[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GDP: welcome, helpers!

From: Trevor Bača
Subject: Re: GDP: welcome, helpers!
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:32:45 -0500

On 9/24/07, Graham Percival <address@hidden> wrote:
> Trevor Bača wrote:
> >> Something like this? These are the closing measures of the first
> >> movement of the Ravel sonatine.
> Other than the things you mentioned, looks great.  See it in action here:

Oh wow. The exact image is at ...

... and looks great to my eyes (minus the slur gripes I mentioned in
the previous mail).

Question: is the amount of the Ravel example what you're looking for?
I think you had said 8 staves total (either 8 *1 or else 4 * 2 or else
2 * 4 or else 1 * 8)? This is only half that amount, but looks right
to my eyes. What do you think?

> One note: click on the image, and see the source.  All the headwords
> will have the same \paper{} section; you simply create great stuff in
> the "ly snippet" section.  This way you should be able to see exactly
> what the doc output will look like.

Perfect. This is exactly what I was looking for.

> If you'd rather have the headwords with slightly different
> specifications (larger font, slightly changed line-widths), that's
> possible... but I'd like every headword to have the same specs.

Yes, agreed.

> Don't miss the #(set-global-staff-size)  -- that should be placed inside
> the cut-&-paste section.  I'll file a bug report about that.


Question: should the global-staff-size be the same for all headwords?
I'm leaning towards "yes" ... I'll see if I can make it happen.

> One concern: is Ravel mutopia-worthy?  How long has he been dead?  I
> hate to ask, but... :(

Ravel died in 1937 but the Sonatine was finished earlier, in 1905
( Isn't copyright
something like 75 years max? If so the Sonatine should be public by
now, though it's possible that any of his various publishers along the
way may have taken out renewals or something.

Please somebody correct me, but my understanding of fair use is that a
snippet of absolutely anything, regardless of medium -- score,
soundfile, text, film, whatever -- is perfectly acceptable to use, so
long as you're not trying to make any money with it (which we're in
the bizarrely unique position of). So I would assume that a "snippet"
of any score -- even a bit of Grisey published only a couple of years
back -- should be completely acceptable; I seem to remember the upward
limit being something like no more than 10% of a work quoted, even if
in separate fragments.

At any rate, there are three separate copyright strategies (at least)
that we can take with the headwords:

1. Use only stuff that we're absolutely certain is public domain,
which in our case means tonal stuff from the common practice;

2. Use whatever we want, so long as we're respect fair use guidelines
in a professional way;

3. Write our own examples.

Copyright strategy #1 is certainly the safest and there is without
doubt an abundance of beautiful material in scores of the common
practice. But many of the most beautiful scoring achievements of all
live in later centuries.

Copyright strategy #2 should be fine. This is the point of fair use, after all.

Copyright strategy #3 is actually a possibility for our team -- we
have a community of composers available (and I'm not just guessing
here -- I've traded score with many new friends on the list, and I've
been quite astounded in some cases). So this might ultimately be the
most interesting strategy of all -- commission each chapter's headword
from a different composer on the list. I'll get the ball rolling by
hacking up an original headword for 1.2 "Rhythms", just as you had
suggested. If the example works (beautiful and characteristic of Lily,
both interesting and inviting) then maybe we can ask some of the other
composers on the list to contribute, too, or extend an open
invitation; I'd be happy to help guide the process and make

> >> 2. Is there a way to set slur attachment points to *end-of-stem*
> >> rather than notehead? The two-note chordal slurs would look better
> >> that way. If it's intensely manual I don't wanna mess with it; but if
> >> there's a smart way to make that specification, then cool.
> IIRC this feature was removed in 1.6 or so (because it wasn't a smart
> way :)  and was never re-implemented (in a smart way).

Hm, I thought I remembered as much, but couldn't be sure. OK, it's not
a requirement.

What *is* a requirement is getting rid of that hideous line-breaking
with the slurs at the beginning of line two.

Perhaps someone else on the list can help clean up the example and
answer some of my earlier questions about the Ravel fragment ... or
perhaps not since my posts to both user and devel were rejected do
violating our 64k message size limit ... which still, years on, makes
absolutely no sense to me.

If anyone else is following this thread and wants to look at the
proposed snippet for 1.1 "Pitches", please click on, again, ...

... and click, as usual, on the image itself to reveal input.

Trevor Bača

reply via email to

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