Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 4:11 PM David Kastrup wrote: > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 5:27 PM Abraham Lee > wrote: > > > >> Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion > to > >> see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical > >> document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be > needed > >> at all. > > > > I agree to this. It is better to simply put a small intro to the essay > > that gives the context. > > > > We could then add an updated preface/postscriptum that puts it in > > context for 2023. To note, a lot of modern music engravers have taken > > inspiration from the LilyPond attitude to engraving. The Dorico blog > > posts have been quite explicit about it, and maybe we could ask the > > MuseScore folks for comments too. > > For better or worse, I think the main selling point of LilyPond these > days is not as much quality as workflow. > I think the engraving quality aspect is definitely still there in many ways, but maybe a bit more nuanced and not so obvious to the casual user (i.e., only if you know what to look for). I do, agree, however, that the workflow is a HUGE reason I still use LP for anything and everything I need to create, especially when I know someone else is going to use it. Is LP always the fastest method to enter content? No it's not, but does it allow some of the most amazing flexibility when creating multiple kinds of scores using the same source content? Unequivocally yes! No other software comes even close. I think the only thing that Dorico has advertised that I haven't figured out how to do automagically in LP is the Primo/Secondo layout for multi-person piano scores (or similar). Does anyone know of a way? It's not a big deal to me since I almost never create them, but would be cool to figure out at some point. Best, Abraham
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 5:27 PM Abraham Lee > wrote: > >> Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion to >> see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical >> document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be needed >> at all. > > I agree to this. It is better to simply put a small intro to the essay > that gives the context. > > We could then add an updated preface/postscriptum that puts it in > context for 2023. To note, a lot of modern music engravers have taken > inspiration from the LilyPond attitude to engraving. The Dorico blog > posts have been quite explicit about it, and maybe we could ask the > MuseScore folks for comments too. For better or worse, I think the main selling point of LilyPond these days is not as much quality as workflow. -- David Kastrup
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 3:25 PM Jean Abou Samra wrote: > Le lundi 20 mars 2023 à 10:26 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > > Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion to > see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical > document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be needed > at all. It just feels a bit odd to read "we have chosen Finale 2008, which > is one of the most popular commercial score writers". This was absolutely > true... once upon a time. Reading it now makes it sound like we had to dig > way back in order to pretend to make it seem like Finale isn't good > enough and that LilyPond does it right. How does > Finale/Sibelius/Dorico/etc. do nowadays? Do they get it right now? I'm > certain folks have asked this question. > > For comparison, I just entered the two systems in the essay into MuseScore > 4 and got a practically perfect output. Entering one voice at a time (voice > 1, then voice 2), all existing pitches were maintained in voice 1 despite > making alterations in voice 2 (like that omitted flat that Finale 2008 > leaves out). I didn't have to correct or add anything that was missing. > Maybe I just got lucky because of how I entered the passage. Arguments can > be made about other layout decisions, but I think it's hard to argue > against what MS4 has done compared to the hand-engraved examples: > > So, maybe all that's needed is a different wording in this section to > reflect why *at the time* this comparison made sense (like what is > described at the beginning of the essay)? That would certainly be simpler > than recreating the comparison (which might not come to the original > conclusion like it used to). > > LilyPond too has evolved a lot in 15 years. You could take a more complex > example than this relatively simple (in terms of notation) Bach excerpt, > and re-do the comparison. I'm not sure Finale/Sibelius/Dorico/MuseScore > would use skylines for spacing objects as opposed to simple boxes. > It most certainly has, in so many excellent ways. I've used all of these major apps to some degree over the past number of years and I have discovered there are many things about how each app lays out a page that really frustrate me, some completely hiding the control to force things onto a specific page/system/etc. This is one big reason I continue to use LP after all these years. The layout control is simply superb! My only complaint here is that there isn't a great mechanism to finely control the system placement on a page (or staves/lyrics/etc. within a system) aside from explicit vertical placement, which I avoid completely. I wish there was a more convenient way to do a similar thing like \once \override TextScript.X-offset = #5 to shift a grob and then have things re-flow around it (as opposed to what extra-offset does). Sorry, off on a tangent there. I read that a while ago, Urs Liska organized a "music engraving contest" > where scores were compared in different score writers, probably for the > scores of beauty blog. That blog is now defunct, but you could try to dig > into the list archives. It's old, but not 15 years old, and the chosen > samples could be recompared today. > Yes, those were good times lol. I actively participated in those, partially from the sidelines, but some on the front lines. Those contests were difficult to run in a controlled way. Meaning, what is actually being compared? How do you know who wins? How "out of the box" are we comparing other software to LP? With LP, it's easy, just don't use any overrides and you get default behavior. In other apps, the way things show up are very dependent on how the entry takes place. And an expert user of software X can do just as well a job as an expert user of software Y. So, what actually is being compared in the end? Time to get to a specific result? One user's ability to use their favorite software against another's? This seemed to be the challenge we ran into because these were always the questions that came up. Complaints one way or the other were always about nuanced differences in output or expectations rather than gross errors by the application despite a user's best effort. I'm not against this, but I'm not sure how to make this a practically useful activity, either.
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
Le lundi 20 mars 2023 à 10:26 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion to > see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical > document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be needed at > all. It just feels a bit odd to read "we have chosen Finale 2008, which is > one of the most popular commercial score writers". This was absolutely > true... once upon a time. Reading it now makes it sound like we had to dig > way back in order to pretend to make it seem like Finale isn't good > enough and that LilyPond does it right. How does Finale/Sibelius/Dorico/etc. > do nowadays? Do they get it right now? I'm certain folks have asked this > question. > > For comparison, I just entered the two systems in the essay into MuseScore 4 > and got a practically perfect output. Entering one voice at a time (voice 1, > then voice 2), all existing pitches were maintained in voice 1 despite making > alterations in voice 2 (like that omitted flat that Finale 2008 leaves out). > I didn't have to correct or add anything that was missing. Maybe I just got > lucky because of how I entered the passage. Arguments can be made about other > layout decisions, but I think it's hard to argue against what MS4 has done > compared to the hand-engraved examples: > > > > So, maybe all that's needed is a different wording in this section to reflect > why *at the time* this comparison made sense (like what is described at the > beginning of the essay)? That would certainly be simpler than recreating the > comparison (which might not come to the original conclusion like it used to). LilyPond too has evolved a lot in 15 years. You could take a more complex example than this relatively simple (in terms of notation) Bach excerpt, and re-do the comparison. I'm not sure Finale/Sibelius/Dorico/MuseScore would use skylines for spacing objects as opposed to simple boxes. I read that a while ago, Urs Liska organized a "music engraving contest" where scores were compared in different score writers, probably for the scores of beauty blog. That blog is now defunct, but you could try to dig into the list archives. It's old, but not 15 years old, and the chosen samples could be recompared today. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 3:13 PM Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 5:27 PM Abraham Lee > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 6:17 AM Jean Abou Samra > wrote: > > > > > Le mercredi 15 mars 2023 à 00:57 +0100, Jean Abou Samra a écrit : > > > > > > Le mardi 14 mars 2023 à 17:44 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > > > > > > At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old > > > in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this > > > since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, > Finale 27 > > > has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. I'm not saying the > > > example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical > > > piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering > if > > > it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* > needed, > > > even after all these years? Thoughts? > > > > > > I suggest you open a tracker issue. > > > > > > I have done it now, https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6547 > > > > > > > Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion > to > > see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical > > document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be > needed > > at all. > > I agree to this. It is better to simply put a small intro to the essay > that gives the context. > > We could then add an updated preface/postscriptum that puts it in > context for 2023. To note, a lot of modern music engravers have taken > inspiration from the LilyPond attitude to engraving. The Dorico blog > posts have been quite explicit about it, and maybe we could ask the > MuseScore folks for comments too. > Hey, Han-wen! Thanks for chiming in! You would certainly know better than anyone the context of the statements/examples in the essay. And, yes, the other apps certainly have taken inspiration from LP's output, which is part of why I wasn't sure which the right answer would be. I am strongly leaning towards modifying the context of what's there to keep things in the appropriate perspective with the competition. Best, Abraham
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 5:27 PM Abraham Lee wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 6:17 AM Jean Abou Samra wrote: > > > Le mercredi 15 mars 2023 à 00:57 +0100, Jean Abou Samra a écrit : > > > > Le mardi 14 mars 2023 à 17:44 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > > > > At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old > > in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this > > since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, Finale 27 > > has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. I'm not saying the > > example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical > > piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering if > > it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* needed, > > even after all these years? Thoughts? > > > > I suggest you open a tracker issue. > > > > I have done it now, https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6547 > > > > Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion to > see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical > document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be needed > at all. I agree to this. It is better to simply put a small intro to the essay that gives the context. We could then add an updated preface/postscriptum that puts it in context for 2023. To note, a lot of modern music engravers have taken inspiration from the LilyPond attitude to engraving. The Dorico blog posts have been quite explicit about it, and maybe we could ask the MuseScore folks for comments too. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanw...@gmail.com - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 6:17 AM Jean Abou Samra wrote: > Le mercredi 15 mars 2023 à 00:57 +0100, Jean Abou Samra a écrit : > > Le mardi 14 mars 2023 à 17:44 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > > At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old > in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this > since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, Finale 27 > has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. I'm not saying the > example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical > piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering if > it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* needed, > even after all these years? Thoughts? > > I suggest you open a tracker issue. > > I have done it now, https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6547 > Thanks, Jean, for doing that. I was hoping for a more public discussion to see if creating an issue is even warranted. The essay is a historical document, to be sure, so updating the comparison files might not be needed at all. It just feels a bit odd to read "we have chosen Finale 2008, which is one of the most popular commercial score writers". This was absolutely true... once upon a time. Reading it now makes it sound like we had to dig way back in order to pretend to make it seem like Finale isn't good enough and that LilyPond does it right. How does Finale/Sibelius/Dorico/etc. do nowadays? Do they get it right now? I'm certain folks have asked this question. For comparison, I just entered the two systems in the essay into MuseScore 4 and got a practically perfect output. Entering one voice at a time (voice 1, then voice 2), all existing pitches were maintained in voice 1 despite making alterations in voice 2 (like that omitted flat that Finale 2008 leaves out). I didn't have to correct or add anything that was missing. Maybe I just got lucky because of how I entered the passage. Arguments can be made about other layout decisions, but I think it's hard to argue against what MS4 has done compared to the hand-engraved examples: [image: image.png] So, maybe all that's needed is a different wording in this section to reflect why *at the time* this comparison made sense (like what is described at the beginning of the essay)? That would certainly be simpler than recreating the comparison (which might not come to the original conclusion like it used to). Best, Abraham
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
Le mercredi 15 mars 2023 à 00:57 +0100, Jean Abou Samra a écrit : > Le mardi 14 mars 2023 à 17:44 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > > > At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old > > in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this > > since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, Finale > > 27 > > has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. > > I'm not saying the example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical > > piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering if > > it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* needed, > > > > even after all these years? > > Thoughts? > > I suggest you open a tracker issue. I have done it now, https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6547 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
Le mardi 14 mars 2023 à 17:44 -0600, Abraham Lee a écrit : > At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old > in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this > since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, Finale 27 > has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. > > I'm not saying the example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical > piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering if > it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* needed, > even after all these years? > > Thoughts? I suggest you open a tracker issue. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Is it time to update the Finale 2008 sample in Essay?
At the time I started with LP, the Finale 2008 example wasn't that old in the Essay section. Is it really fair for us to continue showing this since quite a few versions have been released since then? I mean, Finale 27 has been out since June 2021 and is now at 27.3. I'm not saying the example is bad, nor doesn't it illustrate a historical piece of evidence clarifying why LP was needed. I guess I'm wondering if it's worth creating a new set of examples to show why it's *still* needed, even after all these years? Thoughts? Best, Abraham
