Re: No fiddling claim

[Jonathan Wilkes]

--- On Mon, 9/28/09, Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> wrote:

> From: Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden>
> Subject: Re: No fiddling claim
> To: "Jonathan Wilkes" <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Monday, September 28, 2009, 12:20 AM
> HI Jonathan,
> 
> > what do the experienced users think about what I've
> said here?
> > If there's anyone out there who has used other
> notational
> > software and thinks the "less fiddling" claim is
> true?
> 
> I used Finale from 1991-2003, eventually becoming *quite*
> proficient.
> Then I switched to Lilypond (around v1.8), and now consider
> myself at least as proficient [relatively speaking] as I was
> with Finale.
> [I used Igor Engraver (v1.5) for a year or so in the
> interim, but that product died, which is why I ended up
> looking elsewhere and finding Lilypond...]
> 
> I definitely feel the "less fiddling" claim is true... for
> me, for the type of music I engrave, and for the particular
> quality of output I desire/demand.
> 
> That being said, if you don't particularly care about
> Finale's *horrible* [default] note-spacing, lyric placement,
> etc., then there would almost certainly be less fiddling
> time required with Finale — I just find that with
> Lilypond, I do almost no note or lyric adjustment, measure
> width/spacing adjustment, and so on, which are the
> activities that took up the bulk of my "tweaking" time with
> Finale. [Disclaimer, the last version I used was 2003, so
> things might be much better now.]

Hmm., I don't have much experience with lyric placement (I only have 
one piece I've written with text), but yes, the note-spacing tweaks 
for an entire piece can take a lot of time, depending on the complexity 
of the rhythms.

> 
> Right now, I estimate the following for my engraving work
> using Lilypond:
>   1. Basic note entry (including *all* items, e.g.,
> slurs, articulations, fingering, etc.) requires 20%-50% as
> long as I used to spend with Finale.
>   2. Spacing tweaks (notes, lyrics, vertical spacing,
> etc.) requires less than 5% of the time I used to spend with
> Finale.
>   3. Specific tweaks (like the ones you mention) take
> 2-5 times [!!] as long as I used to spend with Finale.
> 
> I roughly estimate that #1 represents 50% of my total
> engraving time, #2 is about 40%, and #3 is the final 10%. So
> taking the *worst case* scenario [for Lilypond], a
> hypothetical piece that would take 100 min to engrave in
> Finale means:
>    (50 min @ 50% time) + (40 min @ 5% time)
> + (10 min at 500% time) = 25 min + 2 min + 50 min = 77 min =
> 77% of the time I used to spend doing the same work in
> Finale.
> 
> This is obviously non-scientific and anecdotal to the
> extreme... but the final result (i.e., that I *never* spend
> more than about 3/4 of the time I used to working in Finale)
> seems about right. I tend to feel like I currently get
> things done in 1/2 the time, on average.
> 
> Of course, YMMV — in particular, if the spacing
> atrocities in Finale aren't where you spend your time, you
> will not see nearly as much benefit from using Lilypond, and
> in fact it may overall require more time.

It sounds like your experience is indeed different 
than what mine has been so far.

I would be really interested to see one of the Lilypond gurus go up 
against a Finale guru to notate a piece of music from the canon, and keep 
track of the total amount of time like you've done above.  I know a 
finale guru who might be interested in this.  For me, it would be really 
helpful to see the code on the Lilypond side.

> 
> Hope this helps!

Definitely.  Good to know that there's the possibility of working faster 
as I learn the ins and outs.  Thanks for your detailed response to my 
question.

-Jonathan

> Kieren.