2009/7/27 Daryna Baikadamova <daryna.baikadam...@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> I have got some friends in the orchestra who are really afraid of
> tackling the Lilypond language. However I would really need them to
> share my workload of re-typesetting orchestral scores to get the
> parts.
>
> My long term plan is to give a player an orchestral part to typeset,
> then I collect all of their files and convert to Lilypond
>
> For the second stage, I create a common part which has common details
> of tempo, repeats, rehearsal section mark etc. Then I edit the
> orchestral lilypond parts and get rid of common things that are in the
> common parts and produce the full score, as well as lilypond
> orchestral parts files by combining the common part and the edited
> lilypond file.
>
> How workable is this arrangement? Could you offer a better startegy?
I made an informal experiment with collaborative typesetting among my
students. I split them in two-people teams and asked them to produce
variables of the type pianoOneRH={ ... } , pianoOneLH={ ... },
pianoTwoRH= etc. copied from staves off a score for 2 pianos.
These variables can be \included in a variety of files: one for
student, for him/her to test his/her own work, and one for me, which
contains the complete two-pianos structure. Single-staff parts could
be \included in single-staff score structures or into orchestral <<
\new Staff ... >> structures.
Now I repeat it on a yearly basis because it is very instructive. They
have to remember to process the master file (that of \includes) and
not the ones they are editing, that containing the variables.
I even managed to make my 7-old daughter typeset full piece, complete
with lyrics, asking her only to write the Spanish names of the
pitches, followed for a 8, 4 or 2 for the durations. For the lyrics, I
asked her to write down the syllables, space-doubledash-space
separated whenever needed. I prepared the structure for her but
undoubtedly this is a score typeset by her, in her mind.
I can imagine that for a complex orchestral work, the language
constructs could be complex as well, but the bulk of the work is still
pitches and durations only. With LilyPondTool they could even put
slurs afterwards, and enjoy pressing F7 frequently to watch their
progress.
--
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain)
www.paconet.org
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
