RE: improving LilyPond useability

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

Hello,

Since my practice and performance of Lilypond spans less than a year
(installed 21 May 2013), I might qualify to comment on the "attractiveness"
and/or "accessibility" of Lilypond to a newbie.

Preservation of a two-part invention written for an undergraduate course
(1967) in Baroque Music Practice was the impetus to diving into Lilypond
(pardon the pun). The web page offered everything that I needed to start;
basic tutorials, which really go somewhat beyond just basic, and several
text editors. I chose Frescobaldi. A comment was made that the "drag and
drop" instructions for the test leaves one "hanging." Well, that may be true
for someone who does not peruse the tutorials or the manual readily
available on the web site.

Some criticism has been made about the length of the manual. I started with
an IBM PS2 (1982) using a non-graphical interface Microsoft Word. The
manual, if my addled memory is correct was somewhere around 300+ pages.
Other manuals (Aldus/Adobe PageMaker, PowerPoint, Excel, Windows) were at
least the same, or of greater length. I do not read manuals - that would be
like reading all of Proust at one sitting. My learning process is basically:
I want to do this, how do I do this, where is this in the manual (the
"search" provision is very helpful here), experiment with the command(s) in
the score, copy the successful command onto a cheat sheet with notation.

For those times at which I could not find a solution or I could not make the
selected command behave as I wanted, then someone from the Users' Group
would guide me. This is an aspect that is not noted or is highly underrated
as a plus for Lilypond. Support for other software requires, at best,
hunting through a forum or waiting for an e-mail response (usually days) or,
at worst, some type of paid support. My requests for help to the group got
responses in less than two hours!

Although Lilypond is a complex program, it is not a complicated program. As
with any complex program, acquisition of all of the "bells and whistles" is
not at ones fingertips and requires some time and effort.

To date I have transcribed some 25+ piano scores for use on my PC Slate. The
PDF's produced by Lilypond are crisper than other published or scanned
scores. The consistent spacing allows my eyes to track in the same manner
from score to score. Lilypond allows me to make my own "edition" of the
score with personal fingering, dynamics, and reminders. It also allows me to
eliminate editorials with which I do not agree.

Not having any experience with any other engraver (have recently dabbled
with Demeno), I cannot make comparisons. I do know that from the start
Lilypond may have challenged me. It never frustrated me.

Mark Stephen Mrotek

-----Original Message-----
From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden On Behalf Of
David Kastrup
Sent: Monday, December 02, 2013 7:16 AM
To: Phil Burfitt
Cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: improving LilyPond useability

"Phil Burfitt" <address@hidden> writes:

> I believe first impressions are important, and I think that LilyPond 
> lets itself down here. After installing LilyPond, a new user will 
> discover a new icon on their desktop. They'll double click on it, and 
> what do they get?....a sort-of read me file (it's LilyPad, but you 
> wouldn't know that unless you spotted the header/title), and a command 
> prompt that doesn't work or do anything (many computer users have 
> never seen or even heard of a command prompt!).

Well, we are selling a Porsche engine.  So that people can start doing
something useful with it right away, it gets delivered built into a dune
buggy.

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user