lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?


From: Janek Warchoł
Subject: Re: musescore lands sponsoring?
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:27:49 +0200

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> wrote:
>    
> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?

I think it's not a matter of "what".  We are technically superior
indeed (i've checked their score and Lily would engrave it better).
It's the "just do it" thingy.  We don't have anyone who would just do it.
I'd love to handle this, but i already have more Lily activities that
i can manage... :(


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
> turn money into LilyPond.

I'd say that we can turn /some/ money into LilyPond: without money,
you wouldn't be able to work on Lily.  Another example: Mike could
spend more time on Lily if he didn't have to do fundraising for his
ensemble and his compositional work (correct me if i remembered this
wrong).
The problem is that we cannot guarantee anything specific.

> We don't make the best of our potential for selling LilyPond out.  But
> we should not run into trap of making money a metric for the success of
> LilyPond or its contributors.

+1


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Federico Bruni <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2012/5/29 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden>:
>>
>> Just to make sure you have seen
>>
>>    
>> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>>
>> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
>> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>>
>
> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
> I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191

This isn't Lily output, it's directly from MuseScore.
You were fooled by the fact that MuseScore uses our Feta font.

> Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
> music schools in my area.
> But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
> scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).

There is a chance, but only when the syntax is *obvious* enough.
Currently used syntax isn't obvious enough, but it won't be difficult
to change it, i think.

Take this example:

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  r4 e8(-> gis <>) ^"sul D" \f \> << \repeat unfold 8 { cis-. } { s2
s2^\markup { \italic "rit." } } >>
  <>\sfz <>\downbow \repeat unfold 2 { cis8 gis } <fis cis'>1\>
<>\enddecr \mark \markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.coda" }
  << a1 { s2\< s2\> } >> <>\!
}

Looks like a mystery to non-geeks.  But, if we just define some nice
commands (actually, some of them already exist, but they usually
aren't encouraged so many people don't know about them) we may end up
with something like this (just a rough example):

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  rest4 e8 \accent \beginSlur gsharp csharp \endSlur \staccato \"sul
D" \forte \decrescendoHairpin csharp \staccato csharp \staccato csharp
\staccato |
  csharp \staccato \ritardando csharp \staccato csharp \staccato
csharp \staccato csharp \downBow \sforzando gsharp csharp gsharp |
  \chord { fsharp csharp' }1 \decrescrendoHairpin |
  \coda
  a1 \crescrendoHairpin \decrescendoHairpin
}

Sure, it's much longer, but everything's pretty obvious even for
someone who sees lily code for the first time.

> The other big obstacle is: schools in general (in any area) organize
> classes and workshops on software programs used by the industry.
> LilyPond should be first introduced in the publishing industry...
> but... how many geeks work in the music publishing companies?

There is a plan to change this.  Currently it's top secret ;) because
we don't know if it'll work out, but if it does, we'll need help.
We'll post a call to arms on user, be ready :)

cheers,
Janek



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]