(replying to a bug-lilypond digest message into lilypond-user -- the problem
seems to be more appropriate for this list)
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:18:10 -0500
From: Alexander De Sina <address@hidden>
Subject: time lapse
To: <address@hidden>
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Can anyone explain why it takes almost a minute for my three month-old,
windows vista dell running the latest lilypond almost a minute to convert
files as simple as:
{ c d e f g a b c }{ a1 a2 a4 a8 a16 a32 a64 a128 }{ r2 r4 r8 r16 r32 r64
}{ a2. a4 r8 a8 }
{ \clef treble \time 6/8 c d e f g a b c }
Lilypond can't work while you are working: since input and processing are going on in
separate programs, Lilypond has to do all the processing while you wait and stare at your
desktop background. A system that integrates data entry and graphical output in the same
program can do some of the work "behind the scenes", while you're still writing
the latter parts of the file. But Lilypond is designed differently, so its score layout
machinery isn't even running while you're working on a file.
For longer files, you can reduce your wait by only processing the part you're currently
working on; see "Skipping corrected music" in the manual (section 10.5 in the
manual for version 2.10).
The first file you (successfully) process on any computer will take even longer
because the first time Lilypond runs it prepares the fonts it will use. This
should only happen once; later runs will be faster because they use the cached
font information which was generated that first time.
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 19:48:27 -0500
From: Alexander De Sina <address@hidden>
Subject: will pay for lilypond lessons in the New York City area
To: <address@hidden>
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Dear All,
I am a Schenkerian theorist and wanting to use lilypad for use in
illustrating graphs. The software is touted as being perfect for
this function,
I can't really help you with Schenker graphs -- never used one, can't read
them. Note however that Lilypond is NOT good at Schenkerian graphs. In fact,
Lilypond doesn't do Schenker at all. But Lilypond is good at Plain Old
Notation, and P.O.N. can be hammered into Schenker graphs by overriding
Lilypond's ideas about e.g. what noteheads to use, where to put beams, whether
to print stems etc.
This is what Kris Shaffer did and wrote about in that article two years ago. In
his opinion, twisting Lilypond's arm until it produces Schenker is easier (or
at least more straightforward) than trying the same with any graphical music
typesetter which, like Lilypond, is made for Plain Old Notation and doesn't
know about Schenkerian analysis.
In other words, you can't write a Lilypond input file that describes a Schenker graph and
have that processed into a graphical file. You have to write a file that describes the
"ordinary" notation, then add in all the ways in which the Schenker graph
differs from that.
This is why the first replies to your questions about Schenker graphs said little more
than "learn to do ordinary notation first" -- Schenker is not a function of the
software, it's an advanced step you can take once you are at least slightly familiar with
the software.
Hope this clarifies a thing or two. With solstice-related greetings
Xander Deubelbeiss