lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Reducing staff numbers in LilyPond


From: David Wright
Subject: Re: Reducing staff numbers in LilyPond
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 13:53:07 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Wed 18 Oct 2017 at 10:00:56 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
> James Harkins <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> On 16 Oct 2017 20:38, "Ken Williams" <address@hidden> wrote: 
> >> I honestly did not expect this kind of response, and I'm getting it from 
> >> multiple people.  I asked a technical question and got a whole bunch of 
> >> "answers" saying I'm stupid to try to achieve that effect.  Except for 
> >> Kieren hinting that it will probably be difficult, there has been *zero* 
> >> actual discussion about the technical aspects of it. 
> >>  
> >> If LilyPond or its community isn't friendly to people who want to 
> >> experiment with notation, I guess I'm finding that out pretty quickly. 
> >
> [...]
> 
> > I can see how some of the comments on this thread came across like,
> > "You're doing it wrong," and this could seem like hostility toward the
> > idea of experimenting with notation. I read it a bit differently. The
> > commenters are expressing concern that you may have unpleasant
> > surprises when you get into rehearsal. Some expressed this with
> > sarcasm, which usually doesn't come across well in e-mail.
> 
> "Some" is an overgeneralization I think.  I indeed read one reply I
> considered inappropriate.  Don't remember whether I'd have characterized
> it as "sarcasm", but at any rate, sarcasm does not work in real life for
> putting a discussion back on track, and it isn't suitable for mailing
> lists either.

I have already apologised to the OP because he obviously
interpreted my remark (rather than the post, I assume) as
unfriendly, which was not my intention.

The post was not an attempt to put anything back on track.
While Chris had already mentioned mistakes, Kieren ambiguity,
and you the puzzled men, I wanted to point out the actual
effect on singers caused by the subconcious link between
what the eye sees and how the vocal apparatus prepares to
sing a pitch. That was the first paragraph, on topic and
appropriate.

The second came about because I had a brief chat with a
soprano about the compositional effect (tutti unison). She
mentioned the limited range over which sopranos and basses
can realistically sing in unison, and I said that, were it
for an instrument, it might be written with a C clef,
thinking about having to read all those ledger lines.

Anyway, apologies a second time for trying to be clever and
light-hearted, and obviously failing.

Cheers,
David.



reply via email to

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