Lilycollider or superfomus?

anyone still using these?

advice on getting one or both to work with 3.10?

thanks in advance

I have just started using superfomus recently (with 3.10/3.11).

I’m on macOS and the issues I encountered were mostly with handling of paths (and installing fomus itself). Here’s some notes:

  • you need to install fomus - the installer fails but I was able to install by hand, I believe

  • you need to make sure that fomus executable is in the PATH

"which fomus".unixCmd if this returns non-0, that means that SC can’t find fomus. Add its path (where you installed it) to the PATH env variable, in my case: "PATH".setenv("PATH".getenv ++ ":/usr/local/bin") and re-run "which fomus".unixCmd, which should now return a path to the fomus executable

  • I believe that the files you are working on can’t have spaces in the whole path, so no spaces in folder names either (I worked around that by adding quotes in the class file, but I haven’t made a pull request to the quark repo yet)
  • finally, superfomus still doesn’t seem to handle some events well and if it fails it’s not clear what’s wrong

I hope this helps!
Marcin

I recently went through a research spike on SuperCollider + FOMUS/Lily for a project. Let me see what I can remember…

  • I ended up settling on this Lilypond quark: https://github.com/n-armstrong/lilypond for score generation. I was using this because there were a few notational things that SuperFOMUS wasn’t doing very well, and this one seemed more powerful. I don’t know notation really at all, so take that with a grain of salt :slight_smile:
  • I ran into pretty serious bugs between SuperFomus and the FOMUS implenentations I was using - scores with certain kinds of elements in them caused FOMUS to crash. This also pushed me in the direction of the above quark.
  • IIRC Fomus isn’t very stable with respect to it’s syntax, and I recall finding some things where SuperFOMUS output syntax that my build of FOMUS didn’t understand.
  • I don’t remember significant problems with running them in current version of SC. I have a few local changes to the lilypond library, but these were bug fixes / score generation issues - I’m happy to share them if you run into trouble.
  • I produced some example scores via:
    [a] an ingested MIDI score,
    [b] modified by some Pattern stuff,
    [c] output using either SuperFOMUS or the LIlypond quark.
    These were a little dumbed down, e.g. no tempo changes, everything rounded to a 1/4 note, etc. I showed them to a person that was working with us on the scoring part of this project (see above, I don’t know music theory / notation well at all…), and he said they were barely comprehensible and definitely wouldn’t work for the production setup (really professional ensemble, only 1-2 rehearsals kinda thing) :). So, I guess be aware that if you’re working with complex material, you might end up doing a LOT of hand tweaking of the output.

I have to agree that FOMUS breaks easily and I haven’t investigated further number of issues I have encountered (handling rests etc).
Fomus was my choice since I needed musicXML output and AFAIK LilyPond does not provide that…

And yes, absolutely, any score generation still needs manual cleanup, I don’t think there’s really a way around it (especially for semi-complex and certainly for all complex notation tasks).

m

Thank You both. Will write with any problems. Doing something quite simple actually.