[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: <<aes,2. \\ {s4 ees2} \\ {s2 bes4}>>

From: Wols Lists
Subject: Re: <<aes,2. \\ {s4 ees2} \\ {s2 bes4}>>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2019 19:30:36 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.0

On 05/01/19 17:34, Aaron Hill wrote:
> On 2019-01-05 2:40 am, Wols Lists wrote:
>> On 04/01/19 18:41, Aaron Hill wrote:
I *H*A*T*E* about people who proclaim "This is
>> correct".
>> Take my case - which would you choose between "follow the current
>> wisdom" and "music that is readable (and hence playable)". Note that
>> this *IS* an either/or choice! How often have I moaned on this list
>> because I need to over-ride lily's defaults because the result is
>> otherwise pretty much unplayable ...
> I disagree.  The two options are not mutually exclusive--they are one
> and the same.  That is, I see following classical and modern wisdom as
> tools to aid in achieving what will be readable and playable.  But the
> goal is very much the latter, not the former...

They may not be mutually exclusive for you. But as you may remember, I
regularly struggle to eliminate page-breaks, and if that leads to
cramped, hard-to-read music so be it - the alternative is unplayable.

> The problem I have with something like Elements of Style is that the
> work is largely arbitrary yet presented as if it were based in fact. 
> Modern research and analysis of written works through history do not
> agree with Strunck and White's conclusions.  Based on that, one might
> all too quickly throw out the Elements; but putting aside the ego of the
> authors, there is still wisdom in its pages.  It is ultimately born out
> of understanding why and how a rule can be useful in different
> situations.  And to quote a cult classic, "Sometimes you have to know
> when to break the rules."
> In the world of music notation, it would seem that Gould has filled a
> similar role.  I have seen many folks cite their work as the rational
> basis for engraving something a particular way.  It would be my approach
> to take this work not as "you must strictly adhere to these various
> commandments" but rather "while ideal to follow this path as closely as
> reasonable, stray from it should it make things clearer."
> Given that, you should definitely feel free to experiment with notation
> and treat it like an artist who has much freedom with their brush.  If> 
> -- Aaron Hill
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden

> your music is particularly unusual, perhaps an equally unusual engraving
> is most apropos.  And hopefully LilyPond is and will continue to be
> malleable enough to accommodate the whims of the unusual.

I agree with you, "Elements of Style", "Gould", "The Oxford English
Dictionary" are all necessary to *define* *standards* to make it easy
for us to understand each other :-)
> But for matters of the not-so-unusual, have no disillusion your
> engraving (or writing) will be readily clear if you choose to stray too
> far from the path.

But standards are of no use if applying them results in output that is
not "fit for purpose" as English law puts it ... :-)


reply via email to

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