Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[kmg]

Hey,

As I'm recently starting to type more and more in Lily and browsing some
scores on Mutopia Project to see how others are doing it, I wonder how you
- proffessionals - are approaching it? Does it depends on the type of the
score?

I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a time,
instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. On the
other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate your note
lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem sometimes. But
it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting something like
baroque sonata for the piano..

I did the same with the score where right hand had only once voice most of
the time, still I'm yet to see someone else using it - seems like many
people just use /new Voice and write them separately.

Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
(including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too? Maybe
someone could share a snippet from some good quality and complex piano
score? Honestly, almost every score I saw on Mutopia Project unfortunately
doesn't look too great, but maybe I'm tripping. Anyway, I'd like to see how
people with deadlines and efficient workflow are managing this - assuming
this is even a thing with LilyPond...

Thanks in advance guys.


Pozdrawiam,
Krzysztof Gutowski
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Andrew Bernard]

Hello Krzysztof,

I am sure how each person uses lilypond is a very personal thing, since it
is so flexible. I engrave quite deeply complex New Complexity School
keyboard music in the main, as a serious professional undertaking. I simply
use multiple voices for treble and bass staves, sometimes up to six or
seven per staff, and also sometimes breaking out into three or four staves
per system for clarity. Using Frescobaldi makes all this terribly easy and
I have therefore never stopped to think about it. For my work, I colourise
each voice with a different colour so my brain can untangle the complex
braids of the music. I just turn this off when ready to publish. I find
that helps greatly.

Andrew
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno mar 21 feb 2017 alle 10:40, kmg 
 ha scritto:
I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a 
time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. 
On the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate 
your note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem 
sometimes. But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting 
something like baroque sonata for the piano..




Frescobaldi allows to split the editor pane vertically, so you can work 
on multiple voices (each in a different variable) without having to 
scroll up and down. This is what I use to do on 2 voices guitar pieces 
(what I usually typeset).




Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the 
line (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too?


No, I don't.
In general I use one line per measure; each measure ends with a 
barcheck.

If the measure is long, I let Frescobaldi wrap lines (View>Wrap lines).
If the measure contains tweaks or overrides, I nest them using two 
spaces. Even though using Frescobaldi format tool makes this nesting 
disappear; so you have to be careful (and use version control like 
git). See these two discussions:

https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/437




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Urs Liska]

Am 21.02.2017 um 10:40 schrieb kmg:
> Hey,
>
> As I'm recently starting to type more and more in Lily and browsing
> some scores on Mutopia Project to see how others are doing it, I
> wonder how you - proffessionals - are approaching it? Does it depends
> on the type of the score?

Surely. On the type and the complexity. And sometimes also on the nature
of your project (for example if you're "just" entering a score or if you
have a project with many scores).

>
> I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a
> time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth.
> On the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate
> your note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem
> sometimes. But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting
> something like baroque sonata for the piano..

It may seem so, and I don't want to talk you out of this, but I have
found LilyPond's general approach of having continuous layers (aka
"voices") instead of measure based boxes like many other tools (like
notation programs or file formats like MusicXML) liberating.

As Federico pointed out you can split the editor in Frescobaldi to
achieve a similar effect as with parallelmusic. And above all,
point-and-click makes it so easy to hop around in the input file that I
don't see it as an issue at all that the music input is laid out in
different places.

In addition, it is often a good idea separate things out in individual
files (e.g. one for each staff or even one for each voice).

>
> I did the same with the score where right hand had only once voice
> most of the time, still I'm yet to see someone else using it - seems
> like many people just use /new Voice and write them separately.
>
> Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
> (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too? Maybe
> someone could share a snippet from some good quality and complex piano
> score? Honestly, almost every score I saw on Mutopia Project
> unfortunately doesn't look too great, but maybe I'm tripping. Anyway,
> I'd like to see how people with deadlines and efficient workflow are
> managing this - assuming this is even a thing with LilyPond...

With barchecks there are two somewhat mandatory recommendations,
everything else is up to personal style or agreement (if you're working
in a team):
1) Please do use them (always)
2) use them consistently.

Whether you put them at the end of the line or at the beginning doesn't
really matter.
The end of the line is somewhat "natural", as it ends the previous measure
At the beginning of the line gives a more consistent "look", because it
is always in the same place.

An alternative I use regularly is to put them on an empty line, together
with a barnumber comment, like so:

  c4 c c c

  | % 41
  d4 d d d

This makes the input file vertically "longer", but usually that doesn't
matter. The advantage is that it makes it very clear visually what
happens, and (if you use that) it gives very good commits to a version
control system such as Git.

The sample includes another recommendation: Specify the duration at the
beginning of each line, even if it's not technically necessary. This
makes it more obvious on first sight, and it helps avoid errors if you
should change anything later.

HTH
Urs

>
> Thanks in advance guys.
>
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Krzysztof Gutowski
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[kmg]

Thanks! Actually somehow I never used screen splitting.. now trying it out,
and it means you have basically \parallelmusic without drawbacks, that's
really cool. Also with folding Frescobaldi provides, you can hide stuff you
already completed. I guess you can even split to 4 when working on 4 voices
and then use another Frescobaldi window just to see preview of the score.
I'll try that approach next time.

Pozdrawiam,
Krzysztof Gutowski

2017-02-21 11:18 GMT+01:00 Federico Bruni :

> Il giorno mar 21 feb 2017 alle 10:40, kmg 
> ha scritto:
>
>> I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a
>> time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. On
>> the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate your
>> note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem sometimes.
>> But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting something like
>> baroque sonata for the piano..
>>
>>
> Frescobaldi allows to split the editor pane vertically, so you can work on
> multiple voices (each in a different variable) without having to scroll up
> and down. This is what I use to do on 2 voices guitar pieces (what I
> usually typeset).
>
>
>> Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
>> (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too?
>>
>
> No, I don't.
> In general I use one line per measure; each measure ends with a barcheck.
> If the measure is long, I let Frescobaldi wrap lines (View>Wrap lines).
> If the measure contains tweaks or overrides, I nest them using two spaces.
> Even though using Frescobaldi format tool makes this nesting disappear; so
> you have to be careful (and use version control like git). See these two
> discussions:
> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/437
>
>
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[kmg]

Also, thanks Urs! For some reason I saw your response only when checking
out the lists directly, it was not in my mailbox. Honestly I also like the
idea of one voice at a time better, and Frescobaldi helps with seeing it
consistently (as you guys pointed out). Before I saw only "|" at the
beginning in some files, but your "| % bar " is so cool, I'll definitely
try to use that (as the lines are sometimes so long you can't really find
that mark easily). Specifying durations every time is something I'll try
out too, kinda got used to it by using parallel input anyway. Thanks again.

Pozdrawiam,
Krzysztof Gutowski

2017-02-21 12:19 GMT+01:00 kmg :

> Thanks! Actually somehow I never used screen splitting.. now trying it
> out, and it means you have basically \parallelmusic without drawbacks,
> that's really cool. Also with folding Frescobaldi provides, you can hide
> stuff you already completed. I guess you can even split to 4 when working
> on 4 voices and then use another Frescobaldi window just to see preview of
> the score. I'll try that approach next time.
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Krzysztof Gutowski
>
> 2017-02-21 11:18 GMT+01:00 Federico Bruni :
>
>> Il giorno mar 21 feb 2017 alle 10:40, kmg 
>> ha scritto:
>>
>>> I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a
>>> time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. On
>>> the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate your
>>> note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem sometimes.
>>> But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting something like
>>> baroque sonata for the piano..
>>>
>>>
>> Frescobaldi allows to split the editor pane vertically, so you can work
>> on multiple voices (each in a different variable) without having to scroll
>> up and down. This is what I use to do on 2 voices guitar pieces (what I
>> usually typeset).
>>
>>
>>> Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
>>> (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too?
>>>
>>
>> No, I don't.
>> In general I use one line per measure; each measure ends with a barcheck.
>> If the measure is long, I let Frescobaldi wrap lines (View>Wrap lines).
>> If the measure contains tweaks or overrides, I nest them using two
>> spaces. Even though using Frescobaldi format tool makes this nesting
>> disappear; so you have to be careful (and use version control like git).
>> See these two discussions:
>> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
>> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/437
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Urs Liska]

Am 21.02.2017 um 12:29 schrieb kmg:
> Also, thanks Urs! For some reason I saw your response only when
> checking out the lists directly, it was not in my mailbox. Honestly I
> also like the idea of one voice at a time better, and Frescobaldi
> helps with seeing it consistently (as you guys pointed out). Before I
> saw only "|" at the beginning in some files, but your "| % bar " is so
> cool, I'll definitely try to use that (as the lines are sometimes so
> long you can't really find that mark easily).

You may have a look at this file:
https://git.openlilylib.org/bfsc/kayser/blob/master/works/masses/six/kyrie/corno-one.ily

Here it is clearly not necessary to sort out complex input, but I still
think it makes the file very clean as a whole.

> Specifying durations every time is something I'll try out too, kinda
> got used to it by using parallel input anyway. Thanks again.
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Krzysztof Gutowski
>
> 2017-02-21 12:19 GMT+01:00 kmg  >:
>
> Thanks! Actually somehow I never used screen splitting.. now
> trying it out, and it means you have basically \parallelmusic
> without drawbacks, that's really cool. Also with folding
> Frescobaldi provides, you can hide stuff you already completed. I
> guess you can even split to 4 when working on 4 voices and then
> use another Frescobaldi window just to see preview of the score.
> I'll try that approach next time.
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Krzysztof Gutowski
>
> 2017-02-21 11:18 GMT+01:00 Federico Bruni  >:
>
> Il giorno mar 21 feb 2017 alle 10:40, kmg
>  > ha scritto:
>
> I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one
> measure at a time, instead of of putting bunch of voices
> and going back and forth. On the other hand, it seems like
> it's limited and you have to restate your note lengths
> every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem
> sometimes. But it seems like the most clean approach for
> typesetting something like baroque sonata for the piano..
>
>
> Frescobaldi allows to split the editor pane vertically, so you
> can work on multiple voices (each in a different variable)
> without having to scroll up and down. This is what I use to do
> on 2 voices guitar pieces (what I usually typeset).
>
>
> Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning
> of the line (including the very first bar). Are you doing
> it like that too?
>
>
> No, I don't.
> In general I use one line per measure; each measure ends with
> a barcheck.
> If the measure is long, I let Frescobaldi wrap lines
> (View>Wrap lines).
> If the measure contains tweaks or overrides, I nest them using
> two spaces. Even though using Frescobaldi format tool makes
> this nesting disappear; so you have to be careful (and use
> version control like git). See these two discussions:
> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
> 
> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/437
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[karl]

Krzysztof Gutowski:
> As I'm recently starting to type more and more in Lily and browsing some
> scores on Mutopia Project to see how others are doing it, I wonder how you
> - proffessionals - are approaching it? Does it depends on the type of the
> score?
> I started to like \pararellmusic, [...]

I use emacs as the editor.

I always use voices put into variable (unless for testing short stuff).
Since I do mostly set choral works done by someone else, voices is a
natural way to express the music.

Also many works I typeset are in more than one parts, so I use latex to
make a booklet of the music together with some text. That also allows me
to include music from differen works in the same booklet.

> Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
...

I always put in barchecks. I have a simplicit program [1], that puts the 
bar number after the bar check symbol. Also I write in all barnumbers 
in the music (on paper) I'm transcribing. That makes it easy to find 
possible errors and correlate to the original.

///

You can find examples of what I do at [2].

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

[1] http://aspodata.se/git/musik/bin/addnum.pl
[2] http://aspodata.se/git/musik/

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden
+46 173 140 57



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[kmg]

Karl, Urs, thanks for your repositories, definitely interesting stuff
there. I'm kinda overwhelmed by all your includes and multiple files +
scheme stuff, but I can appreciate the organisation of larger works and
will maybe try it out little by little, even for smaller works. LilyPond
Manuals are great, but seeing some live application is totally different
story!

Pozdrawiam,
Krzysztof Gutowski

2017-02-21 12:29 GMT+01:00 kmg :

> Also, thanks Urs! For some reason I saw your response only when checking
> out the lists directly, it was not in my mailbox. Honestly I also like the
> idea of one voice at a time better, and Frescobaldi helps with seeing it
> consistently (as you guys pointed out). Before I saw only "|" at the
> beginning in some files, but your "| % bar " is so cool, I'll definitely
> try to use that (as the lines are sometimes so long you can't really find
> that mark easily). Specifying durations every time is something I'll try
> out too, kinda got used to it by using parallel input anyway. Thanks again.
>
> Pozdrawiam,
> Krzysztof Gutowski
>
> 2017-02-21 12:19 GMT+01:00 kmg :
>
>> Thanks! Actually somehow I never used screen splitting.. now trying it
>> out, and it means you have basically \parallelmusic without drawbacks,
>> that's really cool. Also with folding Frescobaldi provides, you can hide
>> stuff you already completed. I guess you can even split to 4 when working
>> on 4 voices and then use another Frescobaldi window just to see preview of
>> the score. I'll try that approach next time.
>>
>> Pozdrawiam,
>> Krzysztof Gutowski
>>
>> 2017-02-21 11:18 GMT+01:00 Federico Bruni :
>>
>>> Il giorno mar 21 feb 2017 alle 10:40, kmg 
>>> ha scritto:
>>>
 I started to like \pararellmusic, because you can go one measure at a
 time, instead of of putting bunch of voices and going back and forth. On
 the other hand, it seems like it's limited and you have to restate your
 note lengths every time, also some nested slurs can be a problem sometimes.
 But it seems like the most clean approach for typesetting something like
 baroque sonata for the piano..


>>> Frescobaldi allows to split the editor pane vertically, so you can work
>>> on multiple voices (each in a different variable) without having to scroll
>>> up and down. This is what I use to do on 2 voices guitar pieces (what I
>>> usually typeset).
>>>
>>>
 Last thing - I saw some putting barchecks in the beginning of the line
 (including the very first bar). Are you doing it like that too?

>>>
>>> No, I don't.
>>> In general I use one line per measure; each measure ends with a barcheck.
>>> If the measure is long, I let Frescobaldi wrap lines (View>Wrap lines).
>>> If the measure contains tweaks or overrides, I nest them using two
>>> spaces. Even though using Frescobaldi format tool makes this nesting
>>> disappear; so you have to be careful (and use version control like git).
>>> See these two discussions:
>>> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/573
>>> https://github.com/wbsoft/frescobaldi/issues/437
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi all,

> On Feb 21, 2017, at 5:35 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
> 
>   | % 41
>   d4 d d d
> 
> This makes the input file vertically "longer", but usually that doesn't 
> matter. The advantage is that it makes it very clear visually what happens, 
> and (if you use that) it gives very good commits to a version control system 
> such as Git.
> 
> The sample includes another recommendation: Specify the duration at the 
> beginning of each line, even if it's not technically necessary. This makes it 
> more obvious on first sight, and it helps avoid errors if you should change 
> anything later.

+1 to both of these. I’m slowly updating all my old scores/code to this 
standard.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[karl]

Krzysztof Gutowski:
> Karl, Urs, thanks for your repositories, definitely interesting stuff
> there. I'm kinda overwhelmed by all your includes and multiple files +
> scheme stuff,

:) yea, I know the fealing.

> but I can appreciate the organisation of larger works and
> will maybe try it out little by little, even for smaller works.

Just gather things that is common to a few files, put it in a file and
include it.

> LilyPond
> Manuals are great, but seeing some live application is totally different
> story!

Yes, they are very good.

Regards,
/Karl Hammar

---
Aspö Data
Lilla Aspö 148
S-742 94 Östhammar
Sweden
+46 173 140 57



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[Johan Vromans]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 11:35:40 +0100, Urs Liska  wrote:

> Specify the duration at the beginning of each line, even if it's not
> technically necessary. This makes it more obvious on first sight, and it
> helps avoid errors if you should change anything later.

I've been doing that for ages and it is really, really helpful!

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Your favourite/most efficient methods of inputting scores (piano)?

[David Wright]

On Tue 21 Feb 2017 at 11:35:40 (+0100), Urs Liska wrote:
> Am 21.02.2017 um 10:40 schrieb kmg:

> In addition, it is often a good idea separate things out in individual
> files (e.g. one for each staff or even one for each voice).
> >
> > I did the same with the score where right hand had only once voice
> > most of the time, still I'm yet to see someone else using it - seems
> > like many people just use /new Voice and write them separately.

If, like me, you enter parts in \relative mode, parallel music
makes it much more difficult. It's also unnatural to think of
much vocal music in a "vertical" layout, bar by bar.

> With barchecks there are two somewhat mandatory recommendations,
> everything else is up to personal style or agreement (if you're working
> in a team):
> 1) Please do use them (always)

Almost. I don't use them in Anglican Chants (too brief) and
hymns, where the natural unit is the line, not the bar.
In fact, I set many hymns with the printed lines split at each
anacrusis to match the word underlay, and so the LP source,
both notes and lyrics, reflects that.

> 2) use them consistently.

And everything else too. This makes it easier to spot mistakes,
make systematic/bulk changes (eg moving version 2.18 to 2.19/20)
and even various indexing/post-processing operations.

> Whether you put them at the end of the line or at the beginning doesn't
> really matter.
> The end of the line is somewhat "natural", as it ends the previous measure
> At the beginning of the line gives a more consistent "look", because it
> is always in the same place.
> 
> An alternative I use regularly is to put them on an empty line, together
> with a barnumber comment, like so:
> 
>   c4 c c c
> 
>   | % 41
>   d4 d d d
> 
> This makes the input file vertically "longer", but usually that doesn't
> matter. The advantage is that it makes it very clear visually what
> happens, and (if you use that) it gives very good commits to a version
> control system such as Git.

I do find that's too slack for my liking. With emacs split into four
panes, giving 7 or 8 lines per pane, there just isn't enough context
(and no indication of the part). I don't know where I stole my
preferred format from, but it looks like this:

soprano = \relative {
  a'2. a4
  a4 a g e
  f4. g8( a4) a
  g4 e f4. g8
  \barNumberCheck #5 | % soprano
  a8( b c2) b4~
  b4 a2 gs4
  a2 r4 a
  gs4 a2 gs4
  a2 r4 a
  \barNumberCheck #10 | % soprano
  gs4 a2 gs4
  a2 r4 a~ ...

which means at least one check is always visible in each pane.
And I can subitize five bars as I type in the code, typically
into a buffer containing:

soprano = \relative {
  \barNumberCheck #5 | % soprano
  \barNumberCheck #10 | % soprano
  \barNumberCheck #15 | % soprano
...

Occasionally I insert the checks in arrears (with an emacs macro).
It's no fun working on a score lacking them.

> The sample includes another recommendation: Specify the duration at the
> beginning of each line, even if it's not technically necessary. This
> makes it more obvious on first sight, and it helps avoid errors if you
> should change anything later.

Yes. And so far I am entirely a pitch-priority person, even though
you can now type durations on their own. That facility might suit
minimalists (and the occasional alto or tenor part :) ). I suppose
in that case the recommendation would be to reaffirm the pitch at
the beginning of each line.

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user