13 Jun
2003
13 Jun
'03
3:57 p.m.
Hi folks,
I'm a kde user and musician. I've looked at both programs and am unable to
determine what the major differences are between the two. What makes one
better than the other? I'm trying to figure out which one to install. I'd
install both, but it;s a bit of work.
What are th major feature differences between the two? Note edit seems
all-round better for score handling..
Thanx,
Bearcat M. Sandor
13 Jun
13 Jun
7:59 p.m.
On Friday 13 Jun 2003 5:44 pm, Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
What makes one better than the other? I'm trying
to figure out
which one to install.
As a Rosegarden-4 developer, not only am I not impartial but also I'm
not a typical Rosegarden user and am not really a NoteEdit user at
all. So obviously I can't give you a user's perspective, but that's
not going to stop me! At least I can describe some of the intended
differences between the two, assuming you principally want to enter
and edit music as score.
The big obvious difference is that NoteEdit is intended to be purely a
score editor, while Rosegarden-4 is rather grandly intended to be
some kind of composition and performance tool, which basically means
a MIDI/audio sequencer that does score editing.
This means that NoteEdit supports quite a bit more score notation than
Rosegarden and makes a lot of it easier to use, but includes
play/record facilities only so far as they are directly helpful in
editing score, and sometimes makes them a bit obscure -- for example,
the first time I looked at it I never got as far as discovering that
it could import MIDI files, as that feature was not on the File menu
but instead on a menu obscurely labelled "TSE3" (the name of the MIDI
engine it uses).
Meanwhile, the implementation of some notation features in
Rosegarden-4 has been slowed by the problem of having to make them
editable and playable in formats other than notation and the fact
that the developers have to work on all sorts of stuff besides score.
(I say that with some bitterness, having wasted quite a bit of good
notation-coding time on tedious MIDI-device stuff recently.) For
example it can't even draw repeats on your barlines yet, let alone
segnos and first/second variations; the implementation of grace notes
is still very rudimentary; and nobody's got around to implementing
things like guitar tab yet. On the other hand, it includes handy
non-notation things like a matrix (pianoroll) editor, and can do cool
stuff like recording MIDI and then quantizing it only for the
notation editor without losing the original performance timings. And
it still does a reasonable amount of notation (including n-tuplets,
nonstandard noteheads etc).
Both of them allow you to enter notes with the mouse, PC keyboard, or
MIDI keyboard.
NoteEdit employs the paradigm in which it comes up with a blank score
at the start and you just keep inserting notes, and it starts a new
bar whenever it needs to (which is one reason why I think it may be
modelled on NoteWorthy Composer -- although I suppose it could be
modelled on Rosegarden-2.1). Rosegarden-4 expects you to define and
resize your staffs on an overview editor (in a sequencer style) and
stops you entering stuff into the notation editor when you reach the
end of a staff.
Both allow changes of time sig, key sig, clef etc and support the
usual accidentals.
Both allow you to see and edit several staffs at once.
Both can turn your dynamics into MIDI velocities, make tempo changes
during playback to match those in the composition, and so on.
Both do "proper" notation layout, in the sense that they don't just
stick the notes at positions proportional to their times and end up
with a complete mess as some sequencers do (MusE and Brahms for
example, if I remember correctly).
Neither of them does it as well as Sibelius or Finale.
Both can export MIDI and Lilypond files; NoteEdit can also export to
ABC, PMX and MusiXTeX, while Rosegarden can export Csound scorefiles,
MusicXML and Mup. (NoteEdit perhaps doesn't need to have Mup export
as its native file format is based on Mup anyway.) Rosegarden can
also print score direct from the application, though the results are
currently so bad you probably wouldn't want to.
Rosegarden is generally flashier -- antialiased notes, optional
textured backgrounds, nattier key signature and clef dialogs etc.
NoteEdit has (IMHO) some rather clunky menu and dialog layout: the
most painful bit of GUI (the use of the middle mouse button to insert
notes) has been fixed in the 2.1.x/2.2.x releases, but I can still
never work out how to do simple stuff like play from the somewhere in
the middle of the piece, while Rosegarden has a nice transport window
with all that kind of stuff in it, and can do things like playing a
selected region in a loop while you edit it.
NoteEdit has rather more complete help than Rosegarden, which of
course makes inexcusable that I don't know how to do basic stuff like
the foregoing with it. Rosegarden does have help, and the help for
notation isn't too bad, but it's not as finished.
NoteEdit's GUI comes in English, German, Italian, Slovak and Swedish;
Rosegarden's in English, German, Spanish, Russian and Welsh.
Both of them can still be annoyingly flaky at times. SuSE 8.2, which
is my preferred distro in most other ways, includes a version of
NoteEdit that crashes on startup if you have no MIDI devices and a
version of Rosegarden that can't play in the right time (though I
suspect that's SuSE's fault for building it with a buggy compiler).
And in the course of quickly researching this email I imported a few
MIDI files into the latest versions of both and tried displaying and
printing them via Lilypond; Rosegarden generally did a better job of
on-screen display (it looks nicer, and one of the files apparently
hung NoteEdit) but they actually both failed to produce Lilypond
output that Lilypond could immediately use: Rosegarden output an
unparseable hairpin, NoteEdit provoked a weird "Dimension too large"
error from LaTeX. (Joerg/Jan, I can send you details of the NoteEdit
problems if you like.) Of course that's no test of editing.
Rosegarden has a more obvious community about it, with active mailing
lists, bug trackers, apparently a greater number of casual
contributors. NoteEdit appears to be developed by a smaller number
of people with no dedicated mailing list etc. I'm not sure that
really makes any difference though. Both are actively worked on,
have been for some time, and probably will be for some time more.
And that's about all that comes to mind.
Hey, I rather enjoyed that. I wouldn't mind seeing a reply from one
of the NoteEdit developers, as I've probably inadvertantly slandered
them somewhere.
Chris
8:48 p.m.
On Friday 13 Jun 2003 9:40 pm, Chris Cannam wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing a reply from
one of the NoteEdit developers, as I've probably inadvertantly
slandered them somewhere.
Actually, reading it through again, I realise the opposite may be
true: I probably haven't done much of a job of explaining why anyone
would prefer to use Rosegarden. What a great salesman I am. Not
that it makes any difference, since they're both free.
The principle about Rosegarden is that all of the non-notation stuff
is actually useful when working on notation as well, particularly if
you're doing composition rather than just transcribing scores. For
example, it does a good job of helping prepare reasonable MIDI
performances: it can estimate things like velocities from the score,
and can remember the performed times and durations of notes even
while tidying them up for score purposes. It includes a quantizer
dedicated to producing readable score, that admittedly still needs
work but still does pretty much as good a job from performance
timings as (say) Sibelius does (although Rosegarden really needs
tempo-tracking as well -- it's on my to-do list). You can use it
(with a soft synth or external synth and mixer) to render your
compositions down to audio tracks. It has configurable program/bank
patch maps for MIDI devices, including a number of popular devices as
standard. Flashy stuff like antialiasing for notes isn't just for
show, it makes it much easier to see and follow scores in smaller
sizes; and having a nice friendly GUI is also a genuinely useful
thing.
There are also several areas where it has interesting potential rather
than immediate utility, but they maybe aren't of much interest here.
And there are some real downsides (here I go again with my
non-salesman stuff). It sometimes behaves inconsistently or
unexpectedly for reasons connected to the fact that it's manipulating
sequenceable data behind the scenes -- i.e. things like tuplets and
grace notes are stored in playable form rather than displayable form,
and it takes some testing to get all the potential conversion cases
working correctly. Many of the natty features described above are
incomplete: for example the notation quantizer can guess slurs,
tenuto etc but it tends to do so in rather inappropriate places at
the moment. The lyric editor is weaker than NoteEdit's (forgot to
mention that last time). And of course perhaps what you want is an
editor you can enter whatever you like into, and that will do
whatever you tell it with it, instead of an editor that thinks it
knows what you're doing.
And the Rosegarden developers talk too damn much.
Chris
14 Jun
14 Jun
5:20 a.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Chris,
Wow. Thank you for the detailed reply. You answered all my questions! I
think the untilamate answer for me would be, use both. I think I'll use
RoseGarden to get the initial score in to the system and then use NoteEdit
for the fine tuning (so to speak). I some respects I suppose Note Edit is
kinda a graphical interface for musixtex.
One point you forgot was that Rosegarden is easier to install. Since Note Edit
is tied to the musixtex stuff there are a million dependances to be met. I
even had to fix one of the directories in a source code file to get it to
install at al and I still can't install the main code base.
Happy listening,
Thank you so much,
Bearcat M. Sandor
On Friday 13 June 2003 16:29, Chris Cannam wrote:
On Friday 13 Jun 2003 9:40 pm, Chris Cannam wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing a reply from
one of the NoteEdit developers, as I've probably inadvertantly
slandered them somewhere.
Actually, reading it through again, I realise the opposite may be
true: I probably haven't done much of a job of explaining why anyone
would prefer to use Rosegarden. What a great salesman I am. Not
that it makes any difference, since they're both free.
The principle about Rosegarden is that all of the non-notation stuff
is actually useful when working on notation as well, particularly if
you're doing composition rather than just transcribing scores. For
example, it does a good job of helping prepare reasonable MIDI
performances: it can estimate things like velocities from the score,
and can remember the performed times and durations of notes even
while tidying them up for score purposes. It includes a quantizer
dedicated to producing readable score, that admittedly still needs
work but still does pretty much as good a job from performance
timings as (say) Sibelius does (although Rosegarden really needs
tempo-tracking as well -- it's on my to-do list). You can use it
(with a soft synth or external synth and mixer) to render your
compositions down to audio tracks. It has configurable program/bank
patch maps for MIDI devices, including a number of popular devices as
standard. Flashy stuff like antialiasing for notes isn't just for
show, it makes it much easier to see and follow scores in smaller
sizes; and having a nice friendly GUI is also a genuinely useful
thing.
There are also several areas where it has interesting potential rather
than immediate utility, but they maybe aren't of much interest here.
And there are some real downsides (here I go again with my
non-salesman stuff). It sometimes behaves inconsistently or
unexpectedly for reasons connected to the fact that it's manipulating
sequenceable data behind the scenes -- i.e. things like tuplets and
grace notes are stored in playable form rather than displayable form,
and it takes some testing to get all the potential conversion cases
working correctly. Many of the natty features described above are
incomplete: for example the notation quantizer can guess slurs,
tenuto etc but it tends to do so in rather inappropriate places at
the moment. The lyric editor is weaker than NoteEdit's (forgot to
mention that last time). And of course perhaps what you want is an
editor you can enter whatever you like into, and that will do
whatever you tell it with it, instead of an editor that thinks it
knows what you're doing.
And the Rosegarden developers talk too damn much.
Chris
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+6snsya+RPo9ly58RAoNwAJ9xya2RFD3VBBqOjc3zwNvNJ7ZcBQCgjBhU
R12T3d2WjIQXnAKcycjnLTc=
=EMZx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5:28 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Folks,
No, I don;t mean pop music..I already know that's harmful.
I'm an audiophile (how many of you are?) and I am a linux geek as well. In
trying to bridge my two loves, I have hooked my sound card directly to my amp
(a Carver TFM-75x) which puts out about 380 watts per channel into 8 ohms.
When i restart my system i get a loud thump from my speakers. I have
Definitive Technology speakers with built in active subs. I think the thump
is coming from both my subs and my mid range drivers.
Could this be harmful to my system? What is happening? It is a sound card
grounding issue? Can i fix it? Currently i am just shutting off my amp b4
turning off my computer, but there may be times when it restarts itself and I
cannot shut down my amp. I'm using a Sound Blaster Live for what it's worth.
Thanks,
Bearcat M. Sandor
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+6svMya+RPo9ly58RAn2TAJ9+LWt5bqthzU8xYjhiU1mQsVbHIACeJrPP
BdUELfhjhZwfZZMcgT0pqHM=
=Jbxn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
5:40 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
Could this be harmful to my system?
More likely to your nerves.
What is happening? It is a sound card
grounding issue?
Some cards have driver problems at shutdown and some don't. Many of my
cards cause noise when deactivated or power is turned off.
Can i fix it?
I've never been able to figure out how and have seen suggestions that it
may even be acceptable behaviour.
Currently i am just shutting off my amp b4
turning off my computer, but there may be times when it restarts itself and I
cannot shut down my amp. I'm using a Sound Blaster Live for what it's worth.
You could also set the volume to a very low level.
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide
========================================
Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No!
We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything
I've ever done.
Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002
The Scotsman
10:33 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
um as a general rule its not advised to reboot while the volume's up,
because thuds can damage monitor speakers... turning down the faders is
reccomended :). my system has always done that when rebooting - and yes,
i forget all too often and get blasted with a thud out of my MSP-5's...
hey patrick have you tried this with the quattro yet?... its better than
a thud (and probably more damaging for my monitors)... you get this
interesting digital glissando that starts high and then as it comes
through the mid range it makes horrible decimated noises... i should
sample it one day....
but if you really want to harm your system without the use of pop
music... skip over to the linux-dell-laptops mailing list and check the
thread 'Drop your Dell. See what happens.' disappointingly... nothing
happens. theres one thing to be said for dragging round a ten ton weight
of a laptop....
m~
Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Folks,
No, I don;t mean pop music..I already know that's harmful.
I'm an audiophile (how many of you are?) and I am a linux geek as well. In
trying to bridge my two loves, I have hooked my sound card directly to my amp
(a Carver TFM-75x) which puts out about 380 watts per channel into 8 ohms.
When i restart my system i get a loud thump from my speakers. I have
Definitive Technology speakers with built in active subs. I think the thump
is coming from both my subs and my mid range drivers.
Could this be harmful to my system? What is happening? It is a sound card
grounding issue? Can i fix it? Currently i am just shutting off my amp b4
turning off my computer, but there may be times when it restarts itself and I
cannot shut down my amp. I'm using a Sound Blaster Live for what it's worth.
Thanks,
Bearcat M. Sandor
--
|\ _,,,---,,_
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ HTTP 503: Too Busy
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL
.::. www.iriXx.org .::. www.copyleftmedia.org.uk .::.
gnupg key ID: AEB7A31E
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+6svMya+RPo9ly58RAn2TAJ9+LWt5bqthzU8xYjhiU1mQsVbHIACeJrPP
BdUELfhjhZwfZZMcgT0pqHM=
=Jbxn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
6:05 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:16:23AM -0600, Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
When i restart my system i get a loud thump from my
speakers. I have
Definitive Technology speakers with built in active subs. I think the thump
is coming from both my subs and my mid range drivers.
If by "restart" you mean switching the power on, I'm not a bit
surprised as the output is not controlled while the power is coming up.
Normal practice in any audio setup (PA, studio) is to turn off the power
amplifier or at least turn down the volume while doing anything with the
equipment at the input end, whether it's sound cards or microphones.
It's just a good habit you have to get into.
Rebooting with the power on could also have an effect as someone has
mentioned, because of things happening while the software drivers start
up.
Whether it'll damage your speakers depends on the speakers, the
amplifier power and how often you do it.
It's not a grounding problem.
--
Anahata
anahata(a)treewind.co.uk -+- http://www.treewind.co.uk
Home: 01638 720444 Mob: 07976 263827
15 Jun
15 Jun
10:50 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 01:16:23AM -0600, Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
Currently i am just shutting off my amp b4 turning off
my computer,
but there may be times when it restarts itself and I cannot shut down
my amp. I'm using a Sound Blaster Live for what it's worth.
I'm also using a Sound Blaster Live, with a Samson XP300 powered
speaker, which has the mixer controls on the back ... and I hear this
problem as well.
I'm interested to know how you end up solving it.
--
James Cameron mailto:quozl@us.netrek.org http://quozl.netrek.org/
16 Jun
16 Jun
6:55 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] Could my system be harmed by "pop"
I'm an audiophile (how many of you are?)
It occurs to me that most musicians are interested in sound quality.
However, some audiophiles are more interested in the science of sound
rather than actually listening to music, and I find this very dull.
You can tell people like that if they spent a lot on hi-fi but don't
have any good records, or choose records because they show off the
equipment rather than because they like the music...
I have hooked my sound card
directly to my amp (a Carver TFM-75x) which puts out about 380
watts per channel into 8 ohms.
As I understand it, cheaper amps have a built-in anti-thump circuit,
but audiophile amps don't because it would interfere with the signal
path. So I'd recommend always dropping the power amp level to zero
before rebooting your box.
Cheers
Daniel
2:08 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] I need help recording from soundcard
Hey folks,
You all have been great so far at helping me figure out all this audio stuff,
and I have a new problem that perhaps one of you can solve. The problem: I
kinda don't know what I'm doing. I'm trying to get some material from
minidisc (remember those) onto my computer as wav files so that i can edit
them and move them onto CD. The problem is I can't get a peep into my system
from my MD player.
I am using the following tools to accomplish this. A sound Blaster Live card
and ALSA., KDE, and Cinelerra. Hopefully one of you has this or a similar
combo so you can follow along. I am trying to output from the analog
outputs of my MD player into the Sound blaster. I have no pcm digital
outputs on the MD player or else i would use those. I have the md player and
my sound card connected via the analog output of the player to the jack on
the very top of the back of the sound blaster (that's line in).
I open the Kmix panel and make sure that Gain is high and that the green
button below the word "iGain" is lit. Then i make sure that the green button
below Line is lit and that the volume of that is high and the red button
below it is lit as well.
I start Cinelerra and choose File..Record. I choose a file name, the
"Microsoft WAV" format and check Record audio tracks. I unchecked Record
Video tracks.. I press OK.
I am given a monitoring window and a recording dialog. In the monitoring
window the meters are jumping, but i don;t think hight enough and they may be
reacting to other noise.. I have the md player playing something.
I hit the record button and let it run for awhile. Then i hit stop, exit the
program and play what I've done in Xine. If i turn the volume all the way up,
i can hear what I recorded faintly. In the recording window there is a text
box labeled Source. I wold think that it is supposed to have /dev/something
in it, but I don't; know what. On a sound blaster what is the line-in mapped
to. I have all these /dev/dsp devices, but i don't know what to look as far
as a device for the analog in.
When i switch the red dot (record input) in kmix to the volume control, my
meters start jumping a lot, and recording gives me good sound when i play
back the resulting file. The devices is still not set in this case, so I
don;t know whether that matters at all.
Can anyone give me a clue? I've looked around the web a bit, browsed the ALSA
archives and have struck out.
Thanx,
Bearcat M. Sandor
2:20 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] I need help recording from soundcard
Hi,
Have you run alsamixer and looked at all of your levels. On some of
the sound card type devices there are separate input and output level
adjustments. See if you have the right ones turned up.
- Mark
On Sun, 2003-06-15 at 20:56, Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
Hey folks,
You all have been great so far at helping me figure out all this audio stuff,
and I have a new problem that perhaps one of you can solve. The problem: I
kinda don't know what I'm doing. I'm trying to get some material from
minidisc (remember those) onto my computer as wav files so that i can edit
them and move them onto CD. The problem is I can't get a peep into my system
from my MD player.
I am using the following tools to accomplish this. A sound Blaster Live card
and ALSA., KDE, and Cinelerra. Hopefully one of you has this or a similar
combo so you can follow along. I am trying to output from the analog
outputs of my MD player into the Sound blaster. I have no pcm digital
outputs on the MD player or else i would use those. I have the md player and
my sound card connected via the analog output of the player to the jack on
the very top of the back of the sound blaster (that's line in).
I open the Kmix panel and make sure that Gain is high and that the green
button below the word "iGain" is lit. Then i make sure that the green button
below Line is lit and that the volume of that is high and the red button
below it is lit as well.
I start Cinelerra and choose File..Record. I choose a file name, the
"Microsoft WAV" format and check Record audio tracks. I unchecked Record
Video tracks.. I press OK.
I am given a monitoring window and a recording dialog. In the monitoring
window the meters are jumping, but i don;t think hight enough and they may be
reacting to other noise.. I have the md player playing something.
I hit the record button and let it run for awhile. Then i hit stop, exit the
program and play what I've done in Xine. If i turn the volume all the way up,
i can hear what I recorded faintly. In the recording window there is a text
box labeled Source. I wold think that it is supposed to have /dev/something
in it, but I don't; know what. On a sound blaster what is the line-in mapped
to. I have all these /dev/dsp devices, but i don't know what to look as far
as a device for the analog in.
When i switch the red dot (record input) in kmix to the volume control, my
meters start jumping a lot, and recording gives me good sound when i play
back the resulting file. The devices is still not set in this case, so I
don;t know whether that matters at all.
Can anyone give me a clue? I've looked around the web a bit, browsed the ALSA
archives and have struck out.
Thanx,
Bearcat M. Sandor
2:27 a.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] I need help recording from soundcard
Bearcat M. Sandor wrote:
Can anyone give me a clue? I've looked around the web a bit, browsed the ALSA
archives and have struck out.
Check out the quicktoots (via LAU guide below) for a tutorial on using
arecord to test alsa properly.
It's better to make sure the native tools work before using a whole lot
of guis.
--
Patrick Shirkey - Boost Hardware Ltd.
Http://www.boosthardware.com
Http://www.djcj.org - The Linux Audio Users guide
========================================
Being on stage with the band in front of crowds shouting, "Get off! No!
We want normal music!", I think that was more like acting than anything
I've ever done.
Goldie, 8 Nov, 2002
The Scotsman
10:40 a.m.
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, Chris Cannam wrote:
Meanwhile, the implementation of some notation
features in
Rosegarden-4 has been slowed by the problem of having to make them
editable and playable in formats other than notation and the fact
that the developers have to work on all sorts of stuff besides score.
(I say that with some bitterness, having wasted quite a bit of good
notation-coding time on tedious MIDI-device stuff recently.) For
A short remark from a NoteEdit developer about this, because it is
the most basic statement in this mail. Many times I was prompted
to join other open musical score editor projects. And the
question arises: "Why so many different projects?". And this sentence
gives me the opportunity to declare why I didn't:
In other projects the MIDI related way of thinking dominates.
The score editor is regarded as an appendix.
In my opinion, this is a basic error. The internal
data structures must represent the score and the midi data
must be derived from these data. Why: The mapping from
score to midi is unique mapping. But the reverse mapping isn't unique.
And another aspect: From the very beginning it was quite
clear to me: The main problem is grouping: The are
vertical groups (chords) and horizontal groups
(beams, slurs, ties, tuplets). Every note can be a member of
any of these groups, even simultaniously.
The grouping phenomenon is completely unknown
to the MIDI world. Thus, I think: Any MIDI based
data design won't succeed and leads to the effects described
above.
notes) has been fixed in the 2.1.x/2.2.x releases, but
I can still
never work out how to do simple stuff like play from the somewhere in
the middle of the piece, while Rosegarden has a nice transport window
with all that kind of stuff in it, and can do things like playing a
selected region in a loop while you edit it.
Please read:
http://rnvs.informatik.tu-chemnitz.de/~jan/noteedit/doc/playing.html
BTW: You have forgotten:
- Multiple voices per staff!
--
J.Anders, Chemnitz, GERMANY (ja(a)informatik.tu-chemnitz.de)
11:43 a.m.
On Monday 16 Jun 2003 12:28 pm, Joerg Anders wrote:
In other projects the MIDI related way of thinking
dominates.
The score editor is regarded as an appendix.
Assuming you're referring at least partly to Rosegarden here, then
it's not true to describe the score editor as an appendix. It was
designed in from the start and was the first editing mode we
implemented. As I had previously worked on Rosegarden-2.1 (whose
score editor is much more like NoteEdit: it only does score, and
knows nothing about MIDI) the exciting thing for me with Rosegarden-4
was to set out to do a score editor that was powerful enough to be
genuinely useful for score, without compromising the sequencing
capabilities of the application at all. Of course that's an ongoing
challenge and I won't claim that we've succeeded yet, but I think
it's an interesting and worthwhile goal.
The internal
data structures must represent the score and the midi data
must be derived from these data. Why: The mapping from
score to midi is unique mapping.
Nonsense! A performance (in MIDI or anything else) contains any
amount of information not representable in score, just as the score
can contain any amount of information not representable in MIDI.
There is no unique mapping in either direction.
The fact is that any program that aims to be a score editor and a
performance or composition tool at the same time, rather than
concentrating on one particular area, is going to have to work harder
and make compromises. Rosegarden is a sequencer and compositional
tool, and so (as we agree) will inevitably find some things harder to
implement in notation than NoteEdit, which is primarily a score
editor and so is not particularly useful as a sequencer.
(Rosegarden's internal data structures actually represent neither the
MIDI nor the score exactly, although producing MIDI from them is
certainly easier than producing score.)
And another aspect: From the very beginning it was
quite
clear to me: The main problem is grouping: The are
vertical groups (chords) and horizontal groups
(beams, slurs, ties, tuplets). Every note can be a member of
any of these groups, even simultaniously.
Yes, of course. And basing an internal representation directly on
that will lead to difficulties in performance or MIDI editing -- but
I'm not about to claim that that makes it "wrong" to do so, or a
"basic error". The two programs are simply different.
Chris
11:59 a.m.
Hi,
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 13:28, Joerg Anders wrote:
The internal data structures must represent the score
and the midi data
must be derived from these data.
I generate scores in an algorithmic way. I wonder whether I could import
generated scores to NoteEdit for editing. Therefore my questions:
How does your internal data structure look like? Could you _perhaps_ add
a textual import format, which is very close to you internal data
structure? Or even add importing Lilypond or MusicXML?
Thank you!
Best,
Torsten
--
Torsten Anders
Sonic Arts Research Centre
Queens University Belfast
Tel: +44 28 9027 4831 (office)
+44 28 9066 7439 (private)
12:38 p.m.
On Mon, 16 Jun 2003, Torsten Anders wrote:
Sometimes I plan to write a paper about this, to enable more people
to contribute the program. But - as many programmers - I'm very bad in such
things. To tell the truth sometimes I've forgotten some details and
so this paper were also helpful to me. And especially the multiple
voices per staff makes all very difficult.
Some users also asked for a ABC importer. And indeed, if I knew about
ABC music at the very beginning I'd use ABC music as the storage format.
And I think generation of ABC music format is relatively simple.
But currently I have not time for such an importer.
So, the only way so far is to try to create MUP. This is sometimes
complicated because it shows some ornaments and decorations in
extra lines.
The internal
data structures must represent the score and the midi data
must be derived from these data.
I generate scores in an algorithmic way. I wonder whether I could import
generated scores to NoteEdit for editing. Therefore my questions: How does your internal data structure look like?
I think the ABC music is very close. Of course, you cannot describe
pointers directly in textual format. But the principle: All information
needed for drawing a note should be next to the note is the same as in
NoteEdit.
In any case NoteEdit itself has no MIDI like representation
and also the replay works by examining the score directly.
Only during MIDI import there is a TSE3 structure with MIDI like
representation. The TSE3 library by Pete Goodliffe <pete(a)cthree.org>
and expecially the TSE3 filters are very helpful for MIDI --> score
reconstruction.
BTW: This is the reason for ...
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, Chris Cannam wrote:
the first time I looked at it I never got as far as
discovering that
it could import MIDI files, as that feature was not on the File menu
but instead on a menu obscurely labelled "TSE3" (the name of the MIDI
engine it uses).
... I wanted to make clear the benefit of Pete's library.
--
J.Anders, Chemnitz, GERMANY (ja(a)informatik.tu-chemnitz.de)
17 Jun
17 Jun
12:41 p.m.
>>>> "Chris" == Chris Cannam
<cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com> writes:
Chris> Both do "proper" notation layout, in the sense that they don't
just
Chris> stick the notes at positions proportional to their times and end up
Chris> with a complete mess as some sequencers do (MusE and Brahms for
Chris> example, if I remember correctly).
Chris> Neither of them does it as well as Sibelius or Finale.
That's a matter of opinion. Doing unbarred music in Sibelius is
impossible, or close to it, and in Finale it takes a fair amount of
tweaking. If you spend the Finale note-value tweaking time on
tweaking the spacing parameters in lilypond, you can arguably get a
better output from lilypond.
--
Laura (mailto:lconrad@laymusic.org , http://www.laymusic.org/ )
(617) 661-8097 fax: (801) 365-6574
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139
12:59 p.m.
Laura Conrad wrote:
Just to be clear, I was referring strictly to the native (on-screen
or direct printing) layout in NoteEdit and Rosegarden as being still
seriously inferior to that of Sibelius or Finale. I certainly have
no argument about the output quality possible with Lilypond.
Chris
>>>> "Chris" == Chris Cannam <cannam(a)all-day-breakfast.com>
>>>> writes:
Chris> Neither of them does it as well as Sibelius or
Finale.
That's a matter of opinion. [...] If you spend the Finale note-value
tweaking time on tweaking the spacing parameters in lilypond, you can
arguably get a better output from lilypond.
27 Jun
27 Jun
5:28 p.m.
New subject: [linux-audio-user] SACD on computer
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hey folks,
I'm lookig into the possibility of SACD on the computer. I know that for now
getting DSD out of the system is problematic at best since no card that I
know of exports the DSD digitaly.
However, if by mericle i found such a card, could my regular dvd-rom drive
play the non cd layers on an SACD? Is is physically different from a
DVD/DVD-Audio disk?
Regards,
Bearcat
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+/Jfqya+RPo9ly58RAtYTAJ9Ratu45AHMDXZmor4tmJS/UNyCYQCgl+BI
tKxjCX4wBid7CMInj0TUHVQ=
=TTIt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
7821
days inactive
7835
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
19 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Anahata -
Bearcat M. Sandor -
Chris Cannam -
Daniel James -
iriXx -
James Cameron -
Joerg Anders -
Laura Conrad -
Mark Knecht -
Patrick Shirkey -
Torsten Anders