Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
[snip]
> > > But, if this view upsets you, don't get more upset trying to
> > > answer it!
> >
> > I actually can't see your point - no offense, but I can't ?
> [..]
> > by the tone in John Sankey's mail to me, is this a general attitude
> > here ?
[snip]
> So no offense intended, we just have slightly different goals.
Okay, I see, and I think you are doing something useful - well not
only useful, but really a _good thing_ !. And I must maybe also then
be more elaborate on my "angle" as I apparently has fallen more
or less in with the door here :-).
As I understand GNU music, the effort could contain more than one
branch of activities: you mention "John's goal to put as much music
on the web as possible", and your own work to "build a fine music
typesetting package usable for absolute idiots" - which I must say
very easily could include many composers I know ;-).
They are not quite the same activities, although related I understand
- anyway why not have room for some more blubbering screen-junkies
with nutty ideas, like myself ?
Okay, you see I do know the "contemporary music circus" rather well,
and I am accustomed to the habits of "making career moves" or
being "all elbows", and I don't like that, and have never bothered to
participate in it. I am though a fully educated active composer, and
my musical activities is more or less centered around preparation
of scores, and participating in playing them with my close friends
in an ensemble called "Situation Interpretes et Compositeur" (SIC)
located in Paris, I also do other stuff offcause, but working with
SIC is what I like the most. So I do care a lot about the look and
"symbol designs" used in my own scores, and this, plus the inspiration
from reading "Godel Escher Bach" by Douglas E. Hoffstaedter, is why
I got so involved in fontdesign. Now turning to FSF is a result of being
very feed up with the inflexibility of commercial programs like
Finale, and indeed any software you need on a platform like MacOS,
or Windows. Not least because I do not like to do a lot of work with
the software, finding bugs, coming with new ideas, adding fonts,
or whatever you end up doing when you use the software every day,
and then just get a automatically generated message like "We will
pass it on to the tech. department" and newer see the feature
implemented, nor having any chance to make a patch yourself.
Okay - next thing - music aesthetics: I know that people are
rather sensible with music, some composers are that as well,
and some even get very aggressive, just for you to know - I am
not such a person, I really enjoy talking and working with
people no matter which kind of music they prefer, be it
simple or absurdly complicated. My main standpoint is
probably best reflected in the sentence from my previous
post:
"...do that if you get exited about it, and if you don't -
well don't do that then - as it is a free world."
Also I have absolutely no problems with the the issue that
you consider "LilyPond" to be aimed at - well you did say
it in a rather masochistic way yourself :-). Anyway, I may
be able to get others interested, and eventually assemble
a group, or participate in one, which would be aiming at making
tools for the "professional" contemporary composers, and if so
that would just enrich GNU music, and if not I am completely
happy with participating in the evolution of "LilyPond".
I have also discussed the copyright issues with fellow composers
regarding music. I face the problem that ensemble SIC would
like to make a concert, but they can not afford to pay my
Music Editor, and then I end up in the absurd situation that I
can not do what I want, with my own stuff (although my
Editor is quite fleksible, so for now it is not a big problem).
On the other hand I don't make enough money to make
a living, and therefore end up in more or less difficult
situations, so liberating my music completely from
copyrights is impossible for me, in the currently available
income construction for composers in Denmark. However
if I could find a construction that would allow me to do
so, I actually think I would prefer to have it that way.
But I have to take one step at a time.
>
> OTOH, if you do make a new font, I will be happy to adapt LilyPond to
> use them. One word of caution is in place: music fonts are no text
> fonts, and I think that it will be difficult to design a font that is
> usable both for LilyPond and for other packages.
Yes I know, but I will try it anyway, there is not any other way to
find out for sure :-).
I will look at the symbols you need, which char slot do you want
them to go in ? Should I just put them in where there are room
and send the ATM + .mf files then ?
--
My best regards,
Michael Nyvang.
Composer
ref. Edition Wilhelm Hansen, Dacapo Records.
DIEM, Aarhus,
Ens. SIC (Ens. Situatione Interpretes et Compositeur), Paris.
http://www.dacapo-records.dk/komponister/nyvang.html
