>So you take a widget library with a good canvas widget and you design a system
>of metric/meter rulers that can be used to allign rectangular blocks along
>horizontal lines (aka tracks). The blocks here are measures/staffs not piano
>roll notes.
>Multiple rulers are allowed, complex tempo maps s
On Wednesday 02 February 2005 17:21, NadaSpam wrote:
> I wanted to post this to the root of the thread since this isn't a reply to
> any particular post, but I lost the beginning of the thread somehow.
>
> This is my initial stab at a development plan. I'm tentatively calling this
> project Scortch
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 19:49:42 +, Chris Cannam wrote
> On Wednesday 02 Feb 2005 19:02, Paul Davis wrote:
> > I continue to think that this crazy.
>
> So do I.
>
> The design process at work here reminds me a lot of the way I
> approached Rosegarden: look at how other applications work and what
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 07:49:42PM +, Chris Cannam wrote:
> For example, Rosegarden contains structure intended to support things
> like arbitrary layout engines for editing; multiple different layouts
> on the same music data; event-based systems that are not MIDI, and so
> on. Yet becaus
NadaSpam writes:
> This isn't meant to be the "ultimate music development system", perfect for
> everyone's needs.
Indeed. Can't you please also include score printing, so that we can
stop LilyPond development and sleep in the sun all day? ;-)
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
On Wednesday 02 Feb 2005 19:49, Chris Cannam wrote:
> You should see some of our planning emails from five years ago,
> excitedly talking about how we just had to do one or two generic bits
> and bobs and the rest would simply fall into place.
... and five years ago we were already on our third it
On Wednesday 02 Feb 2005 19:02, Paul Davis wrote:
> I continue to think that this crazy.
So do I.
The design process at work here reminds me a lot of the way I approached
Rosegarden: look at how other applications work and what they do, and
then add in a few interesting generalisations to make
>I wanted to post this to the root of the thread since this isn't a reply to
>any particular post, but I lost the beginning of the thread somehow.
>
>This is my initial stab at a development plan. I'm tentatively calling this
>project Scortch. Because of fundamental differences in design, I don't
On Wednesday 02 Feb 2005 17:21, NadaSpam wrote:
> This is my initial stab at a development plan. I'm tentatively
> calling this project Scortch.
Scorch is a registered trademark of Sibelius. It's probably wise to
avoid choosing a name that sounds the same.
http://www.sibelius.com/products/sco
I wanted to post this to the root of the thread since this isn't a reply to
any particular post, but I lost the beginning of the thread somehow.
This is my initial stab at a development plan. I'm tentatively calling this
project Scortch. Because of fundamental differences in design, I don't thin
On Saturday 29 January 2005 09:24 pm, NadaSpam wrote:
> Sorry if multiple copies of this appear. The spam filter doesn't like my
> choice of titles. I've tried a few variations so far.
>
> I'm looking to develop a music editor/sequencer somewhat in the vein of
> Cakewalk/Rosegarden, but looking mor
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 06:53:05AM -0500, Paul Davis wrote:
> but anyway, i just wanted to note that tracks don't have to be
> considered as this kind of burden at all. when you get down to the
> core of it, tracks are a grouping mechanism, that's all.
agreed...
> and they
> don't group by using
>That said, I completely agree with Frank: the track concept is *very*
>restricting when doing composition - you want to be able to define
>relationships between objects not only by defining time links but
>perhaps logical, statistical, etc... (that's why I use non-visual
>software à la Csound, SC3
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 11:52:08AM +0100, gerard van dongen wrote:
> Is it difficult to write hooks that generate lilypond notation, or that
> can read a lilypond notation file and generate OSC and/or MIDI or sounds
> from that?
Converting Lilypond to OSC/Midi should be possible. I wouldn't b
Le lundi 31 janvier 2005 à 09:55 +0100, Frank Barknecht a écrit :
> Hallo,
> Dave Robillard hat gesagt: // Dave Robillard wrote:
>
> > Abstraction is good - it makes improvement easy. The core of your
> > engine shouldn't even know what "audio" or "MIDI" is.
>
> Maybe such an engine shouldn't e
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 11:21:54 +0100, Alfons Adriaensen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 10:30:44AM +, vanDongen/Gilcher wrote:
SuperCollider is pretty much a synthesis engine as far as I know.
With extensive support for algorithmic compositio of course, but doesn't
seem to b
On Mon, Jan 31, 2005 at 10:30:44AM +, vanDongen/Gilcher wrote:
> SuperCollider is pretty much a synthesis engine as far as I know.
> With extensive support for algorithmic compositio of course, but doesn't
> seem to be the "composers workspace" that is the ambition.
It's two things (in separ
vanDongen/Gilcher wrote:
SuperCollider is pretty much a synthesis engine as far as I know.
With extensive support for algorithmic compositio of course, but doesn't seem
to be the "composers workspace" that is the ambition.
SC3 certainly has enough "composition primitives" to keep a composer
hap
On Sunday 30 January 2005 10:54, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> If the answer is yes, and you want such a tool, then my pragmatic response
> would be to bite the bullet and learn to use things like SuperCollider.
> They wil give you complete freedom (and a hard time to exploit it), and
> virtually compl
Hallo,
Dave Robillard hat gesagt: // Dave Robillard wrote:
> Abstraction is good - it makes improvement easy. The core of your
> engine shouldn't even know what "audio" or "MIDI" is.
Maybe such an engine shouldn't even know what a "track" is? I'm
serious: For some years now I use a sequencing so
On Sun, 2005-30-01 at 10:58 -0500, NadaSpam wrote:
> My thought is of a system where MIDI, audio, etc. would be handled by plug-in
> modules. In this way, new formats could be added. I'm not sure if a track of
> type "algorithm" would be possible or not. I think an algorithmic section
> within a
On Sunday 30 January 2005 05:54 am, you wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 09:24:58PM -0500, NadaSpam wrote:
> > End Notes for the Curious
> > ...
> > My degree is in applied mathematics.
>
> Since I am curious, are you also a musician or composer ? Would you be a
> _user_ of the kind of system you p
On Sat, Jan 29, 2005 at 09:24:58PM -0500, NadaSpam wrote:
> End Notes for the Curious
> ...
> My degree is in applied mathematics.
Since I am curious, are you also a musician or composer ? Would you be a
_user_ of the kind of system you propose ?
If the answer is yes, and you want such a tool, t
If you have several years to dedicate to this, go right ahead and have
fun. Otherwise, I strongly and respectfully suggest you consider how
to at least start from where Rosegarden already is. You could also
help the Lilypond team on their work to create a GUI/WYSIWYG system
for their tool. Even the
Sorry if multiple copies of this appear. The spam filter doesn't like my
choice of titles. I've tried a few variations so far.
I'm looking to develop a music editor/sequencer somewhat in the vein of
Cakewalk/Rosegarden, but looking more towards the future of MIDI and audio
capabilities. I've be
25 matches
Mail list logo
