On 24.02.2008, at 16:36, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi James,
for just getting something quick, that doesn't really have to look
good,
finale is definitely faster
Several years ago, I would have called myself a Finale expert: in
addition to over a decade of use (typesetting well over a hundred
scores, including my Master's Thesis, starting with Finale v2), I
was even paid as a Finale tutor while I was doing my Master's
(1994-7).
Therefore, I feel like I can speak from a pretty good place of
competence in this regard...
With the one possible exception of playing the music into Finale
from a MIDI keyboard, my experience is PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE of
yours: using just a computer with (QWERTY) keyboard and mouse, I can
get *any* score into Lilypond at least as quickly as I could into
Finale, and most scores I figure I get the notes on to the page in
25-50% of the time required for Finale. The tweaking -- which ALWAYS
takes longer with Finale -- just cements Lilypond's advantage.
So, I'm curious...
1. Are you simply talking about Step-Time Entry (or whatever they
currently call note-entry using a MIDI keyboard), or with QWERTY
keyboard and mouse?
2. If you still find Finale faster at note-entry without a MIDI
keyboard, what is slowing you down? (e.g., Do you not have good
standard templates set up? Is there something about the syntax that
consistently trips you up or confuses you?)
Best regards,
Kieren.
oh, I don't (didn't) use the MIDI entry much. I used mostly the simple
entry, with keyboard commands modified from igor engraver. I think
it's just that I have to completely re-work the way I think to put
music into lilypond. Oh, I get the stuff into lilypond easily enough,
lilypond requires me to adapt to it to put music in, while finale
adapts to me to put music in (i.e., I can change the QWERTY keyboard
commands to something that makes sense to me in finale.)
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
