On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Paul Morris <p...@paulwmorris.com> wrote:
> Carl Peterson wrote > > I use MuseScore, > > Scorio, and Finale Notepad (depending on where I am and how I feel) > > for compositional work because they provide ease of note entry in the > > composing process and the ability to have instant aural feedback on > > what I've written (particularly if I'm not at my keyboard to play what > > I've written). Once I have the draft of the music written, I will > > manually retype the music into my LilyPond template because of the > > "good default typesetting" it provides. > > Hi Carl, Do you find that manually retyping is easier or better than > export > -> musicXML -> import? Curious to hear your thoughts as I would assume > that > import/export would be the ideal way to use a workflow like this. > > Retyping by far. I pretty much write exclusively a cappella SATB, and I have developed a very specific template/workflow for the part combining and layout. I've tried a few different ways of getting the music from these formats into LP, and in each case, I found myself spending longer in cleaning up the resulting LilyPond code than if I had just transcribed it manually from the other program. That is why I suggested an IDE feature that would allow for creating a variable, and then providing a basic visual note-entry tool that can handle single or chorded notes (whether it allows polyphonic music may be a more challenging question), then return minimal code (just the notes). I know someone suggested just turning off the PDF conversion to speed things up, but it's not just a matter of instantaneous aural feedback. There's a visual component and a matter of input error reduction, because I have been known to enter incorrect octaves or durations and not realize it until I've finished typing and have compiled the entire score. Carl
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
