Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] Note typesetting for Linux
From: Immanuel Litzroth (immanuell_AT_enfocus.be)
Date: Fri Jul 09 2004 - 16:35:16 EEST
saraband <darwin886_AT_yahoo.ca> writes:
> --- Immanuel Litzroth <immanuell_AT_enfocus.be> wrote: >
> Mikhail Ramendik <mr_AT_ramendik.ru> writes:
>> > Hello,
>> > Any sort of alphabetic medium for typesetting
>> notes is about as "right"
>> > for a professional musician as it would be "right"
>> for a programmer to
>> > somehow write programs in the language of musical
>> score. So Lilyopnd is
>> > simply off track.
>> Can you explain why and "alphabetic medium" is not
>> > The success of TeX for formula editing came, I
>> think, from the fact that
>> > TeX somehow matches the way a scientist *thinks*
>> about a formula. But
>> > IMHO, neither Lilypond nor any other alphabetic
>> editor can approach the
>> > way a musician thinks about score! And that's why
>> this won't work.
>> Can you explain how a musician thinks about a score,
>> and how this cannot be
>> expressed in alphabetic editor?
>> I'm not sure I follow Mikhail's argument, but for
> the record, I am a working musician and I use PMW
> (Philip's Music Writer) - a typesetting programme
> similar to Lilypond. I've tried many programmes, and
> I find coding (particularly with PMW) to be far more
> intuitive and versatile than the pointy-clicky
> commercial programmes.
I am a musician and a programmer and my experience is the same
as yours, but I was wondering if this was my experience as a programmer
which made me prefer lilypond.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Fri Jul 09 2004 - 17:00:06 EEST