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
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
