--- /dev/null
+\input texinfo @c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+@ignore
+ Translation of GIT committish: e5d3fb33ceaec6d10e06af0c667e4e982a0028ce
+
+ When revising a translation, copy the HEAD committish of the
+ version that you are working on. For details, see the Contributors'
+ Guide, node Updating translation committishes..
+@end ignore
+
+@setfilename lilypond-essay.info
+@settitle Esszé az automatizált kottaszedésről
+@documentencoding UTF-8
+@documentlanguage hu
+@afourpaper
+
+@macro manualIntro
+Ez az esszé a LilyPond @version{} automatikus kottaszedési mechanizmusmába nyújt mélyebb betekintést.
+@end macro
+
+@c `Essay' was born 2002-06-03 with this commit:
+@c tremolo segfault
+@c author: Han-Wen Nienhuys
+@c commit: 29262ca70c3d5209126150752fd3d804bef8e9a3
+@c file: Documentation/user/introduction.itely
+
+@macro copyrightDeclare
+Copyright @copyright{} 2002--2015 a szerzők.
+@end macro
+
+@set FDL
+@include macros.itexi
+
+@c don't remove this comment.
+@ignore
+@omfcreator Han-Wen Nienhuys, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
+@omfdescription Essay on automated music engraving
+@omftype essay
+@omfcategory Applications|Publishing
+@omflanguage English
+@end ignore
+
+
+@lilyTitlePage{Esszé}
+
+
+@ifnottex
+
+@menu
+* A kottaszedés::
+* Irodalomjegyzék::
+* GNU Free Documentation License:: E dokumentum licence.
+* LilyPond tárgymutató::
+@end menu
+
+@docMain
+@end ifnottex
+
+
+@contents
+
+@allowcodebreaks false
+
+@include essay/engraving.itely
+@include essay/literature.itely
+
+@include fdl.itexi
+
+@node LilyPond tárgymutató
+@appendix LilyPond tárgymutató
+@translationof LilyPond index
+
+@printindex cp
+
+@bye
--- /dev/null
+%
+% title =University of Colorado Engraving music bibliography
+% author =Alyssa Lamb (edited & converted to bibtex by HWN)
+%
+
+@Book{jacob47,
+ author = {Jacob, Archibald},
+ year = 1947,
+ title = {Musical handwriting : or, How to put music on paper : A handbook for all musicians, professional and amateur},
+ address = {London},
+ publisher = {Oxford University Press},
+ note = {subject: Musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{brandt,
+ author = {Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer},
+ title = {Standardized Chord Symbol Notation},
+ address = {Sherman Oaks, CA},
+ publisher = {Roerick Music Co.},
+ note = {subject: musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{johnson46,
+ author = {Johnson, Harold M},
+ year = 1946,
+ title = {How to write music manuscript an exercise-method handbook for the music student, copyist, arranger, composer, teacher},
+ publisher = {Carl Fischer, Inc.},
+ address = {New York},
+ note = {subject: Musical notation --Handbooks, manuals},
+}
+
+@Book{sadie90,
+ title = {Music Printing & Publishing},
+ author = {Donald W. Krummel \& Stanley Sadie},
+ year = 1990,
+ publisher = {Macmillan Press},
+ note = {subject: musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{foss,
+ author = {Foss, Hubert},
+ title = {Music Printing},
+ series = {Practical Printing and Binding},
+ address = {London},
+ publisher = {Oldhams Press Ltd., Long Acre},
+ note = {subject: musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{steele03,
+ author = {Steele, Robert},
+ year = 1903,
+ title = {The Earliest English Music Printing},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{austin,
+ author = {Austin, Ernest},
+ title = {The Story of Music Printing},
+ address = {London},
+ publisher = {Lowe and Brydone Printers, Ltd.},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{unknown_author,
+ author = {unknown author},
+ title = {Pictorial History of Music Printing},
+ address = {Elhardt, Indiana},
+ publisher = {H. and A. Selmer, Inc.},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{wintermitz55,
+ author = {Wintermitz, Emmanuel},
+ year = 1955,
+ title = {Musical Autographs from Monteverdi to Hindemith},
+ address = {Princeton},
+ publisher = {Princeton University Press},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{novello47,
+
+ author = {Novello, A},
+ year = 1847,
+ title = {Some Account of the Methods of Musick Printing, with Specimens of the Various Sizes of Moveable Types and of Other Matters},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{chrsander18,
+ author = {Chrsander, F.},
+ year = {18??},
+ title = {A Sketch of the HIstory of Music printing, from the 15th to the 16th century},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Article{squire1897,
+ author = {Squire, W},
+ year = 1897,
+ title = {Notes on Early Music Printing},
+ journal = {Bibliographica},
+ volume = {iii},
+ number = 99,
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Article{meyer35,
+ author = {Meyer, K. and O'Meara, J},
+ year = 1935,
+ title = {The Printing of Music, 1473-1934},
+ journal = {The Dolphin},
+ volume = {ii},
+ pages = {171--207},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+% 4th ver.,
+@Article{pattison39,
+ author = {Pattison, B},
+ year = 1939,
+ title = {Notes on Early Music Printing},
+ journal = {The Library},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+ volume = {xix},
+ pages = {389-421},
+}
+
+@Book{king64,
+ author = {King, H},
+ year = 1964,
+ title = {Four Hundred Years of Music Printing},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+%(Rev.1961).
+@Book{deutsch46,
+ author = {Deutsch, O.F.},
+ year = 1946,
+ title = {Music Publishers' Numbers},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{marco62,
+ author = {Marco, G.A},
+ year = 1962,
+ title = {The Earliest Music Printers of Continental Europe: a Checklist of Facsimiles Illustrating Their Work},
+ address = {Charlottesville, Virginia},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Article{kinkeldey32,
+ author = {Kinkeldey, O},
+ year = 1932,
+ title = {Music And Music Printing in Incunabula},
+ journal = {Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America},
+ volume = {xxvi},
+ pages = {89-118},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{oldman34,
+ author = {Oldman, C.B},
+ year = 1934,
+ title = {Collecting Musical First Editions},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{carter34,
+ author = {Carter, J},
+ year = 1934,
+ title = {New Paths in Book Collecting},
+ address = {London},
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{krummel58,
+ author = {Krummel, D.W.},
+ year = 1958,
+ month = 9,
+ title = {Graphic Analysis in Application to Early American Engraved Music},
+ journal = {Notes},
+ volume = {xvi},
+ pages = 213,
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{krummel71,
+ author = {Krummel, D.W},
+ year = 1971,
+ title = {Oblong Format in Early Music Books},
+ journal = {The Library},
+ volume = {5th ser., xxvi},
+ pages = 312,
+ note = {subject: history of music printing and engraving},
+}
+
+@Book{king73,
+ author = {King, A.H},
+ year = 1973,
+ title = {The 50th Anniversary of Music Printing},
+}
+
+@Book{rastall82,
+ author = {Rastall, Richard},
+ year = 1982,
+ title = {The notation of Western music : an introduction},
+ address = {New York, N.Y.},
+ publisher = {St. Martin's Press},
+ note = {Musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{tappolet47,
+ author = {Tappolet, Willy},
+ year = 1947,
+ title = {La Notation Musicale},
+ address = {Paris},
+ note = {subject: general notation},
+ publisher = {Neuchâtel},
+}
+
+@Book{williams03,
+ author = {Williams, C.F. Abdy},
+ year = 1903,
+ title = {The Story of Notation},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Charles Scribner's Sons},
+ note = {subject: general notation},
+}
+
+@Book{apel53,
+ author = {Apel, Willi},
+ year = 1953,
+ title = {The notation of polyphonic music, 900-1600},
+ address = {Cambridge, Mass},
+ institution= {Mediaeval Academy of America},
+ note = {Musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{berger93,
+ author = {Berger, Anna Maria Busse},
+ year = 1993,
+ title = {Mensuration and proportion signs : origins and evolution},
+ address = {Oxford, England},
+ publisher = {Clarendon Press},
+ scnd_address = {New York},
+ scnd_publisher = {Oxford University Press},
+ note = {subject: early notation},
+}
+
+@Book{parrish57,
+ author = {Parrish, Carl},
+ year = 1957,
+ title = {The notation of medieval music},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Norton},
+ note = {Musical notation},
+}
+
+@Book{parrish46,
+ author = {Parrish, Carl},
+ year = 1946,
+ title = {The Notation of Medieval Music},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Carl Fischer, Inc.},
+ note = {subject: early notation},
+}
+
+@Book{patch49,
+ author = {Patch, Harry},
+ year = 1949,
+ title = {Genesis of a Music},
+ address = {Madison},
+ publisher = {University of Wisconsin Press},
+ note = {subject: early notation},
+}
+
+@Book{cage69,
+ author = {Cage, John},
+ year = 1969,
+ title = {Notations},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Something Else Press},
+ note = {Music, Manuscripts, Facsimiles.
+ Facsimiles of holographs from the Foundation for Contemporary
+ Performance Arts, with text by 269 composers, but rearranged using
+ chance operations.,V)},
+}
+
+@Book{gaburo77,
+ author = {Gaburo, Virginia},
+ year = 1977,
+ title = {Notation},
+ publisher = {Lingua Press},
+ address = {La Jolla, California},
+ note = {A Lecture about notation, new ideas about},
+}
+
+@Book{risatti75,
+ author = {Risatti, Howard},
+ year = 1975,
+ title = {New Music Vocabulary},
+ address = {Urbana, Illinois},
+ publisher = {University of Illinois Press},
+ note = {A Guide to Notational Signs for Contemporary Music},
+}
+
+@Book{cowell30,
+ author = {Cowell, Henry},
+ year = 1930,
+ title = {New Musical Resources},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Alfred A. Knopf, Inc.},
+ note = {subject: 20th century notation},
+}
+
+@Article{cowell27,
+ author = {Cowell, Henry},
+ year = 1927,
+ title = {Our Inadequate Notation},
+ journal = {Modern Music},
+ volume = 4,
+ number = 3,
+ note = {subject: 20th century notation},
+}
+
+@Book{bowers92,
+ author = {Bowers, Roger},
+ year = 1992,
+ title = {Music & Letters},
+ volume = 73,
+ number = 3,
+ month = {August},
+ pages = {347(52)},
+ note = {Some reflection upon notation and proportion in Monteverdi's mass and vespers},
+}
+
+@Book{brainard92,
+ author = {Brainard, Paul},
+ year = 1992,
+ title = {Current Musicology},
+ number = 50,
+ month = {July-Dec},
+ pages = {21(26)},
+ note = {Proportional notation in the music of Schutz and his contemporaries in the 17th Century},
+}
+
+@Book{monelle89,
+ author = {Monelle, Raymond},
+ year = 1989,
+ title = {Comparative Literature},
+ volume = 41,
+ number = 3,
+ month = {Summer},
+ pages = {252(18)},
+ note = {Music notation and the poetic foot},
+}
+
+@Book{pinegar93,
+ author = {Pinegar, Sandra},
+ year = 1993,
+ title = {Current Musicology},
+ number = 53,
+ month = {July},
+ pages = {99(10)},
+ note = {The seeds of notation and music paleography.},
+}
+
+@Book{smith90,
+ author = {Smith, Norman E},
+ year = 1990,
+ title = {Current Musicology},
+ number = {45-47},
+ month = {Jan-Dec},
+ pages = {283(22)},
+ note = {The notation of fractio modi.},
+}
+
+@Book{treitler92,
+ author = {Treitler, Leo},
+ year = 1992,
+ title = {The Journal of Musicology},
+ volume = 10,
+ number = 2,
+ month = {Spring},
+ pages = {131(61)},
+ note = {The unwritten and written transmission, of medieval chant
+ and the start-up of musical notation.
+ Notational practice developed in medieval music to address the written tradition for chant which interacted with the unwritten vocal tradition.},
+}
+
+@Book{west94,
+ author = {West, M.L},
+ year = 1994,
+ title = {Music & Letters},
+ volume = 75,
+ number = 2,
+ month = {May},
+ pages = {161(19)},
+ note = {The Babylonian musical notation and the Hurrian melodic texts.
+ A new way of deciphering the ancient Babylonian musical notation.}
+}
+
+@Book{brown86,
+ author = {Brown, Earle},
+ year = 1986,
+ title = {Musical Quarterly},
+ volume = 72,
+ month = {Spring},
+ pages = {180(22)},
+ note = {The notation and performance of new music.},
+}
+
+@Book{eggleston94,
+ author = {Eggleston, Suzanne},
+ year = 1994,
+ title = {Notes},
+ volume = 51,
+ number = 2,
+ month = {Dec},
+ pages = {657(7)},
+ journal= {New periodicals},
+ note = {A list of new music periodicals covering the period
+ Jun.-Dec. 1994. Includes aims, formats and a description of the
+ contents of each listed periodical. Includes Music Notation News},
+}
+
+@Book{fuller89,
+ author = {Fuller, David},
+ year = 1989,
+ title = {The Journal of Musicology},
+ volume =7,
+ number = 1,
+ month = {Winter},
+ pages = {21(8)},
+ note = {Notes and inegales unjoined: defending a definition. (written-out inequalities in music notation).}
+},
+
+@Book{jones90,
+ author = {Jones, David Evan},
+ year = 1990,
+ title = {Perspectives of New Music},
+ note = {Speech extrapolated. (includes notation)}
+}
+
+@Book{lependorf89,
+ author = {Lependorf, Jeffrey},
+ year = 1989,
+ journal= {Perspectives of New Music},
+ volume = 27,
+ title = {?},
+ number = 2,
+ month = {Summer},
+ pages = {232(20)},
+ note = {Contemporary notation for the shakuhachi: a primer for composers. (Tradition and Renewal in the Music of Japan)},
+}
+
+@Book{rastall93,
+ author = {Rastall, Richard},
+ year = 1993,
+ title = {Music & Letters},
+ volume =74,
+ number = 4,
+ month = {November},
+ pages = {639(2)},
+ note = {Equal Temperament Music Notation: The Ailler-Brennink
+ Chromatic Notation. Results and Conclusions of the Music Notation
+ Refor by the Chroma Foundation (book reviews).},
+}
+
+@Article{francois92,
+ author = {Francois, Jean-Charles},
+ journal = {Perspectives of New Music},
+ volume = {30},
+ number = {1},
+ month = {Winter},
+ pages = {6(15)},
+ year = {1992},
+ note = {subject: Modern music has outgrown notation. While the
+ computer is used to write down music with accuracy never
+ before achieved, the range of modern sounds has surpassed
+ the relevance of the computer...},
+ title = {Writing without representation, and unreadable notation.},
+}
+
+@Book{hamel89,
+ author = {Hamel, Keith A},
+ year = 1989,
+ journal = {Perspectives of New Music},
+ volume = 27,
+ number = 1,
+ month = {Winter},
+ pages = {70(14)},
+ title = {A design for music editing and printing software based
+on notational syntax},
+}
+
--- /dev/null
+%
+% title =The music notation with computer bibliography
+% author =Han-Wen Nienhuys
+%
+
+@String{CitH = {Computing and the Humanities}}
+@String{CMJ = {Computer Music Journal}}
+
+@Book{smith73,
+ year = {1973},
+ title = {Editing and Printing Music by Computer},
+ author = {Leland Smith},
+ totalentry = {Journal of Music Theory},
+ volume = {17},
+ pages = {292-309},
+ note = {Gourlay [gourlay86] writes: A discussion of Smith's
+music-printing system SCORE}
+}
+
+@Article{byrd74,
+ year = {1974},
+ title = {A System for Music Printing by Computer},
+ author = {Donald Byrd},
+ journal = {Computers and the Humanities},
+ volume = {8},
+ pages = {161-72},
+}
+
+@Article{ericson75,
+ author = {R. F. Ericson},
+ title = {The DARMS Project: A status report},
+ journal = {Computing in the humanities},
+ year = 1975,
+ volume = 9,
+ number = 6,
+ pages = {291--298},
+ note = {Gourlay [gourlay86] writes: A discussion of the design
+ and potential uses of the DARMS music-description language.}
+}
+
+% Gomberg
+@PhdThesis{gomberg75,
+ year = {1975},
+ title = {A Computer-Oriented System for Music Printing},
+ author = {David A. Gomberg},
+ school = {Washington University},
+}
+
+@Book{gomberg77,
+ title = {A Computer-oriented System for Music Printing},
+ author = {David A. Gomberg},
+ journal = CitH,
+ volume = {11},
+ month = {march},
+ year = {1977},
+ pages = {63-80},
+ note = {Gourlay [gourlay86] writes: "A discussion of the
+ problems of representing the conventions of musical notation in
+ computer algorithms."}
+}
+
+@TechReport{ornstein83,
+ author = {Ornstein, Severo M. and John Turner Maxwell III},
+ title = {Mockingbird: A Composer's Amanuensis},
+ institution = {Xerox Palo Alto Research Center},
+ address = {3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, CA, 94304},
+ number = {CSL-83-2},
+ month = {January},
+ year = {1983}
+}
+
+@Article{ornstein84,
+ author = {Ornstein, Severo M. and John Turner Maxwell III},
+ title = {Mockingbird: A Composer's Amanuensis},
+ journal = {Byte},
+ volume = 9,
+ month = {January},
+ year = { 1984},
+ note = {A discussion of an interactive and graphical computer system
+for music composition}
+}
+
+% byrd
+@PhdThesis{byrd85,
+ year = {1985},
+ title = {Music Notation by Computer},
+ author = {Donald Byrd},
+ school = {Indiana University},
+ note = {Describes the SMUT (sic) system for automated music printout.}
+}
+
+@InProceedings{assayaag86,
+ author = {G. Assayaag and D. Timis},
+ title = {A Toolbox for music notation},
+ booktitle = {Proceedings of the 1986 International Computer Music Conference},
+ year = 1986
+}
+
+@TechReport{roush88,
+ year = {1988},
+ title = {Music Formatting Guidelines},
+ author = {D. Roush},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-3/88-TR10},
+ institution = {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+ note = {Rules on formatting music formulated for use in
+ computers. Mainly distilled from [Ross] HWN},
+}
+
+@Article{byrd94,
+ author = {Donald Byrd},
+ title = {Music Notation Software and Intelligence},
+ journal = {Computer Music Journal},
+ year = 1994,
+ pages = {17--20},
+ volume = 18,
+ number = 1,
+ note = {Byrd (author of Nightingale) shows four problematic
+fragments of notation, and rants about notation programs that try to
+exhibit intelligent behaviour. HWN}
+}
+
+@Article{field-richards93,
+ author = {H.S. Field-Richards},
+ title = {Cadenza: A Music Description Language},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = 1993,
+ volume = 17,
+ number = 4,
+ note = {A description through examples of a music entry language.
+Apparently it has no formal semantics. There is also no
+implementation of notation convertor. HWN}
+}
+
+@Article{bielawa93,
+ author = {Herbert Bielawa},
+ title = {Review of Sibelius 7},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = {1993?},
+ note = {A raving review/tutorial of Sibelius 7 for Acorn. (And did
+they seriously program a RISC chip in ... assembler ?!) HWN}
+}
+
+@Article{sloan93,
+ author = {Donald Sloan},
+ title = {Aspects of Music Representation in HyTime/SMDL},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = 1993,
+ volume = 17,
+ number = 4,
+ note = {An introduction into HyTime and its score description variant
+SMDL. With a short example that is quite lengthy in SMDL}
+}
+
+@Article{wiggins93,
+ author = {Geraint Wiggins and Eduardo Miranda and Alaaaan Smaill and Mitch Harris},
+ title = {A Framework for the evaluation of music representation systems},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = 1993,
+ volume = 17,
+ number = 3,
+ note = {A categorisation of music representation systems (languages,
+OO systems etc) split into high level and low level expressiveness.
+The discussion of Charm and parallel processing for music
+representation is rather vague. HWN}
+}
+
+@Article{dannenberg93,
+ author = {Roger B. Dannenberg},
+ title = {Music Representation: Issues, Techniques, and Systems},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = 1993,
+ volume = 17,
+ number = 3,
+ url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.44.6067},
+ note = {This article points to some problems and solutions with music
+representation. HWN},
+}
+
+@Article{rothstein93,
+ author = {Joseph Rothstein},
+ title = {Review of Passport Designs' Encore Music Notation Software},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = {?},
+}
+
+@Article{belkin94,
+ author = {Alan Belkin},
+ title = {Macintosh Notation Software: Present and Future},
+ journal = CMJ,
+ year = 1994,
+ volume = 18,
+ number = 1,
+ note = {Some music notation systems are analysed for ease of use,
+ MIDI handling. The article ends with a plea for a standard notation
+ format. HWN},
+}
+
+@InProceedings{montel97,
+ author = {Dominique Montel},
+ title = {La gravure de la musique, lisibilité esthétique, respect de l'oevre},
+ booktitle = {Musique \& Notations},
+ year = 1997,
+ address= {Lyon},
+ editors = {Genevois \& Orlarey}
+}
+
+@Book{casr,
+ note = {Annual editions since 1985, many containing surveys of music typesetting technology. SP},
+ title = {Directory of Computer Assisted Research in Musicology},
+ author = {Walter B Hewlett and Eleanor Selfridge-Field},
+ totalentry = {Menlo Park, CA: Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities},
+}
+
+@Book{selfridge-field97,
+ title = {Beyond MIDI: the handbook of musical codes},
+ editor = {Eleanor Selfridge-Field},
+ publisher = {MIT Press},
+ year = 1997,
+ note = {A description of various music interchange formats.}
+}
+
+@InProceedings{hoos98,
+ title = {The GUIDO Music Notation Format---A Novel Approach
+for Adequately Representing Score-level Music},
+ author = {H. H. Hoos and K. A. Hamel and K. Renz and J. Kilian},
+ booktitle = {Proceedings of International Computer Music Conference},
+ year = 1998,
+ pages = {451--454},
+}
+
+@Article{blostein91,
+ note = {This paper provides an overview of the algorithm used in LIME
+ for spacing individual lines. HWN},
+ year = {1991},
+ title = {Justification of Printed Music},
+ author = {Dorothea Blostein and Lippold Haken},
+ journal = {Communications of the ACM},
+ volume = {J34},
+ number = {3},
+ month = {March},
+ pages = {88-99},
+}
+
+@Article{haken93,
+ year = {1993},
+ title = {The Tilia Music Representation: Extensibility, Abstraction, and Notation Contexts for the Lime Music Editor},
+ author = {Lippold Haken and Dorothea Blostein},
+ journal = {Computer Music Journal},
+ volume = {17},
+ number = {3},
+ pages = {43--58},
+}
+
+@Article{blostein94,
+ author = {Dorothea Blostein and Lippold Haken},
+ title = {The Lime Music Editor: A Diagram Editor Involving Complex
+ Translations},
+ journal = {Software Practice and Experience},
+ year = {1994},
+ volume = {24},
+ number = {3},
+ month = {march},
+ pages = {289--306},
+ note = {A description of various conversions, decisions and issues
+relating to this interactive editor HWN},
+}
+
+@InProceedings{haken95,
+ year = {1995},
+ title = {A New Algorithm for Horizontal Spacing of Printed Music},
+ author = {Lippold Haken and Dorothea Blostein},
+ booktitle = {International Computer Music Conference},
+ address = {Banff},
+ month= {Sept},
+ pages = {118-119},
+ note = {This describes an algorithm which uses springs between
+adjacent columns.},
+}
+
+@InProceedings{bouzaiene98,
+ author = {Nabil Bouzaiene and Loïc Le Gall and Emmanuel Saint-James},
+ title = {Une bibliothèque pour la notation musicale baroque},
+ booktitle = {EP '98},
+ year = 1998,
+ series = {LNCS},
+ note = {Describes ATYS, an extension to Berlioz, that can mimick
+ handwritten baroque style beams}
+}
+
+@InProceedings{balaban88,
+ author = {M. Balaban},
+ title = {A Music Workstation Based on Multiple Hierarchical Views of Music},
+ booktitle = {Proceedings of the 1988 International Computer Music Conference},
+ year = 1988,
+ address = {San Francisco},
+ organization = {International Computer Music Association}
+}
+
+%
+% MusiCopy
+%
+@TechReport{gourlay87-spacing,
+annote = {Algorithm for generating spacing in one line of (polyphonic) music, tailored for use with MusiCopy. LilyPond uses a variant of it.},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Spacing a Line of Music,},
+ author = {John S. Gourlay},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR35},
+ institution = {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+}
+
+@TechReport{parish87,
+ annote = {A brief overview of MusiCopy},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {MusiCopy: An automated Music Formatting System},
+ author = {Allen Parish and Wael A. Hegazy and John S. Gourlay and Dean K. Roush and F. Javier Sola},
+ totalentry = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR29},
+ institution = {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+}
+
+@TechReport{gourlay87-formatting,
+ note = {This paper discusses the development of algorithms for the
+formatting of musical scores (from abstract). It also appeared at
+PROTEXT III, Ireland 1986},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Computer Formatting of Music},
+ author = {John S. Gourlay and A. Parrish
+and D. Roush and F. Sola and Y. Tien},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-2/87-TR3},
+ institution = {Department of Computer and Information Science,
+The Ohio State University},
+}
+
+@TechReport{hegazy87,
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {On the Implementation of the MusiCopy Language Processor,},
+ author = {Wael A. Hegazy},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR34},
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+ note = {Describes the "parser" which converts MusiCopy MDL to
+ MusiCopy Simultaneities and columns.
+
+MDL is short for Music Description Language [gourlay86]. It
+accepts music descriptions that are organised into measures filled
+with voices, which are filled with notes. The measures can be arranged
+simultaneously or sequentially. To address the 2-dimensionality,
+almost all constructs in MDL must be labeled.
+
+MDL uses begin/end markers for attribute values and spanners.
+Rightfully the author concludes that MusiCopy must administrate a
+"state" variable containing both properties and current spanning symbols.
+
+MusiCopy attaches graphic information to the objects constructed in
+the input: the elements of the input are partially complete graphic
+objects.},
+}
+
+@TechReport{hegazy87-breaking-tr,
+ annote = {This generalizes \TeX's breaking algorithm to music. It also
+appeared in Document Manipulation and Typography, J.C. van Vliet (ed)
+1988},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Optimal line breaking in music},
+ author = {Wael A. Hegazy and John S. Gourlay},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-8/87-TR33},
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University,},
+}
+
+@InProceedings{hegazy88,
+ author = {Wael A. Hegazy and John S. Gourlay},
+ booktitle = {Proceedings of the International Conference on
+Electronic Publishing, Document Manipulation and Typography. Nice (France)},
+ month = {April},
+ year = 1988,
+ editor = {J. C. van Vliet},
+ publisher = {Cambridge University Press},
+ ISBN = {0-521-36294-6},
+ title = {Optimal line breaking in music},
+}
+
+@TechReport{roush87,
+ note = {User manual of MusiCopy.},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Using MusiCopy},
+ author = {Dean K. Roush},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-18/87-TR31},
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+}
+
+@TechReport{parrish87-simultaneities,
+ note = {This note discusses
+ placement of balls, stems, dots which occur at the same moment
+ ("Simultaneity")},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Computer Formatting of Musical Simultaneities,},
+ author = {A. Parrish and John S. Gourlay},
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR28},
+}
+
+@TechReport{sola87,
+ note = {Overview of a procedure for generating slurs},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Computer Design of Musical Slurs, Ties and Phrase Marks,},
+ author = {F. Sola},
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio State University},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR32},
+}
+
+@Article{gourlay86,
+ note = {This paper describes the MusiCopy musicsetting system and an input language to go with it.},
+ year = {1986},
+ title = {A language for music printing},
+ author = {John. S. Gourlay},
+ journal = {Communications of the ACM},
+ volume = {29},
+ number = {5},
+ pages = {388--401},
+}
+
+@TechReport{sola87-beams,
+ institution= {Department of Computer and Information Science, The Ohio
+State University},
+ note = {Calculating beam slopes HWN},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Design of Musical Beams,},
+ author = {F. Sola and D. Roush},
+ number = {OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR30},
+}
+
+@PhdThesis{page88,
+ note = {Don't ask Stephen for a copy. Write to the Bodleian Library, Oxford, or to the British Library, instead. SP},
+ year = {1988},
+ title = {Computer Tools for Music Information Retrieval},
+ author = {Stephen Dowland Page},
+ school = {Dissertation University of Oxford},
+}
+
+%
+% three part study by John Grøver
+@TechReport{grover89-symbols,
+ author = {John Grøver},
+ title = {A computer-oriented description of Music Notation. Part I. The Symbol Inventory},
+ institution = {Department of informatics, University of Oslo},
+ year = 1989,
+ number = 133,
+ note = {The goal of this series of reports is a full description of
+music formatting. As these largely depend on parameters of fonts, it
+starts with a verbose description of music symbols.
+
+The subject is treated backwards: from general rules of typesetting
+the author tries to extract dimensions for characters, whereas the
+rules of typesetting (in a particular font) follow from the dimensions
+of the symbols. His symbols do not match (the stringent) constraints
+formulated by eg. [wanske]},
+}
+
+@TechReport{grover89-twovoices,
+ author = {John Grøver},
+ title = {A computer-oriented description of Music Notation. Part II: Two Voice Sharing a Staff, Leger Line Rules, Dot Positioning},
+ institution = {Department of informatics, University of Oslo},
+ year = 1989,
+ number = 134,
+ note = {A lot rules for what is in the title are formulated. The
+descriptions are long and verbose. The verbosity shows that
+formulating specific rules is not the proper way to approach the
+problem. Instead, the formulated rules should follow from more
+general rules, similar to [parrish87-simultaneities]},
+}
+
+@TechReport{grover89-accidentals,
+ author = {John Grøver},
+ title = {A computer-oriented description of Music Notation. Part III: Accidental Positioning},
+ institution = {Department of informatics, University of Oslo},
+ year = 1989,
+ number = 135,
+ note = {Placement of accidentals crystallised in an enormous set of
+rules. Same remarks as for [grover89-twovoices] applies},
+}
+
+@PhdThesis{mueller90,
+ author = {Giovanni Müller},
+ title = {Interaktive Bearbeitung konventioneller Musiknotation},
+ school = {Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich},
+ year = 1990,
+ note = {This is about engraver-quality typesetting with computers. It
+accepts the axiom that notation is too difficult to generate
+automatically. The result is that a notation program should be a
+WYSIWYG editor that allows one to tweak everything.},
+}
+
+@MastersThesis{roelofs91,
+ note = {This dutch thesis describes a monophonic typesetting system,
+ and focuses on the breaking algorithm, which is taken from Hegazy &
+ Gourlay},
+ year = {1991},
+ title = {Een Geautomatiseerd Systeem voor het Afdrukken van Muziek},
+ author = {René Roelofs},
+ school= {Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam},
+ number= {45327},
+ translation = {``An automated system for printing music'' Master's Thesis Managerial Computer Science.},
+}
+
+@Article{filgueiras93,
+ year = {1993},
+ title = {Representation and manipulation of music documents in SceX},
+ author = {Miguel Filgueiras and José Paulo Leal},
+ journal = {Electronic Publishing},
+ volume = {6},
+ number= {4}, pages = {507--518},
+ url= {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.17.1480},
+}
+
+@Article{foxley87,
+ note = {A paper on a simple TROFF preprocessor to typeset music.},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Music --- A language for typesetting music scores},
+ author = {Eric Foxley},
+ journal = {Software --- Practice and Experience},
+ volume = {17},
+ number = {8},
+ pages = {485-502},
+}
+
+@Article{langston90,
+ note = {This paper deals with some command-line
+ tools for music editing and playback.},
+ year = {1990},
+ title = {Unix music tools at Bellcore},
+ author = {Peter S. Langston},
+ journal = {Software --- Practice and Experience},
+ volume = {20},
+ number= {S1},
+ pages = {47--61},
+}
+
+@Book{filgueiras96,
+ year = {1996},
+ title = {Implementing a Symbolic Music Processing System},
+ author = {Miguel Filgueiras},
+ totalentry = {LIACC, Universidade do Porto, 1996; submitted},
+}
+
+@Book{filgueiras,
+ title = {Some Music Typesetting Algorithms},
+ author = {Miguel Filgueiras},
+ totalentry = {Miguel Filgueiras. ``Some Music Typesetting Algorithms''. LIACC, Universidade do Porto, forthcoming},
+}
+
+@Article{colorado-web,
+ author = {Alyssa Lamb},
+ note = {Webpages about engraving (designed with finale
+users in mind) (sic) HWN},
+ institution = {The University of Colorado},
+ title = {The University of Colorado Music Engraving page},
+ HTML= {http://www.cc.colorado.edu/Dept/MU/Musicpress/},
+ year = {1996}
+}
+
+@Article{tablature-web,
+ note = {FAQ (with answers) about TAB, the ASCII variant of Tablature. HWN},
+ title = {how to read and write tab: a guide to tab notation},
+ author = {Howard Wright},
+ email= {Howard.Wright@ed.ac.uk},
+ url= {http://www.guitartabs.cc/tabfaq.shtml},
+}
+
+@Article{niff-web,
+ note = {Specs for NIFF, a reasonably comprehensive but binary
+ format for notation HWN},
+ year = {1995},
+ title = {NIFF6a Notation Interchange File Format},
+ author = {Cindy Grande},
+ publisher= {Grande Software Inc.},
+ HTML= {http://www.jtauber.com/music/encoding/niff/},
+ ftp = {ftp://blackbox.cartah.washington.edu}
+}
+
+@Article{smdl-web,
+ author = {International Organization for Standardization (ISO)},
+ title = {Information Technology - Document Description and Processing Languages - Standard Music Description Language (SMDL)},
+ pdf = {ftp://ftp.ornl.gov/pub/sgml/wg8/smdl/10743.pdf},
+ number = {ISO/IEC DIS 10743},
+ year = {1992},
+ annote = {SGML instance for describing music. Very comprehensive in music
+definition, but no support for notation / performance whatsoever (They
+basically say: "You can embed a NIFF or MIDI file")},
+}
+
+@Article{rader96,
+ note = {Describes a system called MusicEase, and explains that it
+ uses "constraints" (which go unexplained) to automatically position
+ various elements.},
+ html = {http://mesastate.edu/~grader/ieeeme.pdf},
+ year = {1996},
+ title = {Creating Printed Music Automatically},
+ author = {Gary M. Rader},
+ journal = {Computer},
+ volume = {29},
+ number= {6},
+ month= {June},
+ pages = {61--69},
+}
+
+@MastersThesis{gall97,
+ author = {Loïc Le Gall},
+ title = {Création d'une police adaptée à la notation musicale baroque},
+ school = {École Estienne},
+ year = 1997,
+}
+
+@TechReport{droettboom00,
+ author = {Michael Droettboom},
+ title = {Study of music Notation Description Languages},
+ year = 2000,
+ url = {http://www.music.mcgill.ca/~ich/research/omr/levy/format.pdf},
+ note = {GUIDO and lilypond compared. LilyPond wins on practical
+issues as usability and availability of tools, GUIDO wins on
+implementation simplicity.},
+}
+
+@PhdThesis{gieseking01,
+ author = {Martin Gieseking},
+ title = {Code-basierte Generierung interaktiver Notengraphik},
+ school = {Universität Osnabrück},
+ year = 2001,
+ isbn = {ISBN 3-923486-30-8}
+}
+
+@Book{hewlett01,
+ editor = {Walter B. Hewlett and Eleanor Selfridge-Field},
+ title = {The Virtual Score; representation, retrieval and restoration},
+ publisher = {MIT Press},
+ series = {Computing in Musicology},
+ year = 2001
+}
+
+@PhdThesis{renz02,
+ author = {Kai Renz},
+ title = {Algorithms and data structures for a music notation system based on GUIDO music notation},
+ school = {Universität Darmstadt},
+ year = 2002
+}
+
+@InBook{powell02,
+ author = {Steven Powell},
+ title = {Music engraving today},
+ publisher = {Brichtmark},
+ year = 2002,
+ note = {A "How Steven uses Finale" manual.}
+}
+
+@InProceedings{nienhuys03,
+ author = {Han-Wen Nienhuys and Jan Nieuwenhuizen},
+ title = {LilyPond, a system for automated music engraving},
+ booktitle = {XIV Colloquium on Musical Informatics},
+ year = 2003,
+ pages = {167--172},
+ address = {Firenze},
+ month = {May}
+}
--- /dev/null
+@c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+
+@ignore
+ Translation of GIT committish: e5d3fb33ceaec6d10e06af0c667e4e982a0028ce
+
+ When revising a translation, copy the HEAD committish of the
+ version that you are working on. For details, see the Contributors'
+ Guide, node Updating translation committishes..
+@end ignore
+
+@c \version "2.19.2"
+
+@node A kottaszedés
+@chapter A kottaszedés
+@translationof Music engraving
+
+Ez az esszé leírja, miért született a LilyPond, és hogyan képes ilyen gyönyörű kottákat előállítani.
+
+
+@c TODO:
+@c remove 3mm eps bounding box left padding for Sarabande (This will
+@c require adding a new snippet option to lilypond-book.py
+@c check formatting of HTML output
+
+@menu
+* A LilyPond története::
+* A kottaszedés fortélyai::
+* Automated engraving::
+* Building software::
+* Putting LilyPond to work::
+* Engraved examples (BWV 861)::
+@end menu
+
+@node A LilyPond története
+@section A LilyPond története
+@translationof The LilyPond story
+
+Mielőtt a LilyPondot koncerteken használt csodaszép kották szedésére kezdtük volna használni, mielőtt zenetudományi dokumentumok zenei idézeteit vagy akár egyszerű dallamokat le lehetett volna vele kottázni, mielőtt szerte a világon a felhasználók széles körben kezdték volna használni, vagy ez az esszé megszületett volna, a LilyPond története egy kérdéssel kezdődött:
+
+@quotation
+Miért nem adják vissza a számítógép által szedett kották a kézzel szedett kották szépségét és kiegyensúlyozottságát?
+@end quotation
+
+@noindent
+Erre többnyire választ kaphatunk, ha górcső alá vesszük a következő két kottát. Az első példa egy gondosan kézzel szedett kotta 1950-ből, a második egy modern, számítógéppel szedett kiadás.
+
+@ifnottex
+@quotation
+@noindent
+Bärenreiter BA 320, @copyright{}1950:
+
+@sourceimage{baer-suite1-fullpage,,,png}
+@end quotation
+
+@quotation
+@noindent
+Henle no. 666, @copyright{}2000:
+
+@sourceimage{henle-suite1-fullpage,,,png}
+@end quotation
+@end ifnottex
+
+J. S. Bach első, csellóra írt szólószvitjének két kiadása hangról hangra megegyezik, mégis megjelenésükben merőben különbözőek, különösen, ha kinyomtatjuk és megszokott távolságból szemléljük őket. Próbáljuk meg mindkét kottapéldát elolvasni, illetve játszani belőlük, és meg fogjuk állapítani, hogy a kézzel szedett kotta használata kellemesebb. Folyékonysága és dinamikája egy élő, lélegző zenemű érzetét kelti, miközben az újabb kiadás hidegnek és mechanikusnak hat.
+
+Nehéz egyből észrevenni, miben rejlik a különbség a kották között. Az új kotta első ránézésre rendezett és pontos, talán még „jobb” is, mivel számítógéphez illőbb és egységes a megjelenése. Ez gondolkodóba ejtett minket egy időre. Javítani akartunk a számítógép által szedett kottaképen, de ehhez előbb rá kellett jönnünk, mi volt a gond vele.
+
+A válasz az új kotta precíz, matematikai pontosságú egyformaságában rejlik. Keressük csak meg minden sor közepén az ütemvonalakat: a kézzel szedett változatban az ütemvonalak elhelyezkedése természetes módon változik, míg a számítógép szinte pontosan egymás alá, középre szedte őket. Ezt mutatja be a következő egyszerűsített ábra, melyen a kézzel (balra), ill. a komputerrel szedett változat (jobbra) elrendezése látható:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/page-layout-comparison,,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{page-layout-comparison,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+@noindent
+
+A számítógép által előállított szedésben még az egyes kottafejek is függőlegesen egymáshoz lettek igazítva, ami azt az érzetet kelti, mintha a dallamvonal eltűnne egy szimbólumokból álló merev rács mögött.
+
+További különbségek is vannak: a kézzel szedett változat függőleges vonalai erősebbek, a kötőívek szorosabban tapadnak a kottafejekhez, és a gerendák szögeiben is nagyobb változatosság figyelhető meg. Noha az ilyen részletes elemzés szőrszálhasogatásnak tűnhet, végeredménye egy olyan kotta, ami egyszerűbben olvasható. A számítógépes kottában minden sor szinte egyforma, és ha a zenész egy pillanatra máshová tekint, hamar elveszítheti a tájékozódást az oldalon.
+
+A LilyPond megalkotásának célja az volt, hogy kiküszöböljük a többi kottaszedő szoftver szépséghibáit, és segítségével olyan kottákat lehessen előállítani, melyek szépsége a legigényesebb kézzel szedett kottákéval vetélkedik.
+
+@iftex
+@page
+@noindent
+Bärenreiter BA 320, @copyright{}1950:
+
+@sourceimage{baer-suite1-fullpage-hires,16cm,,}
+@page
+@noindent
+Henle no. 666, @copyright{}2000:
+@sp 3
+@sourceimage{henle-suite1-fullpage-hires,16cm,,}
+@page
+@end iftex
+
+@node A kottaszedés fortélyai
+@section A kottaszedés fortélyai
+@translationof Engraving details
+
+@cindex engraving
+@cindex typography, music
+@cindex music typography
+@cindex plate engraving
+@cindex music engraving
+
+A zeneművek nyomdai előkészítését @emph{kottaszedésnek} nevezik. Ez a kifejezés a kották nyomtatásának hagyományos, kézi módszerére utal.@footnote{A régi idők nyomdászai különböző technikákat próbáltak ki, mint például a kézzel metszett fa nyomóformák (nyomódúc), a mozgatható betű- és nyomóelemek, illetve a gravírozott vékony fémlemezek. A mozgatható betű- és nyomóelemekkel való szedésnek megvolt az az előnye, hogy gyorsan bele lehetett javítani és egyszerűen lehetett szöveget is beleilleszteni. De csak a fémlemezre végzett hangjegymetszés tette lehetővé a hibátlan elrendezést és az új kottaelemek gyors bevezetését. Végül ez utóbbi technika lett a szabvány, és még a 20. század elején is ez volt a helyzet, pár korálkönyv és daloskönyv kivételével, ahol a sablonelemek használatát annak gazdaságossága és gyorsasága indokolta.} Ez a folyamat még a 20. században első felében is úgy nézett ki, hogy a kotta elemeit kivágták, majd tükrözve belemélyesztették egy cink- vagy ónlemezbe. A lemezre ezután festéket hordtak fel, és a festék a bemélyedésekben maradt. A lemez a papírra rányomva a kotta képét adta. A metszést teljesen kézzel végezték, és bárminemű javítás nagyon körülményes volt, így a kottakép elsőre tökéletes kellett, hogy legyen. A kottaszedés tudománya nagyon különleges szakma, ahol a kézművesnek körülbelül öt éves képzést kellett elvégeznie, mielőtt a mester címet kérvényezhette. További öt év volt szükséges ahhoz, hogy a szakma minden csínját-bínját valóban magáénak tudhassa.
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{hader-slaan,,7cm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{hader-slaan,,,jpg}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+A LilyPond megalkotását azok a kézzel szedett kották inspirálták, amelyeket a 20. század közepe felé az európai kottakiadók (többek között Bärenreiter, Duhem, Durand, Hofmeister, Peters és Schott) hoztak forgalomba. Munkásságukat bizonyos szempontból a hagyományos kottaszedés csúcsának lehet tekinteni. Kiadványaik tanulmányozásával rengeteget tanultunk arról, mik az ismertetőjelei egy szép tipográfiájú kottának, és milyen szempontokat szeretnénk a LilyPonddal utánozni.
+
+@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 mechanical look, which makes them unpleasant to play from.
+
+@menu
+* A kottában használt betűtípusok::
+* Optical spacing::
+* Ledger lines::
+* Optical sizing::
+* Why work so hard?::
+@end menu
+
+@node A kottában használt betűtípusok
+@unnumberedsubsec A kottában használt betűtípusok
+@translationof Music fonts
+
+A lenti ábra jól mutatja a különbséget egy hagyományosan és egy számítógép által szedett kottaelem közt. A bal oldali képen egy beszkennelt b módosítójel látható egy kézi Bärenreiter kiadásból, míg a jobb oldali ugyanennek a zeneműnek 2000-ben kiadott változatából származik. Noha mindkét képet ugyanolyan árnyalatú tintával nyomtatták, a régebbi verzió sötétebb: a kottasorok vonalai vastagabbak, és a Bärenreiter b-je gömbölyded, majdhogynem érzékien kerek. A jobb oldali kép vonalai ezzel szemben vékonyabbak, elrendezése szögletes, sarkai élesek.
+
+@multitable @columnfractions .25 .25 .25 .25
+@item @tab
+@ifnotinfo
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{baer-flat-gray,,4cm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{baer-flat-gray,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@tab
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{henle-flat-gray,,4cm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{henle-flat-gray,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@end ifnotinfo
+@ifinfo
+@sourceimage{henle-flat-bw,,,png}
+@sourceimage{baer-flat-bw,,,png}
+@sourceimage{lily-flat-bw,,,png}
+@end ifinfo
+
+
+@item @tab
+Bärenreiter (1950)
+@tab
+Henle (2000)
+
+@end multitable
+
+@cindex musical symbols
+@cindex font
+@cindex blackness
+@cindex balance
+
+Amikor úgy döntöttük, hogy írunk egy kottaszedő programot, nem volt olyan, szabad felhasználású zenei betűtípus, ami jól passzolt volna kedvenc kottáink elegáns kottaképéhez. Ezen felbuzdulva megalkottunk egy zenei szimbólumokból álló betűtípust, amely a kézzel szedett kották szemrevaló kinézetét veszi alapul. A betűtípus megtervezése során szerzett tapasztalatok nélkül soha nem ismertük volna fel, milyen csúnyák is azok a betűtípusok, amiket eleinte csodáltunk.
+
+Lent két zenei betűkészletre láthatunk példát: a felső a Sibelius alapbeállítású készlete (@emph{Opus}), az alsó a LilyPondé.
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/OpusAndFeta,,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{OpusAndFeta,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+A LilyPond kottaelemei vastagabbak, valamint vastagságuk konzisztensebb, ami miatt jóval egyszerűbb az olvasásuk. A vonalaknak, mint például a negyed szünet szárnyai, nem hegyes végük van, hanem finoman legömbölyített. Ennek oka, hogy a hegyes végek a hagyományos nyomóformán nagyon törékenyek, és a használat közben gyorsan elkopnak. Összefoglalva, a jelkészlet teltségét gondosan össze kell hangolni a vonalak (gerendák, ívek) vastagságával, hogy erős, mégis kiegyensúlyozott összképet kapjunk.
+
+Vegyük észre továbbá, hogy a félkotta feje nem ellipszis, hanem enyhén rombusz alakú. A b módosítójel függőleges szára felfelé némileg kiszélesedik. A keresztet és a feloldójelet egyszerűbb távolról megkülönböztetni, mert ferde vonalaiknak eltérő a dőlésszöge, illetve függőleges vonalaik különböző vastagságúak.
+
+@node Optical spacing
+@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
+scores adhere to the durations with mathematical precision, which leads
+to poor results. In the next example a motif is printed twice: the
+first time using exact mathematical spacing, and the second with
+corrections. Which do you prefer?
+
+@cindex optical spacing
+
+@lilypond
+\paper {
+ ragged-right = ##t
+ indent = #0.0
+}
+
+music = {
+ c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4
+ \stemDown
+ b'8[ e'' a' e'']
+ \stemNeutral
+ e'8[ e'8 e'8 e'8]
+}
+\score
+{
+ \music
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \override NoteSpacing.stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
+ \override NoteSpacing.same-direction-correction = #0.0
+ \override StaffSpacing.stem-spacing-correction = #0.0
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@lilypond
+\paper {
+ ragged-right = ##t
+ indent = #0.0
+}
+
+music = {
+ c'4 e''4 e'4 b'4 |
+ \stemDown
+ b'8[ e'' a' e'']
+ \stemNeutral
+ e'8[ e'8 e'8 e'8]
+}
+
+\score
+{
+ \music
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \override NoteSpacing.stem-spacing-correction = #0.6
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@cindex regular rhythms
+@cindex regular 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
+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
+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,
+the upper two measures, however, form down-stem/@/up-stem clumps of
+notes. A master engraver would adjust the spacing as needed to please
+the eye.
+
+The spacing algorithms in LilyPond even take the barlines into account,
+which is why the final up-stem in the properly spaced example has been
+given a little more space before the barline to keep it from looking
+crowded. A down-stem would not need this adjustment.
+
+@node Ledger lines
+@unnumberedsubsec Ledger lines
+
+@cindex ledger lines
+@cindex collisions
+
+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
+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.
+
+@multitable @columnfractions .25 .25 .25 .25
+@item @tab
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{baer-ledger,3cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{baer-ledger,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@tab
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{lily-ledger,3cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{lily-ledger,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@end multitable
+
+
+@node Optical sizing
+@unnumberedsubsec Optical sizing
+
+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
+scaled to any size, which is very convenient, but at the smaller sizes
+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
+26:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/size26,,23mm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{size26,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+@noindent
+and this is the same engraving set at staff size 11, then
+magnified by 236% to print at the same size as the previous example:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/size11,,23mm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{size11,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+@noindent
+At smaller sizes, LilyPond uses proportionally heavier lines so the
+music will still read well.
+
+This also allows staves of different sizes to coexist peacefully when
+used together on the same page:
+
+@c Grieg's Violin Sonata Op. 45
+@lilypond[indent=1.5\cm]
+global = {
+ \time 6/8
+ \key c \minor
+}
+
+\score {
+ <<
+ \new Staff \with {
+ \magnifyStaff #2/3
+ }
+ \relative c' {
+ \global
+ \set Staff.instrumentName = #"Violin"
+ c8.(\f^> b16 c d) ees8.(^> d16 c b)
+ g8.(^> b16 c ees) g8-.^> r r
+ R2.
+ }
+ \new PianoStaff <<
+ \set PianoStaff.instrumentName = #"Piano"
+ \new Staff \relative c' {
+ \global
+ s2.
+ s4. s8 r8 r16 <c f aes c>
+ <c f aes c>4.^> <c ees g>8 r r
+ }
+ \new Staff \relative c {
+ \global
+ \clef "bass"
+ <<
+ {
+ \once \override DynamicText.X-offset = #-3
+ <ees g c>2.~->^\f
+ <ees g c>4.~ <ees g c>8
+ } \\ {
+ <c g c,>2.~
+ <c g c,>4.~ <c g c,>8
+ }
+ >>
+ r8 r16 <f, c' aes'>16
+ <f c' aes'>4.-> <c' g'>8 r r
+ }
+ >>
+ >>
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+
+@node Why work so hard?
+@unnumberedsubsec Why work so hard?
+
+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:
+everything is done to aid the musician in letting her perform better,
+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
+distribution of white space allows music to be set very tightly without
+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,
+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,
+better typography translates to better performances.
+
+These examples demonstrate that music typography is an art that is
+subtle and complex, and that producing it requires considerable
+expertise, which musicians usually do not have. LilyPond is our
+effort to bring the graphical excellence of hand-engraved music to
+the computer age, and make it available to normal musicians. We
+have tuned our algorithms, font-designs, and program settings to
+produce prints that match the quality of the old editions we love
+to see and love to play from.
+
+
+@node Automated engraving
+@section Automated engraving
+
+@cindex engraving, automated
+@cindex automated engraving
+
+Here we describe what is required to create software that can mimic the
+layout of engraved scores: a method of describing good layouts to the
+computer and a lot of detailed comparisons with real engravings.
+
+@menu
+* Beauty contests::
+* Improvement by benchmarking::
+* Getting things right::
+@end menu
+
+@node Beauty contests
+@unnumberedsubsec Beauty contests
+
+How do we actually make formatting decisions? In other words, which
+of the three configurations should we choose for the following slur?
+
+@lilypond
+\relative c {
+ \clef bass
+ \once \override Slur.positions = #'(1.5 . 1)
+ e8[( f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+ \once \override Slur.positions = #'(2 . 3)
+ e8[( f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+ e8[( f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+There are a few books on the art of music engraving
+available. Unfortunately, they contain simple rules of thumb 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
+hand-coded exceptions. Doing all this case analysis is a lot of work,
+and often not all cases are covered completely:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{ross-beam-scan,7cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{ross-beam-scan,,,.jpg}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+(Image source: Ted Ross, @emph{The Art of Music Engraving})
+
+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,
+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 @q{ugly points}. The first example gets
+15.39 points for grazing one of the noteheads:
+
+@lilypond
+\relative c {
+ \clef bass
+ \once \override Slur.positions = #'(1.5 . 1)
+ e8[(_"15.39" f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+The
+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 ugly points:
+
+@lilypond
+\relative c {
+ \clef bass
+ \once \override Slur.positions = #'(2 . 3)
+ e8[(_"13.08" f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+The final slur gets 10.04
+points for the gap on the right and 2 points for the upward slope, but
+it is the most attractive of the three configurations, so LilyPond
+selects this one:
+
+@lilypond
+\relative c {
+ \clef bass
+ e8[(_"12.04" f] g[ a b d,)] r4
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+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
+real engravings.
+
+@node Improvement by benchmarking
+@unnumberedsubsec Improvement by benchmarking
+
+LilyPond's output has improved gradually over time, and it continues to
+improve by comparing its output to hand-engraved scores.
+
+For example, here is one line of a benchmark piece from a
+hand-engraved edition (Bärenreiter BA320):
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{baer-sarabande-hires,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{baer-sarabande,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent
+and the same quotation as engraved by a very old version of LilyPond
+(version 1.4, May 2001):
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/lily14-sarabande,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{lily14-sarabande,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent The LilyPond 1.4 output is certainly readable, but close
+comparison with the hand-engraved score showed a lot of errors in the
+formatting details:
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{lily14-sarabande-annotated-hires,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{lily14-sarabande-annotated,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@itemize @bullet
+@item there is too much space before the time signature
+@item the stems of the beamed notes are too long
+@item the second and fourth measures are too narrow
+@item the slur is awkward-looking
+@item the trill marks are too big
+@item the stems are too thin
+@end itemize
+
+@noindent
+(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
+from the current version of LilyPond (@version{}):
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{baer-sarabande-hires,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{baer-sarabande,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@lilypond[staffsize=17.5,line-width=15.9\cm]
+\relative c {
+ \clef "bass"
+ \key d \minor
+ \time 3/4
+ \mergeDifferentlyDottedOn
+ <<
+ { \slurDashed d8.-\flageolet( e16) e4.-\trill( d16 e) }
+ \\
+ { d4_2 a2 }
+ >>
+ \slurDashed
+ <f' a, d,>4. e8( d c)
+ \slurSolid
+ bes8 g' f e16( f g_1 a_2 bes_3 d,_2)
+ \slurDashed
+ cis4.-\trill b8_3( a g)
+ <<
+ { \slurDashed d'8.( e16) e4.-\trill( d16 e) }
+ \\
+ { <f, a>4 a2 }
+ >>
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+The current output is not a clone of the reference edition, but it is
+much closer to publication quality that the earlier output.
+
+@node Getting things right
+@unnumberedsubsec Getting things right
+
+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 score writers, particularly
+in North America. Sibelius is its major rival and appears to be
+especially strong in the European market.
+
+For our comparison we selected Bach's Fugue in G minor from the
+Well-Tempered Clavier, Book I, BWV 861, whose opening subject is
+
+@lilypond
+\relative c' {
+ \key g \minor
+ \clef "treble_8"
+ r8 d ees g, fis4 g
+ r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a bes8
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@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
+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
+any adjustments to the default output because we are trying to show the
+things that each software package gets right without assistance. The
+only major edits that we made were adjusting the page size to match this
+essay and forcing the music onto two systems to make the comparison
+easier. By default Finale would have engraved two systems of three
+measures each and a final, full-width system containing a single
+measure.
+
+Many of the differences between the two engravings are visible in
+measures 28--29, as shown here with Finale first and LilyPond second:
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/bwv861mm28-29,14cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861mm28-29,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@lilypond[staffsize=19.5,line-width=14\cm]
+global = { \key g \minor }
+
+partI = \relative c' {
+ \voiceOne
+ fis8 d' ees g, fis4 g
+ r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a d8 r r4
+}
+
+partII = \relative c' {
+ \voiceTwo
+ d4 r4 r8 d'16 c bes8 c16 d
+ ees8 d c ees a, r r4
+}
+
+partIII = \relative c' {
+ \voiceOne
+ r2 r8 d ees g, fis4 g r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a
+}
+
+partIV = \relative c {
+ \voiceTwo
+ d4 r r2
+ r8 d ees g, fis4 a
+}
+
+\score {
+ <<
+ % \set Score.barNumberVisibility = #all-bar-numbers-visible
+ % required in 2.13
+ \set Score.currentBarNumber = #28
+ \bar ""
+ \new PianoStaff <<
+ \new Staff = "RH" <<
+ \global
+ \new Voice = "voiceI" { \partI }
+ \new Voice = "voiceII" { \partII }
+ >>
+ \new Staff = "LH"
+ <<
+ \clef "bass"
+ \global
+ \new Voice = "voiceIII" { \partIII }
+ \new Voice = "voiceIV" { \partIV }
+ >>
+ >>
+ >>
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \PianoStaff
+ \override StaffGrouper.staff-staff-spacing.padding = #1
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+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
+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 easily be improved
+with their Patterson Beams plug-in, but we elected to skip that step for
+this example.
+@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:
+
+@lilypond
+collide = \once \override NoteColumn.force-hshift = #0
+
+\score {
+ <<
+ \new Voice = "sample" \relative c''{
+ \key g \minor
+ <<
+ { \voiceOne g4 \collide g4 }
+ \new Voice { \voiceTwo bes \collide bes }
+ >>
+ }
+ \new Lyrics \lyricsto "sample" { "good " " bad" }
+ >>
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@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 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 than Finale does.
+
+@end itemize
+
+This example is not intended to suggest that Finale cannot be used to
+produce publication-quality 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
+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.
+
+One particularly glaring omission we found from Finale is a missing flat
+in measure 33:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/bwv861mm33-34-annotate,7.93cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861mm33-34-annotate,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+@noindent
+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.
+So in addition to running a beaming plug-in and checking the spacing on
+the noteheads and rests, the user must also check each measure for
+cross-voice accidentals to avoid interrupting a rehearsal over 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 along
+with four different published engravings. Close examination reveals that
+there is some acceptable variation among the hand-engravings, but that
+LilyPond compares reasonably well to that acceptable range. There are
+still some shortcomings in the LilyPond output, for example, it appears
+a bit too 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
+of years, the software can be refined to do more and more things
+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 Building software
+@section Building software
+
+This section describes some of the programming decisions that we made
+when designing LilyPond.
+
+@menu
+* Music representation::
+* What symbols to engrave?::
+* Flexible architecture::
+@end menu
+
+
+@node Music representation
+@unnumberedsubsec Music representation
+
+@cindex syntax
+@cindex recursive structures
+
+Ideally, the input format for any high-level formatting system is
+an abstract description of the content. In this case, that would
+be the music itself. This poses a formidable problem: how can we
+define what music really is? Instead of trying to find an answer,
+we have reversed the question. We write a program capable of
+producing sheet music, and adjust the format to be as lean as
+possible. When the format can no longer be trimmed down, by
+definition we are left with content itself. Our program serves as
+a formal definition of a music document.
+
+The syntax is also the user-interface for LilyPond, hence it is
+easy to type:
+
+@example
+@{
+ c'4 d'8
+@}
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+to create a quarter note on middle C (C1) and an eighth note on
+the D above middle C (D1).
+
+@lilypond[quote]
+{
+ c'4 d'8
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+On a microscopic scale, such syntax is easy to use. On a larger
+scale, syntax also needs structure. How else can you enter
+complex pieces like symphonies and operas? The structure is
+formed by the concept of music expressions: by combining small
+fragments of music into larger ones, more complex music can be
+expressed. For example
+
+@lilypond[quote,verbatim,fragment,relative=1]
+f4
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+Simultaneous notes can be constructed by enclosing them with
+@code{<<} and @code{>>}:
+
+@example
+<<c4 d4 e4>>
+@end example
+
+@lilypond[quote,fragment,relative=1]
+\new Voice { <<c4 d4 e>> }
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+This expression is put in sequence by enclosing it in curly braces
+@code{@{@tie{}@dots{}@tie{}@}}:
+
+@example
+@{ f4 <<c4 d4 e4>> @}
+@end example
+
+@lilypond[quote,relative=1,fragment]
+{ f4 <<c d e4>> }
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+The above is also an expression, and so it may be combined again
+with another simultaneous expression (a half note) using
+@code{<<}, @code{\\}, and @code{>>}:
+
+@example
+<< g2 \\ @{ f4 <<c4 d4 e4>> @} >>
+@end example
+
+@lilypond[quote,fragment,relative=2]
+\new Voice { << g2 \\ { f4 <<c d e>> } >> }
+@end lilypond
+
+Such recursive structures can be specified neatly and formally in
+a context-free grammar. The parsing code is also generated from
+this grammar. In other words, the syntax of LilyPond is clearly
+and unambiguously defined.
+
+User-interfaces and syntax are what people see and deal with most.
+They are partly a matter of taste, and also the subject of much
+discussion. Although discussions on taste do have their merit,
+they are not very productive. In the larger picture of LilyPond,
+the importance of input syntax is small: inventing neat syntax is
+easy, while writing decent formatting code is much harder. This
+is also illustrated by the line-counts for the respective
+components: parsing and representation take up less than 10% of
+the source code.
+
+When designing the structures used in LilyPond, we made some different
+decisions than are apparent in other software. Consider the hierarchical
+nature of music notation:
+
+@lilypond[quote,fragment]
+<<
+ \new Staff \relative c'' {
+ \key g \major
+ \time 3/4
+ d4 g,8 a b c d4 g, g
+ }
+ \new Staff \relative c' {
+ \clef "bass"
+ \key g \major
+ <g b d>2 a4 b2.
+ }
+>>
+@end lilypond
+
+In this case, there are pitches grouped into chords that belong to
+measures, which belong to staves. This resembles a tidy structure of
+nested boxes:
+
+@quotation
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/nestedboxes,,4cm,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{nestedboxes,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+@end quotation
+
+Unfortunately, the structure is tidy because it is based on some
+excessively restrictive assumptions. This becomes apparent if we
+consider a more complicated musical example:
+
+@lilypond[quote]
+\layout {
+ \context {
+ \Score
+ \remove "Timing_translator"
+ \remove "Default_bar_line_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \consists "Timing_translator"
+ \consists "Default_bar_line_engraver"
+ }
+}
+
+\new PianoStaff <<
+ \new Staff = "RH" <<
+ \new Voice = "I" \relative c''' {
+ \time 3/4
+ \voiceOne
+ \tuplet 7/6 { g8 g g g g g g }
+ \oneVoice
+ r4 <b,, fis' g bes> r4\fermata
+ }
+ \new Voice = "II" \relative c' {
+ \voiceTwo
+ c4
+ \tuplet 5/4 {
+ <c ees>8 f g
+ \change Staff = "LH" \oneVoice
+ \stemUp g,( c}
+ r4
+ \override Stem.cross-staff = ##t
+ \override Stem.length = #12
+ <fis, b>) r\fermata
+ }
+ >>
+ \new Staff = "LH" <<
+ \new Voice = "III" \relative c' {
+ \time 2/4
+ \clef "bass"
+ g4 \stopStaff s
+ \startStaff s2*2
+ }
+ >>
+>>
+@end lilypond
+
+In this example, staves start and stop at will, voices jump around
+between staves, and the staves have different time signatures. Many
+software packages would struggle with reproducing this example because
+they are built on the nested box structure. With LilyPond, on the other
+hand, we have tried to keep the input format and the structure as
+flexible as possible.
+
+@node What symbols to engrave?
+@unnumberedsubsec What symbols to engrave?
+
+@cindex engraving
+@cindex typography
+@cindex engraver
+@cindex plug-in
+
+The formatting process decides where to place symbols. However,
+this can only be done once it is decided @emph{what} symbols
+should be printed -- in other words, what notation to use.
+
+Common music notation is a system of recording music that has
+evolved over the past 1000 years. The form that is now in common
+use dates from the early Renaissance. Although the basic form
+(i.e., note heads on a 5-line staff) has not changed, the details
+still evolve to express the innovations of contemporary notation.
+Hence, common music notation encompasses some 500 years of music.
+Its applications range from monophonic melodies to monstrous
+counterpoints for a large orchestra.
+
+How can we get a grip on such a seven-headed beast, and force it
+into the confines of a computer program? Our solution is to break
+up the problem of notation (as opposed to engraving, i.e.,
+typography) into digestible and programmable chunks: every type of
+symbol is handled by a separate module, a so-called plug-in. Each
+plug-in is completely modular and independent, so each can be
+developed and improved separately. Such plug-ins are called
+@code{engraver}s, by analogy with craftsmen who translate musical
+ideas to graphic symbols.
+
+In the following example, we start out with a plug-in for note
+heads, the @code{Note_heads_engraver}.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+
+\score {
+ \topVoice
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Voice
+ \remove "Stem_engraver"
+ \remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Script_engraver"
+ \remove "New_fingering_engraver"
+ \remove "Beam_engraver"
+ \remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Accidental_engraver"
+ \remove "Key_engraver"
+ \remove "Clef_engraver"
+ \remove "Bar_engraver"
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ \remove "Staff_symbol_engraver"
+ \consists "Pitch_squash_engraver"
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+Then a @code{Staff_symbol_engraver} adds the staff,
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+
+\score {
+ \topVoice
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Voice
+ \remove "Stem_engraver"
+ \remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Script_engraver"
+ \remove "New_fingering_engraver"
+ \remove "Beam_engraver"
+ \remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Accidental_engraver"
+ \remove "Key_engraver"
+ \remove "Clef_engraver"
+ \remove "Bar_engraver"
+ \consists "Pitch_squash_engraver"
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+the @code{Clef_engraver} defines a reference point for the staff,
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+
+\score {
+ \topVoice
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Voice
+ \remove "Stem_engraver"
+ \remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Script_engraver"
+ \remove "New_fingering_engraver"
+ \remove "Beam_engraver"
+ \remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Accidental_engraver"
+ \remove "Key_engraver"
+ \remove "Bar_engraver"
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+and the @code{Stem_engraver} adds stems.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+
+\score {
+ \topVoice
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Voice
+ \remove "Phrasing_slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Slur_engraver"
+ \remove "Script_engraver"
+ \remove "New_fingering_engraver"
+ \remove "Beam_engraver"
+ \remove "Auto_beam_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Accidental_engraver"
+ \remove "Key_engraver"
+ \remove "Bar_engraver"
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+The @code{Stem_engraver} is notified of any note head coming
+along. Every time one (or more, for a chord) note head is seen, a
+stem object is created and connected to the note head. By adding
+engravers for beams, slurs, accents, accidentals, bar lines, time
+signature, and key signature, we get a complete piece of notation.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+\score { \topVoice }
+@end lilypond
+
+@cindex polyphony
+@cindex engraving multiple voices
+@cindex contexts
+
+This system works well for monophonic music, but what about
+polyphony? In polyphonic notation, many voices can share a staff.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+\new Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >>
+@end lilypond
+
+In this situation, the accidentals and staff are shared, but the
+stems, slurs, beams, etc., are private to each voice. Hence,
+engravers should be grouped. The engravers for note heads, stems,
+slurs, etc., go into a group called @q{Voice context}, while the
+engravers for key, accidental, bar, etc., go into a group called
+@q{Staff context}. In the case of polyphony, a single Staff
+context contains more than one Voice context. Similarly, multiple
+Staff contexts can be put into a single Score context. The Score
+context is the top level notation context.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\include "engraver-example.ily"
+\score {
+ <<
+ \new Staff << \topVoice \\ \botVoice >>
+ \new Staff << \pah \\ \hoom >>
+ >>
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@seealso
+Internals Reference: @rinternals{Contexts}.
+
+@node Flexible architecture
+@unnumberedsubsec Flexible architecture
+
+When we started, we wrote the LilyPond program entirely in the C++
+programming language; the program's functionality was set in stone
+by the developers. That proved to be unsatisfactory for a number
+of reasons:
+
+@itemize
+
+@item When LilyPond makes mistakes, users need to override
+formatting decisions. Therefore, the user must have access to the
+formatting engine. Hence, rules and settings cannot be fixed by
+us at compile-time but must be accessible for users at run-time.
+
+@item Engraving is a matter of visual judgment, and therefore a
+matter of taste. As knowledgeable as we are, users can disagree
+with our personal decisions. Therefore, the definitions of
+typographical style must also be accessible to the user.
+
+@item Finally, we continually refine the formatting algorithms, so
+we need a flexible approach to rules. The C++ language forces a
+certain method of grouping rules that cannot readily be applied to
+formatting music notation.
+
+@end itemize
+
+@cindex Scheme programming language
+
+These problems have been addressed by integrating an interpreter
+for the Scheme programming language and rewriting parts of
+LilyPond in Scheme. The current formatting architecture is built
+around the notion of graphical objects, described by Scheme
+variables and functions. This architecture encompasses formatting
+rules, typographical style and individual formatting decisions.
+The user has direct access to most of these controls.
+
+Scheme variables control layout decisions. For example, many
+graphical objects have a direction variable that encodes the
+choice between up and down (or left and right). Here you see two
+chords, with accents and arpeggios. In the first chord, the
+graphical objects have all directions down (or left). The second
+chord has all directions up (right).
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+\score {
+ \relative c' {
+ \stemDown <e g b>4_>-\arpeggio
+ \override Arpeggio.direction = #RIGHT
+ \stemUp <e g b>4^>-\arpeggio
+ }
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Score
+ \override SpacingSpanner.spacing-increment = #3
+ \hide TimeSignature
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@cindex score formatting
+@cindex formatting a score
+@cindex formatting rules
+
+@noindent
+The process of formatting a score consists of reading and writing
+the variables of graphical objects. Some variables have a preset
+value. For example, the thickness of many lines -- a
+characteristic of typographical style -- is a variable with a
+preset value. You are free to alter this value, giving your score
+a different typographical impression.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+fragment = {
+ \clef bass f8 as8
+ c'4-~ c'16 as g f e16 g bes c' des'4
+}
+<<
+ \new Staff \fragment
+ \new Staff \with {
+ \override Beam.beam-thickness = #0.3
+ \override Stem.thickness = #0.5
+ \override Bar.thickness = #3.6
+ \override Tie.thickness = #2.2
+ \override StaffSymbol.thickness = #3.0
+ \override Tie.extra-offset = #'(0 . 0.3)
+ }
+ \fragment
+>>
+@end lilypond
+
+Formatting rules are also preset variables: each object has
+variables containing procedures. These procedures perform the
+actual formatting, and by substituting different ones, we can
+change the appearance of objects. In the following example, the
+rule governing which note head objects are used to produce the
+note head symbol is changed during the music fragment.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+#(set-global-staff-size 30)
+
+#(define (mc-squared grob orig current)
+ (let* ((interfaces (ly:grob-interfaces grob))
+ (pos (ly:grob-property grob 'staff-position)))
+ (if (memq 'note-head-interface interfaces)
+ (begin
+ (ly:grob-set-property! grob 'stencil
+ (grob-interpret-markup grob
+ (make-lower-markup 0.5
+ (case pos
+ ((-5) "m")
+ ((-3) "c ")
+ ((-2) (make-smaller-markup (make-bold-markup "2")))
+ (else "bla")))))))))
+
+\new Voice \relative c' {
+ \stemUp
+ \set autoBeaming = ##f
+ \time 2/4
+ <d f g>4
+ \once \override NoteHead.stencil = #note-head::brew-ez-stencil
+ \once \override NoteHead.font-size = #-7
+ \once \override NoteHead.font-family = #'sans
+ \once \override NoteHead.font-series = #'bold
+ <d f g>4
+ \once \override NoteHead.style = #'cross
+ <d f g>4
+ \applyOutput #'Voice #mc-squared
+ <d f g>4
+ <<
+ { d8[ es-( fis^^ g] fis2-) }
+ \repeat unfold 5 { \applyOutput #'Voice #mc-squared s8 }
+ >>
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+
+
+@node Putting LilyPond to work
+@section Putting LilyPond to work
+
+@cindex simple examples
+@cindex examples, simple
+
+We have written LilyPond as an experiment of how to condense the
+art of music engraving into a computer program. Thanks to all
+that hard work, the program can now be used to perform useful
+tasks. The simplest application is printing notes.
+
+@lilypond[quote,relative=1]
+{
+ \time 2/4
+ c4 c g'4 g a4 a g2
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+@noindent
+By adding chord names and lyrics we obtain a lead sheet.
+
+@lilypond[quote,ragged-right]
+<<
+ \chords { c2 c f2 c }
+ \new Staff
+ \relative c' {
+ \time 2/4
+ c4 c g' g a a g2
+ }
+ \addlyrics { twin -- kle twin -- kle lit -- tle star }
+>>
+@end lilypond
+
+Polyphonic notation and piano music can also be printed. The
+following example combines some more exotic constructs.
+
+@lilypond[quote,line-width=15.9\cm]
+\header {
+ title = "Screech and boink"
+ subtitle = "Random complex notation"
+ composer = "Han-Wen Nienhuys"
+}
+
+\score {
+ \context PianoStaff <<
+ \new Staff = "up" {
+ \time 4/8
+ \key c \minor
+ << {
+ \revert Stem.direction
+ \change Staff = down
+ \set subdivideBeams = ##t
+ g16.[
+ \change Staff = up
+ c'''32
+ \change Staff = down
+ g32
+ \change Staff = up
+ c'''32
+ \change Staff = down
+ g16]
+ \change Staff = up
+ \stemUp
+ \set followVoice = ##t
+ c'''32([ b''16 a''16 gis''16 g''32)]
+ } \\ {
+ s4 \tuplet 3/2 { d'16[ f' g'] } as'32[ b''32 e'' d'']
+ } \\ {
+ s4 \autoBeamOff d''8.. f''32
+ } \\ {
+ s4 es''4
+ } >>
+ }
+
+ \new Staff = "down" {
+ \clef bass
+ \key c \minor
+ \set subdivideBeams = ##f
+ \override Stem.french-beaming = ##t
+ \override Beam.beam-thickness = #0.3
+ \override Stem.thickness = #4.0
+ g'16[ b16 fis16 g16]
+ << \makeClusters {
+ as16 <as b>
+ <g b>
+ <g cis>
+ } \\ {
+ \override Staff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction =#down
+ <cis, e, gis, b, cis>4\arpeggio
+ }
+ >> }
+ >>
+ \midi {
+ \tempo 8 = 60
+ }
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \consists "Horizontal_bracket_engraver"
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
+
+The fragments shown above have all been written by hand, but that
+is not a requirement. Since the formatting engine is mostly
+automatic, it can serve as an output means for other programs that
+manipulate music. For example, it can also be used to convert
+databases of musical fragments to images for use on websites and
+multimedia presentations.
+
+This manual also shows an application: the input format is text, and can
+therefore be easily embedded in other text-based formats such as
+@LaTeX{}, HTML, or in the case of this manual, Texinfo. Using the
+@command{lilypond-book} program, included with LilyPond, the input
+fragments can be replaced by music images in the resulting PDF or HTML
+output files. Another example is the third-party OOoLilyPond extension
+for OpenOffice.org or LibreOffice, which makes it extremely easy to
+embed musical examples in documents.
+
+For more examples of LilyPond in action, full documentation, and the
+software itself, see our main website: www.lilypond.org.
+
+@page
+@node Engraved examples (BWV 861)
+@section Engraved examples (BWV 861)
+
+This section 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):
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-baer,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-baer-small,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent
+Bärenreiter BA5070 (Neue Ausgabe Sämtlicher Werke, Serie V, Band 6.1,
+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
+@sourceimage{bwv861-baer-alt,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-baer-alt-small,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent
+Breitkopf & Härtel, edited by Ferruccio Busoni (Wiesbaden, 1894), also
+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:
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-breitkopf,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-breitkopf-small,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent
+Bach-Gesellschaft edition (Leipzig, 1866), available from the Petrucci
+Music Library (IMSPL #02221):
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-gessellschaft,16cm,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-gessellschaft-small,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@noindent
+Finale 2008:
+
+@iftex
+@sourceimage{pdf/bwv861-finale2008a,,,}
+@end iftex
+@ifnottex
+@sourceimage{bwv861-finale2008a,,,png}
+@end ifnottex
+
+@sp 4
+@noindent
+LilyPond, version @version{}:
+
+@lilypond[staffsize=14.3,line-width=15.9\cm]
+global = {\key g \minor}
+
+partI = \relative c' {
+ \voiceOne
+ fis8 d' ees g, fis4 g
+ r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a d8 r r4
+ r2 r8 d16 ees f8 ees16 d
+ ees4 ~ 16 d c bes a4 r8 ees'16 d
+ c8 d16 ees d8 e16 fis g8 fis16 g a4 ~
+ 8 d, g f ees d c bes
+ a2 g\fermata \bar "|."
+}
+
+partII = \relative c' {
+ \voiceTwo
+ d4 r4 r8 d'16 c bes8 c16 d
+ ees8 d c ees a, r r4
+ r8 fis16 g a8 g16 fis g2 ~
+ 2 r8 d' ees g,
+ fis4 g r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a
+ bes4. <g b>8 <a c> r <d, g> r
+ <ees g>4 <d fis> d2
+}
+partIII = \relative c' {
+ \voiceOne
+ r2 r8 d ees g, fis4 g r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a
+ bes2 ~ 8 b16 a g8 a16 b
+ c4 r r2
+ R1
+ r8 d ees g, fis4 g
+ r8 a16 bes c8 bes16 a b2
+}
+partIV = \relative c {
+ \voiceTwo
+ d4 r r2
+ r8 d ees g, fis4 a
+ d,8 d'16 c bes8 c16 d ees2 ~
+ 8 ees16 d c8 d16 ees fis,8 a16 g fis8 g16 a
+ d,8 d'16 c bes8 c16 d ees8 c a fis'
+ g f ees d c bes a g
+ c a d d, g2\fermata
+}
+
+\score {
+ <<
+ % \set Score.barNumberVisibility = #all-bar-numbers-visible
+ % required in 2.13
+ \set Score.currentBarNumber = #28
+ \bar ""
+ \new PianoStaff <<
+ \new Staff = "RH" <<
+ \global
+ \new Voice = "voiceI" { \partI }
+ \new Voice = "voiceII" { \partII }
+ >>
+
+ \new Staff = "LH" <<
+ \clef "bass"
+ \global
+ \new Voice = "voiceIII" { \partIII }
+ \new Voice = "voiceIV" { \partIV }
+ >>
+ >>
+ >>
+ \layout {
+ \context {
+ \Staff
+ \remove "Time_signature_engraver"
+ }
+ \context {
+ \PianoStaff
+ \override StaffGrouper.staff-staff-spacing.padding = #1
+ }
+ }
+}
+@end lilypond
--- /dev/null
+% This file cannot be named "engraving.bib" due to a conflict
+% with the existing engraving.itely file. -gp
+
+%
+% TITLe =The engraving bibliography
+% AUTHOr =Han-Wen Nienhuys
+%
+
+@Book{gould_de11,
+ author = {Elaine Gould},
+ title = {Hals über Kopf},
+ publisher = {Edition Peters},
+ year = {2014},
+ isbn = {ISBN 1843670488},
+ note = {Ein vollständiges Regelwerk für den Modernen Notensatz auf
+ höchstem Niveau, ein Meilenstein der Notationskunde und ein Leitfaden
+ für jeden Musiker, der sich auf diesem Gebiet umfassende Kenntnisse
+ aneignen möchte.},
+}
+
+@Book{gould11,
+ author = {Elaine Gould},
+ title = {Behind Bars},
+ publisher = {Faber Music Ltd.},
+ year = {2011},
+ isbn = {ISBN 0-571-51456-1},
+ note = {A comprehensive guide to the rules and conventions of music
+ notation. Covering everything from basic themes to complex techniques
+ and providing a comprehensive grounding in notational principles.},
+}
+
+@Book{banter87,
+ author = {Harald Banter},
+ title = {Akkord Lexikon},
+ publisher = {Schott's Söhne},
+ year = {1987},
+ isbn = {ISBN 3-7957-2095-8},
+ note = {Comprehensive overview of commonly used
+ chords. Suggests (and uses) a unification for all different kinds
+ of chord names.},
+ address = {Mainz, Germany},
+}
+
+@Book{rastall83,
+ author = {Richard Rastall},
+ ALTeditor = {},
+ title = {The Notation of Western Music: an
+ Introduction},
+ publisher = {J. M. Dent \& Sons London},
+ year = {1983},
+ note = {Interesting account of the evolution and origin of common notation starting from neumes, and ending with modern innovations HWN},
+}
+
+@Book{ignatzek95,
+ author = {Klaus Ignatzek},
+ title = {Die Jazzmethode für Klavier 1},
+ publisher = {Schott},
+ year = 1995,
+ note = {This book contains a system for denoting chords that is used in LilyPond.}
+}
+
+@Book{mcgrain91,
+ author = {Mark Mc Grain},
+ title = {Music notation},
+ year = 1991,
+ publisher = {Hal Leonard Publishing Corporation},
+ isbn = {0793508479},
+ note = {HWN writes: `Book' edition of lecture notes from XXX school of
+music. The book looks like it is xeroxed from bad printouts. The
+content has nothing you won't find in other books like [read] or
+[heussenstamm]. }
+}
+
+@Book{ross87,
+ author = {Ted Ross},
+ title = {Teach yourself the art of music engraving and processing},
+ publisher = {Hansen House},
+ year = 1987,
+ annote = {This is about engraving, i.e. professional typesetting. It contains
+ directions on good typesetting, but the sections on reproduction
+ technicalities, how to use pens and history are interesting.
+ Especially the section on Music Typewriters is amusing HWN},
+ address = {Miami, Florida},
+}
+
+@Book{read78,
+ note = {Sound (boring) review of the various hairy rhythmic notations used by avant-garde composers HWN},
+ year = {1978},
+ title = {Modern Rhythmic Notation},
+ author = {Gardner Read},
+ publisher = {Indiana University Press},
+}
+
+@Book{read79,
+ note = {This is as close to the ``standard''
+reference work for music notation issues as one is likely to get.},
+ title = {Music Notation: a Manual of Modern Practice},
+ author = {Gardner Read},
+ totalentry = {(2nd edition)},
+ year = 1979,
+ publisher = {Taplinger Publishing},
+ address = {New York},
+}
+
+@Book{weaner93,
+ year = {1993},
+ title = {Standard Music Notation Practice},
+ author = {Maxwell Weaner and Walter Boelke},
+ totalentry = {revised edition by Arnold Broido and Daniel Dorff.},
+ publisher = {Music Publisher's Association of the United States Inc},
+ address = {New York}
+}
+
+@Book{wanske88,
+ annote = {I. A very thorough overview of engraving practices of various
+craftsmen. It includes detailed specs of characters, dimensions
+etc. II. a thorough overview of an anonymous (by now antiquated)
+automated system. EDV Means e(lektronischen) D(aten)v(erarbeitung),
+electronic data processing HWN.},
+ year = {1988},
+ title = {Musiknotation --- Von der Syntax des
+Notenstichs zum EDV-gesteuerten Notensatz},
+ author = {Helene Wanske},
+ publisher = {Schott-Verlag},
+ address = {Mainz},
+ isbn = {ISBN 3-7957-2886-x},
+}
+
+@Book{hader48,
+ year = {1948},
+ title = {Aus der Werkstatt eines Notenstechers},
+ author = {Karl Hader},
+ publisher = {Waldheim--Eberle Verlag},
+ address = {Vienna},
+ note = {Hader was a chief-engraver in a Viennese engraving
+workshop. This beautiful booklet was intended as an introduction for
+laymen on the art of engraving. It contains a step by step, in-depth
+explanation of how to cut and stamp music into zinc plates. It also
+contains a few compactly formulated rules on musical orthography. Out
+of print.}
+}
+
+@Book{gamble23,
+ author = {William Gamble},
+ title = {Music Engraving and printing. Historical and Technical Treatise},
+ publisher = {Sir Isaac Pitman & Sons, ltd.},
+ year = 1923,
+ note = {This patriotic book was an attempt to promote and help
+British music engravers. It is somewhat similar to Hader's
+book [hader48] in scope and style, but Gamble focuses more on
+technical details (Which French punch cutters are worth buying from,
+etc.), and does not treat typographical details, such as optical
+illusions. It is available as reprint from Da Capo Press, New York
+(1971).}
+}
+
+@Booklet{mpa96,
+ note = {Pamphlet explaining a few fine points in music font design HWN},
+ year = {1996},
+ title = {Standard music notation specifications for computer programming.},
+ month = {December},
+ author = {mpa},
+ publisher = {MPA},
+}
+
+@Book{donato63,
+ year = {1963},
+ author = {Anthony Donato},
+ title = {Preparing Music Manuscript},
+ address = {Englewood Cliffs, NJ},
+ publisher = {Prentice-Hall},
+}
+
+@Book{karkoshka72,
+ year = {1972},
+ title = {Notation in New Music; a critical guide to interpretation and realisation},
+ author = {Erdhard Karkoshka},
+ translator = {Ruth Koenig},
+ publisher = {Praeger Publishers},
+ address = {New York},
+ note = {(Out of print)},
+}
+
+@Book{roemer84,
+ year = {1984},
+ title = {The Art of Music Copying},
+ author = {Clinton Roemer},
+ publisher = {Roerick music co.},
+ address = {Sherman Oaks (CA)},
+ note = {Out of print. Heussenstamm writes: an instructional manual
+which specializes in methods used in the commercial field. },
+ edition = {2nd},
+}
+
+@Book{rosecrans79,
+ year = {1979},
+ title = {Music Notation Primer},
+ author = {Glen Rosecrans},
+ publisher = {Passantino},
+ address = {New York},
+ note = {Heussenstamm writes: Limited in scope, similar to [Roemer84]}
+}
+
+@Book{donemus82,
+ year = {1982},
+ title = {Uitgeven van muziek},
+ subtitle = {Handleiding voor componisten en copiisten},
+ author = {Donemus},
+ publisher = {Donemus Amsterdam},
+ note = {Manual on copying for composers and copyists at the Dutch
+publishing house Donemus. Besides general comments on copying, it
+also contains a lot of hands-on advice for making performance
+material for modern pieces.}
+}
+
+@Book{vinci,
+ author = {Vinci, Albert C.},
+ title = {Fundamentals of Traditional Music Notation},
+ publisher = {Kent State University Press},
+ year = {1989}
+}
+
+@Book{schirmer90,
+ author = {Schirmer},
+ title = {The G. Schirmer Manual of Style and Usage},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {The G. Schirmer Publications Department},
+ year = {2001},
+ note = {This is the style guide for Schirmer publications. This manual
+specifically focuses on preparing print for publication by
+Schirmer. It discusses many details that are not in other, normal
+notation books. It also gives a good idea of what is necessary to bring
+printouts to publication quality. It can be ordered from the rental department.},
+}
+
+@Book{stone80,
+ year = {1980},
+ title = {Music Notation in the Twentieth Century},
+ author = {Kurt Stone},
+ publisher = {Norton},
+ address = {New York},
+ note = {Heussenstamm writes: The most important book on notation in recent years.},
+}
+
+@Book{heussenstamm87,
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {The Norton Manual of Music Notation},
+ author = {George Heussenstamm},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {Norton},
+ note = {Hands-on instruction book for copying (ie. handwriting) music. Fairly complete. HWN}
+}
+
+@Book{gerou96,
+ note = {A cheap, concise, alphabetically ordered list of typesetting and music (notation) issues with a rather simplistic attitude but in most cases "good-enough" answers JCN},
+ year = {1996},
+ title = {Essential Dictionary of Music Notation},
+ author = {Tom Gerou and Linda Lusk},
+ publisher = {Alfred Publishing},
+ address = {Van Nuys CA},
+ isbn = {ISBN 0-88284-768-6},
+}
+
+@Book{chlapik87,
+ note = {An clearly written book for the casually interested
+reader. It shows some of the conventions and difficulties in
+printing music HWN},
+ year = {1987},
+ title = {Die Praxis des Notengraphikers},
+ author = {Herbert Chlapik},
+ publisher = {Doblinger},
+ isbn = {ISBN 3-9000 035-96-2},
+}
+
+@Book{barksdale57,
+ author = {Barksdale, A},
+ year = {1957},
+ title = {The Printed Note: 500 Years of Music Printing and Engraving},
+ address = {Toledo, Ohio},
+ month = {January},
+ note = {`The exhibition "The Printed Note" attempts to show the various processes used since the second of the 15th century for reproducing music mechanically ... '. The illustration mostly feature ancient music},
+ publisher = {The Toledo Museum of Art},
+}
+
+@Book{wolf19,
+ author = {Wolf, Johannes},
+ year = {1919},
+ title = {Handbuch der Notationskunde},
+ address = {Leipzig},
+ publisher = {Breitkopf & Hartel},
+ note = {Very thorough treatment (in two volumes) of the history of music notation},
+}
+
+@Book{rosenthal67,
+ author = {Rosenthal, Carl A},
+ year = {1967},
+ title = {A Practical Guide to Music Notation},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {MCA Music},
+ note = {Heussenstamm writes: Informative in terms of traditional notation. Does not concern score preparation}
+}
+
+@Book{boehm61,
+ author = {Boehm, Laszlo},
+ year = {1961},
+ title = {Modern Music Notation},
+ address = {New York},
+ publisher = {G. Schirmer, Inc.},
+ note = {Heussenstamm writes: A handy compact reference book in basic notation.}
+}
+
+@Book{button20,
+ author = {Button, H. Elliot},
+ title = {System in Musical Notation},
+ publisher = {Novello and co.},
+ year = 1920,
+ address = {London}
+}
+
+@Book{johnson46,
+ author = {Johnson, Harold},
+ title = {How to write music manuscript},
+ publisher = {Carl Fischer, Inc.},
+ year = 1946,
+ address = {New York}
+}
+
+@Book{tyboni94,
+ author = {Börje Tyboni},
+ title = {Noter Handbok I Traditionell Notering},
+ publisher = {Gehrmans Musikförlag},
+ year = 1994,
+ address = {Stockholm},
+ note = {Swedish book on music notation.}
+}
+
+@Book{jaschinski00,
+ editor = {Andreas Jaschinski},
+ title = {Notation},
+ publisher = {Bärenreiter Verlag},
+ year = 2000,
+ number = {BVK1625},
+ annote = {Articles from "Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart"
+pertaining to notation. Both "alternative" notation and ancient
+notation is treated in depth, while "common" notation is not. }
+}
--- /dev/null
+@c -*- coding: utf-8; mode: texinfo; -*-
+
+@ignore
+ Translation of GIT committish: e5d3fb33ceaec6d10e06af0c667e4e982a0028ce
+
+ When revising a translation, copy the HEAD committish of the
+ version that you are working on. For details, see the Contributors'
+ Guide, node Updating translation committishes..
+@end ignore
+
+@c \version "2.16.0"
+
+@node Irodalomjegyzék
+@chapter Irodalomjegyzék
+@translationof Literature list
+
+Here are lists of references used in LilyPond.
+
+@menu
+* Short literature list::
+* Long literature list::
+@end menu
+
+@node Short literature list
+@section Short literature list
+
+If you need to know more about music notation, here are some
+interesting titles to read.
+
+@table @cite
+@item Ignatzek 1995
+Klaus Ignatzek, Die Jazzmethode für Klavier. Schott's Söhne
+1995. Mainz, Germany ISBN 3-7957-5140-3.
+
+A tutorial introduction to playing Jazz on the piano. One of the first
+chapters contains an overview of chords in common use for Jazz music.
+
+@item Gerou 1996
+Tom Gerou and Linda Lusk, Essential Dictionary of Music
+Notation. Alfred Publishing, Van Nuys CA ISBN 0-88284-768-6.
+
+A concise, alphabetically ordered list of typesetting and music
+(notation) issues, covering most of the normal cases.
+
+@item Gould 2011
+Elaine Gould, Behind Bars: the Definitive Guide to Music Notation.
+Faber Music Ltd. ISBN 0-571-51456-1.
+
+Hals über Kopf: Das Handbuch des Notensatzes.
+Edition Peters. ISBN 1843670488.
+
+A comprehensive guide to the rules and conventions of music notation.
+Covering everything from basic themes to complex techniques and
+providing a comprehensive grounding in notational principles.
+
+@item Read 1968
+Gardner Read, Music Notation: A Manual of Modern Practice.
+Taplinger Publishing, New York (2nd edition).
+
+A standard work on music notation.
+
+@item Ross 1987
+Ted Ross, Teach yourself the art of music engraving and processing.
+Hansen House, Miami, Florida 1987.
+
+This book is about music engraving, i.e., professional typesetting.
+It contains directions on stamping, use of pens and notational
+conventions. The sections on reproduction technicalities and history
+are also interesting.
+
+@item Schirmer 2001
+The G.Schirmer/AMP Manual of Style and Usage. G.Schirmer/AMP, NY, 2001.
+(This book can be ordered from the rental department.)
+
+This manual specifically focuses on preparing print for publication by
+Schirmer. It discusses many details that are not in other, normal
+notation books. It also gives a good idea of what is necessary to bring
+printouts to publication quality.
+
+@item Stone 1980
+
+Kurt Stone, Music Notation in the Twentieth Century.
+Norton, New York 1980.
+
+This book describes music notation for modern serious music, but
+starts out with a thorough overview of existing traditional notation
+practices.
+
+@end table
+
+
+@node Long literature list
+@section Long literature list
+
+@subheading University of Colorado Engraving music bibliography
+
+@include colorado.itexi
+
+@subheading Computer notation bibliography
+
+@include computer-notation.itexi
+
+@subheading Engraving bibliography
+
+@include engravingbib.itexi
+
projects / lilypond.git / commitdiff