This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LilyPond article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
LilyPond was nominated as a Music good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (April 18, 2016). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
It would be profitable to add a small sample .ly file (and an image of the generated sheet music) to the article, just to show people how easy it is to write Lilypond music. Perhaps some day a high school teacher will be inspired by this article and start creating music with Lilypond instead of writing it by hand (or buying Finale.) --Ardonik 05:40, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)
to start with a real small example, say
\relative { \time 6/8 a'16( gis a b c d e4) r8 }
which allows viewing and comparing the input and result in one glance. Of course, this is just what the [HowTo] and [Tutorial] are for. -- JCN 30 June 2005 15:32 (UTC)
Just a small thing I would change in the otherwise brilliant example .ly file. Despite the 3/4 time signature it is more conventional to notate a full bar rest with a "semi-breve" rest and lilypond allows this by using a uppercase 'R2.' instead of a lowercase 'r2.' rest for bar 8 in the lower part. --87.194.118.205 (talk) 12:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
This inserted objection is nonsense. Lilypond is a programming language for graphics generation - the graphics of musical notation. All significant programming language articles in Wikipedia that I've ever seen (and I looked at number of them) have coding examples and often output examples. These examples portray the FACTS of language syntax, ease of use, applications for which it's appropriate, and so. Remove these coding examples and essential - I repeat, ""essential"" - information about the language simply disappears. One can talk about it, or show it. Showing is more powerful. Doing both is even more powerful, of course, and good articles do just that.
I strongly object to the notion that this article needs to be "improved" by excising the coding example. It is just an example. It certainly doesn't teach much, and only the naive would think it does.
This is a good article. Leave it be.
Tomcloyd (talk) 01:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi,
I take issue with
because it implies that LilyPond can be considered "done" from a typographical POV (which it isn't, IMO). Furthermore, "comparable" is a vague statement: mosquitos and elephants are comparable, and the result of the comparison is that the elefant is bigger. Esthetics aren't well defined, but most printout of Finale and Sibelius still (we're speaking 2006) looks made with a computer.
I think I am not the right person to edit the page itself, though.
Han-Wen (LilyPond Author).
First of all, "the first public release" was made long before the said essay. LilyPond now has improved a lot wrt. versions from then.
I don't own licenses to either Finale or Sibelius, so I can't provide you with any specific samples, but I've seen both in action. I think that pointing out weaknesses of other packages should not be done on the LilyPond page, but rather on the pages of said packages. I think it's better to point out what sets apart Lily, as this is more informative and more objective, eg
Also, in general, LilyPond does much better on automatically avoiding collisions for ties, slurs, articulation marks, nested tuplets, etc.. For example, if you add an arpeggio to a chord in Finale, Finale just parks it on top of the accidentals, you have to manually tweak things to look ok.
Han-Wen
--213.84.26.127 17:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
This articles features about "WikiTeX, a MediaWiki interface, supports editing LilyPond notation directly in wiki articles", but do you know LilySnap ? it's a plugin for the snipsnap wiki/blog engine, that allows integration of lilypond. Here it is : http://lilysnap.blogdns.net/space/LilySnap
You note three free GUI programs that can export sheet music to LilyPond format; however, they are for Linux only. Should the fact be noted that no such programs exist for Windows or even for the Macintosh? Denelson83 06:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Frescobaldi doesn't export lilypond format, it's just a graphical front end to lilypond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.48.118 (talk) 15:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
It seems LilyPond's documentation now recommends Frescobaldi for MacOS use, with no mention of LilyPad. &&Hugopoon&& (talk) 08:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi there, can someone please add a few lines about the relationship with TeX/LaTeX? It's pretty clear that the notation is at the very least heavily influenced by TeX, but is there more? From a user perspective, is there a (La)TeX lilypond package for integrating music scores into regular TeX documents? From an architectural perspective, is there any reuse going on? (I would expect Lilypond did not reinvent the TeX-parsing wheel.) Thanks. 205.228.118.62 (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
A random look at the CTAN yields this: [1], so the answer to the first question is probably no. 205.228.104.142 (talk) 05:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Should a peice of example code really contain encoding information for one particular editor? Does that line have any meaning to lillypond or can it simply be removed? 130.88.108.187 (talk) 12:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
This article is entitled "GNU LilyPond." But the software package itself is just "LilyPond." See [2], [3], [4], etc. I propose moving it to LilyPond, replacing the redirect that is there, and redirecting GNU LilyPond to it (due to the many internal and potential external links) to it. Objections? TJRC (talk) 00:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
the templates for the release don't have the right number of days/months. i don't see how to correct that 71.237.23.168 (talk) 01:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I propose to add at the end of this chapter: Therefore, numerous programms deliver lilypond output to be processed by lilypond, and can be used as graphical interface. Pipecat (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
It would be good to have an example of Hello World simplicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deluno (talk • contribs) 03:09, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
I see this is up for GAN. It'll run into problems there, though, as it's missing citations for a lot of statements—even whole paragraphs. There seem to be a lot of sources out there you might be able to use: "LilyPond scores beautiful music" at opensource.com, for instance, as well as in other languages (This one in German). The LilyPond website also links to a bunch of reviews. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 04:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
@Peter SamFan:, what you've done to this example is not an improvement. The whole point of mediawiki supporting lilypond is that people don't need to know much about the lilypond language to display a simple melody on a page. The original Solfeggio example is much more appropriate here than the incomprehensible mess you have created. Also, WP is not a manual. Here is not the place to be showing off every feature that lilypond provides. Tayste (edits) 17:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 07:55, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
When are you going to begin? Peter Sam Fan 19:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Failing this article because I don't think that it was sufficiently prepared for being nominated to be a Good Article. There are issues with sourcing, comprehensiveness and referencing. I'm sure there must be more info than there currently is. This article does not satisfy the criteria at the present stage. It needs a lot of work, more than I believe is worth putting on hold for 7 days for. — Calvin999 08:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LilyPond. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
((dead link))
tag to http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/user/lilypond-learning/Preface((dead link))
tag to http://lilypond.org/web/images/xivcim.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template ((source check))
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
Isn't Lilypond a kind of markup language? If yes, can someone incorporate this information into the article? --kupirijo (talk) 08:10, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
The definitions are fuzzy, but my own point of view is that markup languages show *the finished product more or less*, with added features in code. To me, a "true" markup language for music would have to be written directly in musical notation. I don't consider note letter names to be the finished product more or less. However, any of the things I've just said may be completely wrong, so don't rely on them. TooManyFingers (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2021 (UTC)