Interesting thread. Allow me to weigh in.
In singers, vibrato is primarily pitch modulation. Any amplitude modulation
is a secondary effect. You can check this by recording singers on a digital
program such as MOTU's Digital Performer, and analyzing the sound bites. Or
you can slow up the audio (either digitally, or with a slowed down tape
recorder), and hear distinctly the separate tones representing the vibrato.
I've been a singer all my life, and the following is my understanding of the
vocal mechanism involved: The vibrato is produced by a relaxation of the
muscles controlling the vocal cords, which relaxation allows air to pulsate,
unhindered, through the vocal chords, up and out of the head. You can check
this by singing a sustained "ah" in a normal head position, then lowering
your chin all the way down until it rests on your chest. You'll hear the
constriction of the tone, and ultimately the elimination of the vibrato, as
more and more air flow is restricted. I also believe there may be an
influence of sonic overtones. When the vocal-head alignment is pinched, the
overtones of the sound literally interfere with each other and squelch
production.
Although produced by air, I don't think of vibrato as a diapragmatic action.
I can increase or decrease my vibrato without any mental adjustment except
in the upper part of the vocal mechanism. On the other hand, the volume and
pressure of air is a factor. If the singer is over-blowing, i.e., sending
too much air into the voice box, the sound is husky and is called by vocal
teachers "hyper-phonation;" if the volume of air is insufficient
("Hypo-phonation"), the tone is flaccid and typically under pitch.
"Wobble" refers to a flaccidity of the muscles that control the vocal cords,
such that the fluctuations in pitch and speed of the fluctuations (i.e., the
time interval between the two intervals constituting the limits of the
vibrato) are wider and slower, respectively. As we grow old, flaccidity of
the muscles increases (heh-heh!) and thus wobble is a greater problem with
senior adult choirs than it is with the youth choir.
Voice teachers do teach vibrato, generally, but not so much to create an
"operatic" effect, as it is to allow maximum vocal freedom (i.e.,
unrestricted passage of air through the body) thus increasing volume and
resonance of the tone, while preserving the vocal instrument. In choral
singing with elder choirs, where "wobble" becomes a problem, one of the
fixes is to suggest that the choir "add more air" to the sound. In that
instance, diaphragmatic action and control may be appropriate.
For those interested, a good book on the subject of singing and vibrato,
wobble, etc., is "The Diagnosis and Correction Of Vocal Faults" by William
McKinney, the late Dean of Music at Southwestern Baptist Theological
Seminary in Fort Worth. The book was used as the text for Dean McKinney's
class in Vocal Pedagogy. Sorry, I don't recall the publisher.
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 12:00:20 -0600
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Finale digest, Vol 1 #430 - 16 msgs
>
> Send Finale mailing list submissions to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Finale digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes") (Michael Cook)
> 2. Re: Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes") (John Howell)
> 3. Re: Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes") (Mark D. Lew)
> 4. Re: Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes") (Mark D. Lew)
> 5. Vibrato (Harold Owen)
> 6. Cautionary time signature (Pierre Bailleul)
> 7. Re: Cautionary time signature (Mark D. Lew)
> 8. Re: Cautionary time signature (Pierre Bailleul)
> 9. limited tool selection (Tom Godfrey)
> 10. Re: Cautionary time signature (Pierre Bailleul)
> 11. Re: limited tool selection (Scott J.)
> 12. Re: Cautionary time signature (David H. Bailey)
> 13. Re: Cautionary time signature (David H. Bailey)
> 14. Re: Cautionary time signature (Pierre Bailleul)
> 15. Re: Cautionary time signature ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> 16. Re: Cautionary time signature (Klaaschello)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 18:57:52 +0100
> To: "Finale list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: Michael Cook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes")
>
> At 3:57 -0800 20/02/2003, Mark D. Lew wrote:
>> For what it's worth, in my world we like to distinguish between wobble and
>> vibrato. Of course I realize that "wobble" is hardly a technical term, but
>> it's not the same as vibrato either.
>>
>> The important thing is to distinguish phenomena which are fundamentally
>> amplitude modulation from those which are fundamentally frequency
>> modulation.
>
> Which of the two words do you consider to be connected with amplitude
> modulation? I'm used to both terms being connected with frequency,
> "vibrato" being a small regular fluctuation in pitch (= frequency),
> and "wobble" being an excessive or uncontrolled vibrato.
>
> Michael Cook
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:31:01 -0500
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: John Howell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes")
>
>> Which of the two words do you consider to be connected with amplitude
>> modulation? I'm used to both terms being connected with frequency,
>> "vibrato" being a small regular fluctuation in pitch (= frequency),
>> and "wobble" being an excessive or uncontrolled vibrato.
>>
>> Michael Cook
>
> Off the top of my head, I'd say that almost all woodwind and the better
> vocal vibrato are AM rather than PM. Good brass vibrato can be either, but
> on the classical side it's more AM. All these vibratos are produced by the
> diaphragm, not the throat. All string vibrato, of course, is PM. So a
> vocal wobble can be the result of either excessive and slow AM from the
> diaphragm or excessive and slow PM in the throat.
>
> Virtually all voice teachers preach that a vibrato is an inevitable result
> of good vocal production. Translated, that means the it's an inevitable
> result of the kind of vocal production they teach, which is operatically
> inclined. An increasing number of early music singers are finding that the
> lighter, unforced technique appropriate to early music allows much more
> flexibility and much more controlable vibrato, including real trills rather
> than forced vibrato trills. Good jazz singers never thought otherwise!
>
> John
>
>
> John & Susie Howell
> Virginia Tech Department of Music
> Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240
> Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034
> (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
> http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:49:56 -0800
> To: "Finale list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark D. Lew)
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes")
>
> At 6:57 PM 02/20/03, Michael Cook wrote:
>
>> Which of the two words do you consider to be connected with amplitude
>> modulation? I'm used to both terms being connected with frequency,
>> "vibrato" being a small regular fluctuation in pitch (= frequency),
>> and "wobble" being an excessive or uncontrolled vibrato.
>
> In my experience, "vibrato" always refers to fluctuation in pitch. "Wobble"
> is used with less precision. Often it is used to describe an excessive
> vibrato, exactly as you describe. But because "wobble" has a negative
> connotation, it is applied carelessly to any sort of fluctuating sound that
> the listener dislikes, and as often as not that is a fluctuation in
> amplitude.
>
> In my experience, casual listeners don't always hear the difference. That
> is, what they perceive to be a widening of the vibrato is in fact an
> widening in the amplitude modulation. Because this corresponds with the
> actual vibrato, the listener thinks that the vibrato has widened. In fact
> the vibrato itself has remained unchanged, but it has become more
> noticeable in that it is being reinforced by a greater volume on one side
> of the cycle and lesser volume on the other. A similar misconception
> accompanies the sort of bleating sound that some singers make due to
> excessive tension in the vocal musculature. This is a fast amplitude
> modulation, but it is often characterized by listeners as a "tight
> vibrato".
>
> In a discussion of aesthetics, all of this is fine. A listener can so,
> "Yuck, that singer has a wobble and I don't like it," and there's no
> problem if he doesn't know exactly what that wobble is. If another person
> follows along with the assumption that wobble is synonymous with widened
> vibrato, he might draw erroneous conclusions about vocal technique and/or
> physics. I've seen conversations follow this path numerous times.
>
> mdl
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 14:50:03 -0800
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark D. Lew)
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Vibrato (was" Problems with Smart Shapes")
>
> At 4:31 PM 02/20/03, John Howell wrote:
>
>> [...] So a
>> vocal wobble can be the result of either excessive and slow AM from the
>> diaphragm or excessive and slow PM in the throat.
>
> I would argue that AM can be created in the throat as well, albeit with
> different muscles from those which create PM.
>
>> Virtually all voice teachers preach that a vibrato is an inevitable result
>> of good vocal production. Translated, that means the it's an inevitable
>> result of the kind of vocal production they teach, which is operatically
>> inclined. An increasing number of early music singers are finding that the
>> lighter, unforced technique appropriate to early music allows much more
>> flexibility and much more controlable vibrato, including real trills rather
>> than forced vibrato trills. Good jazz singers never thought otherwise!
>
> I think that most classical voice teachers would not disagree with any of
> that except for your characterization of the lighter technique as
> "unforced", implying that the classical operatic technique entails some
> sort of extra muscular effort in the voice, which it does not.
>
> But yes, a lighter, more controlled technique which can include straight
> tone and so forth can be perfectly healthy and aesthetically pleasing.
> Only the narrowest opera snob would suggest otherwise. You will not,
> however achieve the same volume and projection if you control your vibrato.
> Opera evolved in a context where volume was required, and that's exactly
> why the traditional operatic vibrato developed: it was a natural side
> effect of the sort of vocal technique required for the bigger sound.
>
> Inevitably there is an aesthetic component here. Opera fans have come to
> like the sound of a natural vibrato, so to them giving up the control over
> vibrato is no loss. Jazz and early music fans have no need to sing loud
> enough to fill a large hall over a full orchestra, so to them giving up the
> extra projection is no loss.
>
> (A few years ago the chorus director at San Francisco Opera started asking
> for more straight tone from the women in the chorus, as well as making
> adjustments to the hiring to reflect this trend. He liked the sound better
> and thought it would be an improvement. One of the results was that the
> chorus because significantly less audible. After a while the experiment was
> quietly abandoned and things returned to normal.)
>
> mdl
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 16:16:10 -0800
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Harold Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Finale] Vibrato
>
> Dear Listers,
>
> The subject of vibrato has always fascinated me. Here are a few
> personal ruminations on vibrato that you might consider: In
> describing vibrato I would consider five main characteristics -
> frequency variation, amplitude variation, timbre variation, speed
> (number of variations per second), and changes in the magnitude of
> vibrato during a single tone. All are involved in any singers' use of
> vibrato. Frequency variation is the most obvious and easiest to
> detect. Some pop singers have used a vibrato focusing on amplitude
> variation (Donovan?). Because "bel canto" training almost always
> involves vibrato, it is difficult for opera singers (until more
> recently) to sing with a straight tone. Variations in frequency,
> amplitude, and timbre are more pronounced (and perhaps more
> acceptable) at louder volumes and higher pitches. I think this is
> just part of the nature of singing. I don't think singers consciously
> widen their vibrato in order to be heard above the orchestra. A
> really well-trained singer should have control over all five
> characteristics I listed above.
>
> You can probably guess that I care not for the diva with a drive-thru
> vibrato (and cleavage to match).
>
> Disrespectively,
>
> Hal
> --
> Harold Owen
> 2830 Emerald St., Eugene, OR 97403
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Visit my web site at:
> http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~hjowen
> FAX: (509) 461-3608
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> From: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 10:39:04 +0100
> Subject: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>
> This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C2D995.7479F7A0
> Content-Type: text/plain;
> charset="Windows-1252"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm working on a single instrument part with a lot of time signature =
> changings. At the end of a staff, the last measure show a cautionary =
> time signature.=20
> That is wrong : I don't understand why the staff lines of this measure =
> ended against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out ?
> When I reajust the system margin to the left, It's worse...
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Pierre.
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C2D995.7479F7A0
> Content-Type: text/html;
> charset="Windows-1252"
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Dwindows-1252">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2600.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV>Hi all,</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>I'm working on a single instrument part with a lot of time =
> signature=20
> changings. At the end of a staff, the last measure show a =
> cautionary=20
> time signature. </DIV>
> <DIV>That is wrong : I don't understand why the staff lines of this =
> measure=20
> ended against the page margin and the cautionary time =
> signature is out=20
> ?</DIV>
> <DIV>When I reajust the system margin to the left, It's =
> worse...</DIV>
> <DIV>Thanks for your help.</DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>Pierre.</DIV></BODY></HTML>
>
> ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C2D995.7479F7A0--
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 02:53:50 -0800
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark D. Lew)
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>
> At 10:39 AM 02/21/03, Pierre Bailleul wrote:
>
>> I'm working on a single instrument part with a lot of time signature
>> changings. At the end of a staff, the last measure show a cautionary time
>> signature.
>> That is wrong : I don't understand why the staff lines of this measure
>> ended against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out ?
>
> Sounds to me like you need to do an Update Layout.
>
> mdl
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> From: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 13:25:50 +0100
>
> I allow Finale itself to place the cautionary time signature.
> I've tried also to do an update layout.
> Something new : This problem occurs when I insert a repeat bar before a
> multi measure rest in this staff.
> Do you think it's a sort of bug?
>
> Pierre.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:05:03 -0500
> From: Tom Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Finale List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Finale] limited tool selection
>
> Hello
>
> I have a friend with a Finale problem. She's using Fin2002b on a Macintosh,
> system 9.something. She is only able to select the hand grabber tool, and
> Finale won't seem to let her select any other tool. I have a feeling she may
> have to reinstall Finale, but I wanted to run this problem by the list first
> to see if anyone else had a suggestion.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Tom Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> From: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 14:20:45 +0100
>
> I think there is a bug in finale when you use in a staff , several multi
> measures rests, a repeat bar and a cautionary time signature in the last
> measure, when the staff is locked ?
> The staff lines of this last measure ended
> against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out !
>
> Pierre.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:29:04 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Scott J." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Tom Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] limited tool selection
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> One way to possibly get back to normal would be to have her locate the finale
> preferences file via SYSTEM FOLDER/PREFERENCES on the startup drive. Removing
> that file and restarting Finale should return her to the normal state. If she
> had some custom settings she will have to redo them such as pallette
> layout/placement etc.
>
>
> -------Original Message-------
> From: Tom Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: 02/21/03 08:05 AM
> To: Finale List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Finale] limited tool selection
>
>>
>> Hello
>
> I have a friend with a Finale problem. She's using Fin2002b on a
> Macintosh,
> system 9.something. She is only able to select the hand grabber tool, and
> Finale won't seem to let her select any other tool. I have a feeling she
> may
> have to reinstall Finale, but I wanted to run this problem by the list
> first
> to see if anyone else had a suggestion.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Tom Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Finale mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>>
>
> ---
> J. Scott Jones
> Elementary Band Director/Freelance Trumpet player/Music Engraver
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:35:30 -0500
> From: "David H. Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Pierre Bailleul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>
> I just tried what I think you are describing -- a measure or two, a
> multi-measure rest, and a key change that begins the next system,
> requiring a cautionary key signature at the end of the system with the
> multi-measure rest and a repeat bar immediately preceding it.
>
> It works fine on my computer (Winfinale2003a) so perhaps you have a bug
> in your file?
>
> Sorry I can't offer more assitance.
>
>
> Pierre Bailleul wrote:
>> I allow Finale itself to place the cautionary time signature.
>> I've tried also to do an update layout.
>> Something new : This problem occurs when I insert a repeat bar before a
>> multi measure rest in this staff.
>> Do you think it's a sort of bug?
>>
>> Pierre.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Finale mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>>
>> .
>>
>
>
> --
> David H. Bailey
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 08:36:29 -0500
> From: "David H. Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Pierre Bailleul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>
> In my experiment I locked the system and the cautionary key signature
> still stayed put.
>
> Pierre Bailleul wrote:
>> I think there is a bug in finale when you use in a staff , several multi
>> measures rests, a repeat bar and a cautionary time signature in the last
>> measure, when the staff is locked ?
>> The staff lines of this last measure ended
>> against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out !
>>
>> Pierre.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Finale mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>>
>> .
>>
>
>
> --
> David H. Bailey
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> From: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "David H. Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 15:07:35 +0100
>
> Thanks for your assistance.
>
> Pierre.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David H. Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 2:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>
>
>> In my experiment I locked the system and the cautionary key signature
>> still stayed put.
>>
>> Pierre Bailleul wrote:
>>> I think there is a bug in finale when you use in a staff , several multi
>>> measures rests, a repeat bar and a cautionary time signature in the last
>>> measure, when the staff is locked ?
>>> The staff lines of this last measure ended
>>> against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out !
>>>
>>> Pierre.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Finale mailing list
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David H. Bailey
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Finale mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 10:53:44 EST
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> In a message dated 2/21/03 3:46:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << I'm working on a single instrument part with a lot of time signature
> changings. At the end of a staff, the last measure show a cautionary time
> signature.
> That is wrong : I don't understand why the staff lines of this measure ended
> against the page margin and the cautionary time signature is out ?
> When I reajust the system margin to the left, It's worse...
> Thanks for your help.
>>>
>
> Yes - I've seen this many times, too. I am not sure what the exact cause is
> but it does relate to the multi-meas. rest at the end of the system.
>
> I assume that you have updated the layout - so your only option is not to use
> the Pg. layout tool but use the measure tool and drag the barline before the
> caut. key sig to the left. Now print it or take an eps snapshot of the page
> because if you update the layout you will lose this edit.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 18:38:23 +0100
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
> From: Klaaschello <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Pierre Bailleul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Hi, I can't recreate your problem. Everything seems OK (MacFin2k3a)
>
>
>> From: "Pierre Bailleul" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 13:25:50 +0100
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: Re: [Finale] Cautionary time signature
>>
>> I allow Finale itself to place the cautionary time signature.
>> I've tried also to do an update layout.
>> Something new : This problem occurs when I insert a repeat bar before a
>> multi measure rest in this staff.
>> Do you think it's a sort of bug?
>>
>> Pierre.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Finale mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Finale mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
>
> End of Finale Digest
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
