Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Patrick Schmidt wrote:
Dear Bertalan,
when I compile your circular-staff-code with LilyPond version 2.13.19
I get a syntax error, unexpected STRING for each line containing an
override-command. The compilation fails. Am I missing out on something?
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
I have no idea, I don't use 2.13.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Now I tested the code with 2.12.3:
With \relative c' {} the compilation fails. I get loads of syntax
error messages (syntax error, unexpected STRING) and a complaint
about using \relative c' {.
Without relative c' {} the syntax error messages remain. Despite of a
failed compilation-message the following pdf is produced:
circular-staff.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Any ideas?
Thanks for your help!
patrick
Am 03.05.2010 um 09:45 schrieb Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool):
Patrick Schmidt wrote:
Dear Bertalan,
when I compile your circular-staff-code with LilyPond version
2.13.19 I get a syntax error, unexpected STRING for each line
containing an override-command. The compilation fails. Am I
missing out on something?
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
I have no idea, I don't use 2.13.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Perhaps you copied some invalid character from the email?
Patrick Schmidt wrote:
Now I tested the code with 2.12.3:
With \relative c' {} the compilation fails. I get loads of syntax
error messages (syntax error, unexpected STRING) and a complaint
about using \relative c' {.
Without relative c' {} the syntax error messages remain. Despite of a
failed compilation-message the following pdf is produced:
Any ideas?
Thanks for your help!
patrick
Am 03.05.2010 um 09:45 schrieb Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool):
Patrick Schmidt wrote:
Dear Bertalan,
when I compile your circular-staff-code with LilyPond version
2.13.19 I get a syntax error, unexpected STRING for each line
containing an override-command. The compilation fails. Am I missing
out on something?
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
I have no idea, I don't use 2.13.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Dear Bertalan,
when I compile your circular-staff-code with LilyPond version 2.13.19
I get a syntax error, unexpected STRING for each line containing an
override-command. The compilation fails. Am I missing out on something?
Thanks for your help!
patrick
Am 04.02.2010 um 17:33 schrieb Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool):
Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this:
moz-screenshot-50.jpg
This was made using LilyPondTool's ruler feature, with the
following score:
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
% The clef
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-10.6 . -11.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #90 \musicglyph #clefs.G }
#'(-17.1 . -8.0 )
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-17.1 . -8.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #85 \note #4 #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-22.7 . -5.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #60 \note #4 #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-27.9 . -2.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #45 \note #4 #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-33.3 . -1.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #30 \note #4 #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-43.1 . 0.2 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #40 \beam #3.2 #0 #0.5 }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset =
#'(-44.2 . 0.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #0 \note #4 #UP }
}
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Reading this discussion makes me curious about SCORE. Do I have the chance to try SCORE somehow? I dont think I would switch away from Lilypond since I got experience with it. But I could be worth the know the other side. Cheers, Helge -- Sicherer, schneller und einfacher. Die aktuellen Internet-Browser - jetzt kostenlos herunterladen! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/chbrowser ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 05:22:07PM +0100, Helge Kruse wrote: Reading this discussion makes me curious about SCORE. Do I have the chance to try SCORE somehow? Sure, for $750 or so. I don't know where the webpage is to order it, but I'm sure it can't be too hard to find. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Wed, 24 Feb 2010, Graham Percival wrote: On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 05:22:07PM +0100, Helge Kruse wrote: Reading this discussion makes me curious about SCORE. Do I have the chance to try SCORE somehow? Sure, for $750 or so. WinScore ver. 5.00 : $300 upgrade from SCORE ver.4 : $100 Lilypond 2.12.3 : $0 Upgrade from older versions: $0 Upgrade to upcoming version 2.14: $0 And our website is looking much better also ! :-) I don't know where the webpage is to order it, but I'm sure it can't be too hard to find. www.scoremus.com -- Martin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Am 24.02.2010 19:08, schrieb Graham Percival: On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 05:22:07PM +0100, Helge Kruse wrote: Reading this discussion makes me curious about SCORE. Do I have the chance to try SCORE somehow? Sure, for $750 or so. Ok, I think the curiousity is not so strong. Helge ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
I found a page about Score at
http://www.jeffreygrossman.com/engraving.html showing the problems with
Sibelius and showing Score's superiority.
I created the same example using LilyPond 2.12.3 (attached) - definitely
not perfect, but almost is - using only the default settings and the
easiest ways, as I almost never engrave piano music. Certainly beats the
Sibelius example (I don't know the Sibelius version, though).
Bert
Bobber wrote:
I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the
music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond
or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that
most of the major music publishers in the world use Score.
Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior?
% Created on Sun Feb 21 22:51:50 CET 2010
\version 2.12.3
#(set-global-staff-size 18)
\header {
title = Score vs LilyPond vs Sibelius
subtitle = Example from http://www.jeffreygrossman.com/engraving.html;
}
\include deutsch.ly
staffZongora = \new PianoStaff {
\set PianoStaff.midiInstrument = #acoustic grand
\set PianoStaff.instrumentName = #
\time 12/8
\context Staff = RH { % Right hand
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f
\clef treble
\key c \major
\relative c'' {
\context Voice = 1 { b a'16.[( des f c e des f e a f b a des c e] }
{ des! f[ e a des f c e a f f b e a des f] } \\
{ g,8 b! des! c a e } |
\time 4/4
\context Voice = 1 {
c' e16.[ des f c e a des f b e a des f c e] a des8[ f b]) } |
\context Voice = 2 {
r8\
\override Staff.Stem #'stemlet-length = #0.75
\times 2/3 { r16[ ais_( h] }
\times 2/3 { eis ais[ dis' ais' cis] }
}
{ r32 fis''16.- fis1 } \\ { h,,, fis' ais his cis eis ais4\!_\ff ~
\times 4/5 { h fis' ais his cis eis ais8[) \
cis ais' his cis g'
h fis' his cis f
ais eis' g ais eis'!
h fis' cis' d ais'
]
}
\oneVoice
dis! ais'! cis! eis! h'4.
h fis' cis' eis ais8\!_\p ~
h fis' cis' eis ais8.[
eis dis' ais'16] fis cis' ais'!2^\startTrillSpan fis cis' ais'2\\stopTrillSpan ais, fis' cis' eis gis8\!
}
}
}
\context Staff = LH { % Left hand
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'stencil = ##f
\clef bass
\key c \major
\relative c {
d,,8\sustainOn des' b' f' a des s4. s |
des8[^\ a f] e[ des c]
\once \override Voice.TupletBracket #'transparent = ##t
\once \override Voice.TupletNumber #'extra-offset = #'( 0 . 0.5 )
\once \override Voice.TupletNumber #'text = \markup { \italic 3:2 }
\times 2/3 { b[ g\! f] } |
\time 13/8
d,8[\sustainOn dis'16 cis'] fis cis'[ dis' h'] r4. r r2 |
\time 11/8
R8*11
}
}
}
\score {
\staffZongora
\midi {
}
\layout {
}
}
\paper {
#(set-paper-size a4)
indent = 0
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Odds are this was much easier to do in LilyPond than it was in SCORE (or Sibelius, for that matter). I think it looks better than either of the example on Grossman's page. Nice job. On 02/22/2010 08:02 AM, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote: I found a page about Score at http://www.jeffreygrossman.com/engraving.html showing the problems with Sibelius and showing Score's superiority. I created the same example using LilyPond 2.12.3 (attached) - definitely not perfect, but almost is - using only the default settings and the easiest ways, as I almost never engrave piano music. Certainly beats the Sibelius example (I don't know the Sibelius version, though). Bert Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
David Stocker wrote: Odds are this was much easier to do in LilyPond than it was in SCORE (or Sibelius, for that matter). I think it looks better than either of the example on Grossman's page. There are some issues with the LilyPond output: - the most severe is 16th beam-accidental collision in measure 3 - the hairpin alignment (can be easily fixed though) - the hairpin start position in measure 3 - the ties in measure 3 (though I think that would need tweaking in all softwares) Bert ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
2010/2/4 Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com: 2010/2/4 Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this: Great and almost perfect, except for the six-line staff What version did you use? I can not reproduce the example either in 2.13.12 nor 2.13.13, see attached PNG 360 is better than 361 for the arc. PNG result gives no difference, but gedit shows the overlap. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com attachment: prueba.png___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape[was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
2.12 i suppose that the difference in the default spacing or margins causing this ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
I have to admit - I tried it and it's not easy to get a staff to conform to a circle, for example. Maybe someone else can. My Inkscape skills are weak, though I love the software. Not sure how to wrap the entire staff in a circle, but you can easily draw a circular staff in Inkscape:- Draw a circle (F5) with Ctrl held down, 115 px in size; Get outline only by Ctrl+Shift+F, click the X under Fill, and flat color (2nd left) under Stroke paint (or click the X near bottom left of window, and Shift-click a coler for line color); Clone it 4 times (Alt + D); Hit F1 and make sure the circle and all clones are selected by drawing a selection box around the circle (the status bar will tell you if they're all selected; you anly see the top one); Open the Transform dialog (Shift+Ctrl+M), go Scale, width height both 110%, and make sure 'Scale proportionally' and 'Apply to each object separately' are both checked. Click Apply :) Btw, Inkscape has layers -- use them if you don't want to be constantly dragging the wrong notes and whatnot around. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this:
This was made using LilyPondTool's ruler feature, with the following
score:
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
% The clef
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-10.6 .
-11.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #90 \musicglyph #"clefs.G" } #'(-17.1 .
-8.0 )
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-17.1 .
-8.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #85 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-22.7 .
-5.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #60 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-27.9 .
-2.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #45 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-33.3 .
-1.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #30 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-43.1 .
0.2 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #40 \beam #3.2 #0 #0.5 }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-44.2 .
0.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #0 \note #"4" #UP }
}
}
eyeglassesps = #"
0.15 setlinewidth
30 0 moveto
20 0 10 0 361 arc
31 0 moveto
20 0 11 0 361 arc
32 0 moveto
20 0 12 0 361 arc
33 0 moveto
20 0 13 0 361 arc
34 0 moveto
20 0 14 0 361 arc
35 0 moveto
20 0 15 0 361 arc
stroke
"
eyeglasses = \markup { \postscript #eyeglassesps }
\eyeglasses
M Watts wrote:
I have to admit - I tried it and it's not
easy to get a staff to conform
to a circle, for example. Maybe someone else can. My Inkscape skills
are
weak, though I love the software.
Not sure how to wrap the entire staff in a circle, but you can easily
draw a circular staff in Inkscape:-
Draw a circle (F5) with Ctrl held down, 115 px in size;
Get outline only by Ctrl+Shift+F, click the X under Fill, and flat
color (2nd left) under Stroke paint (or click the X near bottom left of
window, and Shift-click a coler for line color);
Clone it 4 times (Alt + D);
Hit F1 and make sure the circle and all clones are selected by drawing
a selection box around the circle (the status bar will tell you if
they're all selected; you anly see the top one);
Open the Transform dialog (Shift+Ctrl+M), go Scale, width height
both 110%, and make sure 'Scale proportionally' and 'Apply to each
object separately' are both checked.
Click Apply :)
Btw, Inkscape has layers -- use them if you don't want to be constantly
dragging the wrong notes and whatnot around.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
У чт, 2010-02-04 у 17:33 +0100, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) пише: Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this: Bgha-gha-gha!.. Hm.. Sorry :-) Great!-) Great demonstration, indeed :-) ps. 2LSR?.. -- Dmytro O. Redchuk ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
2010/2/4 Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) lilypondt...@organum.hu Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this: Great and almost perfect, except for the six-line staff -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
On 02/05/2010 02:33 AM, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote: Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this: Impressive! ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
M Watts zwy648...@gmail.com wrote on 02/04/2010 05:18:40 AM: I have to admit - I tried it and it's not easy to get a staff to conform to a circle, for example. Maybe someone else can. My Inkscape skills are weak, though I love the software. Not sure how to wrap the entire staff in a circle, but you can easily draw a circular staff in Inkscape:- Draw a circle (F5) with Ctrl held down, 115 px in size; Get outline only by Ctrl+Shift+F, click the X under Fill, and flat color (2nd left) under Stroke paint (or click the X near bottom left of window, and Shift-click a coler for line color); Clone it 4 times (Alt + D); Hit F1 and make sure the circle and all clones are selected by drawing a selection box around the circle (the status bar will tell you if they're all selected; you anly see the top one); Open the Transform dialog (Shift+Ctrl+M), go Scale, width height both 110%, and make sure 'Scale proportionally' and 'Apply to each object separately' are both checked. Click Apply :) Btw, Inkscape has layers -- use them if you don't want to be constantly dragging the wrong notes and whatnot around. Thanks, but this I could do, if I wanted to. What I'd rather do is typeset the piece entirely in Lilypond, *then* warp and twist it, clone it, shade it, blur it, etc. with Inkscape. I know it can be done, I just lack the Inkscape-fu to do some of those things, specifically the first one. Bertalan's trick is also very cool, but requires a lot of tweaking to get the stems at the correct angles, etc., and isn't very flexible. Tim Reeves ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Circular Staff in Inkscape [was Re: Lilypond vs Score]
Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote:
Circular staves ARE possible with pure LilyPond, just look at this:
This was made using LilyPondTool's ruler feature, with the following
score:
\score {
\relative c' {
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.KeySignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.BarLine #'transparent = ##t
\override Staff.Clef #'transparent = ##t
% The clef
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-10.6 .
-11.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #90 \musicglyph #"clefs.G" } #'(-17.1 .
-8.0 )
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-17.1 .
-8.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #85 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-22.7 .
-5.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #60 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-27.9 .
-2.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #45 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-33.3 .
-1.0 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #30 \note #"4" #UP }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-43.1 .
0.2 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #40 \beam #3.2 #0 #0.5 }
\once \override Voice.TextScript #'extra-offset = #'(-44.2 .
0.8 )
s1^\markup { \rotate #0 \note #"4" #UP }
}
}
eyeglassesps = #"
0.15 setlinewidth
30 0 moveto
20 0 10 0 361 arc
31 0 moveto
20 0 11 0 361 arc
32 0 moveto
20 0 12 0 361 arc
33 0 moveto
20 0 13 0 361 arc
34 0 moveto
20 0 14 0 361 arc
35 0 moveto
20 0 15 0 361 arc
stroke
"
eyeglasses = \markup { \postscript #eyeglassesps }
\eyeglasses
You, sir, are a genius! Demented, certainly, but a genius!
my congratulations,
Colin
--
When you find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it.
- Scott Adams, "Dilbert" Sept 22,'09
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
After seeing that output, I'm curious: has anybody played around in Lilypond with making the staff curve around (like forming a circle, or just bending down the page or something)? I'd like to be able to do that. Best, Jonathan This is exactly why I 'm so glad that Lilypond can produce SVG output. Import the SVG into Inkscape 0.47 and you can do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING with your score. I've said it before - SVG output from Lilypond can be imported into Inkscape, where the graphical elements can be manipulated in any way you want. No restrictions on placement of notes, spacing, text, pictures, grob sizes, bend staves, stems, etc. The LilyPond/LilyPondTool/Inkscape combination is OUTSTANDING. Gerard ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
No, that's not true. Score is like a notation drawing program, so you have very precise control over the musical elements' positions. If you create a simple score, LilyPond's output is clearly superior. If you are creating a complicated one, than Score becomes a hand-engraving tool. In that case YOU must produce the superior engraving. Which is surely possible with LilyPond - with less effort I think. Bert Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
I'm not saying it is inconceivable that a DOS-based relic of a program would be considered superior to any open source or commercially developed notation software over the last twenty years, but claims like this set my bullshit detector clanging like a chinese fire drill. :-) Anyway, there is TeX: This is more than 30 years old and still superior to many, many programs which aim to produce similar output. Think of it this way- if you were a major publisher and were dependent upon trained professional engravers to provide you with a massive variety of material, would it make good business sense at all to insist that all these engravers, many graduating from Berklee or some other school where Finale or Sibelius is the standard, learn another format? Well, in case Score would be the superior program, I would insist on that. A comparable situation arises if e.g. people trained to MS Word have to learn Adobe Publisher... You can't argue that `MS Word is the standard'... Werner ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com wrote: From http://www.scoremus.com/score.html Aarg. Please add a warning before posting such links :) As far as I'm concerned: LilyPond is Free Software, Score is not. Period. Isn't life simple after all? :-) Cheers, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Ahh this is like the old arguments I used to hear when I worked for a small Typesetting/reprographics house at the end of the 1980's to the end of the 1990's. We would get a 'new' designer turn up and he would then proceed to tell us that all the 'real' typesetters/repro houses were using XYZ.app and that new fangled stuff we used (Aldus Pagemaker - remember that?) was never going to be as good. Then Quark Xpress came along and then Indesign and then and then...each new hire we got would tell us that 'the industry' used something that we weren't and how much better it was etc etc. I won't even begin to tell you about the CMYK pre-process technology arguments (I do remember though being told that this silly PDF technology was useless). Fortunately we had a tight fisted boss, as heaven knows how much wasted money we would have spent on all this different software. We actually used whatever tool was easiest and quickest for the specific job in hand. We had some really skilled designers who could produce lovely work with any of the tools or even a combination of them. As a case in point, I remember one of our designers cutting and pasting (albeit using Aldus Freehand - remember that?) two or three pages of music for a local carol concert to hand out to the public, it was two staves and she literally would take whatever font it was that showed all the music glyphs, outline them in Freehand and then manually drag/drop them in place over a tiff file that has been a photocopy of an original. Then once it was all in place removed the tiff file and tweaked it by eye. Took her a day but it looked lovely. I didn't know anything about music at all back then (not even sure she did either), and thought that was how all music was typeset. James Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote: No, that's not true. Score is like a notation drawing program, so you have very precise control over the musical elements' positions. If you create a simple score, LilyPond's output is clearly superior. If you are creating a complicated one, than Score becomes a hand-engraving tool. In that case YOU must produce the superior engraving. Which is surely possible with LilyPond - with less effort I think. Bert Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu wrote: On 2/1/10 3:08 PM, David Bobroff bobr...@centrum.is wrote: On 2/1/2010 9:57 PM, Bobber wrote: Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? to use Finale, but haven't in several years) and he is also probably correct when he says that most major publishing houses use Score. Then again, most large businesses use Windows, too. SCORE is currently available for Windows systems that can run DOS (so it may not work under Windows 7 -- I don't know one way or another). If it can't run in the command console of Win7 or Vista, you could set up a virtual machine and run DOS on that. Or you could use Dosbox (www.dosbox.com). Dosbox is primarily aimed at allowing newer OSs to run older games, but it should work here. I've heard many good things about it. HOWEVER - the Score website says that their newest version is called WinScore 5.00. That sounds like it's engineered for Windows, not DOS. -- Tim Slattery slatter...@bls.gov http://members.cox.net/slatteryt ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Message: 9 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:15:37 +0100 From: Valentin Villenave v.villen...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Lilypond vs Score To: Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: eefe316d1002020215q31a6d677pf2e1959189448...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com wrote: From http://www.scoremus.com/score.html Aarg. Please add a warning before posting such links :) What kind of warning? I don't understand. As far as I'm concerned: LilyPond is Free Software, Score is not. Period. Isn't life simple after all? :-) It's as simple as looking at the output examples on that website and saying, Oh, it'd be neat to have a way to do curvy staff lines in Lilypond, or whatever your particular impression is. -Jonathan Cheers, Valentin -- ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user End of lilypond-user Digest, Vol 87, Issue 10 * ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On 02/02/2010 04:15 AM, Valentin Villenave wrote: As far as I'm concerned: LilyPond is Free Software, Score is not. Period. Yes, I agree. However, one of the claims made in the discussion was that publishers can work with a Finale file and convert it to work with Score but this is not possible with Lilypond. So the issue is that if you create your own music and submit a Lilypond file to a potential publisher, they may not want to work with it. I have no experience with this so I really don't know. I guess the question is how many publishers are still using Score? -- Bob Wooldridge bob...@kc0dxf.net blog: http://kc0dxf.net/blog/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Message: 1 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 10:33:07 -0800 (PST) From: Jonathan Wilkes jancs...@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Lilypond vs Score To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: 225545.87662...@web65612.mail.ac4.yahoo.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Message: 9 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 11:15:37 +0100 From: Valentin Villenave v.villen...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Lilypond vs Score To: Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: eefe316d1002020215q31a6d677pf2e1959189448...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com wrote: From http://www.scoremus.com/score.html Aarg. Please add a warning before posting such links :) What kind of warning? I don't understand. As far as I'm concerned: LilyPond is Free Software, Score is not. Period. Isn't life simple after all? :-) It's as simple as looking at the output examples on that website and saying, Oh, it'd be neat to have a way to do curvy staff lines in Lilypond, or whatever your particular impression is. -Jonathan If recent reports are true, that svg output from Lilypond is working well now, then this kind of thing should be no problem. Generate the svg from LP, then open it with Inkscape and sculpt away. I found this - http://freesvg.texterity.com:90/ - to convert a pdf to svg which can then be manipulated in Inkscape also. I have to admit - I tried it and it's not easy to get a staff to conform to a circle, for example. Maybe someone else can. My Inkscape skills are weak, though I love the software. Tim Reeves ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Lilypond vs Score
I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? -- Bob Wooldridge bob...@kc0dxf.net blog: http://kc0dxf.net/blog/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On 2/1/2010 9:57 PM, Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? I have never used Score myself. I recall that, quite a few years ago, when I was first looking for a music printing program I was advised by the guy behind the counter that Score was The One. I suspect that this was true at the time. I recall reading somewhere that Score was the first software to meet the music publishing industry's standard. Up to that time, published music was either engraved, or manuscript. I have some music in my personal library that was published using Score. I know this because I know the publisher and he told me that he uses Score. When I compare Score output to LilyPond output I would agree that it is not comparable. I think LilyPond looks better. Perhaps I'm a bit biased, but I don't think a strong argument can be put forward that Score is obviously superior. This publisher you've been talking to is likely somewhat biased in favor of Score since he uses/understands it. He's probably right when he says that Finale can't compare (I used to use Finale, but haven't in several years) and he is also probably correct when he says that most major publishing houses use Score. Then again, most large businesses use Windows, too. -David ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Bobber bob...@kc0dxf.net wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? Never heard of it either. I wonder how old this site is: From http://www.scoremus.com/score.html The ideal system for running SCORE consists of a Pentium or 486DX computer with as little as 4 to 8 megabytes of memory. SCORE runs in the MS-DOS mode under Windows 95/98/XP or directly in MS-DOS. A 600/1200 dpi PostScript laser printer is required for quality output. (Printing of SCORE output can also be done on most ink-jet printers and the lowest priced laser printers by means of a Windows 95/98 shareware program called Ghostscript. This program may be downloaded from the internet.) SCORE's current MIDI connections require a MPU401 board or a compatible 16-bit ISA sound board. SCORE can run on a Macintosh computer with a DOS simulator - but very slowly; it is not recommended. An adequate 486/Pentium PC system may be had in many areas for only a couple of hundred dollars or less. SCORE's performance under a LINUX system is unknown. MPU401? 16-bit ISA Sound card? How antiquated! I know Berklee doesn't use it -- they are pretty standardized on Sibelius and Finale. -- Brett In the rhythm of music a secret is hidden; If I were to divulge it, it would overturn the world. -- Jelaleddin Rumi ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Brett McCoy idragos...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Bobber bob...@kc0dxf.net wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? One of my songs is published by G. Schirmer, and the songbook containing it was done in Score. This was in 1996. I'm not sure if Schirmer is still using it or not. It looks very good, though. From what I've heard it also costs quite a lot of money (or used to). Jon -- Jonathan Kulp http://www.jonathankulp.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Lilypond vs Score
-- Message: 8 Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:57:49 -0600 From: Bobber bob...@kc0dxf.net Subject: Lilypond vs Score To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Message-ID: 4b674e5d.3030...@kc0dxf.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? -- Bob Wooldridge bob...@kc0dxf.net blog: http://kc0dxf.net/blog/ I'm also curious to hear from anyone who has had experience using Score, and comparing to Lilypond output. There are some wacky examples of Score output at: http://www.scoremus.com/ (especially that deer standing on the staff! There needs to be an Animal_engraver in lilypond!) After seeing that output, I'm curious: has anybody played around in Lilypond with making the staff curve around (like forming a circle, or just bending down the page or something)? I'd like to be able to do that. Best, Jonathan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On 2010-02-01, Jonathan Wilkes wrote: I'm also curious to hear from anyone who has had experience using Score, and comparing to Lilypond output. There are some wacky examples of Score output at: http://www.scoremus.com/ (especially that deer standing on the staff! There needs to be an Animal_engraver in lilypond!) After seeing that output, I'm curious: has anybody played around in Lilypond with making the staff curve around (like forming a circle, or just bending down the page or something)? I'd like to be able to do that. I've contemplated the possibility, and Jan apparently has too: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-09/msg00505.html It would be quite awesome if LilyPond could do this. Here's another example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CordierColor.jpg We should probably add a feature request to the tracker. Thanks, Patrick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:57:49PM -0600, Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Score can do stuff like having the staves in a spiral. Think of George Crumb -- if he used any computer engraver, it would be score. Score is also not free: it's not open source, and IIRC it costs $500 or more. I only saw it briefly a few years ago. I think our fonts are better, but score could clearly do more wacky things. I believe our input format is much easier, though. I can't speak to what major music publishers use. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Hi Bob, SCORE is an old program and, while I think it is still being supported, I don't think it's under active development. It's a DOS program and there have been rumors for years of a Windows port, but no one seems to know whether it's happening or not. While a small number of publishers and engravers still use SCORE, most publishers (and almost all Major Publishers) are now using Finale or Sibelius. SCORE is notoriously difficult to use (if you believe the people who use it or used to use it) and even now is quite pricey, at US$750.00 It has a reputation for fine control over placement of score elements and can certainly produce some astonishing output configurations (most of which no one would ever need), but I find the look of its output cold and mechanical, even compared with Finale or Sibelius (and certainly when compared to LilyPond). David Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
I'll now post this to the entire list! It's been a long time since I've used Score (late 90s), but one of the great things about the program was the precise control it allowed of all elements in a score. For example, it allowed you to specify the exact horizontal and vertical positions of all objects -- notes, beams, etc. -- if you so chose. It allowed me to create scores in proportional notation by placing the notes exactly where I chose. Another nice feature -- if very specific! -- was the ability to space cross-staff beamed notes so that the stems, not the noteheads, were evenly spaced, which really improves the appearance of complex keyboard music. I liked the program a lot because it seemed to take nothing for granted. Unlike other programs, you did not have to trick it to do anything unconventional. On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 5:20 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.cawrote: On Mon, Feb 01, 2010 at 03:57:49PM -0600, Bobber wrote: I have been having a discussion with a small publisher who uses the music manuscript program called Score. He says that neither Lilypond or Finale can produce engraving that is comparable to Score. And that most of the major music publishers in the world use Score. Score can do stuff like having the staves in a spiral. Think of George Crumb -- if he used any computer engraver, it would be score. Score is also not free: it's not open source, and IIRC it costs $500 or more. I only saw it briefly a few years ago. I think our fonts are better, but score could clearly do more wacky things. I believe our input format is much easier, though. I can't speak to what major music publishers use. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
Graham Percival wrote: Score can do stuff like having the staves in a spiral. Think of George Crumb -- if he used any computer engraver, it would be score. Score is also not free: it's not open source, and IIRC it costs $500 or more. I only saw it briefly a few years ago. I think our fonts are better, but score could clearly do more wacky things. I believe our input format is much easier, though. That ability would seem to indicate more possibilities. The person I spoke to who is one of the publishers listed on the Wikipedia page, said that the output of both Finale and Lilypond was unacceptable for a professional publisher. But he did say that the output of Finale could somehow be manipulated by Score. I don't quite understand how that could be done but this is what he said. I can't speak to what major music publishers use. Cheers, - Graham -- Bob Wooldridge Blog: http://kc0dxf.net/blog/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On 2/1/10 3:08 PM, David Bobroff bobr...@centrum.is wrote: On 2/1/2010 9:57 PM, Bobber wrote: Is anyone familiar with Score and what makes it superior? to use Finale, but haven't in several years) and he is also probably correct when he says that most major publishing houses use Score. Then again, most large businesses use Windows, too. SCORE is currently available for Windows systems that can run DOS (so it may not work under Windows 7 -- I don't know one way or another). You can get SCORE here: http://www.scoremus.com/ Check out Products. Current cost is $300. You can find some samples of SCORE usage here: https://ccrma.stanford.edu/~craig/score/ Based on what I've read, the nicest thing about SCORE is that one can have infinite control over spacing of particular objects. Based on what I've seen, I couldn't stand to use the SCORE input format -- LilyPond is vastly superior. I guess there are still a few places where we can't make LilyPond do the right thing; as far as I'm concerned that's the only place where it would be superior to use SCORE. But I find LilyPond to be far superior. HTH, Carl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
On 02/02/2010 01:24 AM, Bobber wrote: That ability would seem to indicate more possibilities. The person I spoke to who is one of the publishers listed on the Wikipedia page, said that the output of both Finale and Lilypond was unacceptable for a professional publisher. IMHO it's not only the software that matters: I saw some really good scores done with Finale, and some dreadful examples of composers just printing their midi-stuff (Finale, Sibelius, ...). Have a look at (for example) Baerenreiter piano-reductions (Bach Johannespassion, Mozart operas) - they are a nightmare to read, so even with Score you can produce some questionable output. Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty sure that Score used to be state of the art for a decade, but IMO it's not only a question of features but a question of knowing how you want your score to look. somehow be manipulated by Score. I don't quite understand how that could be done but this is what he said. There seem to be a lot of third-party programms out there - see http://www.scoremus.com/links.html Regards, Bernhard ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Lilypond vs Score
I'm not saying it is inconceivable that a DOS-based relic of a program would be considered superior to any open source or commercially developed notation software over the last twenty years, but claims like this set my bullshit detector clanging like a chinese fire drill. Think of it this way- if you were a major publisher and were dependent upon trained professional engravers to provide you with a massive variety of material, would it make good business sense at all to insist that all these engravers, many graduating from Berklee or some other school where Finale or Sibelius is the standard, learn another format? Or pay someone to translate output from other formats into the *DOS-based* score? Just sayin'... Jack -- Jack Cooper, BerLen Music www.berlenmusic.com www.jack-cooper.com That ability would seem to indicate more possibilities. The person I spoke to who is one of the publishers listed on the Wikipedia page, said that the output of both Finale and Lilypond was unacceptable for a professional publisher. But he did say that the output of Finale could somehow be manipulated by Score. I don't quite understand how that could be done but this is what he said. I can't speak to what major music publishers use. Cheers, - Graham -- Bob Wooldridge Blog: http://kc0dxf.net/blog/ ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
