Music Formats and image format
Tohm
I would like to ask the question about music formats. What software/
font would be prefered?
I have the ability to work with Finale, Sibelius, and Lilypond and
would be happy to collect/ convert any of these to which ever is
decided.
Also, which image format is prefered? I work in Photoshop a lot and
would also be willing to convert or create images needed into the
proper format. For example, the example request for scales in the
requests page... I have those already and convert them to PNG, JPEG,
PSD, GIF, etc... Which would you feel is best?
Any input would be great.
Thanks,
tohm
Jonathan Kulp
program and produces excellent output. I'm currently writing a
counterpoint workbook using LaTeX and Lilypond and it looks really nice.
(Incidentally my counterpoint workbook will also be a Creative
Commons-licensed work when it's done.)
I don't have strong preferences about image formats, but I understand
that png is an open format, whereas some others are not. I always
prefer the more open formats.
Jon
--
Jonathan Kulp, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Music History and Theory
UL Lafayette School of Music
P. O. Box 41207
Lafayette, LA 70504-1207
Office phone: (337) 482-5203
http://www.jonathankulp.com
Ian Quinn
My feeling is that at this stage of the project, there's no sense in
legislating what software should be used, and people should use
whatever software they like the most. We're likely to get broader
participation that way. If and when we decide that we'd like to have
a uniform look to examples, something can be worked out.
My read on image formats is that PNG is the way to go.
Ian
-------------
Ian Quinn
-------------
Assistant Professor (on leave, 2008-09)
Department of Music and Program in Cognitive Science
Editor, Journal of Music Theory
Yale University
-------------
2008-09 Residential Fellow
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
Stanford University
Aaron D
uniform look for all music examples, which would suggest using one
piece of software.
Personally I would vote for Sibelius or Finale, and in fact perhaps
the deciding factor should be if I can get one of them to donate a
couple free versions for the project, then we can use them
exclusively for our book. At the very least I know Finale offers a
decent free version we can use.
The reason I prefer using those over Lilypond is: they are much easier
to use and install, even though the software is proprietary the
creator owns all of the music they produce, if we store the music
examples on Musopen in sib or fin files, more people will be able to
edit them.
Regarding images, PNG would be the best, it has the smallest footprint
than both Jpeg and GIF
-Aaron
Ian Quinn
Finale's "decent free version" will not be useful for our purposes; it
lacks a lot of special notational functionality that you need when
creating pedagogical illustrations.
Again, I think we need to avoid specifying software if that's possible
at this stage; I think that will just slow the project down with holy
wars and restrict the number of people able and willing to work on
examples.
Do both Finale and Sibelius work well enough with MusicXML to make
that a neutral interchange format for us? How well does Lilypoind
work with MusicXML?
iq.
-------------
Ian Quinn
-------------
Assistant Professor (on leave, 2008-09)
Department of Music and Program in Cognitive Science
Editor, Journal of Music Theory
Yale University
-------------
2008-09 Residential Fellow
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences
Stanford University
Tohm Judson
I'm not really worried about which software at this point, I am more
concerned with the look of the images as I make images of each scale,
note, chord, etc...
Here is what I am thinking... To keep images consistent looking (the
engraving), I will use Lilypond for now because I like the look.
These can then be pretty easily converted to Finale or Sibelius (even
scanned if we have to) since we have all probably used either or
both. In the long run, I think it would be good to have all 3
versions available for download.
I am all for using PNG as well.
Jonathan Kulp
>
> Finale's "decent free version" will not be useful for our purposes; it
> lacks a lot of special notational functionality that you need when
> creating pedagogical illustrations.
>
> Again, I think we need to avoid specifying software if that's possible
> at this stage; I think that will just slow the project down with holy
> wars and restrict the number of people able and willing to work on
> examples.
Agreed here, too. I use Lilypond but am also very experienced with
Finale. A uniform look at the end is the most important consideration.
The problem with Finale is the lack of backwards-compatibility. I
have 2006 but many will have 2008 or newer. The musicXML export will be
our friend, I think.
>
> Do both Finale and Sibelius work well enough with MusicXML to make that
> a neutral interchange format for us? How well does Lilypoind work with
> MusicXML?
>
Lilypond can *import* musicXML files very well, at least musicXML files
made from Finale. I've never tried it from Sibelius because I don't
have access to a Sibelius installation. It can not *export* to
musicXML. This is a feature many of us in the Lilypond community want,
but since it's an open-source project there needs to be a developer with
the time, skills, and desire to implement it. I and a couple of others
have offered a monetary bounty for its creation but so far it's not enough.
Jon
Ian Quinn
A uniform look at the end is the most important consideration.
Jonathan Kulp
>
> On Dec 18, 2008, at 12:03 PM, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
>
>> A uniform look at the end is the most important consideration.
>
> To be honest, I think a high-quality, low-BS book and the cultivation of
> an energetic community to develop it are the most important
> considerations right now. A uniform look at the end is indeed an
> important consideration – but at the end.
>
> We should start talking about processes for framing the book, which I
> think is a more important discussion.
Definitely!
Who is this book for? What
> should it cover? At what level? With what repertoire? Is it going to
> be just one book? Are we going to write it wiki-style or some other
> way? It's going to be hard for us to agree on these issues, I think.
>
> Ian
[This should go in a new thread, but since you brought it up here I'll
go ahead and respond.]
I imagine that whoever came up with the idea for this book had in mind a
free, open alternative to standard theory texts like Kostka/Payne, for
use in a college classroom, or perhaps in a conservatory theory class.
(That was what I had in mind when I started writing my counterpoint
workbook, at least--a free alternative to Kennan's increasingly
expensive workbook.) It would be nice, I think, if there were either a
companion workbook for the text, or an online repository of exercises
from which theory teachers could draw to use in conjunction with the book.
Perhaps a way to begin would be to come up with a list of topics to be
covered, say, in a first-semester theory course. Then see who has
particular interests in the various topics. Not all of us will be
writers. I have no experience teaching the standard undergrad theory
sequence. I have a good bit of experience teaching counterpoint, and I
have a MM in Theory, but when I signed up for the project I imagined my
own role as that of proofreader, music engraver, and whatever else I
could do to help. I believe in the project and I think I can make
valuable contributions, but I don't have the same perspective that an
experienced theory teacher has. Should we start a new thread with these
planning questions?
Best,
Aaron D
Has anyone been able to view my proposal for getting started on the
wiki? At the start the board should agree on the 1) scope of the book
(or books if we separate parts of it), including things like the
counterpoint workbook you mentioned)
2) table of contents
As for a writing process, I suggested each willing prof can be
assigned a chapter, or more if they have the time. The wiki can
organize the book by chapters, with proof readers and engravers
assigned to chapters x through y.
Aaron
Tom Goldie
vocabulary of the field and the hierarchy of that vocabulary drive the
scope and sequence of the book. It may not be just what anyone ELSE has
done, but it would certainly be original --I like to think it's original
to ME, but if it is, I'll gladly donate the concept to the improvement
of education.
I have a concept tree I've drawn by using the dictionary, starting with
the word "mordent" and worked my way down through a hierarchy of
concepts. It proved to be a revelation to ME, an amateur musician and
professional (let's leave off any discussions of quality :P) educator.
I would gladly share the tree and my thoughts on it with anyone who is
interested. It is not comprehensive, but one can see from the existing
branches which way it might expand.
So guided by my "tree," let me suggest that such a book start at the
bottom level, with a discussion of physics: sound, vibration, pitch,
volume, waveform/timbre.
Then it go to the next level: music, (with a discussion of the etymology
of music: muses), and the pleasing arrangement of sounds, usually
produced by voice or instrument, but increasingly electronic.
Then it should talk about WESTERN music, at which point it must talk
about the central idea of tonality: discussing octaves, diatonic scales,
degrees, steps, etc.
Then it should discuss rhythm and pitch, along with the notation of both.
Next should come topics of composition, melody, harmony, and the
vocabulary surrounding compositions, such as themes, variations,
phrases, motifs, and ideas.
(At the next level would come ornamentation, where "mordent" can be found.)
There are plenty of places to add in more depth:
Instruments, and their classification and history.
Western tuning systems (Pythagorean and Equal).
Virtuosos.
Types of compositions and their terminology, like "hooks" and "bridges".
History, math, philosophy, with a fair amount about the Pythagoreans and
their concepts, especially how powers of 2 and 3 in relation to each
other comprised the basics of the tonal system (perhaps best inserted
right in the intro of Western music).
Musical genres (I'd like a shot at gathering the information for a
section on barbershop singing from a large internet gathering).
I'm sure some of you more PhD types can go into more depth on theories
of harmony, musical development, or whatever else -- I'm just suggesting
a larger focus on building up on basics for the HUGE number of students
who are NOT receiving any instruction in music in their elementary or
high school years. If we also keep it as an online resource, then we
can add audio files (I've got a few little ditties like a Pythagorean
versus ET chromatic scale) or screen shots of waveforms from an
oscilloscope.
A whole bunch of practical exercises (like making a simple instrument
then using mathematics calculate the location of the frets) could be
added. Or a bunch of "gee whiz" things like how to watch sympathetic
vibrations in guitar strings, or how to listen for the "beat" when
tuning a guitar, would add to the practical value of the book.
Or a whole bunch of links to online music resources, from PUBLIC DOMAIN
sheet music to frequency analyzers, music notation software and
languages (ABC, MTex, LilyPond, Midi, etc.), you name it.
Now if all of us could just start adding their wish list and we could
start categorizing what we'd like to include and where, we could get a
good start on it.
Tom Goldie
Jack of all trades, master of none
Aaron D
I would have liked to see more context to the theory I learned,
history, how it all fits together to form a composition..
The beauty of an open source project is we can always have too much
content, and those who think the information about the beginnings of
music belong elsewhere, can either remove it from our word/pdf
document or we can simply create volumes, which they can skip.
Aaron
Jonathan Kulp
If the music theory textbook is supposed to be used for the core music
theory curriculum in a college setting, then IMO many of the topics you
suggest would fall well outside the scope of the book. They would be
better suited for an eventual Open Music Appreciation book or some other
ancillary material on aesthetics, style, performance practice, and so
forth. However if you or someone else wants to write chapters on this
material then I'm sure they'll find a home somewhere.
Best,
Jonathan
Tom Goldie wrote:
> I would like to see a guiding principle of any book be that the
> vocabulary of the field and the hierarchy of that vocabulary drive the
> scope and sequence of the book. It may not be just what anyone ELSE has
> done, but it would certainly be original --I like to think it's original
> to ME, but if it is, I'll gladly donate the concept to the improvement
> of education.
>
> So guided by my "tree," let me suggest that such a book start at the
> bottom level, with a discussion of physics: sound, vibration, pitch,
> volume, waveform/timbre.
>
> Then it go to the next level: music, (with a discussion of the etymology
> of music: muses), and the pleasing arrangement of sounds, usually
> produced by voice or instrument, but increasingly electronic.
>
> Then it should talk about WESTERN music, at which point it must talk
> about the central idea of tonality: discussing octaves, diatonic scales,
> degrees, steps, etc.
>
> Then it should discuss rhythm and pitch, along with the notation of both.
>
> Next should come topics of composition, melody, harmony, and the
> vocabulary surrounding compositions, such as themes, variations,
> phrases, motifs, and ideas.
>
> (At the next level would come ornamentation, where "mordent" can be found.)
>
aef110
I wish to second the suggestion that we use Lilypond for the final
output. We can all use our favorite editors (Finale, Sibelius, etc.)
and output to MusicXML. The current Lilypond handles XML quite well
(though there are some parsing errors, like when it exits on extra
carriage returns -- this could be fixed easily in the Python script),
though it's true there's no way to convert .ly to XML. (Lilypond
documents are essentially programming scripts, and since they're so
flexible in format I can't imagine how converting to XML would be
achieved.)
A major advantage to Lilypond is that it can be scripted, which will
be useful for formatting the book. I suggest using MusicXML 1.0 if
possible since it's the most basic and makes conversion relatively
simple.
An alternative is to export in a vector format like EPS (can Sibelius
do this?), then use a batch process to rasterize. This would only work
if everyone used the same source program, however, so the examples
would ultimately appear inconsistent in fonts, spacing and size /
resolution with this alternative.
Re: MIDI vs. wave, why don't we render the MIDI files using sampled
instruments? (That can also be scripted!)
Kind regards,
Albert
Aaron D
formats, people will just export large samples in either an open
format or in multiple versions, so there shouldnt be too many
problems.
My first concern is accessibility, so in terms of what we highlight,
it'll be mp3 and PNG, we can always let users then download alternate
versions.
Aaron