I wouldn't object to improvement in this area, either. Adding a more intuitive interface to the midi area of Finale would certainly make it far more attractive to many people who currently don't like the program.
And it wouldn't even require any reworking of the current capabilities! Just a reorganization which would make things like Andrew Stiller's most recent question unnecessary -- he would be able to open a mixer panel which would allow him to do as he wishes volume-wise. Johannes Gebauer wrote: > On 10.07.2002 16:05 Uhr, Robert Patterson wrote > > >>>The Sibelius method of understanding what arco means after a >>>pizzicato and automatically switching to the appropriate patch seems so >>>obviously superior >>> >>Until, as eventually with any automation, its assumptions are not what you >>want. >>I think those who are resistant to it are so because they feel that current >>Finale versions address the need adequately and there are many other things >>they'd rather see Coda working on. >> > > However, I would argue that the current MIDI implementation is actually > loosing valuable customers, who will then not buy the upgrades, perhaps even > switch to the competition, and thereby loose Coda the money they desperately > need to improve the program in other areas. > > Not that I am all that bothered about playback anyway, but for this reason I > definitely do not object to improvement in this area. > > Johannes > -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
