It's different than simply releasing the full, finished recording. It's much more like releasing the source code, if you want to make such analogies. You can load all 11 tracks into open source programs like Audacity and mix and master them yourself. One application of this would be to make a surround sound version with 5 channels.

yes, isn't it glorious?

Thanks for correcting the oversight!

I noticed that too - and even wrote to feedback@slashdot.org about it. Seems better now!

Instruments have developed since Bach's time. It's nice to play on period instruments, but it's also nice to play on modern instruments. The equivalent of the Bösendorfer 280 on which this recording was made never existed in Bach's lifetime. Would he have liked it? Who knows, but I like it!

The license is included in the download, and it is CC0 - public domain. Use it as you please.

Building a web service that takes a MuseScore or MusicXML score, converts it, returns the braille score is a step in making music more accessible. Not every blind person can be expected to download Java libraries and apply them to XML files. Plus, out of the two libraries that look promising (Freedots and music21), Freedots is unmaintained and unlikely to be extended. The other library is less familiar to the MuseScore developers, so part of the cost estimate includes maintenance and feature development of these libraries. Plus, we want to test this stuff, which, as sighted people who don't read braille, is a process that involves a lot of time and back-and-forth with blind musicians. So, in short, it will take software engineering and time. Ergo, money.

Are you talking about Musescore.com, or just ranting?

A lot of classical music is exceptionally complicated. Bach's fugues have up to five voices all going simultaneously. Plus, there are very important markings in scores, like dynamics, tempo markings, articulations, and performance instructions, all of which are impossible to divine accurately from listening to recordings. Worst of all, if you learn from a recording, you're not only learning the notes, you're learning that performer's interpretation, and you'll never be able to separate your understanding of the music from the recording you learned from. Thus you've no chance at making an original interpretation.

We're not "irresponsible and at times illiterate keyboard players". I have 3 higher degrees in music, and I'm just the one overseeing the project. Furthermore, nobody said we're archiving music in MIDI. The "responsible" organizations that will archive these works include IMSLP, Musopen, Wikimedia Commons, Archive.org, and Freemusicarchive. I agree with your analysis of the twilight of the publishing gods. PS we're not using MIDI from a keyboard. Please look at the score of the Goldberg Variations that we made: http://static.musescore.com/48072/42e392b49d/score.pdf

Yes - and the score that we're going to make goes to 11 in comparison. Because it's digital, meaning "source code", not just a printed PDF. Check this out - it's important for the understanding of what we're doing: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D7zHey9x8Xuc

Thank you for explaining that.