On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:30 AM, David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote: > Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[email protected]> writes: >> Man, am I naive. I do see now what you find depressing about this. >> How can we ever hope to get people to suggest LilyPond; by merit >> only?! > > They won't give up their working cars and their mechanics. We need to > offer something new. And new business models (like transpose-on-demand > with electronic or overnight delivery when the soloist would be > inconvenienced by wrong pitches). Ultimately things like a whole > orchestra playing from electronic paper, getting acoustically > synchronized page turns, live synchronized performance indications (the > conductor makes a different decision in his partitura and the sheets > from the musicians follow suit) and corrections. Including "let's take > that aria one note down". > > Entertainers play the first notes of some piece by heart, and the score > knows what registrations and accompaniment to use on their equipment, > and in which transposition the supporting score should appear. > > There is a world of things that can be done with good-quality electronic > typesetting that is beyond just replacing established high-quality > typesetting on paper. If we want to tap into big business, it will be > much easier not competing in the areas the existing players are best at. > But rather in the areas that they suck at.
Now, that's a piece of vision! I feel enthusiastic again :D _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
