Thanks Kieren, On 08/23, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > My primary suggestion: use absolute instead of relative note entry, and you > will never have incorrect octavation again. :)
I thought of that, but my worry is that I'll still make octave errors, but each will result in one transposed note instead of a transposed phrase, which might be even less apparent than proofreading. I also find relative note entry to be more intuitive and human readable. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if I got used to it though. > My secondary suggestion: to make entry fast and super-accurate, use MIDI > entry if possible. I have never looked into MIDI entry for Lilypond. I was never fond of it back when I used Sibelius, because correcting things like the spelling of accidentals became more trouble than it was worth. A quick search finds this,[1] which likes like it has the potential for a reasonable workflow. What's your experience with MIDI entry? > If you stick with relative note entry, then perhaps use octave checks > regularly? Now that I know about octave checks I'm going to start using them and see if that's enough to avoid octave errors. Depending on how that goes I might try out absolute or MIDI entry next. Mason [1] https://github.com/jurihock/lilyfrog
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
