Jeremy Brown wrote: > I know plenty of people use the Cakewalk and Cubase notation editors > on a daily basis and are happy with this, but I also know that at > least some people find them tedious and difficult to use, too (I fit > into this category). From messing around with Rosegarden it seems > like the Rosegarden notation editor most closely resembles that of > Cubase. Is there any intent to extend on this, or are most people > happy with it as is?
I don't think anyone's entirely happy with it as is. Notation is obviously pretty tough to do, and there are compromises all the way once you start trying to mix notation and performance data. I am certainly interested in continuing to improve it though. To a great extent of course it all depends on what it is about a program like Sibelius that you find more satisfactory than one like Cubase. There are plenty of possibilities: feature-related pure notation aspects such as support for particular symbols or more precise positioning control; usability aspects such as ease of note entry or ability to do first-cut notation from performance data; quality of printed output, and so on. There are certain things that will always be harder for us in Rosegarden because of the need to permit the user to edit the raw performance data as well as the notation. For example, features like performable ornaments are pretty damn difficult (although nonetheless on the to-do list), and we have some rather basic limitations at the moment like the fact that beams cannot cross bar lines (not a fundamental limitation, just a problem when managing the rendering phase) or staffs (more fundamental) and that we don't even have repeats yet because we're (OK, I'm) mired in indecision about how they should integrate with playback. Also there is not yet any support for multi-voice staffs, etc., though again that's feasible and planned. If you saw my earlier post about printing from Rosegarden vs. printing from Lilypond (using data exported from Rosegarden), you'll have noticed that we aren't in any hurry to make Rosegarden able to do true typeset-quality layout natively, either. None of this is quite as negative as it may sound -- there is an awful lot of capability already in the code, and it certainly will only get better. So, what in particular did you have in mind? Chris ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
