Re: Lilypond lobbying?

[Urs Liska]

Although not being interested in this competition (as I'm not a composer), I read through the contest rules.
I totally agree with you that it doesn't _seem_ to make sense to restrict the composition to the two commercial software packages.

a)
For the whole process of the contest they only need printed scores and pdf files. So it is really nonsensical to exclude specific software. (Well, it doesn't sound like an oversight, as they not only do name Finale and Sibelius but explicitly prohibit the use of any other software.)
aa)
So far it also seems nonsensical to exclude handwritten scores. This isn't only unusual but also musically restricting.
While really loving computer notation (at least with LilyPond), I often had the impression that some composer had let his creativity be influenced by the capabilities of their software (or their capability to use this software). Well, it is definitely easier to experiment with composition and notation by hand, without thinking about how to realize this with software.

b)
One of the prizes is the publication of the winning work. They don't tell anything about how and where this will happen. And it is quite possible that some publishing house won't just print from the pdf files but will want to edit the scores to fit their needs and conventions. So it may be possible that they really can only handle Finale and Sibelius files.
(You may remember a discussion on this topic recently on the list (search for "Lilypond to Finale :-("))
If this is the case there won't be any possibility to change their mind.
If not, I think it is also highly unlikely. But it should be worth thinking about (more) strategies how to "lobby" LilyPond.

c)
This might be another push for thinking about a MusicXML backend.
Althought this may seem opposite of lobbying LilyPond it still may encourage people to use LilyPond. I think I'd easier take the decision to make the jump and learn LilyPond if I know that I can still be compatible with the Finale/Sibelius world if necessary.

Best
Urs

Am 18.08.2011 12:01, schrieb address@hidden:

Hey all,

I recently came across an announcement for an incredible composition competition for SIX ORGANS (!!!!1one).

http://mmp.cm-cascais.pt/NR/rdonlyres/5BBEE22D-3C21-4996-AEFE-A2C0B2FAF9C9/12487/regulMCIngles2.pdf

The rules state that one can only use Sibelius or Finale.  Thinking that this was perhaps an oversight, I contacted the administrator to see if I could use Lilypond, who replied:

***

Dear Sir

We can't accept another program. Only those referred in the contest rules.

***

I found this rather bizarre, making me think that:

(a) Sibelius and Finale are paying competitions to exclude other software (unlikely)

(b) People are writing nonsensical rules (likely)

In either case, it makes me sad that I won't be able to write a work for SIX ORGANS.  My question is: what can we do, as a community, to overcome this type of hurdle?  Obviously, the more competitions/clients/whathaveyou that require one to use a specific piece of software for music making makes LilyPond less and less advantageous to use.  So, is it appropriate for a representative from the development team to contact competitions like this on the behalf of the user community to signal non-understanding and/or outrage?

In the meantime, if anyone has six organs at their disposition, please let me know and I will write a piece for you.

Cheers,

MS

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