-Foreword (optional)\r
-\r
-OBS! [...] = Hjälp till om ni kan och lägg in text\r
-\r
-1. Introduction\r
-\r
-The purpose of our project was to design and construct a composer's tool for the MIDI interface. The program was to be used for composing and sequencing MIDI songs from scratch, as well as for playback and visualisation of existing MIDI files. We chose this project for two reasons. Firstly, none of us had previous experience of working with music in the Java language, so the task of developing an application using an API with which we had no previous experience was challenging. Secondly, we are all very interested in music. One of the developers is also an experienced MIDI composer.\r
+Foreword (optional)
+
+OBS! [...] = Hjälp till om ni kan och lägg in text
+
+1. Introduction
+
+The purpose of our project was to design and construct a composer's tool for the MIDI interface. The program was to be used for composing and sequencing MIDI songs from scratch, as well as for playback and visualisation of existing MIDI files. We chose this project for two reasons. Firstly, none of us had previous experience of working with music in the Java language, so the task of developing an application using an API with which we had no previous experience was challenging. Secondly, we are all very interested in music. One of the developers is also an experienced MIDI composer.
The MIDI application we were going to develop was at an early stage given the name Moosique - a name obviously derived from the word music, but with a touch of moose.
-\r
-2. Analysis\r
------------------------------\r
-2.1 The Java MIDI Package\r
-Our first step was to look at the Java MIDI package (javax.sound.midi), and to try to find out what limitations the package had. As previously stated, none of us was familiar with the package and we all wanted to get an overview before we started working on the design document. And it didn't take long to realize that the functionality and structure of our application were largely dictated by the possibilities provided by the MIDI package. We also looked at software that supported MIDI to get an idea of which features our application might have.\r
------------------------------\r
-2.2 Design Document \r
-One of the first design decisions that was made was to divide the program into two major parts. The main part, the classes providing the actual features of the program, included four functional classes. The executable class, the only one containing a main method, was given the same name as the program - Moosique.\r
-\r
-In a hierarchy below the Moosique class, we placed three classes that represented the different parts of a MIDI file: \r
+
+2. Analysis
+-----------------------------
+2.1 The Java MIDI Package
+Our first step was to look at the Java MIDI package (javax.sound.midi), and to try to find out what limitations the package had. As previously stated, none of us was familiar with the package and we all wanted to get an overview before we started working on the design document. And it didn't take long to realize that the functionality and structure of our application were largely dictated by the possibilities provided by the MIDI package. We also looked at software that supported MIDI to get an idea of which features our application might have.
+-----------------------------
+2.2 Design Document
+One of the first design decisions that was made was to divide the program into two major parts. The main part, the classes providing the actual features of the program, included four functional classes. The executable class, the only one containing a main method, was given the same name as the program - Moosique.
+
+In a hierarchy below the Moosique class, we placed three classes that represented the different parts of a MIDI file:
x MooSequence The functional representation of a MIDI sequence. Was to extend Java's Sequence class.
x MooTrack The functional representation of a MIDI track. Was to extend Java's Track class.
x MooNote The functional representation of a MIDI note. Was to encompass the two MIDI events that constitute a note: NoteOn and NoteOff.
-The second part of the program was the graphical user interface, including all the graphical classes. The main class of the interface was named MooGUI. Since we had decided to use Swing in building the interface, this class was naturally to extend JFrame. Here, all other GUI components were to be created. Most of these components - maintaining different kinds of data, having listeners and requiring different methods for update their content - were to be quite complex, and were therefore given their own classes. Among these are graphical classes that construct the menu, the toolbar and the view of the MIDI tracks. All these classes [...]. \r
-\r
-Apart from the strictly graphical classes we decided to make a graphical representation of the functional classes, this to get an better overview of our work [...]. MooView (a graphical representation of MooSequence), MooTrackView and MooTrackTitle (MooTrack), and MooNoteElement (MooNote). Supporting these components, some other graphical classes were needed: MooViewCounter, representing a ruler that visualises the time signature of the MIDI file; MooTrackTitle, handling the properties of a track; and MooNoteElement, supplying a way of editing the properties of a note.\r
-\r
-We put the application's design document together very quickly, perhaps a bit too quickly. We were not entirely certain of how the Java MIDI package worked. As our work with the project progressed, we were forced to reevaluate some of these design decisions and change the system design (see section [Major Decissions]). On the other hand, our interface design has barely needed any changes.\r
-------------------------------\r
-2.3 Time Schedule\r
+The second part of the program was the graphical user interface, including all the graphical classes. The main class of the interface was named MooGUI. Since we had decided to use Swing in building the interface, this class was naturally to extend JFrame. Here, all other GUI components were to be created. Most of these components - maintaining different kinds of data, having listeners and requiring different methods for update their content - were to be quite complex, and were therefore given their own classes. Among these are graphical classes that construct the menu, the toolbar and the view of the MIDI tracks. All these classes [...].
+
+Apart from the strictly graphical classes we decided to make a graphical representation of the functional classes, this to get an better overview of our work [...]. MooView (a graphical representation of MooSequence), MooTrackView and MooTrackTitle (MooTrack), and MooNoteElement (MooNote). Supporting these components, some other graphical classes were needed: MooViewCounter, representing a ruler that visualises the time signature of the MIDI file; MooTrackTitle, handling the properties of a track; and MooNoteElement, supplying a way of editing the properties of a note.
+
+We put the application's design document together very quickly, perhaps a bit too quickly. We were not entirely certain of how the Java MIDI package worked. As our work with the project progressed, we were forced to reevaluate some of these design decisions and change the system design (see section [Major Decissions]). On the other hand, our interface design has barely needed any changes.
+------------------------------
+2.3 Time Schedule
Before we started implementing the classes, we made a time schedule for each class and divided the classes between us. Later on, we realized that for some classes this time schedule was overly optimistic. As a consequence of these misconceptions, some of the classes were not implemented until the very last stages of the project.
-The schedule that was made initially reflected the time required to implement the functionality of which we then knew. However, as time went on, the complexity of building this type of application became apparent and all our time estimates were by far exceeded. Also, many minor details were changed or for other reasons reimplemented, which of course took a lot of time.\r
-------------------------------\r
-2.4 Implemention\r
+The schedule that was made initially reflected the time required to implement the functionality of which we then knew. However, as time went on, the complexity of building this type of application became apparent and all our time estimates were by far exceeded. Also, many minor details were changed or for other reasons reimplemented, which of course took a lot of time.
+------------------------------
+2.4 Implemention
As we earlier realized, some implementation of the functional classes was required to see what features the graphical representations would need.
As an indication of which classes that were most difficult to implement, the version numbering of the Concurrent Versions System can be compared. In that respect, the most frequently altered classes were MooTrackView, Moosique and MooToolbar.
-[...]\r
+[...]
-Strictly graphical classes [...]\r
-------------------------------\r
-2.5 Testing\r
+Strictly graphical classes [...]
+------------------------------
+2.5 Testing
Är det nån som har testat nåt dårå?!?
-------------------------------\r
-2.6 Major Decisions\r
+------------------------------
+2.6 Major Decisions
2.6.1 Removing some of the functional classes
-Initially, the idea behind the functional classes - MooSequence, MooTrack and MooNote - was that they would extend the classes provided by the Java MIDI API and provide additional functionality for simplifying data manipulation. Soon however, it was discovered that this was not possible because of the methods related to these classes in the API. It was then decided that these classes would imitate the data hierarchy of the MIDI file, as the Java classes do, but provide their own implementations. When the edited sequence was to be sent to the synthesizer for playback, the data would be assembled and inserted into the Java classes. At a later stage, this design was also scrapped, the reason being that creating and maintaining such a data structure would require more code than using the somewhat limited methods of the API. MooSequence and MooTrack was therefore removed.\r
+Initially, the idea behind the functional classes - MooSequence, MooTrack and MooNote - was that they would extend the classes provided by the Java MIDI API and provide additional functionality for simplifying data manipulation. Soon however, it was discovered that this was not possible because of the methods related to these classes in the API. It was then decided that these classes would imitate the data hierarchy of the MIDI file, as the Java classes do, but provide their own implementations. When the edited sequence was to be sent to the synthesizer for playback, the data would be assembled and inserted into the Java classes. At a later stage, this design was also scrapped, the reason being that creating and maintaining such a data structure would require more code than using the somewhat limited methods of the API. MooSequence and MooTrack was therefore removed.
2.6.2 Adding and removing some of the GUI classes
-As this was the first time for all of us in designing an application before implementation, we were not able to predict exactly which classes would be required. During the course of the project, the following classes were added:
+As this was the first time for all of us in designing an application before implementation, we were not able to predict exactly which classes would be required. During the course of the project, the following classes were added:
x MooDialog A dialog generator class for all the application's dialogs.
x MooInstrumentList A combo box with the 128 General MIDI instruments.
x MooKeyboard A keyboard listener emulating a synthesizer.
One class, MooStatus, was also removed. It was reduced to a JLabel with a single method and was therefore merged inte the main GUI class.
-------------------------------\r
-2.7 Problems\r
+------------------------------
+2.7 Problems
Of all the problems we have come across in our work with Moosique, only one has persisted and is yet unresolved. As always when working with Java, we were aware that the visualisation performance leaves more to be desired. But we did not expect the extremely low performance the program displayed. During playback, a thread updates the view port of the main scroll pane (MooView). However, the update delay on low-end hardware exceeds one second. This obviously makes the GUI unresponsive, but also affects synthesizer playback performance. In order for the application to work properly, this delay must at the very least fall below the time it takes the synthesizer to play a sixteenth note. In a sequence of standard tempo, 120 beats per minute, this would mean 1/8 of a second.
-This problem is especially unfortunate since it was the only performance aspect that was mentioned in the requirements specification.
+This problem is especially unfortunate since it was the only performance aspect that was mentioned in the requirements specification.
[Ändra font och dra ner textstorlek, citat juh!]
"Delays during execution should be minimized, but are allowed when loading files. Playback should be smooth and delays should not change the beat or tempo."
-------------------------------\r
-3. Conclusions\r
-During the course of this project, the importance of extensive system design has become clear to us. With no prior experience in writing such documents or with working with the API in question, designing every aspect of our application would have been nearly impossible without at least approaching the implementation phase. In the future, our proficiency in this field will hopefully improve drastically, and we will be able to save a lot of implementation time by writing more complete design documentation.\r
-\r
+
+The major changes and that not enough work design of the graphical classes resulted in that the different graphical classes couldn't be implemented on their own. Instead changes often had to take place in many different classes when some feature was added. This made the implementation slow, especially in the beginning, since there where many different ideas on how things should be implemented. This got better through time though, when the basic foundation was implemented it got easier to add the rest of the features.
+------------------------------
+3. Conclusions
+During the course of this project, the importance of extensive system design has become clear to us. With no prior experience in writing such documents or with working with the API in question, designing every aspect of our application would have been nearly impossible without at least approaching the implementation phase. In the future, our proficiency in this field will hopefully improve drastically, and we will be able to save a lot of implementation time by writing more complete design documentation.
+
------------------------------
-4. References\r
+4. References
LITTERATURE
Sun Microsystems Inc. (2002) Java Sound API Programmer's Guide [http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.1/docs/guide/sound/programmer_guide/]
Horstmann, Cay (2003) Computing Concepts with Java Essentials (3rd Edition), New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
-Jia, Xiao-Ping\r
-Code Complete\r
+Jia, Xiao-Ping
+Code Complete
APPLICATIONS
-FastTracker II\r
-MidiSoft Recording Session\r
-CakeWalk 5\r
+FastTracker II
+MidiSoft Recording Session
+CakeWalk 5
Cubase SX 1.0
projects / moosique.git / commitdiff