> …how can you be so sure that the LilyPond output wrong?
I'm not at all sure it is wrong, but as Werner points out, there were
non-German traditions that Lilypond does not address. Since this comes from one
of those and I am trying to represent the score in a nicer format that is still
"true"
Arle Lommel writes:
> Thanks for pointing out the regional and temporal variations at work here.
> That tells me the Lilypond default isn't a bug. It is just a difference of
> aesthetic ideal and intention.
It still /could/ be, what I say it that it's impossible for me to tell
yet.
Greetings, Ja
Arle Lommel writes:
> I thought I was fairly clear about the specifics—“I find the stem here awfully
> short because it makes the flag on the eighth note run into the note
> heads”—but I guess not.
Yes, that's clear.
> But the inline images (yes) shown below should resolve any confusion
> on the
The score I am working from was printed in Boston in the 1860s. It was
relatively clear, but the "corrected" version of 1874 was loaded with junk:
pervasive fingerings, nonsensical slurs, seemingly random articulation marks.
So much was loaded in that it looks like a rat's nest.
Thanks for poi
>> LilyPond tries to mimick traditional engraving. There are bugs,
>> however, saying "I find xx is too short" is not helpful.
>
> I thought I was fairly clear about the specifics―“I find the stem
> here awfully short because it makes the flag on the eighth note run
> into the note heads”―but I
