daemon@BARTOK.ENG.SUN.COM (10/07/89)
Music-Research Digest Sat, 7 Oct 89 Volume 4 : Issue 58
Today's Topics:
ConcertWare vs. DMCS: you be the judge (3 msgs)
Machine-readable Bach
programs that can infer key/meter
Report from Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities
*** Send contributions to Music-Research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
*** Send administrative requests to Music-Research-Request
*** Overseas users should reverse UK addresses and give gateway if necessary
*** e.g. Music-Research@prg.oxford.ac.uk
*** or Music-Research%prg.oxford.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 27 Sep 89 16:58:32 GMT
From: Mark Turner <hpda!hpcuhb!hpcilzb!mark@edu.berkeley.ucbvax>
Subject: ConcertWare vs. DMCS: you be the judge
To: music-research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
Any opinions on which Mac music composer is better: DMCS or
Concertware+MIDI? I bought Concertware 'cause it was cheaper, and it
has a 30-day money back guarantee (which DMCS doesn't). It
seems to do everything I will need for the time being, but I would like
to know if DMCS is better.
Also, has anyone tried MacDrums? It's only $30 at MacZone, so I was
thinking of buying it.
Please email me if possible, because I don't get to read notes very
often.
Mark Turner
closet musician
------------------------------
Date: 3 Oct 89 14:33:19 GMT
From: Usenet file owner <pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!tank!eecae!cps3xx@uk.ac.oxford.prg>
Subject: ConcertWare vs. DMCS: you be the judge
To: music-research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
In article <4140001@hpcilzb.HP.COM> mark@hpcilzb.HP.COM (Mark Turner) writes:
>Any opinions on which Mac music composer is better: DMCS or
>Concertware+MIDI? I bought Concertware 'cause it was cheaper, and it
>has a 30-day money back guarantee (which DMCS doesn't). It
>seems to do everything I will need for the time being, but I would like
>to know if DMCS is better.
>
I can't send private mail as you requested, but...
I've used the Amiga version of DMCS. I've heard the code was ported
almost directly from the MAC version ... therefore it's rather slow in
many respects. Other than that I'd say it was a good tool for
composing. There are some features that it lacks, but what do you
expect for $70?
cmd
------------------------------
Date: 4 Oct 89 21:02:31 GMT
From: Mark Turner <hpda!hpcuhb!hpcilzb!mark@edu.berkeley.ucbvax>
Subject: ConcertWare vs. DMCS: you be the judge
To: music-research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
Thanks for the info. I'm pretty happy with CW+, so I think I'll stick
with it at least until I receive the new version (5.0), due next week.
It is supposed to be quite an improvement over 4.0, which is pretty good
to begin with.
Mark
------------------------------
Date: Tue Sep 19 1989
From: GUEST4%YUSol@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca
Subject: Machine-readable Bach
To: bradr@bartok.sun.com
In my note (not intended for posting on the Digest) commending the Moderator of
MRD for an especially helpful reply, I inadvertently used the word "deserve"
instead of "expect", and otherwise may have seemed as if I disapproved of the
query that prompted that reply.
I am sorry if I sounded annoyed at the questioner, whose perplexity was of
course perfectly natural under the circumstances, rather than at the relative
difficulty he and others experience in finding out about and accessing existing
music databases. The efforts of MRD to remedy that situation should also be
encouraged and applauded.
------------------------------
Date: 6 Oct 89 15:36:36 GMT
From: Brian Gordon <bari!briang@com.sun>
Subject: programs that can infer key/meter
To: music-research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
In article <15170@netnews.upenn.edu> hardt@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Dan Hardt) writes:
>I'd like to know what programs exist that can
>infer the key and meter of a melody, just based
>on the pitch and duration information. Does anyone
>know about programs that can do this?
Isn't that what Finale is supposed to do? The early write-ups (when the
beta-quality version was $1,000+) said it could listen to you play something on
the piano and print it out virtually unassisted (more or less). It is
supposedly in much better shape now, and a lot cheaper. Unfortunately, I've
never actually met an owner/user, so I'm just guessing.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Brian G. Gordon briang@Corp.Sun.COM (if you trust exotic mailers) |
| ...!sun!bari!briang (if you route it yourself) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
------------------------------
Date: Wed Sep 20
From: XB.L36@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Report from Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities
To: bradr@sun.com
For five years the Center for Computer Assisted Research in
the Humanities has been developing electronic transcriptions of
major repertories of eighteenth-century music. The Bach, Handel,
and Telemann database projects all proceed apace. The sample data
distributed by MRD was donated to the Oxford Text Archives in the
spring of 1986 as a sample of what was then current. The
representation system has been continuously refined. It is
sufficiently highly evolved to have produced the score and parts for
a four-hour Handel oratorio, Susanna, recently performed and
recorded in San Francisco. Other projects of comparable magnitude
are in progress.
A report on the Center's databases will appear in the 1989
Directory of Computer Assisted Research in Musicology, which is
currently in press. Those who wish to have a brochure on the
databases should request one directly; please provide a mailing
address.
The first release of data is tentatively scheduled for the
end of 1990. Sample data may be made available to software
developers in the spring of 1990. The same material can be made
available to interested researchers on request. Please write to the
Center describing your intended use. Our address is 525 Middlefield
Road, Suite 120, Menlo Park, CA 94025.
------------------------------
End of Music-Research Digest