Re: [Finale] syllabification

2004-04-11 Thread musicminister
There is one school of thought that says always split after a long vowel, in which case you would have ma-king. I've seen that in some 19th century British editions, but I think it's pretty much rejected now. If you agree with ma-king then you should also do ma-keth to be consistent. I

Re: [Finale] syllabification

2004-04-11 Thread John Howell
At 7:03 PM -0700 4/10/04, Mark D Lew wrote: On Apr 10, 2004, at 4:53 PM, Ryan Beard wrote: I'm working on a choir piece based on Psalm 23. I'm having trouble finding the correct syllabification of some of the King James English words like maketh, leadeth, restoreth, preparest all those -eth -est

Re: [Finale] SmartScan Pro

2004-04-11 Thread Henry Howey
Sorry about the html being dropped. It's part of our SPAM protection. You fail yo note MAC or PC. This might help a bit;-) -- Henry Howey, D.M.A. Professor of Music Sam Houston State University Box 2208 Huntsville, TX 77341 (936) 294-1364 http://www.shsu.edu/~music/faculty/howey.html Owner of

Re: [Finale] syllabification

2004-04-11 Thread Mark D Lew
On Apr 11, 2004, at 1:10 PM, John Howell wrote: I should also point out that Mark's suggestion makes reading the words much quicker and intuitive. But of course a singer isn't going to actually pronounce them that way. Tacking the consonant onto the 2nd syllable is good vocal practice:

Re: [Finale] syllabification

2004-04-11 Thread John Howell
At 2:48 PM -0700 4/11/04, Mark D Lew wrote: On Apr 11, 2004, at 1:10 PM, John Howell wrote: I should also point out that Mark's suggestion makes reading the words much quicker and intuitive. But of course a singer isn't going to actually pronounce them that way. Tacking the consonant onto

Re: [Finale] syllabification

2004-04-11 Thread Mark D Lew
On Apr 11, 2004, at 4:27 PM, John Howell wrote: Hey, read my message again. We're on the same side, here! I was simply making the point that there are different criteria for printing than for singing. Non-singers may not know that. And singers often get hung up trying to write down the

[Finale] Automatically Numbered Rehearsal Numbers

2004-04-11 Thread David W. Fenton
I'm doing a Pachelbel Canon arrangement (for a wedding gig -- I certainly wouldn't do it for fun!), and want to automatically number each time through the ground. I want the first numbered 1, the second (m. 9) 2, the third (m. 17), 3, and so forth. Is there any automatic way of doing this at

[Finale] Plugin wish

2004-04-11 Thread Johannes Gebauer
I could really use a plugin which can copy text blocks on a per page basis from one document to another. There should be an option to copy only text blocks which are limited to that one page, or also those which appear on a page range or on all pages. Perhaps the TGTools text block transfer

Re: [Finale] Automatically Numbered Rehearsal Numbers

2004-04-11 Thread Giz Bowe
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. At the worst, you can specify a lettering system if the numbering base is too clunky. At 06:55 PM

Re: [Finale] Automatically Numbered Rehearsal Numbers

2004-04-11 Thread tim-cates
why could MakeMusic not make an option to add rehearsal numbers w/ enclosures at every double bar that you define? - the option could also exist to use letters or to do pre-defined numbers (every X number of measures, insert a rehearsal letter/number) - shouldn't be that difficult, even for