Foldable e-ink screens : Yay or Nay ?

[Quoth]

You'd maybe want 2 x 13.3", though 2 x 10.3" would work with good eyesight/ suitable glasses.
Could even be hacked if a BT or other page turn button drives both and a "hinge" of Duck Tape joins the pair.
Certainly doesn't need the dogyness of a folding 20"+ screen, nor even a hinge. A suitable cover that folds and added software so that the two ereaders are both turning page at the same time and turn two pages.

I'm sure it could be done today. The foot-pedal is easy, but having it wired rather than BT is harder.

[Renate]

Originally Posted by Quoth

I'm sure it could be done today. The foot-pedal is easy, but having it wired rather than BT is harder.

Actually, wired USB would be easier, a piece of cake.
Most (all?) stock Bluetooth firmware is designed to only connect to one thing at a time.
You'd have to do a bunch of work to have some Bluetooth hardware to connect to two things at a time.
Obviously two separate Bluetooth modules working in synchrony would be simple enough.
The same goes for a foot pedal controlling two USB peripherals.

But operationally, this leaves a lot to desire.
If you have the same music loaded on both devices and you don't screw up, yeah, it will work fine.
If you forget what you're doing and turn the page by hand on one monitor you'll get out of sync and lose your mind.

No, the best way is to use a small computer with two video outputs and two (presumably Eink) displays.
That way you always have just one music file and the coordination of the two displays is controlled.

If they were not Eink displays but IPS/LCD/OLED, you might even have the pages "slide" over.
It's not easy to say how well that would work until you try it.
It might make it less confusing than having everything change at once or it might just be annoying.
OTOH, if you were using a non-Eink display, just put in a single large display.

A Raspberry Pi 4 has two HDMI outputs and costs less than $100.
That's chump change compared to two large Eink displays.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Is a 13.3" screen large enough for sheets of music?

Standard sheet music pages (for piano at least) are just a shade under 9" x 12". That would require a 15" diagonal monitor. A 13.3" screen would display 7.8" x 10.8". That's significantly smaller when you're talking about music. And with piano you don't typically "read" the music, allowing your brain time to focus everything, except during early learning. You quickly glance at it, only for fractional seconds sometimes. So larger is better, to a point. If it's so large, or so spread out side-to-side that you have to move your head, then that is counter productive. For me, three sheets side-by-side is about the limit of head movement that I want. I can do four, but I don't like it much.

A roll-up (or foldable) lightweight eInk display screen about 27" x 12" that connects to its remote "brains" with a thin cable would be ideal. Since there wouldn't be much call for such a thing, it's definitely not a "general purpose" item - therefore no economy of scale, it would probably cost a fortune.

Performing musicians (pianists at least) memorize their music that they are currently performing. You perform much better that way. But keeping a large repertoire of difficult pieces memorized over time is impossible. So a display device would be handy, if you hate sheet music page turning like I do.

[Renate]

I keep my guitar chord/vocals on all my devices.
I have over 1000 "stage-ready" songs that vary in memorization from "I could play this in my sleep" to "I need to know the next chord".
Obviously chord/vocal sheets are different than sheet music.

I view them in landscape format and scroll them by a few different foot pedals.
I find the sudden jump in Eink a bit disorienting but better than using smooth scroll.
I usually use an LCD-ish device with continuous scrolling.
Most of the songs could fit on one page of a 8 or 10" device, but I prefer to keep the device down to a souffleur size.

[DuskyRose]

Originally Posted by JBaby

No thank you. It’s not for me. Besides I can only read one page at a time.

Same here. No real interest.

These folding screens just seem to me to add something not really needed, that's just gonna break on me.

I guess I'd rather that than the color screens, though. I just can't seem to warm up to the idea of color eink.

[TeaBot]

Interesting, so it's all Nays so far.

Really good resons for it too, it's true that such a device would be problematic in particles heavy environnment. (e.g. above beach)

I agree With DuskyRose, i cannot be interested in color e ink, B&W is the pinnacle for me.


In the end, the ereaders available right now are pretty damn great in the design, single page is much simpler.

[Quoth]

Colour static pages needs a different technology to mono eInk, which only just manages black, white and 14 greys and can only use front lighting. I thought Mirasol might be it, but apparently not.

[Barty]

I just want better contrast

[Spinningwoman]

If they were developed enough to be sure of long life and reliability, I don’t see what could be bad about being able to fold my e-reader in half. It would be ‘self covering’ and fit in a pocket half the width. What’s not to like?

[John F]

Originally Posted by Spinningwoman

If they were developed enough to be sure of long life and reliability, I don’t see what could be bad about being able to fold my e-reader in half. It would be ‘self covering’ and fit in a pocket half the width. What’s not to like?

I do agree, although it may be twice as thick when folded.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Spinningwoman

If they were developed enough to be sure of long life and reliability, I don’t see what could be bad about being able to fold my e-reader in half. It would be ‘self covering’ and fit in a pocket half the width. What’s not to like?

One of the issues I have with a folding eInk device is that when I look at the Samsung folding devices, the screen does not lie flat when unfolded. I found this very annoying when in the store and suspect that it would not improve with use.

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by John F

I do agree, although it may be twice as thick when folded.

A cover makes a conventional reader about twice as thick.

Originally Posted by DNSB

One of the issues I have with a folding eInk device is that when I look at the Samsung folding devices, the screen does not lie flat when unfolded. I found this very annoying when in the store and suspect that it would not improve with use.

Bummer, but this could be somewhat mitigated with the fold in the other dimension and reading in a dual page mode.

I'm having trouble seeing the attraction of paying extra for an elongated device that folds about the long axis and has an ugly crease that mars the appearance no matter what the orientation is.

[John F]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

A cover makes a conventional reader about twice as thick.

...

Ok, so about twice as thick without a cover, and about four times as thick with a cover.

[Dazrin]

Originally Posted by DNSB

One of the issues I have with a folding eInk device is that when I look at the Samsung folding devices, the screen does not lie flat when unfolded. I found this very annoying when in the store and suspect that it would not improve with use.

I wonder if it would be as bad with a matte e-ink screen? I have read MANY, MANY books where the pages weren't completely flat and unless it was extreme it never bothered me.

The main example I can think of is the middle portions of a thick book laid "flat" when the center margin is too small.

Still not a feature I find myself needing. I just don't think the mild wave in the middle of the screen would phase me after the first couple of lines.

[theducks]

The sign says DO NOT FOLD spindle or mutilate.
That says it all