Joseph Wakeling <joseph.wakel...@webdrake.net> writes: > Now consider that relative difficulty scaled up across the number of > times you might have to implement an individual custom tweak in a > 50-page orchestral score, and you begin to see the issue from the > publisher or engraver's point of view. The fact that Finale may get > more things wrong initially is not an issue when correcting them is > simple; the fact that Lilypond may get so many things right initially > is not an issue when it's so much more tricky to make (and validate) > small manual corrections.
Except when you are ordering orchestral scores for Monteverdi's Vespers, use Renaissance tuning that is usually a minor third off, play partly with historical instruments, practice with modern instruments and would like to have the choir scores transposed to be on pitch. A good Lilypond source will require very little touchup work for pulling out the (expensive) custom order. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user