![]() It is not perfect, and will certainly required tweaking, and of course an experienced user can definitely create high quality, professional output with Finale, but I believe there are more basic notation errors with Finale. However, it also took some work to learn to work properly in Finale.įrom an output point of view, I think the default Lilypond output is superior to the default Finale output. I will qualify this and add that I come from a computer programming background and it certainly was necessary to put in a fair amount of time getting used to the program. I find it quite logical and believe that I am able to work as efficiently with Lilypond as I do with Finale. Like any complex computer application, it does take some time to accustom yourself to working the Lilypond way. As I said in another thread, it is very much like Score, another text-based engraving program well respected and often used for the high quality of its output. It contains quite an extensive set of extras, for example human playback, save as wave, auto-arrange, rhythm section generator, exercise wizard, and a host of other plugins and features not immediately related to the printed output. Finale is intended to appeal to a broad segment of music-application users - not just professional engravers, but amateurs, composers, students, educators, etc. However, it is better to consider Finale and Lilypond as two different types of applications. This difference alone is enough to turn off a large percentage of Finale users. It is somewhat akin to programming - you create a text file with the correct syntax, and process it with the lilypond program which outputs a postscript document. The major difference between the two programs is of course that Finale is a GUI driven application, while Lilypond is essentially a typesetting program, changing correctly formatted Lilypond text commands into a graphical score. I have not used Lilypond for very long, but I think I can offer a bit of comparison. Information when it comes to comparing these two programs? With both Finale and Lilypond that could give some more neutral I was wondering if there is someone who has worked seriously What you're seeing with Lillypond is the mid-level programming behind a retail piece of software (and that doesn't include the user interface). But imagine spending six months hand coding, then polishing and tweaking output for a single short piece of music. I guess the bottom line is, I would imagine it's output would be great as long as all positioning parameters are available, but it's output would be no different than any notation software (for example, one person might prefer a different slur thickness than another - can this be adjusted? I don't know). But in all cases, you'd be manually adjusting things to avoid collisions (I didn't see any section whether it automatically handles collisions of elements) I would assume you could do it but I didn't notice it in the documentation. You can't just drag it upwards since to create output you type in parameters, but I didn't see in the documentation how to incrementally move it up. The up/down parameter only refers to above or below the staff. ![]() Notice not only that you have to enter all the information by hand but also notice that the fermata is a little bit close to the note. Here's an example from the 2.2 documentation in how to create fermata. Essentially, to create output, you have to code all the information by hand with no user interface at all. if you take a look at the documentation, you'll see the process by which Lillypad creates a score. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |