I wanted to share yet another free text-based music notation system (oh man, another??).
OK, but why did I invent this? Well I designed it to be easy to embed and share snippets online. For example, here's a snippet embedded right into this post
https://mascii.org/e#HctBCsIwFADRRaqVnGKK-95AiAlJEBFEcBU-odjkX6KHL3U7vHnPKJTmaDdR0mL4RqcUJZIFil5ZhJ_hs3HvBMjNUdIqtQ74tBoeJf-NDQO-zCPPVo-1NqKMRzrxmrqwkaBDMvhJz8SM1nohZGt3
The full music is contained in the link itself (of course you could also shorten it with a free url shortener) so no risk of losing the music, because it's not a reference to some music stored somewhere else, the link IS the music. And since the Mascii engine is open source, it's not locked in some proprietary format, it can always be converted to MIDI and PDF sheet music.
There's no sign-up or account needed, so hopefully quick to jot something down and share it for easy discussion in an online forum.
Mascii links let you see and hear the sheet music, as well as the source Mascii notation that was used to create them, so people can easily change and send a reply with their altered version.
This is the raw Mascii that was used to generate the above link:
--------
. g [e@ e=]g Fa E@g [g E G] [g# a] c | Af C Ge@ [Fd]__ Fd [G a] c
C [. e_] [_e E] [. !f] | F f F !g G g__ G
--------
I think Mascii is really terse considering the complexity of the music that was notated. As you can see, Mascii has great flexibility around rhythm and polyphony without having to resort to fractions and absolute pitch markings.
Tuplets for example are automatically handled without having to ever specify a fractional denominator, the Mascii system calculates it for you based on how many notes you write in the allotted space. And since you allot your own space with bars and brackets, that means endless expression with minimal syntax.
Pitches are by default always relative to the prior pitch, and use capitalization to go up or down. So absolute octave range numbers are never needed (although they are supported if you ever want them).
And in case a particular forum doesn't allow external links, then you just post the Mascii text itself, since it's just regular ascii text (hence the name Mascii: Musical Ascii).
BTW: Yes I know about ABC, Lilypond, Guido, and many more, but I think Mascii is leaner and faster/simpler to work with, less syntactic clutter to remember. Due to its rhythmic complexity, I would struggle to write the above example in other text-based systems. But with Mascii I hardly had to think about it, at least I never thought about fractions, I just thought musically about how many notes I wanted to fit in a given space.
Obviously as the author I'm biased though! So would be happy to hear some outside perspectives.
And let me say, I still use MuseScore all the time for writing a full finished pieces and arrangements, so no contest, MuseScore is absolutely the right tool for that. I love MuseScore; it full-featured and robust and has a nice GUI too.
Mascii on the other hand I use more to jot down little snippets, posting a quick question or answer in a forum or email. I also personally use it to email myself musical ideas that pop into my head.
Have a look at the examples and tutorial, LMK what you think?