Am 21.02.2017 um 10:40 schrieb kmg: > Hey, > > As I'm recently starting to type more and more in Lily and browsing > some scores on Mutopia Project to see how others are doing it, I > wonder how you - proffessionals - are approaching it? Does it depends > on the type of the score?
Surely. On the type and the complexity. And sometimes also on the nature of your project (for example if you're "just" entering a score or if you have a project with many scores). > > I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a > time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. > On the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate > your note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem > sometimes. But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting > something like baroque sonata for the piano.. It may seem so, and I don't want to talk you out of this, but I have found LilyPond's general approach of having continuous layers (aka "voices") instead of measure based boxes like many other tools (like notation programs or file formats like MusicXML) liberating. As Federico pointed out you can split the editor in Frescobaldi to achieve a similar effect as with parallelmusic. And above all, point-and-click makes it so easy to hop around in the input file that I don't see it as an issue at all that the music input is laid out in different places. In addition, it is often a good idea separate things out in individual files (e.g. one for each staff or even one for each voice). > > I did the same with the score where right hand had only once voice > most of the time, still I'm yet to see someone else using it - seems > like many people just use /new Voice and write them separately. > > Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line > (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too? Maybe > someone could share a snippet from some good quality and complex piano > score? Honestly, almost every score I saw on Mutopia Project > unfortunately doesn't look too great, but maybe I'm tripping. Anyway, > I'd like to see how people with deadlines and efficient workflow are > managing this - assuming this is even a thing with LilyPond... With barchecks there are two somewhat mandatory recommendations, everything else is up to personal style or agreement (if you're working in a team): 1) Please do use them (always) 2) use them consistently. Whether you put them at the end of the line or at the beginning doesn't really matter. The end of the line is somewhat "natural", as it ends the previous measure At the beginning of the line gives a more consistent "look", because it is always in the same place. An alternative I use regularly is to put them on an empty line, together with a barnumber comment, like so: c4 c c c | % 41 d4 d d d This makes the input file vertically "longer", but usually that doesn't matter. The advantage is that it makes it very clear visually what happens, and (if you use that) it gives very good commits to a version control system such as Git. The sample includes another recommendation: Specify the duration at the beginning of each line, even if it's not technically necessary. This makes it more obvious on first sight, and it helps avoid errors if you should change anything later. HTH Urs > > Thanks in advance guys. > > > Pozdrawiam, > Krzysztof Gutowski > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- u...@openlilylib.org https://openlilylib.org http://lilypondblog.org
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
