On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:31 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > SoundsFromSound <soundsfromso...@gmail.com> writes: > > > The biggest complaint I've heard from many of my peers (when it comes > > to possibly switching from Finale/Sibelius) is that "LilyPond looks > > like way too much work" and "Text input?? That makes absolutely no > > sense for music. You're not writing a book! It's a score!". > > Well, I'd argue that a mouse makes absolutely no sense for music input. > A practised typist can write several hundred words per minute and keep > this up for quite a long time. > > Input the same amount of information with a mouse, and you'll have > Repetitive Strain Injury in no time at all. >
I don't know about "several hundred" words per minute (is that even physically possible?), but the last time I took a secretarial test, I rated around 70-75 wpm. For transcription work, I use direct text input exclusively. It is faster and more intuitive than either point-and-click mouse entry or (computer) keyboard entry in point-and-click programs (the latter because I don't have to think about relative intervals). For composition and arranging, I sometimes directly input into LP, but I also use MuseScore to "play" with the notes (pun intended). When I am finished, I will manually retype the finished parts into my LP template. If I am composing away from the computer, I will frequently compose using LP syntax. By this point, I can look at LP code for SATB parts and more or less "hear" what it's supposed to sound like, check for objectionable parallels, etc., as well as if I were looking at traditional music notation.
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
