Hi Jean,
>> but for me, it's the highest-impact sales tool when I'm Lily-vangelizing. :)
> I'm curious, could you say more?
When I show someone that you can install "vanilla" Lilypond, just type
something like
%%%%
\version "2.23.4"
randomNotes = {
$@(let ((notes (ly:music-property #{ <e f g a b c' d' e' f' g' a' b' c'
d'> #} 'elements)))
(map (lambda (x) (list-ref notes (random (length notes)))) (iota 400)))
}
\new Voice { \randomNotes }
%%%%
and [every time you compile you] get random notes for interval practice, it
blows their mind.
Writing
%%%%
\language "english"
\include "init_schenker.ly <http://init_schenker.ly/>"
global = {
\cadenzaOn
\key g \major
s8*16
\bar "|."
}
urlinie = \relative c'' {
s8*4
b8*4[-3
\lesser b8*2
a8*4-2
g8]-1
}
\score {
\new SchenkerGrandStaff <<
\new SchenkerStaff <<
\clef treble
\global
\new UrlinieVoice { \voiceOne \urlinie }
>>
>>
}
%%%%
and getting the output
also seems very impressive at first… but the moment they see they can't do it
with "vanilla" Lilypond (i.e., they need my included LilySchenker
file/framework), they’re immediately less impressed.
I don't know how many other people have tried to convert composers/engravers to
Lilypond, but every bit of sugar makes the whole platform seem more
approachable. As a wise man once said: “Every sufficiently advanced technology
is indistinguishable from magic.” :)
Hope that makes it clearer?
Kieren.
