Dorico/Lilypond/SCORE?

[benwiggy]

How big are the slices? If I wanted a 34-foot high clef, would it be possible to set the slice size to be small enough?

Having written quite a few tools for manipulating SCORE files, and therefore being pretty familiar with a lot of the internal workings, I did make a start on a sort of desktop clone of it which at least got as far as opening up files and being able to display them in a window (at least partly - to implement the translation of all the parameter types and values into graphics would be a huge job, but I made a start on the basics), but that was rather too much work to keep up purely as a hobby, so I abandoned it. I attach a screenshot for the curious.

Have you thought about putting your project up on github and seeing if anyone is interested in collaborating?

There may be mileage in taking SCORE's algorithms and using them in a modern software product that takes advantage of all the advances in computational power and capabilities of modern hardware and practices. (Now with Curves™ )

But realistically, for generations of musicians raised on GUI interfaces (and increasingly now on touchscreen devices), having to learn a big load of code is a massive barrier to entry. Whatever form 'Son of SCORE' takes, it would have to be GUI.

There's also the fact that the notation app market is massively over-saturated. Only the other day, we had posts from someone starting their own notation software, despite two large open source projects: Lilypond and MuseScore, and several others in various states; then there's around 20 small commercial projects -- all of which are vying for position behind Dorico, Finale and Sibelius.

[OCTO]

Thanks for sharing this, DatOrganistTho, I have read it twice and appreciate your personal reflection upon lilyPond. I am in a very similar situation and have many contemplated learning and using LilyPond, but never started really. Now after reading this, I am sure that LilyPond is a very powerful tool, but for my own work is less useful. I am not only a long time user of Finale, with a decent knowledge of Sibelius and MuseScore, but I am also dependent of other's people help in music copying and engraving. Once I was offered to get my score done in SCORE instead of Sibelius, but now I have the score in Finale and I have edited it already several times. This is the most crucial for me: able to do wonderful engraved scores (basically any software can do it), but to get help and do the things by myself is the crucial in my decision. I am following Dorico, but as my forum-friend Wess once stated: "keep composing and don't focus on the software and fonts" - which is pretty fair conclusion. However, fonts and software are my hobby, and good that it is next to my profession.

Musescore is next for me, but I won't entertain it probably until 3. By then, more of the glyphs which are missing should be filled in (on the new Leland font... so gorgeous!), and maybe some better intuitive pallets and being able to use open meter, irrational meter, etc. I'd love to use it for analytic notation, but I'm not sure about that yet. Also, it's still too basic to reproduce some scores of Bach, such as keyboard works with 6 voices per staff!

You mean the version 4?
Yes, the glyphs are missing, and their doctrine to limit music fonts (closed-class) is contrary to the open-source philosophy. I mean, I need to know how to compile software from the source in order to implement my own fonts. Music engravers and composers don't do that. They want to apply their own fonts to get their own standards.
However I disagree about Leland font - for me it is unbalanced and somehow weak, lacking any kind of personality.

There's also the fact that the notation app market is massively over-saturated. Only the other day, we had posts from someone starting their own notation software, despite two large open source projects: Lilypond and MuseScore, and several others in various states; then there's around 20 small commercial projects -- all of which are vying for position behind Dorico, Finale and Sibelius.

I remember an article on the Internet, some years ago, with the title "What is wrong with the notation software?" or so - in which it is claimed how all notation software are basically both good and bad at the same time. The writer compared it with any desktop publishing tools or DAW etc, which are basically complete in that what they do. None of these apps are doing something you don't want, while many of notation software does exactly that, what you don't want, or what is incorrect.
There are also numerous notation addons in various DAWs, and recently I have seen pretty OK score done in LogicProX!

[benwiggy]

None of these apps are doing something you don't want, while many of notation software does exactly that, what you don't want, or what is incorrect.

That's because music notation is something that's evolved over hundred of years. New symbols and rules are added, and other symbols exist because they started out as something else entirely. Every rule has an exception, and different styles have their own conventions. (I've always found it weird/amusing that computers are used to make scores that look like they are handwritten, just because that's what people are used to.)

If you were to invent notation today, it wouldn't be like this!

There are also numerous notation addons in various DAWs, and recently I have seen pretty OK score done in LogicProX!

This point has been made on these pages over and over: it's not so much what the software can do, but what the engraver knows. Arguably, computers can already create beautiful (or faultless) scores with little or no human input, but a competent operator will always produce good results. That's true for DTP software, too.