At 03:23 PM 4/16/02 -0800, Mark D. Lew wrote:
>[*] I must confess -- although I realize this is very eccentric of me -- I
>still haven't got past thinking of all MIDI and playback functions as
>"frills".  I wouldn't expect my word processing application to read my
>letters out loud; why should a notation program be different?  I use Finale
>to write the music on paper, not to play it.  That's what instruments and
>musicians are for.

Ummm... okay. If you can get them.

In order to get them, very important from this composer's point of view is
the demo. Who auditions music through scores anymore? Very seriously (and
perhaps sadly, and even though they may deny it), conductors, performers
and producers would much rather pop in a CD when driving along than take
time out to go through a stack of scores (or in the case of performers,
rent or buy a score on spec). Demos also help with rehearsals (my flute
concerto wouldn't have been prepared in time for the premiere without the
demo, for example).

Beyond submissions to conductors or performers, I have an extensive on-line
catalog with lots of demos in mp3 format, some of the latter created from
the Midi output of Finale, and then massaged in Sonar. I have gotten many
performances (and even two commissions) from my audio catalog.

In 1993 it was different, but today I can't use a notation program without
Midi output to work with. Times have changed. It's no longer a
printed-score world.

Dennis



_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to