On Sat, 2022-12-03 at 10:49 +0000, Joe Wilkinson wrote: > > > On 02/12/2022 19:42, Richard Shann wrote: > > On Fri, 2022-12-02 at 19:29 +0000, Joe Wilkinson wrote: > > > Hi Richard: It looks as if the individual instruments should be > > > easy > > > to add (sort of, as my midi is not VERY tone-accurate). > > yes, I would expect so - but I don't at all recall what is > > involved. > > When I looked I saw that each instrument was a .denemo file so I'm > > guessing that what you write below is gleaned by looking at > > examples??? > Yes, in denemo.share.denemo.templates (from where I extracted table > data).
That is you looked at the XML of the .denemo files? > I'm sure there is a reason for it but there seems a lot of redundant > and > repeated info in these files, yes, the original coding didn't leave out values that were the default (such as 4/4), later coding did tend to do that. > as if each could be used to set up a New > denemo file, well, they *are* valid Denemo scores, it's just a cheapskate way of storing template information, instead of creating a new format which would not need to store non-template information. > but presumably in an existing file most would be overridden > by existing values, e.g key or time signature > > The staff-range lo & hi are presumably what is used to register [...] > > belonging to it (in the GM soundfont, which is what is being used). > Only true if it has been preset. Else you get a drop down with a > blank > value on it and can then choose the midi sound, presumably > irrespective > of the Instrument that you had it previously set to. not sure - setting up the instrument name from a script will not examine which soundfont is loaded - there is no scripted interface to the soundfont - so it may start off blank... > > > But are the rest of the items significant; has figures and has [...] > > > I'll have some further investigation and try creating a few > templates. Great! Richard
