Sax on the Web Forum banner
81 - 94 of 94 Posts

Registered
Joined
3,397 Posts
Discussion Starter · #81 ·
On the Quaderno, which displays 16 levels of grey, you can import any template you want in pdf format. Your yellow background will be converted to the closest level of gray.
 

Registered
Keilwerth saxes (S/A/T), Selmer clarinets (S/B), Altus Azumi flute
Joined
1,942 Posts
On the Quaderno, which displays 16 levels of grey, you can import any template you want in pdf format. Your yellow background will be converted to the closest level of gray.
But then you're just reducing contrast. You could accomplish the same end by using the contrast adjustment dialog or changing the text color to a lighter shade of gray (or by reducing the ambient light level).
 

Registered
Joined
4,147 Posts
Yeah, I know what you mean. When I was playing shows, I always appreciated the acts that paid for good copyists who used high quality 鈥減archment colored鈥 paper.


On a stage, I prefer the parchment style paper, as described above. Nowadays, reading gigs have computer printed music on standard letter paper, so for my old, tired eyes it鈥檚 a double whammy - smaller sheets and white paper. Of course, lots of bands (those with gigs, anyway) have tablets for the music, which I guess is OK, if one can control the background color.

I understand now that the e-ink background is not electronically produced, but the front lighting might be interesting.

But I鈥檓 probably not going to buy an e-ink tablet, I still use a pencil when writing music, unless producing parts for others. Which is quite a comedown for a guy that spent 4 years writing notation software (Encore, now sadly defunct).
Yep, and the the other issue is that now you are almost always playing off of copies, of copies, of copies, since copying is cheap and nobody wants to handout the originals for fear parts will be lost. I don't really blame them for that but the print resolution is often not great as it gets fuzzy from the copying. One of the things that surprised me about reading music off a tablet was how easy it was to do even on a smaller screen because the resolution is so good.
 

Registered
YAS-62 Series 1 | Holton 241 Tenor (1952)
Joined
55 Posts
Peripherally related, I also have the time to create my own editons of tunes. This gives me control of fonts, font size, and the overall page layout to maximise readability. While this is not specific to eInk readers it is perhaps even more important than any given technology.

(As an aside, I have a friend who plays lute professionally, using an iPad, playing off facsimilie editions when he can. I am in awe of his ability to read these chicken scratchings at distance, at speed. Amazing. For those unaware of this niche I'll include a sheet for giggles and sh*ts. This is from 1620 known as Margret Board's Lute Book)
 

Attachments

Registered
Joined
3,454 Posts
Yep, and the the other issue is that now you are almost always playing off of copies, of copies, of copies, since copying is cheap and nobody wants to handout the originals for fear parts will be lost. I don't really blame them for that but the print resolution is often not great as it gets fuzzy from the copying. One of the things that surprised me about reading music off a tablet was how easy it was to do even on a smaller screen because the resolution is so good.
The few reading things I've done in the last 10 years have had music printed from computer scores, so fuzziness isn't an issue.

Note that when I came up (in the 1970's) it was cheaper to hire a copyist to redo the parts than have them copied. Kinko's (remember them?) was just getting underway. I remember once getting union scale for recopying a part that had become dogeared - it was $6.08... A good copyist could do it better and faster than copying old worn parts (with tons of pencil marks). Especially since music was usually on quarto size paper, not letter size. To do a quarto size copy, you had to do 11x17, then cut off the excess.

To be frank, and speaking strictly as a sideman, I don't think that computer generated parts are better than hand copied ones. Speaking as an arranger/composer, computer parts are vastly superior, too bad that it's hard (and expensive) to get the parts printed on the larger form factor, but dealing with a singer is so much easier ("I need that whole thing down a step").
 

Registered
Joined
4,147 Posts
The few reading things I've done in the last 10 years have had music printed from computer scores, so fuzziness isn't an issue.

Note that when I came up (in the 1970's) it was cheaper to hire a copyist to redo the parts than have them copied. Kinko's (remember them?) was just getting underway. I remember once getting union scale for recopying a part that had become dogeared - it was $6.08... A good copyist could do it better and faster than copying old worn parts (with tons of pencil marks). Especially since music was usually on quarto size paper, not letter size. To do a quarto size copy, you had to do 11x17, then cut off the excess.

To be frank, and speaking strictly as a sideman, I don't think that computer generated parts are better than hand copied ones. Speaking as an arranger/composer, computer parts are vastly superior, too bad that it's hard (and expensive) to get the parts printed on the larger form factor, but dealing with a singer is so much easier ("I need that whole thing down a step").
I wouldn't argue that. What I'm talking about is stuff like big band charts that have been photo copied from the originals and often reduced so they fit on standard size paper. Once you do this it doesn't matter much if the charts were originally hand written or digitally generated, the resolution gets worse through the photocopying copying process regardless. I'd rather read digital charts off my 10 inch iPad than bad photo-copied charts that may be on larger paper but at much poorer resolution.
 

Registered
Joined
102 Posts
Peripherally related, I also have the time to create my own editons of tunes. This gives me control of fonts, font size, and the overall page layout to maximise readability. While this is not specific to eInk readers it is perhaps even more important than any given technology.

(As an aside, I have a friend who plays lute professionally, using an iPad, playing off facsimilie editions when he can. I am in awe of his ability to read these chicken scratchings at distance, at speed. Amazing. For those unaware of this niche I'll include a sheet for giggles and sh*ts. This is from 1620 known as Margret Board's Lute Book)
Looks like chutes & ladders...
 

Registered
Joined
29 Posts
I think it's actually a lack of demand (i.e., a small, specialized market) and the consequent lack of supply. Sort of the same reason manufacturers can charge $100 for a ligature that costs < $1 to make.

In addition, there's the fact that a single company (E-ink Corp.) still owns the patent and controls all manufacturing of the displays (i.e., they alone make the E-ink films at the core of all these displays). Once the patent expires, I imagine that you'll see these devices available for much cheaper.



For me, the main music-related use case would be for playing in large ensembles, like my 17-piece big band, which:
  • sometimes plays in bars
  • often plays in cramped spaces
  • is a 17-piece group, which would make providing power for many individual devices difficult
If I'm not playing scored music as part of a big group, I generally don't need written music.
I finally went to a Surface Pro, and Mobile Sheets. I also got a page-turner, which was almost no installation at all. Took maybe 30 seconds. Definitely works well for Windows. My problem is that the pages are too small. I most often play from a stand front (so, arm's length from my face). Kind of dicey when the charts are 1930's vintage and really small. The other thing is that when you stand up for a solo, the tablet is pretty tiny, and reading changes is impossible on a couple of the charts. Definitely would like something the size of a sheet of paper (11" tall screen). I'm a bit older than you are, and sometimes my eyes don't adjust as quickly as I'd like. Trombones and trumpets stand closer to the music, so less of a problem for brass than for reeds.
 

Registered
Joined
4,147 Posts
Are you trying to use it in portrait mode or attempting to read two pages side-by-side in landscape? I've found I prefer using Mobile Sheets on my Samsung tablet in portrait orientation and scroll mode. Easier to see and deal with repeats, DSs and Codas.
 

Registered
Keilwerth saxes (S/A/T), Selmer clarinets (S/B), Altus Azumi flute
Joined
1,942 Posts
I finally went to a Surface Pro [...] My problem is that the pages are too small. I most often play from a stand front (so, arm's length from my face). Kind of dicey when the charts are 1930's vintage and really small. The other thing is that when you stand up for a solo, the tablet is pretty tiny, and reading changes is impossible on a couple of the charts. Definitely would like something the size of a sheet of paper (11" tall screen).
Are you trying to use it in portrait mode or attempting to read two pages side-by-side in landscape? I've found I prefer using Mobile Sheets on my Samsung tablet in portrait orientation and scroll mode. Easier to see and deal with repeats, DSs and Codas.
@kentd, I don't understand why you responded by quoiting my post (I didn't say anything about screen size), but I think I have a similar question to @KeithL's above: doesn't the Surface Pro come with a 12.3 inch screen?
 

Registered
Joined
2,372 Posts
@kentd, I don't understand why you responded by quoiting my post (I didn't say anything about screen size), but I think I have a similar question to @KeithL's above: doesn't the Surface Pro come with a 12.3 inch screen?
Screens are measured diagonally. You need a 14" diagonal for an 11" tall letter size screen. That's precisely why I got a 14" tablet instead of a Surface.
 

Registered
Keilwerth saxes (S/A/T), Selmer clarinets (S/B), Altus Azumi flute
Joined
1,942 Posts
Screens are measured diagonally. You need a 14" diagonal for an 11" tall letter size screen. That's precisely why I got a 14" tablet instead of a Surface.
Yes, I knew this; brainfart on my end. I thought he meant that he wanted an 11" diagonal screen (rather than an 11" tall screen).
 

Registered
Joined
2,372 Posts
I finally went to a Surface Pro, and Mobile Sheets. I also got a page-turner, which was almost no installation at all. Took maybe 30 seconds. Definitely works well for Windows. My problem is that the pages are too small. I most often play from a stand front (so, arm's length from my face). Kind of dicey when the charts are 1930's vintage and really small. The other thing is that when you stand up for a solo, the tablet is pretty tiny, and reading changes is impossible on a couple of the charts. Definitely would like something the size of a sheet of paper (11" tall screen). I'm a bit older than you are, and sometimes my eyes don't adjust as quickly as I'd like. Trombones and trumpets stand closer to the music, so less of a problem for brass than for reeds.
I just posted above that I have a 14" screen which gives me actual letter size. Makes a big difference.

But all is not lost. Pull out your pen and write in the changes in big bold letters on the charts that are hard to read. I annotate the heck out of all my charts in Mobile Sheets. I even write the changes in several keys in different colors all on the same chart, so I can use the same chart for alto, tenor and flute. I highlight D.S. and Coda, and stuff like that in yellow, make notes about who solos where, make the A, B, and C sections really obvious, etc. I can really make a lot more marks than I would ever dare on a paper chart. I love the annotation functionality.
 
81 - 94 of 94 Posts
Top