Tech: tunes on websites

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 06:41 PM

A common tendency is for people to underestimate the costs of getting a job done, but the real disasters happen when people think "this^* is gonna be easy."

^* (the estimating, not necessarily the making of the book and website.)

One way at looking at the notation from audio recordings is that the person doing the notation will probably listen to the recording once to get it in mind, at least once during the transcribing, and should listen all the way through when finished to verify the work. That means that the cost to notate a song in rough draft form probably is about equal to a labor/burden rate multiplied by about 7 times the length of the tune.

The additional "number of times" factor could be to allow for others to review the transcription, notate it into a musical score, and pass it on to whoever will convert it back to the "postable" scores and audio files formats, etc.

You can pick the "factors" and "costs per" numbers to suit your own estimating needs. - that's just one common way of looking at such kinds of work.

At one office where I was involved with quite a lot of document preparation, the standard estimate was 8 hours for each page of the document, with 16 hours for per page for "complex pages." This despite that most engineers would take 2 to 5 hours to produce a new page, and a lot of pages were "boiler plate" that just got copied from one document to the next. The extra "time factor" was to accomodate reviews, typing, filing, indexing, etc. Many of the engineers were amazed that each hour was calculated at a "burden rate" of about $135/hour, when the average engineer doing the writing was getting about $28 - $30 dollars per hour. The trite explanation was that "the boss has to look at it and he gets more," but the actual reason is that the salary is only a small part of what it actually costs to "employ" a person. (insurance, vacations, heat, light, and "overhead" associates like lawyers, accountants, human resources, tech support - etc... ad. infinitum.)

Working out the details is a really tough job, and you're apparently starting from scratch. The compromise between estimating costs realistically and still keeping the estimates competitive (you're "competing" to get funding for this project, in one way or another) can be really difficult, and does have to be thought out carefully and in some detail.

Note that I'm not implying that it sounds like you're taking shortcuts. You do give the impression that you're working/looking in the right directions. I suspect you've already written a "business plan" to define your objectives, before people start running off and "doing things." (?)

John

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: GUEST,Fa-so-la
Date: 19 Jan 07 - 05:25 PM

Yes, Malcolm Douglas, all that is in hand and we're contacting various other groups who have done something similar for advice. We're not saying for sure that the project will go ahead; currently we're just costing it to see if it is at all feasible.

Many thanks.

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: Malcolm Douglas
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 08:08 PM

You speak of audio recordings "from archives". What archives would those be? Presumably you have the permission of the archive owners to make transcriptions for publication; presumably you also have permission from the recorded singers, or their heirs or assignees? The fact that a song is considered generically "traditional" doesn't of itself place an individual person's version or performance of it in the public domain. Ask the School of Scottish Studies, for example; they have encountered all manner of associated issues.

Doubtless you have already taken advice on the legal implications of all that, and will know that the fact that you are a "small community music project" doesn't exempt you from the same obligations regarding copyright and the payment of royalties that would apply to a commercial organisation.

Please do keep us posted. It sounds like a very interesting project.

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: GUEST,Fa-so-la
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 05:49 PM

Thanks for all this. I'll read it in detail over the weekend.

Some clarification:

I have people who can easily notate from the audio. Not a problem. As we'll be putting together a bid for public funding, I would prefer that these people were paid something respectable. Even if they were willing to do it for free, that contribution in time would be 'allowable' as income on the grant application.

The pieces that they would be working on would certainly be 'traditional' and not in print elsewhere. If some pieces are already in print, we'd negotiate to use those rather than duplicate effort.

The only reason we want to generate audio files is to give alternatives to people who don't read music and it would be a limited service. We would be posting it on a project website, rather than here, because it's part of a greater 'whole'. Alternatively, or maybe additionally, we would be looking to post the information on sites of other partners with more likelihood of longevity than ourselves. (We don't want the info to disappear if we do!)

Again, thanks. I'll look at the above in greater depth a.s.a.p.

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 05:22 PM

You don't mention what exactly you are trying to do, but there are many people who will help you for nothing: no money at all.

The ABC format was created by enthusiasts, and continues to be improved that way. There are people who like transcribing from audio (it helps keep the ear in good health)

I'd suggest searching out such people, and you may not have to pay a penny.

It may sound counter intuative, but you may well get better results by not paying any money.

Do clarify exactly what you are trying to do though.

Ed

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: treewind
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 05:12 PM

MIDI is about as close as one can come to a universal format

I disagree. If there's any chance of printed output being an important part of the project, MIDI is a dreadful format. Converting MIDI to ABC is very error prone and ABC (especially ABC plus) allows all sorts of other printed annotation (song lyrics for a start, but not just that) that is important for musicians and singers that MIDI can't approach. Converting ABC to MIDI, however, is straightforward and predictable.

While there are programs that will "print a score" from an ABC file, they're NOT GENERALLY PUBLISHER QUALITY scores without significant "tweaking."

The output from abcm2ps is perfectly publishable.

ABC requires specific software
So does MIDI!
It's a shame that more proprietary music scoring programs can't import ABC, though. It would be an easy feature to add.

The only reason why MIDI is popular is because so many people can't read music and also because it has applications (in fact its origin and the definition of the acronym^*) in the hardware world of synthesisers, drum machines and similar toys. It's a performance medium, not a musical notation.

Anahata

*Musical Instrument Digital Interface

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 04:45 PM

Re transcribing from audio:

Almost anything you're likely to have on tape can probably be "stolen" from somewhere on the web, already in ABC, MIDI, or scored page format, with just a little searcing. That is unless you're intent on recording "individual performance" nuances or dealing with material that's "uncollected" prevously.

The "fine details" of individual performance are immensely difficult to transcribe to scores and/or to simple midi/ABC, so possibly mp3 would be quicker and easier for listenable posting.

Unfortunately, mp3 is virtually useless for anything beyond "just listening."

John

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 04:32 PM

MMario -

We have quite a few people here who can sight read ABC, but that's NOT GENERALLY TRUE for an unknown audience. As I noted, it depends on your audience, so some market research is needed.

For general use, midi is an automatic result of scoring for print, and it takes some extra conversion to get ABC. MIDI is about as close as one can come to a universal format, and in fact in "other cultures" there are some people who can "read" a mid file just about as easily as you read ABC.

While there are programs that will "print a score" from an ABC file, they're NOT GENERALLY PUBLISHER QUALITY scores without significant "tweaking."

It is apparently no longer true that "the right ABC programs" are easily, consistently, and permanently available for new users, according to many people who've had to ask where to find them recently. (Most people here are still using the Mid2ABC program that embeds a broken link to a site that doesn't work in the ABC result. The "working" site seems to have changed several times since I did my last downloads.)

ABC files aren't really significantly smaller than simple midi, with "modern" storage and bandwidth. Either format requires software to get a "useful" other format. ABC requires specific software while for midi there are numerous programs, that lots of people probably already have, for the same kinds of conversions.

It all depends on who your audience is going to be.

ABC used to be the only way to post a tune, and at mudcat it still is, so we have a lot of experienced users. Others don't, or at least may not, have our unique skills.

John

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: MMario
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 03:43 PM

JOhn - the reason I suggested ABC for web posting was it has the versatility of midi PLUS is can be sight read, And there is a reasonable amount of support for it on the web that doesn't even require downloading a plugin or seperate program.; PLUS it is much more compact then most of the other formats.

Yet with a simple cut and paste it can PRODUCE midi; pdf sheet music, gif, etc.

YMMV

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 03:36 PM

It depends on your "market" whether ABC is the "best" format. It's popular here, because people have learned to work with it; but that may not be true for others. The Library of Congress doesn't offer it, do they?

Transcribing from audio requires that you have someone who can do it, and is willing to do it at a price you can afford. (Free would be best?) It's extremely time consuming. You also need to make sure that your "transcriber(s)" can be trusted to distinguish what's tune and what's embellishment; and a consistent "policy" regarding whether or not to include embellishments, counter-points, alternate (harmony) lines, etc.

Even if everything you're working with is by known composers/performers that you're sure are willing to have you use the tunes, or is "accepted" as being "trad" not subject to copyright, you should have someone willing and able to do at least a surface level look at potential copyright claims. There can be lots of surprises in this area.

For your print copies, the ONLY acceptable format is standard music notation on staves with notes, unless you have prior agreement from your users on another format.

Since there are no universal notation program formats, for web posting this probably means pdf or graphic files.

For a "low budget" alternative, for some kinds of music, you could perhaps print lyric-only books (most tunes don't have accepted lyrics) accompanied by a disk of mid files, or have midis on the web that people could get separately; but I've found people "resistant" to making the effort to get stuff from two separate places.

With very few exceptions, any program you choose to print from can (almost automatically) generate midi files from which people can play back the tune. Almost any music notation program your "customers" are likely to have can regenerate a "score" from the midi, although it may or may not look like your original one.

The midi can also be used to generate ABC notations of the tunes, by those who have the right program(s), again with the caveat that results may vary.

If you're going to print the tunes, unless you make an extremely unfortunate choice of scoring program, you'll "automatically" have .mid files for each tune. It's just a matter of doing the saves as midi for each tune from the scoring program.

The files generated by the scoring program for printing probably can only be used by those who have the same program. There are a few programs that can read the formats generated by a few other programs, but the programs with this capability tend to be expensive and require "learning" by each user. Posting these files on a website will be of little use to anyone, unless you can make a "reader" program available to those who may want to download them, and that your clients can use to print from the files.

If you want people to be able to print the music from the website, either a pdf or a graphic of each page should be your choice of what to post. Either jpg or gif are good compact graphic files for this use, and most users will have a program that can print them. Anyone can download the free pdf reader, so you can be assured that all users can print from pdf files, but the files are a lot larger.

Either format, jpg or pdf, can be made from scans of the print copy, although other methods may be more efficient if someone has the programs needed.

If those who will be downloading want another format, such as ABC, it's fairly easy to generate ABC files from the .mid ones. I would suggest that if you choose to post ABC versions it should be in addition to posting printable and midi versions.

If you want people to be able to download "something to listen to" then probably midi is your best bet. Almost all people with a PC or Mac or 'Nix can play midi files. MIDI files also can be converted to printable scores by most notation programs, so those who have a program may want to use them in that way.

As to costs: Re-scoring the 415 odd tunes in a local "Session Book," and adding about 260 "variations" that I knew were popular elsewhere, to get them all in consistent and usable format, took me about 2,500 hours. [A standard metric for labor cost estimating in the US is that one "man year" is 2,088 manhours. At a "cheap clerical" rate of $15/hour, I "donated" $37,500 to this effort.] I had "printed" scores to work from, although some were marginally legible and quite a few were unplayable and required corrections.

Printing one copy of the resulting book on my laser printer cost me about $21 (US), and would have been nearly double that (paper and ink) on an inkjet. A local printer would copy the master print for about $18/copy in minimum quantity of 20 copies. I provided a floppy disk of all the midis for the tunes, which was a minimal cost to make. Offered to the local tribe at $20 each, it took me about 5 years to "break even" on the printing cost, so that book is no longer in print.

It took about another 300 hours to convert the whole thing to a Word file on CD, with embedded jpg graphics, and with linked index and table of contents so that you could click on the tune name and go to the printable tune, or click on the tune number to play the midi. I also included the same "document" as pdf on the disk, along with a separate jpg and a midi file of each tune. I haven't advertised the CD, but haven't found any interest in it (at $10 per copy I've sold 2 in 3 years, but that was an accident.) I don't really consider the CD a "finished" product.

Note that this was a massive collection, and a smaller project may have significantly different "market dynamics" and costs.

John

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: DMcG
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 12:57 PM

Is there a particular reason you want to start a new website? Rather than incur the costs of that, why not post them here, or on www.folkinfo.org or via one of the news groups or, or, or ...

I agree with MMario on both counts. Transcribing from audio is the hard work. And use ABC unless you have a really good reason for using something else.

Subject: RE: Tech: tunes on websites
From: MMario
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 12:47 PM

Part "A" is the biggie. To transcribe from audio recording - that takes skill. Once the music is written down, changing the format to whatever you select is pretty much scut-work...requiring more perseverence then skill.

I'd reccomend ABC format for files - I think it's the closest to universally acceptable - heck, some people can even sight read it, plus there are a lot of programs that will produce either audio or sheet music from ABC files.

Subject: Tech: tunes on websites
From: GUEST,Fa-so-la
Date: 18 Jan 07 - 12:40 PM

I'm part of a small community music project in the UK which is hoping to publish a series of folk song books over the next few years. In addition to the print editions, we'd want to put the tunes, and maybe a few verses, on a website. I understand that people here might be able to offer an educated guess as to how I cost some of the work that needs to be done.

I'm thinking primarily of

a) noting down some music which might only be available on tape in archives - we'd need just the melody line, but would need to pay someone to 'take it down'

b) transferring music, either as per a) or stuff that's already available, to an appropriate format: abc or whatever

And if anyone has an opinion on what the most appropriate format might be - we'd appreciate advice on that too.

But mostly I'm interested in what you think we need to pay someone to do these jobs. Maybe an hourly rate?

many thanks