Re: workflow advice: avoiding wrong octave errors?

[mason]

Thanks Kieren,

On 08/23, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> My primary suggestion: use absolute instead of relative note entry, and you 
> will never have incorrect octavation again.  :)

I thought of that, but my worry is that I'll still make octave errors,
but each will result in one transposed note instead of a transposed
phrase, which might be even less apparent than proofreading. I also find
relative note entry to be more intuitive and human readable. Maybe it
wouldn't be so bad if I got used to it though.

> My secondary suggestion: to make entry fast and super-accurate, use MIDI 
> entry if possible.

I have never looked into MIDI entry for Lilypond. I was never fond of it
back when I used Sibelius, because correcting things like the spelling
of accidentals became more trouble than it was worth. A quick search
finds this,[1] which likes like it has the potential for a reasonable
workflow. What's your experience with MIDI entry?

> If you stick with relative note entry, then perhaps use octave checks 
> regularly?

Now that I know about octave checks I'm going to start using them and
see if that's enough to avoid octave errors. Depending on how that goes
I might try out absolute or MIDI entry next.

Mason

[1] https://github.com/jurihock/lilyfrog

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature