Thoughts on Midge (was: Re: [midi] Re: Articulate midi script)

[Peter Chubb]

>>>>> "Grammostola" == Grammostola Rosea <address@hidden> writes:

Grammostola> David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
>>> 
>> Again, why not get in touch with the developer(s) of midge? The
>> syntax is completely different, but it is *text-based* and GNU.  It
>> is dedicated to midi, not notation.  Why not find a way to use
>> their work, at worst by means of a translation script?  Regards,
>> daveA
>> 

I had a look at midge.  The main thing it adds that Lilypond doesn't
have, is much greater control over individual notes.  You can add
bends (so presumably could implement a portamento or glissando,
although it appears to be limited to 4 semitones, which is too small
for most of the music I deal with); you can control attack and decay,
and effects such as reverb. chorus and pan.

Musical stuff (articulations, ornaments, dynamics, tempo variations
such as rit. or stringendo, etc., etc) has to be interpreted and
written explicitly in expanded form into the midge source.

While midge could be used as an intermediate format for MIDI output, I
can't see at present what it would gain for us --- the level of
abstraction over a standard binary MIDI file is very small.  And the
hard bits would still be hard: understanding the textual annotations
that composers put into their scores, and interpreting them.

--
Dr Peter Chubb        www.nicta.com.au      peter DOT chubb AT nicta.com.au
http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au           ERTOS within National ICT Australia
From Imagination to Impact                       Imagining the (ICT) Future