Essay on Music Notation

7/27/2019 Essay on Music Notation

1/39

LilyPondThe music typesetter

Essay on automated music engraving

The LilyPond development team

This essay discusses automatic music engraving unctions within LilyPond version 2.16.2.

For more inormation about how this manual ts with the other documentation, or to read thismanual in other ormats, see Section Manuals in General Information.

I you are missing any manuals, the complete documentation can be ound athttp://www.lilypond.org/ .

Copyright c 20022012 by the authors.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modiy this document under theterms o the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.1 or any later versionpublished by the Free Sotware Foundation; with no Invariant Sections. A copy othe license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License.

For LilyPond version 2.16.2
http://web.pdf/http://web.pdf/http://www.lilypond.org/http://www.lilypond.org/http://web.pdf/


2/39

i

Table of Contents

1 Music engraving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11.1 The LilyPond story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.2 Engraving details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Music onts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Optical spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Ledger lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Optical sizing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Why work so hard? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

1.3 Automated engraving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Beauty contests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Improvement by benchmarking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Getting things right. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

101.4 Building sotware. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Music representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11What symbols to engrave? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13Flexible architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

1.5 Putting LilyPond to work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161.6 Engraved examples (BWV 861) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2 Literature list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212.1 Short literature list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212.2 Long literature list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Appendix A GNU Free Documentation License . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Appendix B LilyPond index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37


3/39

Chapter 1: Music engraving 1

1 Music engraving

This essay describes why LilyPond was created and how it can produce such beautiul sheetmusic.

1.1 The LilyPond story

Long beore LilyPond had been used to engrave beautiul perormance scores, beore it couldcreate university course notes or even simple melodies, beore there was a community o usersaround the world or even an essay on music engraving, LilyPond began with a question:

Why does most computer output ail to achieve the beauty and balance o a hand-engraved score?

Some o the answers can be ound by examining the two scores on the ollowing pages. Therst score is a beautiul hand-engraved score rom 1950 and the second is a modern, computer-

engraved edition.The notes here are identical, taken rom Bachs rst Suite or solo cello, but the appearance

is diferent, especially i you print them out and view them rom a distance. Try reading orplaying rom each o the scores and you will nd that the hand-engraved score is more enjoyableto use. It has owing lines and movement, and it eels like a living, breathing piece o music,while the newer edition seems cold and mechanical.

It is hard to immediately see what makes the diference with the newer edition. Everythinglooks neat and tidy, possibly even better because it looks more computerized and uniorm.This really puzzled us or quite a while. We wanted to improve computer notation, but we rsthad to gure out what was wrong with it.

The answer lies in the precise, mathematical uniormity o the newer edition. Find the barline in the middle o each line: in the hand-engraved score the position o these bar lines has somenatural variation, while in the newer version they line up almost perectly. This is shown in thesesimplied page layout diagrams, traced rom the hand-engraved (let) and computer-generatedmusic (right):

In the computer-generated output, even the individual note heads are aligned in verticalcolumns, making the contour o the melody disappear into a rigid grid o musical markings.

There are other diferences as well: in the hand-engraved edition the vertical lines are allstronger, the slurs lie closer to the note heads, and there is more variety in the slopes o thebeams. Although such details may seem like nitpicking, the result is a score that is easier toread. In the computer-generated output, each line is nearly identical and i the musician looks

away or a moment she will be lost on the page.LilyPond was designed to solve the problems we ound in existing sotware and to create

beautiul music that mimics the nest hand-engraved scores.


4/39


Barenreiter BA 320, c1950:


5/39


Henle no. 666, c2000:


6/39


1.2 Engraving details

The art o music typography is called (plate) engraving, a term that derives rom the manual

process o music printing1

. Just a ew decades ago, sheet music was made by cutting andstamping the music into a zinc or pewter plate in mirror image. The plate would be inked, andthe depressions caused by the cutting and stamping would hold ink. An image was ormed bypressing paper to the plate. The stamping and cutting was done completely by hand and makinga correction was cumbersome, so the engraving had to be nearly perect in one go. Engravingwas a highly specialized skill; a cratsman had to complete around ve years o training beoreearning the title o master engraver, and another ve years o experience were necessary tobecome truly skilled.

LilyPond is inspired by traditional manual engravings published by European music pub-lishers in and towards the end o the rst hal o the twentieth century, including Barenreiter,Duhem, Durand, Homeister, Peters, and Schott. This is sometimes regarded as the peak o tra-ditional musical engraving practice. As we have studied these editions we have learned a greatdeal about what goes into a well-engraved score, and the aspects that we wanted to imitate inLilyPond.

Music fonts

The images below illustrate some diferences between traditional engraving and typical computeroutput. The let picture shows a scan o a at symbol rom a hand-engraved Barenreiter edition,while the right picture depicts a symbol rom an edition o the same music published in 2000.Although both images are printed in the same shade o ink, the earlier version looks darker: thestaf lines are heavier, and the Barenreiter at has a bold, almost voluptuous rounded look. Theright scan, on the other hand, has thinner lines and a straight layout with sharp corners.

1 Early European printers explored several processes, including hand-carved wooden blocks, movable type, and

engraved sheets o thin metal. Typesetting had the advantage o b eing more easily corrected and acilitatingthe inclusion o text and lyrics, but only engraving ofered the ability to do unimpeded layout and unanticipated

notation. In the end, hand-engraved scores became the standard or all printed music, with the exception o

some hymnals and songbooks where typesetting was justied by its ease and economy, even into the twentieth

century.


7/39


Barenreiter (1950) Henle (2000)

When we wanted to write a computer program to create music typography, there were nomusical onts reely available that could match the elegance o our avorite scores. Undeterred,we created a ont o musical symbols, relying on nice printouts o hand-engraved music. Theexperience helped develop a typographical taste, and it made us appreciate subtle design details.Without that experience, we would not have realized how ugly the onts were that we admiredat rst.

Below is a sample o two music onts: the upper set is the deault ont in the Sibelius sotware(the Opus ont), and the lower set is our own LilyPond ont.

The LilyPond symbols are heavier and their weight is more consistent, which makes themeasier to read. Fine endings, such as the ones on the sides o the quarter rest, should not endin sharp points, but rather in rounded shapes. This is because sharp corners o the punchingdies are ragile and quickly wear out when stamping in metal. Taken together, the blackness othe ont must be careully tuned together with the thickness o lines, beams and slurs to give astrong yet balanced overall impression.

Also, notice that our hal-note head is not elliptic but slightly diamond shaped. The verticalstem o a at symbol is slightly brushed, becoming wider at the top. The sharp and the naturalare easier to distinguish rom a distance because their angled lines have diferent slopes and thevertical strokes are heavier.

Optical spacing

In spacing, the distribution o space should reect the durations between notes. However, as wesaw in the Bach Suite above, many modern scores adhere to the durations with mathematicalprecision, which leads to poor results. In the next example a moti is printed twice: the rsttime using exact mathematical spacing, and the second with corrections. Which do you preer?


8/39


Each bar in the ragment only uses notes that are played in a constant rhythm. The spacingshould reect that. Unortunately, the eye deceives us a little; not only does it notice thedistance between note heads, it also takes into account the distance between consecutive stems.As a result, the notes o an up-stem/down-stem combination should be put arther apart, andthe notes o a down-stem/up-stem combination should be put closer together, all dependingon the combined vertical positions o the notes. The lower two measures are printed with thiscorrection, the upper two measures, however, orm down-stem/up-stem clumps o notes. Amaster 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 thenal up-stem in the properly spaced example has been given a little more space beore thebarline to keep it rom looking crowded. A down-stem would not need this adjustment.

Ledger lines

Ledger lines present a typographical challenge: they make it more dicult to space musicalsymbols close together and they must be clear enough to identiy the pitch at a glance. In theexample below, we see that ledger lines should be thicker than normal staf lines and that anexpert engraver will shorten a ledger line to allow closer spacing with accidentals. We haveincluded this eature in LilyPonds engraving.

Optical sizingMusic may need to be printed in a range o sizes. Originally, this was accomplished by creatingpunching dies in each o the required sizes, which meant that each die was designed to look itsbest at that size. With the advent o digital onts, a single outline can be mathematically scaledto any size, which is very convenient, but at the smaller sizes the glyphs will appear very light.

In LilyPond, we have created onts in a range o weights, corresponding to a range o musicsizes. This is a LilyPond engraving at staf size 26:

43


9/39


10/39


rom literature leads to algorithms with lots o hand-coded exceptions. Doing all this caseanalysis is a lot o work, and oten not all cases are covered completely:

(Image source: Ted Ross, The Art of Music Engraving)

Rather than trying to write detailed layout rules or every possible scenario, we only haveto describe the objectives well enough that LilyPond can judge the attractiveness o severalalternatives. Then, or each possible conguration we compute an ugliness score and we choosethe least ugly conguration.

For example, here are three possible slur congurations, and LilyPond has given each one ascore in ugly points. The rst example gets 15.39 points or grazing one o the noteheads:

15.39

The second one is nicer, but the slur doesnt start or end on the note heads. It gets 1.71points or the let side and 9.37 points or the right side, plus another 2 points because the slurascends while the melody descends or a total o 13.08 ugly points:

13.08

The nal slur gets 10.04 points or the gap on the right and 2 points or the upward slope,but it is the most attractive o the three congurations, so LilyPond selects this one:

12.04

This technique is quite general, and is used to make optimal decisions or beam congurations,ties and dots in chords, line breaks, and page breaks. The results o these decisions can be judgedby comparison to real engravings.


11/39


Improvement by benchmarking

LilyPonds 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 o a benchmark piece rom a hand-engraved edition (B arenreiter

BA320):

and the same quotation as engraved by a very old version o LilyPond (version 1.4, May 2001):

The LilyPond 1.4 output is certainly readable, but close comparison with the hand-engravedscore showed a lot o errors in the ormatting details:

there is too much space beore the time signature

the stems o the beamed notes are too long

the second and ourth measures are too narrow

the slur is awkward-looking

the trill marks are too big

the stems are too thin

(There were also two missing note heads, several missing editorial annotations, and an incorrectpitch!)

By adjusting the layout rules and ont design, the output has improved considerably. Com-pare the same reerence score and the output rom the current version o LilyPond (2.16.2):

2

4

32

2

3

1

3

The current output is not a clone o the reerence edition, but it is much closer to publicationquality that the earlier output.


12/39


Getting things right

We can also measure LilyPonds ability to make music engraving decisions automatically by

comparing LilyPonds output to the output o a commercial sotware product. In this case wehave chosen Finale 2008, which is one o the most popular commercial score writers, particularlyin North America. Sibelius is its major rival and appears to be especially strong in the Europeanmarket.

For our comparison we selected Bachs Fugue in G minor rom the Well-Tempered Clavier,Book I, BWV 861, whose opening subject is

8

We made our comparison by engraving the last seven measures o the piece (2834) in Finaleand LilyPond. This is the point in the piece where the subject returns in a three-part stretto andleads into the closing section. In the Finale version, we have resisted the temptation to make anyadjustments to the deault output because we are trying to show the things that each sotwarepackage gets right without assistance. The only major edits that we made were adjusting thepage size to match this essay and orcing the music onto two systems to make the comparisoneasier. By deault Finale would have engraved two systems o three measures each and a nal,ull-width system containing a single measure.

Many o the diferences between the two engravings are visible in measures 2829, as shownhere with Finale rst and LilyPond second:

28

Some shortcomings in the unedited Finale output include:

Most o the beams extend too ar of the staf. A beam that points towards the center o thestaf should have a length o about one octave, but engravers shorten this when the beam

points away rom the staf in multi-voice music. The Finale beaming can easily be improvedwith their Patterson Beams plug-in, but we elected to skip that step or this example.

Finale doesnt adjust the positions o interlocking note heads, which makes the music ex-tremely dicult to read when the upper and lower voices exchange positions temporarily:


13/39


good

bad

Finale has placed all o the rests at xed heights on the staf. The user is ree to adjust

them as needed, but the sotware makes no attempt to consider the content o the othervoice. As luck would have it, there are no true collisions between notes and rests in thisexample, but that has more to do with the positions o the notes than the rest. In otherwords, Bach deserves more credit or avoiding a complete collision than Finale does.

This example is not intended to suggest that Finale cannot be used to produce publication-quality output. On the contrary, in the hands o a skilled user it can and does, but it requires skilland time. One o the undamental diferences between LilyPond and commercial scorewritersis that LilyPond hopes to reduce the amount o human intervention to an absolute minimum,while other packages try to provide an attractive interace in which to make these types o edits.

One particularly glaring omission we ound rom Finale is a missing at in measure 33:

The at symbol is required to cancel out the natural in the same measure, but Finale missesit because it occurred in a diferent voice. So in addition to running a beaming plug-in andchecking the spacing on the noteheads and rests, the user must also check each measure orcross-voice accidentals to avoid interrupting a rehearsal over an engraving error.

I you are interested in examining these examples in more detail, the ull seven-measureexcerpt can be ound at the end o this essay along with our diferent 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 someshortcomings in the LilyPond output, or example, it appears a bit too aggressive in shorteningsome o the stems, so there is room or urther development and ne-tuning.

O course, typography relies on human judgment o appearance, so people cannot be replaced

completely. However, much o the dull work can be automated. I LilyPond solves most o thecommon situations correctly, this will be a huge improvement over existing sotware. Overthe course o years, the sotware can be rened to do more and more things automatically, somanual overrides are less and less necessary. Where manual adjustments are needed, LilyPondsstructure has been designed with that exibility in mind.

1.4 Building software

This section describes some o the programming decisions that we made when designing Lily-Pond.

Music representation

Ideally, the input ormat or any high-level ormatting system is an abstract description o thecontent. In this case, that would be the music itsel. This poses a ormidable problem: howcan we dene what music really is? Instead o trying to nd an answer, we have reversed thequestion. We write a program capable o producing sheet music, and adjust the ormat to be


14/39


as lean as possible. When the ormat can no longer be trimmed down, by denition we are letwith content itsel. Our program serves as a ormal denition o a music document.

The syntax is also the user-interace or LilyPond, hence it is easy to type:

{

c'4 d'8

}

to create a quarter note on middle C (C1) and an eighth note on the D above middle C (D1).

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 isormed by the concept o music expressions: by combining small ragments o music into largerones, more complex music can be expressed. For example

f4

Simultaneous notes can be constructed by enclosing them with >:

This expression is put in sequence by enclosing it in curly braces { ... }:

{ f4 }

The above is also an expression, and so it may be combined again with another simultaneousexpression (a hal note) using :

>

Such recursive structures can be specied neatly and ormally in a context-ree grammar.The parsing code is also generated rom this grammar. In other words, the syntax o LilyPondis clearly and unambiguously dened.

User-interaces and syntax are what people see and deal with most. They are partly a mattero taste, and also the subject o much discussion. Although discussions on taste do have theirmerit, they are not very productive. In the larger picture o LilyPond, the importance o inputsyntax is small: inventing neat syntax is easy, while writing decent ormatting code is much


15/39


harder. This is also illustrated by the line-counts or the respective components: parsing andrepresentation take up less than 10% o the source code.

When designing the structures used in LilyPond, we made some diferent decisions than areapparent in other sotware. Consider the hierarchical nature o music notation:

4343

In this case, there are pitches grouped into chords that belong to measures, which belong tostaves. This resembles a tidy structure o nested boxes:

Unortunately, the structure is tidy because it is based on some excessively restrictive as-

sumptions. This becomes apparent i we consider a more complicated musical example:

4342

7

5

In this example, staves start and stop at will, voices jump around between staves, and the

staves have diferent time signatures. Many sotware packages would struggle with reproducingthis example because they are built on the nested box structure. With LilyPond, on the otherhand, we have tried to keep the input ormat and the structure as exible as possible.

What symbols to engrave?

The ormatting process decides where to place symbols. However, this can only be done once itis decided what symbols should be printed in other words, what notation to use.

Common music notation is a system o recording music that has evolved over the past 1000years. The orm that is now in common use dates rom the early Renaissance. Although thebasic orm (i.e., note heads on a 5-line staf) has not changed, the details still evolve to expressthe innovations o contemporary notation. Hence, common music notation encompasses some

500 years o music. Its applications range rom monophonic melodies to monstrous counterpointsor a large orchestra.

How can we get a grip on such a seven-headed beast, and orce it into the connes o a com-puter program? Our solution is to break up the problem o notation (as opposed to engraving,


16/39


i.e., typography) into digestible and programmable chunks: every type o symbol is handled bya separate module, a so-called plug-in. Each plug-in is completely modular and independent, soeach can be developed and improved separately. Such plug-ins are called engravers, by analogy

with cratsmen who translate musical ideas to graphic symbols.

In the ollowing example, we start out with a plug-in or note heads, theNote_heads_engraver.

Then a Staff_symbol_engraver adds the staf,

the Clef_engraver denes a reerence point or the staf,

and the Stem_engraver adds stems.

The Stem_engraver is notied o any note head coming along. Every time one (or more, or achord) note head is seen, a stem object is created and connected to the note head. By addingengravers or beams, slurs, accents, accidentals, bar lines, time signature, and key signature, weget a complete piece o notation.

This system works well or monophonic music, but what about polyphony? In polyphonicnotation, many voices can share a staf.

In this situation, the accidentals and staf are shared, but the stems, slurs, beams, etc., areprivate to each voice. Hence, engravers should be grouped. The engravers or note heads, stems,

slurs, etc., go into a group called Voice context, while the engravers or key, accidental, bar,etc., go into a group called Staf context. In the case o polyphony, a single Staf contextcontains more than one Voice context. Similarly, multiple Staf contexts can be put into a singleScore context. The Score context is the top level notation context.


17/39


See also

Internals Reerence: Section Contexts in Internals Reference.

Flexible architecture

When we started, we wrote the LilyPond program entirely in the C++ programming language;

the programs unctionality was set in stone by the developers. That proved to be unsatisactoryor a number o reasons:

When LilyPond makes mistakes, users need to override ormatting decisions. Thereore, theuser must have access to the ormatting engine. Hence, rules and settings cannot be xedby us at compile-time but must be accessible or users at run-time.

Engraving is a matter o visual judgment, and thereore a matter o taste. As knowledgeableas we are, users can disagree with our personal decisions. Thereore, the denitions otypographical style must also be accessible to the user.

Finally, we continually rene the ormatting algorithms, so we need a exible approach torules. The C++ language orces a certain method o grouping rules that cannot readily beapplied to ormatting music notation.

These problems have been addressed by integrating an interpreter or the Scheme program-ming language and rewriting parts o LilyPond in Scheme. The current ormatting architectureis built around the notion o graphical objects, described by Scheme variables and unctions.This architecture encompasses ormatting rules, typographical style and individual ormattingdecisions. The user has direct access to most o these controls.

Scheme variables control layout decisions. For example, many graphical objects have a direc-tion variable that encodes the choice between up and down (or let and right). Here you see twochords, with accents and arpeggios. In the rst chord, the graphical objects have all directionsdown (or let). The second chord has all directions up (right).

The process o ormatting a score consists o reading and writing the variables o graphicalobjects. Some variables have a preset value. For example, the thickness o many lines acharacteristic o typographical style is a variable with a preset value. You are ree to alter thisvalue, giving your score a diferent typographical impression.
http://internals.pdf/http://internals.pdf/http://internals.pdf/


18/39


Formatting rules are also preset variables: each object has variables containing procedures.These procedures perorm the actual ormatting, and by substituting diferent ones, we canchange the appearance o objects. In the ollowing example, the rule governing which note head

objects are used to produce the note head symbol is changed during the music ragment.

2cm

cDF G 242 m c bla

1.5 Putting LilyPond to work

We have written LilyPond as an experiment o how to condense the art o music engraving intoa computer program. Thanks to all that hard work, the program can now be used to perorm

useul tasks. The simplest application is printing notes.

42 By adding chord names and lyrics we obtain a lead sheet.

42kle

C

tle

twinkle

twin

C

star

C

lit

F

Polyphonic notation and piano music can also be printed. The ollowing example combinessome more exotic constructs.

Screech and boinkRandom complex notation

Han-Wen Nienhuys

3

84 84

The ragments shown above have all been written by hand, but that is not a requirement.Since the ormatting engine is mostly automatic, it can serve as an output means or other

programs that manipulate music. For example, it can also be used to convert databases omusical ragments to images or use on websites and multimedia presentations.

This manual also shows an application: the input ormat is text, and can thereore be easilyembedded in other text-based ormats such as LATEX, HTML, or in the case o this manual,


19/39


Texino. Using the lilypond-book program, included with LilyPond, the input ragments canbe replaced by music images in the resulting PDF or HTML output les. Another example isthe third-party OOoLilyPond extension or OpenOce.org, which makes it extremely easy to

embed musical examples in documents.

For more examples o LilyPond in action, ull documentation, and the sotware itsel, see ourmain website: www.lilypond.org.


20/39


1.6 Engraved examples (BWV 861)

This section contains our reerence engravings and two sotware-engraved versions o Bachs

Fugue in G minor rom the Well-Tempered Clavier, Book I, BWV 861 (the last seven measures).

Barenreiter BA5070 (Neue Ausgabe Samtlicher Werke, Serie V, Band 6.1, 1989):

Barenreiter BA5070 (Neue Ausgabe Samtlicher Werke, Serie V, Band 6.1, 1989), an alternatemusical source. Aside rom the textual diferences, this demonstrates slight variations in theengraving decisions, even rom the same publisher and edition:


21/39


Breitkop & Hartel, edited by Ferruccio Busoni (Wiesbaden, 1894), also available rom thePetrucci Music Library (IMSLP #22081). The editorial markings (ngerings, articulations,etc.) have been removed or clearer comparison with the other editions here:

Bach-Gesellschat edition (Leipzig, 1866), available rom the Petrucci Music Library (IMSPL#02221):


22/39


23/39

Chapter 2: Literature list 21

2 Literature list

Here are lists o reerences used in LilyPond.

2.1 Short literature list

I you need to know more about music notation, here are some interesting titles to read.

Ignatzek 1995

Klaus Ignatzek, Die Jazzmethode ur Klavier. Schotts Sohne 1995. Mainz, Ger-many ISBN 3-7957-5140-3.

A tutorial introduction to playing Jazz on the piano. One o the rst chapterscontains an overview o chords in common use or Jazz music.

Gerou 1996

Tom Gerou and Linda Lusk, Essential Dictionary o Music Notation. Alred Pub-lishing, Van Nuys CA ISBN 0-88284-768-6.

A concise, alphabetically ordered list o typesetting and music (notation) issues,covering most o the normal cases.

Read 1968

Gardner Read, Music Notation: A Manual o Modern Practice. Taplinger Publish-ing, New York (2nd edition).

A standard work on music notation.

Ross 1987 Ted Ross, Teach yoursel the art o music engraving and processing. Hansen House,Miami, Florida 1987.

This book is about music engraving, i.e., proessional typesetting. It contains di-rections on stamping, use o pens and notational conventions. The sections onreproduction technicalities and history are also interesting.

Schirmer 2001

The G.Schirmer/AMP Manual o Style and Usage. G.Schirmer/AMP, NY, 2001.(This book can be ordered rom the rental department.)

This manual specically ocuses on preparing print or publication by Schirmer. Itdiscusses many details that are not in other, normal notation books. It also gives agood idea o what is necessary to bring printouts to publication quality.

Stone 1980

Kurt Stone, Music Notation in the Twentieth Century. Norton, New York 1980.

This book describes music notation or modern serious music, but starts out with athorough overview o existing traditional notation practices.

2.2 Long literature list

University of Colorado Engraving music bibliography

Willi Apel. The notation o polyphonic music, 900-1600. Cambridge, Mass, 1953. Musicalnotation.

Ernest Austin. The Story o Music Printing. Lowe and Brydone Printers, Ltd., London.subject: history o music printing and engraving.

Anna Maria Busse Berger. Mensuration and proportion signs : origins and evolution.Clarendon Press, Oxord, England, 1993. subject: early notation.

Roger Bowers. Music & Letters, volume 73. August 1992. Some reection upon notationand proportion in Monteverdis mass and vespers.


24/39


Paul Brainard. Current Musicology. Number 50. July-Dec 1992. Proportional notation inthe music o Schutz and his contemporaries in the 17th Century.

Carl Brandt and Clinton Roemer. Standardized Chord Symbol Notation. Roerick MusicCo., Sherman Oaks, CA. subject: musical notation.

Earle Brown. Musical Quarterly, volume 72. Spring 1986. The notation and perormanceo new music.

John Cage. Notations. Something Else Press, New York, 1969. Music, Manuscripts,Facsimiles. Facsimiles o holographs rom the Foundation or Contemporary PerormanceArts, with text by 269 composers, but rearranged using chance operations.,V).

J Carter. New Paths in Book Collecting. London, 1934. subject: history o music printingand engraving.

F. Chrsander. A Sketch o the HIstory o Music printing, rom the 15th to the 16th century .18??. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

Henry Cowell. Our Inadequate Notation. Modern Music, 4(3), 1927. subject: 20th centurynotation.

Henry Cowell. New Musical Resources. Alred A. Knop, Inc., New York, 1930. subject:20th century notation.

O.F. Deutsch. Music Publishers Numbers. London, 1946. subject: history o musicprinting and engraving.

Suzanne Eggleston. Notes. New periodicals, 51(2):657(7), Dec 1994. A list o new musicperiodicals covering the period Jun.-Dec. 1994. Includes aims, ormats and a descriptiono the contents o each listed periodical. Includes Music Notation News.

Hubert Foss. Music Printing. Practical Printing and Binding. Oldhams Press Ltd., Long

Acre, London. subject: musical notation. Jean Charles Francois. Writing without representation, and unreadable notation.. Per-

spectives of New Music, 30(1):6(15), Winter 1992. subject: Modern music has outgrownnotation. While the computer is used to write down music with accuracy never beoreachieved, the range o modern sounds has surpassed the relevance o the computer...

David Fuller. The Journal o Musicology, volume 7. Winter 1989. Notes and inegalesunjoined: deending a denition. (written-out inequalities in music notation).

Virginia Gaburo. Notation. Lingua Press, La Jolla, Caliornia, 1977. A Lecture aboutnotation, new ideas about.

Keith A Hamel. A design or music editing and printing sotware based on notational

syntax. Perspectives of New Music, 27(1):70(14), Winter 1989. Archibald Jacob. Musical handwriting : or, How to put music on paper : A handbook or

all musicians, proessional and amateur. Oxord University Press, London, 1947. subject:Musical notation.

Harold M Johnson. How to write music manuscript an exercise-method handbook or themusic student, copyist, arranger, composer, teacher. Carl Fischer, Inc., New York, 1946.subject: Musical notation Handbooks, manuals.

David Evan Jones. Perspectives o New Music. 1990. Speech extrapolated. (includesnotation).

H King. Four Hundred Years o Music Printing. London, 1964. subject: history o music

printing and engraving. A.H King. The 50th Anniversary o Music Printing. 1973.

O Kinkeldey. Music And Music Printing in Incunabula. Papers of the BibliographicalSociety of America, xxvi:89-118, 1932. subject: history o music printing and engraving.


25/39


D.W. Krummel. Graphic Analysis in Application to Early American Engraved Music.Notes, xvi:213, 9 1958. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

D.W Krummel. Oblong Format in Early Music Books. The Library, 5th ser., xxvi:312,1971. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

Jefrey Lependor. ?. Perspectives of New Music, 27(2):232(20), Summer 1989. Contempo-rary notation or the shakuhachi: a primer or composers. (Tradition and Renewal in theMusic o Japan).

G.A Marco. The Earliest Music Printers o Continental Europe: a Checklist o FacsimilesIllustrating Their Work. Charlottesville, Virginia, 1962. subject: history o music printingand engraving.

K. Meyer and J OMeara. The Printing o Music, 1473-1934. The Dolphin, ii:171207,1935. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

Raymond Monelle. Comparative Literature, volume 41. Summer 1989. Music notation

and the poetic oot. A Novello. Some Account o the Methods o Musick Printing, with Specimens o the

Various Sizes o Moveable Types and o Other Matters. London, 1847. subject: history omusic printing and engraving.

C.B Oldman. Collecting Musical First Editions. London, 1934. subject: history o musicprinting and engraving.

Carl Parrish. The Notation o Medieval Music. Carl Fischer, Inc., New York, 1946. subject:early notation.

Carl Parrish. The notation o medieval music. Norton, New York, 1957. Musical notation.

Harry Patch. Genesis o a Music. University o Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1949. subject:

early notation. B Pattison. Notes on Early Music Printing. The Library, xix:389-421, 1939. subject:history o music printing and engraving.

Sandra Pinegar. Current Musicology. Number 53. July 1993. The seeds o notation andmusic paleography.

Richard Rastall. The notation o Western music : an introduction. St. Martins Press,New York, N.Y., 1982. Musical notation.

Richard Rastall. Music & Letters, volume 74. November 1993. Equal Temperament MusicNotation: The Ailler-Brennink Chromatic Notation. Results and Conclusions o the MusicNotation Reor by the Chroma Foundation (book reviews).

Howard Risatti. New Music Vocabulary. University o Illinois Press, Urbana, Illinois, 1975.

A Guide to Notational Signs or Contemporary Music. Donald W. Krummel \& Stanley Sadie. Music Printing & Publishing. Macmillan Press,

1990. subject: musical notation.

Norman E Smith. Current Musicology. Number 45-47. Jan-Dec 1990. The notation oractio modi.

W Squire. Notes on Early Music Printing. Bibliographica, iii(99), 1897. subject: history omusic printing and engraving.

Robert Steele. The Earliest English Music Printing. London, 1903. subject: history omusic printing and engraving.

Willy Tappolet. La Notation Musicale. Neuchatel, Paris, 1947. subject: general notation.

Leo Treitler. The Journal o Musicology, volume 10. Spring 1992. The unwritten andwritten transmission, o medieval chant and the start-up o musical notation. Notationalpractice developed in medieval music to address the written tradition or chant which in-teracted with the unwritten vocal tradition.


26/39


unknown author. Pictorial History o Music Printing. H. and A. Selmer, Inc., Elhardt,Indiana. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

M.L West. Music & Letters, volume 75. May 1994. The Babylonian musical notationand the Hurrian melodic texts. A new way o deciphering the ancient Babylonian musicalnotation.

C.F. Abdy Williams. The Story o Notation. Charles Scribners Sons, New York, 1903.subject: general notation.

Emmanuel Wintermitz. Musical Autographs rom Monteverdi to Hindemith. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, 1955. subject: history o music printing and engraving.

Computer notation bibliography

G. Assayaag and D. Timis. A Toolbox or music notation. In Proceedings of the 1986International Computer Music Conference, 1986.

M. Balaban. A Music Workstation Based on Multiple Hierarchical Views o Music . SanFrancisco, In Proceedings of the 1988 International Computer Music Conference, 1988.

Alan Belkin. Macintosh Notation Sotware: Present and Future. Computer Music Journal,18(1), 1994. Some music notation systems are analysed or ease o use, MIDI handling. Thearticle ends with a plea or a standard notation ormat. HWN.

Herbert Bielawa. Review o Sibelius 7. Computer Music Journal, 1993?. A raving re-view/tutorial o Sibelius 7 or Acorn. (And did they seriously program a RISC chip in ...assembler ?!) HWN.

Dorothea Blostein and Lippold Haken. Justication o Printed Music. Communications ofthe ACM, J34(3):88-99, March 1991. This paper provides a overview o the algorithm usedin LIME or spacing individual lines. HWN.

Dorothea Blostein and Lippold Haken. The Lime Music Editor: A Diagram Editor Involv-ing Complex Translations. Software Practice and Experience, 24(3):289306, march 1994.A description o various conversions, decisions and issues relating to this interactive editorHWN.

Nabil Bouzaiene, Loc Le Gall, and Emmanuel Saint-James. Une bibliotheque pour lanotation musicale baroque. LNCS. In EP 98, 1998. Describes ATYS, an extension toBerlioz, that can mimick handwritten baroque style beams.

Donald Byrd. A System or Music Printing by Computer. Computers and the Humanities,8:161-72, 1974.

Donald Byrd. Music Notation by Computer. PhD thesis, Indiana University, 1985. De-scribes the SMUT (sic) system or automated music printout.

Donald Byrd. Music Notation Sotware and Intelligence. Computer Music Journal,18(1):1720, 1994. Byrd (author o Nightingale) shows our problematic ragments o nota-tion, and rants about notation programs that try to exhibit intelligent behaviour. HWN.

Walter B Hewlett and Eleanor Selridge-Field. Directory o Computer Assisted Researchin Musicology. . Annual editions since 1985, many containing surveys o music typesettingtechnology. SP.

Alyssa Lamb. The University o Colorado Music Engraving page. 1996. Webpages aboutengraving (designed with nale users in mind) (sic) HWN.

Roger B. Dannenberg. Music Representation: Issues, Techniques, and Systems. ComputerMusic Journal, 17(3), 1993. This article points to some problems and solutions with music

representation. HWN. Michael Droettboom. Study o music Notation Description Languages. Technical Report,

2000. GUIDO and lilypond compared. LilyPond wins on practical issues as usability andavailability o tools, GUIDO wins on implementation simplicity.


27/39


R. F. Ericson. The DARMS Project: A status report. Computing in the humanities,9(6):291298, 1975. Gourlay [gourlay86] writes: A discussion o the design and potentialuses o the DARMS music-description language.

H.S. Field-Richards. Cadenza: A Music Description Language. Computer Music Journal,17(4), 1993. A description through examples o a music entry language. Apparently it hasno ormal semantics. There is also no implementation o notation convertor. HWN.

Miguel Filgueiras. Some Music Typesetting Algorithms. .

Miguel Filgueiras and Jose Paulo Leal. Representation and manipulation o music docu-ments in SceX. Electronic Publishing, 6(4):507518, 1993.

Miguel Filgueiras. Implementing a Symbolic Music Processing System. 1996.

Eric Foxley. Music A language or typesetting music scores. Software Practice andExperience, 17(8):485-502, 1987. A paper on a simple TROFF preprocessor to typesetmusic.

Loc Le Gall. Creation dune police adaptee a la notation musicale baroque. Mastersthesis, Ecole Estienne, 1997.

Martin Gieseking. Code-basierte Generierung interaktiver Notengraphik. PhD thesis,Universitat Osnabruck, 2001.

David A. Gomberg. A Computer-Oriented System or Music Printing. PhD thesis, Wash-ington University, 1975.

David A. Gomberg. A Computer-oriented System or Music Printing. Computing andthe Humanities, 11:63-80, march 1977. Gourlay [gourlay86] writes: "A discussion o theproblems o representing the conventions o musical notation in computer algorithms.".

John. S. Gourlay. A language or music printing. Communications of the ACM, 29(5):388

401, 1986. This paper describes the MusiCopy musicsetting system and an input languageto go with it.

John S. Gourlay, A. Parrish, D. Roush, F. Sola, and Y. Tien. Computer Formatting o Mu-sic. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-2/87-TR3, Department o Computer and InormationScience, The Ohio State University, 1987. This paper discusses the development o algo-rithms or the ormatting o musical scores (rom abstract). It also appeared at PROTEXTIII, Ireland 1986.

John S. Gourlay. Spacing a Line o Music,. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR35,Department o Computer and Inormation Science, The Ohio State University, 1987.

John Grver. A computer-oriented description o Music Notation. Part III: Accidental

Positioning. Technical Report 135, Department o inormatics, University o Oslo, 1989.Placement o accidentals crystallised in an enormous set o rules. Same remarks as or[grover89-twovoices] applies.

John Grver. A computer-oriented description o Music Notation. Part I. The SymbolInventory. Technical Report 133, Department o inormatics, University o Oslo, 1989. Thegoal o this series o reports is a ull description o music ormatting. As these largelydepend on parameters o onts, it starts with a verbose description o music symbols. Thesubject is treated backwards: rom general rules o typesetting the author tries to extractdimensions or characters, whereas the rules o typesetting (in a particular ont) ollowrom the dimensions o the symbols. His symbols do not match (the stringent) constraintsormulated by eg. [wanske].

John Grver. A computer-oriented description o Music Notation. Part II: Two VoiceSharing a Staf, Leger Line Rules, Dot Positioning. Technical Report 134, Department oinormatics, University o Oslo, 1989. A lot rules or what is in the title are ormulated.The descriptions are long and verbose. The verbosity shows that ormulating specic rules


28/39


is not the proper way to approach the problem. Instead, the ormulated rules should ollowrom more general rules, similar to [parrish87-simultaneities].

Lippold Haken and Dorothea Blostein. The Tilia Music Representation: Extensibility,Abstraction, and Notation Contexts or the Lime Music Editor . Computer Music Journal,17(3):4358, 1993.

Lippold Haken and Dorothea Blostein. A New Algorithm or Horizontal Spacing o PrintedMusic. Banf, In International Computer Music Conference, pages 118-119, Sept 1995. Thisdescribes an algorithm which uses springs between adjacent columns.

Wael A. Hegazy. On the Implementation o the MusiCopy Language Processor,. TechnicalReport OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR34, Department o Computer and Inormation Science, TheOhio State University, 1987. Describes the "parser" which converts MusiCopy MDL toMusiCopy Simultaneities and columns. MDL is short or Music Description Language[gourlay86]. It accepts music descriptions that are organised into measures lled with voices,

which are lled with notes. The measures can be arranged simultaneously or sequentially.To address the 2-dimensionality, almost all constructs in MDL must be labeled. MDL usesbegin/end markers or attribute values and spanners. Rightully the author concludes thatMusiCopy must administrate a "state" variable containing both properties and currentspanning symbols. MusiCopy attaches graphic inormation to the objects constructed inthe input: the elements o the input are partially complete graphic objects.

Wael A. Hegazy and John S. Gourlay. Optimal line breaking in music. Technical Re-port OSU-CISRC-8/87-TR33, Department o Computer and Inormation Science, The OhioState University,, 1987.

Wael A. Hegazy and John S. Gourlay. (J. C. van Vliet, editor). Optimal line breaking

in music. Cambridge University Press, In Proceedings of the International Conference onElectronic Publishing, Document Manipulation and Typography. Nice (France), April 1988.

Walter B. Hewlett and Eleanor Selridge-Field, editors. The Virtual Score; representation,retrieval and restoration. Computing in Musicology. MIT Press, 2001.

H. H. Hoos, K. A. Hamel, K. Renz, and J. Kilian. The GUIDO Music Notation FormatANovel Approach or Adequately Representing Score-level Music. In Proceedings of Inter-national Computer Music Conference, pages 451454, 1998.

Peter S. Langston. Unix music tools at Bellcore. Software Practice and Experience,20(S1):4761, 1990. This paper deals with some command-line tools or music editing andplayback.

Dominique Montel. La gravure de la musique, lisibilite esthetique, respect de loevre. Lyon,In Musique \& Notations, 1997.

Giovanni Muller. Interaktive Bearbeitung konventioneller Musiknotation. PhD thesis, Eid-genossische Technische Hochschule Zurich, 1990. This is about engraver-quality typesettingwith computers. It accepts the axiom that notation is too dicult to generate automati-cally. The result is that a notation program should be a WYSIWYG editor that allows oneto tweak everything.

Han Wen Nienhuys and Jan Nieuwenhuizen. LilyPond, a system or automated musicengraving. Firenze, In XIV Colloquium on Musical Informatics, pages 167172, May 2003.

Cindy Grande. NIFF6a Notation Interchange File Format. Grande Sotware Inc., 1995.

Specs or NIFF, a reasonably comprehensive but binary ormat or notation HWN. Severo M. Ornstein and John Turner Maxwell III. Mockingbird: A Composers Amanuensis.

Technical Report CSL-83-2, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill Road, PaloAlto, CA, 94304, January 1983.


29/39


Severo M. Ornstein and John Turner Maxwell III. Mockingbird: A Composers Amanuensis.Byte, 9, January 1984. A discussion o an interactive and graphical computer system ormusic composition.

Stephen Dowland Page. Computer Tools or Music Inormation Retrieval. PhD thesis,Dissertation University o Oxord, 1988. Dont ask Stephen or a copy. Write to theBodleian Library, Oxord, or to the British Library, instead. SP.

Allen Parish, Wael A. Hegazy, John S. Gourlay, Dean K. Roush, and F. Javier Sola. Musi-Copy: An automated Music Formatting System. Technical Report, 1987.

A. Parrish and John S. Gourlay. Computer Formatting o Musical Simultaneities,. Tech-nical Report OSU-CISRC-10/87-TR28, Department o Computer and Inormation Science,The Ohio State University, 1987. This note discusses placement o balls, stems, dots whichoccur at the same moment ("Simultaneity").

Steven Powell. Music engraving today. Brichtmark, 2002. A "How Steven uses Finale"

manual. Gary M. Rader. Creating Printed Music Automatically. Computer, 29(6):6169, June

1996. Describes a system called MusicEase, and explains that it uses "constraints" (whichgo unexplained) to automatically position various elements.

Kai Renz. Algorithms and data structures or a music notation system based on GUIDOmusic notation. PhD thesis, Universitat Darmstadt, 2002.

Rene Roelos. Een Geautomatiseerd Systeem voor het Adrukken van Muziek. Number45327. Masters thesis, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam, 1991. This dutch thesis describesa monophonic typesetting system, and ocuses on the breaking algorithm, which is takenrom Hegazy & Gourlay.

Joseph Rothstein. Review o Passport Designs Encore Music Notation Sotware. Computer

Music Journal, ?. Dean K. Roush. Using MusiCopy. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-18/87-TR31, Department

o Computer and Inormation Science, The Ohio State University, 1987. User manual oMusiCopy.

D. Roush. Music Formatting Guidelines. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-3/88-TR10, De-partment o Computer and Inormation Science, The Ohio State University, 1988. Ruleson ormatting music ormulated or use in computers. Mainly distilled rom [Ross] HWN.

Eleanor Selridge-Field, editor. Beyond MIDI: the handbook o musical codes. MIT Press,1997. A description o various music interchange ormats.

Donald Sloan. Aspects o Music Representation in HyTime/SMDL. Computer Music Jour-nal, 17(4), 1993. An introduction into HyTime and its score description variant SMDL.With a short example that is quite lengthy in SMDL.

International Organization or Standardization~(ISO). Inormation Technology - DocumentDescription and Processing Languages - Standard Music Description Language (SMDL).Number ISO/IEC DIS 10743. 1992.

Leland Smith. Editing and Printing Music by Computer, volume 17. 1973. Gourlay[gourlay86] writes: A discussion o Smiths music-printing system SCORE.

F. Sola. Computer Design o Musical Slurs, Ties and Phrase Marks,. Technical ReportOSU-CISRC-10/87-TR32, Department o Computer and Inormation Science, The OhioState University, 1987. Overview o a procedure or generating slurs.

F. Sola and D. Roush. Design o Musical Beams,. Technical Report OSU-CISRC-10/87-

TR30, Department o Computer and Inormation Science, The Ohio State University, 1987.Calculating beam slopes HWN.

Howard Wright. how to read and write tab: a guide to tab notation. . FAQ (with answers)about TAB, the ASCII variant o Tablature. HWN.


30/39


Geraint Wiggins, Eduardo Miranda, Alaaaan Smaill, and Mitch Harris. A Framework orthe evaluation o music representation systems. Computer Music Journal, 17(3), 1993. Acategorisation o music representation systems (languages, OO systems etc) split into high

level and low level expressiveness. The discussion o Charm and parallel processing ormusic representation is rather vague. HWN.

Engraving bibliography

Harald Banter. Akkord Lexikon. Schotts Sohne, Mainz, Germany, 1987. Comprehensiveoverview o commonly used chords. Suggests (and uses) a unication or all diferent kindso chord names.

A Barksdale. The Printed Note: 500 Years o Music Printing and Engraving. The ToledoMuseum o Art, Toledo, Ohio, January 1957. The exhibition "The Printed Note" attemptsto show the various processes used since the second o the 15th century or reproducingmusic mechanically ... . The illustration mostly eature ancient music.

Laszlo Boehm. Modern Music Notation. G. Schirmer, Inc., New York, 1961. Heussenstammwrites: A handy compact reerence book in basic notation.

H. Elliot Button. System in Musical Notation. Novello and co., London, 1920.

Herbert Chlapik. Die Praxis des Notengraphikers. Doblinger, 1987. An clearly writtenbook or the casually interested reader. It shows some o the conventions and diculties inprinting music HWN.

Anthony Donato. Preparing Music Manuscript. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Clifs, NJ, 1963.

Donemus. Uitgeven van muziek. Donemus Amsterdam, 1982. Manual on copying orcomposers and copyists at the Dutch publishing house Donemus. Besides general commentson copying, it also contains a lot o hands-on advice or making perormance material ormodern pieces.

William Gamble. Music Engraving and printing. Historical and Technical Treatise. SirIsaac Pitman & Sons, ltd., 1923. This patriotic book was an attempt to promote and helpBritish music engravers. It is somewhat similar to Haders book [hader48] in scope andstyle, but Gamble ocuses more on technical details (Which French punch cutters are worthbuying rom, etc.), and does not treat typographical details, such as optical illusions. It isavailable as reprint rom Da Capo Press, New York (1971).

Tom Gerou and Linda Lusk. Essential Dictionary o Music Notation. Alred Publishing,Van Nuys CA, 1996. A cheap, concise, alphabetically ordered list o typesetting and music(notation) issues with a rather simplistic attitude but in most cases "good-enough" answers

JCN. Karl Hader. Aus der Werkstatt eines Notenstechers. WaldheimEberle Verlag, Vienna,

1948. Hader was a chie-engraver in a Viennese engraving workshop. This beautiul bookletwas intended as an introduction or laymen on the art o engraving. It contains a step bystep, in-depth explanation o how to cut and stamp music into zinc plates. It also containsa ew compactly ormulated rules on musical orthography. Out o print.

George Heussenstamm. The Norton Manual o Music Notation. Norton, New York, 1987.Hands-on instruction book or copying (ie. handwriting) music. Fairly complete. HWN.

Klaus Ignatzek. Die Jazzmethode ur Klavier 1. Schott, 1995. This book contains a systemor denoting chords that is used in LilyPond.

Andreas Jaschinski, editor. Notation. Number BVK1625. Barenreiter Verlag, 2000.

Harold Johnson. How to write music manuscript. Carl Fischer, Inc., New York, 1946.

Erdhard Karkoshka. Notation in New Music; a critical guide to interpretation and realisa-tion. Praeger Publishers, New York, 1972. (Out o print).


31/39


Mark Mc Grain. Music notation. Hal Leonard Publishing Corporation, 1991. HWN writes:Book edition o lecture notes rom XXX school o music. The book looks like it is xeroxedrom bad printouts. The content has nothing you wont nd in other books like [read] or

[heussenstamm].

mpa. Standard music notation specications or computer programming.. MPA, December1996. Pamphlet explaining a ew ne points in music ont design HWN.

Richard Rastall. The Notation o Western Music: an Introduction. J. M. Dent \& SonsLondon, 1983. Interesting account o the evolution and origin o common notation startingrom neumes, and ending with modern innovations HWN.

Gardner Read. Modern Rhythmic Notation. Indiana University Press, 1978. Sound (bor-ing) review o the various hairy rhythmic notations used by avant-garde composers HWN.

Gardner Read. Music Notation: a Manual o Modern Practice. Taplinger Publishing, NewYork, 1979. This is as close to the standard reerence work or music notation issues as

one is likely to get. Clinton Roemer. The Art o Music Copying. Roerick music co., Sherman Oaks (CA),

2nd edition, 1984. Out o print. Heussenstamm writes: an instructional manual whichspecializes in methods used in the commercial eld.

Glen Rosecrans. Music Notation Primer. Passantino, New York, 1979. Heussenstammwrites: Limited in scope, similar to [Roemer84].

Carl A Rosenthal. A Practical Guide to Music Notation. MCA Music, New York, 1967.Heussenstamm writes: Inormative in terms o traditional notation. Does not concern scorepreparation.

Ted Ross. Teach yoursel the art o music engraving and processing. Hansen House, Miami,Florida, 1987.

Schirmer. The G. Schirmer Manual o Style and Usage. The G. Schirmer PublicationsDepartment, New York, 2001. This is the style guide or Schirmer publications. Thismanual specically ocuses on preparing print or publication by Schirmer. It discussesmany details that are not in other, normal notation books. It also gives a good idea o whatis necessary to bring printouts to publication quality. It can be ordered rom the rentaldepartment.

Kurt Stone. Music Notation in the Twentieth Century. Norton, New York, 1980. Heussen-stamm writes: The most important book on notation in recent years.

Borje Tyboni. Noter Handbok I Traditionell Notering. Gehrmans Musikorlag, Stockholm,1994. Swedish book on music notation.

Albert C. Vinci. Fundamentals o Traditional Music Notation. Kent State University Press,1989.

Helene Wanske. Musiknotation Von der Syntax des Notenstichs zum EDV-gesteuertenNotensatz. Schott-Verlag, Mainz, 1988.

Maxwell Weaner and Walter Boelke. Standard Music Notation Practice. Music PublishersAssociation o the United States Inc, New York, 1993.

Johannes Wol. Handbuch der Notationskunde. Breitkop & Hartel, Leipzig, 1919. Verythorough treatment (in two volumes) o the history o music notation.


32/39

Appendix A: GNU Free Documentation License 30

Appendix A GNU Free Documentation License

Version 1.3, 3 November 2008

Copyright c 2000, 2001, 2002, 2007, 2008 Free Sotware Foundation, Inc.http://fsf.org/

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copieso this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

0. PREAMBLE

The purpose o this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other unctional and useuldocument free in the sense o reedom: to assure everyone the efective reedom to copyand redistribute it, with or without modiying it, either commercially or noncommercially.Secondarily, this License preserves or the author and publisher a way to get credit or theirwork, while not being considered responsible or modications made by others.

This License is a kind o copylet, which means that derivative works o the documentmust themselves be ree in the same sense. It complements the GNU General Public License,which is a copylet license designed or ree sotware.

We have designed this License in order to use it or manuals or ree sotware, because reesotware needs ree documentation: a ree program should come with manuals providing thesame reedoms that the sotware does. But this License is not limited to sotware manuals;it can be used or any textual work, regardless o subject matter or whether it is publishedas a printed book. We recommend this License principally or works whose purpose isinstruction or reerence.

1. APPLICABILITY AND DEFINITIONS

This License applies to any manual or other work, in any medium, that contains a noticeplaced by the copyright holder saying it can be distributed under the terms o this License.Such a notice grants a world-wide, royalty-ree license, unlimited in duration, to use thatwork under the conditions stated herein. The Document, below, reers to any such manualor work. Any member o the public is a licensee, and is addressed as you. You acceptthe license i you copy, modiy or distribute the work in a way requiring permission undercopyright law.

A Modied Version o the Document means any work containing the Document or aportion o it, either copied verbatim, or with modications and/or translated into anotherlanguage.

A Secondary Section is a named appendix or a ront-matter section o the Document

that deals exclusively with the relationship o the publishers or authors o the Documentto the Documents overall subject (or to related matters) and contains nothing that couldall directly within that overall subject. (Thus, i the Document is in part a textbook omathematics, a Secondary Section may not explain any mathematics.) The relationshipcould be a matter o historical connection with the subject or with related matters, or olegal, commercial, philosophical, ethical or political position regarding them.

The Invariant Sections are certain Secondary Sections whose titles are designated, asbeing those o Invariant Sections, in the notice that says that the Document is releasedunder this License. I a section does not t the above denition o Secondary then it is notallowed to be designated as Invariant. The Document may contain zero Invariant Sections.I the Document does not identiy any Invariant Sections then there are none.

The Cover Texts are certain short passages o text that are listed, as Front-Cover Texts orBack-Cover Texts, in the notice that says that the Document is released under this License.A Front-Cover Text may be at most 5 words, and a Back-Cover Text may be at most 25words.
http://fsf.org/http://fsf.org/


33/39


A Transparent copy o the Document means a machine-readable copy, represented in aormat whose specication is available to the general public, that is suitable or revisingthe document straightorwardly with generic text editors or (or images composed o pixels)

generic paint programs or (or drawings) some widely available drawing editor, and that issuitable or input to text ormatters or or automatic translation to a variety o ormatssuitable or input to text ormatters. A copy made in an otherwise Transparent le ormatwhose markup, or absence o markup, has been arranged to thwart or discourage subsequentmodication by readers is not Transparent. An image ormat is not Transparent i used orany substantial amount o text. A copy that is not Transparent is called Opaque.

Examples o suitable ormats or Transparent copies include plain ascii without markup,Texino input ormat, LaTEX input ormat, SGML or XML using a publicly available DTD,and standard-conorming simple HTML, PostScript or PDF designed or human modica-tion. Examples o transparent image ormats include PNG, XCF and JPG. Opaque ormatsinclude proprietary ormats that can be read and edited only by proprietary word proces-

sors, SGML or XML or which the DTD and/or processing tools are not generally available,and the machine-generated HTML, PostScript or PDF produced by some word processorsor output purposes only.

The Title Page means, or a printed book, the title page itsel, plus such ollowing pagesas are needed to hold, legibly, the material this License requires to appear in the title page.For works in ormats which do not have any title page as such, Title Page means thetext near the most prominent appearance o the works title, preceding the beginning o thebody o the text.

The publisher means any person or entity that distributes copies o the Document to thepublic.

A section Entitled XYZ means a named subunit o the Document whose title eitheris precisely XYZ or contains XYZ in parentheses ollowing text that translates XYZ inanother language. (Here XYZ stands or a specic section name mentioned below, suchas Acknowledgements, Dedications, Endorsements, or History.) To Preserve theTitle o such a section when you modiy the Document means that it remains a sectionEntitled XYZ according to this denition.

The Document may include Warranty Disclaimers next to the notice which states thatthis License applies to the Document. These Warranty Disclaimers are considered to beincluded by reerence in this License, but only as regards disclaiming warranties: any otherimplication that these Warranty Disclaimers may have is void and has no efect on themeaning o this License.

2. VERBATIM COPYINGYou may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncom-mercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice sayingthis License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add noother conditions whatsoever to those o this License. You may not use technical measuresto obstruct or control the reading or urther copying o the copies you make or distribute.However, you may accept compensation in exchange or copies. I you distribute a largeenough number o copies you must also ollow the conditions in section 3.

You may also lend copies, under the same conditions stated above, and you may publiclydisplay copies.

3. COPYING IN QUANTITY

I you publish printed copies (or copies in media that commonly have printed covers) o theDocument, numbering more than 100, and the Documents license notice requires CoverTexts, you must enclose the copies in covers that carry, clearly and legibly, all these CoverTexts: Front-Cover Texts on the ront cover, and Back-Cover Texts on the back cover. Both


34/39


covers must also clearly and legibly identiy you as the publisher o these copies. The rontcover must present the ull title with all words o the title equally prominent and visible.You may add other material on the covers in addition. Copying with changes limited to

the covers, as long as they preserve the title o the Document and satisy these conditions,can be treated as verbatim copying in other respects.

I the required texts or either cover are too voluminous to t legibly, you should put therst ones listed (as many as t reasonably) on the actual cover, and continue the rest ontoadjacent pages.

I you publish or distribute Opaque copies o the Document numbering more than 100, youmust either include a machine-readable Transparent copy along with each Opaque copy,or state in or with each Opaque copy a computer-network location rom which the generalnetwork-using public has access to download using public-standard network protocols acomplete Transparent copy o the Document, ree o added material. I you use the latteroption, you must take reasonably prudent steps, when you begin distribution o Opaquecopies in quantity, to ensure that this Transparent copy will remain thus accessible at thestated location until at least one year ater the last time you distribute an Opaque copy(directly or through your agents or retailers) o that edition to the public.

It is requested, but not required, that you contact the authors o the Document well beoreredistributing any large number o copies, to give them a chance to provide you with anupdated version o the Document.

4. MODIFICATIONS

You may copy and distribute a Modied Version o the Document under the conditionso sections 2 and 3 above, provided that you release the Modied Version under preciselythis License, with the Modied Version lling the role o the Document, thus licensing

distribution and modication o the Modied Version to whoever possesses a copy o it. Inaddition, you must do these things in the Modied Version:

A. Use in the Title Page (and on the covers, i any) a title distinct rom that o theDocument, and rom those o previous versions (which should, i there were any, belisted in the History section o the Document). You may use the same title as a previousversion i the original publisher o that version gives permission.

B. List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities responsible orauthorship o the modications in the Modied Version, together with at least ve othe principal authors o the Document (all o its principal authors, i it has ewer thanve), unless they release you rom this requirement.

C. State on the Title page the name o the publisher o the Modied Version, as the

publisher.D. Preserve all the copyright notices o the Document.

E. Add an appropriate copyright notice or your modications adjacent to the other copy-right notices.

F. Include, immediately ater the copyright notices, a license notice giving the publicpermission to use the Modied Version under the terms o this License, in the ormshown in the Addendum below.

G. Preserve in that license notice the ull lists o Invariant Sections and required CoverTexts given in the Documents license notice.

H. Include an unaltered copy o this License.

I. Preserve the section Entitled History, Preserve its Title, and add to it an item statingat least the title, year, new authors, and publisher o the Modied Version as givenon the Title Page. I there is no section Entitled History in the Document, createone stating the title, year, authors, and publisher o the Document as given on its


35/39


Title Page, then add an item describing the Modied Version as stated in the previoussentence.

J. Preserve the network location, i any, given in the Document or public access to aTransparent copy o the Document, and likewise the network locations given in theDocument or previous versions it was based on. These may be placed in the Historysection. You may omit a network location or a work that was published at least ouryears beore the Document itsel, or i the original publisher o the version it reers togives permission.

K. For any section Entitled Acknowledgements or Dedications, Preserve the Titleo the section, and preserve in the section all the substance and tone o each o thecontributor acknowledgements and/or dedications given therein.

L. Preserve all the Invariant Sections o the Document, unaltered in their text and in theirtitles. Section numbers or the equivalent are not considered part o the section titles.

M. Delete any section Entitled Endorsements. Such a section may not be included inthe Modied Version.

N. Do not retitle any existing section to be Entitled Endorsements or to conict in titlewith any Invariant Section.

O. Preserve any Warranty Disclaimers.

I the Modied Version includes new ront-matter sections or appendices that qualiy asSecondary Sections and contain no material copied rom the Document, you may at youroption designate some or all o these sections as invariant. To do this, add their titles tothe list o Invariant Sections in the Modied Versions license notice. These titles must bedistinct rom any other section titles.

You may add a section Entitled Endorsements, provided it contains nothing but endorse-ments o your Modied Version by various partiesor example, statements o peer reviewor that the text has been approved by an organization as the authoritative denition o astandard.

You may add a passage o up to ve words as a Front-Cover Text, and a passage o upto 25 words as a Back-Cover Text, to the end o the list o Cover Texts in the ModiedVersion. Only one passage o Front-Cover Text and one o Back-Cover Text may be addedby (or through arrangements made by) any one entity. I the Document already includesa cover text or the same cover, previously added by you or by arrangement made by thesame entity you are acting on behal o, you may not add another; but you may replace theold one, on explicit permission rom the previous publisher that added the old one.

The author(s) and publisher(s) o the Document do not by this License give permission touse their names or publicity or or to assert or imply endorsement o any Modied Version.

5. COMBINING DOCUMENTS

You may combine the Document with other documents released under this License, underthe terms dened in section 4 above or modied versions, provided that you include in thecombination all o the Invariant Sections o all o the original documents, unmodied, andlist them all as Invariant Sections o your combined work in its license notice, and that youpreserve all their Warranty Disclaimers.

The combined work need only contain one copy o this License, and multiple identicalInvariant Sections may be replaced with a single copy. I there are multiple Invariant

Sections with the same name but diferent contents, make the title o each such sectionunique by adding at the end o it, in parentheses, the name o the original author orpublisher o that section i known, or else a unique number. Make the same adjustment tothe section titles in the list o Invariant Sections in the license notice o the combined work.


36/39


In the combination, you must combine any sections Entitled History in the various originaldocuments, orming one section Entitled History; likewise combine any sections EntitledAcknowledgements, and any sections Entitled Dedications. You must delete all sections

Entitled Endorsements.

6. COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS

You may make a collection consisting o the Document and other documents released underthis License, and replace the individual copies o this License in the various documents witha single copy that is included in the collection, provided that you ollow the rules o thisLicense or verbatim copying o each o the documents in all other respects.

You may extract a single document rom such a collection, and distribute it individuallyunder this License, provided you insert a copy o this License into the extracted document,and ollow this License in all other respects regarding verbatim copying o that document.

7. AGGREGATION WITH INDEPENDENT WORKS

A compilation o the Document or its derivatives with other separate and independentdocuments or works, in or on a volume o a storage or distribution medium, is called anaggregate i the copyright resulting rom the compilation is not used to limit the legalrights o the compilations users beyond what the individual works permit. When theDocument is included in an aggregate, this License does not apply to the other works inthe aggregate which are not themselves derivative works o the Document.

I the Cover Text requirement o section 3 is applicable to these copies o the Document,then i the Document is less than one hal o the entire aggregate, the Documents CoverTexts may be placed on covers that bracket the Document within the aggregate, or theelectronic equivalent o covers i the Document is in electronic orm. Otherwise they mustappear on printed covers that bracket the whole aggregate.

8. TRANSLATION

Translation is considered a kind o modication, so you may distribute translations o theDocument under the terms o section 4. Replacing Invariant Sections with translationsrequires special permission rom their copyright holders, but you may include translationso some or all Invariant Sections in addition to the original versions o these InvariantSections. You may include a translation o this License, and all the license notices inthe Document, and any Warranty Disclaimers, provided that you also include the originalEnglish version o this License and the original versions o those notices and disclaimers. Incase o a disagreement between the translation and the original version o this License or anotice or disclaimer, the original version will prevail.

I a section in the Document is Entitled Acknowledgements, Dedications, or History,the requirement (section 4) to Preserve its Title (section 1) will typically require changingthe actual title.

9. TERMINATION

You may not copy, modiy, sublicense, or distribute the Document except as expressly pro-vided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modiy, sublicense, or distributeit is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License.

However, i you cease all violation o this License, then your license rom a particular copy-right holder is reinstated (a) provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitlyand nally terminates your license, and (b) permanently, i the copyright holder ails tonotiy you o the violation by some reasonable means prior to 60 days ater the cessation.

Moreover, your license rom a particular copyright holder is reinstated permanently i thecopyright holder noties you o the violation by some reasonable means, this is the rsttime you have received notice o violation o this License (or any work) rom that copyrightholder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days ater your receipt o the notice.


37/39


Termination o your rights under this section does not terminate the licenses o partieswho have received copies or rights rom you under this License. I your rights have beenterminated and not permanently reinstated, receipt o a copy o some or all o the same

material does not give you any rights to use it.

10. FUTURE REVISIONS OF THIS LICENSE

The Free Sotware Foundation may publish new, revised versions o the GNU Free Doc-umentation License rom time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to thepresent version, but may difer in detail to address new problems or concerns. See http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/ .

Each version o the License is given a distinguishing version number. I the Documentspecies that a particular numbered version o this License or any later version appliesto it, you have the option o ollowing the terms and conditions either o that speciedversion or o any later version that has been published (not as a drat) by the Free Sotware

Foundation. I the Document does not speciy a version number o this License, you maychoose any version ever published (not as a drat) by the Free Sotware Foundation. I theDocument species that a proxy can decide which uture versions o this License can beused, that proxys public statement o acceptance o a version permanently authorizes youto choose that version or the Document.

11. RELICENSING

Massive Multiauthor Collaboration Site (or MMC Site) means any World Wide Webserver that publishes copyrightable works and also provides prominent acilities or anybodyto edit those works. A public wiki that anybody can edit is an example o such a server. AMassive Multiauthor Collaboration (or MMC) contained in the site means any set ocopyrightable works thus published on the MMC site.

CC-BY-SA means the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license publishedby Creative Commons Corporation, a not-or-prot corporation with a principal place obusiness in San Francisco, Caliornia, as well as uture copylet versions o that licensepublished by that same organization.

Incorporate means to publish or republish a Document, in whole or in part, as part oanother Document.

An MMC is eligible or relicensing i it is licensed under this License, and i all works thatwere rst published under this License somewhere other than this MMC, and subsequentlyincorporated in whole or in part into the MMC, (1) had no cover texts or invariant sections,and (2) were thus incorporated prior to November 1, 2008.

The operator o an MMC Site may republish an MMC contained in the site under CC-BY-SA on the same site at any time beore August 1, 2009, provided the MMC is eligible orrelicensing.
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/


38/39


ADDENDUM: How to use this License for your documents

To use this License in a document you have written, include a copy o the License in the document

and put the ollowing copyright and license notices just ater the title page:Copyright (C) year your name.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document

under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3

or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation;

with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover

Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled ``GNU

Free Documentation License''.

I you have Invariant Sections, Front-Cover Texts and Back-Cover Texts, replace thewith. . .Texts. line with this:

with the Invariant Sections being list their titles, with

the Front-Cover Texts being list, and with the Back-Cover Texts

being list.

I you have Invariant Sections without Cover Texts, or some other combination o the three,merge those two alternatives to suit the situation.

I your document contains nontrivial examples o program code, we recommend releasingthese examples in parallel under your choice o ree sotware license, such as the GNU GeneralPublic License, to permit their use in ree sotware.


39/39

Appendix B: LilyPond index 37

Appendix B LilyPond index

Aautomated engraving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Bbalance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

blackness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Ccollisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

contexts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Eengraver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

engraving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4, 13

engraving multiple voices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

engraving, automated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

examples, simple . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Font . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

ormatting a score . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

ormatting rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Lledger lines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

MManuals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

music engraving. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4

music typography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

musical symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Ooptical spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Pplate engraving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

plug-in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

polyphony . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Rrecursive structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

regular rhythms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

regular spacing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

SScheme programming language . . . .