MakeMusic
SmartMusic Finale Garritan MusicXML

Beaming

Moderator: Michael Good

Beaming

Postby Nick Didkovsky » Sun Sep 01, 2002 10:45 pm

Hello,

I am looking at how to write beaming information to a Music XML file, and to test, am reading my MusicXML files into Finale with the Dolet plugin.

I notice that I can actually be very lazy and just write a <beam number="1">begin</beam> tag at the beginning of a run of beamed notes,
'continue' tags for subsequent notes, and an 'end' tag for the last note. Dolet/Finale renders the beaming just fine, regardless of the durations of the notes being beamed.

On other words, I see that don't have to create <beam number="2">begin</beam> tags for 16th notes, etc, nor do I have to write forward or backward hooks explicitly.

Am I getting away with this because Dolet and/or Finale are so smart about beaming, and I should expect trouble with other MusicXML readers, or is it an accepted MusicXML practice to simply write beam begin/continue/end tags and let the rendering engine figure it out?

Nick






Doctor Nerve Home Page, http://www.doctornerve.org Interactive Computer Music, http://www.punosmusic.com Java Music Specification Language, http://www.algomusic.com
Nick Didkovsky
 
Posts: 43
Joined: March, 2014
Reputation: 0

RE: Beaming

Postby Michael Good » Sun Sep 01, 2002 11:47 pm

Hi Nick,

Yes, you are getting away with this because of the interaction of how Dolet and Finale handle beaming. You should not expect other MusicXML readers to give you the same results, especially if those programs have more graphical internal structures than Finale does.

Accepted MusicXML practice is to spell out explicitly all the beams that you want. In general we encourage MusicXML programs to write as much information about the music as they can. It is usually much easier for the writing program to explicitly describe its music format than it is for a reading program to guess what is wanted from incomplete information. But sometimes you do get lucky!

Dolet and Finale do pay attention to the different beam levels when there's a reasonable musical choice involved, most notably in specifying secondary beam breaks.

Best regards, Michael
Michael Good
VP of MusicXML Technologies
MakeMusic, Inc.
User avatar
Michael Good
 
Posts: 2197
Joined: March, 2014
Reputation: 0

Re: Beaming

Postby Nick Didkovsky » Mon Sep 02, 2002 10:20 pm

Thanks, Michael, clear enough. The only (minor) issue is that if I write buggy/incorrect beaming details out, Dolet/Finale will still beam properly without complaint. So I cannot do real "field testing" for explicitly detailed beams.

Writing to MusicXML has been wonderfully straightforward, by the way. Good examples and docs. It's coming together quickly.

Best, Nick



Michael Good wrote:Hi Nick,

Yes, you are getting away with this because of the interaction of how Dolet and Finale handle beaming. You should not expect other MusicXML readers to give you the same results, especially if those programs have more graphical internal structures than Finale does.

Accepted MusicXML practice is to spell out explicitly all the beams that you want. In general we encourage MusicXML programs to write as much information about the music as they can. It is usually much easier for the writing program to explicitly describe its music format than it is for a reading program to guess what is wanted from incomplete information. But sometimes you do get lucky!

Dolet and Finale do pay attention to the different beam levels when there's a reasonable musical choice involved, most notably in specifying secondary beam breaks.

Best regards, Michael

-- Doctor Nerve Home Page, http://www.doctornerve.org Interactive Computer Music, http://www.punosmusic.com Java Music Specification Language, http://www.algomusic.com
Nick Didkovsky
 
Posts: 43
Joined: March, 2014
Reputation: 0

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron