[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Do we really offer the future?
From: |
Kieren MacMillan |
Subject: |
Re: Do we really offer the future? |
Date: |
Mon, 20 Apr 2015 09:52:54 -0400 |
Hi Federico (et al.),
>> I've thought for a long time that the right way to go is to seek
>> public funds for engraving public domain contents
> Me too.
I think it’s telling that most of the non-publishing music world is going in
exactly the opposite direction: schools are adding “musical entrepreneurship”
courses, programs, and degrees all over, in an attempt to teach musicians how
to avoid the trap of relying only on public funds; and there is a significant
(and mostly successful) grassroots effort to abandon the dying “not-for-profit”
model of musical organziations in favour of a model where pleasing the paying
audience actually matters to some extent.
> I started thinking about bringing LilyPond in music schools. Even though I
> never tried because of lack of time, I can imagine two major issues:
> 1. LilyPond is not considered as a professional tool because it's not used by
> the publishing companies. In general schools teach what the market asks.
> That's why I think that this effort by Urs is important.
> 2. Text input. Frescobaldi is doing a good job here, but still.
From the [many] discussions I’ve had with music schools large and small, the
second is *far* less important than the first. And rightly so: all other things
being equal, higher education should be teaching students skills and tools [!!]
which they can immediately apply to their careers. Unfortunately, as long as
Lilypond is a pariah amongst publishers, it does a disservice to students to
teach them Lilypond at the expense of other things.
Cheers,
Kieren.
________________________________
Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: address@hidden
Re: Do we really offer the future?, Jim Long, 2015/04/20
Re: Do we really offer the future?, Andrew Bernard, 2015/04/19