The notes here are identical, taken from Bach's first Suite for solo
cello, but the appearance is different, especially if you print them out
-and veiw them from a distance.
+and view them from a distance.
@ifnottex
(The PDF version of this manual has high-resolution images suitable for
printing.)
@end ifnottex
Try reading or playing from each of the scores and you will find that
-the hand-engraved score is more enjoyable to use. It has flowing lines
+the hand-engraved score is more enjoyable to use. It has flowing lines
and movement, and it feels like a living, breathing piece of music,
while the newer edition seems cold and mechanical.
It is kind of hard to immediately see what makes the difference with the
-newer edition. Everything looks neat and tiny, possibly even ``better''
-because it looks more computerized and uniform. This really puzzled us
-for quite a while. We wanted to improve computer notation, but we first
+newer edition. Everything looks neat and tiny, possibly even ``better''
+because it looks more computerized and uniform. This really puzzled us
+for quite a while. We wanted to improve computer notation, but we first
had to figure out what was wrong with it.
The answer lies in the precise, mathematical uniformity of the newer
-edition. Find the barline in the middle of each line: in the
-hand-engraved score the position of these barlines has some natural
+edition. Find the bar line in the middle of each line: in the
+hand-engraved score the position of these bar lines has some natural
natural variation, while in the newer version they line up almost
-perfectly. This is shown in these simplified page layout diagrams,
+perfectly. This is shown in these simplified page layout diagrams,
traced from the hand-engraved (left) and computer-generated music
(right):
@end quotation
@noindent
-In the computer-generated output, even the individual noteheads are
+In the computer-generated output, even the individual note heads are
aligned in vertical columns, making the contour of the melody disappear
into a rigid grid of musical markings.
There are other differences as well: in the hand-engraved edition the
-vertical lines are all stronger, the slurs lie closer to the noteheads,
-and there is more visual variety in the placement of the beams. Although
+vertical lines are all stronger, the slurs lie closer to the note heads,
+and there is more visual variety in the placement of the beams. Although
such details may seem like nitpicking, the result is a score that is
-easier to read. In the computer-generated output, each line is nearly
+easier to read. In the computer-generated output, each line is nearly
identical and if the musician looks away for a moment, she will be lost
on the page.
LilyPond was designed to solve the problems we found in existing
software and to create beautiful music that mimics the finest
-hand-engraved scores. Along the way, we have learned a great deal about
-the work that goes into a well-engraved score. In this essay we describe
+hand-engraved scores. Along the way, we have learned a great deal about
+the work that goes into a well-engraved score. In this essay we describe
several of those aspects that we have tried to imitate in LilyPond.
@iftex
The art of music typography is called @emph{(plate) engraving}, a term
that derives from the manual process of music printing@footnote{Early
-european printers explored several processes, including hand-carved
+European printers explored several processes, including hand-carved
wooden blocks, movable type, and engraved sheets of thin metal.
Typesetting had the advantage of being more easily corrected and
facilitating the inclusion of text and lyrics, but only engraving
In the end, hand-engraved scores became the standard for all printed
music, with the exception of some hymnals and songbooks where
typesetting was justified by its ease and economy, even into the
-twentieth century.}. Just a few decades ago, sheet music was made by
+twentieth century.}. Just a few decades ago, sheet music was made by
cutting and stamping the music into a zinc or pewter plate in mirror
-image. The plate would be inked, and the depressions caused by the
-cutting and stamping would hold ink. An image was formed by pressing
-paper to the plate. The stamping and cutting was done completely by hand
+image. The plate would be inked, and the depressions caused by the
+cutting and stamping would hold ink. An image was formed by pressing
+paper to the plate. The stamping and cutting was done completely by hand
and making a correction was cumbersome, so the engraving had to be
-nearly perfect in one go. Engraving was a highly specialized skill; a
+nearly perfect in one go. Engraving was a highly specialized skill; a
craftsman had to complete around five years of training before earning
the title of master engraver, and another five years of experience were
necessary to become truly skilled.
LilyPond is inspired by traditional manual engravings published by
European music publishers in and towards the end of the first half of
-the twentieth century, inlcuding Baerenreiter, Duhem, Durand,
-Hofmeister, Peters, and Schott. This is sometimes regarded as the peak
+the twentieth century, including Bärenreiter, Duhem, Durand,
+Hofmeister, Peters, and Schott. This is sometimes regarded as the peak
of traditional musical engraving practice.
-@c Now all newly printed music is produced with computers. This has
+@c Now all newly printed music is produced with computers. This has
@c obvious advantages: prints are cheaper to make, editorial work can be
@c delivered by email, and the original data can be easily stored.
@c Unfortunately, computer-generated scores rarely match the quality of
-@c hand-engraved scores. Instead, computer printouts have a bland,
+@c hand-engraved scores. Instead, computer printouts have a bland,
@c mechanical look, which makes them unpleasant to play from.
@menu
@unnumberedsubsec Music fonts
The images below illustrate some differences between traditional
-engraving and typical computer output. The left picture shows a scan of
+engraving and typical computer output. The left picture shows a scan of
a flat symbol from a hand-engraved Bärenreiter edition, while the right
picture depicts a symbol from an edition of the same music published in
-2000. Although both images are printed in the same shade of ink, the
+2000. Although both images are printed in the same shade of ink, the
earlier version looks darker: the staff lines are heavier, and the
-Bärenreiter flat has a bold, almost voluptuous rounded look. The right
+Bärenreiter flat has a bold, almost voluptuous rounded look. The right
scan, on the other hand, has thinner lines and a straight layout with
sharp corners.
When we wanted to write a computer program to create music typography,
there were no musical fonts freely available that could match the
-elegance of our favorite scores. Undeterred, we created a font of
-musical symbols, relying on nice printouts of hand-engraved music. The
+elegance of our favorite scores. Undeterred, we created a font of
+musical symbols, relying on nice printouts of hand-engraved music. The
experience helped develop a typographical taste, and it made us
-appreciate subtle design details. Without that experience, we would not
+appreciate subtle design details. Without that experience, we would not
have realized how ugly the fonts were that we admired at first.
Below is a sample of two music fonts: the upper set is the default font
@end quotation
The LilyPond symbols are heavier and their weight is more consistent,
-which makes them easier to read. Fine endings, such as the ones on the
+which makes them easier to read. Fine endings, such as the ones on the
sides of the quarter rest, should not end in sharp points, but rather
-in rounded shapes. This is because sharp corners of the punching dies
-are fragile and quickly wear out when stamping in metal. Taken together,
+in rounded shapes. This is because sharp corners of the punching dies
+are fragile and quickly wear out when stamping in metal. Taken together,
the blackness of the font must be carefully tuned together with the
thickness of lines, beams and slurs to give a strong yet balanced
overall impression.
-Also, notice that our half-notehead is not elliptic but slightly diamond
-shaped. The vertical stem of a flat symbol is slightly brushed, becoming
-wider at the top. The sharp and the natural are easier to distinguish
+Also, notice that our half-note head is not elliptic but slightly diamond
+shaped. The vertical stem of a flat symbol is slightly brushed, becoming
+wider at the top. The sharp and the natural are easier to distinguish
from a distance because their angled lines have different slopes and the
vertical strokes are heavier.
@unnumberedsubsec Optical spacing
In spacing, the distribution of space should reflect the durations
-between notes. However, as we saw in the Bach Suite above, many modern
+between notes. However, as we saw in the Bach Suite above, many modern
scores adhere to the durations with mathematical precision, which leads
-to poor results. In the next example a motive is printed twice: the
+to poor results. In the next example a motive is printed twice: the
first time using exact mathematical spacing, and the second with
-corrections. Which do you prefer?
+corrections. Which do you prefer?
@cindex optical spacing
@cindex spacing, regular
Each bar in the fragment only uses notes that are played in a constant
-rhythm. The spacing should reflect that. Unfortunately, the eye deceives
+rhythm. The spacing should reflect that. Unfortunately, the eye deceives
us a little; not only does it notice the distance between note heads, it
-also takes into account the distance between consecutive stems. As a
+also takes into account the distance between consecutive stems. As a
result, the notes of an up-stem/@/down-stem combination should be put
farther apart, and the notes of a down-stem/@/up-stem combination should
be put closer together, all depending on the combined vertical positions
-of the notes. The lower two measures are printed with this correction,
+of the notes. The lower two measures are printed with this correction,
the upper two measures, however, form down-stem/@/up-stem clumps of
-notes. A master engraver would adjust the spacing as needed to please
+notes. A master engraver would adjust the spacing as needed to please
the eye.
Another example of optical spacing is the visual interplay between the
-stems and the bar lines. When an up-stem precedes the bar line, a little
+stems and the bar lines. When an up-stem precedes the bar line, a little
more space is needed to keep it from feeling crowded:
@lilypond
Ledger lines present a typographical challenge: they make it more
difficult to space musical symbols close together and they must be clear
-enough to identify the pitch at a glance. In the example below, we see
+enough to identify the pitch at a glance. In the example below, we see
that ledger lines should be thicker than normal staff lines and that an
expert engraver will shorten a ledger line to allow closer spacing with
-accidentals. We have included this feature in LilyPond's engraving.
+accidentals. We have included this feature in LilyPond's engraving.
@multitable @columnfractions .25 .25 .25 .25
@item @tab
@node Optical sizing
@unnumberedsubsec Optical sizing
-Music may need to be printed in a range of sizes. Originally, this was
+Music may need to be printed in a range of sizes. Originally, this was
accomplished by creating punching dies in each of the required sizes,
which meant that each die was designed to look its best at that size.
With the advent of digital fonts, a single outline can be mathematically
the glyphs will appear very light.
In LilyPond, we have created fonts in a range of weights, corresponding
-to a range of music sizes. This is a LilyPond engraving at staff size
+to a range of music sizes. This is a LilyPond engraving at staff size
26:
@quotation
used together on the same page:
@c TODO: are the stems in this example the right thickness? How should
-@c line wieghts be scaled for small staves?
+@c line weights be scaled for small staves?
@c Grieg's Violin Sonata Op. 45
@lilypond[indent=1.5cm]
Musicians are usually more absorbed with performing than with studying
the looks of a piece of music, so nitpicking typographical details may
-seem academic. But it is not. Sheet music is performance material:
+seem academic. But it is not. Sheet music is performance material:
everything is done to aid the musician in letting her perform better,
-and anything that is unclear or unpleasant to read is a hinderance.
+and anything that is unclear or unpleasant to read is a hindrance.
Traditionally engraved music uses bold symbols on heavy staff to create
a strong, well-balanced look that stands out well when the music is far
-away from the reader: for example, if it is on a music stand. A careful
+away from the reader: for example, if it is on a music stand. A careful
distribution of white space allows music to be set very tightly without
-crowding symbols together. The result minimizes the number of page
+crowding symbols together. The result minimizes the number of page
turns, which is a great advantage.
-This is a common characteristic of typography. Layout should be pretty,
+This is a common characteristic of typography. Layout should be pretty,
not only for its own sake, but especially because it helps the reader in
-his task. For sheet music this is of double importance because musicians
-have a limited amount of attention. The less attention they need for
-reading, the more they can focus on playing the music. In other words,
+his task. For sheet music this is of double importance because musicians
+have a limited amount of attention. The less attention they need for
+reading, the more they can focus on playing the music. In other words,
better typography translates to better performances.
These examples demonstrate that music typography is an art that is
@end lilypond
There are a few books on the art of music engraving
-available. Unfortunately, they contain rules of simple thumbs and some
+available. Unfortunately, they contain rules of simple thumbs and some
examples. Such rules can be instructive, but they are a far cry from
an algorithm that we could readily implement in a computer. Following
the instructions from literature leads to algorithms with lots of
-handcoded exceptions. Doing all this case analysis is a lot of work,
+hand coded exceptions. Doing all this case analysis is a lot of work,
and often not all cases are covered completely:
@quotation
Rather than trying to write detailed layout rules for every possible
scenario, we only have to describe the objectives well enough that
-LilyPond can judge the attractiveness of several alternatives. Then,
+LilyPond can judge the attractiveness of several alternatives. Then,
for each possible configuration we compute an ugliness score and we
choose the least ugly configuration.
For example, here are three possible slur configurations, and LilyPond
-has given each one a score in `ugly points'. The first example gets 15.39
+has given each one a score in `ugly points'. The first example gets 15.39
points for grazing one of the notes:
@lilypond
@end lilypond
The
-second one is nicer, but the slur doesn't start or end on the noteheads.
+second one is nicer, but the slur doesn't start or end on the note heads.
It gets 1.71 points for the left side and 9.37 points for the right
side, plus another 2 points because the slur ascends while the melody
-descends for a total of 13.08 ulgy points:
+descends for a total of 13.08 ugly points:
@lilypond
\relative c {
This technique is quite general, and is used to make optimal decisions
for beam configurations, ties and dots in chords, line breaks, and page
-breaks. The results of these decisions can be judged by comparison to
+breaks. The results of these decisions can be judged by comparison to
real engravings.
@node Improvement by benchmarking
@end itemize
@noindent
-(There were also two missing noteheads, several missing editorial
+(There were also two missing note heads, several missing editorial
annotations, and an incorrect pitch!)
By adjusting the layout rules and font design, the output has improved
-considerably. Compare the same reference score and the output
+considerably. Compare the same reference score and the output
from the current version of LilyPond (@version{}):
@iftex
We can also measure LilyPond's ability to make music engraving decisions
automatically by comparing LilyPond's output to the output of a
-commercial software product. In this case we have chosen Finale 2008,
-which is one of the most popular commercial scorewriters, particularly
-in North America. Sibelius is their major rival and they appear to be
+commercial software product. In this case we have chosen Finale 2008,
+which is one of the most popular commercial score writers, particularly
+in North America. Sibelius is their major rival and they appear to be
especially strong in the European market.
For our comparison we chose Bach's Fugue in G minor from the
@noindent
We made our comparison by engraving the last seven measures of the piece
-(28--34) in Finale and LilyPond. This is the point in the piece where
+(28--34) in Finale and LilyPond. This is the point in the piece where
the subject returns in a three-part stretto and leads into the closing
-section. In the Finale version, we have resisted the temptation to make
+section. In the Finale version, we have resisted the temptation to make
any adjustments to the default output because we are trying to show the
things that each software package gets right without assistance.
Some shortcomings in the unedited Finale output include:
@itemize @bullet
-@item Most of the beams extend too far off the staff. A beam that points
+@item Most of the beams extend too far off the staff. A beam that points
towards the center of the staff should have a length of about one
octave, but engravers shorten this when the beam points away from the
-staff in multi-voice music. The Finale beaming can be easily improved
+staff in multi-voice music. The Finale beaming can be easily improved
with the Patterson Beams plug-in, but we elected to skip that step for
this example.
-@item Finale doesn't adjust the positions of interlocking noteheads,
+@item Finale doesn't adjust the positions of interlocking note heads,
which makes the music extremely difficult to read when the upper and
lower voices exchange positions temporarily:
@item Finale has placed all of the rests at fixed heights on the staff.
The user is free to adjust them as needed, but the software makes no
-attempt to consider the content of the other voice. As luck would have
-it, there are no true collsions between notes and rests in this example,
+attempt to consider the content of the other voice. As luck would have
+it, there are no true collisions between notes and rests in this example,
but that has more to do with the positions of the notes than the rest.
In other words, Bach deserves more credit for avoiding a complete
-collision that Finale does.
+collision than Finale does.
@end itemize
This example is not intended to suggest that Finale cannot be used to
-produce beautiful output. On the contrary, in the hands of a skilled
-user it can and does, but it requires skill and time. One of the
-fundamental differences between LilyPond and commercial scorewriters is
+produce beautiful output. On the contrary, in the hands of a skilled
+user it can and does, but it requires skill and time. One of the
+fundamental differences between LilyPond and commercial score writers is
that LilyPond hopes to reduce the amount of human intervention to an
absolute minimum, while other packages try to provide an attractive
interface in which to make these types of edits.
The flat symbol is required to cancel out the natural in the same
measure, but Finale misses it because it occurred in a different voice.
The user must not only remember to run a beaming plug-in and respace the
-noteheads and rests, she must also check each measure for cross-voice
+note heads and rests, she must also check each measure for cross-voice
accidentals if she is to avoid interrupting a rehearsal for an engraving
error.
If you are interested in examining these examples in more detail, the
full seven-measure excerpt can be found at the end of this essay in
engravings by Finale and LilyPond along with four different published
-engravings. Close examination reveals that there is some acceptible
+engravings. Close examination reveals that there is some acceptable
variation among the hand-engravings, but that LilyPond compares
-reasonably well to that acceptible range. There are still some
+reasonably well to that acceptable range. There are still some
shortcomings in the LilyPond output, for example, it appears a bit too
-agressive in shortening some of the stems, so there is room for further
+aggressive in shortening some of the stems, so there is room for further
development and fine-tuning.
Of course, typography relies on human judgment of appearance, so people
-cannot be replaced completely. However, much of the dull work can be
-automated. If LilyPond solves most of the common situations correctly,
-this will be a huge improvement over existing software. Over the course
+cannot be replaced completely. However, much of the dull work can be
+automated. If LilyPond solves most of the common situations correctly,
+this will be a huge improvement over existing software. Over the course
of years, the software can be refined to do more and more things
-automatically, so manual overrides are less and less necessary. Where
+automatically, so manual overrides are less and less necessary. Where
manual adjustments are needed, LilyPond's structure has been designed
with that flexibility in mind.
@node Appendix
@unnumberedsec Appendix
-This appendix contaions four reference engravings and two
+This appendix contains four reference engravings and two
software-engraved versions of Bach's Fugue in G minor from the
Well-Tempered Clavier, Book I, BWV 861 (the last seven measures).
@noindent
Bärenreiter BA5070 (Neue Ausgabe Sämtlicher Werke, Serie V, Band 6.1,
-1989), an alternate musical source. Aside from the textual differences,
-this demsontrates slight variations in the engraving decisions, even
+1989), an alternate musical source. Aside from the textual differences,
+this demonstrates slight variations in the engraving decisions, even
from the same publisher and edition:
@iftex
@noindent
Breitkopf & Härtel, edited by Ferruccio Busoni (Wiesbaden, 1894), also
-available from the Petrucci Music Library (IMSLP #22081). The editorial
+available from the Petrucci Music Library (IMSLP #22081). The editorial
markings (fingerings, articulations, etc.) have been removed for clearer
comparison with the other editions here:
@end ifnottex
@noindent
-Bach-Gessellschaft edition (Leipzig, 1866), available from the Petrucci
+Bach-Gesellschaft edition (Leipzig, 1866), available from the Petrucci
Music Library (IMSPL #02221):
@iftex
projects / lilypond.git / commitdiff