Feature Request -- Digital Music Files (Typesets)

Jinx · Post by **Jinx** » Tue Jul 22, 2008 11:57 pm

It's possible I've simply yet to run across one, but as far as I can tell, IMSLP doesn't support digital sheet music files. This is something being done by Mutopia using Lilypond (which is free, open source, digital music notation software). This greatly improves a score's usability, as it can be arranged, transcribed, and otherwise altered by the end user.

I know this may not be within the scope of the project, but simply by adding this option to the already-popular IMSLP and encouraging members to submit a digital notation file, the IMSLP can help promote not just the digitization of sheet music images, but digitization of the notation itself. Perhaps IMSLP can even ally with Mutopia to streamline the process, and expand the file formats available (specifically and especially: MusicXML, but perhaps also including Sib, Mus, Etf, Nwc, and MIDI as an audio preview). This would greatly expand not just the availability, but also the capability of the music provided. Thank you,

Jinx Dojo

horndude77 · Post by **horndude77** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:58 am

The main goal of IMSLP is to gather public domain scores. I think it's best keeping that the main focus. Mutopia does have a higher cost to entry because submission happen through email and you actually have to enter the music. (There has been some discussion recently about making it easier to update old scores.) Lilypond also turns many people off. Luckily support for MusicXML has improved greatly in the past few versions. In any case, if IMSLP ever does accept a digital music format I'd hope it would only be an open format like musicxml. But for now I'd prefer to just have IMSLP focused on scans.

Post by **Yagan Kiely** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:29 am

I am personally against the idea of having such specific files. A universal file that serves the exact same purpose is much better and leaves the other obsolete.

It also makes this place a little tacky (my personal opinion).

ras1 · Post by **ras1** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 12:34 pm

I can sympathize with those people with really slow internet connections, for whom downloading a full score of a concerto (or whatever) is really annoying. However, there are a few problems with typesetting:

1) Time. It takes approximately forever to typeset any large-scale work, especially with Lilypond. I know from experience.

2) Consistency. Mostly because of (1), only a tiny fraction of scores on IMSLP would have digital files (compare the sizes of Mutopia and IMSLP). I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense to have 18000 PDFs and 300 Lilypond files.

3) Errors. This is a big one - I've noticed that exact re-typesets almost always are ridden with errors. Having them requires that we trust the engraving process to unpaid volunteers rather than professionals, and the quality difference shows.

4) They aren't as pretty. I'm aware that with Lilypond, the music can be made to look really good. However, it usually isn't nearly as good without quite a bit of work - text/dynamics tend to overlap with notes, etc.

5) Digital files require other software to read. Lilypond is free, but we certainly don't want to exclude people who don't want to pay hundreds of dollars for Finale or Sibelius, and we don't want files that can be read only by Mac or Windows. PDFs are the most universally readable file type.

I know centralization is a goal, but since Mutopia is fairly well-known, I don't think having digital files at IMSLP would be a beneficial addition.

Post by **Yagan Kiely** » Wed Jul 23, 2008 1:04 pm

Lilypond is free, but we certainly don't want to exclude people who don't want to pay hundreds of dollars for Finale or Sibelius, and we don't want files that can be read only by Mac or Windows.

There are free versions for viewing files, but they are almost a waste. It is much easier to (if you wish to do a re-typeset) just convert the file to PDF, then it is universal.

horndude77 · Post by **horndude77** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 2:12 am

ras1 wrote: 4) They aren't as pretty. I'm aware that with Lilypond, the music can be made to look really good. However, it usually isn't nearly as good without quite a bit of work - text/dynamics tend to overlap with notes, etc.

You should try the newest versions of lilypond. Text and dynamics are automatically moved to avoid other objects now as well as lots of other goodies.

ras1 wrote: 5) Digital files require other software to read. Lilypond is free, but we certainly don't want to exclude people who don't want to pay hundreds of dollars for Finale or Sibelius, and we don't want files that can be read only by Mac or Windows. PDFs are the most universally readable file type.

I'm against using a proprietary format. Lilypond is free, but it isn't suitable for archiving. It is too volatile. MusicXML seems to be the best option right now.

Yagan Kiely wrote:It is much easier to (if you wish to do a re-typeset) just convert the file to PDF, then it is universal.

PDF is universal for viewing. The original poster is wanting to take a piece and transpose it, change a note or do something else to it. You can't do that with a PDF. That said I don't think non-PDF re-typesettings belong on IMSLP either. Other sites exist for that.

Vivaldi · Post by **Vivaldi** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:19 am

I do personally think that Lilypond's computer engraving is the closest we've got to matching traditional hand engraving of music scores.

Post by **Yagan Kiely** » Thu Jul 24, 2008 1:03 pm

'Score' is better but even more complex than lilypond.

PDF is universal for viewing. The original poster is wanting to take a piece and transpose it, change a note or do something else to it. You can't do that with a PDF. That said I don't think non-PDF re-typesettings belong on IMSLP either. Other sites exist for that.

That isn't the purpose of IMSLP though.

Vivaldi · Post by **Vivaldi** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:34 am

The one big advantage of using Lilypond though, is that its output is a PDF file, which can be opened with Acrobat Reader, which is free. However, if you plan to alter the music (transcription), you would need to edit the original input file (the one which ends with a .ly extension), which can be difficult if you don't know how to use Lilypond.

Lyle Neff · Post by **Lyle Neff** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:26 am

Vivaldi wrote:The one big advantage of using Lilypond though, is that its output is a PDF file, which can be opened with Acrobat Reader, which is free. [...]

That's possible also with a WYSIWYG notation program like Finale, with the help of the free PrimoPDF program from the web. After you've installed that, you go into the notation program and "Print" to PrimoPDF instead of to your printer, and it makes a PDF of the notation file.

Post by **Yagan Kiely** » Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:59 pm

With Mac (OSX leopard at least) it comes in the OS - nothing else required.

Vivaldi · Post by **Vivaldi** » Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:37 am

Lyle Neff wrote: That's possible also with a WYSIWYG notation program like Finale, with the help of the free PrimoPDF program from the web. After you've installed that, you go into the notation program and "Print" to PrimoPDF instead of to your printer, and it makes a PDF of the notation file.

I didn't know that, thank you for the information Lyle Neff.

gacl · Post by **gacl** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 4:14 am

But there _are_ Finale files on the site: http://imslp.org/wiki/Funeral_March_for ... Charles%29

LilyPond files are pure text, their size for storage is negligible. If I typeset something it would be annoying to post the PDF in one site and the ly file on a different one.

That's just my opinion.

gacl · Post by **gacl** » Sat Sep 27, 2008 4:25 am

Post by **kcleung** » Tue Nov 04, 2008 8:44 pm

I think the best way is that if you take the courage to typeset score. You should load *both* the source code (i.e. lilypond) and the generated PDF file. The generated PDF file is for everyone while the lilypond source code is for advanced users who wants to improve the layout of the scores, utilizes new features of lilypond, or use the source code to produce parts that may have a different transposition. For example, if the original score is for clarinet in A, but I have a junior orchestra that no-one has an A clarinet or can transpose by sight, then I would need to retranspose the clarinet from A to Bb. This would be an easy task if I have the lilypond score, but such task would require another retypeset without access to the source code.

lilypond files should be allowed to be uploaded just like PDF files (maybe in the same batch). IMSLP server only needs to *accept* text file (i.e. lilypond source code), or preferably gzipped (.tar.gz or .zip) source code as long as the zip file is not encrypted (so that the server can inspect files inside). This applies to other source files such as MusicXML etc, although it would be helpful if we are allowed to specify which type of source code in the submission