On 05.06.2002 20:39 Uhr, Norbert Gertsch wrote > The orchestra material on Haydn's secular cantatas, mentioned by Johannes > Gebauer, was _not_ produced using Finale, it was Amadeus. This material was > never intended for publication.
Thank you for clarification. This just shows that Amadeus shows some similar problems as Finale (in the sense that to get perfect output you need to tweak a lot, at least that's what my memory tells me). > > The computer engraving studio, that we use, only became aware of Johannes > Gebauer's Henle templates through (now well known) correspondance between > the latter and our CEO in March/April 2001. Having been working for us since > 1997, the templates did not play any role in their work. Oh, and by the way, > someone commented on the quote that Johannes Gebauer provided of that > correspondance as beeing a little arrogant. I would very much like Mr. > Gebauer to deny this because the whole e-mail to him, which I have in front > of me, sounds totally different, not arrogant at all. That's not how we are! > That's the problem with quotations, isn't it? You are absolutely right that the email was not at all in an arrogant tone. On the contrary it was very polite. I must admit that I didn't quite follow the argumentation (I did not see how my web page in the form it was at the time could seriously be considered to be of any potential danger, or hurting anyone's copyright) and found it pretty unecessary, but I followed the demands made in the email in every respect. I am not questioning the demand to rename the default file, which I think was a legitimate request. But to say that someone could have thought that I was selling Henle's music font is a little far fetched, to be honest. Also, Mr Seiffert complained "that people may think that Henle was using Finale software, which is only true for a fraction of our titles" - don't you think this is a slight contradiction in terms? Since Henle is (and was at the time, which I didn't know then, and never suggested on the page) using Finale software, why is there anything wrong with people assuming this? Moreover, the webpage's original goal was to show that Finale was capable of producing output of similar quality as Henle's, how would anyone then make the assumption that Henle's output was in fact Finale's? I cannot deny that I felt a little threatened by Mr Seiffert's email, but I assume that was in part the intention. The main criticism I have on this is the story that led to this email, which I am not sure you are aware of, nor do I feel like making this public. There is someone else on the list who does know the whole story, and probably more than I do. In fact I think this person may have more reason to be offended than I have. Whatever the case I was never offended by Mr Seiffert's email in the first place. And I still think that Henle produces superb output in their scores - thank you for that. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
