Till Rettig <till.rettig <at> gmx.de>
2007-03-01 15:41:47 GMT
Well, I think the most promising project at the moment is canorus at
http://canorus.berlios.de/ which is not a directly what you are looking
for, but I think it shows much better the structure that a frontend to
the lilypond generator should have: not so much one big block of
software but modules that can be combined. The same goes for the
lilypond-tool which is already a great enhancement. And I would think
that in future all these products could easily be linked to one common
page from where they can be downloaded, so if I would like to edit my
scores with a graphic front end I would download that one, but if I
would like the more direct way, I can get it also. And they could be
combined in future.
In my point of view it is not so much about the input language (which is
not so difficult at all) but more about the ability of intuitively
tweaking properties. The direkt input language is really easy, but when
you start wanting something special you will really have to start
learning strange commands...
I agree that the linking of an optical representation back to the
original output is probably not trivial at all, and so canorus' way is
not to show the final picture of the output but an scematic version
whith all the elements existing but not arranged yet in the final way.
So where would you start here to tweak the output in order to get better
But maybe it should also be clear that some graphical special effects
doesn't necessarily have to be *inside* the program but can be added
easily afterwards using vector graphic programs. Thus they would have to
be applied every time you change your file and compile it again, so it
resembles somewhat the old way of note engraving. But in the end also
this could be automated by adding a second language layout layer upon
the lilypond file which defines the graphic corrections that have been
done afterwards and include this file into the compilation process.
Just some thoughts about the topic...
Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> If you search the mailing list archives, you will find a number of
> discussions. See also the related questions at
> Note that several people on the mailing list have testified that they
> can enter the
> music much faster using the LilyPond text format than using a
> graphical interface
> or a MIDI keyboard.
> greg A Wissing wrote:
>> A few times I have stumbled upon this Lilypond project of yours. What an
>> incredible amount of work has been done, and the print results of
>> the scores look splendid indeed.
>> But, I am amazed, if not stupefied in amazement, that with such a
>> of knowledge nobody in your ranks has thought of making a decent
>> working user interface of this magnificent software.
>> I think it can be done, and should be done next as a logical step in
>> the development process.
>> For me, and I'm sure a lot of other music people, using the asci
>> keyboard along with a prof. level of programming parlance is out of
>> reach, sort of acabadabra.
>> Yes, we composers are very interested in a score notator that can
>> write ANYthing, and do it well. But most of us are want a tool that
>> is both comprehensive and intuitive. It seems to me that you are
>> almost there, if
>> I understand it well, even MIDI files can be edited!. With a little
>> effort you can beat Finale and others.
>> What is there against the use of the mouse, and who cares if Lilypond
>> ends up to be a fine composing app. with top rank score possibilities?
>> Along with that, I read comment in your files about Finale, but have
>> you ever looked into Logic, Cubase and Sibelius? The competition is
>> not doing so bad at all in the score field, yes, there are severe
>> shortcomings, but things are not half as bad as in your comparisons.
>> If, in developing such an interface, I can be of assistance I would
>> be glad to get involved in one way or another.
>> I am both a composer and a graphic designer. I do have an insight in
>> what an interface should do.
>> Gregory Wissing
>> lilypond-devel mailing list
>> lilypond-devel <at> gnu.org