On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 10:52:26 +0100 (CET), Werner LEMBERG wrote:
I'm working on a book of madrigals right now and some of it is
recorded. The YouTube excerpt has affinities w/ mm. 21-30 of the
attached PDF & audio file (it's an excerpt from the 3rd madrigal in
the book, called "Lucky Wok (star!)").
Your sample sounds really amazing! However, the notation is
extremely
complicated: I've listened five times to it, but I still wasn't able
to follow the score...
There's the rub...
Obviously, if I gave this score to 10 highly-skilled amateur chamber
choirs and said "have at it," I would get 10 very different versions of
the piece and probably none of them would resemble the recording
(whether or not they'd be better is another question). However, if I
put more vague indications like "freak out in the style of Mike
Solomon," while this would probably get a better initial result
(assuming the person took the time to research how I freak out), it
would max out at a lower level of interesting nuance and unexpected
concord.
If you listen to each voice solo-ed out with a click track, you'll see
that the recording is pretty much a sonic carbon copy of the notation.
The best way to learn the piece, then, is to learn it by ear as you read
it on a beat-by-beat basis. After rehearsing it this way, the score the
acts as a timeline with various landmarks to jog your muscle memory.
Any chance to make it more simple? Obviously,
you know far too much about lilypond to produce such well looking
scores :-)
I <3 LilyPond (that's why I try to break it so often), and I shudder to
think what putting this together would have been like with any other
notation program.
Cheers,
MS
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
