add markings manually sometimes, but then Opmo turned again the knife in my wound 

 

Thanks,

 

Henry