Antonio Gervasoni agervasoni at gmail.com writes:
There is one reason: software like Sibelius and Finale need even more tweaks
than Lilypond!
For a concrete example of this (never mind the vacation chatter):
http://www.dewdrop-world.net/words/blog5.php/2011/07/11/the-year-s-over-and-done
Am 08.01.2013 08:09, schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
If you have a whole passage of tuplets, then... [...]
And with a small music function like [...]
Excellent, but I would say that only musicians who are also
programmers and with a good knowledge of Scheme might be able to
figure out such
development.
Antonio
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Sibelius-user-looking-for-the-easiest-way-to-learn-LilyPond-tp6427p139053.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user
\set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)
How about a command like \partial?
\tupletDuration 4 % equivalent to the above command
( The rare case \tupletDuration 4*3 would be
\set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 3 4) )
Is there a possibility to either
a) split after the
Antonio Gervasoni writes:
Of course, just typing notes in a keyboard may be faster than inputing them
with the mouse but the workflow becomes very slow when you have to
make all the necessary tweaks to get a nice result. Also, there are lots of
different expressions and commands and some of
/Sibelius-user-looking-for-the-easiest-way-to-learn-LilyPond-tp6427p139011.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
If you have a whole passage of tuplets, then... [...]
And with a small music function like [...]
Excellent, but I would say that only musicians who are also
programmers and with a good knowledge of Scheme might be able to
figure out such solutions.
I disagree. All the knowledge is
Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org writes:
That's why I like to differentiate between inputting and tweaking.
Inputting is probably much, much faster using the keyboard. [...]
I'm still not sure what the ideal way of inputting and tweaking would
look like. The nice thing about text-based
On Jan 3, 2013, at 2:46 AM, Antonio Gervasoni wrote:
John Link johnlink at nyc.rr.com writes:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond
as an alternative to Sibelius because LilyPond
produced more beautiful scores. I was also told that it
would allow me to do things like
Am 03.01.2013 21:54, schrieb james:
My advice, read the learning manual and then task yourself with trying to
copy things of increasing difficulty.
I would also say the learning manual is the best starting point (after
the section about the text input, that you probably already know):
To give you a reverse opinion. Lilypond at a basic level is fairly
easy to understand especially if you use a program like Frescobaldi to
help you construct the scores with their various parts. That initially
was to me the greatest challenge. With Frescobaldi you can build
scores and then from
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Shane Brandes sh...@grayskies.net wrote:
To give you a reverse opinion. Lilypond at a basic level is fairly
easy to understand especially if you use a program like Frescobaldi to
help you construct the scores with their various parts.
This is my experience as
John Link johnlink at nyc.rr.com writes:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond
as an alternative to Sibelius because LilyPond
produced more beautiful scores. I was also told that it
would allow me to do things like specify that bars
25 through 32 are to be identical to bars 9
On 03/01/13 12:46, Antonio Gervasoni wrote:
Take for example a tuplet. It requires this expression: \times 2/3 { c8 d e }.
It's easy if there are just a few tuplets in the piece, but it gets much more
difficult if these occur quite often, even worse if a whole passage,
say 10 bars, is comprised
Take for example a tuplet. It requires this expression: \times 2/3
{ c8 d e }. It's easy if there are just a few tuplets in the
piece, but it gets much more difficult if these occur quite often,
even worse if a whole passage, say 10 bars, is comprised only of
tuplets!
If you have a whole
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com wrote:
2012/3/13 Tim Roberts t...@probo.com:
Amen. There are people who tell me they can do data entry in Finale
quite efficiently using a MIDI keyboard, but for me, from a standard
computer keyboard, entering LilyPond data
James Harkins jamshark70 at gmail.com writes:
http://www.dewdrop-world.net/words/blog5.php/2011/07/11/
the-year-s-over-and-done
I digress a bit in the text, but the point is the 3/8 bar.
In Finale, I'm quite sure you would have to spend(waste) time
adjusting the horizontal position of
vic hug xelnagazch...@hotmail.com writes:
while beeing a newbie at both Sibelius and Lilypond, and already
embracing the magical freedom superiority of the latest, i recently
had to make a transcript from a manuscript, and for that i used
Sibelius, because i needed to produce sibelius files.
On 14 March 2012 03:01, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Off topic, LilyPond now places the dots equally-spaced from the
noteheads, in that particular example.
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2200
Previously, LilyPond put them all in one column because that was
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:20:13 -0700, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
What happens if I want the old behaviour? Do I have to move the
Dot_column_engraver back to the Staff context and forgo the
improvements in more complicated situations?
Yes.
But, somebody made a suggestion on the
On 3/14/12 1:28 PM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:20:13 -0700, Neil Puttock n.putt...@gmail.com
wrote:
What happens if I want the old behaviour? Do I have to move the
Dot_column_engraver back to the Staff context and forgo the
improvements in more
At Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:00:47 -0400,
lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
On 14 March 2012 03:01, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Off topic, LilyPond now places the dots equally-spaced from the
noteheads, in that particular example.
- Original Message -
From: Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca
To: Vaughan McAlley vaug...@mcalley.net.au
Cc: lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: Sibelius user looking for the easiest way to learn LilyPond
Hi Vaughan
...@mcalley.net.au
Cc: lilypond-user lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 4:09 AM
Subject: Re: Sibelius user looking for the easiest way to learn LilyPond
Hi Vaughan,
Finale does automatic word extensions for lyrics.
Um... so does Lilypond.
Cheers,
Kieren
Stjepan Horvat zvanste...@gmail.com writes:
Did you try to press number 3 in sibelius..i think it would create a
third interval..and so on..i'm not sure..
Now this is actually a great example about what makes LilyPond so much
better to work in the long run with than Sibelius or other
2012/3/13 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Stjepan Horvat zvanste...@gmail.com writes:
Did you try to press number 3 in sibelius..i think it would create a
third interval..and so on..i'm not sure..
Now this is actually a great example about what makes LilyPond so much
better to work in the long
On 3/13/2012 10:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Stjepan Horvatzvanste...@gmail.com writes:
Did you try to press number 3 in sibelius..i think it would create a
third interval..and so on..i'm not sure..
Now this is actually a great example about what makes LilyPond so much
better to work in the
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 2:52 PM, John Link johnl...@nyc.rr.com wrote:
On Mar 12, 2012, at 9:42 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
On 3/11/2012 6:39 PM, John Link wrote:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative to
Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I
Hello,
On 13 March 2012 12:02, Rodolfo Zitellini xhero...@gmail.com wrote:
...
If you are used to
finale/sibelius, this is indeed shocking as the first times you use
lilypond it is very difficult to correlate your textual input to what
will end up in the pdf. It took me some deal of time
For me..After moving to Lilypond 3, 4 years ago..When i changed to NO
MOUSE interface..i stoped having headaches couse i didnt have to look
in the music sheet for the wrong notes..and didnt have to think of
kombinations of keys and clicking with mouse..Now when i typeset music
and if i'm not lazy
James wrote:
Oh if you've ever had to transcribe a piece of 'real' music (by real I
mean an old dog-eared printed complete score that's in the 'wrong'
pitch for your instrument) I cannot believe that typing letters on a
keyboard is anything but *significantly* faster than dragging and
2012/3/13 Tim Roberts t...@probo.com:
Amen. There are people who tell me they can do data entry in Finale
quite efficiently using a MIDI keyboard, but for me, from a standard
computer keyboard, entering LilyPond data could not be more efficient.
I used to master Finale's Speedy Entry and
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative to
Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was also
told that it would allow me to do things like specify that bars 25
through 32 are to be identical to bars 9 through 16 and avoid cutting
and pasting
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative to
Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was also
told that it would allow me to do things like specify that bars 25
through 32 are to be identical to bars 9 through 16 and avoid cutting
and pasting
On 3/11/2012 6:39 PM, John Link wrote:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative to
Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was also
told that it would allow me to do things like specify that bars 25
through 32 are to be identical to bars 9 through
On 3/12/2012 1:52 PM, John Link wrote:
On Mar 12, 2012, at 9:42 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
On 3/11/2012 6:39 PM, John Link wrote:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative
to Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was
also told that it would allow
On 3/12/2012 2:15 PM, John Link wrote:
On Mar 12, 2012, at 10:01 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:52 PM, John Link wrote:
1) What is the easiest way to extract parts from a score?
A Zen master would reply mu (= un-ask the question). Extracting
parts is a meaningless idea in
On Mar 12, 2012, at 9:42 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
On 3/11/2012 6:39 PM, John Link wrote:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative
to Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was
also told that it would allow me to do things like specify that
On Mar 12, 2012, at 10:01 AM, David Bobroff wrote:
On 3/12/2012 1:52 PM, John Link wrote:
1) What is the easiest way to extract parts from a score?
A Zen master would reply mu (= un-ask the question).
Extracting parts is a meaningless idea in LilyPond.
I thought that might be the
John Link johnl...@nyc.rr.com writes:
A few years ago I was encouraged to try LilyPond as an alternative to
Sibelius because LilyPond produced more beautiful scores. I was also
told that it would allow me to do things like specify that bars 25
through 32 are to be identical to bars 9 through
At Mon, 12 Mar 2012 12:14:02 -0400,
lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
Impressive! Can you now create scores as quickly as you used to in
Finale?
It's partly a matter of where you want to spend your time. My go-to example is
here:
Hi Vaughan,
Finale does automatic word extensions for lyrics.
Um… so does Lilypond.
Cheers,
Kieren.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
42 matches
Mail list logo
