Digital Tradition Upgrade?

Subject: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 09:38 PM

Any possibility of this in 2007?

Just thought I'd ask, what with it being a new year and all.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 31 Dec 06 - 10:07 PM

Yes, thanks-- as soon as you can get to it, Guest, that will be a great help!

~S~

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: MMario
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 06:27 PM

Dick?

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Greg F.
Date: 01 Jan 07 - 06:59 PM

Send in those checks, money orders& cash & then ask again.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Susan of DT
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 08:58 AM

Money is not the issue, Greg. Contributions go to Max/Mudcat for equipment and expenses in running mudcat. The Digital Tradition is separate and does not really have expenses.

We hope there can be a new version of the DT this year, probably not in the first six months of the year. Dick will write a longer response with more specifics on the issues (working on multiple operating systems, tune format that links words to notes without requiring that current tunes be reentered, fast enough searches and tune playing to work online for the volume mudcat gets, etc.) The volunteer who had done some of this programming has been working on another folk project for the last several years and has not had time to work on this.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 02 Jan 07 - 09:34 AM

There are a few technical obstacles that have prevented the publication of an updated DigiTrad. It's not a question of content--we have a thousand or so new songs waiting for publication. Problems are:

a) Operating systems. Whatever we release must be able to run on all versions of Windows (from 3.1 on up to, probably, Vista) and on all Mac operating systems that Mudcatters are apt to have. For several editions, the Mac versions have been supplied by a hard-working volunteer who is very busy working hard on other projects; I am a MacIlliterate, so this presents real problems. It's also necessary for any new edition to run using HTML, which is doable, but takes more time than I've had to spend.

b) Tunes. Our concept has always been to make the melody lines playable, with some device for showing where the words fit the tune (either bouncing balls or synchronized display or color highlighting or sune such scheme. More recently, the gentleman who worked out the Mac version did some neat programing that displayed the score (dots) and permitted playback in different keys, tempi and instrumentation.
It wasn't a perfect system (timing of notes was sometimes a bit wonky) but IMO a quite good one. Unfortunately, this program took as input transcriptions I made in a handy, if currently out-of-production, system called SongWright. Songwright is still the handiest entry program I've found, but it doesn't support playback (it did, playing the tune on a computer's beeper, but computers for the past six or seven years haven't come with beepers).
    SO, what's needed is a playback program that will work on PCs and Macs, and will play the tune, synchronize words and tune, permit one to print the score (and, ideally, permit changing of key, tempo and instrumentation.) ABCs seem to work--sort of. Does anyone know of an implementation of ABC that will do what's needed? MIDI doesn't handle words. Noteworthy may be a possibility--I'm investigating it. Whatever we come up with, I then have the tasks of converting some 4000 tunes to a new format--I don't want to have to do that more than once.
    If anyone likes to do this kind of programming, I'll be happy to supply both the specifications of a Songwright file (it's similar, though not identical to ABC) and grateful encouragement. At the moment I'm somewhat buried in trying to set up a new website for CAMSCO Music, and while I'm close to finishing that, it still takes up most of my spare time.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Hrothgar
Date: 03 Jan 07 - 06:18 AM

MacIlliterate, Dick?

Does this mean that your father couldn't read and write?

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 03:00 AM

Dick,

Linux is getting ever more popular, and what with VISTA having its greedy little DRM fingers over everything HW & SW wise (including screens!), some people such as myself see no need to waste all that money on VISTA in future - Linux will run on much smaller, slower, and cheaper HW.

If no one else is interested in working on a suitable Linux version, perhaps you and I can have some private words offline. 'Linux Version' may be a bit more hassle than it seems on the surface unless it will be able to be built to run on any Linux setup, of course...

All I would wish to say here is that it would be easiest, if that version could also use the same database and formats as the Windows versions, of course... :-) some executable will have to be built/found...

Robin

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Mick Pearce (MCP)
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:42 AM

Dick

To say that midi doesn't handle words isn't quite accurate. There are several types of text events that can be embedded in a midi file. In fact abc2midi will embed the lyrics from an abc file into the generated midi file and some players (Jet for instance will do this) will display these as the tune plays. I even wrote a trivial version in Java to do this - it just had to listen for a midi text event as the file played and display the word (or highlight it in a line of text with a little bit more work).


Mick

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 04:28 PM

Mick-
Details, please? I know about abc2midi, but I'm not familiar with Jet. In fact, I can prolly write something that will convert Songwright to abc--they're pretty similar in concept abd structure.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:01 PM

I can't think of anything to say that wasn't said last year in Tech: Digital Tradition Programmer Needed.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:11 PM

I recently discovered a (free) midi player that WILL display words, moving a highlight as it goes, as the song is played, much like Noteworthy will highlight the notes. (It shows any text associated with the file)

VanBasco's Karaoke Midi Player

If this helps anyone, or would be useful in thinking about all this, it would be nice.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 05:15 PM

Harmony Assistant and Melody Assistant are good with lyrics and abcs/midis

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Mick Pearce (MCP)
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 07:23 PM

Dick

Just to be clear - these are players that will show karaoke type word display synchronised with the music as the midi file plays, there is no score display like the current DT player. JetAudio is just a free audio player that I use as my standard audio (and video) player (I removed Windows Media Player from my system), but there are a host of players that will display the words from a midi file with embedded lyrics - VanBasco's mentioned above, KarPlayer, a java one called Jokey are some that I've looked at in the past (though some require a slightly different text embedding from the one produced by abc2midi). (I think Windows Media Player does it too, but it's so long since I had it on my system that I've forgotten).

Mick

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 04 Jan 07 - 08:37 PM

There are lots of programs that will do any two of 1)play 2)display words synchronized with playing and 3) display score. I'd really shoot for one that does all three. It's possible; I just don't know how to do it.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 01:20 AM

Harmony Assistant does all three - it even has a voice synthesiser which will 'sing' the lyrics to you! Written b Didier and Olivier Guillion and published by Myriad.
Here: http://www.myriad-online.com/en/index.htm

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:19 AM

Well I think that looks pretty good, and even pretty cheap for a bought program - but now what for a Linux equivalent?

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Captain Ginger
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:31 AM

Trouble is, can Monsieurs Guillion be persuaded to make the working parts of Harmony Assistant public domain to be bundled with the DT?
The alternative would be the possibly heretical concept of making the DT itself shareware (with any monies going to pay the licence for any play/display software, and to fund future updates). It's such a fantastic resource that it has to be worth ten dollars of anyone's money - and, of course, the online version is still freely searchable.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 06:41 AM

So what we need then is a GNU licenced program...

which can be compiled to run under Windoze or Linux, or for that matter any OS whatever...

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Andrez
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 07:52 AM

Re Dicks reference to technical obstacles above I would just like to pick up on the following points and contribute a few suggestions to the discussion.



The question here is why? Why not try and simplify things so that the upgrade works with relatively modern operating systems instead of trying to cater for everything.

From the Microsoft side that means forget about all Windows OS support prior to say at the very least NT/ Win 2000 through to XP. Vista schmista, it'll be years before (a) they sort out the bugs with that OS and XP will be compatible (well more or less we hope) and (b) before people learn how to really work within that environment. Leave Vista for a later upgrade again.

From the Mac side forget about offering support for Classic (Mac OS 9) and just focus onMac OSX. and its nice Unix underpinnings. Opensource Linux also gets the thumbs up but I'll leave it to someone else to argue which distro would be the best development environment for that OS.

The issue here is that the major software manufacturers dont support their old operating systems so why should DT developers. Mudcatters or anyone else who is still using Win 3.1 need to be encouraged to spend a few bucks and upgrade. I mean you can buy a P3 running W2k or XP for around $AUD100. A P4 isnt much dearer and either is superior to 3.1 0r Win 98 etc.

Regarding the next point:



The concept is great of course but once again looking for simplicity, instead of taking the programming route why not take the visual animation route and look at a Flash based approach where you can place images, text audio on a timeline and then animate them. You can also add a whole slew of pefab effects or develop custom ones to enjoy all of the visual bells and whistles.

The resultant file can them be playable on any hardware and operating system capable of running the specific version of Flash player. This way you bypass much of the separate platform specific programming and all of the hack work and time that goes with it.

Finally before anaay work in Flash, it would be even simpler just to put together a quick and dirty version of the DT as a stand alone web app. My 13 year old daughter could do that! You may not get all of the frills but getting a set of words along with an image of the notation and a link to a basic audio file would be a bloody good start to getting a new version of the DT out there.

Reminds me of the old zen line that Donovan adapted... First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain......... its just how we look at things.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Andrez
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 07:57 AM

Hmmm, for some reason the two sections from Dicks post that I inserted didnt get included with the last post. Rather than take up space by reposting the whole thing, I'll just add the key lines that were omitted from my post below.

(a) Operating systems. Whatever we release must be able to run on all versions of Windows (from 3.1 on up to, probably, Vista) and on all Mac operating systems that Mudcatters are apt to have.

(b) Tunes. Our concept has always been to make the melody lines playable, with some device for showing where the words fit the tune (either bouncing balls or synchronized display or color highlighting or sume such scheme.

[left bracket caused those lines not to appear]--clone

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Andrez
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 07:59 AM

Still not there...........aaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!

[fixed---clone]

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 08:38 AM

Andrez, if there is to be a player/browser dt app, Java wins hands down for me. It seems far too much to have tailor made solutions for each O/S.

FT, I think you would tun into problems with the graphical side and perhaps sound side if you went down the route of something like a C program to compile for different plaforms.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Captain Ginger
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 08:47 AM

For a true cross-platform app, Java has to be the simplest. Although HTML would also be pretty universal (which probably shows just how little I know about compiling software!).

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: MMario
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 09:02 AM

well guys - Dick is trying to keep things down to minimum hassle from his end; and (I suspect) also trying to keep his dependence on the "kindness of strangers" to a minimum as well.

Don't forget that even if conversion can be automated - at least the first conversion should be pretty thouroughly proofed and double-checked. That alone is going to be a massive undertaking.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 09:17 AM

I think Mick (MCP) already has a conversion program.

While not tested propery or completed, I can get most dt SongWrite into abc here.

Yet Another Digital Tradtion can get it into abc and PMW.

I don't think that's a problem.

The problems the way I see it are defining whether there is a need for a player/browser app and which platform. Agreeing on a tune format to use, perhaps a live Mudcat version etc.

Apart from finding a developer if needed for poss one app, the main barrier IMO is the "Mudcat/DT loop".

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: OldPossum
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 12:19 PM

As far as Harmony Assistant or Melody Assistant from Myriad is concerned, they have a freeware player that will play back music files in a browser. All you need to do is download a player from their website. Said player could also be bundled with Digital Tradition, with permission from Guillon brothers of course. They seem to be quite approachable.

The real problem is finding someone with Melody Assistant or Harmony Assistant who is willing to convert 4000 tune files! Personally, I have Melody Assistant, but I am not making any promises ...

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: MMario
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 12:26 PM

It the "Assistants" can take abc input as claimed - thiat might be a solution - as Dick has said, conversion to ABC from songwrite looks plausible.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: OldPossum
Date: 05 Jan 07 - 12:34 PM

Yes - but I think that their player application can only play the native Myriad format. ABCs and MIDIs have to be imported to the native format first - and I am not sure that batch conversion is possible. But then again, there would be no harm in asking the Guillon brothers if they would like to somehow co-operate with Digital Tradition on such a project. They are a small independent company, and the project might be worthwhile for them, as a way of advertising their products perhaps.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 12:40 AM

Dick:

Most people here are talking about the stand-alone, downloadable version of the DT. That is, I think, of minuscule importance as compared to getting the online version into a condition where individual entries can be updated on a day-to-day basis as opposed to en bloc (and with few errors corrected but plenty of new ones added) every two or three years.

Mick and Jon have already made recommendations on that score, and I am convinced that that is the way to go. Many people have offered practical help over the years, but this has rarely been taken up. There are corrections to fundamental mistakes in the DT that have been sitting in the Forum for five years and more but have still not been incorporated into the database.

I do understand that it's difficult to abandon a setup that works (or used to work) and surrender a degree of control, but that is the only way to ensure that the DT does not become obsolete or, worse, that it becomes the single biggest source of misinformation about traditional music available in the entire world. It is rapidly heading that way.

The fact that you never intended the DT to be anything more than an online songbook is beside the point. It has grown beyond your intent, and whether you like it or not it is assumed to be, and is used as, an authoritative resource.

It is vital that corrections posted in the Forum (which, although it also contains enormous quantities of misinformation, is still one of the best resources on the web for accurate background on folksong; the problem being that you have to know quite a bit already to be able to tell who is talking sense and who rubbish) be added to the DT.

This can't realistically be done by two people. You need a viable database format which can be edited -and updated- piecemeal via an online interface. You need a team of people you trust to do that. You need to forget about adding new material until the material you already have is accurate, properly proofread and complete (with proper sources and attributions).

Until you have all that, there is no point at all in worrying about how to put together a cd version with a novelty "bouncing ball" feature.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Andrez
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 06:14 AM

As with any project you need a plan. From a technical perspective, the DT project is really no different to any other standard IT type project. You need to identify what you want to achieve, look at the tasks involved, then link these tasks to a timeline and then find the people and resources to implement the project..

Some things can happen concurrently. For example the checking, editing, proofing or whatever... of the actual DT data. This is an essential task and interested people with the time, skills, resources etc, could be working on that element of the DT project.

On the other hand there is nothing in principle to stop other people from working on other elements like the database format and online interface. You just create a "shell" and use dummy data making sure all the bits of the database are connected and work as expected. When the data is ready, you populate the database, test and then deploy it for review and comment. Alpha and Beta testing in that way is all about quality and you get a better final product.

A cross platform solution in Java or Flash, Shockwave etc, could also be investigated and developed concurrently by interested 'catters. I'm sure a little bit of server space could be found as a test site.

Needdless to say you need people to make it happen. Why not put it out to interested 'catters who have the skills interest, resources, time and love of the music to form a working project team to identify the key tasks and sub tasks, develop a work plan, timeline and allocate people to specific subtasks and then get on with it.

This neednt be bigger than Ben Hur but could be managed by a small, committed team that is focussed on outcomes i.e. a new, updated DT available to all on line or in some stand alone format.

Cheers,

Andrez

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 06:40 AM

Andrez, before you start, you need to understand the situation. Please read the other thread I linked to in detail.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Andrez
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 07:41 AM

OK thanks Jon, I checked that thread and recall that I had followed it previously as well. Given the fact of the quality of that discussion re the technical issues there is nothing I want to add in this thread.   

I do note that there didnt really seem to be any resolution from the earlier thread in terms of decisions about the direction to proceed from the technical perspective that is... unless there is something else I have missed (quite likely).

Also, given the obvious expertise of some of the contributors in that thread, it makes no sense to me as to why their skills havent been tapped and why some version of the new DT isnt in process. Have there been any decisions about the preferred direction since the previous thread? Dicks comments above would suggest not.

If a DT project does get underway and I can contribute my own IT skills in some small way I'd be happy to do so.

Cheers,

Andrez

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 08:35 AM

Well, perhaps a 'HTML Version' might be the quickest way to getting a minimum (no bouncing balls!) setup across all platforms.

Flash players (depending on the version of Flash used!) are available for most OS platforms, I think.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 08:52 AM

Again, we can do that. I've pretty well got that in a crude form here. Like many of the things talked about it is another simple matter to do IF...

What none of us can do is see if anything can be sorted between Mudcat and the dt.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 08:54 AM

Oh, unless a 'minimalistic form' of HTML is used, things will bloat - 'MS Word HTML' ---- aaaargh!

Oh, and while I suggest Flash as a possibility, frnakly it's also a 'large format' too...

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 04:00 PM

I think Malcolm Douglas has a point. Although it may represent a lot of trouble, NOT heading that way may be more trouble in the long run. Pinning updates on one volunteer who may or may not be available to do a 3-4 version conversion seems shaky.

Something cross-platform, with easy updating by a chosen crew of trusted helpers looks like the way to plan, in my (admittedly amateur) view.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 05:16 PM

Okay, folks.
A couple of points:

A cross-platform approach is obviously the way to go. Unfortunately, all the cross-platform approaches I've seen would seriously degrade the usefulness of the collection.The online DigiTrad has a much weaker search engine than do any of the stand-alone versions; the Windows and Mac versions are much weaker (albeit prettier) than the DOS version.
    Susan and I would be absolutely delighted if some person or persons could take the programming aspect of DigiTrad off our hands. THat's what happened several years ago when the Windows and Mac versions were developed by a very helpful third party. Problem was, development of these versions involved a good deal of programming expertise and time, and when the pressure of outside work became sufficiently severe, the time required for an update to suit the new "improved" Mac and Windows operating systems wasn't available.
    It's easy enough to set up a program that will let one find lyrics by title--it's also a fairly useless exercise. Titles are an awful way to search for things. Full text and keyword searches are, in Susan's and my opinion, a necessity. So is the requirement of providing synchronized words and music--many of our users don't read music (either dots or abc), and realizing how the tune fits the words is by no means always obvious. These aren't frills--they're an integral part of the DT's concept. I'd love to be able to correct attrivutions and notes (and even words, though I'm not at all sure that a folk song has any "correct" words); doing this on a Wikipedia-type approach doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. Many, if not most, of the attributions and corrections we receive are inaccurate or trivial; editing is required.
    This being said, we'd be most grateful if some knowledgable folks could take over the programming part of DigiTrad; it's the part of the work that neither of us enjoys terribly, nor it is one in which we can claim any particular expertise. Nothing would make us happier than being able to go back to providing semi-annual updated editions, and concentrating on the songs. I'm reachable here, or by PM or at [e-mail]
    Don't all volunteer at once.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 05:57 PM

Dick...would it be possible or useful if the lyrics database were totally separate from the tunes? That is, make a list of midis (and alternatives, when known) that was not physically linked, but was easily available to those who needed a tune? Synchronized words & music are nice, and they could be done as midis using NoteWorthy, then made available for use in something like VanBasco's. No, it's not the total solution, but as you say, the Windows & Mac versions are not as searchable as DOS right now. A midi, even if it's NOT synchronized, is at least playable on a Mac.

(just brainstorming here...the important goal for many is to make updating more than an annual or semi-annual event....and not totally dependent on you & Susan having time & energy.)

You say you don't trust a wiki database...but these 'can' be done with limited access, so everyone whose grandma sang it "this way" couldn't make radical changes. The Mudcat forum itself can be edited by a few volunteers with limited access....

(The alt.comp.freeware online Wiki requires a password to access, and though it is easily available, that needn't be the case.)

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 06:04 PM

Dick, in the meantime, I wonder if it would be worthwhile to go back to issuing a DOS version of the Digital Tradition on a regular basis, perhaps along with an HTML copy posted at Mudcat. As you've often said, the DOS version works better than any other version we've had. I have a (bootleg) 2005 Digital Tradition in a DOS window in Windows XP, and it opens with two keystrokes and works like a charm. It even beeps out the tunes, which didn't happen in Windows in my previous computers. It took me about ten minutes to install the 2002, and just a little longer to modify it to run the 2005 file.

Has anybody tried the DOS DT on a Beta version of Windows Vista? I talked wiht a Vistar user last night, and he said he has had trouble running some programs on it. I think that the DOS version of the DT is simple enough that it shouldn't cause problems for Vista.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 06:22 PM

Nice idea - and with Bootcamp for the Mac, a DOS programme is pretty universal.
There's a part of me, though, that would love to see the elegance of Harmony assistant incorporated within a Jave app.
But, trouble is, I know diddly-squit about programming.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 06 Jan 07 - 10:56 PM

There are various approaches to running Windows progs now under Linux - I'm not an expert on this - including WINE, etc.

If there is a simple way of running simple DOS progs under Linux, that at least gets around the 'Linux-compatibility' issue - we would only then need the DOS version to get immediate Linux compatibility.

I suggest that most of those who have abandonded 'The Windoze Path of Enlightment' for Linux probably have enough basic 'technical nouse' to cope with getting the thing running with only basic instructions.

~~~~~~~~
I had thought of a 'Wiki-style' Approach with limited access to editing facilities - and I believe that you can 'queue' changes for 'moderation review' before permanent commital.

How difficult would it be to have the 'Wiki thing' implemented as a complete (downloaded and installed) 'standalone package' on each user's PC? (the nightmare of differing OSes rears its head...)

~~~~~~~~~
"Dick...would it be possible or useful if the lyrics database were totally separate from the tunes?"
"Dick, in the meantime, I wonder if it would be worthwhile to go back to issuing a DOS version of the Digital Tradition on a regular basis, perhaps along with an HTML copy posted at Mudcat."

Personal opinions...

1) a web accessible format, especially if kept moderately 'up to date' would serve most users, even those of us on 'slow' dialup, to a degree of usefulness - this might be easiest to implement and update (as per the current format) in a pure HTML style.

2) Re: "It's easy enough to set up a program that will let one find lyrics by title--it's also a fairly useless exercise. Titles are an awful way to search for things. Full text and keyword searches are, in Susan's and my opinion, a necessity. So is the requirement of providing synchronized words and music--many of our users don't read music (either dots or abc), and realizing how the tune fits the words is by no means always obvious. These aren't frills--they're an integral part of the DT's concept. "

I suggest a seperation of the 'basic' and 'all singing, all dancing' formats - while I can see where Dick is coming from, and why, a workable version without the "synchronized words and music" would be easier to get started on and keep updated, and thus more 'useful' (even if not as useful to those with those limited musical technical abilities that he mentions) overall to a fair number of people.

If both versions use the same file formats etc, and the 'deluxe' one can cope with 'missing' (i.e unimplemented or unentered bits of the 'bouncing ball' format stuff) bits, then we have

a) a working more regularly updated basic system

b) an advanced 'deluxe' system that will gradually build up as more items are 'upgraded' (animated bouncing balls, etc) over time.

As per Andrez's suggestions re 'treating it as a real world IT development project' - if we just all sit and wait for the 'all singing, all dancing' Showboat to arrive before we do any implementation, then we won't have much that is useful for some time is my polite and respectful thought...

This suggested breakup of concepts helps to allow several independent teams to be working on related but seperated sections simultaenously.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 07 Jan 07 - 12:23 PM

The problem with tunes (display and playing) is not just with new additions--if we use a new play program, ALL the tunes will have to be converted before they become available.The direction I'm working in now is an improved search program (similar to the old DOS one) which can operate independently of platform; it will have the capacity to link to a music display/play program assuming one can be found or developed.
It's possible that the next edition, then, will be lyrics-only. What are people's feelings about that?

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: MMario
Date: 07 Jan 07 - 03:11 PM

Better then nada

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: DMcG
Date: 07 Jan 07 - 05:11 PM

I have Harmony Assistant. It includes a built-in programming language that can be used for all kinds of things and I'm pretty confident that I could write a macro for it that could import lots of ABC files and convert them to the Myriad standard if we had to. As has been noted above, these could be made available as an online version, and the plug-in does support a marker showing which note is playing. There is an example at the Myriad Website. Of course, one disadvantage of this is that everyone would have to install the plugin.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: DMcG
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 07:43 AM

Just confirming the above. I've written and run the script and converted a few hundred ABCs as a test.

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 08:09 AM

"Better then nada"

As long as it works on my pile of junk, I'll be happy....

:-)

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: GUEST,riverboat annie
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 07:58 PM

well, Dick...I'm okay with lyrics only because I can find fiddle tunes so easily on JC's ABC. The folk stuff tunes are easily had as well...

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Ferrara
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 09:14 PM

I would strongly prefer that this project start by concentrating on upgrading the on-line Digitrad database. It is a more feasible, clearly defined, and doable project and I think it would have the biggest payoff for the largest number of people. The programming would be a fraction of what the stand-alone will take. And there is no shortage of qualified (and eager) volunteers to help with the content.

And I really don't think it would be too hard to come up with procedures that ensure Dick and Susan can validate changes and additions done by a picked set of Dick-and-Susan-clones.

I would love to see it. I could live with a lyrics-only version. What I would prefer though, is if a good tune file (midi or mp3) is available through Mudcat, there could be a link to it. Maybe have space for "at most" one midi and one mp3. If they are optional, then music files could be added as they become available but not having them won't keep a song out of Digitrad.

Can't speak for anyone else, but for me about half my use of Digitrad is to get complete lyrics for a song whose tune is known to me. (Most of the other half is searching for songs that fit an Open Sing topic. Love the search capability.)

Rita F

Subject: RE: Digital Tradition Upgrade?
From: Linda Goodman Zebooker
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 10:19 PM

I too use the Digitrad to search for Open Sing topic songs or just to create a bigger selection for something like the Getaway. I have a much, much more limited knowledge of songs, though, and depend mightily on hearing the tune, especially when timed visually to the notes. I actually use the downloaded 2002 Digitrad when I'm home, so I can change keys, tempi and sometimes the instrument. I've learned a lot of songs cold, just from the Digitrad, without hearing them anywhere else. I'd be lost without the music. A treasured resource, however it works out.

Linda