Sf2 versus sf3

• Dec 17, 2016 - 10:43

A few questions about fonts:

1. What's the difference between sf2 and sf3 soundfonts?
2. Why are there two formats?
3. What are the advantages/disadvantages of both?
4. What's the default font in MS 2.0.3?
5. Any other relevant info?


In sf3 the samples are compressed, resulting in much smaller files, so a much bigger (some 140MB before compression, some 12MB after) and better soundfont could be made part of MuseScore. See https://musescore.org/en/handbook/soundfont.
Sf3 is an invention of Werner Schweer and AFAIK only available for/in MuseScore, whole sf2 is more commeon and in use by other programs too.

Jojo has answered most of your queries I think.

If not let me know.

The default soundfont for MuseScore 2.0.3 is FluidR3Mono_GM version 2.305.

What other things might be relevant??

In reply to by Roger v.d Velde

There is no problem att all getting the MuseScore's Synthesizer to load (real!) SF2 files. Not here at least, MuseScore 2.0.3 on Windows 7. Just placing the sf2 soundfone in the directory specified in preferences, then opening the Synthesizer and hitting the add button and it shows as an available choice and can get added.
Changing the extension can even be dangarous, as it won't change the file's format, but may change how it gets loaded, and that could fail pretty miserably when the file is a different format than expected

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

Try and calm down. I'm not using Windows I'm on Debian. When I put the sf2 files in the 'sound' folder within usr/share (which is where it goes) there is no recognition. I don't know why this is, but it's also not something I can put the time into to solving either.

Renaming the file, which is neither dangerous nor a failure, merely makes it usable, though as Marc already stated below, it does not confer the advantage of high compression.

edit - I should add that I just solved my sf2 loading problem!

In reply to by Roger v.d Velde

No reason to calm down, I'm not upset :-)
Renaming a file so it predends to be a different format that it really is is dangarous, it just seems top work in your case, but that's more the except than the rule. Dangarous in the sense that the application opening the file might Crash on it, as it is expacting a different format
For Debian it is not different than for Window or Mac, just put the soundfont, as is, into the directory that your prefecences are configureg to look at, check https://musescore.org/en/handbook/soundfont#install, which caims that for Linux the default is ~/Documents/MuseScore2/Soundfonts for the user and /usr/share/sounds/sf2 for the system, all users.

In reply to by Roger v.d Velde

Not to worry, we're all calm, just trying to help you debug your problem and also to avoid confusing other users. Glad you figured it out, though!

For the record, usr/share (or equivalent system folder for other OS's) is *not* the place you should be installing soundfonts into. They should be going into your *own* soundfonts folder - the default being right next to your Scores folder under your home or documents folder, as shown in Edit / Preferences. But while it is not a good idea for various reasons (having to do with install, uninstall, and update, as well as general system security issues), it *does* work to put the file in the system folder. Also, depending on how your particular filesystem handles caching etc, you might need to reload the dialog, or maybe even close and reopen MuseScore, before the file is seen.

In reply to by Roger v.d Velde

The default soundfont goes there, yes. But any soundfonts *you* download should go ton *your* soundfont folder. Same story for templates, styles, and plugins. MuseScore provides some that it installs into its own folders, but you should never mess with those. Your own files should always go onto your own folders, letting MuseScore manage it's own folders. This is true for pretty much all applications on pretty much all operating systems (no doubt with a few exceptions here or there).

In reply to by Roger v.d Velde

Most likely there was something else going on - like you had the file in the wrong folder as well, or there was a typo or hidden character in the filename preventing it from being recognized. most likely you could change it back to sf3.

Anyhow, the point of sf3 is to save space; merely changing the name won't do that. So renaming obviously doesn't help with the actual purpose of sf3.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.