Live data from Hacker News

Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

youtube.com

31–40 of 47 posts

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm quite sure that's not right. I don't think anything else is in much common use besides basic solfege, especially for teaching.

Music production (ie: what you hear on radio, Spotify, ...) pretty much exclusively uses the so called "piano roll" notation. Most music production software (Ableton, ...) doesn't even support Western notation.

Logic Pro - and even GarageBand would like to say hello...they are the reason, as a classically trained composer, I purchased my first Mac (Mini G4) in 2005 and have never looked back. :)

I use Pro Tools to mix and Logic to compose for this very reason. I don't use Ableton for this very reason.

Logic is certainly a mainstream DAW. :) Same with GarageBand.

EDIT: Doesn't Cubase also do this? ...like I am pretty sure there are quite a few apps that support this?

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#32
post #22
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you'd be wrong. Western notation is used throughout the world, even more so than local notation systems. That's 100% true for classical, jazz, marching band, etc. musicians, but also for musicians in "pop" genres. Even folk/ethnic musicians around the world, with a few exceptions, are more common to use western notation than their historical notation (if available). If they gig and work with studios and orchestra…

My point is that the perceived "ubiquity" of notation is far exceeded by the plethora of ways music is recorded outside notation or recorded in a symbolic format that is nothing like western notation (from which is obviously the context of the OP). I can think of sample-based music (MPC/Decks/Acousmatic tradition/Ikeda/Microsound/Chartier/Field-recordings), improvised music, as well as the most obvious modern develop…

MIDI data can easily be converted into western score notation and vice-versa. You can write a musical score in western notation using MuseScore, export it as a MIDI file, and then import that into Ableton and see it on the piano roll. It's all one big "the map is not the territory" situation. The same piece of music is still the same piece of music whether it's written in staff notation, programmed into a sequencer in some proprietary format, written out in LSDJ code on a GameBoy, drawn in a piano roll, or played from memory by someone who doesn't know how to read any of those.

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm quite sure that's not right. I don't think anything else is in much common use besides basic solfege, especially for teaching.

Music production (ie: what you hear on radio, Spotify, ...) pretty much exclusively uses the so called "piano roll" notation. Most music production software (Ableton, ...) doesn't even support Western notation.

Ableton lets you import .mid files which can be easily created from western notation using MuseScore. I use Ableton as my DAW and if I want to write something in staff notation I just write it in MuseScore (because it's got a good interface for it anyway) and export it as a midi file which I import into Ableton. For the kind of music that I make, though, there's rarely a need to write anything down. I know the parts in my head, I hit record, I start playing.

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#35
post #10
post #2

Well, the founders of Sibelius created another music notation software called Dorico[1]. Is Dorico's UI more consistent? Does it address many of the issues of this video's criticism? Or put another way, does being a green-field software project allow the freedom to create a sane UI? Or did it have to deliberately copy may of Sibelius' faults so migrating users can quickly get up to speed with Dorico? (Analogous to MS…

Dorico is indeed better, and definitely not a copy of Sibelius UI-wise. Not only was the team starting over with a lot more experience under their belt, but they also had a much better idea of what didn't scale (from a user interface perspective) from the original Sibelius to its current incarnation, which has tons more features. It's worth pointing out that when Sibelius was first released, it was hugely nicer to us…

I used Finale at the time at home, but Sibelius at school. This was back when it was only on the Acorn ... compared to Finale it was an absolute joy to use.

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#37
post #22
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you'd be wrong. Western notation is used throughout the world, even more so than local notation systems. That's 100% true for classical, jazz, marching band, etc. musicians, but also for musicians in "pop" genres. Even folk/ethnic musicians around the world, with a few exceptions, are more common to use western notation than their historical notation (if available). If they gig and work with studios and orchestra…

My point is that the perceived "ubiquity" of notation is far exceeded by the plethora of ways music is recorded outside notation or recorded in a symbolic format that is nothing like western notation (from which is obviously the context of the OP). I can think of sample-based music (MPC/Decks/Acousmatic tradition/Ikeda/Microsound/Chartier/Field-recordings), improvised music, as well as the most obvious modern develop…

> as well as the most obvious modern development of MIDI data and the piano roll which is not an interchangeable format with a "score".

midi is pretty much a piano-oriented subset of western music theory in terms of expressive power

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#38
Have a look at what is actually needed for someone doing arbitrary copy/engraving jobs-- e.g., making money on the side by using software to engrave film scores, modern classical, musicals, etc.

IIRC the most valuable feature is the ability for the engraver to quickly and deterministically escape the set of behaviors that the software provides to ease the act of engraving exactly what they want to see.

Score and Finale have been the gold standards because there is a way to escape the default behavior, to draw whatever they want on the score. In Finale's case, these ways are all explicitly documented so that even a relatively new user can (slowly) find each escape valve. Finale even has a shitty, black-and-white Microsoft paint for the user to paint whatever articulation, shape, or even notehead they need to accommodate whatever notational style or concept is needed.

That's all to say-- the power user is going to live in the escape valves for a substantial amount of time. (How else could you explain people still using Score when Finale had been around for decades?)

Historically, competitors to Finale/Score simply did not have the adequate number of escape valves. In those cases good interface design was irrelevant because professional engravers couldn't get the control they needed to engrave scores, which meant they couldn't use those programs to make money. Either that, or the software would do a really good job at, say, jazz engraving, and then imply that it was good at all style of notation when it wasn't.

Somebody at Musescore should do a kickstarter to cross-reference the current Finale documentation against the escape-valves present in Musescore. In the domain of engraving, is Musescore feature complete with all of Finale's escape valves? If so, it's worth advertising that because it's a really important achievement.

(Note: I'm reticent to mention specific engraving problems for fear that a neophyte will take my 10 seconds of examples as a complete set and declare Musescore feature complete. But if someone wants examples and promises not to do that, I'll give them.)

Edit: clarification

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#39
post #25
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you'd be wrong. Western notation is used throughout the world, even more so than local notation systems. That's 100% true for classical, jazz, marching band, etc. musicians, but also for musicians in "pop" genres. Even folk/ethnic musicians around the world, with a few exceptions, are more common to use western notation than their historical notation (if available). If they gig and work with studios and orchestra…

lol as someone with a PhD in music and many years experience in industry and academia I can't rationalise such a reductive view of music as anything but lack of lateral thinking to imagine a world where western notation isn't king. I can think of heaps of examples where western notation absolutely isn't used- tabla bol, gamelan, zither/guqin/guzhen, indian classical music, just to name a few (and without being even s…

>lol as someone with a PhD in music and many years experience in industry and academia I can't rationalise such a reductive view of music as anything but lack of lateral thinking to imagine a world where western notation isn't king.

Well, if you felt the need to "lol", let me LOL back at you :-)

No PhD, but as someone with years of music training, who has travelled all over the world, and with a couple of professional musicians in the family, coming from a country with its own ancient music notation and millenia of musical history, and who has non-western modes and tradition, I can't even imagine the pedantry of your comment.

Musicians all over the world:

(a) playing westernized music (which covers about most of the charts everywhere, from Asia to Latin America and Africa), and western music directly

(b) playing western music directly (classical, jazz, rock, blues, etc)

(c) playing other genres with traditional western notation and even influences (tango, samba, and so on)

deal predominantly with western music theory, notation, and instruments -- and which cover a huge chunk of global musicians.

But

(d) even traditional "folk" (ethnic) musicans adapt to westernized versions of local music, with few exceptions, and use standard western notations (or notation hacks, like tablature and chord charts) in the studio and the concerts.

Heck, our traditional music is modal and microtonal, but it's mostly translated and played in your run of the mill western scales and keys. And I've seen the same all around the world.

You might have in mind places like India, China, Indonesia, etc, but still most pros will use western style music theory and write with western notation than not. To the point that the exceptions are more folkore than actual every-day chart music.

>I've also rarely worked session musicians who aren't orchestral who use anything other than charts and an enormous amount of the music we consume in the west is produced in a DAW or whatever without ever touching notation...

Which is neither here, nor there. The Nashville number system, for example or a piano roll is still based on western music theory and norms (even if not notation), and those musician will still 99% use the typical major/minor/etc scales.

The problem with a deep knowledge of musicology in this regard is that it makes it very easy to lose the forrest for the trees, and e.g. know 1000s of local / oral etc traditions, etc, but not see that those are nonetheless niche and very much not the norm in the day to day music of a country, and difficult to even find in the radio/charts in most countries.

The rest are as representative as e.g. jazz is in 2021 US musical tastes, charts, sales, and so on...

Re: Music Software and Bad Interface Design: Avid’s Sibelius (2018) [video]

#40
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that the perceived "ubiquity" of notation is far exceeded by the plethora of ways music is recorded outside notation or recorded in a symbolic format that is nothing like western notation (from which is obviously the context of the OP). I can think of sample-based music (MPC/Decks/Acousmatic tradition/Ikeda/Microsound/Chartier/Field-recordings), improvised music, as well as the most obvious modern develop…

MIDI data can easily be converted into western score notation and vice-versa. You can write a musical score in western notation using MuseScore, export it as a MIDI file, and then import that into Ableton and see it on the piano roll. It's all one big "the map is not the territory" situation. The same piece of music is still the same piece of music whether it's written in staff notation, programmed into a sequencer i…

yeah, but just because a program can function as an adapter between two formats doesn't mean the person who wrote the music understands the intricacies of italian dynamic markings or the connotations of notation style. By the same logic any translation of a non-english novel is equivalent. Buh-buh
Post reply on HN