Discussion: Unconscious bias toward alternative notation systems

[Thomas Nguyen]

Dear Music Notation Project community,

In recent discussions, I’ve noticed that unconscious bias among trained Western-notation musicians toward alternative systems is very real — even when new notation aims only to support beginners rather than replace tradition.

To help foster thoughtful dialogue, I’d love to invite members here to read and share feedback on this Reddit thread, where many professional musicians responded: https://www.reddit.com/r/pianolearning/comments/1ojqkp7/question_for_professional_musicians_educators/

Your perspectives are valuable, and I believe our shared mission benefits when we openly study real-world reactions to notation innovation.

Thank you for your time and insight.

[John Freestone]

Hi Thomas,

That's an interesting question I've puzzled over quite a bit myself. I've introduced the idea of alternative notations on the pianostreet forum and found quite a critical response, not quite hostile usually, but tiresomely dismissive. I read a few of the threads you linked to and noted the same general feeling. I must say I admire your accommodating style of argument. I don't have a Reddit account and don't wish to create one, so won't dive in there - I'm not sure if you were asking us if we'd like to, or just to discuss it on this forum - but I'll add a few thoughts here.

I do think the response from trained musicians is, as you suggest, largely unconscious bias, and probably comes from a range of causes:
1. The most educated in music have typically expended a great deal of time, energy and money mastering their skill, making it difficult to appreciate any downside to traditional notation (TN) at all. At its least attractive, this trait is notable snobbery, and the fact that not many people can read music doesn't make them recognise its flaws, it just boosts their ego about how brilliant they must be.
2. Naturally gifted musicians (particularly those who are good at certain mathematical tasks and have good retention of visually structured information...I'm struggling to put precise words to that) probably learn quickly and gain lots of knowledge, so they imagine this is the case for everyone, and can't understand others (people like me) struggling with it. Or maybe they're just more determined. Having a good ear, on the other hand, can hinder learning to read, because you don't *need* to read to make the music you want to make.
3. Inertia. One respondent said the idea of a new notation is pointless unless everyone switches, which is a ridiculous claim, but there's everything from that to a vague reluctance to consider anything other than the status quo simply because that is how it currently is. Certainly it can be a disadvantage learning a system nobody else knows, but it's not if you like playing music alone and don't have any ambitions to work in an orchestra.
4. It's very pretty. :)

I have a slightly different take on the problem from you. You repeatedly mention the benefit of alternative notations (ANs) for beginners, also mentioning those with disabilities, brain injuries, processing challenges, and the 'neurodivergent'. I agree that many ANs can help with that, but I have a different focus. I also think there's a risk that this perspective unfortunately can emphasize the idea that TN is the goal, the better or best notation possible, and that's not how I see it. TN is inherently flawed, in my opinion, and I think its difficulties arise for learners most often not as they start, but as they move from the easy stage to more difficult pieces.

The most obvious feature leading to this is the introduction of different keys, the plurality of meanings of the staff positions. Furthermore, teachers often over-sell the fun and ease of learning to read music, so the come-down can be dramatic. Piano students learn that the top staff of the grand staff is for the right hand and the bottom is for the left, except later on, they discover that's not so. They learn that the top has a treble clef and the bottom has the bass clef, and, despite it being an idiotic pain in the butt having to learn two alphabets at the same time, we cope, only later to find that that's not true either - right hand and left hand can wander onto the other staff, and clefs can switch on either staff as well. The list is endless. Note and rest values must add up to the time signature in each bar, except when they don't...

A REALLY BIG problem is that TN is mostly inscribed *through the medium of* Western music *theory*. All its redundancies - whether to write a note as B or C-flat or A-double-sharp, for instance, or whether a note should be dotted or tied with another half its value - are informed by quite complex theoretic traditions. I don't think they need to be. They reinforce that glass ceiling.

So I'm sure some ANs help absolute beginners get a taste for reading music, but I worry that these can be gateway drugs to a long, hard slog, disappointment and quitting when the going gets tough, which they too often think is their fault rather than the archaic notation we've inherited.

All the best,
John F

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CALmDnXRmeFCfgOCDYO3brBkV-71Gmqtn%2Bx2zVOoxWpWj3eS4LQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Thomas Nguyen]

Thank you so much, John — very thoughtful, and I really appreciate the depth and honesty in your perspective.

I completely understand not wanting to join Reddit — and I wasn't specifically asking anyone to, only opening the door. That said, I do hope more members in the MNP group will eventually share their analysis and arguments there, because right now it feels like mostly beginners are supporting me, and thoughtful voices like yours would add balance and clarity to the discussion.

Thanks again for taking the time. Your comments really help move this conversation forward.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/fe5ad5d9-20bd-4d65-afe8-2a637daa4008%40gmail.com.

[Waller Dominique]

Hi Thomas and John, 

Very interesting discussion and thank you for this link 

https://youtu.be/Eq3bUFgEcb4 I found on the Reddit forum.

Dominique

menvoyé : 31 octobre 2025 à 03:24
de : Thomas Nguyen <3jcn...@gmail.com>
à : musicn...@googlegroups.com
objet : Re: [MNP] Discussion: Unconscious bias toward alternative notation systems

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CALmDnXTsTQLruaGvXso221ZnQ3QVwfFrLf-5_%3Dgbu3dQdQFGqw%40mail.gmail.com.

[John Freestone]

Hi Dominique and Thomas,

Yes, I saw that video some time ago. I jumped in to it again at the middle just now to watch the section on 'Notes' (from 32 minutes). I emphasized some of the problems with TN in my last reply, but I was aware that any notation will face difficult compromises that need to be navigated. In that section, he makes an interesting assertion about chromatic solutions - that 'these symbols' (the sharp and flat symbols) are 'kind of one-time problems; you have to learn how they work and become accustomed to reading them, and then that's it; I know [it?] can be a something, or it can be a flat-something - you got it! Extending the vertical range to get rid of these symbols is, in my opinion, trading a short-term complexity problem for a much more permanent complexity problem'.

He has a point, and the chromatic staves he illustrates in that section demonstrate the problem well. On the other hand, there could be (are) several ways to mitigate it, and his presentation of the theory of sharps and flats is banal. He skips gaily over the complexity of learning thirty-odd different scales, and - as I mentioned last time - that there are double-sharps and double-flats (in fact, rarely, even triples of those, I've heard!). He makes the even more misleading suggestion that, because almost all the music we play is 'diatonic', it's fine to use a diatonic staff, as though we just write a key signature and that takes care of everything. There's no mention of the accidental naturals (in that section) that are necessary for all the notes we also use while we play supposedly 'diatonic' music, or the additional raising or lowering of notes according to theory, such that the same note can be notated in two different ways in the same bar, or the confusions arising from the continuation of accidentals through the bar unless reversed or changed again to some other altered note, or - the kicker for me - the use of 'courtesy' accidentals, which are actually the very same sharp or flat that's already in the key signature, to remind you you're back where you might have forgotten you are, but just create mental chaos!

There has to be a lot of 'permanent complexity' to override the simplicity of: this note is always what it says it is.

Anyway, sorry, I guess I'm preaching to the converted here. I think, when I have more time, I might write a whole article analysing that video in detail.

Cheers,
John

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/511395334.1084458.1761909824587.JavaMail.open-xchange%40opme11oxm14aub.op.aub.pom.fr.intraorange.

[John Keller]

A few thoughts about this thread:

I only looked at the video briefly and dont understand the point of starting with the chess game. 

He cites certain alternative notations that i hadnt heard of and are not on our website (but should be?).

My own conclusion is that the diatonic key signature system can be better for sight reading especially in Bach,

- in that the contours of fast melody is easier to perceive if it is not broken up by varying notehead colour.

I think The problem of wider vertical spacing can be fixed as in my ExpressStave and Paul’s ClareNote for example.

Thanks for your thoughts John and Thomas.

John Keller

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/7a8abfcb-9a29-454e-8890-2e6821a5e845%40gmail.com.

[John Freestone]

G'day John,

I regretfully suspect you're quite right, and you almost certainly have a much better perspective on the comparisons. However, would you agree that the easier sight reading you refer to depends on quite a deep internalization of all the keys on your instrument, so that modulations are a case of switching from one memorized diatonic scale to another, not to mention various other elements of theory like the additional accidentals in the rising and falling melodic minor, etc.? I guess all these things must become second nature after devouring books of Preludes and Well-tempered Claviers in every key, sandwiched between hours of scales practice.

I suppose if I put in the hours, I might get to that point of being able to sight read quicker with TN (than WYSIWYP or my own app that I'm still developing). But I don't, because, really, I have little desire to be able to sight read quickly. My desire is to be able to decode the notes on the page 'quickly' (in terms of days and weeks for a new piece) without the issues I've mentioned throwing me off, and relying on recordings to help with the oddities of time values, which I also find difficult.

I imagine that desire is quite common, and the desire to sight read quickly (if you mean read a piece you've never seen before near tempo and with very few mistakes) isn't high on most people's agenda. In what circumstances is it helpful? We don't learn pieces that way (though I'm sure if you can read fluently, it helps a lot with a new piece). We don't perform them that way. We expect work, just not spanners in the works. When I'm learning from TN, which I mostly still am, the sooner I can memorize pieces the better so I can stop being deceived by the notation.

Yeah, loads of people commenting wonder what the point of the chess analogy is, and why it goes on so long!
JF

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/259A72C5-625C-4C0E-986A-B7FB30D4972A%40gmail.com.

[Benjamin Spratling]

Howdy,

Yes, there are practical, emotional and skill-gaps associated with getting classically trained musicians to embrace options that work for others.

For the emotional, people can’t make a rational decision on whether to learn traditional music notation based on the outcome and effect on their lives.  They have to decide to forgo other things, like play time with friends, before they are a musician, in order to learn the skill.  So there must have been an emotional decision “I feel this is worth it” which is what truly undergirds their belief, not the outcome.  They are unaware of what the other outcome is, because it is a life they didn’t live.

When folks encounter difficulties, either they believe emotionally "it is worth it” and continue, or they belief “it is too hard”, and give up.  Only the ones who believed “it is worth it” become classically-trained musicians.  So no classical-trained musician understands what it feels like to decide “it is too hard”, which is the decision 70%-90% of people make.

This leaves any classically-trained musician in a very difficult spot when it comes to empathizing with and understanding the priorities and value trade offs of non-musicians.  And often the decision of “it is worth it” comes from an identity “I am a musician” as opposed to a behavior “I learned to read music”.  Identities cement down deep in the subconscious, and aren’t easily changed.  It also means loosing traditional music notation, or aspects of it, will be more like loosing yourself.  One would literally go through the stages of grief.  And with stages like denial and bargaining and anger….   if there is not bald faced reality confronting the person, they may simply not go through them.

But in UX, we start with the core belief that we are the experts in our product and care deeply about our product and our users are not and do not.  We must start with the intention, not of turning them into experts, but in making the complex accessible to someone who does not understand it, will not understand it.  i.e. it is a service we are providing to them.  This means, we must swallow our pride and our biases to believe that “it is too hard”.  and rigorously prioritize exactly what they value and what we’re going to be able to deliver, to find a viable compromise between expert perfection and accessible practicality.

To invent my notation which 85%-90% of non-musicians can “get” in 6 minutes merely through example, required not only going through the 5 stages of grief over losing traditional music notation, but a career in User eXperience design, which most music professors don’t even know is a field that exists, since it didn’t exist until the ’90’s.  Musicians are simply not trained in the various skill sets necessary to make good notations, called “User eXperience Design” or “UX".

Anyway, here’s my 33 minutes explanation of 20 violations of UX best practices by traditional music notation, which explains why it can’t be “fixed” and must be thrown away and start over from scratch.  Even if you disagree with 5 of these, there’s still another 15 that make the conclusion the same.

-Ben

[Philip Rhoades]

John,


On 2025-11-01 02:00, John Freestone wrote:
> G'day John,
>
.
.

>
> I suppose if I put in the hours, I might get to that point of being
> able to sight read quicker with TN (than WYSIWYP or my own app that
> I'm still developing). But I don't, because, really, I have little
> desire to be able to sight read quickly. My desire is to be able to
> decode the notes on the page 'quickly' (in terms of days and weeks for
> a new piece) without the issues I've mentioned throwing me off, and
> relying on recordings to help with the oddities of time values, which
> I also find difficult.

In my case (like many who found this list?), just getting started is a
major exercise - some years ago I did my own version AN just for
classical guitar using Lilypond - but even though I thought it was an
improvement, it didn't cause me to devote an hour a day to becoming
proficient . . as usual, other life stuff intervened . .

> I imagine that desire is quite common, and the desire to sight read
> quickly (if you mean read a piece you've never seen before near tempo
> and with very few mistakes) isn't high on most people's agenda. In
> what circumstances is it helpful? We don't learn pieces that way
> (though I'm sure if you can read fluently, it helps a lot with a new
> piece). We don't perform them that way. We expect work, just not
> spanners in the works. When I'm learning from TN, which I mostly still
> am, the sooner I can memorize pieces the better so I can stop being
> deceived by the notation.

I have come to the conclusion that we should "let a thousand notations
bloom" and make use of tech to convert between all the personal and
hardly used notations - that won't help someone who used their own
obscure notation when the band leader says: "Now we will do the same
thing but in the key of Eb" or whatever . . but it _might_ allow many
more people to play and create their own stuff? - or at least more
easily get involved for their own pleasure . . and use whatever is
easiest to achieve whatever "level" they are trying to reach . .

> Yeah, loads of people commenting wonder what the point of the chess
> analogy is, and why it goes on so long!

I liked the chess stuff! - but it _was_ a bit long . .

Phil.

[John M. Honeycutt]

Have a look at kmaps.com for an easy to learn and read open source notation for piano. It could use some sponsors from among piano lovers and teachers. Have a look. This message was placed by jhnh...@gmail.com. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/05b4c47a2900366671a3c626618653a3%40pricom.com.au.

[John F]

Hi Phil,

I couldn't agree more, especially with, "let a thousand notations bloom"!

I think it's important for learners to realise there is a fair bit to learn, technical stuff about playing an instrument, necessary theory (a lot of that can develop over time, I think), auditory skills, and reading so we can learn the pieces we want to play, and I see my goal as trying to make some of the reading (and writing) as easy as possible. How's it going now, and is guitar your main/only instrument?

John

[Thomas Nguyen]

Hi Waller,

The person who posted the video titled “Notation Must Die” to criticize me has since removed his post. I believe he realized that the conclusion of the video — which he overlooked — actually conflicted with his argument.

Here is the summary from the video's author: 

Martin Keary (@Tantacrul) 

“Do we really have to just accept that things should never change? Well, no.”

Music notation has been evolving for about 600 years, and it did not stop two or three centuries ago. Although progress has been slow, the system has gradually become more simplified over time.

In the 20th century, we saw an explosion of adapted notation systems created to support new musical needs — including microtonal music, free-metered music, and aleatoric music.

And now, with digital tools, evolution is accelerating. Software and apps are expanding possibilities by offering flexibility and accommodating diverse approaches, so musicians can choose whatever system suits them best — chromatic staff, colored notation, piano roll, guitar tab, Klavarskribo, Jianpu, and many others.

Best,

Thomas

[Philip Rhoades]

John,

On 2025-11-01 23:40, John F wrote:
> Hi Phil,
>
> I couldn't agree more, especially with, "let a thousand notations
> bloom"!

Good! - what good is modern tech good for if we can't leverage it to
convert any notation to any other notation to allow a substantial
increase in participation?

> I think it's important for learners to realise there is a fair bit to
> learn, technical stuff about playing an instrument, necessary theory
> (a lot of that can develop over time, I think), auditory skills, and
> reading so we can learn the pieces we want to play, and I see my goal
> as trying to make some of the reading (and writing) as easy as
> possible.

I think that is right - getting started easily (somehow) for the fun and
joy of it should be the priority - while understanding that the theory
and "higher levels" of competence will need other sorts of work to make
progress - is a good idea.

> How's it going now, and is guitar your main/only instrument?

Yes, my only real, though unreliable, focus is classical guitar -
originating from 60s/70s folk / protest stuff with a limited number of
chords - which was easier of course. In more recent times I have
thought that something like the Lumatone might help me with a more
"instinctive" feel for music structure - but that instrument is outside
of my current financial capacity unfortunately . .

Regards,

Phil.

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the forum of
> the Music Notation Project (hosted by Google Groups).
> To post to this group, send email to musicn...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/musicnotation?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "The Music Notation Project | Forum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to musicnotatio...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/b4f7726e-049f-4744-99ee-b8a432c47a08n%40googlegroups.com
> [1].
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/b4f7726e-049f-4744-99ee-b8a432c47a08n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

--
Philip Rhoades
PO Box 896
Cowra NSW 2796
Australia

[John F]

Hi Phil,

I think the Janko keyboard would be harder to master than a guitar neck, but maybe it has some other advantages, like being able to program it with all sorts of different intonations, including microtones. I'm more of a purist when it comes to instruments and prefer my 110-year-old upright piano and classical guitar (or steel-string acoustic) to any synth. But if you have a touch-screen device of a decent size, you might find this fun to try. http://terpstrakeyboard.com/play-it-now/  It's a web app that loads a Janko keyboard into the browser (best start with a 12TET setting rather than the default microtonal one, IMHO). Probably not much like the real thing, but saves a few grand. :D  The guitar has one of the main advantages of a Janko keyboard, that you learn some shapes and then you can transpose them anywhere on the neck.

John 

[Thomas Nguyen]

P.S. I think he may have blocked me — that’s probably why I can’t see his posts when I’m logged in.:)

On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 4:23 AM Waller Dominique <d.wa...@orange.fr> wrote:

[Joseph Austin]

My two cents: I've been "foolin' around" with keyboard for over 50 years now.
I've "finished" book 5 but comfortably play book 2-3. In other words, I guess I'm still a beginner.  

I'm really a computer professional. I've adapted TN for the traditional keyboard by using the 7-shape Aikin shape-note sytem (because it's readily available), coloring the sharps and flats, and splittling lines at phrase boundaries instead of bar. I reprint all my music with Lilypond or more recently MuseScore. 
You may know for a while I was experimenting with a twelve-shape shape-note system I called ChromaTonnetz on a 12-position staff.

My opinion of isomorphic notation is that it's great for an isomorphic instrument like a Jankó but not much advantage for 7-5.  Shape notes are great for singing, and when I'm singing choir-issued standard sheet music, I pencil in the solfedge.

After all my years trying to play sheet music unprofessionally, I'm convinced that the problem isn't so much which notation one uses, but that one is learning from notation instead of "by ear." 

Music is sound. I believe we should  learn to hear it and learn to play what we hear.  I think that using sheet music impeads the learning of "music".

My experience with sheet music is that it is useful when learning a piece, but when actually performing, one is mostly playing from memory, using the sheet music as "cue cards" to jog the memory. Now I suppose there are professionals who can pick up a piece of sheet music they've never seen before and play it. They may have a different opinion.

When my children learned violin, they were playing fo weeks before ever seeing a sheet of music.  My father played violin,mostly Broadway tunes,  and I never saw him with a sheet of music.  A polyphonic, chording instument may be more difficult to learn wholly by ear, but that may be because pedagogical techniques are less developed. But blind people learn to play without reading notation.

I'd suggest this experiment. Teach the begining student to play by "by ear" and don't introduce sheet music.  If they express a desire to "write down" the piece, let them develop their own notation, and see what they come up with. Or perhaps, they would simply prefer an audio recording--an option not available when "classical" music was composed and TN invented.

---

From: musicn...@googlegroups.com <musicn...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Thomas Nguyen <3jcn...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 2, 2025 12:17 PM
To: Waller Dominique <d.wa...@orange.fr>; musicn...@googlegroups.com <musicn...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [MNP] Discussion: Unconscious bias toward alternative notation systems

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CALmDnXQcUTt1OchOwjvMUJZ5pEoTwfUjqzhdzTvmu9CC_BS5JA%40mail.gmail.com.

[stuar...@gmail.com]

First of all I must say how pleased I am to see discussion of ANs on the forum again.  There are a number of things upon which I would like to comment on this topic of bias.

At the risk of being accused of trying to promote my own AN, I will begin by referencing my website (that makes a "pitch" for academic evaluation) that includes a webpage dedicated to the challenges of overcoming Tradition: https://pitch.wysiwyp.org/the-great-challenge-of-breaking-tradition.  No need to read the entire website, but on this page you will find my own take on the biases that John talked about in his first response to this thread.  I think we are in total agreement.

With respect to the Music Educator Reddit forum, I will not address the comments regarding Thomas’s notation.  As I think everyone on this forum knows, constructive comments and criticisms are valuable to the authors of ANs.  However, in the anonymous world of the internet, commenters don’t always understand this (nor always feel the need to politely question and discuss).  And with the Reddit forum (as well as those unfamiliar with ANs in general), I think there are some basic misunderstandings that make discussions difficult.  Here is my take on some of them:

1. AN promoters want readers of TN to switch.  I am not speaking for all AN designers, but I think it’s pretty clear that trying to convince musicians brought up on TN to switch is a waste of time.  No, I believe the adoption of ANs will be by beginners.  But before that happens, the music instructors will have to get on board (what I call a top-down approach), or, AN promoters will have to create attractive websites and instructional videos (the bottom-up approach).  I think the former is the main barrier until there are widely successful implementations of the latter.

2. ANs will never replace TN.   Again, I can’t speak for all AN authors, but I have to believe that most of us know it’s not going to happen anytime soon (not that we aren’t trying).  Current generations are just too invested in TN and no single AN has yet proved to be a powerful near-term contender.  However, for now I believe they all can exist side by side as alternatives but not replacements.  Even readers of TN may find the use of ANs beneficial in special situations.  But there is a huge amount of work in getting an AN to the point where it is viable: that is to say there is sheet music, instruction, and support.  Klavarskribo does, but I think its design is just not appealing enough (e.g., vertical timeline, etc.).  Perhaps someday an AN will prove itself to become a replacement for TN, but that day I think is way in the future if ever for the conservatory crowd.

3. ANs are not as full function as TN.  That is not necessarily the case, but there are precious few designs that are fleshed out enough to even know (often just staff line and notehead designs).  There are others that are well-defined but don’t have a convenient way for users to generate sheet music or require the notation designer to supply a limited inventory.  Aside from Klavarskribo, I know of only one that is pretty far down the road to full functionality with a user-friendly app that can actually be used to generate virtual sheet music from MusicXML.  

4. ANs that are not full function are useless.  The traditionalists cannot get their heads around the idea that less than full function ANs can be very helpful for beginners, for casual players, retirees, etc.  There is no reason multiple ANs cannot exist at the same time to serve different needs and different skill levels (again, as long as there are the three prerequisites: sheet music, instruction, and support).

5. “TN is perfect!  But maybe quirky.”  That’s roughly how one commenter put it on the Reddit forum, but that seems to be the argument that many of the AN nay-sayers are using.  Some even argue that TN is simple.  And if you can’t learn it, you are stupid and/or lazy.


Many TN adherents use the logic that because it has survived centuries of use, then therefore it must be the ultimate solution.  I am glad that this same logic hasn’t been applied to everything, otherwise we’d be commuting to work in horse and buggies and doing our income taxes in Roman numerals. But clearly, change can happen when better ideas, methods, and tools become available and people recognize the benefits.  Historically this has meant profits to businesses furnishing them.  But it’s not clear to me that there is enough profit incentive in “fixing” TN.  So today, people are generally not aware of the benefits of ANs because the music education systems don’t mention them, thus leaving the seemingly overwhelming task to dedicated volunteers.

I have found discussion of ANs to be like politics.  It’s difficult to discuss a topic with those whose thoughts are based on emotion instead of logic.  My experience with most people is that there is an immediate gut-level dismissive response to the idea of ANs without understanding their scope and why they might be useful to a lot of students of music.  A few friends have been willing to listen to my logical arguments, but very few have been swayed (and it’s notable that those were young people).

I think Thomas did an excellent job of responding to comments with patience, politeness, and thoughtfulness.  I think it is a real reflection of the times nowadays that one of the Reddit commenters asserted that Thomas’ posts must be an AI bot because a person couldn’t possibly be that polite (that reply now appears to have been deleted, thankfully).  Thus, talking and listening continue to be a challenge in all domains.  But I think the most impact we AN designers can make is when we follow Thomas’s example.  

[John Keller]

Hi Stewart,

I looked at your website. My first question was where is the diagram of WYSIWYP and the keyboard? I want to see a picture, not read a lot of text! After a while I found https://sites.google.com/view/the-challenges-of-sheet-music?usp=sharing with the diagram a bit of a scroll down. I wanted this diagram to be the first thing the audience sees! And do you have a beginners piano course? is there a list of transnotated standard piano pieces? Is there an automatic translation app?

I guess your system is not on the MusicNotation website because it doesn't comply with the pitch proportionality condition, In that B and D are space notes equally below and above the C line, instead of showing the semitone and wholetone distances accurately.

I have general question about your website. What brand is it? How much does it cost? Can a website continue on after a person dies? Paul Morris has urged me to get my own site for my Express Stave instead of the MNP Wiki page it is on currently (https://musicnotation.org/wiki/notation-systems/express-stave-by-john-keller/), but I am aware of my age and health concerns so feel my current page is a better place for my files. Just that I cannot edit it. I would like to delete a lot and streamline the teaching method, have an automated transnotation ability, as well as all the downloadable piano pieces I have notated.

Yes it is good to see a discussion about ANs again. I have a piano club that meets monthly to play for each other. All retiries who learnt or are learning traditional notation, but no-one even wants to look at my notation! Definitely biased against an alternative to traditional notation! So one project I have is to develop a very concise presentation that I could take a person through in 10 minutes to get them playing from ES. And this would be upfront on my website.

I agree with your points 1 to 5 about misunderstandings. In my opinions an AN can assist in understanding TN. My beginners courses teach both. Point 3 has been made that ES is not as full function as TN because it does not distinguish sharps and flats. But most instruments play enharmonics the exact same way (fingerings on woodwind and brass). On violin and viola we play them with different fingers but in practice the fingering would be understood from context. Not that I am intending ES be for all instruments, just that it could be.

Thanks for all who have interacted in this discussion.

John Keller

PS After writing all this i thought to look up WYSIWYP on the MNP site and found your Wiki page. (https://musicnotation.org/wiki/notation-systems/what-you-see-is-what-you-play-wysiwyp-by-stuart-byrom/)

This is good and concise with the explanatory picture right at the top. What I thought should be on your website!

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/5e0f87b4-4e52-4c20-a7c5-ba03ccdcca3an%40googlegroups.com.

[Thomas Nguyen]

Thanks, Dominique. I agree with you that the professional western musicians' unconscious bias is true.

Thomas

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/5e0f87b4-4e52-4c20-a7c5-ba03ccdcca3an%40googlegroups.com.

[Waller Dominique]

Hi Thomas, 

In fact it was Stuart Byrom, not me, responding to you, but never mind, I agree with him on this anyway.  

Regards,

Dominique Waller 

envoyé : 4 novembre 2025 à 03:27

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/CALmDnXRgzKZrDEmS2AnYCfLHOTobdbrgPRF85uj%3DRdOUkd1MAw%40mail.gmail.com.

[stuar...@gmail.com]

I created a new conversation thread to respond to this post since it's off topic.

[Thomas Nguyen]

Oh, thank Stuart & Dominique.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/musicnotation/512478265.1294047.1762259252410.JavaMail.open-xchange%40opme11oxm14aub.op.aub.pom.fr.intraorange.