This section allows you to view all Messages made by this member. Note that you can only see Messages made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - William Ashworth
The point we've been trying to make is that there is no single "right" realization of a figured bass. The figures tell you in one specific place in the music what chord notes the composer expects to be played above the bass line. They don't tell you what register those notes should appear in, or what their order should be above the bass, or how they should lead into the next chord - and voice leading is critically important for figured bass, because it was used in the contrapuntal era, before harmony as we know it had been developed, so every note in every chord arrived and departed as part of a contrapuntal melody. These things were all left up to the performer. There were certain conventions, but the best composers (Bach; Frescobaldi; etc.) broke convention a great deal of the time, as good artists always do. So, no, you can't mechanically realize a figured bass into standard notation, without putting a great deal of AI to work to simulate what a performer might come up with (emphasize might, because different performers would likely come up with different, but equally valid, realizations). You can mechanically indicate what notes the figured bass implies, in standard notation. But that's not the same thing.
Yeeesss. That would be a start. But - and perhaps more relevant for me personally - would be doing it the other way round, and thus realising a Figured Bass Score into standard notation form. That ought to be relative easy, no? Though even then there'd be problems, with many of the "tune" notes not having any figuring directly associated with them.
Right. But I think the problem for those who are unfamiliar with figured bass is deciding which chords they're supposed to be harmonizing the line with in the first place. An algorithm could do that. It's unlikely to be able to create a satisfactory realization, but it could provide a skeleton for the arranger to work from, without having to go through the mental gymnastics necessary to figure out which notes the composer wanted above the bass line. Figured bass originated, and was primarily used, before Rameau wrote the book that originated the functional analysis of chordal harmony, so composers were not yet thinking in terms of chords - just how individual lines came together. Good lines would still have to be developed, but modern arrangers who haven't studied Baroque harmony could get a head start by knowing which chords they were working in. I suspect that's all the OP wants.
.....the main problem with playing figured bass is, in my humble opinion, voice leading (as with all chord writing): Putting a following chord is always also a melodic enterprise, including decisions about leaving out notes; using typical patterns, most important, of course, countermovement - at least of outer voices; deciding how much movement there is in the chords - one-on-one movement, i.e., one chord per number, is typical, but also arpeggiated chords may be an option. A very wide and, I'd say, "under-determined" (in the mathematical sense) area....
The developer's website is at http://www.synthfont.com/About_SyFonOne.html: it's not secure, but I've never had a problem with it. If you're worried about that, try Cnet's download site: https://download.cnet.com/SyFonOne/3000-2170_4-75833849.html.
Bill, do you have a reputable source for that one? I am having some issues with CoolSoft and thought I might switch to see if it resolves them.
Not quite all. Some of us use SyFonOne. I find it a little easier to use than CoolSoft, but either of them will work well with soundfonts, and both of them are free.
....the default we all seem to be using is the CoolSoft VitrualMIDISynth....
That's the main reason I'm in the process of switching, but there are other advantages to Sibelius. You can select across staves in systems. All the special notations like 8va lines, arpeggios, etc., that we put in via user objects in NWC are native in Sib, and usually very simple to create. Obbligato staves, cue staves, and cutout scores can also be made very simply; NWC can fake the first two, sort of, but it can't do the third one at all. Sib is compatible with NotePerformer, which gives you far better sound than any work with soundfonts in NWC can ever produce - important when you're submitting new works to calls for scores, which I often do. The list could go on, but I think the point has been made.
I really wish this wasn't the case. I hate Sibelius almost as much as I love NWC. The user interface is simply awful - after almost two years with the program, I still spend far too much of my time at the computer swearing at the Sibelius development team. (Would you believe it's the best of a bad lot ? I find the Finale and Dorico interfaces even worse.) NWC is still my program of choice for any job where Sib's advantages won't matter, such as whipping out examples for Facebook forums or producing music for friends and family to use that isn't intended for wider distribution. If it could match Sib in a head-to-head reading comparison, I'd be back in a flash. But unless development resumes, it can't. And that is why I am very, very reluctantly switching my professional work away from it.
I thought NWC users should be aware of this paragraph, toward the end of the article (the emphasis is my own):
The mainframes and micros of the 20th century are long since gone; and the software that ran on them are now only a memory. On the Mac and PC platforms, there is a lengthy roll-call of applications that are no longer developed nor maintained: COMUS, ConcertWare, DMCS, Encore, Graphire, Igor Engraver, MagicScore, MusEdit, MusiCAD, Music Write, Music Ease, Musikrafters, NOTEWORTHY COMPOSER, Professional Composer, Personal Composer, SCORE. Even if you can still acquire them, they probably won’t work on today’s OSes.
It saddens me, but this is also how I must now view NWC. I'm continuing to use it for as many tasks as I can get away with, but unless further development occurs, I will have to continue to move more and more of my work to Sibelius. I wish it weren't so.
Well, let's say that there is an error in one of the staves that needs to be corrected, and that staff is present in several of the different configurations. The composer would need to make the change to each of the saved score copies. Whereas with @hmmueller's approach, only a single score would need to be updated.
I haven't yet experimented with the new objects, but I think I see how they might be very useful.
Screen-shotting, in my humble opinion, is never the way to go for copying around graphics: It introduces all the parameters of your graphics card and selected display resolution, which plainly adds arbitrary information loss.
But it's a lot quicker....<smile>
I use PDFreDirect, and have for many years. It has the ability to throw a preview into Adobe Acrobat (or whatever your PDF reader might be) without actually printing it, so I can get a vector rendering that way without cluttering my computer with extra files. I should probably start doing that. I honestly was unaware that the difference between Print Preview and an actual print was that distinct.
(1) Enter the notes you want to sound on the upper staff. Set staff length to 0.
(2) Enter any notes you like on the lower staff, at the horizontal positions of the notes you want in the upper staff. Beam them normally. Mute them, and hide their ledger lines.
(3) Using <shift><ctrl> and the up-arrow key, move the muted notes on the lower staff upward step by step until they hide the notes you've placed in the upper staff.
This method doesn't give you a beam between the staves, but it's perfectly acceptable to beam cross-staff notes with all the stems pointing the same direction.
Yup. I write chamber music primarily, usually for mixed ensemble. Most players accept NWC scores without complaint. But I have a pianist who objects to pedal markings without the line, and I've not found the user object to create these satisfactory. And there are a couple who've complained about the 8va lines produced by the Mike's octavamatic object. Also, my scores are often submitted to contests - I've been a finalist for the American Prize - and although I've never actually had a piece rejected for the quality of the engraving, I'm more and more uncomfortable with the possibility that this could happen. I'm in the "music engraving tips" Facebook group, and I know how picky professional engravers can get.
Do you perhaps produce for some really, really picky people?
Wondering the same thing, and have been for a while. I've had to move to Sibelius for final drafts, as standards have improved to the point where performers were beginning to complain about my scores. Still do the first drafts of everything in NWC, because it's so intuitive - closer to pencil and score paper than anything else out there. But the quality of the output has definitely lagged way behind the rest of the field.
Given how quiet things have been on that front, do you think there's much likelihood of a new version any time soon? As far as I can see, the last update to 2.75 was 3rd quarter 2017.
This might be a dangerous thing to admit here, but I've shifted to Sibelius and NotePerformer for final drafts and MIDI performance. I still do all of my composing and most arranging/cleanup in NWC - nothing else out there comes nearly as close as NWC does to the experience of writing with a pencil on music paper, and I love that about this program - but with development stalled, and with other tools out there that produce much better publication-ready copy - and integrate fully with realistic MIDI playback systems - I felt forced to move on. I settled on Sib after trying it, Dorico, Finale, and LilyPond, because Sib does a far better job than the others do of reading musicxml files produced by Lasconic's NWC to musicxml online converter. There's actually very little cleanup necessary after I've moved a piece of music over. It's expensive, but the ability to produce videos natively, with the uncannily realistic sounds generated by NotePerformer, seems worth the price - at least, to me. And I've still got all of NWC's advantages for the creative part of the work.
<snip> Is it possible to convert it to another notation system that has this problem under control? <snip>
I've found no other significant problems with the converter, which is quick, easy to use, and otherwise very well done. Kudos to Lasconic for creating and maintaining the website, and to Robin Walker of the Sibelius users Facebook page for spotting the reason for the missing beats.
In addition to what Bart has suggested, I think you should run a tool like Ccleaner. It can find all the junk files on your computer and delete them. I ran Ccleaner yesterday, after a six-month gap, and regained 3 gigabytes of space. Well worth it (and my computer runs much quicker now!)
Re the vegan/vegetarian section still being full: unfortunately, not true. I have a family member who is a respiratory therapist in San Francisco, and - needless to say - she's been incredibly busy. She's also a vegan, and she primarily eats fresh produce. A couple of days ago, she posted a picture on Facebook of empty produce shelves: it seems hoarders have been after those, too, even though what they hoard won't keep. My family member's comment: I work really hard all day saving people's lives, and then I get to the store and there's nothing here I can eat.
....but China has turned the corner. Only 34 new cases yesterday, all people who appear to have caught it elsewhere. They've started, slowly, to re-open. Here in Oregon we seem to be running about a month to six weeks behind them. Looking forward to May....