[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GDP: welcome, helpers!

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: GDP: welcome, helpers!
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 16:03:33 -0700
User-agent: Icedove (X11/20070607)

Trevor Bača wrote:

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

Well, the slur across the key signature looks _awful_... but maybe that'll encourage new developers to tackle more bugs. :)

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?

IIRC I said 4 staves, so this is perfect.  :)
(I'm pretty certain that I _did_ say "up to 4 single-staff lines"; I'm not just making this up)

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.

Yes, but that's part of the file that's auto-generated. (not part of your "ly snippet" area)

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).

Err... no, that is totally incorrect. Movie "piracy" (on the internet, not in physical form) is almost entirely "not trying to make money with it", but is forbidden by law in most countries. (let's not get sidetracked by a discussion about morality; I'm only addressing the legal status of "fair use" or "fair dealing", as I understand them with my non-expert knowledge, in Western countries)

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.

Again, no. Many university post a "no more than 10% of the work" rule in various places, but that's already using their special educational exceptions.

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

I'm not positive that fair use applies in this case. If we were evaluating the musical worth of Ravel -- particularly if we were comparing it to something else -- then quoting six bars is totally fine. But we're not reviewing his work; we're using his music as an example of our typesetting quality.

3. Write our own examples.

This is my preferred option.  That's why I started composing, after all.

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

I would rather not go this route. I'm all for composers contributing their own work, but not in any kind of competitive manner. I could easily see this getting out of hand.

- Graham

reply via email to

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