Re: Thoughts on Midge (was: Re: [midi] Re: Articulate midi script)
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 11:15:21 +1000 Peter Chubb lily.u...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote: Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes: Grammostola David Raleigh Arnold wrote: Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA I had a look at midge. The main thing it adds that Lilypond doesn't have, is much greater control over individual notes. You can add bends (so presumably could implement a portamento or glissando, although it appears to be limited to 4 semitones, which is too small for most of the music I deal with); you can control attack and decay, and effects such as reverb. chorus and pan. Musical stuff (articulations, ornaments, dynamics, tempo variations such as rit. or stringendo, etc., etc) has to be interpreted and written explicitly in expanded form into the midge source. While midge could be used as an intermediate format for MIDI output, I can't see at present what it would gain for us --- the level of abstraction over a standard binary MIDI file is very small. Thanks for taking the time. One of the other text-based programs might be better. I have found midge to be an easy and quick way to massage lilypond-generated midi files but I haven't used it much. I keep forgetting to bring up copyright. Having copyright in the header does not generate a notice in the midi file. I have edited the midi file directly but I really don't think that should be necessary to put in a notice, do you? Regards, daveA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes:
Grammostola But I got this message:
Grammostola d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly
Grammostola /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized
Grammostola option: `--midi'
Here's an updated lilywrap script.
You don't actually have to use lilywrap: all it does is insert
\include articulate.ly
near the top of the file, and insert
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
around the main part of the score. In fact, in the general case,
you're better off adding it all by hand --- especially if there is
anything between the \score{ and the first bit of real music.
lilywrap
Description: Binary data
--
Dr Peter Chubb www.nicta.com.aupeter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Peter Chubb wrote:
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes:
Grammostola But I got this message:
Grammostola d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly
Grammostola /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized
Grammostola option: `--midi'
Here's an updated lilywrap script.
You don't actually have to use lilywrap: all it does is insert
\include articulate.ly
near the top of the file, and insert
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
around the main part of the score. In fact, in the general case,
you're better off adding it all by hand --- especially if there is
anything between the \score{ and the first bit of real music.
Thanks!
@ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by
default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not
from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And
while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe
that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and
good midi output?
Regards,
\r
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Peter Chubb wrote:
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes:
Grammostola But I got this message:
Grammostola d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly
Grammostola /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized
Grammostola option: `--midi'
Here's an updated lilywrap script.
You don't actually have to use lilywrap: all it does is insert
\include articulate.ly
near the top of the file, and insert
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
around the main part of the score. In fact, in the general case,
you're better off adding it all by hand --- especially if there is
anything between the \score{ and the first bit of real music.
Do you put the new version also on your website?
\r
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Peter Chubb wrote:
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes:
Grammostola But I got this message:
Grammostola d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly
Grammostola /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized
Grammostola option: `--midi'
Here's an updated lilywrap script.
You don't actually have to use lilywrap: all it does is insert
\include articulate.ly
near the top of the file, and insert
\unfoldRepeats \articulate
around the main part of the score. In fact, in the general case,
you're better off adding it all by hand --- especially if there is
anything between the \score{ and the first bit of real music.
When using lilywrap I get:
lilywrap dynamics.ly
/usr/local/bin/lilywrap: 23: Syntax error: ( unexpected
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:23:28PM +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: @ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and good midi output? Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. We'll be happy to review and commit any patches that people send. Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 18:53:37 +0100 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:23:28PM +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: @ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and good midi output? Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
David Raleigh Arnold wrote: On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 18:53:37 +0100 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:23:28PM +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: @ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and good midi output? Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA Could an improved articulate script no be enough? What can Midge add to Lilypond midi? \r ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 01:49:12PM -0400, David Raleigh Arnold wrote: On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 18:53:37 +0100 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? What part of nobody wants to work on midi output did you fail to understand? Getting in touch with them and working on integrating things means work that I personally am not interested in doing. If you're interested, then great! Why don't *you* get in touch with them, figure out how to use it as a library or share code or whatever, and prepare properly-formatted patches for discussion? Cheers, - Graham ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 20:49:50 +0200 Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com wrote: David Raleigh Arnold wrote: On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 18:53:37 +0100 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:23:28PM +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: @ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and good midi output? Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA Could an improved articulate script no be enough? What can Midge add to Lilypond midi? \r Everything lilypond doesn't have. daveA ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 7:49 PM, David Raleigh Arnoldd...@openguitar.com wrote: Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. Perhaps the newly-created `midi' mailing list could provide us (and them) with a convenient place to get working together without cluttering -user or -devel? Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes: Grammostola Peter Chubb wrote: Grammostola When using lilywrap I get: Grammostola lilywrap dynamics.ly /usr/local/bin/lilywrap: 23: Syntax Grammostola error: ( unexpected Hmmm. Are you using a non-standard /bin/sh ??? It sounds like you're using one that isn't POSIX-compliant, and doesn't understand the `function' keyword, or doesn't understand shell functions. You probably have dash installed as the system shell. Here's an updated verion of the script that will work with Dash, and will *still* work on POSIX compliant shells, but will no longer work with the traditional Korn shell. lilywrap Description: Binary data -- Dr Peter Chubb www.nicta.com.aupeter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Peter == Peter Chubb lily.u...@chubb.wattle.id.au writes: Peter You probably have dash installed as the system shell. Here's Peter an updated verion of the script that will work with Dash, and Peter will *still* work on POSIX compliant shells, but will no longer Peter work with the traditional Korn shell. Arrrgh. A bug. Fixed below. lilywrap Description: Binary data -- Dr Peter Chubb www.nicta.com.aupeter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
David Raleigh Arnold a écrit : On Sun, 06 Sep 2009 20:49:50 +0200 Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com wrote: David Raleigh Arnold wrote: On Sun, 6 Sep 2009 18:53:37 +0100 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 12:23:28PM +0200, Grammostola Rosea wrote: @ Valentin, yeah would be nice if we could improve the midi output by default. I can remember I mentioned this before, but one comment (not from you) was that Lilypond was mainly a notation typesetter... And while been busy with the lilywrap script, I was thinking, ok maybe that's right, but what is wrong with having both, e.g. good lay-out and good midi output? Of course there's nothing wrong with having both! However, nobody else wants to work on midi output. Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA Could an improved articulate script no be enough? What can Midge add to Lilypond midi? \r Everything lilypond doesn't have. daveA Hi, I'm also sensitive to this problem mainly because it is in relation with the Drummer's Gigsaw project. Thanks to Dominic Sacré and his Mididings which help me to solve the issue of CC7. I wanted to change the way Lilypond encodes it by default to a velocity value. And it works perfectly. For now the Gigsaw is going to succeed in a third incarnation. Again a revolution. And i've been discovering and becoming very curious of midicomp a week ago which is also txt-based and GNU. Unfortunately I have no skills with a language of programmation such awk, sed, python or perl. For instance I'm wondering how to paste in a chronological way the val from a Param line... 027:00:-336 Param ch=10 con=7 val=10 ...to a vol for a Note On line: 027:00:-336 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 It's important to note that this two previous lines shows the same timing because sometimes in the list the Note On line and the Param line are inverted. You'll see this case at the 4th and 5th line below. And also to note there is a vol information for a note Off. Here is an short excerpt of an ascii file from midicomp: (the midi source comes from the Drummer's Gigsaw) 027:00:-192 Param ch=10 con=7 val=31 027:00:-192 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 027:00:-144 Off ch=10 note=a4 vol=64 027:00:-144 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 027:00:-144 Param ch=10 con=7 val=31 027:00:-96 Off ch=10 note=a4 vol=64 027:00:-96 Param ch=10 con=7 val=31 027:00:-96 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 027:00:-48 Off ch=10 note=a4 vol=64 027:00:-48 Param ch=10 con=7 val=49 027:00:-48 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 027:00:000 Off ch=10 note=a4 vol=64 028:-2:000 Param ch=10 con=7 val=127 028:-2:000 On ch=10 note=c#4 vol=127 028:-1:-288 Off ch=10 note=c#4 vol=64 028:00:000 Param ch=10 con=7 val=95 028:00:000 On ch=10 note=a4 vol=127 028:00:192 Off ch=10 note=a4 vol=64 034:00:000 On ch=10 note=c#4 vol=127 034:00:000 Param ch=10 con=7 val=105 034:00:080 Off ch=10 note=c#4 vol=64 034:00:080 Param ch=10 con=7 val=95 034:00:080 On ch=10 note=c#4 vol=127 034:00:160 Off ch=10 note=c#4 vol=64 034:00:161 Param ch=10 con=7 val=95 034:00:161 On ch=10 note=c#4 vol=127 034:00:241 Off ch=10 note=c#4 vol=64 I think this excerpt doesn't cover all cases. What happens with chords? I've not such example within reach for now. I send you this example because I think midicomp is the best way to investigate the Lilypond's midi files and also in the hope someone is able to give me some hints to play the game. (smiley) Cheers. -- Phil. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Thoughts on Midge (was: Re: [midi] Re: Articulate midi script)
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes: Grammostola David Raleigh Arnold wrote: Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA I had a look at midge. The main thing it adds that Lilypond doesn't have, is much greater control over individual notes. You can add bends (so presumably could implement a portamento or glissando, although it appears to be limited to 4 semitones, which is too small for most of the music I deal with); you can control attack and decay, and effects such as reverb. chorus and pan. Musical stuff (articulations, ornaments, dynamics, tempo variations such as rit. or stringendo, etc., etc) has to be interpreted and written explicitly in expanded form into the midge source. While midge could be used as an intermediate format for MIDI output, I can't see at present what it would gain for us --- the level of abstraction over a standard binary MIDI file is very small. -- Dr Peter Chubbwww.nicta.com.au peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia From Imagination to Impact Imagining the (ICT) Future ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Thoughts on Midge (was: Re: [midi] Re: Articulate midi script)
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes: Grammostola David Raleigh Arnold wrote: Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU. It is dedicated to midi, not notation. Why not find a way to use their work, at worst by means of a translation script? Regards, daveA I had a look at midge. The main thing it adds that Lilypond doesn't have, is much greater control over individual notes. You can add bends (so presumably could implement a portamento or glissando, although it appears to be limited to 4 semitones, which is too small for most of the music I deal with); you can control attack and decay, and effects such as reverb. chorus and pan. Musical stuff (articulations, ornaments, dynamics, tempo variations such as rit. or stringendo, etc., etc) has to be interpreted and written explicitly in expanded form into the midge source. While midge could be used as an intermediate format for MIDI output, I can't see at present what it would gain for us --- the level of abstraction over a standard binary MIDI file is very small. And the hard bits would still be hard: understanding the textual annotations that composers put into their scores, and interpreting them. -- Dr Peter Chubbwww.nicta.com.au peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia From Imagination to Impact Imagining the (ICT) Future ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Grammostola Rosea wrote: Hi, I was wondering if the acticulate midi script is already in Lilypond? http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate I put articulate.ly in my lilypondfiles folder and the script in /usr/local/bin But I got this message: d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized option: `--midi' \r Anyone please? \r ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
Grammostola == Grammostola Rosea rosea.grammost...@gmail.com writes: Grammostola Grammostola Rosea wrote: Hi, I was wondering if the acticulate midi script is already in Lilypond? Not yet. http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate I put articulate.ly in my lilypondfiles folder and the script in /usr/local/bin But I got this message: d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized option: `--midi' Looks like the code in lilywrap.sh that tries to work out what arguments to give Lilypond to generate just midi is broken. I'll try to fix it today or tomorrow, and get a new version up. Peter C -- Dr Peter Chubb www.nicta.com.aupeter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au ERTOS within National ICT Australia ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Articulate midi script
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Peter Chubblily.u...@chubb.wattle.id.au wrote: Not yet. This won't go forgotten as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond :-) (I could open a tracker page if that may help) Looks like the code in lilywrap.sh that tries to work out what arguments to give Lilypond to generate just midi is broken. I'll try to fix it today or tomorrow, and get a new version up. Could we imagine a more LilyPond-ish way to wrap your functions without having to use an external awk script? For what it's worth, I have now created a low-traffic mailing list specially dedicated to midi-related discussions: http://lists.lilynet.net/midi I have taken the liberty to add your address and Rosea's in case you'd want to use this list. Regards, Valentin ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Articulate midi script
Hi, I was wondering if the acticulate midi script is already in Lilypond? http://www.nicta.com.au/people/chubbp/articulate I put articulate.ly in my lilypondfiles folder and the script in /usr/local/bin But I got this message: d...@debian:~/lilypondfiles$ lilywrap lilywraptest.ly /usr/local/lilypond/usr/bin/lilypond: unrecognized option: `--midi' \r ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
