Re: [Finale] Trombone grace note interpretation
I'm wondering if there are any trombone players/experts out here. My question is, how would a trombonist generally interpret a grace note with a slur onto another note about a 2nd lower (in a 20th century score)?: a. Would they soft-tongue the second note? I certainly would, in a non-jazz context. b. Would they just tongue the first note as with any other brass or wind player? No, trombonists mostly have learned to soft-tongue to sound like a slur. There are other techniques (like cross-grain lip slurs) to imitate slurring, but most players simply soft-tongue. If this is the case, would it generally sound like a very quick and short glissando, or is there enough control even at grace note speed to make it sound like two distinct notes? It's all about the sound. They will try to make it sound like it should, regardless of how they choose to execute it. Usually trombonists will only resort to the gliss when it is specifically asked for. c. Is it just not usual or practical for grace notes to be found in 20th cent. trombone parts? I see 'em all the time. Half-steps are more common, and certainly easier to execute, than whole steps, but go for it anyway! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] FinMac 2004b sys 9 -- horrible
At 2:15 PM -0700 4/20/04, Philip Aker wrote: I think it best if the OS 9 version was dropped. In fact, it might have been cheaper for Coda to buy the 2 users still running it new G5s rather than pay the engineers for the several months of effort put into it. Philip Aker Hmm, one would be me. I wouldn't complain! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] More about blank notation
The point may be moot, since the 2004 disks for OS9 have allegedly begun shipping...but here's the issue anyway: I frequently want to put chord symbols (indicating harmony changes) over held notes--e.g., a whole note is held, but on beat 3 a suspension resolves (or, heck, we just go from one chord to another). There are several ways to accomplish this, of course, and perhaps the clearest one would be to notate the whole note as two tied half-notes. Clearest, but it looks non-standard. Another is to put dummy notes or rests, as many as needed per bar, in an otherwise unused layer (e.g., layer 4), and put the chord symbols there, then use the Staff Style Blank Notation (Layer 4) to hide the dummy notes. I like this solution and use it a lot. But... When I do that, in measures where the vocal part is resting--indicated by a default whole-rest, those rests disappear. Layer 1 ends up blank as well. Any idea why? Or how to make it stop? Regards, Clay Layer 1 might not be hidden, it may just be not showing the default rest. Put in a real whole rest and it will show. If not, there may be a problem with your Staff Style. Go into Define Staff Styles. In the dialogue box, select Blank Notation (Layer 4), then go down to ALternate Notation and click Select. Make sure show Item s attached to Notes, Show NOtes in Other Layers and Show Items Attached to Notes in Other Layers are all checked, then OK your way out. If it doesn't work now, then I'm stumped. christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Automatically Numbered Rehearsal Numbers
At 11:39 AM -0400 4/12/04, David W. Fenton wrote: On 11 Apr 2004 at 22:22, Giz Bowe wrote: In the measure number box, go to Style, where you can define a measuring number system. Add a region (so region 1 will number measures conventionally). Experiment with the base numbering system. How do I specify a numbering system that uses a formula for its numbering? Is it possible that there's a whole-number base that will render m. 65 as 9? I tried to find a way to do this before, and it seems that there is no way, other than manually. If you find a way, let us all know! In my situation, I had measures of 9/4 divided into a measure of 5 and a measure of 4, with the barline between the two rendered as a dotted barline. No problem copying these two bars for the duration of the piece, but to number the measures as if every 2 measures was only one measures was beyond me. I ended up abandoning measure numbers as being too much work, and only using rehearsal letters. Graphic-only dotted barlines were too much of a kludge when it came time to space, otherwise that might have been a solution for me. Obviously, this won't work at all for you. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Asymmetric time signatures
At 3:30 PM -0700 4/12/04, Brad Beyenhof wrote: On 4/12/04 3:06 PM, Owain Sutton wrote: My preference, from a performer's perspective, would be to have the whole thing in 20/8, and use dotted barlines to show the irregular subdivisions. I have two different suggestions: 1. Like Owain suggested, use 16/8 (not 20) throughout, and notate (3+3+3+3+2+2) on the first measure, and then notate the new division when it changes. Alternatively, you could do this with (d.+d.+d.+d.+d+d) where the d's are quarter notes, stem-up. 2. You could use the method Orff does in Carmina Burana: rather than put time signatures on every staff, just put 4/p.+2/p above the first bar, and then 2/p.+1/p+2/p.+1/p or whatever above the bar when it changes. Obviously, don't use fractions; just put one on top of the other (similarly, the p's here would be quarter notes, stem-down). -- Brad Beyenhof I would endorse that, as it makes things a lot more understandable immediately. The dotted barlines are more useful when the divisions DON'T change constantly. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Disappearing chord symbols
At 9:55 AM -0500 4/09/04, Joel Sears wrote: Hi fellow listers, Please help. On FinMac 2004, my chord symbols disappear when I place them over rhythmic slash notation. The OLM talks about the Alternate Notation window. I think this has worked for me in the past. Show Items Attached to Notes box is checked, but nothing is changed. Any Ideas? Are you in the Staff ToolStaff MenuDefine Staff Styles window, where you have selected at the top Rhythmic Notation (assuming you mean stemmed slashes. If you mean unstemmed slashes, this is Slash Notation) and then you have edited about halfway down Alternate Notation to find the box you are talking about? Or in 2004, I think that box has changed place, now directly to the right of the Alternate Notation item. If so, then this should have worked. If you have changed this in Staff Attributes instead (it's the same dialogue box), then your settings here get overridden by the Staff Style, which might be why you are having problems. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Disappearing chord symbols
At 11:49 AM -0500 4/09/04, Joel Sears wrote: Christopher, Yes, I do mean stemmed slashes and I'm pretty sure that I was in the Define Staff Styles window. I just compared it to my FinMac 2001 at work and the window seemed to be the same, only in 2k1 it works as advertised and in 2k4 it doesn't. Joel Sears I remember that the box is not exactly in the same place in 2004 as 2003. As I said, are you looking to the right of the Alternate Notation pop-up? This might be where you need to find it. If you need to, you could send me the file, and I could try it out. Make sure you send it only to me, and not to the list, though! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Conventional Metronome Mark
At 4:45 PM +0200 4/08/04, Giovanni Andreani wrote: Thank you David, and all who answered to my question. I didn't get to explain myself correctly. Her's how it stands: I've got, lets say, a 16 bars melody in 3/8 and a metronome value as: sixteenth = 120. I want to display the metronome's pulse over each of the 16 bars, like a series of beats overlaying the melody, shifted above the staff; I would have to display, in this case, six metronome symbols per each measure. The symbol of the M.M.'s beat has not to be related to the sixteenth value. I personally selected a cross symbol like the percussion map ride cymbal, but was asking myself if there where a sort of conventional symbol/s for displaying M.M.'s beats Thanks again Giovanni If you were to enter them all as measure or note expressions, you would have to position them all individually, which might take a bit of time if you have a lot of them. I would add a new staff, enter a measure of 3 eighth notes on the same pitch, change the note heads to the cross symbol using Mass EditUtilitesChangeNoteheads (type shift = on my keyboard), copy the measure as many times as needed, and change the Staff Attributes Items to Display uncheck everything. Also change in the same dialogue box uncheck Desplay Rests in Empty Measures, and change the Staff Staff to 0 line with full barline. This worked perfectly for me on FinMac2003. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Dash Line on Hook Length
Hello Is there any way I can have a dashed hook length (the one normally used after the 8va/8vb dashed line)? Finale seems to provide and edit only a non-dashed hook, while one can edit the dashed horizontal line, in the Smart Shape Options dialog box. Thank you Giovanni You are right that you can't make an adjustable dotted hook. But if you don't mind it not being adjustable, you can create a Custom Arrowhead in the shape of a dotted hook with the line tool in the Shape Designer by making a few smaller lines, and it will keep its shape perfectly. If you want to be able to drag it, I think you are out of luck, unless you assign two separate dotted lines and carefully position them on the page at 400% or 800% zoom for accuracy. If you need more information, write back. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale vs. Sibelius in this month's Keyboard Magazine
At 9:27 PM -0500 4/01/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: For those who actually have the issue -- what's the cover date? I looked in the Brooklyn Barnes and Noble today, and they have the April issue, which didn't have the Finale vs. Sibelius. Did I miss it already, or are BN an issue behind? - Darcy March 2004. They are an issue behind, apparently. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Time Signature question
At 10:42 AM -0800 4/01/04, Brad Beyenhof wrote: On 4/1/04 9:48 AM, Ken Parsons wrote: How do you enter two time signatures for a piece that oscillates back and forth between them - e.g. 3/4 6/8? I'd like to enter these in the first measure, and not have to put them in every time the grouping changes. Well, I don't think there's any automatic way to have the time signature change every bar. However, you can set the first time signature to use another time sig for display and display a composite signature of 3/4+6/8 (3 over 4 in the first set of boxes, and 6 over 8 in the second set). You'd have to make the *actual* signature of the bar 3/4, and change signatures every measure, but hide them with the Measure Tool. The easiest way to do this, of course, would be to set the signature to 3/4 for the whole section and change every other bar individually to 6/8. Then, highlight the whole section (minus the first measure) and use the Measure Tool to always hide the time signature. Wow, this would be slow! Do it your way for two bars, then highlight those two bars in Mass Edit, drag them over to bar 3 and drop it. When Finale asks you how many times to copy it, enter a big number. Done. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Help with scripting
At 3:06 PM +1000 4/01/04, Paul Copeland wrote: Hello. I hope someone will be kind enough to help me with scripting please. Thank you. I have about 30 midi files that I want to notate. I also have a file template that I want to use. Is it possible to 1. Load each midi file in to Finale. 2. Copy the contents of the new file. 3. Past the data into the template and save the template automatically 4. Ending up with 30 new files? I have read the manual and looked at the instructions, but am at a loss as what to do. Could someone please give me a few simple examples of the actual script needed to load a file (eg. file path etc). I can't help you with the scripting part, but I can tell you that you can cut out a step. Finale uses the settings in Maestro Font Default in the Component Files folder when importing MIDI files. Rename your default file to XMaestro Font Default or anything that is different so that you can name it back again when you are done. Change the name of your template file to Maestro Font Default and save it in the Component Files folder. If you are on PC, make sure you save it as a template (on Mac it doesn't seem to matter, but if you DO save it as a template, then you will automatically prompted for a new name when you save). Now your template file will be used for all settings when you import MIDI files in the usual way. Just hit Save after you have imported a file, and you will be prompted for a name. Not too many more steps than what you proposed for a script. I can't see using a script for this myself, as I tend to change quantization setting depending on the content of the MIDI file, and I also re-transcribe passages constantly. But your kilometrage may vary. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius survey
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 03:29:03 -0500 From: Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ha! Someone else up as late as I am. So what's YOUR excuse? 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius survey
This kind of NDA (non-disclosure agreement) is very common ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Another Music Spacing Issue
I ran into the same bug in FinMac 2003, and reported it, and apparently it is a problem with the way the feature was implemented, to be corrected in later versions (I haven't checked in 2004, as I rarely use OSX these days.) The way around it is to enter the passage with the dots and the second in different layers, one note each layer. Space it. Then turn off auto-space, enter the extra notes in the chord, and exit the bar without ever respacing it again. Christopher At 3:36 PM -0500 3/26/04, David W. Fenton wrote: Is my version of Finale set up wrong, or are there simply lots of things about music spacing that have gone wrong in the last couple of versions of Finale? First there was the blank notation affecting spacing, and now I see all sorts of problems with spacing between layers with seconds and dotted notes and accidentals. To see the problem: 1. in layer 1, enter a note. 2. in layer 2, enter a note a step away lower than the note in layer 1. 3. apply spacing metatool 4. Everything's fine! Repeat the process, but make it a dotted note, and everything spaces fine (the dots are, properly, aligned, even though the notes are, properly, offset). But an accidental into the mix on the lower note or on both notes, and everything is fine. Here's the problem: If layer 2 is a chord instead of a single note, the spacing is completely wrong -- the layer 1 note is spaced by itself and the layer 2 chord is spaced way out to the right, as though the two didn't occur in the same metric position. I'm working on piano music and this kind of thing is quite common, and it's causing me to do far more manual editing than I ever had to do in the past, and I'm having to move the notes, the accidentals *and* the dots. Can anyone confirm this? I'm using WinFin2K3. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] help with cross-staff percussion notation (v.2003)
At 8:52 PM -0500 3/24/04, Ed Klinger wrote: Christopher, Thanks very much for the reply. It's very effective, at least for notating. What I'm running into, though, is that the notes I want to hear aren't being played back- when I 'pull' the notes into their new staff, they are always 'dropped' in a specified note on the new staff, and the playback is unchanged (that is, the note sounds exactly as if I'd left it where it was, not where it is on its new staff). This is the same whether or not the two staves share a MIDI instrument. Can I do this? Or, do I need to use a separate playback file to hear correctly what I've described? Again, thanks.. -Ed K. Hmm, your question is a new one on me. Sounds like one for tech support. However, a separate playback file seems to be the way to go for a lot of problems, and it would certainly be effective. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale vs. Sibelius in this month's Keyboard Magazine
At 3:19 AM -0500 3/25/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: I should mention that I found out about this issue of Keyboard from composer (and Village Voice new music critic) Kyle Gann, who has some thoughts on his blog about Sibelius (his music notation software of choice) and about the influence of notation software on the composition process: http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic/archives20040301.shtml#72698 http://www.artsjournal.com/postclassic/archives20040301.shtml#72838 Just a couple of articles farther up there is an update, letting us know that Sib 3 can save files in Sib 2 format. There's an option I would have killed for in several versions of Finale! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Kyle Gann's Articles on Sibelius
At 3:04 PM -0500 3/25/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 25 Mar 2004, at 02:55 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: (replying to a message that he himself wrote! Ever get the feeling that you're just talking to yourself? 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale vs. Sibelius in this month's Keyboard Magazine
At 5:36 PM -0500 3/24/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: http://www.keyboardmag.com/ (sadly, the article is not available online) Anyone read this? - Darcy Yep! What did you think? As someone who has used both, you should be in a good position to critique the review. Some quotes: Sibelius is a model of interface design... (Finale's) infuriating design decision... (referring to not being able to edit the second page when two pages are shown side by side.) (Finale) is sometimes quicker... - if you learn how to use it. (Methinks he doth damn with faint praise!) Finale's biggest input edge:... you can insert notes as you can in a word processor, shifting the rest of your music to the right. (Really? That's all?) Advantage for newcomers: Sibelius. For non-newcomers, I'd sooner try to tell you how to take your coffee. Sibelius' omissions are what sometimes cause frustration. (he goes on to list lack of control over slur arcs, symbols not intelligent enough to avoid collisions, no drawing facility.) Finale has the edge on (file) compatibility. It might be me, but I was reading between the lines that he liked Sibelius better because he found it easier to learn, and was afraid to say it outright. Comments? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] help with cross-staff percussion notation (v.2003)
At 7:06 PM -0500 3/24/04, Ed Klinger wrote: Hello all. I am trying to notate a percussion duo where each player plays several instruments. Certain figures played 'across' two (or more) instruments would be best notated by cross-staff beaming, e.g. playing a two-handed figure with each hand on a different instrument. For something like this, it's- how do I notate across two separate staves but keep a 'common beam' for the two? For the life of me, I don't see a way to do this with Finale 2003's cross-staff beaming (Note Mover). Enter all the notes into one staff only, leaving the other staff blank. If you want both hands to hit a note on different instruments at the same time, enter both notes onto one stem. With the Note Mover tool selected, go the Note Mover menu and select Cross Staff. Click on the measure you want to edit. Handles appear near the note heads. Select the notes you want to move to the other staff, holding down the Shift key to select odd notes, or else dragging across them. Drag them to the other staff (make sure you release them in the staff). There may be rests in the dragged-to staff that you might want to hide, so do so by entering real whole rests and hiding them with the letter O key in Speedy Entry. All done! Except for rests (which sometimes need editing) this feature is pretty much foolproof. One of the fine things about Finale! The only thing I would want more is to be able to select more notes in OTHER measures at the same time, and drag them all at once, instead of doing it measure by measure. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Arrow fonts
Title: Re: [Finale] Arrow fonts Hi, Would anyone know of a font that would have vertical filled in arrows with a short stem on them? I am using win98 and Finale 2004. Any help would surely be appreciated. George Ports There are four arrows in the font that was installed with Word Perfect, called WP Math A. Unfortunately, they are not Postscript, which meant that I had to download them to my printer if I created a EPS file to embed in a text document. I haven't tried to create PDFs using them, but I imagine that the same problem would crop up. If I were to do it all over again, I would create the arrows as a shape _expression_. Also you can create custom lines in the Smart Shapes tool that end with arrowheads. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request: stack windows instead of tiling
At 12:19 AM -0800 3/17/04, Mark D Lew wrote: I too find it odd that someone never zooms larger than 100%. I usually do speedy entry at 100% in scroll view. Almost everything else I do at 200%, or sometimes 150%. mdl I thought I was odd before (or had an old monitor) but I see I'm not alone. I use 150% so often that I wish it was hardwired like 100%, 50%, 75%, etc. are now. One key zoom, yeah baby! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Feature request: stack windows instead of tiling
At 5:10 PM -0500 3/16/04, Phil Daley wrote: At 3/16/2004 01:57 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: I can't image what possible purpose there would be in maximizing a scroll view. Whole width, obviously, but maximized would have at least 50% of the screen blank below the scroll view. But so what? What's the problem here? What else do you need to see when you are working on a single Finale file? Lyrics from a website. The manual. A sequencer window when transcribing MIDI files. The text of a class handout when I am creating an example in Finale to insert into AppleWorks. My email program when I am checking an answer to a question that shows up on this list. Tons of things. Yet, I agree it would be nice to have Finale act the way I have come to expect other Mac programs to act. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Spacing with blank notation in Layer 1
At 7:51 PM -0500 3/16/04, David W. Fenton wrote: Why should blank notation be used in spacing? So that chord symbols attached to blank items can be taken into account for spacing. So that hidden items could add extra space without appearing, to make room for things that you need to add as graphics or text. But I agree that your situation seems curious. Why is it that it didn't used to be and now it is? It seems to me that you should be able to specify whether you want blank notation taken into account for spacing purposes by editing the Layer Optionsuncheck Affect Music Spacing. This assumes that you always use the same layer for hidden notation. Certain things changed in more recent versions, especially staff style definitions. But I have often had things operate differently in an older, imported file, and ended up copying all the music over to MY new template, where all my metatools and staff styles and chord symbols were available to me in the way that I am used to. This may help you. Or not. Another option, if you are only creating PDFs, then you can safely delete the hidden layers for printing purposes. This means two version of the same file: one for playback, one for printing, but it is at least a workaround. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Getting a barline at the start of ech line
On Tuesday, March 16, 2004, at 11:34 PM, Klaas de Jong wrote: The point is that for Finale there's only one barline: the one to the right. Only the first measure in a system has a 'left' barline also. I think this may be the cause of some confusion. Speaking of which, I've never understood the selection for Left barline in the Measure Attributes dialog. It never changes anything, so why is it even there? Or *does* it have some sort of function that I haven't ever cared to explore? You can set left barline to be a double barline, so that it shows up at the beginning of a system instead of the end of the previous one. Among other things. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Spacing with blank notation in Layer 1
At 2:17 PM -0500 3/17/04, David W. Fenton wrote: On 17 Mar 2004 at 9:35, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: At 7:51 PM -0500 3/16/04, David W. Fenton wrote: Why should blank notation be used in spacing? So that chord symbols attached to blank items can be taken into account for spacing. So that hidden items could add extra space without appearing, to make room for things that you need to add as graphics or text. . . Yes, but in defining a staff style, you get to choose whether or not those things are visible or not. If they are visible, yes, they should be used for spacing. If they aren't, they shouldn't be. My point was, sometimes you need to fool Finale into making room for something that isn't visible, for instance, I might want a bunch of extra space added at some point in the measure so that I could add a text box over it. The text box wouldn't be taken into account for spacing (they never are) so I need to force the space to appear in the measure without anything showing. Am I the only person who prepares files for playback in this fashion? I'm pretty sure I got this technique from recommendations made by members of this list. This sounds like a situation for TechSupport. They must have an idea about this, if they changed implementation of blank notation spacing. Or maybe it was a bug? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Double sharps, douible flats
At 7:22 AM -0500 3/08/04, Crystal Premo wrote: Am I correct in my assumption that the double sharps and flats which frequently appear when you transpose a piece are actually the *correct pitches*? However awkward they may be, and however appropriate it may be to simplify them through editing (as opposed to changing to an equivalent key), they are still technically correct. Am I right? Crystal Premo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Umm, yes, but there is lot more to it than that. Generally if you are changing some enharmonics, you should change the whole passage so that it appears to be in the correct key. For example, it is pretty common in modern music to go briefly to the key of the flat 7th. In G major, this would mean spelling everything in F for that passage. In Gb major, this would mean Fb major spellings, which would start to give you Bbb's so I might consider respelling the passage in E major. You would have to respell the ENTIRE passage, though, not just change the Bbb's to A's, otherwise it would give you wacky triads like Gb-A-Db instead of F#-A-C#, which get mighty hard to read quickly. And if it is Sondheim, well, he is already hard enough to read, so it is easy to make something pretty much unplayable through unconsidered enharmonic changes. I am reading between the lines here, and assuming that a client has given you grief about some of the spellings in a transposition? This is dangerous ground to tread upon, but I might venture that you should charge more for difficult pieces like most of Sondheim, and your regular rates for the Lloyd-Webber and Richard Rodgers works, which contain much fewer notational problems than Sondheim. If the client balks, point out that he won't like the results unless you go through and spend the extra time to make the spellings right. I remember an early transposition I did of The Ballad of Sweeney Todd and just the last eight or so measures gave me fits about which spellings to use. There was no excellent solution, just a series of bad ones, so like Captain Jack Aubry, I had to go with the lesser of two weevils. ;-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: F2003a won't print to acrobat
At 9:19 AM +0100 3/07/04, Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 07.03.2004 2:19 Uhr, Christopher BJ Smith wrote This is a routine I got from this list (I think it was Johannes Gebauer, thanks loads, man!) Not me, I don't have Acrobat... Johannes Dang. Well, whoever you were who gave me that help, thanks again! (And incidentally, for all the help you have given both to me and to others, thank you Johannes!) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] non-rhythmic pitch entry???
At 1:36 PM -0800 3/07/04, MDM wrote: Hi all. I want to create some examples for my jazz students, and I need to enter pitches into a measure without regard to rhythm. In other works, whole note, whole note, quarter note head, whole note, etc. The note heads would be graphic elements only. Is there a way to do this so that Finale does not try to interpret any rhythmic values to the note heads I place? A related question...is there an easy way to enter quarter note heads only (i.e. no stems), or must I go back after the fact and remove stems? Thanks in advance! Create a Staff Style, where under Items to Display you have unchecked Stems. When you enter the pitches, enter them all as quarter notes, so that they will all space evenly. If you need a whole note head rather than a half note head (small difference), enter everything as quarter notes anyway, and change the ones you need to with the Special Tool to whole note heads. This will save you from having to respace the measure manually, which I always find to be a pain. David Bailey's method will allow you to put noteheads literally anywhere, but you probably want them on the lines and spaces. My method will space them evenly automatically as well, which will save you time if you have a lot to do. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Punctuation and Word Extensions
At 9:06 AM +0100 3/06/04, Mario Aschauer wrote: Mark Wrote: I was assuming that Mario learned English as a second language, so I wondered if some outdated source was inadvertently teaching archaic plural forms which are no longer idiomatic. In fact, I did learn English as a second language. Instead of trying to be an odd individual who thinks himself clever for using the obsolete irregular form I simply used a German plural form in my English sentence without much thinking. If anyone's offended be this I deeply apologize and promise to try much harder next time. Hee hee! Most of the English-speaking listers are North American, and the thought that any of us would be offended by liberties with the English language after all the liberties already taken is pretty funny. Remember, words like thru, noize, phat, irregardless, and supersize as a verb are in common circulation in North America, so I wouldn't worry about commata. But I do promise to take care with any other language I speak, and I'm sure we all appreciate your polite apology, but I would like to assure you that it was unnecessary. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: F2003a won't print to acrobat
At 3:08 PM -0700 3/06/04, jef chippewa wrote: i haven't solved the problem yet, but have narrowed the scope down a bit. macfin2k3a printing to acrobat v.5, G4/400 OS 9.2.2/384 RAM, finale accorded 75M. jef, This is a routine I got from this list (I think it was Johannes Gebauer, thanks loads, man!) and it has never let me down since I started following it. The only difference between our setups is I use Acrobat Distiller 4.0, rather than 5, and my computer is a bit faster. I don't know whether you have been in the habit of creating PDFs before, and just got some new, buggy software, or whether this is your first time, so bear with me if I don't supply any info that is new to you. My problems were similar to yours, though I don't remember the exact error messages, and I also got LOTS of font substitution when I did succeed in creating a PDF, but all those problems disappeared once I started following this routine to the letter. Christopher Creating PDFs in Finale In the Chooser, select Adobe PS as the printer In Finale, select Postscript settings font inclusion All and Printer-Specific Settings resolution 1200 dpi. Print, but print to Destination: File. set Distiller to Press Optimised. It will remember this setting for next time. Drag the resulting .ps file from the print operation onto the Distiller icon or into the Distiller window. The PDF will be created in the same directory that the .ps file was dragged from. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Translation about Snare drum
That would be on the shell, to use the percussion-specific term. Christopher At 5:11 PM -0800 3/06/04, Ryan Beard wrote: Pierre, I think le ft literally means the barrel. So I take it to mean play on the side of the instrument. Ryan === Hi all, Do you know the right translation of sur le cercle ou sur le ft : on the rim or ??? Thanks in advance. Pierre. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what youíre looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] It's official...
At 10:39 PM -0500 3/01/04, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: ...as of this afternoon, so I can announce it. I'm very pleased to tell my Finale friends that I have received the annual commission from the Vermont Symphony Orchestra. The new work will be premiered on September 22, My birthday! and played ten times during the orchestra's statewide tour from September 22 to October 4. That's fantastic! A commission AND ten guaranteed performances! Congratulations! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Microtonal accidental size.
Title: Re: [Finale] Microtonal accidental size. At 3:37 PM +0100 2/29/04, Bettina Crimmins wrote: Does anyone know how to change the font size of eighth-tone accidentals? I have set up the score using non-standard key signature to allow 8 steps per whole-tone and allocated the symbols I wish to use. All works beautifully, except that the symbols are too small. I can't see an option to change font size when choosing the symbols and changes made in document options - fonts - accidentals don't seem to effect them either. Would be grateful for any other suggestions! Thanks, Bettina. You can adjust individual accidentals' size one at a time with the Special Tool's Accidental Mover. With the tool selected, double click on the accidental in question and enter a percentage in the resizing box. Maybe a macro program can speed this process up a bit. I know this is huge drag, but the only other option at this time is to edit the font so that the actual character is larger, which would screw up portability to other computers. I run into the same problem with parenthesized courtesy accidentals in the JazzFont (but not the regular font!) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Microtonal accidental size.
At 3:57 PM -0500 2/29/04, Aaron Sherber wrote: At 03:40 PM 2/29/2004, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: You can adjust individual accidentals' size one at a time with the Special Tool's Accidental Mover. This looks a little bit like a bug. You can select multiple accidentals within a measure by click-dragging or shift-clicking, and you can move them in tandem by dragging them, but it looks like you can't get the Accidental Settings dialog to apply to all of them at once. Aaron. I can confirm that apparent bug on my system as well, FinMac 2003, system 9.2. None of the changed settings apply to all selected accidentals; only the first one is changed. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Anti-spam white list nonsense.
At 9:03 AM +1100 2/29/04, Michael Edwards wrote: Well, would there be any future in asking Henry to do something about it? And maybe to bar posting from non-members? Most lists I'm on require you to be a member in order to post messages. However, Henry seems to want to leave things exactly as they are, although I haven't read that he ever actually said so. But he just didn't make the requested changes. Actually, there seems to be some sort of filtering going on. Whenever I post to the list from my school computer, I get a message saying that since my return address is not listed, my post will be held until it is determined that it is a valid message. It usually shows up on the list inside of the day. These anti-spam automatic replies seem to be coming from a legitimate member who isn't filtered, and I DO seem to remember seeing a post or two from this person, so he probably IS a registered lister. But, nothing for a few hours now, so it would seem that he (or Henry) fixed it. Phew. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: Horns and signatures
At 2:22 PM -0500 2/27/04, John Howell wrote: What about new shows? Are they finally getting away from hand copy and producing computer-engraved parts? Yes! Many are, and strangely, they have enabled in Finale that weird hold-over from hand-copying of only showing keys on the first system of each page. I don't know why. I see Finale copying in most of the Disney shows, and it looks very odd at times, with the union-approved 4 measures per system, whether for whole notes or sixteenth notes, and quite small (I'd guess 65% or 70%, which is smaller than I would use in a book read from three feet away.) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [OT] Re: [Finale] Just noticed Graphire manual online [plus rant]
At 12:07 PM -0500 2/27/04, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: Speaking of the Polansky, I need an 'approximate equals' sign in one of the music fonts (the curved equal sign) to add before dynamic markings. Anybody seen one? In Avant Garde font on my Mac under Opt-x I have that symbol. Hope that helps. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] [OT] Re: Horns and intonation
At 9:49 AM +0200 2/24/04, Mr. Liudas Motekaitis wrote: The narrow, cookie-cutter rim on a horn mouthpiece doesn't help with reliability, either. What would happen if you put a trumpet mouthpiece on a horn? Obviously it would be worse, but in what way, since you say the present horn mouthpiece doesn't help with reliability? Liudas It would sound real bad, and you couldn't have the same shank and backbore, since the lead pipe of a horn is so much smaller. A trumpet rim alone is a possibility. A mellophonium is kind of like that (though not exactly) and you lose the silky tone of the horn in the middle register, as well as the characteristic sound in the high and low registers. Players tell me that it is not as flexible, which makes sense, as thicker rims tend to inhibit agility. Kind of silly, but we love the horn, in spite of its flaws (or perhaps because of them!) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Hyphen under rest?
At 1:23 PM -0800 2/22/04, Mark D Lew wrote: Hyphens continuing under the rest is correct. I wouldn't call it rare. I've even seen it in pop music. mdl Rocky Horror Picture Show, opening number, lyric at one point is antici- bar or so rest pation! Very effective. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 1st and 2nd Endings -- Automatic Dots after the numbers,
At 12:40 PM +0100 2/15/04, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Thing is, as far as I can tell, none of this is a bug, it is by design. And it works more or less. The one thing I would really like to see changed with repeat brackets is a system similar to staff lists in Expressions, whereby I can define a repeat bracket to appear only in certain staves in the score, but in all parts. This currently requires manual adjustments on part extraction. Johannes I agree with you about that, but you wouldn't want the right and left halves of the bracket to automatically match? That is, you drag the right half up or down and the left half automatically moves with it? And the thing I have trouble with is the double handle on the right side of the left-hand bracket. I have to select BOTH handles before I drag up or down, otherwise I leave a hook. Then I have to match the right-hand bracket. Way more clicks and fussy drags than I need. The other things about vertical bracket placement never bothered me much - I changed them in my default file and now I never think about it. But I don't get Arkay's thing about periods after the digits. It is no bother to me to type a period after 1. or 2., and I often want text other than digits in my endings, without periods. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Measure number Plug in request
At 7:40 PM -0500 2/15/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: Actually, we just had this discussion with Bob Florence. Though I'm sure Robert's plugin makes this easier, I question the wisdom of having two sets of measure numbers for repeated sections in the first place. I know this is an old manuscript convention, but I don't see what advantage is gained by doing things this way. What's wrong with calling out Let's start in bar 5, but take the second ending? To me, that's a lot less confusing than having two different measure numbers which apply to a single bar. - Darcy It's probably so that the horn parts can be completely written out without a repeat with different material, while the rhythm parts can be edited to have a repeat, to save space and page turns. I don't go for that myself (all forms identical on all parts is my rule, and Finale makes that the default) but I can see how it might make the rhythm section's reading job easier. Christopher - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY On 15 Feb 2004, at 02:27 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Here's a question for plugin developers: Is it practical/possible to create a plug in which will renumber measures, taking into account first and second endings? In other words (a simple example), you have a 32 measure form in which the first 8 measures and measures 17 through 24 are identical; you could make measures 9 - 16, and 25 - 32, into first and second endings; then you could number the first region twice - 1 - 8, and 17 - 24 (being careful to end the first region at real measure 8, and the second set of numbers at 16), start a new number region at what looks to Finale like measure 17, start numbering there at 25, and all is logical. Of course, this requires a horizontal offset for the second set of numbers in the first region and a lot of counting of measures to do it successfully. Imagine a succession of choruses of Sweet Georgia Brown, ABAC - in which A sections in each chorus are identical. Plugin? Thanks, Chuck ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Phantom Word Extension
At 5:30 PM -0500 2/15/04, Marc Shepherd wrote: I'm using Finale 2004's automatic word extensions. The file I'm editing was created using an earlier release of Finale, but I've upgraded the file and saved it in F2004 format. The problem is that a phantom word extension is appearing--a word extensions not tied to any syllable. Even if I delete all words from the file, a phantom word extension still appears. Any idea what causes this, or how to make it go away? -- Marc Shepherd This might possibly be just a screen artifact - does it go away when you press Redraw (command D on a Mac, probably control D on a PC)? If it doesn't go away, it is possible that it is a word extension attached to a hard space, that is, a blank syllable. To make it go away, select the note it appears to be attached to, which will bring up a handle on the right end of it. CLick the handle, press Clear or Delete, (I forget which one clears the extension on a PC.) Or it is possible that it is a bug from a mildly corrupted file, or something that showed up in translation. Probably in that case, you would have to delete the note it is attached to, and re-enter the music. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Avoiding Articulation Collisions
At 7:36 PM -0500 2/12/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 12 Feb 2004, at 07:23 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: Of course, it doesn't help me with the bowings I've already put in. Sorry, no. If there are more colliding upbows and downbows than not, you might want to swap the modified bow markings for the regular ones, then redo the bowings on notes *without* other articulations attached. And to second Darcy's advice, it is REAL easy to erase large sections of articulations, by holding down the Delete key and dragging over the affected sections of notes. Bang, entire tracts of articulations cleared in one click-and-drag. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] lyric and chord spacing
At 11:23 PM -0600 2/10/04, Don Hart wrote: Thanks, Mark and Christopher. You guys and a few notable others always seem to take the time to help out even (maybe especially) when Finale is having a little trouble holding up its end of the bargain. Well, I'm not in engraving for publication very much, so I don't mind fielding the easy questions, especially since I've been helped so much by this list. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] lyric and chord spacing
You were pretty clear. I have the same darned problems. For the chords, I generally turn off taking chords into account when music spacing, and only turn it on to respace passages where there is a chord on every entry. Or I increase the measure size for that measure only, or manually respace. Finale doesn't seem to know, or care, that the next item may not have a chord attached, and so doesn't need to be avoided. It's the same thing for lyrics, and the solution is not as easy, since you will have many more occurences with lyrics than with chords. You can try this: Space the piece with Avoid Lyrics turned on, as you probably already do. Turn off Avoid Lyrics in the Music Spacing options. Check Select Partial Measures in the Edit menu Select and respace (4 key is the metatool) the problem passages (tied notes), being careful to avoid correctly-spaced notes. This may solve it, or it may space the whole measure anyway. If the latter, then manual respacing may be the only solution (yuch!). TG Tools has some options that help this considerably, as well (something about melismas in the lyrics portion of the tools.) Christopher At 4:36 PM -0600 2/10/04, Don Hart wrote: Hi all, I'm using finmac2k2 and I'm trying to deal with the space eating way Finale spaces a lyric or chord attached to the first of two tied notes. Does anyone know of some setting I'm missing or a non-labor intensive workaround for this? I've known about and worked my way through the chord situation before but hadn't until today noticed virtually the same problem for lyrics. I'm working on an arrangement of a tune with a lot of 16th note pushes in the melody. If a lyric lands on the first of two notes that are tied together it's centered on that first note, and the second note is moved to the right to avoid the lyric. Am I wrong in saying that the movement of the second note is unnecessary all of the time? Left align starts to help with chords but it really falls short of doing the job, and we don't even have that when dealing with lyrics. If I haven't explained the problem clearly enough, try this. [q = quarter note], [e = eighth note], [s = sixteenth note] and [-- = a tie] enter into Finale the following: beats __ |1 23 4 e s s--s e s--s es--q see the crys-tal rain-drops fall and apply music spacing with the lyrics included. There is too much space left between the tied notes by the lyric spacing, and in a piece with a lot of these types of measures the spacing overall is, well, too spacious. If the above was too muddled by either my description or the email server, let me know and I'll send you a clip file that demonstrates the problem. Thanks, Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] comparing finale/sibelius
At 11:11 AM -0500 2/09/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: There's still all of Sibelius's blatant claims along the lines of Finale can't do this, or Sibelius is the *only* music notation program that does that. There are a couple of unique features that caught my eye when I saw the Sibelius 2 demo at school. One is the instant arrangement, where you take a piece of piano music, hit the button, and it is immediately and surprisingly intelligently divided among the staves of a concert band or orchestra score. Everything seemed to be in the correct octave and preserved reasonable voice-leading, which already put it ahead of some of my students. Of course, I would rather do my own, but it seems if you need the Congolese national anthem in a hurry for a special occasion, you could run this, edit some sections, and bob's your uncle! Another one that I could actually use is where you copy a passage to another staff, then put the cursor over the first note, and start playing the second voice harmony on the MIDI keyboard. Every successive note gets changed to the new melody you are playing, jumping over rests and intelligently converting tied notes in one hit. This takes at least twice the keystrokes in Finale, not even counting two hits to jump a rest, and four to tie a new pitch over the barline. The harmonic analysis feature looked good until I tried it. It is no better than Finale's analysis, making similar errors. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Triplet question
At 8:06 AM -0500 2/09/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: Okay, In 4/4, one normally shows beat 3 of a measure when it contains eighth note values or smaller. However, I've run into a situation where my source has the following rhythm: quarter rest - eighth rest - a triplet consisting of: two eighth notes followed an eighth rest - eighth rest - quarter rest In other words, an eighth-note triplet starting on the and of two. I guess the correct way to write this would be to split the eighth note triplet into two groups of sixteenth note triplets, like this: quarter rest - eighth rest - a triplet consisting of: an eighth note followed by a sixteenth note, tied to a triplet consisting of: a sixteenth note followed by an eighth rest - eighth rest - quarter rest. This would correctly show beat 3 of the measure. But in this case, I think the above notation (with the tie) is actually much more difficult to read than a single eighth-note triplet starting on beat 2.5. What say you all? - Darcy It looks to me that the difference between your first solution and this quarter rest - eighth rest - a triplet consisting of: an eighth note followed by a sixteenth note, half rest is only the length of the last note. If you needed the last note longer, why not just tie it to a sixteenth or eighth, rather than to a triplet value that doesn't get completed? If you really, really need the triplet completed in the third beat of the measure, I would go with covering the third beat - your first solution. If this went over a barline, then things start looking hairy. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Re: November Font
At 4:05 PM -0500 2/07/04, Williams, Jim wrote: Interesting...Mr. Piechaud is also the designer of Human Playback. Jim And his name means hot magpie in French, like the bird, though the word is often used to denote someone who talks too much. 8-) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: November Font
That must have been directed at me, as I see nothing teasing in pointing out that he designed Human Playback. It was only a joke! I'm sure he is marvellously talented and kind to small children. My own name means carrier of Christ who works with metal, which is kind of funny since I'm not Christian, but I DO play a brass instrument! Sorry, I will never joke about someone's name again. Christopher At 4:13 PM +0200 2/08/04, Mr. Liudas Motekaitis wrote: Come on, guys. I met Robert Piechaud in Frankfurt's Musikmesse and he's a nice and talented guy. Liudas - Original Message - From: Christopher BJ Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Williams, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Rob Deemer [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2004 3:55 PM Subject: RE: [Finale] Re: November Font At 4:05 PM -0500 2/07/04, Williams, Jim wrote: Interesting...Mr. Piechaud is also the designer of Human Playback. Jim And his name means hot magpie in French, like the bird, though the word is often used to denote someone who talks too much. 8-) ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Lyrics in Sibelius (Was: 2k5 features (was Expression Metatools))
on 2/8/04 10:17 AM, William Roberts at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and having to rely on e.g. plug-ins for word extensions etc. has meant that I'd rather use Sib than Finale. FYI, word extensions are automatic starting in Fin2004. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Problem with chord symbols using Jazz font
Title: Re: [Finale] Problem with chord symbols using Jazz fon At 3:45 PM -0500 2/04/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have no trouble using the chord tool with the Maestro font, but when I use the Jazz font I have a problem with minor seven flat five chords. Normally I use a lower case B for the flat symbol, which works fine for the Maestro font, but itputs a little B when I use the Jazz font. I would like it to look like a flat symbol. How does one accomplish that? Starnagely enough, when the lower case B is in the root note rather than the chord suffix, it comes out fine. Lie Abm7b5, for example. Yup, that's how it works. What you have to do is to go into the jazz font suffix you created, and edit it so that the b is gone, and instead you have a 5 with number box checked, and flat as well. From then on, Finale will know when you type it in that the b you type is really a flat. Or you could memorise the suffix number, then type Ab colon suffix-number, like this Ab:60 where 60 is the suffix number of m7(b5) then when you hit the space bar to go to the next chord, the colon-suffixnumber is replaced by the real suffix. That's how I do all my complex suffixes. I have a Postit stuck to my monitor with all my most usual ones written on it. If ever I don't know the suffix number (say for an Ab chord), I type Ab colon zero, and the suffix selector opens up and I find the one I want. I have sorted them by the first number that appears (6 chords, then 7 chords, then 9 chords, etc,) so that they are easier to find. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] New Discovery with Articulations
At 2:56 PM -0500 2/02/04, David W. Fenton wrote: Maybe everyone else already knew this, but I just discovered that with the articulation tool you can click-drag to enclose a group of notes and apply an articulation to the group. It also works with metatools (e.g., hold the S key and click drag a group of notes, and the stacatto dot will be applied, assuming that's the metatool defined for S). Oh, what a time saver! I'm sure I'm just ignorant and everyone else already knew this! Nah, I find out things all the time that everyone ELSE has known for years, too! Try this, hold down the Delete key (or backspace on PC?) and drag across some notes with articulations in the same way you described above. All articulations inside the box are deleted! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tubas and 8vb
At 11:20 AM + 1/22/04, Colin Broom wrote: If one has a very low register part for tuba, using the lowest notes, does anyone know whether tubists generally prefer to read leger lines or an 8ve symbol? I'm guessing an 8ve symbol is better, but I know some instrumentalists prefer to read leger lines, si I thought I'd see if anyone here knew. Cheers, Colin. Anything down to a D (5 ledger lines) I prefer ledger lines. That's also what I am used to seeing on professionally-copied parts. If it is lower than that, then it can't be moving very quickly in any case, so the arguments in favour of one or the other being quicker to read are moot. I would have trouble recognizing 6 or more ledger lines at sight, and part layout starts to become problematic. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale for Mac OSX delivered
At 9:26 AM -0600 1/19/04, tim-cates wrote: when did you pre-order? just curious TC Right on the first day the announcement was made, back in the summer, I think. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale for Mac OSX delivered
At 10:19 AM -0500 1/19/04, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: Got my FinMac2004 just now by UPS, free shipping as promised, though I had to pay Canadian sales tax to the UPS guy. OK, first look. Installation went without a hitch. I registered right away by internet, no problem. I had to look up my old serial number, though. I discovered that I had to download a new driver for my MIDI interface for OS10.2 (Midisport 4x4) and did so, as this is my first OSX MIDI application, and to my surprise everything was just ducky. (Some may remember that I have had problems with my Midiman products in OS9). Strangely, the new OS9 driver doesn't work in OS9, but the old one still works (such as it does) so it stays. Started her up, and all was well and fairly familiar. I found there was a fair delay between touching a note on my MIDI keyboard and hearing it, (which made me suspect my Midiman again!) until I realised that the Sound Font for playback was enabled out of the box. I turned it off, enabled my MIDI thru, and all was well. I will have to look more into that SOund Font business, though. I opened an old file and tried some edits. Importation of old files was perfect, as far as I could tell, except some ties seemed to be flipped, but I will check in FIn 2003 to see if they weren't already. Playback using the sound fonts is very cool, as many things play back that didn't through my MIDI setup, such as glisses, bends, jazz shakes, and the like. But there is a heck of a delay, and some sounds are REALLY cheesey, and I mean pure Velveeta. I didn't get a chance to try any other new features, but will as soon as I can. The one thing that struck me negatively is that re-drawing screens is very slow. Also the time required to gear up for playback is very long. Comparing Fin2004 on OS 10.2 to Fin2003 on OS9, I would say about half the speed. This may be cured by some tweaking. I wouldn't know yet, as I am relatively a newbie on OSX. This could be an equipment issue, rather than a Finale one, but it could prove to be an insufferable pain. Gotta go now. Please share your insights as you get them, Mac users! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Changing Font within Smart Shape Palette
At 5:50 PM +0100 1/17/04, Giovanni Andreani wrote: Hello I hope someone can help me with this: I'm transcribing music for solo piano and would like to change the font of the 8va/8vb tool within the Smart Shape palette (the one octave higher symbol is the one I intend to use). Is there any way to do this, without changing the font in use? (I'm actually using Maestro font) Thank you all Giovanni Andreani With the Smart Shape tool selected, go to the Smart Shape menu and select Smart Shape Options. In Fin2003, the top item is a selection box for the various texts, with Set Font in a box beside it. You can set 8va and 8vb separately, though apparently you have to have a font that has 8va as one character, as you can't enter more than one character. What you CAN do though, if you need to create an 8va from a non-music font, is to create a Custom Line, which allows any number of characters as starting text. This gets a little complicated, though you should be able to feel your way through it, as I did. You can create as many Custom Lines as you need, though switching between them takes a few too many keystrokes for my speed deemon personality. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Different Lyrics for different layers...
At 12:42 AM + 1/16/04, John Bell wrote: At 6:52 pm -0500 15.01.2004, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: The right-most one is stupid (meaning I'm stupid because I can't figure out a use for it.) It's for lyrics you haven't yet entered. I guess I'm still stupid, because I can't figure out how I'm going to know ahead of time that I'm going to need some lyrics higher or lower. That's something I always do AFTER entering the lyrics. Oh, well, if someone uses it, I guess it's good. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Different Lyrics for different layers...
At 7:06 PM -0400 1/15/04, Taris L Flashpaw wrote: I don't know if this has been discussed here before, but I was wondering if there was a way to attach different lyrics to different layers of a single staff. For example, I'm working on a choral piece right now and the sopranos divide in two for a few bars during which they have different rhythms. I'd like to be able to set different lines of text for each soprano section. Is there any easy way to do this? Taris I've done it by choosing Verse 1 for one part and Verse 2 for the other, and then adjusting the baselines. I decided to put the lyrics for the upper part above the staff for legibility, and had no problem dragging the baseline up there. You know about the four baseline-adjusting arrows? The left most one adjusts all staves, all systems. The second adjusts just this staff, all systems. The third adjusts just this staff, this system. The right-most one is stupid (meaning I'm stupid because I can't figure out a use for it.) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale class
At 4:09 PM + 1/14/04, Javier Ruiz wrote: Am I the only one who has received this? Dear Macintosh Customer, We are happy to report that the Finale Macintosh OS X disc has completed our rigorous testing cycle with flying colors and is currently in production. We have made arrangements to expedite the process so we expect to start shipping on January 16 . Etc.. Javier Ruiz Nope, I got it too. Yay! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Reducing the size of time signatures, clefs, accidentals?
At 11:01 AM -0600 1/12/04, Richard Huggins wrote: George, go Options Select Default Fonts Notation and after that item-by-item select Clef, Time Signature and whatever else you want smaller. For each one, click the Set Font button and change the size for the selected element from its default of 24 pt. to whatever you wish, i.e. 20 pt, 18 pt. etc. When you close the box you'll see that those elements are smaller. Richard That changes EVERY instance of that item. What if you only want some items smaller or larger? Particularly, I have been looking for a way to have the parenthesized sharp, flat, and natural a little larger in JazzFont. Other than editing the font itself (I would like my files to be transportable) is there a way? I don't particularly care for editing each and every courtesy accidental individually in every part with the accidental Special tool. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Reducing the size of time signatures, clefs, accidentals?
At 1:25 PM -0800 1/12/04, Brad Beyenhof wrote: On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 11:40 AM, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: That changes EVERY instance of that item. What if you only want some items smaller or larger? Particularly, I have been looking for a way to have the parenthesized sharp, flat, and natural a little larger in JazzFont. Other than editing the font itself (I would like my files to be transportable) is there a way? I don't particularly care for editing each and every courtesy accidental individually in every part with the accidental Special tool. Are you sure you are using the larger-sized JazzFont parenthesized accidentals (i.e. for the sharp using character 97, not character 91, in Doc Opts Accidentals)? Yes, I checked. On my computer, the parenthesised accidentals are substantially smaller than the non-parenthesised ones, and I would like them to be closer to the same size, if not identical. They are too easily misread, for example, the parenthesised natural looks a LOT like a sharp on the page. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Reducing the size of time signatures, clefs, accidentals?
At 2:02 PM -0800 1/12/04, Brad Beyenhof wrote: On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 01:41 PM, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: At 1:25 PM -0800 1/12/04, Brad Beyenhof wrote: On Monday, January 12, 2004, at 11:40 AM, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: That changes EVERY instance of that item. What if you only want some items smaller or larger? Particularly, I have been looking for a way to have the parenthesized sharp, flat, and natural a little larger in JazzFont. Other than editing the font itself (I would like my files to be transportable) is there a way? I don't particularly care for editing each and every courtesy accidental individually in every part with the accidental Special tool. Are you sure you are using the larger-sized JazzFont parenthesized accidentals (i.e. for the sharp using character 97, not character 91, in Doc Opts Accidentals)? Yes, I checked. On my computer, the parenthesised accidentals are substantially smaller than the non-parenthesised ones, and I would like them to be closer to the same size, if not identical. They are too easily misread, for example, the parenthesised natural looks a LOT like a sharp on the page. Odd. In my copy of the Jazz font, the larger parenthesized sharp (character 97, the a) is nearly exactly the same size as the standard sharp (character 35, the #). Possibly the actual accidentals (through the Special Tool), rather than the Doc Opts default, are defined as 91 (the [). They are close in size, but not close enough for me. When I resize the parenthesised sharp or flat to about 110%, they look about right to me. Even though they are both a little shorter and wider, at least they look as if they were drawn with the same pen. The bracketted natural, which is the biggest problem, needs about 115% enlargement to look right to me. I wish I could make that change permanently, as individual edits are out of the question for the kind of quick-turnaround stuff I do. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
But that doesn't explain why the open note on the standard band instrument is written C, but sounds Bb. Why not change it so that all trumpet players read Bb and play Bb, on the usual instrument? I refer you to my original answer. And by the way, in a professional context even your answer doesn't hold. Many orchestral players use a C trumpet to play Bb parts, they use an A piccolo trumpet to play Bb piccolo parts, they play parts written in low A, Bb, C, D, Eb, F, and G on whatever key trumpet sounds best to them (or that they happen to own and is pretty close in timbre), transposing the fingerings as they go. Tuba players can choose between BBb, C, Eb, F and Bb instruments, all written in concert pitch (British band music notwithstanding) and they have to learn the new fingerings. Christopher At 5:29 AM -0500 1/09/04, David H. Bailey wrote: The trumpet transposition is so that a trumpet player doesn't have to learn different fingerings for A, Bb, C, D, Eb, F, G trumpets -- one set of fingerings works for all (with some adjustments for intonation, but that happens even between different trumpets of the same pitch.) If they were all written in concert pitch it would make trumpet playing a lot more complicated. Same for saxes, clarinets, Oboe/English Horn, and all the transposing instruments. Christopher BJ Smith wrote: At 5:43 PM -0500 1/08/04, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: That's why I said this was a religious debate. There ultimately are no compelling arguments on either side. It's the same answer I give to my students when they ask why trumpets transpose. It's not because it's easier to read (like alto clef for violas, or a ninth for tenor saxophone, which puts their parts pretty much in the staff). It's not even (any more) because Bb trumpets sound better than C trumpets, which is the reason my orchestration teacher gave to me. It's because it's a common convention that everyone understands perfectly well (except for my students!) and one should have a good reason to go against convention. christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale . -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 9:23 AM -0500 1/09/04, Aaron Sherber wrote: At 08:47 AM 1/9/2004, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: But that doesn't explain why the open note on the standard band instrument is written C, but sounds Bb. Why not change it so that all trumpet players read Bb and play Bb, on the usual instrument? Trumpets are notated so that the fundamental pitch on the instrument is a C. The second valve lowers each open note by a minor second, the first valve by a major second, and the third valve by a minor third. This connects the physical properties of the instrument with the fingering, rather than having the fingering be random. The reason that a third-line B (for example) is fingered with the second valve down is that it's a half step from the open note C, on any trumpet. Horns work the same way. Trombones are the exception -- the standard tenor trombone is a Bb instrument, with each slide position lowering the open notes a further half step, but it is notated in C. Your last sentence illustrates my point. Why do trombones (and tubas) get off easily, while trumpets have to transpose? They have the same concert pitch open note (an octave apart). I know the historical path of choosing a Bb instrument from the many available lengths of natural trumpets to add valves to, because they liked the sound of it better at the time, adn that trumpet players were used to always seeing their parts notated in C up to that point, but the only reason to write trumpets in Bb today is because of convention. There is no other reason. Understand me, I am not arguing IN FAVOUR of writing concert pitch trumpets (or other instruments), I am explaining that the only reason to do so is because it was done that way from the start, and now everyone understands it and learns trumpet that way, and to change it now would be an enormous and confusing pain. Just to wrap up everything, Dennis B-K is right, that conventions change, and these transposition conventions may go the way of the dodo eventually, but for now, we have them, and in the interest of clear and efficient communication, I write Bb trumpet parts. I also maintain that the conductor should see what the musician sees, whereas some others disagree, and I concede that there may be some merit to both sides of the argument. However, in my little world, conductors like transposed scores, and that is what I will continue to produce. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 10:46 AM -0500 1/09/04, Aaron Sherber wrote: At 10:02 AM 1/9/2004, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: Your last sentence illustrates my point. Why do trombones (and tubas) get off easily, while trumpets have to transpose? What? First of all, from the player's point of view, it's the trumpets who get off easily, because the way their part is notated is related to the physics of the instrument. Tenor trombone players have to re-orient themselves to a Bb harmonic series to have the same effect. Re-orient? I'm a trombone player, and I learned Bb is the open note. Concert pitch. Nothing to re-orient there. Why can't trumpet players learn as beginners that concert Bb is the open note? Once again, convention. Nothing wrong with that, except everyone has to deal with transposition. natural trumpets to add valves to, because they liked the sound of it better at the time, adn that trumpet players were used to always seeing their parts notated in C up to that point, No, this is wrong. Trumpet and horn parts were always notated in they key of the instrument (C trumpets in C, D trumpets in D, etc.). Unless you mean that the parts were notated with no key signature, which is correct and is the result of transposing the parts to the correct key. That's what I meant. Understand me, I am not arguing IN FAVOUR of writing concert pitch trumpets (or other instruments), I am explaining that the only reason to do so is because it was done that way from the start, and now everyone understands it and learns trumpet that way, and to change it now would be an enormous and confusing pain. But it was done that way from the start for an important reason, not just on a whim. Right. I'm not disagreeing with you. Whew. but for now, we have them, and in the interest of clear and efficient communication, I write Bb trumpet parts. I hope you only write Bb parts if you expect a Bb instrument. I hope you understand that this was only an example for all transposing instruments. I'm not some rabid flake who thinks that Bb trumpets were handed down from God, along with G alto flute and A clarinet and... well you get the idea. It's just a convention. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 3:54 PM -0500 1/08/04, John.Howell wrote: Christopher wrote: Well, the problem with octave clefs is that those instruments DON'T read in those clefs, they read in regular treble and bass clef, and use of an octave clef for say, double bass, (or even worse, guitar or glock, for which parts are routinely notated in wrong octaves) would result in a host of questions about what octave was actually intended. Actually the reverse is true. Using the 8 or 15 symbols on the clefs gives a very exact reading of what is intended, while the use of unadorned clefs is what raises questions: viz. horn or bass clainet parts in bass clef and the automatic questions of octave placement and transposition (or not) that have to be answered and that might vary from one composer to the next. One would hope that the early confusion a century ago about what octave bass-clef horn and bass clarinet parts were in has been cleared up in modern works. There is a clear convention that DOESN'T use octave clefs for all octave-transposing C instruments in common use in the orchestra. Tenor voice (and perhaps recorders) is one of the only ones that uses an octave clef by convention. The tenor-G-clef with the 8 under it removes any question (except the question of why those stupid Americans can't read the 9 clefs!). But for a double bass, etc., it would only cause questions. My main objection here is to creating new conventions where perfectly workable and commonly-known ones already exist. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 5:43 PM -0500 1/08/04, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: That's why I said this was a religious debate. There ultimately are no compelling arguments on either side. It's the same answer I give to my students when they ask why trumpets transpose. It's not because it's easier to read (like alto clef for violas, or a ninth for tenor saxophone, which puts their parts pretty much in the staff). It's not even (any more) because Bb trumpets sound better than C trumpets, which is the reason my orchestration teacher gave to me. It's because it's a common convention that everyone understands perfectly well (except for my students!) and one should have a good reason to go against convention. christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 8:56 PM -0500 1/08/04, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I've heard lots of preferences expressed on this list from composers and conductors, but no horror stories. Has anyone actually encountered an in-the-flesh, contemporary objection to one or the other that resulted in a refused or aborted performance? Not some mid-career, confused conductor with no C-score experience, but something in, say, the last decade? Hmm, not in the last decade, no. Not a real horror story. But do you really need one, or would you be satisfied with preserving a level of tension short of open war? (That last quote, BTW, was from the Retief series, a science-fiction diplomat. Sorry.) Now, it might not be a horror story (and I remember the real, actual horror stories you told here on the list!) but I have witnessed crossed wires, wasted time, frustrated musicians, and fast phone calls by orchestra administrators during rehearsals to composers, as well as wasted studio time in recording sessions. But if those things could be avoided, why not avoid them? I actually do have a few reasons why I prefer scores at concert pitch; here are two: 1. I had to copy parts for the Berlioz Funeral Triumphal Symphony back in 1966 or so when we (Rutgers Wind Ensemble) were reputedly doing its first American performance. I was so sick of tracking obsolete transpositions on that horrid photocopy and turning them into modern ones that by the end of the job I resolved to write C scores so as not to put any future copyist or conductor in jeopardy. (Watching the conductor sweat the double transpositions was entertaining, but the rehearsals could be very tense.) Well now, if I could be so bold, the problem there was non-standard, obscure transpositions that needed to be changed to standard ones. How often does that come up in scores written these days? 2. I write for many ensemble combinations -- including electronics and 'generic' parts -- where there are really no clues from the patterns or groupings you would find in standardized pre-20th century instrumental groupings. Now that is a good reason! If I were writing generic parts (and I often do, in the form of jazz lead sheets) then concert pitch is definitely the way to go. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 11:04 PM -0500 1/06/04, Darcy James Argue wrote: Chris Smith: Well, the problem with octave clefs is that those instruments DON'T read in those clefs, Well, sure, but a bari sax or bass clarinet doesn't (normally) read in bass clef, either. Those clefs don't go on the *parts*, they go on the score. Ah. I see. In vocal music, there is nothing ambiguous about a treble clef with an 8 below it, and pretty much every conductor in the world is going to be familiar with that notation and be able to extrapolate from there. Most likely true enough, but I prefer to go with standard notation as much as possible, as it IS unusual to have an octave clef on instruments other than tenor voice. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Explode!
At 3:48 AM -0800 1/07/04, Philip Aker wrote: Well, I'm just talking about the essential parts of a composition, not the orchestration. And in that, I certainly agree with you. My name with my students for what you are calling parts is gesture. I think I got that from one of my 20th century theory teachers, and I like it because it describes anything that holds together in a recognizable shape at the macro level. It isn't restricted to melodic motives or cells. And BTW, I think Hal must have been born with his special talent: I've never even seen an email by him with an unprepared dissonance! Ha! Actually not as weird as it sounds at first read. I've been noticing lots of similarities between musical approaches and literary, visual, or speech patterns. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] No key signature on contemporary score
At 10:45 AM -0500 1/07/04, dumusic wrote: I generally find C Scores very difficult to use. I have never met a conductor who didn't prefer transposed scores. I'm not saying there aren't any, I just haven't met them. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Still having trouble with chord spacing
Title: RE: [Finale] Still having trouble with chord spacing Or in Speedy Entry (with automatic music spacing turned off) just drag the note to the left or right (or up or down, but you don't want to do that this time!) Or in the Measure tool, click the lower handle of the right-hand barline. You will see the handles for individual notes appear. Drag at will. Christopher At 10:36 PM -0600 1/05/04, Rick Neal wrote: Try Tools-Advanced Tools-Special Tools-Note Position. The first choice on this pallette should give you handles for all the notes in a measure when you click on the measure. You can then adjust the notes horizontally as you are describing. Good luck! Rick Neal - Original Message - From: To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 1/5/2004 7:46:46 PM Subject: [Finale] Still having trouble with chord spacing Hi again; I was able to use the Measure tool to change the horizontal size of a measure, but so far I have not figured out how to change the placement of notes within a measure. For example, suppose I have a quarter note, then half, then a quarter. I would like to move the half note over to the right so the chords won't clash, overriding the proportional spacing algorithm. Is there a way to do that? I tried the Note mover tool but that clobbers the pitches, I just want to change the horizontal spacing between notes. Thanks; Bill S. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Explode!
At 3:16 AM -0800 1/06/04, Philip Aker wrote: On Friday, Jan 2, 2004, at 07:08 US/Pacific, David H. Bailey wrote: I don't think you can make the presumption that the chords would be continuously parallel. How 'bout largely parallel? Chris describes using one hand. Yes, but I have large hands (a twelfth in my left hand, which is the hand I use for entering MIDI info.) I can extend that by using my nose, a toe, a pencil between my teeth, or one of my children (usually for a bass-register note that is widely separated.) One of my small-handed colleagues uses a small accordian-sized keyboard (made by Roland) for entering MIDI data in order to enter large spreads in one shot. In fact, I often enter even non-homophonic passages this way, then add the ornamentations in the various voices once I have exploded. And I don't think it really matters if you think of it as one part with 4 voices or 4 parts that are in sync with each other. I think of such a passage as 4 parts in sync with each other, but I'm not sure why how it is thought of would make a difference in the discussion. Little difference for the Explode! topic per se. That's why I was confused. However, more than interesting for me to hear how folks describe such relationships as it would seem to reflect on their analytical ear. Kinda wondering if I've done too much Bach at this point. Philip Aha, now we are off the Explode function, and into counterpoint. I'm not sure I would necessarily group passages together according to how much counterpoint (in the traditional sense of the word) they contain. It's a little greyer than that for me (although admittedly I am not a thoroughly trained contrapuntist, like Hal Owen is. Great book, Hal!) I remember being told in first-year theory that if ANY one voice moves in non-parallel (or non-similar) motion, then the contrapuntal relationship of the passage is preserved, otherwise it falls immediately into the domain of parallism, which my teacher hastened to assure me is not so much bad music as bad counterpoint. Some composers in the jazz domain (Duke Ellington, Thad Jones, notably) adhered more or less to this concept, even in places where other jazz composers might have resorted to all-parallel line thickening-type voicings. I'm not convinced that it makes all that much difference. Certainly if the thrust of a passage is primarily contrapuntal, then the more one avoids parallelism the more counterpoint one hears, but ONE voice in oblique motion saving the whole passage from the dreaded curse of parallelism? I dunno. BUT (as PeeWee Herman said, everyone has a big but) I recognize that counterpoint (even homophonic counterpoint, which is what we are talking about, I suppose) can save a passage from the even more dreaded curse of monotony, even outside a classical idiom. Pure parallism gets boring in large doses, as it creates a hum of consistent sound without variation, kind of like musical whitewash. If that's what you need, so be it. But a lot of musicians (mostly non-classical) rely on this thickening technique way too much. It's the difference between say, the unrelenting wall of parallel harmony one hears in most radio music, and the more intricate, variable, and interesting harmonies one hears in the Beach Boys, or Crosby, Stills, Nash, and Young, or some of the better R+B groups. I guess the word is, don't stick to the same thing for too long, and it will go over fine. You can get away with a lot if it doesn't last very long, and you can't get away with much if that's all you got. (words of one my composition teachers.) Sorry to get off the topic of classical music, but as I get older, I see more and more similarity and less and less difference between the various idioms. Christopher On Wednesday, Dec 31, 2003, at 12:15 US/Pacific, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: I often write for big band, and homophonic sections are easily entered by holding down big fat 4 or 5 part chords on the MIDI keyboard with one hand while entering the note value with the other, on the first trumpet part for example, then Exploding it to the other trumpet staves. As a matter of clarification, and not to disagree with your other remarks on Finale's Explode, I would characterize anything with such lock-step rhythm and (presumably) continuously parallel motions as being conceptually one part. Like in a 4 part piece, it would be one part (homophonic sections and first trumpet part notwithstanding) and the various trumpets being the voices of the part. Agree or disagree? Philip Aker http://www.aker.ca ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] to Hal Owen
To Hal Owen, Hal, I tried to reply to your private message, but your server rejected my email. Heavy duty spam filters, most likely. Any suggestions as to how I can email you without the filters cutting in? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Translation
At 3:26 PM +0100 1/05/04, Pierre Bailleul wrote: Hi all, I'm working on a pedagogical book about drums, and I like to ask you some translations of french words : Conseil = advice? Right Exercices = Exercises? Right Etude = Study? If you are talking about a musical piece written to practice a particular technical or musical difficulty, then the usual English word is etude, without the accent on the first e, though we pronounce it anyway. Sometimes one sees study as well, but not often. If the context is non-musical, as in a research paper, then study is correct. Doigté = Fingering? Right. Though in reference to a drummer with two sticks, it is called sticking, indicated L and R. You won't find this meaning in a dictionary, most likely. Coordination = ? Coordination, same word. Petite tournerie = ? I have never heard this expression, and I can't find it in my Petit Robert or any of my music books. Could it mean a flam, ruff, drag, or 5-stroke roll? Or does it refer to the Hawaii Five-O which is a single stroke roll around the drum kit, high to low? Can you describe it? It may be one of those things that doesn't have a real translation. Compter = ? To count. As in Il faut compter = You must count or You have to count. Thanks for your aid. My pleasure. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Translation
At 6:44 PM +0100 1/05/04, Pierre Bailleul wrote: Dear Christopher PB Petite tournerie = ? CB I have never heard this expression, and I can't find it in my Petit Robert or any of my music books. Could it mean a flam, ruff, drag, or 5-stroke roll? Or does it refer to the Hawaii Five-O which is a single stroke roll around the drum kit, high to low? Can you describe it? It may be one of those things that doesn't have a real translation. PB I have never heard this expression in french too! But I'm not a drummer. I think that tournerie (that is not a correct word in french) mean that you must faire tourner en boucle, playing a lot of time a measure or a pattern until you obtain a regular tempo. Perhaps there is a musical expression used by drummer teachers in english? Aha! That's loop, as in We will loop measures 45 to 46 until we get it right. Thanks another time for your aid. Pierre. Il n'ya pas de quoi. Bonne chance avec le livre. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Explode!
At 9:54 AM -0800 12/31/03, Philip Aker wrote: On Wednesday, Dec 31, 2003, at 06:25 US/Pacific, David H. Bailey wrote: But the complaint about Finale's explode function not copying unison sections to all exploded parts... While I do agree with folks who think that a part-savvy Explode should be built-in, and agree with RGP's comment that it would be better if Finale didn't re-transcribe, it seems to me that this dumb explode situation comes about because people aren't thinking part-wise during score entry. That is, two instruments on a staff = entering in two layers. I use Explode regularly for more productive things than two instruments on the same staff. I often write for big band, and homophonic sections are easily entered by holding down big fat 4 or 5 part chords on the MIDI keyboard with one hand while entering the note value with the other, on the first trumpet part for example, then Exploding it to the other trumpet staves. When I get down to unison or two-part passages in a four-man section, I really appreciate TG Tools' options on what to do with the other two or three trumpets. I still use Finale's built-in Explode when I can, as it is faster and under a single Metatool key, but I kind of wish it had some of TG Tools' options. Also, two layers on a staff doesn't explode to two staves as easily using the built-in Explode function, whereas TG Tools deals with almost anything I have ever thrown at it automatically. Two layers on a score staff automatically means TG Tools for later part extraction in my book. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Explode!
At 8:13 PM -0600 12/30/03, Randolph Peters wrote: Well, you can wait for MakeMusic to add features and fix bugs which may never happen, or you can get a very responsive turnaround with Robert and Tobias. I've emailed them both about small bugs in their plugins in the past and have gotten fixes sometimes within hours. Yes, I can attest to that as well. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Explode!
At 1:03 PM +1100 12/30/03, helgesen wrote: Situation- 1st and 2nd flute parts, lots of unison and some complex divisi. Therefore done as seperate parts, flute 1 and flute 2. Explode music does the divisi fine, but only puts unison line in top part. I Have looked at dialogue box carefully, but can find nowhere which says put unison in both/all parts. I also have three Horns with similar situation- again, unison line is only put in 'top' horn part. OK I can mass move the missing unison lines to flute 2 and Horns 2 3 , but surely it must be 'do-able' in the initial 'explode Help folks! Please. Cheers Keith in OZ Nope, not in stock out-of-the-box Finale. You need Tobias Geisen's excellent TG Tools Smart Part Distribution plugin, which do it all and then some. Otherwise check in the Edit Menu Select Partial Measures, then in the Mass Mover tool you can drag and copy partial measures to fill in the unisons. TG Tools is much easier, and better! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Merged syllable question
At 1:20 PM -0800 12/19/03, Philip Aker wrote: On Friday, December 19, 2003, at 12:28 PM, Weldon Whipple wrote: The turning point for me was when I travelled from Minnesota (where I lived at the time) to Toronto. Trawna! But try Gander Newfoundland (and points north), for an ear opener on pronunciation of the English language in North America! Philip Aker Try singing this, on four quarter notes in a descending augmented triad (C,Ab,E,C) Whale oil beef irked You have just perfectly pronounced what many Newfoundlanders might say when told something surprising. ;-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Merged syllable question
At 11:11 PM -0800 12/18/03, Mark D Lew wrote: On Thursday, December 18, 2003, at 01:46 PM, Christopher BJ Smith wrote: Hmm, I and my immediate family pronounce obliterate and oligarchy with long o sounds, and onerous with a short o. So much for generalisations with regional pronounciations, as I would have hyphenated those words incorrectly if I had followed your guide. You are absolutely right that these words might be pronounced differently in different dialects, but you should always hyphenate to reflect your intended pronunciation whatever it may be. For example, if you want lever to rhyme with fever, as the British say it, then you should write it le-ver; if you want lever to rhyme with never, as the Americans say it, then you should write lev-er. Likewise for pro-gress vs prog-ress, pri-vacy vs priv-acy, etc. mdl Really?! This is quite a revelation to me (that's rev-e-la-tion not re-ve-la-tion) as I always thought hyphenation was fixed and not dependent on pronounciation. Shows what I know. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Merged syllable question
At 12:18 PM -0600 12/18/03, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: A review of my dictionary shows that all of the multi words which begin with a long O, including among others, obey, open, over, onerous, and Otolaryngologyst, seem to have the long 'o' as a separate syllable, and those where the o is short, (obliterate, ocular, oligarchy, omniciscient, opera, oven) seem to include the following consonant in the intial syllable. Hmm, I and my immediate family pronounce obliterate and oligarchy with long o sounds, and onerous with a short o. So much for generalisations with regional pronounciations, as I would have hyphenated those words incorrectly if I had followed your guide. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Merged syllable question and Printer
Title: Re: [Finale] Merged syllable question and Printer At 1:58 PM -0500 12/18/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 18/12/2003 18:53:50 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: know that Glo-ster (Glouchestershire) is in a song. Anyone know a song with Bal-muh (Baltimore) in it? No need for apostrophes there. No, sorry, Gloucester (pronouned Gloster) is the town ; Gloucestershire (pronounced Glostershire) is the county. Anyway, what I'm really writing about - Up to now I've used my inkjet printer for printing music but would like to move up a notch. The main problem being that with the inkjet, if water gets onto the page the ink runs, (something which is almost inevitable when printing music for brass instruments!) What are the advantages of a Laser printer (or any other kind if it comes to that) over an inkjet? Doctor Foster went to Gloucester was the old rhyme, alerting me to the silent syllable. I changed five years ago to a laser printer after realizing that I had bought the equivelant of one already in ink jet cartridges. Faster, more durable machine, more durable print, better resolution (at the time, maybe modern inkjets are almost the equivelant), can print beautifully on any paper expensive or cheap, and the laser I bought has Postscript capability, which means my embedded EPS graphics in my school handouts print correctly. For the quantity I print (considerable) it works out to be cheaper per page than inkjet. I bought a refurbished HP LaserJet 4 with an Ethernet card for a very resonable price (big and slow, but plenty for me), and it is going strong several boxes of parts and scores and only one cartridge change later. I never looked back. Do it. Chrisotpher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] circular breathing expression
At 6:26 PM -0500 12/03/03, Darcy James Argue wrote: I don't mean to pile on, but this struck me as odd as well. While I know a number of people who are able to circular breathe on woodwinds, my impression is that it is considerably more difficult to do on brass instruments, especially trumpet. In fact, I don't think I've ever heard anyone circular breathe on trumpet. But of course, if the piece is being written with a specific performer in mind, then it isn't an issue. Circular breathing IS a virtuoso technique, and requires a specialist. James Ranti, former first trumpet of the Montreal Symphony could do it, as could Ellis Wean (now tubist in the Vancouver Symphony), and I heard most of the French horn section in the Montreal orchestra fifteen years ago could do it as well. I was able to do it when I was in university on bass trombone, but discovered recently that somewhere along the way I lost it from lack of practice. My brother sent me a digeridoo from Australia, and circular breathing is pretty much essential for that instrument, and it is WAY harder than on trombone, let me tell you! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Combining staves
Title: Re: [Finale] Combining staves At 8:22 AM -0500 12/04/03, Aaron Sherber wrote: Hi all, I've got two trumpet staves which I'm combining into one Tpt 1/2 staff. When the two parts are written in such a way that what I want is layer 1/layer 2, the process of moving things around is very easy. But when the two parts are, for example, moving jointly in thirds, I have not yet found a quick way of doing things. I have tried Implode Music, but the main problem there is that there's something in the Quant Settings that keeps screwing things up -- a series of syncopated quarter notes, for example, gets rewriten as alternating quarters and tied eighths instead of maintaining all the quarter notes. And things like cautionary accidentals keep getting dropped. Is there something I'm missing, or is this all Finale provides? Aaron, I can't help you with your current problem, but I'm guessing that you are combining the staves so that the conductor's score will be vertically more compact? If that is the case, then may I suggest an alternate working method that will save time. Create the staff as Tpt 1+2, enter the content as you want, add articulations, etc, and then print your conductors score. Save it under a new name (I add Parts to the name) and then run Tobias Geisen's TG Tools plugin Smart Distribution of Multipart Staves. This plugin creates new staves (both called Tpt 1+2, so you have to edit the names) but most importantly, distributes everything among the new staves in an incredibly intelligent way, including preserving unisons (!) or not, according to whether you have written Solo or 1. or a2 or something similar on the staff! It also distributes and aligns(!) dynamics, hairpins, and the like. It will also change layer 2 parts to layer 1 on the new staff in an intelligent way. This is a lot faster than combining staves. In short, this plugin has saved me MANY hours. Then you can extract your parts, with no hassle. One thing to watch out for: if you have measures that contain no notes, only rests (say a half rest, a quarter rest with a fermata, then another quarter rest; or else a quarter rest for a pickup measure), then TG tools will empty those measures, and you will have to enter them again on the new staves. I recently finished 8 arrangements for full orchestra, and the score and parts would have taken me about twice the time without the TG Tools plugins. And it's cheap, too! There are other useful plugins in the set as well, but that one has paid for the set several times over by now. Go to http://www.tgtools.de to pickup the demo version, or to buy it. Tobias doesn't pay me to advertise for him, I do it for free because his plugin is so great. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Group Names
At 11:22 AM -0500 12/04/03, Phil Lehman wrote: I was working on a project this week and I wanted to remove the group staff names from the score for printing. Document set up with setup wizard. Finale 2003 - Mac. Problem when I unchecked display group name it only did it for the first system. I had to go through the piece and remove the name for each system. Is there a global way to do this? I did this is both page view and scroll view. Phil Lehman I bet this is because you have Optimised the score. It's one of the features of Optimisation that any system edits only apply to that system if you have optimised (even if no staves end up being removed!) Remove Optimisation, perform your group name edit, then re-optimise. Now all systems will have the edit. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] circular breathing expression
At 1:35 PM -0500 12/04/03, Darcy James Argue wrote: Hmm... I always expected that circular breathing would be easier on a digeridoo -- maybe because the bore is so much wider than a brass mouthpiece? Anyway, my friend Josh Sinton, a great multi-woodwind player, first learned to circular breathe on digeridoos. It was only after he had mastered the technique on the digeridoo that he was able to transfer the skill to his other woodwinds. He still tends to do it more on the lower instruments (bari sax and bass clarinet) -- I don't know if that's because it's easier on those instruments or just because he feels like doing it more often when he's playing the low winds. In my experience, there are two conflicting properties at work: your mouth has to be relaxed enough to hold the extra air and squeeze it out while you breathe in, and you have to have enough resistance to keep all the air from rushing out in one puff. Trombone in the upper register is very difficult because of the first reason, your cheeks and surrounding muscles are too tight to puff out and give you any reservoir. Tuba in the low register and digeridoo are difficult for the second reason, there is very little resistance and you run out of air before you have had a chance to inhale. I can't imagine flute at all, it must be as hard as the didge; oboe needs a lot of muscle like the trumpet, whereas sax, clarinet, etc, must be the easiest, like trombone. As regards your friend, he must have perfected the technique on didge first, then it was a snap to transfer it to woodwinds. He probably needs the technique more on the bari and bass clarinet. A bassonist (playing a Bach cello suite) once told me that the problem was not conserving the air, the problem was getting rid of it and getting some fresh air in before he passed out! Not a problem on the tuba! ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: Tuplet brackets in slurred passages - Darcy
At 12:28 PM -0800 12/01/03, Chuck Israels wrote: Darcy wrote: [N.B. In jazz, bracketed triplets are always supposed to go above the staff, so I'm kind of constrained there. It would be convenient to put all the triplet brackets below the staff and all the slurs above, but jazz players aren't used to seeing triplet brackets below the staff.] Darcy, I have always adhered to the convention that tuplet brackets go above the notes when the stems go up or are mixed and below when the stems are all down. No one has complained (almost all of my players are jazz musicians at one level or another), and the page looks neater to me that way. Slurs crashing through tuplet brackets are not beautiful, and I'd avoid the condition when possible but, if it's the only solution, I prefer it to moving the brackets. Chuck Yes, that agrees with my authorities, except for Clinton Roemer, who insists on tuplets going ABOVE the passage. I am used to seeing them as you describe. However, your (and I believe, the standard) solution still puts slurs and tuplets both above the staff when stem directions are mixed, with the resultant possibility of collisions. The Norton Manual (Heussenstamm) suggests moving bracketed tuplets below the staff to avoid collisions with slurs above, while unbracketed tuplets would stay where they are. He also suggests moving tuplet brackets to avoid collisions with dynamics, hairpins, text, or anything else. He also puts slurs generally outside tuplets where the slur lasts longer than the tuplet, and there is one notable exception where two notes of a triplet are slurred INSIDE the bracket. THere is no example given where three notes with mixed stem directions are all slurred AND there is a bracket, which I would like to see, as I write that kind of thing all the time and never know what to do about it. I would not allow a collision (not on purpose, anyway!) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Beaming eighth notes/quavers
At 3:15 PM +0100 11/29/03, d. collins wrote: Thanks, Ole, for your reply. I remember reading somewhere, but can't find it, of course, that this beaming by four was only recommended if there were only 8th notes/quavers under the beam: if you have a dotted 8th and a 16th, for instance, you should revert to beaming by two. Can anyone remind me where I read this? Or comment on this rule? You are right, and I remember seeing it as the rule of 4, meaning that you have to be able to see groupings of four of the smallest subdivision. That means 4 eighths, 4 sixteenths, etc. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] tuplets
At 1:36 AM + 11/26/03, Colin Broom wrote: -Original Message- The second (much better) way is to select the tuplet tool, click the first note, set the tuplet up the way I want it, and hit OK. I click next on the first note of the NEXT group, and the tuplet I had set up is now the default, and I only have to hit Return to apply it. Repeat until carpal tunnel syndrome sets in as it still amounts to a hundred or so click-returns for Charles Small. Here's another (IMO) faster and slightly better way of achieving this. You can program metatools for tuplets. Select the tuplet tool and then hold down Shift + 3 (or shift plus whatever key you want). The tuplet dialog box comes up. Set it to 3 16ths in the time of 2, and any other settings you need. Then when you hold down 3 and click on the first of any group, it will turn it into 16th triplets, EVEN if you have an 8th followed by a 16th. Colin Broom. Very nice! But what would be better is the ability to change note values by factors other than duple. We can only double or halve note values (or quadruple or quarter) right now. If one was able to triple and divide into three, this problem would not exist. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Ten/Bar/Bass?
At 3:12 AM -0500 11/21/03, Darcy James Argue wrote: Hi gang, Okay, so I'm faced with a movement of a piece for orchestra + chorus where only the men sing. The (highly unreliable) manuscript has the men divided three ways and calls them tenor, baritone, and bass -- but I'm not sure if that's the standard way of referring to that subdivision in a chorus. Wouldn't the standard nomenclature in this case be tenor, bass 1, and bass 2? Also, the abbreviated staff names look odd to me if we call the middle voice baritone: T. Bar. B. Hmmm... what say you? If it's wrong, then you are in good company. That's the way I have always done it when writing consistent 3-part men, and that is how it is recommended in every reference I own. Bass 1 and 2 would imply that the regular bass section splits, as opposed to dividing the men in three according to range. I take weights of numbers into account when deciding my choral splits (though I don't go nuts about it like some do), so I don't think I get exactly the same results from T, B1, B2 (nor T1, T2, B) as I would from T, Bar, B. But I would justify the names right, like this: T. Bar. B. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Ten/Bar/Bass?
At 5:35 AM -0600 11/21/03, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: Darcy wrote, The only oddity now is that the altos and tenors both have to share an 8vb treble clef placing tenors on an 8vb G clef did not used to be the norm; in the past, tenors were noted on a treble clef, in alto range, and transposed down the octave at sight. The use of the transposed G clef seems to be a consequence of notation software. Dennis responded to Darcy's comment, writing: I raised this very question not long ago and was strongly advised against using the tenor clef for an alto part. If I remember the thread correctly, Darcy is not referring to the same tenor clef that Dennis is. I understood the earlier thread to refer to using the C clef in the alto position, whereas Darcy refers to using the G clef with the 8 vb designation. As a tenor, I would advocate using the nontransposed G clef, for the altos and tenors. ns Ooo, I've run into bad karma on this one before, and will never repeat the experience. Altos and tenors read the treble clef differently, and will never be sure of the octave required unless they each have their own staff and clef. Altos CAN be told to read along with the tenors, but you have to be there to do it, as there is no standard way to notate this in modern music. It's exactly the same situation as if you want cellos and basses to play a unison, but don't want to write a new staff. You will always get things in the wrong octave somewhere, so add the staff and choke back the tears. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale to mp3 or wav
At 7:20 AM -0500 11/23/03, David H. Bailey wrote: It's the old The razor's free but the blades cost money philosophy that made Gillette wealthy. You have to pay for the songs you download to listen to with iTunes, but iTunes itself is free. Eh? I have a ton of my own music I digitised myself that plays perfectly well in iTunes, not to mention CD rips from my collection. To extend your analogy, it's as if Gillette gave you the option to use your own razor blades in its free razor. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] tuplets
Dang, I was SURE I had done this about a month ago! I tried it again (same version of Finale as always, FinMac 2003) and it didn't work! I did find two rather laborious methods to change existing 16th notes to triplets. One was to select the Simple Entry tool, set it to 16ths (3 key) and tuplets (9 key) and click individually on the first note of each group, being careful NOT to click above or below the note, as this would add an extra pitch. The second (much better) way is to select the tuplet tool, click the first note, set the tuplet up the way I want it, and hit OK. I click next on the first note of the NEXT group, and the tuplet I had set up is now the default, and I only have to hit Return to apply it. Repeat until carpal tunnel syndrome sets in as it still amounts to a hundred or so click-returns for Charles Small. What the heck had I done last month to accomplish this? Sorry for the red herring. Christopher At 2:29 PM -0600 11/23/03, Richard Huggins wrote: I didn't write the original question but I was interested in seeing if what you said would indeed work on a measure of existing 16th notes (turning them into tuplets). I repeated your steps and for me it did not work the way you said. After setting Caps Lock and doing Option-3, I hit the 3 key on the first note and...nothing. If I held it down, still nothing. The frame blipped each time but the cursor didn't advance and tuplets weren't created. So... I dunno! Richard From: Christopher BJ Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:29:02 -0500 To: Charles Small [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] tuplets At 12:39 PM -0500 11/21/03, Charles Small wrote: Hello, I have hundreds of measures full of 16th notes, in 18/16 time sig. I'd like to convert all this to 16th-note triplets, in 3/4. No problem changing time sig and converting to tuplets one tuplet at a time, BUT: is there a way to select a region and tupletize the whole region in one go? Thanks, Ch.S. (PS-- Finale 2000c, Mac) The Caps lock button in Speedy will do this. Speedy Tool, open the frame on the first measure. Set Caps lock. Hit Opt 3 for triplets. Hit 3 for sixteenths and hold it down, letting it auto-repeat. When you are done, change the time sig to 3/4. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] tuplets
At 4:55 PM -0500 11/23/03, David H. Bailey wrote: You can't go back in speedy and tupletize notes which have already been entered. Yes you can, but it only works for ONE set of tuplets, then you have to reset it. Not a good solution for Charles. Open up the Speedy frame on a measure of already-entered sixteenths, hit (on the Mac) option 3 to set up a triplet, then hit 3 again to make them 16th triplets. The tuplet is created. Now hit the right arrow three times to move to the next group. Repeat. Sheesh! Maybe a macro would help. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Midisport 2x2
Title: Re: [Finale] Midisport 2x2 Keef, Thanks for the response, I've been trying to get info about this for quite a while. I have NO idea what I need to allow my system to run best when I am using MIDI. My printer is connected through Ethernet, so I need that. I need CD access. There are some other things I am sure I need, but do you have any idea how MANY extensions there are in even a bare-bones OS9 set? And many of them have descriptions like No additional information is available for this item or Provides 2d graphics acceleration which means absolutely nothing to me in terms of whether it would be creating a conflict. I have asked friends to send me lists of what they have installed, but many of them have removed internet functionality, so that isn't really an option. I would think that simply having a set of extensions that I boot with whenever I need to do serious MIDI work would do it, but I can't come up with a set that will let the computer run properly without conflicts. This is an ENORMOUS job, especially when you factor in the 2 minutes or so bootup time every time I want to test a set. I could easily spend a week on it, assuming I had a week to spend on it, and I have no assurance that the problem would be solved. Plus the disappearing MIDI act doesn't occur consistently or immediately. So I live with it. Any ideas? Resources? Lists of extensions? BTW, the problems have been there ever since I bought the machine (G4 733mHz) new and installed a MIA card and Midiman 4x4 USB interface right away, so I doubt old drivers are causing problems, unless they are old drivers for OTHER things. Christopher At 1:41 PM -0500 11/15/03, Keef wrote: I have both a G4 tower and a self-built PC in my studio and have Midiman Delta 1010LT's in both -- both are run as absolutely barebones as possible -- no funny stuff -- webless, no power management, no networking, etc. As absolutely bare as is possible to make it (in a studio situation I believe you can't afford to have extras on those machines because if they cause conflicts you lose time). There is also a Delta 1010LT in my web system (which is PC), with all the fun stuff -- web email, games, tunes, video, etc. I normally use the Delta Midi interface but I do use the 2x2 for a quick keyboard hookup. In the year or so that I've had these cards, I've had absolutely no issues whatsoever on any machine related to the Midi. 99% of the issues you're describing have to do with conflicting extras or old stuff getting in the way -- are you sure everything you had before this stuff went in is absolutely off your systems? Keef Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:43:06 +0100 From: Giovanni Andreani [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] Midisport 2x2 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 6 There is some sort of badly written driver or something for Midiman devices for Mac, it appears. I hear nothing but problems from my Mac friends, who have all discarded their Midiman interfaces, and I have a 4x4 Midiman that decides once a day or so to stop listening to my MIDI keyboard. Also, I can never sleep my computer without losing all MIDI communications, and switching between Finale and Cubase causes MIDI to stop working whenever I switch back to Finale. Sometimes I can get it back up again by going into OMS and making the Output device None, then choosing my master keyboard again. Sometimes I just have to reboot. I have learned to live with it, but I'm not buying Midiman again, I can tell you. Christopher Christopher, I can confirm the same happened to me to, so I changed from Midisport 2X2 and installed an Audiophile S/PDIF card with MIDI connections just ready for plugin Giovanni -- ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tenor Clef for Cello
At 5:12 PM -0500 11/08/03, David W. Fenton wrote: Is there any kind of rule of thumb for when to switch to tenor clef in a cello part? I'm used to writing for viola da gamba with switching between bass and alto clef, and I know by gut instinct where to switch there, but I'm not a cellist, so don't know what would be confusing or not for tenor clef. My thinking is: 1. any extended passage with ledger lines. 2. Two ledger lines is fine, even in extended passages. That means the part would have to be up around G or above and hang around there for a while in order to merit a switch to tenor clef. Comments? You sound like you agree with me. My rule (very flexible!) is extended passages with three or more ledger lines would be generally better in a different clef or with an 8va sign, (violin, flute, trombone exceptions, as they prefer up to five ledger lines.) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Transcribing Wind Music for Strings (bowing question)
At 5:22 PM -0500 11/08/03, David W. Fenton wrote: I'm just finishing up a transcription of a Mozart Divertimento for winds and have simply carried over the phrasings (i.e., tonguings) from the original. These generally look like they'd end up as pretty good bowings. Comments? As to articulations, I'm wondering if I need to put in additional ones or not. Obviously, unslurred nots will be tongued on wind instruments and bowed separately on strings, which kind of gives the same effect. But I'm mostly concerned about repeated notes, often in the pattern 8th-8th-quarter. In general, instrumentalists will shorten repeated notes, and this is probably what's needed, but my sense of string players is that they will shorten the repeated notes less than a wind player would, and tend to do that awful middle-of- the-road non-legato, non-stacatto with the note way too evenly accentuated. Would I be helping or hindering by putting in additional articulations? Hmm, that's a very good question. There is no doubt that winds and strings interpret certain markings differently (for example, tenutos strings to seem to play shorter, a series of pairs of slurred eights the strings will not shorten the second eighth as much as a wind player might, and for stacattos over tenutos, your guess is as good as mine. Also winds often have long slurred passages which of course are pretty much unplayable exactly as written on strings, so you would have to break up the long slurs.) For a composer as well-known as Mozart, I would probably put in less articulations, as I might mess up an otherwise perfectly musical performance by hobbling the musicians with markings that they have to guess at the meaning of. I've played transcriptions of some Mozart Divertimenti for trombones and even tuba quartet (!) and even though they departed considerably from the original, they still sounded like Mozart, so I wouldn't worry too much. That's just my opinion, mind you. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] FW: 2004 slowness problem
At 6:05 PM -0600 11/04/03, Richard Huggins wrote: [...] As my files grow larger, the entire program bogs down and runs like molassas. I've got one other friend with the problem and I believe it's in the software. It is normal for Finale to run more slowly with a large score. I just haven't noticed it as much recently with my newer, faster computer. Maybe 2004 is more of a resource hog than previous versions (I'm on 2003), but for sure if you program staff sets (hiding staves you aren't working on, in the View menu) then everything speeds up. I also turn off Automatic Music Spacing (Editi menu) when the score gets big. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
