Re: calling all opera/musical engravers

[Valentin Villenave]

On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Kieren MacMillan
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Best, I suppose, would be to have a calculated default with a manual override 
> option.  =)

Hi Kieren,
I’m a bit late but:

I did use LilyPond for long and complex scores (operas tend to be a
LOT less complex than chamber music or solo piano music, at least in
my experience).

- I don’t care much for lilypond-book. Never have used it nor required it.

- I never needed to use anything other than plain vanilla LilyPond.
(Which didn’t keep me from trying, just ’cause I can.)

- In this regard, I also favor staying as close to the default layout
as possible. Every tweak you make is an additional risk of trouble to
come with future versions.

- Much like everybody (I guess?) I did use several Scheme macros, but
that was mostly for convenience (for example not having to type the
full syntax every time I want a frigging tuplet, or not having to add
staccato dots after each and every note). My coding habits and tastes
have evolved quite a bit over time, so that’s hardly relevant to your
own needs.

- Contemporary notation is quite achievable in LilyPond, especially
compared to, well, anything else. Complex rhythms, multiple
simultaneous meters, weird instrument-specific graphical gizmos,
microtones, you name it. You have to trust the program. Just take a
deep breath and dive in.

- I have _absolute_ trust in the program. But also in its evolution:
every time I thought something couldn’t be done, someone went and
fixed it:
-> I was fortunate enough to publish my first opera at the exact time
when Nicolas Sceaux added the \bookpart thingy, which was _immensely_
helpful (and part of the reason why lilypond-book isn’t required IMO).
-> Most of the stuff I really, really wanted to do but couldn’t is now
quite easily achievable thanks to David’s work over the past couple of
years.
-> The only missing feature that made me pull my head off, was the
need for a neo-modern accidental style; I offered Rune Zedeler to add
it for a fee, which he very competently did.
-> Even when what you’re looking at seems depressingly buggy, that
doesn’t mean it will be forever. Years later when I tried and
recompile my code (minus a few syntax updates, albeit quite minor),
the layout and spacing had greatly improved.

- Trust not only the program but the community. I can’t count the
hundreds of times where I got stuck, angstily asked a crucial question
and got my life-defining answer WITHIN MINUTES. Every roadblock I
encountered evidently wasn’t _that_ much of a big deal, but you tend
to lack objectivity when it comes to your own work and everything
seems desperately adverse.

The point is: stop hesitating and go. LilyPond will take you
*anywhere* you need; what it will not do is write the score on its own
nor make you decide what you want to write. But as long as you can
overcome your own uncertainties and tell LilyPond what you envision
with sufficient clarity, it *will* take you anywhere.

- Needless to say, you know where to find me if you have any doubts,
questions, regrets or jokes you want to share :-)

Hope this helps -- And a happy new year to you!

Cheers,
Valentin.