On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 2:31 PM, N. Andrew Walsh [via Lilypond] <
[email protected]> wrote:
> PS- reading that blog made my head hurt. Is working with Sibelius always
> this nightmarishly clunky and dysfunctional?
>
Just for the record, I couldn't agree more :-)
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:24 PM, N. Andrew Walsh <[hidden email]
> <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=177458&i=0>> wrote:
>
>> I would think it might be preferable to follow what I take to be the more
>> standard practice for cutaway scores, in which all staves appear at the
>> beginning of the first system, with whatever other establishing marks
>> (clef, key, instrument name, tempo, time signature, etc) are necessary, and
>> then blanking out the measures until their music appears. Using the first
>> example from Sibelius's blog on this topic (as you can see from their blog
>> post here:
>> http://www.sibeliusblog.com/tutorials/learning-more-advanced-cut-away-score-techniques/
>> ) seems like it might immediately raise some hackles (not the least of
>> which simply because it's Sibelius, but also because it seems like terrible
>> notational practice).
>>
>> That would probably also be easier than moving the brackets and
>> everything to the first instance of notes, no?
>>
>> Then it just becomes a much easier matter of whiting out any staves that
>> don't have notes in them.
>>
> Agreed. Personally, I don't like the idea of starting a instrument
mid-score like the tutorials demonstrate. I was just curious if it was
possible. My logic is this: if there's a tutorial on it, *someone* must be
using it, whether they *should* or not, and if I was asked to do it, I'd
feel better knowing that I can.
- Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/RE-Creating-cut-away-or-scrapbook-scores-in-LilyPond-tp177445p177460.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
