Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-08 Thread Jack Cooper
- Original Message > From: Graham Percival > To: Martin Tarenskeen > Cc: lilypond-user mailinglist > Sent: Mon, February 8, 2010 6:51:26 AM > Subject: Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond > conversion suite) > > On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:45:58AM

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-08 Thread Michael Good
You can get started with a reasonable MusicXML import project for as little as a US $10 investment in Finale NotePad. For a MusicXML export project, just download a free Finale demo. Recordare does not make any money from either the sales or downloads of MakeMusic products. The Finale products

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-08 Thread Martin Tarenskeen
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, Graham Percival wrote: On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:45:58AM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: But the main problem remains: Lilypond developers are also very happy Lilypond users, which could explain the lack of motivation to put a lot of time and effort exporting to a format

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-08 Thread Graham Percival
On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:45:58AM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > > But the main problem remains: Lilypond developers are also very happy > Lilypond users, which could explain the lack of motivation to put a lot > of time and effort exporting to a format that only people who do NOT use > Li

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-08 Thread Martin Tarenskeen
Personally I would already be quite happy if Lilypond would only be able to export the most basic information like staffs, clefs, keys, notes, and beamings. More detailed and/or complex details I would then add manually in the software that I use to import the exported musicxml. Even that wou

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-07 Thread Reinhold Kainhofer
On Sunday 07 February 2010 20:40:55 you wrote: > MusicXML isn't a standard at all. If you have to say "umm, dunno, > look at what this other piece of software does", it's not a > standard. Just to make things clear: It's not so bad. It's just impossible to write a full specification for musical

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-07 Thread Graham Percival
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 07:12:59PM +0100, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > However, there is also a practical problem: How do you check the > quality of your export? There are so many things in the MusicXML > "specification" that are left unclear, and the typical advice on > the MusicXML mailing list is

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-07 Thread Reinhold Kainhofer
On Saturday 06 February 2010 16:18:54 Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > Everyone will agree having not only musicxml2ly but also a Lilypond to > MusicXML converter would be cool. Absolutely. The only problem is who will develop it? I don't have the time for such a task, but rather create some more Urtex

Re: Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-06 Thread Graham Percival
On Sat, Feb 06, 2010 at 04:18:54PM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote: > Could this also be true for Lilypond ? Would it be better/easier to have > a --musicxml output option ( just like --png --ps and --pdf ) instead of > a separate application that has to be written from scratch ? Maybe then > the

Lilypond to MusicXML (was: Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite)

2010-02-06 Thread Martin Tarenskeen
Everyone will agree having not only musicxml2ly but also a Lilypond to MusicXML converter would be cool. I remember a similar discussion some time ago in the Mup mailing list. The Mup developers from Arkkra Enterprises were saying it would probably be less work to add musicxml export as an e

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-04 Thread Karl Hammar
Michael Good: ... > LilyPond may be free software, but it has more lock-in than nearly any > current > commercial music notation product. ... You might be able to claim that and get away with it, but look at [1]: In economics, vendor lock-in, also known as proprietary lock-in, or customer loc

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-04 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 2/4/10 3:53 PM, "Michael Good" wrote: > > LilyPond may be free software, but it has more lock-in than nearly any current > commercial music notation product. Scores can only be imported into LilyPond > format. They can never be moved effectively from LilyPond to another notation > program.

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-04 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Feb 04, 2010 at 04:03:17PM -0800, Patrick McCarty wrote: > On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Michael Good wrote: > > > > It is unfortunate that LilyPond users cannot take advantage of > > the same data freedom that Finale and Sibelius users can. I agree that it is unfortunate that nobody ha

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-04 Thread Patrick McCarty
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Michael Good wrote: > > LilyPond may be free software, but it has more lock-in than nearly any current > commercial music notation product. Scores can only be imported into LilyPond > format. They can never be moved effectively from LilyPond to another notation > pr

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-04 Thread Michael Good
Hi Martin and Kirill, Martin, MusicXML is pervasive in the music preparation business, whether it is preparation for print music, film, or TV. It is not yet used very widely as a consumer format for sheet music, but this is starting to change. You can see the list of sites offering MusicXML sco

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-03 Thread Martin Tarenskeen
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Michael Good wrote: There will definitely be lossiness going from Sibelius to an intermediate format, and from that intermediate format to LilyPond. But I think the lossiness will be minimized if that intermediate format is MusicXML produced by our latest Dolet plug-ins. Th

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-03 Thread Kirill
Michael Good wrote: Obviously one can do much better than Dolet 1 with Sibelius 6, but I don't think this extends to Dolet 5. Hi Michael, Granted, your Dolet 5 is perhaps much more advanced than the earlier versions. I'm sure you are doing a wonderful job there, and a very useful one too.

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-03 Thread Michael Good
Hi Kirill, This is an interesting approach to Sibelius to LilyPond conversion. However, I do agree with Carl's earlier message. It seems that a more generally useful approach would be to improve MusicXML to LilyPond conversion. The Dolet 5 for Sibelius and Dolet 5 for Finale converters both con

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-03 Thread Johan Vromans
Kirill writes: > Update for sib2ly released (v1.01, 2 Feb 2010) > > * Chord symbols now supported. Confirmed. > * sib2lydump.plg updated to work with Sibelius 5. Confirmed. I'm very impressed! > Johan, > When you reported that chords do not work, I misunderstood you at first. > The chords a

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kirill
Update for sib2ly released (v1.01, 2 Feb 2010) * Chord symbols now supported. * sib2lydump.plg updated to work with Sibelius 5. * Fixed a serious bug with phrasing slurs. * Odd cases like multiple BarRests per bar are handled more gracefuly. * Various other bug fixes. Updated version can be downl

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kirill
Ewald Gutenkunst web.de> writes: > > Thanks - with ruby it works well on my mac. > > The pdf is made, but I have an error and  warnings: > > Dear Ewald, You report really helped. There was indeed a bug with phrasing slurs -- fixed now. The problem with double bar rests is more of a Sibeli

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Johan Vromans
Kieren MacMillan writes: > > But maybe it is feasible to translate Kirill's XML into MusicXML using > > nifty XSLT? Then we have best of at least two worlds. > > My XSLT-fu is pretty strong -- is this something that people will > really use? Do you want an honest answer? Not me. My personal i

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 2/2/10 9:18 AM, "Kirill" wrote: > Carl, > I promise I will maintain the project better, and will follow more robust > testing procedures (absolutely essential for this kind of tool). > I apologise for the temporary bugs, but the project is very-very young. > I'm sure in a few weeks it wil

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kirill
Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool organum.hu> writes: > > But why don't you dump directly to lilypond? Because Sibelius plugin > interface is not so good as writing in Ruby? > > Bert > That was my first naive attempt, to do all the work in a Sibelius plugin. (That would have made things 100% port

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kieren MacMillan
Hi all, > But maybe it is feasible to translate Kirill's XML into MusicXML using > nifty XSLT? Then we have best of at least two worlds. My XSLT-fu is pretty strong -- is this something that people will really use? Cheers, Kieren. ___ lilypond-user m

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Johan Vromans
Carl Sorensen writes: > However, it seems to me to be less than ideal to have both Kirill's > xml->ly converter and the lilypond xml2ly that Reinhold has worked > on. Well, though they both have xml in their names, they process a fundamentally different xml. LP's XML converter handles MusicXML w

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool)
Kirill wrote: To make things work via xml2ly, one would need to write: 1) A simple plugin for Sibelius to dump the score in some format preserving 100% of what can be programmatically accessed using Sibelius ManuScript language. Say, dump all the score elements into an .XML 2) Write an interprete

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kirill
Carl Sorensen byu.edu> writes: > This brings up an issue that has been concerning me in this whole thread. > > I believe that a good xml dump from Sibelius is a wonderful tool, and I'm > delighted that Kirill has been working on it. Thanks, Kirill! > > However, it seems to me to be less than i

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Carl Sorensen
On 2/2/10 12:49 AM, "Johan Vromans" wrote: > Kirill writes: > > >> 4) Chords ARE produced by the converter, at least from Sib6 scores. > > There are chords in the .xml but not in the .ly. > This brings up an issue that has been concerning me in this whole thread. I believe that a good xml

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Kirill
Ewald Gutenkunst web.de> writes: > > > > Am 01.02.2010 um 16:39 schrieb Hans Aberg: > Ruby is a part of later Mac OS X; on 10.5.8: $ which ruby /usr/bin/ruby $ ruby --version ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0] Hans > > Thanks - with ruby it works well on my mac. > >

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-02 Thread Ewald Gutenkunst
Am 01.02.2010 um 16:39 schrieb Hans Aberg: > Ruby is a part of later Mac OS X; on 10.5.8: > $ which ruby > /usr/bin/ruby > $ ruby --version > ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0] > > Hans Thanks - with ruby it works well on my mac. The pdf is made, but I have an er

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Johan Vromans
Kirill writes: > 1) NumStaveLines has apparently been introduced only in Sib6. Using > the value of NumStaveLines the interpreter decides whether the staff > is a normal staff or a rythmic staff (hence all your staves are > RhythmicStaffs). I guess I will have to detect it differently for > Sib5.

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Kirill
Johan Vromans squirrel.nl> writes: > > This is really very good stuff! > Johan, Thank you for your report! 1) NumStaveLines has apparently been introduced only in Sib6. Using the value of NumStaveLines the interpreter decides whether the staff is a normal staff or a rythmic staff (hence all

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Johan Vromans
Kirill writes: > > Must I conclude that this, too, requires Sibelius 6 or higher? > > I have no way of testing if it works for Sibelius earlier than 5. > However, I see no reason why it shouldn't work with Sibelius 5. > I have only tested it with Sibelius 6, though. > > Try running the dump plu

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Kirill
Ewald Gutenkunst web.de> writes: > > Hi, > > Very interesting tool! > is there any way to use it on Mac? > The first step (the sib plugin) works already well. > > ~Ewald > I have uploaded the SIB2LY suite in form of Ruby scripts. These should be useable on any platform that is capable of ru

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Hans Aberg
On 1 Feb 2010, at 15:06, Johan Vromans wrote: Ewald Gutenkunst writes: Very interesting tool! is there any way to use it on Mac? The first step (the sib plugin) works already well. It's written in ruby, so... Ruby is a part of later Mac OS X; on 10.5.8: $ which ruby /usr/bin/ruby $

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Kirill
Johan Vromans squirrel.nl> writes: > > Kirill yandex.ru> writes: > > > This new tool I wrote might be of interest to some: > > > > http://www.sidorefa.com/sib2ly/ > > Must I conclude that this, too, requires Sibelius 6 or higher? > I have no way of testing if it works for Sibelius earlier

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Kirill
Ewald Gutenkunst web.de> writes: > > Hi, > > Very interesting tool! > is there any way to use it on Mac? > The first step (the sib plugin) works already well. > > ~Ewald > Yes, it should work on all platforms provided you have a Ruby interpreter. I will update the instructions shortly. _

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Kirill
Hi all, I apologise for multiple posting this morning. I replied to earlier threads where Sib->Ly conversion was discussed, without realising it was going straight to the mailing-list to annoy everyone. Sorry!! Best, Kirill Sidorov ___ lilypond-u

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Johan Vromans
Kirill writes: > This new tool I wrote might be of interest to some: > > http://www.sidorefa.com/sib2ly/ Must I conclude that this, too, requires Sibelius 6 or higher? -- Johan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.o

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Johan Vromans
Ewald Gutenkunst writes: > Very interesting tool! > is there any way to use it on Mac? > The first step (the sib plugin) works already well. It's written in ruby, so... -- Johan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.o

Re: New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-02-01 Thread Ewald Gutenkunst
Hi, Very interesting tool! is there any way to use it on Mac? The first step (the sib plugin) works already well. ~Ewald ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

New Sibelius to LilyPond conversion suite

2010-01-31 Thread Kirill
This new tool I wrote might be of interest to some: http://www.sidorefa.com/sib2ly/ To my best knowledge, this is the most powerful Sibelius to LilyPond converter to date. The whole thing is, of course, free and open source. Tell me what you think. Best, Kirill Sidorov