> Don't forget reading. The notation has to be readable on the fly by people who are capable of doing it. Proving this to be possible for a given notation syste

> Don't forget reading. The notation has to be readable on the fly by people who are capable of doing it. Proving this to be possible for a given notation system is a massive undertaking. Well, that's the goal: to make learning to read more approachable. The main difficulty is getting the user to practice reading your new system. > I'm in this boat myself right now. I'm a working double bassist. As a lockdown project, I decided to get back into playing cello, after a 35+ year hiatus. I'm also trying to get up to speed on sight reading treble clef. I can tell that it will take me a crazy amount of effort on the cello to reach the level of the bands that I play bass in. You have just presented one of the main ways that a clef-less notation system would be easier in the long run. Clefs are a workaround for putting the average note of an instrument closer to center of the staff, so there aren't as many occurrences of ledger lines, which themselves are a workaround. How many times have you heard a conductor fail to correctly convert notes written in C on his score to what is written in C=Bb on a trumpet's part? Any number higher than zero represents a huge room for improvement. > The good stuff isn't in the computer. ;-) Only about the past couple decades of literature has been digitized. Of that, vanishingly little is publicly available due to heavy handed copyright restrictions for sheet music. Some of the really good stuff was never even published, but hastily photocopied and shared. That's the sad truth of it. Copyright is one of the main things holding us back.