Simple, cheap (free?) notation program?

[Bach5G]

I just want to enter and print chord changes.

C7 | F7 |

Etc.

Anything new out there?

[jorymil]

I use lilypond for this. Kind of like HTML for music.

John

[calcbone]

New? Not sure. But have you tried MuseScore?

[robcat2075]

I just want to enter and print chord changes.

C7 | F7 |

Just the chord symbols with no music?


Here's the MuseScore Tut on adding lyrics and Chord symbols to music...

[Matt K]

If you just want the chords, irealpro would work too

[timothy42b]

Musescore, Noteworthy Composer (if that one still has a demo version), Finale Notepad.

There's a bit of a learning curve, and you might find some more intuitive than others. I struggled with Musescore but found Noteworthy Composer easy; others had the opposite experience. I liked Noteworthy enough I bought the full version and later the upgrade. Finale Nohave tepad worked but had some disabling feature i couldn't work around, something to do with changing key signatures.

[Bach5G]

It looks like Notepad will do the job with a minimal learning curve. And free. Thx.

[Kbiggs]

I use Notion for my initial input for music. I haven’t tried chord symbols yet, but it has that function. If you use it with a tablet, it accepts pencil input. Very similar to hand writing music.

[timothy42b]

It looks like Notepad will do the job with a minimal learning curve. And free. Thx.

I'm trying to remember what I didn't like about it. I think I was playing in a musical, and struggling to read that scribbled handwritten score that was typical, and wanted to notate one of the harder pieces.
But the free version did not allow you to change key signatures mid stream, IIRC. And the piece changed keys constantly.

[X200]

MuseScore is also free, as in freedom.
https://www.fsf.org/

[jorymil]

MuseScore is also free, as in freedom.
https://www.fsf.org/

Glad to see another Free Software user here. Without the FSF, much of the core software the Internet runs on would be considerably different.

John

[boneagain]

I saw a mention of Lilypond.

If you have a specific thing you want visually, it is usually possible to make up a text file as a sort of template. After that it gets pretty simple.

For example, I wanted to make up a bunch of Christmas tune parts book. The default for all the programs is to put each part on its own page. I exported musicXML from Musescore for theparts, then pulled all the 1st trombone parts into a Lilypond setup to make that book, etc.

For just chords with some sort of rhythm notation I found these links:

https://music.stackexchange.com/questio ... kicks-over

https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.22/Document ... name-chart

https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.21/Document ... jazz-combo

The first gives an idea of how far down you could boil the "code" behind the notation, depending on what you want. It could get VERY close to "write chord symbol and move on."

The second gives chord "codes" and example pitches relative to C keys (major and minor.)

The third shows just how involved you can get, if you want. From the first link you can see how MUCH you can strip from the pretty complete third to get just one line of chord symbols.

[X200]

MuseScore is also free, as in freedom.
https://www.fsf.org/

Glad to see another Free Software user here. Without the FSF, much of the core software the Internet runs on would be considerably different.

John

Indeed.

Lilypond is also free, as in freedom, software.

[afugate]

Doing a page of chord changes is trivial with MuseScore.

Of course, that undoubtedly applies to most other notation programs once one has learned how to use them... (not trying to be snarky - just an observation )

--Andy in OKC

[Cmillar]

Call me 'old school', but I don't mind paying for a good notation (or any other) well designed piece of software that took someone time, money, education, training, etc. etc. to create.

People need to put food on their table.

[Matt K]

Call me 'old school', but I don't mind paying for a good notation (or any other) well designed piece of software that took someone time, money, education, training, etc. etc. to create.

People need to put food on their table.

Free in the context of free software usually means more than free of price. In many cases it overlaps with free of price (you’ll hear “free as in free speech, not free beer” in such circles). But some developers would prefer not to have direct payment for something, but rather put the code out publicly and have others collaborate on it as their payment.

There’s nothing wrong with either model. Just a matter of preference for the developer(s).

I was a big Sibelius user for years but since they got acquired, I had an abysmal time with their licensing. Every time I would go to use it, it would be a two day ordeal to get someone via email and then call me blah blah blah. I don’t have much time anymore to do that but I intend on switching to MuseScore thanks to a very helpful chat member who helped convert all my sib files.

If the license didn’t deactivate constantly and they had a version that worked on my OS (Ubuntu) I’d probably buy a full price perpetual license since it’s otherwise a great product.

[jorymil]

Call me 'old school', but I don't mind paying for a good notation (or any other) well designed piece of software that took someone time, money, education, training, etc. etc. to create.

People need to put food on their table.

This is a really common misconception about Free Software: that it's zero-cost. There have been a whole ton of attempts to come up with a better name: "libre," for example. Other languages use different words for "free of charge" versus "freedom to modify and edit." The latter is what we're talking about here. As you say, people need to put food on the table.

If you want the dissertation, feel free to PM me: this is how I've put food on my own table for the past 20 years.

[Cmillar]

Call me 'old school', but I don't mind paying for a good notation (or any other) well designed piece of software that took someone time, money, education, training, etc. etc. to create.

People need to put food on their table.

This is a really common misconception about Free Software: that it's zero-cost. There have been a whole ton of attempts to come up with a better name: "libre," for example. Other languages use different words for "free of charge" versus "freedom to modify and edit." The latter is what we're talking about here. As you say, people need to put food on the table.

If you want the dissertation, feel free to PM me: this is how I've put food on my own table for the past 20 years.

Yes...proper language should be used in order to clarify something like this.

If a group of programmers feel it's a 'duty' to put out free software that can be edited and changed by a community of like-minded end users, then go ahead. If that's called 'freedom', then maybe describe it as 'freedom software' or something.

To be clear, I'm very much against people who feel it's some kind of right that they can have 'something for nothing' and refuse to pay for any of their software and would rather use pirated technology.

That's not called 'freedom'. That's just people trying to get something for nothing and profit off the hard work and labor of others.

If MuseScore cuts it for some people, then go to it. There are certainly some notation programs out there that don't make creating music easy at all, and that just appear to be pet projects by well intentioned individuals that, however, don't quite cut it.

When you get a tool like Sibelius (or Finale) that works and is time-proven, then you buy should just buy it and use it. They're both pretty freaking amazing and get better and better all the time. That's worth the investment.

You can get low-cost versions of Sibelius that'll do what the OP desires. Even 'Band in a Box' will put out good looking chord symbols and lead sheets. (you need to pay for it though.)

[Bach5G]

I struggled with Finale Printmusic back in the day, watched the rise and fall—it seems—of Sibelius, and downloaded a couple of versions of Musescore. Dorito- preferred the cool ranch flavour. I couldn’t justify paying for a full copy of Finale, even when I qualified for an academic version. I don’t have the patience to deal with the learning curve of new software generally, and music notation gets pretty finicky pretty fast, even when it isn’t buggy.

I can get BIAB or IReal Pro to do what I want. Also something called JJazzlab. There’s that learning curve again but maybe I am just going to have to suck it up.

I’m happy to leave all that complex stuff to others.

[robcat2075]

As the realistic objections to MuseScore fall away I have no doubt that soon we'll be hearing it's responsible for someone's uneven tire wear.

Even the years-ago version 1 of Muse Score would have been enough to satisfy the needs of anything I was expected to notate in college theory and arranging classes and anything I would have wished to whip up when I was a band director. It would have been more than a miracle.

Today's MuseScore is ready for almost any notation need and well-documented for any one wanting to learn to use it. The complaints I hear generally boil down to something like, "that's not how you do it in Sibelius."

It's true that MuseScore doesn't make money for Sibelius but with Sibelius' long head start and name-dropping endorsement by almost everyone in the arranging and composing biz they should be just fine. Why aren't they?

[X200]

What is Free Software?
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html
(note the four essential freedoms)

Selling Free Software
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

Worth reading.

[Mr412]

I started out with SongWriter and upgraded to Fidelity. Neither are free. But I can open and massage the charts from the Wikiphonia zip file database found here:

http://www.synthzone.com/forum/ubbthrea ... ia_all_6_6

If anyone else knows of a good music database where the charts can be opened and massaged with one of the conventional music notation programs - free or otherwise - now is the time to share.

[jorymil]

I really got into the business after reading John Naughton's _A_Brief_History_of_the_Future_: it's a really engaging account of how the Internet and the various software licenses came into being.

A free/libre/open source model certainly isn't for everything: a lot of times businesses will come up with a novel idea, say for medical imaging, which is considered a trade secret. Obviously they want to keep a lid on that. Or say, video games (though there are video game modding groups out there).

As a relatively technical computer user, though, I want the ability to view, modify, and possibly contribute to or redistribute source code to the programs I use. By no means does everyone need or want this. I liken it to the "right to repair" laws that are becoming increasingly common: someone with a certain level of technical skill should be able to fix it if it's broken, or make the bad parts better.

[X200]

A free/libre/open source model certainly isn't for everything: a lot of times businesses will come up with a novel idea, say for medical imaging, which is considered a trade secret. Obviously they want to keep a lid on that. Or say, video games (though there are video game modding groups out there).

As a relatively technical computer user, though, I want the ability to view, modify, and possibly contribute to or redistribute source code to the programs I use. By no means does everyone need or want this. I liken it to the "right to repair" laws that are becoming increasingly common: someone with a certain level of technical skill should be able to fix it if it's broken, or make the bad parts better.

Open source is a nebulous term:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-sou ... nt.en.html

The free/libre model is absolutely for everything. Proprietary software is always unethical.

[timothy42b]

A free/libre/open source model certainly isn't for everything: a lot of times businesses will come up with a novel idea, say for medical imaging, which is considered a trade secret. Obviously they want to keep a lid on that. Or say, video games (though there are video game modding groups out there).

TRX gym equipment is a classic case. He came up with a novel idea and started a business, but his invention is so easy to copy and build that knockoffs flooded the market almost immediately. He did win a patent infringement lawsuit for $6.8 million against one company but there are lots out there doing it. It is an ingenious device, I've used it in our local gym.

[BGuttman]

A free/libre/open source model certainly isn't for everything: a lot of times businesses will come up with a novel idea, say for medical imaging, which is considered a trade secret. Obviously they want to keep a lid on that. Or say, video games (though there are video game modding groups out there).

As a relatively technical computer user, though, I want the ability to view, modify, and possibly contribute to or redistribute source code to the programs I use. By no means does everyone need or want this. I liken it to the "right to repair" laws that are becoming increasingly common: someone with a certain level of technical skill should be able to fix it if it's broken, or make the bad parts better.

Open source is a nebulous term:
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-sou ... nt.en.html

The free/libre model is absolutely for everything. Proprietary software is always unethical.

You seem not to understand the term "Trade Secret". If something took a lot of effort to develop, the person who came up with it deserves to maintain control over it. If it is a minor variation of something else, it doesn't deserve secret or patent protection, but something really novel should be able to be controlled.

Examples:

I develop a detergent based on a sample formula provided by a surfactant manufacturer: not secret.

I develop a detergent blend on my own using one or several cleaning and surfactant agents: secret.

[robcat2075]

I'm doubtful that MuseScore infringes on any patents of Sibelius or Finale.

What would those patents even be? Using computers to create and print music notation was not new in those programs.

Certainly the graphics and rules of music notation are not novel at all. Anyone can make them.

I'm guessing any patents they claim are extremely narrow in scope, probably the result of needing to avoid someone else's patents in similar ventures.

[X200]

I understand that detergents are not software.

I recommend reading the works of Richard Stallman to gain a basic understanding of the injustice of software patents as well as proprietary software and digital restrictions management. Companies that implement these schemes violate user freedoms.

[Matt K]

Richard Stallman is definitely on the extreme end of that philosophy, particularly given how avid OSS contributors joke about his infamous 1990s copypasta about ".... or as I've taken to calling it recently GNU/Linux". Regardless, the strategy of posting links to Stallman's writings in a group full of musicians, who are likely beneficiaries of existing intellectual copy protections, in order to convince them that it is unethical for them to purchase software they use for their livelihood is probably not going to be a fruitful endeavor.

[rickfaulknernyc]

I'm a huge proponent of MuseScore - fairly easy to use (my daughter taught herself at age 9), good quality (I've used it for many published arrangements), and FREE!

[timothy42b]

I'm doubtful that MuseScore infringes on any patents of Sibelius or Finale.

I suspect that MuseScore made choices very carefully to avoid infringing on those patents. There are elements of MuseScore that I find very nonintuitive, but others don't. I think it is just because I started on other programs and became accustomed to different ways of doing things.

[BGuttman]

I noticed there are two MuseScore programs on my Linux App List. One is called MuseScore 3, and the other is MuseScore 3.3. MuseScore 3 has a blue logo and MuseScore 3.3 has a white logo. Does anybody know what's up with that? MuseScore 3 looks and feels much like an improved MuseScore 2, but I don't use them enough to really appreciate the difference.

[Matt K]

Probably how your OS handles the distribution of packages. What OS are you running? There’s a function that differs from district to distro that will tell you the path of apps which should give insight into why you have two.

[BGuttman]

It's Linux Mint (20.3). I don't have a problem with either of the versions (I still haven't explored 3.3 yet), but I just was surprised to have two different MuseScores available.

[jorymil]

It's Linux Mint (20.3). I don't have a problem with either of the versions (I still haven't explored 3.3 yet), but I just was surprised to have two different MuseScores available.

If you click on each package, it'll tell you which repository they come from. Alternatively, do a command-line 'apt search musescore', which should also tell you. We run into this sort of thing every so often at work, and it can cause real grief when it's an important package.

I'm a big proponent of LM. They came along at a time when Ubuntu was getting a little weird, and really straightened a lot of that out. It was my main work OS for quite a while, and my father uses it as well.

[Matt K]

Yeah, I suspect it's either two from the same repo or, in my opinion, more likely that there's a flatpak/snap of musescore installed alongside a .deb or something from the repositories.

Basically, there are a few ways that you can package applications in Linux and they all have their pros/cons. But you can install two side-by-side (purposefully or otherwise!) very easily if one is from the repo and one is from say a snap.

Sometimes the repositories aren't as up-to-date so you might have v 3.0 in the official repos but install flatpak from the maintainer and have it be 3.3 The reason it might be behind in the repos is that much of the time those are packaged by the OS and it might not get done right away. Other modes of distribution tend to come right from the maker and avoid dependency issues.

I'd probably figure out where each version was coming from and uninstall the less up-to-date version personally. You might run into issues where if you use the new version, the old version might not be able to load the files generated by the new version.

[robcat2075]

The intuitive way to enter music notation is to put a pencil to paper and draw it.

I'd have to know what is regarded as un intuitive to judge the merits of that label.

[jorymil]

Yeah, I suspect it's either two from the same repo or, in my opinion, more likely that there's a flatpak/snap of musescore installed alongside a .deb or something from the repositories.

Ubuntu (and by association, LM) has really been pushing snap and flatpak for its software the past few years. It's a very different approach than other Linux distributions: centered around LXC containers. I suspect that they're great to work with once you overcome that learning curve, but when you're pretty much required to know Docker professionally these days, it's a hard sell.

This is probably partially why I didn't get a job with Canonical a few years back: I just wasn't excited about dealing with that ecosystem on a daily basis.

[Matt K]

Yeah, I suspect it's either two from the same repo or, in my opinion, more likely that there's a flatpak/snap of musescore installed alongside a .deb or something from the repositories.

Ubuntu (and by association, LM) has really been pushing snap and flatpak for its software the past few years. It's a very different approach than other Linux distributions: centered around LXC containers. I suspect that they're great to work with once you overcome that learning curve, but when you're pretty much required to know Docker professionally these days, it's a hard sell.

This is probably partially why I didn't get a job with Canonical a few years back: I just wasn't excited about dealing with that ecosystem on a daily basis.

I think LM has decoupled from the snaps but they’re obviously really easy to install even if not the default. They get a lot of criticism which I totally get. For headless stuff, docker is way better and flatpak has been really stable for GUI applications. Although I really only use Firefox, thunderbird, and PyCharm and the last one the easiest way to install is snap so I have snaps on every system I have!

[Posaunus]

I think LM has decoupled from the snaps but they’re obviously really easy to install even if not the default. They get a lot of criticism which I totally get. For headless stuff, docker is way better and flatpak has been really stable for GUI applications. Although I really only use Firefox, thunderbird, and PyCharm and the last one the easiest way to install is snap so I have snaps on every system I have!

You do realize that you're talking a foreign language to most of us, don't you?

[jorymil]

We hit Tangents territory long ago! I'd certainly vote to move most of this thread over there. Hit me up in a PM if you're interested, though: I'm happy to explain more.

[Matt K]

Me? Tangent? No way! Should I split topic? I think the original question is answered. But if not I can do that