At 8:47 PM 09/20/02, Christopher BJ Smith wrote:

>I'm on Mac, but the only thing your solution does is make the hyphen
>(which should be butt up against the first syllable on its right
>side) drift over to  halfway between the first syllable and the
>opt-space. Also, the next note after the open-ended hyphen usually
>has its own syllable attached, so there is no need for an opt-space.
>Right now my kludge is to use an opt-hyphen (which is really an
>m-dash) instead of the hyphen.

I don't like using the opt-hyphen, since the character has a completely
different appearance (it's actually an N-dash, not an M-dash).

Yes, if you have a syllable in the second ending, and if you don't mind
entering the lyrics so that it is considered to be "next", then you can use
that instead.

To adjust the horizontal position of the hyphen move the opt-space
ghost-syllable to the left or right. That's the other reason to use an
opt-space instead of the real syllable that's already there.  In the
situation you describe, I do want the hyphen to drift right, rather than
hug the syllable to its left, though I typically will move opt-space
leftward so that it doesn't drift quite so far.

Other kludges are possible of course, but I find this one to be the easiest
and most flexible for this sort of situation.

--
>But my question was aimed at the intended implementation of hyphens
>that Dennis was proposing. [...]
> [...] After all, the lyric is so small compared to a
>sound file; the mapping info for a syllable might be an order of
>magnitude larger than the syllable itself, at least! Plus, the way
>lyrics are usually handled is so sequential, compared to sound or
>video editing, that I think the way it is laid out now might be a
>better system [...]

That was the impression I got, too, but unlike you I still don't totally
understand what Dennis is talking about, so I wasn't going to jump to
conclusions.

The whole thing reminds me of audio-geeks who can paste together anything
using just a few bits and pieces of recorded voice.  Sort of like that Star
Trek TNG episode where Spock is trying to achieve detente with the
Romulans.  They capture him and ask him to make an announcement telling the
ships to turn back.  The Romulan says, "No matter, we already have enough
of you on tape that we could fabricate the speech."

If you follow this idea to its logical extreme, you could have a "text
pool" which consists only of abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz plus a few
punctuation marks, and then use very selective editing to create your
entire lyric out of that.

To me that feels very roundabout and geeky.  On the other hand, I don't
particularly mind typing out "Kyrie eleison, eleison, eleison! Kyrie
eleison, eleison! Christe eleison, eleison, eleison, eleison, eleison!
Christe eleison! Kyrie eleison, eleison, eleison! Kyrie eleison, eleison!
Christe eleison, eleison! Christe eleison! Kyrie eleison, eleison, eleison!
Christe eleison, eleison, eleison, eleison, eleison, eleison! Kyrie
eleison!" That is the singer's text, after all, so why wouldn't I type it?
That took me all of about 30 seconds to type out, which is probably less
than it will take to assign the syllables. The real work is in the
assignment, not the typing, so shifting the work over to the assignment
side is a net minus.

That's how it seems to me, anyway.  Perhaps it looks different to someone
who doesn't use click-assignment, or to someone who is a slow typist.
Mileages vary.

mdl


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

Reply via email to