Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
[lots of discussion about LilyPond vs other notation software] Hi people, it seems that i've missed an important discussion. After reading it (and reading comments on the Steinberg blog), i decided to add my comment in the form of a blog post: http://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/honestly-is-lilypond-good-enough/ I'd be interested in hearing your opinions in the comments! best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Hello Janek, Very interesting post, thanks! Typo: algorythmic JM Le 14 août 2013 à 10:54:17, Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com a écrit : [lots of discussion about LilyPond vs other notation software] Hi people, it seems that i've missed an important discussion. After reading it (and reading comments on the Steinberg blog), i decided to add my comment in the form of a blog post: http://lilypondblog.org/2013/08/honestly-is-lilypond-good-enough/ I'd be interested in hearing your opinions in the comments! best, Janek ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
An absolutely marvellous typo in our particular context. :-) Andrew Jacques Menu 14 August 2013 7:25 PM Typo:algorythmic ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Lol, indeed! Thanks for letting me know, Jacques! Corrected. Janek 2013/8/14 Andrew Bernard andrew.bern...@gmail.com An absolutely marvellous typo in our particular context. :-) Andrew Jacques Menu jacques.m...@tvtmail.ch 14 August 2013 7:25 PM Typo: algorythmic ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user compose-unknown-contact.jpg___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 14:09, schrieb David Kastrup: Well, if enough people only slightly overstep a line, it will disappear. I think it would make sense to expand on most followup thoughts in our own blog, once they can't be expected to be of much interest to Daniel. While he will be able to answer competently about Sibelius, again this is not what his blog is about. So far, he has been polite in his reactions and I commend him for that. But the question you should ask yourself is what chances you have to make him interested or enjoyed in his reactions. If you can't think of anything, remember that this is basically his home on the web. +1 I must admit, that I didn't read all he wrote about his projects. But what I saw, he is answering politely and competent. And he seems passionate in his work. So I hope my diffuse speech yesterday was not misunderstood! I think Daniel Spreadbury is passionate at work with his projects and what he is doing with his colleagues at steinberg might be a really good thing. The only thing I don't like for now is the closed file format. He wrote something about coexistance. That would be nice - and if lilypond would open his gates that it can also export musicXML files, it would be a step on lilyponds side. Just another comment on a longrunningthread ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound: Thoughts? http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1 For now just one: Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response. Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics, absence of bar restrictions etc.? I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so far. Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'. And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right. So _please step out_ and contact us. Urs - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.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 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison. Period. With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination. When I go to pack away my scores for the definitive and long-term archive master, I engrave everything in LilyPond. I'm currently in the process of converting all my older scores now too, to LilyPond. To each their own, I guess. We'll see what Daniel and the team has planned... Urs Liska wrote Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound: Thoughts? http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1 For now just one: Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response. Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics, absence of bar restrictions etc.? I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so far. Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'. And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right. So _please step out_ and contact us. Urs - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148848.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
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 10:35, schrieb SoundsFromSound: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison. Period. With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination. When I go to pack away my scores for the definitive and long-term archive master, I engrave everything in LilyPond. I'm currently in the process of converting all my older scores now too, to LilyPond. To each their own, I guess. We'll see what Daniel and the team has planned... Of course there are some advantages of using programs like Sibelius for applications that aren't the key target of LilyPond (e.g. arranging and similar tasks where it is essential to have quick and flexible access to the material. And I think that adding text input as an option (if it is thoroughly thought through) would be a great step forward for the resulting program. One could say of course that such an extension would make LilyPond's advantages smaller. But I think that's not the point. Of course LilyPond's goal should be to be as good as possible, but not necessarily compared to the competitors. Urs Urs Liska wrote Am 08.08.2013 04:29, schrieb SoundsFromSound: Thoughts? http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1 For now just one: Let's see if Kieren's comments on the post provoke _any_ response. Anybody ready to write a post on lilypondblog.org about polymetrics, absence of bar restrictions etc.? I would really cherish if _someone_ would do this who hasn't posted so far. Maybe less with the 'we can do better' attitude that somewhat poisoned my 'Finale' post(s) but rather like 'that's an interesting feature of LilyPond, and the Spreadbury post triggered some thoughts about it'. And BTW such a post would be very welcome in its own right. So _please step out_ and contact us. Urs - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148848.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 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
SoundsFromSound writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond are ignored. The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? Greetings, Jan -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 11:06, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: SoundsFromSound writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond are ignored. The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? Greetings, Jan Well, now there is at least one (and right from the top ;-) ): http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/#comment-610 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Urs Liska writes: And I think that adding text input as an option (if it is thoroughly thought through) would be a great step forward for the resulting program. Aren't they talking about keyboard entry, instead of text input? Text input is about the storage format. Most wordprocessors have keyboard entry, yet compare a the opaque .doc [or even .docx] with latex. There's no way to read, manipulate, work with those. Jan -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 11:11, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: Urs Liska writes: And I think that adding text input as an option (if it is thoroughly thought through) would be a great step forward for the resulting program. Aren't they talking about keyboard entry, instead of text input? Text input is about the storage format. Most wordprocessors have keyboard entry, yet compare a the opaque .doc [or even .docx] with latex. There's no way to read, manipulate, work with those. Jan Oh, probably you're right. So I have to revoke my positive impression ;-) Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 11:08, schrieb Urs Liska: Am 08.08.2013 11:06, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: SoundsFromSound writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond are ignored. The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? Greetings, Jan Well, now there is at least one (and right from the top ;-) ): http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/#comment-610 (indeed, I'm currently drafting bits of user documentation for our new application using Markdown, for similar reasons to those given by Urs in his essay about Lilypond) (from http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/#comment-621) Interesting to know they're noticing our blog ... ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
I'm not that surprised. During the last few years I became something nerd-like. After beeing a Mac-User for a long time, I now only use Ubuntu or Debian and all its related tools for my everyday work. So for me using lilypond is a quite natural thing and I am getting better and quicker using emacs - well, frescobaldi is still my lilyeditor. But most people I talk to say something like: I want switch on my computer and immediatly work with my everyday tools without needing to touch the keyboard! Beyond the mouse there is a touch-screen ... To see, that one is giving away a lot of control over his own work that way, is not a matter of course. Now to the steinberg-post: I was an intense user of steinberg cubase vst in the middle of the 90s until I switched to emagic logic because cubase sx did very bad on macosx in the beginning. These two applications are to compose and produce music. When I came to create sheet-music a few years ago, I luckily found lilypond on my newly installed ubuntu computer ... the beginning of a deep friendship ;) As I worked as a software-developer (mostly java) for a long time, the text based input didn't have any bad taste for me. But when I want to compose music, I will not use lily. It is an amazing software to engrave music. But to let the musical inspiration flow, something like logic with all its bundled software synthesizers, will let me make music together with others, who aren't nerds like me ;) One just has to build up the (home-)studio hardware and start to sing, groove, rock, dream, whatever. Nowadays there is no room for that kind of individual fulfilment. And if there is a need, I will examine ardour, if it fulfills my needs. So I am a software-developer, a musical typesetter and a musical interpreter (singer). I did compose music, but that was a long time ago. Back to the point. I have a demo-version and the notepad-version of finale using wine on my ubuntu computer. If I import some musicXML the virtual instruments sound much better than the standard midi output of either timidity or mac-quicktime. AFAICS there are some ways to have a reasonable midi/audio workflow with lilypond, but it needs some nerdish tweaking ;) This is not what I want from lilypond, but I think many people want to *hear* *immediatly* what they are creating. And if a common musician is used to a tool to compose music and that tool creates nice PDF-sheets, he will use it to create his publications. So the steinberg software might create good typesetting results. And finale and sibelius can produce them too, if you know how to use them! What can we say? IMO we shouldn't close any doors to the capitalist world outside there! What I don't like anymore is closed software from the day I tried opening my old micrologic files in logic 8 ... I want control over my work and the ability to look what is saved in my documents. And the possibilities with lilypond are amazing *and* open a wide horizon of dreams, what one could else do with it. It is not the fact, that I have to pay for software. It is the dependency to the tool creator, who might one day change something and force me to follow him. And it is the worth of what I am creating. With a new mac or ipad and garageband you can create a song in about 5 minutes. But what did you use to create that tune? You bought most instruments, beats, patterns with your app - so is it your song? Back to easy notation-software: You will produce a sheet for your choir in about 5 minutes with the steinberg app. And it will look OK. Your choir will get used to that look. If now someone comes and produces a good looking lilypond-sheet, who will really recognize the difference? Who will say, it is worth doing it this way for the composition and the acting musicians? Using all those tools to easily and *quick* produce sheet-music (or whatever) IMHO are open to reduce the /inner/ worth of the compositions and there graphical representation. It is easy and quick and it is OK. But can you do better? As I know some publishers, I would be careful using free to copy symbols without providing a don't copy glyph! If all choirs only buy one sheet and then copy as much they need, those publishers will not be able to produce more. If you sell old music, you won't get a provision from any license so the paper has to run your business. The problem is, that anything needs to be cheaper than yesterday, so the audience will not pay the price for a concert, the musicians will not pay the sheets, the publisher will not pay the typesetting and the typesetter can't pay the ticket for the next concert. And all are only thinking, if they can get cheaper what they need and not, if it was valuable what they received. Ok, enough of this! Sorry for this diffuse rant ;) Cheers, Jan-Peter Am 08.08.2013 10:35, schrieb SoundsFromSound: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. As a former
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org writes: SoundsFromSound writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond are ignored. Maybe because some people don't comment on things they don't know? I know that's a rather unusual concept these days, but it does increase the quality of discourse. The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png Well, I have to admit rolling my eyes when the author stated that those were two new glyphs he really liked. sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? What about the Creative Commons logos? They are more specific than some copying allowed logo, frequently employed, and most people _do_ choose licenses different from effectively Public Domain, so a Copying Allowed logo will usually be misleading for some uses. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 12:47, schrieb David Kastrup: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org writes: SoundsFromSound writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Yes, it could be very interesting to know why comments about Lilypond are ignored. Maybe because some people don't comment on things they don't know? I know that's a rather unusual concept these days, but it does increase the quality of discourse. Es gibt ein T-Shirt von Dieter Nuhr mit dem Aufdruck: Wenn man keine Ahnung hat, einfach mal Fresse halten The blog did inspire me a little bit, we could add two new glyphs to the feta font that have the opposite meaning of these http://blog.steinberg.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/do-not-copy-1024x489.png Well, I have to admit rolling my eyes when the author stated that those were two new glyphs he really liked. sharing and copying is good and encouraged! And then blog about it? What about the Creative Commons logos? They are more specific than some copying allowed logo, frequently employed, and most people _do_ choose licenses different from effectively Public Domain, so a Copying Allowed logo will usually be misleading for some uses. +1 Of course it should be accompanied by an explicit command. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
SoundsFromSound soundsfromso...@gmail.com writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Frankly, if I were Daniel, I'd be pissed already. I think he is perfectly correct to remind people that his blog is not the place for LilyPond advocacy. Since it is also not the place to go into real depth concerning what LilyPond is and what not, there is little point in bringing it up in the first place. When he states things for which LilyPond provides a valid counterthesis or counterexample, pointing out an example may be in order. But for statements like I changed to LilyPond and never looked back and similar is simply wrong. He does have misconceptions about LilyPond, but his blog is not the place to address them. Yes, that's unfortunate, but please behave like one would expect guests to behave. We are not doing our case a favor by making a spectacle where it is not asked for. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 13:13, schrieb David Kastrup: SoundsFromSound soundsfromso...@gmail.com writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Frankly, if I were Daniel, I'd be pissed already. I think he is perfectly correct to remind people that his blog is not the place for LilyPond advocacy. Since it is also not the place to go into real depth concerning what LilyPond is and what not, there is little point in bringing it up in the first place. When he states things for which LilyPond provides a valid counterthesis or counterexample, pointing out an example may be in order. But for statements like I changed to LilyPond and never looked back and similar is simply wrong. He does have misconceptions about LilyPond, but his blog is not the place to address them. Yes, that's unfortunate, but please behave like one would expect guests to behave. We are not doing our case a favor by making a spectacle where it is not asked for. I think it is interesting to compare the suggested new features to the behaviour of other programs, and I would like to read about that from other perspectives too. I hope I didn't do more in my comments. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 12:06:36 +0200 Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: If I import some musicXML the virtual instruments sound much better than the standard midi output of either timidity or mac-quicktime. Isn't this just a question of which soundfont is bundled? We distribute Denemo with a samll (5Mb) soundfont not to waste people's bandwidth when, if they care, they will use one of the many free sound fonts that suit their needs. For my own use I have a 100 Mb single harpsichord stop patched in, replacing the grand piano. Richard Shann ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 14:02, schrieb Richard Shann: On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 12:06:36 +0200 Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: If I import some musicXML the virtual instruments sound much better than the standard midi output of either timidity or mac-quicktime. Isn't this just a question of which soundfont is bundled? We distribute Denemo with a samll (5Mb) soundfont not to waste people's bandwidth when, if they care, they will use one of the many free sound fonts that suit their needs. For my own use I have a 100 Mb single harpsichord stop patched in, replacing the grand piano. Richard Shann Of course. There are some really nice soundfonts out there. And I can use aeolus with jack and timidity with kellner tuning to try, if something is sounding on a baroque organ. And I can use one of the many free soft synths. But I have to install it and prepare it to do this. If I use one of the apps I mentioned, it all is sounding out of the box - nice, like most things we hear nowadays in the radio. The question is, if users are willing to invest that work. Cheers, Jan-Peter Voigt ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes: Am 08.08.2013 13:13, schrieb David Kastrup: He does have misconceptions about LilyPond, but his blog is not the place to address them. Yes, that's unfortunate, but please behave like one would expect guests to behave. We are not doing our case a favor by making a spectacle where it is not asked for. I think it is interesting to compare the suggested new features to the behaviour of other programs, and I would like to read about that from other perspectives too. Ok, let's put ourselves in his shoes. He is coming from Sibelius (and knows it quite well), and he is going to a Steinberg based project that is in its early beginnings. It's his blog, so our focus should be on what is he interested in knowing and talking about rather than what can we hijack his audience for. Now one problem is that it's actually rather hard to sensibly talk about _any_ music typesetting program other than LilyPond since with LilyPond you can cut and paste an example of how to do things. With other programs, you are mostly reduced to cutting and pasting the _results_. So if you state something like With LilyPond, I do x with the following source, and get the following result, how do you do that with y?, you are basically asking a question to a dumb. He can probably _show_ you how to do it, but he can't easily tell you. In addition, his own project is in its infancy, so he could likely not even _show_ you how this will at one time work, and parading the capabilities of a program grown over dozens of years is putting him on the defensive. So most of the questions regarding how to input things will not yield useful answers and/or can only be answered in respect to existing software, and that is not really what the blog is about. I hope I didn't do more in my comments. Well, if enough people only slightly overstep a line, it will disappear. I think it would make sense to expand on most followup thoughts in our own blog, once they can't be expected to be of much interest to Daniel. While he will be able to answer competently about Sibelius, again this is not what his blog is about. So far, he has been polite in his reactions and I commend him for that. But the question you should ask yourself is what chances you have to make him interested or enjoyed in his reactions. If you can't think of anything, remember that this is basically his home on the web. It's like a protestant has invited me over to dinner, what should I tell him about hell and Mary?. Or the seven hells or whatever. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 14:08, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt: Am 08.08.2013 14:02, schrieb Richard Shann: On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 12:06:36 +0200 Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: If I import some musicXML the virtual instruments sound much better than the standard midi output of either timidity or mac-quicktime. Isn't this just a question of which soundfont is bundled? We distribute Denemo with a samll (5Mb) soundfont not to waste people's bandwidth when, if they care, they will use one of the many free sound fonts that suit their needs. For my own use I have a 100 Mb single harpsichord stop patched in, replacing the grand piano. Richard Shann Of course. There are some really nice soundfonts out there. And I can use aeolus with jack and timidity with kellner tuning to try, if something is sounding on a baroque organ. And I can use one of the many free soft synths. But I have to install it and prepare it to do this. If I use one of the apps I mentioned, it all is sounding out of the box - nice, like most things we hear nowadays in the radio. The question is, if users are willing to invest that work. And it's a question of download capacity. I think you still get these programs in boxes with DVDs in them, so it doesn't really matter if the thing is 22 MB or 2.2 GB in total. And if you're willing to spend hundreds of Euro for a software package you will also be willing to download it even if it takes hours. So, having this out-of-the-box ear-candy is of course nice, and probably an important selling point to many users. But I don't think it is within reach of our project to provide a similar experience. What could be useful however (I don't know _anything_ about it) would be to add a chapter to the documentation talking about how to get high-quality audio output from/through LilyPond, referencing useful free soundfonts or whatever is useful to get this to work. Urs Cheers, Jan-Peter Voigt ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
high-quality audio output from Lilypond (was Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software)
Hi Urs, What could be useful however (I don't know _anything_ about it) would be to add a chapter to the documentation talking about how to get high-quality audio output from/through LilyPond, referencing useful free soundfonts or whatever is useful to get this to work. Agreed. I have been using Lilypond for over a decade now. I have never used it to compose (only engrave), and only *once* have I used the MIDI output for listening. However, I feel I will likely be needing this functionality in the near future, and would be very interested in seeing good documentation on how to get (or improve) high-quality audio output from Lilypond. Thanks, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: high-quality audio output from Lilypond (was Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software)
Am 08.08.2013 15:19, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: Hi Urs, What could be useful however (I don't know _anything_ about it) would be to add a chapter to the documentation talking about how to get high-quality audio output from/through LilyPond, referencing useful free soundfonts or whatever is useful to get this to work. Agreed. I have been using Lilypond for over a decade now. I have never used it to compose (only engrave), and only *once* have I used the MIDI output for listening. However, I feel I will likely be needing this functionality in the near future, and would be very interested in seeing good documentation on how to get (or improve) high-quality audio output from Lilypond. Thanks, Kieren. ___ I will need this too next year. So anybody having substantial experience with this is highly welcome sharing his ideas, tools, work-flows with us. If this ends up in a documentation contribution or a tutorial/blog post it's fine. But don't keep hidden just because of being afraid of being forced to do anything like that. Just start the discussion ... TIA Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Richard Shann richard.sh...@virgin.net writes: On Thu, 08 Aug 2013 12:06:36 +0200 Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: If I import some musicXML the virtual instruments sound much better than the standard midi output of either timidity or mac-quicktime. Isn't this just a question of which soundfont is bundled? We distribute Denemo with a samll (5Mb) soundfont not to waste people's bandwidth when, if they care, they will use one of the many free sound fonts that suit their needs. I'm afraid to say that the 20+ years old Midi expander I use beats the pants off the available free sound fonts. That's not something where the free software world really has a lot to offer. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:06 AM, Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: I'm not that surprised. During the last few years I became something nerd-like. After beeing a Mac-User for a long time, I now only use Ubuntu or Debian and all its related tools for my everyday work. So for me using lilypond is a quite natural thing and I am getting better and quicker using emacs - well, frescobaldi is still my lilyeditor. But most people I talk to say something like: I want switch on my computer and immediatly work with my everyday tools without needing to touch the keyboard! Beyond the mouse there is a touch-screen ... To see, that one is giving away a lot of control over his own work that way, is not a matter of course. Difference in end-user philosophy. Most computer users do not see themselves giving away that control because they didn't need it or want it in the first place. Linux distributions like Ubuntu, Debian, etc., are simply inappropriate tools for probably 98% of computer users- which is exactly why the market share of those OSes is what it is. Most users need a hammer and a screwdriver- Linux is a whole machine shop. For the people who need the machine shop, Linux is the thing they want. Most people want to use their computer like they use a refrigerator or a toaster: just use it, no reading of documentation necessary. I write 40 pages of reports a day for work. I don't use LaTeX because it's too complicated to use; I use LibreOffice because the default operation for text is fine. If I was writing out complex math equations, it'd be a different story. Similarly LilyPond is probably not the most appropriate tool for most people just looking to print out some chord charts for their coffee house open mic night. I don't think that it's presented as the tool for those folks- LilyPond is aimed at the people who want that fine-grained control over output (although for people like me, writing lead sheets for jazz combos, the default ways of doing things works well for almost everything and only a few tweaks are necessary. A few minutes and I've got charts for everyone that are vastly more readable than Real Book charts). I find it faster than MuseScore, which I also tried, and the output is vastly better than Finale. I don't really know who Steinberg's target market is, although it looks like it is more towards the LilyPond end of things. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
At 10:32 08/08/2013 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: I use LibreOffice because the default operation for text is fine. If I was writing out complex math equations, it'd be a different story. Surely not: you'd use LibreOffice's Math facility! Brian Barker ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 17:40, schrieb Brian Barker: At 10:32 08/08/2013 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: I use LibreOffice because the default operation for text is fine. If I was writing out complex math equations, it'd be a different story. Surely not: you'd use LibreOffice's Math facility! Brian Barker I think the questions are: - Is the quality of output relevant for my application? Word processors just _can't_ produce professionally typeset documents. But if the documents aren't used for publication or presentation this may not be relevant. - What is the maintainability and transparency of plain text files worth compared to the (seemingly) added complexity. If I produce 40 pages of documents each day I think there should be a sufficient amount of 'common behaviour' to make setting up a structured text-based, versioned work-flow a worthwile investment. But if these pages are quite different (or even randomly structured) and are more or less for one-day use it probably isn't worth it. Urs ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
- Original Message - From: Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net To: LilyPond Users lilypond-user@gnu.org Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 4:32 PM Subject: Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software Similarly LilyPond is probably not the most appropriate tool for most people just looking to print out some chord charts for their coffee house open mic night. I don't think that it's presented as the tool for those folks- LilyPond is aimed at the people who want that fine-grained control over output (although for people like me, writing lead sheets for jazz combos, the default ways of doing things works well for almost everything and only a few tweaks are necessary. A few minutes and I've got charts for everyone that are vastly more readable than Real Book charts). I find it faster than MuseScore, which I also tried, and the output is vastly better than Finale. To a large extent, that was exactly what started me with Lily. I use Windows and a low cost notation tool that doesn't do anything like decent printing. I just wanted something that printed out better, and wasn't expensive. I found Lily and have been with her ever since. -- Phil Holmes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Tim McNamara tim...@bitstream.net writes: On Aug 8, 2013, at 5:06 AM, Jan-Peter Voigt jp.vo...@gmx.de wrote: I'm not that surprised. During the last few years I became something nerd-like. After beeing a Mac-User for a long time, I now only use Ubuntu or Debian and all its related tools for my everyday work. So for me using lilypond is a quite natural thing and I am getting better and quicker using emacs - well, frescobaldi is still my lilyeditor. But most people I talk to say something like: I want switch on my computer and immediatly work with my everyday tools without needing to touch the keyboard! Beyond the mouse there is a touch-screen ... To see, that one is giving away a lot of control over his own work that way, is not a matter of course. Difference in end-user philosophy. Most computer users do not see themselves giving away that control because they didn't need it or want it in the first place. Linux distributions like Ubuntu, Debian, etc., are simply inappropriate tools for probably 98% of computer users- which is exactly why the market share of those OSes is what it is. Uh, that's quite an absurd characterization. If you take a stock GNU/Linux distribution like Ubuntu, it does a lot more painlessly and out of the box for the end user than a stock Windows install. Most users need a hammer and a screwdriver- Linux is a whole machine shop. No, it _offers_ a whole machine shop. But the standard desktop from a typical desktop distribution does not get into your way any more than a standard Windows desktop. For the people who need the machine shop, Linux is the thing they want. For the people who prefer the machines coming with a Linux desktop distribution over the machines they can buy for Windows (and you can buy a lot!). Most people want to use their computer like they use a refrigerator or a toaster: just use it, no reading of documentation necessary. Uh, my 77-year old computer-illiterate mother runs an Ubuntu installation because I refused continuing to support a system I don't even use. Do you think she _ever_ read a piece of documentation? She does not even know the names of GUI elements. Makes for challenging phone support. Similarly LilyPond is probably not the most appropriate tool for most people just looking to print out some chord charts for their coffee house open mic night. I don't think that it's presented as the tool for those folks- LilyPond is aimed at the people who want that fine-grained control over output (although for people like me, writing lead sheets for jazz combos, the default ways of doing things works well for almost everything and only a few tweaks are necessary. A few minutes and I've got charts for everyone that are vastly more readable than Real Book charts). I find it faster than MuseScore, which I also tried, and the output is vastly better than Finale. LilyPond has a learning curve. It's perfectly feasible for quick and dirty work once you get beyond that. I don't really know who Steinberg's target market is, although it looks like it is more towards the LilyPond end of things. Well, LilyPond has no user interface. You write files in its file format with a text editor yourself. It's safe to say that the typical light user of software will not particularly fancy that, and I would be quite surprised if Steinberg went there. Personally, I am glad not to have to learn yet another GUI. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
on 2013-08-08 at 14:16 Urs Liska wrote: What could be useful however (I don't know _anything_ about it) would be to add a chapter to the documentation talking about how to get high-quality audio output from/through LilyPond, referencing useful free soundfonts or whatever is useful to get this to work. the quality of the soundfonts will naturally make a difference. but i think it's more important to have a good midi to begin with. last time i tried it, the midi output generated by lilypond was very basic, just pitches and durations. IIRC, velocity is fixed at 127, and dynamic is mapped to changes in volume. so basically you get everything played with someone turning up and down the volume knob of the radio... in my opinion, even with the best soundfonts in most situations you'll only get a very crude rendering. i haven't been following too closely the development of notation/composing applications for windows and mac, but i've seen enough to know that their rendering engines are *far* more complex than sending basic midi messages to a couple of good soundfonts. packages like the garritan orchestra or the eastwest collections are huge beasts where not only the quality (and sheer quantity) of the sound samples is important, but also the ability to properly interpret dynamics (including things like crescendo or decrescendo during a note), legato, staccato and all kinds of articulations, tremolos, trills, different playing techniques, etc, etc. just listen to some of the demos here, and if you can stand the horrible music, you'll see (hear, that is) what i mean: http://www.soundsonline.com/Symphonic-Orchestra browsing through the manual can also be revealing: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-QL_Orchestra_Manual.pdf in short, you need both: - a complex midi sequence, with all kinds of CC messages to represent all the information involved in musical notation besides the notes, - a *very* complex rendering system, to properly interpret all those messages. that's what people who buy those things pay hundreds of $$$ for. i guess that lilypond midi output could be somewhat improved, and with some further tweaking in a dedicated midi sequencer and a good soundfont you can get reasonable results for simple music. but if you want to talk about high-quality audio output, that's something different. and i don't think lilypond will ever compete there, because LP is a *notation* software, and Finale is not. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Am 08.08.2013 18:05, schrieb luis jure: on 2013-08-08 at 14:16 Urs Liska wrote: What could be useful however (I don't know _anything_ about it) would be to add a chapter to the documentation talking about how to get high-quality audio output from/through LilyPond, referencing useful free soundfonts or whatever is useful to get this to work. the quality of the soundfonts will naturally make a difference. but i think it's more important to have a good midi to begin with. last time i tried it, the midi output generated by lilypond was very basic, just pitches and durations. IIRC, velocity is fixed at 127, and dynamic is mapped to changes in volume. so basically you get everything played with someone turning up and down the volume knob of the radio... in my opinion, even with the best soundfonts in most situations you'll only get a very crude rendering. i haven't been following too closely the development of notation/composing applications for windows and mac, but i've seen enough to know that their rendering engines are *far* more complex than sending basic midi messages to a couple of good soundfonts. packages like the garritan orchestra or the eastwest collections are huge beasts where not only the quality (and sheer quantity) of the sound samples is important, but also the ability to properly interpret dynamics (including things like crescendo or decrescendo during a note), legato, staccato and all kinds of articulations, tremolos, trills, different playing techniques, etc, etc. just listen to some of the demos here, and if you can stand the horrible music, you'll see (hear, that is) what i mean: http://www.soundsonline.com/Symphonic-Orchestra browsing through the manual can also be revealing: http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/docs/EW-QL_Orchestra_Manual.pdf in short, you need both: - a complex midi sequence, with all kinds of CC messages to represent all the information involved in musical notation besides the notes, - a *very* complex rendering system, to properly interpret all those messages. that's what people who buy those things pay hundreds of $$$ for. i guess that lilypond midi output could be somewhat improved, and with some further tweaking in a dedicated midi sequencer and a good soundfont you can get reasonable results for simple music. but if you want to talk about high-quality audio output, that's something different. and i don't think lilypond will ever compete there, because LP is a *notation* software, and Finale is not. That's perhaps one more application for MusicXML export: being able to use a dedicated program to render a LilyPond score to a good MIDI representation. one-task-one-tool. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Message: 9 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 01:35:47 -0700 (PDT) From: SoundsFromSound soundsfromso...@gmail.com To: lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software Message-ID: 1375950947119-148848.p...@n5.nabble.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison. Period. With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination. That's funny. I always thought the one defining positive attribute of SCORE was that you *could do anything* imaginable (music notation-wise) with it. The drawback is that you *have to do everything* manually, one note at a time...requires a lot more thinking, deciding. Whereas Lilypond has the best of both worlds - very good results automatically, plus all the flexibility to do crazy stuff. Tim Reeves___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
I agree. That's the main reason why I chose to write that comment on this mailing list vs. his blog post ;) David Kastrup wrote SoundsFromSound lt; soundsfromsound@ gt; writes: I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. Frankly, if I were Daniel, I'd be pissed already. I think he is perfectly correct to remind people that his blog is not the place for LilyPond advocacy. Since it is also not the place to go into real depth concerning what LilyPond is and what not, there is little point in bringing it up in the first place. When he states things for which LilyPond provides a valid counterthesis or counterexample, pointing out an example may be in order. But for statements like I changed to LilyPond and never looked back and similar is simply wrong. He does have misconceptions about LilyPond, but his blog is not the place to address them. Yes, that's unfortunate, but please behave like one would expect guests to behave. We are not doing our case a favor by making a spectacle where it is not asked for. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148899.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
Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
SCORE was amazing and practically limitless. Back in the DOS days. Now, with newer versions of the program? I'd only use it if I was forced. YMMV Tim Reeves-3 wrote Message: 9 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 01:35:47 -0700 (PDT) From: SoundsFromSound lt; soundsfromsound@ gt; To: lilypond-user@ Subject: Re: Steinberg's progress report on new notation software Message-ID: 1375950947119-148848.post@.nabble Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I'm surprised that no one else in those comments responded to any of the LilyPond mentions. As a former SCORE user, personally I can't possibly imagine /ever /going back now that I've tried LilyPond. There truly is just no comparison. Period. With LilyPond, you're only limited by your imagination. That's funny. I always thought the one defining positive attribute of SCORE was that you *could do anything* imaginable (music notation-wise) with it. The drawback is that you *have to do everything* manually, one note at a time...requires a lot more thinking, deciding. Whereas Lilypond has the best of both worlds - very good results automatically, plus all the flexibility to do crazy stuff. Tim Reeves ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@ https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842p148901.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
Steinberg's progress report on new notation software
Thoughts? http://blog.steinberg.net/2013/08/development-diary-part-two/?fb_source=pubv1 - composer | sound designer -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Steinberg-s-progress-report-on-new-notation-software-tp148842.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
