Scala seq file change

A small change has been made to the format of .seq files
in Scala 2.2n.
The program numbers now are from 1 to 128 and before from
0 to 127. That means the numbers are now the same as in the
Edit:Sound settings dialog and General MIDI list. You have
to add 1 in each "program" statement of any existing files
if they are to be used in the future.

The Edit scale dialog has been rewritten for a large part
to use a different list widget. Now the columns can be
sorted by clicking on the header, which is useful to make
rankings of intervals according to an attribute function.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~huygensf/software/Scala_Setup.exe

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
>
> A small change has been made to the format of .seq files
> in Scala 2.2n.
> The program numbers now are from 1 to 128 and before from
> 0 to 127. That means the numbers are now the same as in the
> Edit:Sound settings dialog and General MIDI list.

It also means they are *not* the same as the numbers in the midi
file, and so will be one off from the number you see when you convert
that to a text file with, for instance, mf2t.exe, and likewise one
off from the number you see when you look at a GM bank in Sound
Forge. I think this is likely to cause more confusion, not less, and
invalidates old seq file. Why in the world were you willing to do
this but won't consider adding functionality to the scl format?

Could you offer the option of disabling this feature and allowing use
of the older numbering?

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Gene Ward Smith" <gwsmith@s...> wrote:

> It also means they are *not* the same as the numbers in the midi
> file, and so will be one off from the number you see when you
convert
> that to a text file with, for instance, mf2t.exe, and likewise one
> off from the number you see when you look at a GM bank in Sound
> Forge.

Er, Audio Compositor. The point remains--the numbering from 1-128 is
what you most often see in files *describing* midi instruments, but
the numbering from 0-127 is what is actually used. I would stick to
the industry de facto standard, and ignore inaccurate descriptions.

>> A small change has been made to the format of .seq files
>> in Scala 2.2n.
>> The program numbers now are from 1 to 128 and before from
>> 0 to 127. That means the numbers are now the same as in the
>> Edit:Sound settings dialog and General MIDI list.
>
>It also means they are *not* the same as the numbers in the midi
>file, and so will be one off from the number you see when you convert
>that to a text file with, for instance, mf2t.exe, and likewise one
>off from the number you see when you look at a GM bank in //
>Audio Compositor.

Huh, I'm lost. This change was supposed to get Audio Compositor
to agree with Scala seq files.

-Carl

on 1/14/04 11:11 AM, Gene Ward Smith <gwsmith@svpal.org> wrote:

> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
> <manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
>>
>> A small change has been made to the format of .seq files
>> in Scala 2.2n.
>> The program numbers now are from 1 to 128 and before from
>> 0 to 127. That means the numbers are now the same as in the
>> Edit:Sound settings dialog and General MIDI list.
>
> It also means they are *not* the same as the numbers in the midi
> file, and so will be one off from the number you see when you convert
> that to a text file with, for instance, mf2t.exe, and likewise one
> off from the number you see when you look at a GM bank in Sound
> Forge. I think this is likely to cause more confusion, not less, and
> invalidates old seq file. Why in the world were you willing to do
> this but won't consider adding functionality to the scl format?
>
> Could you offer the option of disabling this feature and allowing use
> of the older numbering?

It strikes me that there is likely to be a way to retain compatibility, even
if it involves adding a comment with a distinct form to indicate the format
version number.

I am assuming .seq files are not in any way a standard exchange format like
.scl files are, otherwise you would not have considered making this change.

-Kurt

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Carl Lumma <ekin@l...> wrote:

> Huh, I'm lost. This change was supposed to get Audio Compositor
> to agree with Scala seq files.

If you open a GM font in AC, you will find that a grand piano is
instrument 0, a violin instrument 40, and so forth. These are the
same numbers the midi file is using internally. Some sort of blunder
lead to the situation where we have two numbering systems, but I
would stick to the ones midi and GM banks actually use.

Carl wrote:
>Huh, I'm lost. This change was supposed to get Audio Compositor
>to agree with Scala seq files.

I never said that, and most midi programs count the instruments
starting with 1, just as in the General MIDI spec.

Kurt wrote:
>It strikes me that there is likely to be a way to retain compatibility,
even
>if it involves adding a comment with a distinct form to indicate the
format
>version number.

Didn't anticipate that Gene felt so strong about the binary number in
midi files, so okay, that can be done.

>I am assuming .seq files are not in any way a standard exchange format
like
>.scl files are, otherwise you would not have considered making this
change.

That's right, I still add things to the .seq format, and Scala is the only
program that uses it.

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:
>
> Carl wrote:
> >Huh, I'm lost. This change was supposed to get Audio Compositor
> >to agree with Scala seq files.
>
> I never said that, and most midi programs count the instruments
> starting with 1, just as in the General MIDI spec.

It is less relevant what such programs display while playing a midi
file than what is actually in the midi file, and what you will see if
you open up a GM/GS bank in a bank editor.

> Didn't anticipate that Gene felt so strong about the binary number
in
> midi files, so okay, that can be done.

Thanks!

>It is less relevant what such programs display while playing a midi
>file than what is actually in the midi file, and what you will see if
>you open up a GM/GS bank in a bank editor.

Sure I believe it's that for you, but the use case which I have in mind
is that someone wants to write a seq file, needs to know a program
number and looks it up in a bank editor, GM list, Scala dialog, etc.
and doesn't need to remember not to forget to subtract one.

>Thanks!

Welcome. In the next version you can append "b" to get the 0..127
range like this (from "binary" or "backward compatible"):

0 program 0 b

Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Manuel Op de Coul"
<manuel.op.de.coul@e...> wrote:

> Welcome. In the next version you can append "b" to get the 0..127
> range like this (from "binary" or "backward compatible"):
>
> 0 program 0 b

Excellent; that should clear up any potential confusion.

on 1/15/04 9:10 AM, Manuel Op de Coul <manuel.op.de.coul@eon-benelux.com>
wrote:

>
>> It is less relevant what such programs display while playing a midi
>> file than what is actually in the midi file, and what you will see if
>> you open up a GM/GS bank in a bank editor.
>
> Sure I believe it's that for you, but the use case which I have in mind
> is that someone wants to write a seq file, needs to know a program
> number and looks it up in a bank editor, GM list, Scala dialog, etc.
> and doesn't need to remember not to forget to subtract one.
>
>> Thanks!
>
> Welcome. In the next version you can append "b" to get the 0..127
> range like this (from "binary" or "backward compatible"):
>
> 0 program 0 b

What I am missing here. It *used* to be 0-127 and required no "b". Thus
this is anything but backward compatible. That is all existing seq files on
people's hard drives will no longer work. This was always the issue as I
see it. Not a problem for me - I have no seq files, but I just wanted to
point it out in case something was missed in the thinking here.

-Kurt

>
> Manuel

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Bigler <kkb@b...> wrote:

> What I am missing here. It *used* to be 0-127 and required
no "b". Thus
> this is anything but backward compatible. That is all existing seq
files on
> people's hard drives will no longer work.

They will work if you stick in an extra line.