On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Stanislav Kneifl wrote: > > It's a nice idea, but there are still some arguments against it: > 1. The resolution of todays displays is still too low for partitures or > crowded piano or organ parts. > 2. It would be hard to make notes into the score. > 3. Either you will still have to print the parts for practicing, or each > musician will be required to have a computer at home, with the same > system installed and with further problems with off-line score distribution. > 3. It makes acoustic music needlessly dependent on electricity. > For practising, the paper copy is indispensible where you mark fingerings and footings, indicate difficult parts and articulation. But for a performance of an organ piece, it may indeed be a good thing: the high resolution is not required because the notes are only a help for the memory. The setting of the stops is done any way by a computer; why not incorporate a display to show where you are? The electricity is certainly no argument for an organist. Christof > However, if you beg me long enough, I can make antialiase slurs for > screen displaying. But I still did not find any way how to detect that > the PS/PDF file is displayed on screen, so there would have to be > different versions for screen and printer. I am somewhat puzzled. It is true that the PDF-files look much worse on screen than the PS-files, but on paper slurs and ties look fine, no matter wither a 6000-resolution laser pinter or a 300-resolution inkjet is used. In contrast to YAP, xdvi has no problems in displaying postscript slurs. The only disadvantage is that the pdf-files generated by ps2pdf are considerably bigger than the ones generated by pdftex. Christof
_______________________________________________ TeX-music mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sunsite.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
