On 9 Jul 2002, at 14:55, Robert Patterson wrote: > "David W. Fenton" wrote > > > But who would waste a metatool on pizzicato/arco, when you'd need 1 pizz > > and an arco for each of the string patches you had in use (assuming they > > aren't all orchestral)? > > Me, for one. As I said, I don't worry too much about the MIDI playback.
Well, if you don't worry about it, then it would just be irrelevant. That's not a reason for the feature to not be added to Finale, just because it's not something you personally would use. I have no use for tab notation, but heavens, I'm certainly happy that the new version of Finale has vastly improved its capabilities there, for the sake of those for whom it *is* important. > > There simply aren't enough numbers on the keyboard to make metatools work > > for this kind of thing. > > I seem to recall you are still on Fin98. In later Finale versions, every > alphanumeric key is available to be a metatool. WinFin97, actually. WinFin98 was the version that no one bought because of the copy protection. In any event, quadrupling the number of metatool keys isn't exactly user- friendly, since how in the world could one keep track of so many different shortcuts? And why is it assumed that the suggestion of having the Finale method somehow implies that those who like the idea of it would want metatools removed from Finale? Metatools in their place, type-in-score in its place. -- David W. Fenton | http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates | http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
