Re: Is Sibelius really as bad as this?

[Urs Liska]

Am 29.05.2015 um 16:23 schrieb Richard Shann:
> On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 10:29 +0200, Urs Liska wrote:
> > Am 29.05.2015 um 10:13 schrieb Richard Shann:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 21:16 +0200, Jacques Menu wrote:
> > > > Hello Richard,
> > > >
> > > > Find attached what I get after raw import of the XML file into Sibelius 7.1.3 
> > > > and then export as PDF.
> > > >
> > > > It seems there’s no difference with what you got from IMSLP.
> > > >
> > > > JM
> > > Well, again I couldn't view this in Evince but I could open it with
> > > Iceweasel, and it shows something interesting: in bar 13 the original
> > > has a cautionary accidental in parentheses.
> > >
> > > Denemo's MusicXML import ignores this field (yes! I've submitted a bug
> > > report for this) so I have inserted it manually, getting the attached
> > > typeset LilyPondBar13.png.
> > >
> > > The hand-written Sibelius output was particularly bad for this (see
> > > SibeliusHandGenerated.ly), while Sibelius's MusicXML import, like
> > > Denemo's, ignored the cautionary attribute when re-importing its own
> > > MusicXML (see SibeliusImportedFromMusicXML.png attached - this has been
> > > snipped from your file).
> > >
> > > Reading this mailing list gave me the impression that Sibelius was a
> > > required format for some publishing houses.
> > This is correct. From my own experience and comments by others most
> > (major) publishers require you to submit one of the following:;
> > - Finale files
> > - Sibelius files
> > - SCORE files
> > - ((((PDF))))
> >
> > > How can this be?
> > Good question.
> > Has to be put also the other way round: How can it be that practically
> > noone accepts LilyPond yet? It can't be the text approach alone,
> > otherwise they wouldn't use SCORE (and sometimes even Amadeus which is
> > very similar to LilyPond in a way).
> I think the answer may be that they re-typeset everything in-house, so
> even a manuscript is acceptable. Have you ever had a chance to ask them?

No, maybe I wasn't clear.
These are the file formats publishers work with, so they want the files 
to be able to fine-tune them to their standards and have the option to 
apply future fixes.

Re-typesetting is what very few publishers do nowadays because it's of 
course cheaper to let the editors do the bulk of the work for free. I 
know of some Gesamtausgaben where the editors supply *anything* because 
it will be re-typeset, and Henle does so. But most others expect you to 
deliver near-print-ready files, mostly Finale or Sibelius.

Urs


> Richard