Old 03-05-2016, 11:46 AM   #521
reddiesel41264
Human being with feelings
 
reddiesel41264's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North East UK
Posts: 492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberheim View Post
I am sorry if there was some questions or ideas before. Topic have lots of pages and I dont read all.
I think you should read through them all you will find answers to all your questions and you will see how the notation editor is progressing - yes it takes time to read through but not as much time as you think, you'll soon see where you can skip a bunch of posts that you're not interested in.

The very first page of this thread has a list of almost all the feature requests so far.
__________________
http://librewave.com - Freedom respecting instruments and effects
http://xtant-audio.com/ - Purveyor of fine sample libraries (and Kontakt scripting tutorials)
reddiesel41264 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2016, 01:20 PM   #522
Zephyrus
Human being with feelings
 
Zephyrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nuremberg
Posts: 142
Default



two things about rests in the current pre15:

-when only entering the high voice or low voice, no rests are displayed for the low voice or high voice. Default behavior would be, show rests for the low voice when entering only the high voice and vice versa, also if, what brings me to the next point, we are using 4 voices. Hiding the low voice rests should be optional.

-when entering high voice the first half bar, then low voice the second half bar as in the pic attached, high voice got no rest but this must be.

about 4 voices: as stated before, the only logical way to implement notation properly is having 4 voices per staff, bass,tenor,alto and sopran. Should be not too complicated once the implementation of the high and low voices is getting stable, but it is essential to us composers.

about staff layout: currently the staff spacing is not beeing adjusted when entering low or high notes above the system, alot of collison is happening here.

another tiny feature request: different note heads, like triangle and cross but also small note heads would be very interesting though it is not that essential at the moment.

as always thank you for the works you've done, looking forward what's coming next
Attached Images
File Type: jpg rests.jpg (10.5 KB, 755 views)
Zephyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2016, 01:36 PM   #523
Zephyrus
Human being with feelings
 
Zephyrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Nuremberg
Posts: 142
Default

one small bug: when copy and pasting measures staff beaming direction is not preserved.
Zephyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2016, 06:08 PM   #524
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

Three quick observations:
- When a track is visible but not editable, the notes are greyed out but the ledger lines and rests are still dark.
- The ledger lines are much thicker than the staff lines.
- At some zoom levels, the stems do not align nicely with the noteheads.

P.S. These beta versions of the notation view are already better than SONAR's!
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2016, 08:39 PM   #525
ijijn
Human being with feelings
 
ijijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 479
Default

Onwards and upwards! There is a definite feeling of refinement coming through.

I'm wondering, do you think we could have the option of snapping GLPH events to a note, and maybe even for a group of notes for things like crescendo hairpins? Pretty please?

Perhaps we could commandeer the existing text event structure to do this:

NOTE <channelNumber> <pitchNumber> glyph <glyphText>

for "one-shot" dynamics such as pppp, and something like:

NOTE <channelNumber> <pitchNumber> glyph <glyphText> <numberOfExtraNotesToIncorporate> <durationInBeats> <optionalDisplayOffsetsFromDraggingHandles...>

for hairpins and so on. Then when we move notes around, the glyphs will move with them, and the note and channel information is accessible to allow for different layers of dynamics, among other benefits. The <durationInBeats> property would most likely be internally derived from the others, but would still be very valuable information in its own right to make visible for any downstream (native or external) processes planning a smooth ramp or other sneaky timings.

As for how to do this interface-wise, if we had access to ALL of the available notation options via the right click context menu on events themselves, that would be a great way to link these up by default, leaving the right click in an empty space (currently the only way to do it anyway) for positioning them normally using GLPH. Later on you could maybe even add something like dragging onto noteheads as a means of linking previously unaffiliated events, and dragging away to unlink. Does that make sense?
ijijn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 01:36 AM   #526
bijaganita
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 19
Default did you know?

After reading this thread (http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=173786), I got to know that Reaper can represent total score. It's wonderful!
bijaganita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 06:10 AM   #527
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

I suggest that the following FR (from the list at the start of the thread) be updated to request Quantize Display as a *note* property of individual notes, rather than a global setting. (Or perhaps one can have a global setting as well as a note property, with the latter overriding the former.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcartwright View Post
Snooks explained as follows:
Quote:
Originally Posted by snooks View Post
On the subject of Quantize Display, at the moment it's global and we've mentioned per measure too but in an ideal world it would be....

Global/Track/Clef/Measure/Note

... with a minimum rest value (and perhaps an offset) with the same hierarchy.

Having notes set to 1/32nd with rests set to 1/8th, for example, would change the first image in the example above to the final result whilst still allowing for runs of short notes. For example a run of staccato 1/16ths (which would have a bunch of 1/32nd rests in between with QD set to 1/32nd) and a 1/32nd ornament.

Small gaps are part and parcel of playing, but small rests are much less common.
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 10:30 AM   #528
Oberheim
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 43
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reddiesel41264 View Post
I think you should read through them all you will find answers to all your questions and you will see how the notation editor is progressing - yes it takes time to read through but not as much time as you think, you'll soon see where you can skip a bunch of posts that you're not interested in.

The very first page of this thread has a list of almost all the feature requests so far.
I found there is 1 feature request from my question (1), zoom level problem was discussed (3), mentioned feature request change pitch by mouse (5), and partially my point 2 (my is extended with dynamics to midi cc). I dint find something about show / display channels (4). Hope my points 2 and 4 will be considered.
Oberheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 05:14 PM   #529
paaltio
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 111
Default

Thanks for all the great work with the notation view so far, I think it's amazing how far it's already gone in this time!

Now, I know this isn't specifically a notation issue, and I'm a bit of a broken record with my "support multitrack MIDI editing with MIDIEditor_GetTake", of which this is clearly a subissue of... but in notation view it becomes especially confusing that stuff like "Edit: Set time selection to selected notes" doesn't work as expected.

I don't find that specific function that important, but I feel like the multitrack MIDI editing limitations are really beginning to show here in general, so I hope this area gets addressed soon (and with scripting in mind as well!). I think stuff like this is going to be very weird for people who just expect it to work, since multiple staves is not really a rare situation.

paaltio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 05:54 PM   #530
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paaltio View Post
Now, I know this isn't specifically a notation issue, and I'm a bit of a broken record with my "support multitrack MIDI editing with MIDIEditor_GetTake", of which this is clearly a subissue of...
This is indeed important. Please keep spinning that record!

I noticed that markers and regions do not appear in notation view. Could we add this as a feature request?
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2016, 06:09 PM   #531
hamish
Human being with feelings
 
hamish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Reflection Free Zone
Posts: 3,026
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by paaltio View Post
I think stuff like this is going to be very weird for people who just expect it to work, since multiple staves is not really a rare situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bijaganita View Post
I got to know that Reaper can represent total score. It's wonderful!
Given the intrinsic vertical (pitchwise) efficiency of notation view over piano roll, I'm inclined to agree.

Perhaps 'one MIDI editor per project' should be made default now?

Last edited by hamish; 03-07-2016 at 02:54 AM. Reason: intrinsic
hamish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 01:43 AM   #532
Victor_M
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 83
Default

IMHO, for the overall functionality is better to leave three existing points: "one MIDI editor per" - media item, - track, - project.
Victor_M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 02:53 AM   #533
hamish
Human being with feelings
 
hamish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Reflection Free Zone
Posts: 3,026
Default

I'm not meaning remove any option.

I just mean the 'factory default' for the MIDI editor may be better as 'per project', so that new people coming to look at the notation will realise what it can do. I have noticed a few posts lately by new users who didn't know of this capability.

Current default option (version 5.16):


What do you think of that?

Last edited by hamish; 03-07-2016 at 03:16 AM.
hamish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 05:11 AM   #534
ivansc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near Cambridge UK and Near Questembert, France
Posts: 19,997
Default

Good point, Hamish.
__________________
"What a dick comment. I'm gonna make sure to avoid your name." Dicks other than Trump can speak????
ivansc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 05:54 AM   #535
heda
Human being with feelings
 
heda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,822
Default

How can I color the notes by velocity or pitch or channel? I remember it was working in previous pres.

heda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 11:43 AM   #536
Commala
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 615
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by heda View Post
How can I color the notes by velocity or pitch or channel? I remember it was working in previous pres.

If the theme you're using is based on one of my mods, the selection bars after the notes are black because the notation editor takes the colours, logically, from the section of the midi note colour map used to colour selected notes.

In several themes including my mods, midi notes turn black when selected, which seems to work well in the midi editor, because the notes are also outlined in colour. But in the notation editor, this creates a problem.

My suggestion is for the notation editor to be given it's own colour map, that can override the standard colour map, and if the dedicated colour map is not present simply have the notation editor fall back to the regular one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcartwright View Post
37. Dedicated note colors for notation viewer (separate color map from piano roll)
http://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php...&postcount=255
This as opposed to having to change the midi note colour map in question to accommodate the notation editor, which I don't want to do because I like the filled-in black selected midi notes. For what it's worth, I've seen several other people who also like them, and it would be a shame to have to compromise the design established for the midi editor for the notation editor to be fully functional.
Commala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 11:48 AM   #537
kerryg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commala View Post
If the theme you're using is based on one of my mods, the selection bars after the notes are black because the notation editor takes the colours, logically, from the section of the midi note colour map used to colour selected notes.

In several themes including my mods, midi notes turn black when selected, which seems to work well in the midi editor, because the notes are also outlined in colour. But in the notation editor, this creates a problem.

My suggestion is for the notation editor to be given it's own colour map, that can override the standard colour map, and if the dedicated colour map is not present simply have the notation editor fall back to the regular one.



This as opposed to having to change the midi note colour map in question to accommodate the notation editor, which I don't want to do because I like the filled-in black selected midi notes. For what it's worth, I've seen several other people who also like them, and it would be a shame to have to compromise the design established for the midi editor for the notation editor to be fully functional.
Thanks for the explanation, this is exactly the behavior I was seeing and couldn't figure why.
kerryg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 12:23 PM   #538
flaviodmc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sao Paulo - Brazil
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberheim View Post

2. I like there are articulations, dynamic signs and legato. Will be this signs able to change midi notes in future? For example staccato change note in to half duration, legato add more duration to note and marcato add little more velocity, dynamics to midi cc and everything will be customizable. Idealy through rules.
I'm wondering the same thing. What's the point of having written articulations if they don't affect the midi notes? If I want a staccato on a 1/8th note, I'd have to write a 1/16th note and a rest.

Thank's!
flaviodmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 12:59 PM   #539
kerryg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flaviodmc View Post
I'm wondering the same thing. What's the point of having written articulations if they don't affect the midi notes? If I want a staccato on a 1/8th note, I'd have to write a 1/16th note and a rest.

Thank's!
Agreed; it's early days yet (not even at release candidate status yet) and I'm pretty sure this is on Schwa's priority list.
kerryg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 01:14 PM   #540
planetnine
Human being with feelings
 
planetnine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Lincoln, UK
Posts: 7,629
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flaviodmc View Post
I'm wondering the same thing. What's the point of having written articulations if they don't affect the midi notes? If I want a staccato on a 1/8th note, I'd have to write a 1/16th note and a rest.
...

This is similar to what Expression Maps would do I think, but I think that's a thing for the future (ie post-5.20).

Stuff like that needs a control panel of some type to set what and how (eg) staccato affects different length notes for different instruments, and probably even individual note settigs -don't tell me you wouldn't want this control if notation punctuation was to affect note velocity/length/articulation/etc...



>
__________________
Nathan, Lincoln, UK. | Item Marker Tool. (happily retired) | Source Time Position Tool. | CD Track Marker Tool. | Timer Recording Tool. | dB marks on MCP faders FR.
planetnine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 01:16 PM   #541
kerryg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
This is similar to what Expression Maps would do I think, but I think that's a thing for the future (ie post-5.20).

Stuff like that needs a control panel of some type to set what and how (eg) staccato affects different length notes for different instruments, and probably even individual note settigs -don't tell me you wouldn't want this control if notation punctuation was to affect note velocity/length/articulation/etc...
>
Oh yeah, absolutely. The staccato of Mozart's day meant a fairly different thing than the staccato of Wagner's, so control over "what the symbols mean in this particular piece" is pretty crucial. In some cases you'll want a staccato marking to shorten a note length by X%, but in other cases you'll want it to keyswitch to an entirely different articulation.
kerryg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 02:04 PM   #542
flaviodmc
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sao Paulo - Brazil
Posts: 36
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by planetnine View Post
This is similar to what Expression Maps would do I think, but I think that's a thing for the future (ie post-5.20).

Stuff like that needs a control panel of some type to set what and how (eg) staccato affects different length notes for different instruments, and probably even individual note settigs -don't tell me you wouldn't want this control if notation punctuation was to affect note velocity/length/articulation/etc...



>
You're right, thank's! Hopefully we'll have this feature in the future!
For now, I'm really happy with the implementation of notation on REAPER!
flaviodmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2016, 03:07 PM   #543
heda
Human being with feelings
 
heda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Spain
Posts: 5,822
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Commala View Post
If the theme you're using is based on one of my mods, the selection bars after the notes are black because the notation editor takes the colours, logically, from the section of the midi note colour map used to colour selected notes.
ahhh ok.. yes.. that explains it.
my vote too for a separate colour table then.
thanks!
heda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 08:19 AM   #544
memyselfandus
Human being with feelings
 
memyselfandus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,598
Default

Separate color table "option" would be awesome.

Don't get rid of the current option though

There are a few very creative uses for the current option regarding color schemes in the main piano roll that relate to the notation.
memyselfandus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 10:08 AM   #545
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

Regarding color, I hope that the following FR is still getting some attention:

Quote:
5. Color note heads (similar to piano roll)
http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.p...65#post1636965
- Color by track/item/source helps to visually orientate the user when faced with dozens of similar-looking staves, particularly when switching between piano roll and notation view.

- Color by velocity is even more useful in notation view than in piano roll view, since the CC/velocity panes are not available in notation view.

- Colors are pretty!

(When color by track is selected, I suggest that rests and other notation symbols should also be similarly colored.)
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 11:00 AM   #546
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

I might have stumbled across a bug: it seems that notes with zero (that is, 0.0.00) length sometimes confuse the notation view, resulting in a blank staff with no notes displayed. All the notes are still visible in piano roll view, but not in notation view. This happens most often if the note's position is right at the start of the project, at position 1.1.00.
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 02:58 PM   #547
Indirect
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 121
Default

Any way to marry GM drum map and drum notation (percussion clef doesn't work that way)? Also it would be fine to make at least one clef where pitch doesn't matter.
On a side note: it would be nice to see velocities somewhere. I guess some clever graphical implementation needed
Indirect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2016, 03:45 PM   #548
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,119
Default

That's what the new note mapping feature is about (implemented in 5.20pre16, but fixes coming in pre17).
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 03:21 AM   #549
ijijn
Human being with feelings
 
ijijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 479
Default

This may be silly and obvious, but in terms of the latest exciting note-mapping saga, would it be possible to have the notehead type option available as a separate concern, perhaps even as a stepping stone on the way to Map City?

Ideally we could have a (nice and juicy) range of notehead choices via the usual per-note menu and the subsequent reflection of any changes from the default in the whole FF|0F|NOTE xyz business. This data would be extremely useful for a wide range of applications (e.g. harmonics, esoteric performance techniques, silent data points for internal use) and would, I think, remain consistent with the established representations.

So something like NOTE 0 74 notehead cross, to hang our (note)hats on...

In any case, looking forward to pre17!
ijijn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 05:29 AM   #550
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 10,817
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ijijn View Post
Ideally we could have a (nice and juicy) range of notehead choices via the usual per-note menu and the subsequent reflection of any changes from the default in the whole FF|0F|NOTE xyz business. This data would be extremely useful for a wide range of applications (e.g. harmonics, esoteric performance techniques, silent data points for internal use) and would, I think, remain consistent with the established representations.

So something like NOTE 0 74 notehead cross

As you've described it, this would be per-note, rather than per-pitch. In other words, if you wanted a custom note head for some particular Bb, you'd set it just as you would set an articulation, but no other Bb notes would be affected.

Would you mind giving some specific examples of how this would be useful?
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 05:41 AM   #551
EvilDragon
Human being with feelings
 
EvilDragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 24,119
Default

Avantgarde scores would be one.
EvilDragon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 07:09 AM   #552
mpb2016
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 99
Default

Dedicated note editors like Notion, Musescore, Sibelius & Finale etc already exists for really advanced stuff and the point with notation in Reaper I thought was more about just displaying the pianoroll in notation?

There are core functions that are really important like displaying correct notation and some sort of articulation control and if these core functions then could be customized according to personal taste with external code it would be ideal as I see it.

Too many options can make it less useable as well as too few options, IMHO
mpb2016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 07:43 AM   #553
juliansader
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,140
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpb2016 View Post
Dedicated note editors like Notion, Musescore, Sibelius & Finale etc already exists for really advanced stuff and the point with notation in Reaper I thought was more about just displaying the pianoroll in notation?

There are core functions that are really important like displaying correct notation and some sort of articulation control and if these core functions then could be customized according to personal taste with external code it would be ideal as I see it.

Too many options can make it less useable as well as too few options, IMHO
I completely agree.

I do not know what Cockos's own preferences and intentions are, but my hope is for REAPER's MIDI features - including the notation view - to be optimized for MIDI sequencing and creating VI mockups.

I suggest that, when considering how features should be implemented, the question should be "how will this best aid sequencing workflow?" and not "what is the standard, classical way of notation?".
juliansader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 09:31 AM   #554
kerryg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpb2016 View Post
Dedicated note editors like Notion, Musescore, Sibelius & Finale etc already exists for really advanced stuff and the point with notation in Reaper I thought was more about just displaying the pianoroll in notation?

There are core functions that are really important like displaying correct notation and some sort of articulation control and if these core functions then could be customized according to personal taste with external code it would be ideal as I see it.

Too many options can make it less useable as well as too few options, IMHO
Quote:
Originally Posted by juliansader View Post
I completely agree.

I do not know what Cockos's own preferences and intentions are, but my hope is for REAPER's MIDI features - including the notation view - to be optimized for MIDI sequencing and creating VI mockups.

I suggest that, when considering how features should be implemented, the question should be "how will this best aid sequencing workflow?" and not "what is the standard, classical way of notation?".
AFAICT this is not so much focused on delivering a comprehensive feature-complete scoring platform as it is about planning properly for the future. We've already seen a non-backwards-compatible pre-release of the notation editor (a couple of revs back) so it's a good idea to plan flexibly so that doesn't have to happen between released versions. Figuring out what kind of special cases might come up in the future helps design something sufficiently flexible that end users can take the ball and run with it themselves, and questions like "should note heads attach to pitches or individual notes? what are the arguments for either?" are fundamental ways of getting there.
kerryg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 10:00 AM   #555
mpb2016
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by juliansader View Post
I completely agree.

I do not know what Cockos's own preferences and intentions are, but my hope is for REAPER's MIDI features - including the notation view - to be optimized for MIDI sequencing and creating VI mockups.

I suggest that, when considering how features should be implemented, the question should be "how will this best aid sequencing workflow?" and not "what is the standard, classical way of notation?".
Yes, I personally use the notation editor just to get an overview over the voicings & harmony and a fast way to do filmscore mockups (which mostly are written without keysignature or transposing instruments) the next level of usage would probably be normal songs which use chordcharts, keysignatures and then arrangements for bands and smaller orchestras with transposing instruments.

And these functions are more or less already implemented.

As a guitarist I rarely use notation for guitar but rather tabulature, but the problem with guitartabs is that the same note can be played in different positions on a guitar but only on one place on the midi roll plus I sometimes use different guitartunings and a capo and these things might cause a serious headache to solve, so im totally content without it.

Personally im happy if the bugs get sorted out with the notemapping post 5.20 & some sort of expressionmap/articulationswitcher is on the way in the future and if there are anything left with the notation that still needs fixing is fixed for now.

Last edited by mpb2016; 03-09-2016 at 10:25 AM.
mpb2016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 10:03 AM   #556
mpb2016
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryg View Post
AFAICT this is not so much focused on delivering a comprehensive feature-complete scoring platform as it is about planning properly for the future. We've already seen a non-backwards-compatible pre-release of the notation editor (a couple of revs back) so it's a good idea to plan flexibly so that doesn't have to happen between released versions. Figuring out what kind of special cases might come up in the future helps design something sufficiently flexible that end users can take the ball and run with it themselves, and questions like "should note heads attach to pitches or individual notes? what are the arguments for either?" are fundamental ways of getting there.
Sure, I agree. I thought we were talking about 5.20 and I already have empathy for the coders.
mpb2016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 10:39 AM   #557
kerryg
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 328
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpb2016 View Post
Sure, I agree. I thought we were talking about 5.20 and I already have empathy for the coders.
Absolutely. But I'm going to stick on one point mentioned earlier: first and foremost and above all else, it's got to be right. Whether one calls that "classically correct" or not, it's either right or it's not right, and it's got to be right if it's to deliver output that's taken seriously by anyone, from a session guitarist up to an orchestra.

I'm fond of telling my students about a session that I did for a pal where I had the luxury of a single, simple role ("time and pitch Nazi" - my job was to assess a string section's takes for pitch and time and give it the thumbs up or down so the composer could concentrate on intent and the conductor could concentrate on expression) with lots of free time. So I idly calculated all the session players' and tech support peoples' hourly wages plus the studio time etc and it added up to roughly $3600/hr. It certainly wasn't the most expensive session I'd ever been on by a long shot (did TV sessions back in the day LA that must have easily been double or triple that) but the math is elegant on that particular session because that's exactly $60/min - or $1/sec. So you could easily calculate precisely how much of the client's money was spent on wasted time: $1 for each wasted second.

Needless to say I had a bag of pre-sharpened pencils standing by. You don't want the client paying $25 to wait for you to sharpen your pencil for 25 seconds.

Somewhat more intense than when one's working in one's home studio (or even a major studio on a smaller session): mistakes made as a result of a confusing notation, pauses to ask for explanations of charts, sketchy reading because it didn't "look quite right", these all have serious and costly consequences.

So first and foremost and above all else it's got to be right. "Fancy" can come as time permits.
kerryg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 10:50 AM   #558
mpb2016
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 99
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryg View Post
So first and foremost and above all else it's got to be right. "Fancy" can come as time permits.
Sure, that sort of was my point.
mpb2016 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 01:17 PM   #559
ReaDim
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Russia
Posts: 49
Default IMHO

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerryg View Post
So first and foremost and above all else it's got to be right. "Fancy" can come as time permits.
The nature and the purpose of the notation is absolutely different from the midi editor. So that it is not correct to expect equally good paper and sound results. To "print" a book and to "print" a CD are just different thinks. So your mockup will sound worse in case you get a correct and clean notation. IMHO.
But.
The way the notation editor is realized in prerelease versions today - is the best I could ever dream!
I need this exact kind of notation editor for me as a composer. I will use it every day as a communication tool between computer and my musical brain)))). But to communicate with orchestra I use some other software - anyway.
So...
To have "incorrect" features like scale keys and especially when it snaps to the scale key or reveals any "incorrect" accidentals - is a big benefit! It gives me some extra eyes)))
ReaDim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2016, 01:27 PM   #560
ijijn
Human being with feelings
 
ijijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 479
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
As you've described it, this would be per-note, rather than per-pitch. In other words, if you wanted a custom note head for some particular Bb, you'd set it just as you would set an articulation, but no other Bb notes would be affected.

Would you mind giving some specific examples of how this would be useful?
Thanks for asking.

Wow, bit of an unexpected hornet's nest here.

As Mr Dragon said, avant-garde scores would certainly benefit. There's much more too: assigning noteheads per note event rather than pitch has many other advantages, and makes the functionality far more flexible and less situational in general. I certainly don't feel that this idea is on the fringe... on this occasion anyway.

Here's a use case for drums, since this seems to be a focus for many. If a single pitch can utilise multiple different noteheads, which isn't possible with the current system, you can reuse the same core note positions (within the staff) over and over. Drum note notation tends to hang around the staff, without using ledger lines where possible, and you would very quickly run out of notes otherwise with all the different techniques/hits on the same drum, especially in the world of deep sampled virtual kits. This would also be ideal for changing a groove half-way through a song to a firmer type of hit, for instance, by batch-changing the noteheads without needing to use any extra pitches. It looks neater, is less maintenance, and more closely reflects how notation is used.

Also, and unless I'm missing something (which is certainly possible, since notation is such a moving target at the moment) then this is another major limitation: staves are not assignable per channel, so if you have oboe on channel 1 and drums on channel 10, the oboe would be lumped with any funny noteheads that the drums have implemented, as well as the pitch craziness. e.g. the treble clef's "middle B" would no longer be available for any of the other 15 channels on that track, unless you wanted the notes to sound 3.5 octaves lower (or, more likely, not sounding at all) and look like a treasure map at unexpected times.

I could come up with plenty more scenarios if you like, but hope this makes some sense for starters.
ijijn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.