Re: Is lilypond really suitable for composing?

[Tom Cloyd]

I have always found that nothing beats plain pencil and sheets of staff paper, until I have the basic piece fairly complete. For me, it's clearly faster to make even a second draft on paper than to move at that point to LP and continue from there. I consider fast "hand writing" on staff paper to be a basic composing skill, long used by those who come before us.

Working this way, alterations are so much easier, in the initial stages. Later, I find the reverse to be true. I do love getting to the point where it's time to produce an actual engraved score, but revisions certainly do continue after that.

Tom

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten.” ~ Neil Gaiman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tom Cloyd, MS MA LMHC (WA) | address@hidden
Psychotherapist (psychological trauma, dissociative disorders)
Spokane, Washington, U.S.A: (435) 272-3332
TomCloyd.com | Google+ | Facebook ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 5:20 PM, Vaughan McAlley <address@hidden> wrote:

On Fri, 23 Mar 2018, 08:08 Nathan Sprangers, <address@hidden> wrote:

I've been using lilypond for a much shorter time, but my impression is that lilypond excels when you know exactly what you want to input. It's also difficult to work on different parts of the score unless you set up some sort of system to break the piece into smaller chunks.

So I've been doing more work at the piano than I used to, then creating my score in lilypond based on my hand written sketch. Honestly, working at the piano has been more efficient than doing similar work in musescore.

On Mar 22, 2018 11:41 AM, "jtruc34" <address@hidden> wrote:

That may seem like a stupid question, but I've been using LilyPond with
Frescobaldi for a year and a half, but I start to ask myself if it is as
efficient as if I had used another tool like Musescore.

I explain: I don't have at all a powerful computer, and I think that an
essential feature that I have to have to compose efficiently is to see what
I've written in real-time. There is such a feature in Frescobaldi name
"continuous engraving" (or something like that, my version is not in
English), but on my slow computer and with a big project such as a 20-pages
quartet or symphony, it takes at least 40 to 50 seconds to render.

In addition, it would be great to hear the music out of the midi file by
clicking on the preview (like on almost every WYSIWYG music software) but
Frescobaldi's midi player is pretty useless for that.

I'm not saying that LilyPond and Frescobaldi are bad, it's probably just me
who don't know the right tools or the right way to use them. I'm asking to
find a way to make my workflow more convenient to compose.

Do you have any suggestions?

Thanks!



--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

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

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

It sounds like Denemo might suit you. But like Nathan, I try to be dealing with as little technology as possible when I'm actually composing. Unfortunately, even pencils need sharpening and erasers need to be remembered :-)

Vaughan

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