Dear Tim, On 26.04.2013, at 19:28, Tim Roberts wrote:
> For the most part, it doesn't really matter. Both of the images you > showed us are acceptable musically, so there's no real "right" or > "wrong". I beg to differ. What does "acceptable musically" imply - a musician with suitable expertise can interpret a printed-out score the way it is intended by the composer? That was even true for many (very crude, by modern standards) attempts at digital typesetting for music 30 years ago (I remember). My feeling is that most readers of this list are more ambitious then that. > The only difference is how they appeal to your aesthetic > sense. The "stacking" problems are even more pronounced in other parts of the composition and this is particularly vexing as lilypond really creates something beautiful (with no extra effort but with no small amount of admiration on my part) for the rest of the piece. However, with the four extra lines I mentioned, life is good again. Warm regards, Stefan -- Dr. Stefan Vollmar, Dipl.-Phys. Head of IT group Max-Planck-Institut für neurologische Forschung Gleueler Str. 50, 50931 Köln, Germany Tel.: +49-221-4726-213 FAX +49-221-4726-298 Tel.: +49-221-478-5713 Mobile: 0160-93874279 E-Mail: voll...@nf.mpg.de http://www.nf.mpg.de
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
