Re: Any "objective" praises?

[Trevor Bača]

On 9/22/05, Erik Sandberg <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 00:39 +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > Erik Sandberg wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I am looking for good comparisons between different typesetting
> > > softwares' layout beautifulness.
> > >
> > > Lots of people have praised the beautifulness of lily's output on our
> > > various lists; it seems that everyone agrees that the (untweaked) output
> > > of lily is far more beautiful than the (untweaked) output of any other
> > > music typesetting program. However, our lists is a very biased source.
> > >
> > > Does anyone know about a good third-party comparison of music notation
> > > software, where lily is included, and where some general judgement of
> > > beautifulness is included?
> >
> > there aren't, and that's because beauty is subjective. If you want
> > objective measure, then compare with hand-engraved scores. That's also
> > what we do.
>
> Then I'm looking for a third-party comparison between different music
> notation software and corresponding hand-engraved scores. (I guess none
> exists, though ...)

Are there yet professionally available editions engraved in LilyPond?
Anybody working for Schott or Schirmer or UE using LilyPond yet? If
not it's only a matter of time ...

--
Trevor Bača
address@hidden