Um ... I wasn't saying that I thought it was computer-engraved because it
was somehow "better" than a score engraved with plates.  There were just
certain aspects of it that seemed like something someone might have done in
Finale -- for better OR worse.  Perhaps I was wrong, John, but I didn't need
to be reminded of the printing press/invention of the computer timeline.

You know, I haven't been a member of this list for that long -- a year and a
half or so -- and since joining, I have posted a grand total of three new
threads (sorry, maybe four).  In two of those, someone posted a reply
designed to make me feel like an idiot.  Call me thin-skinned, but that
doesn't feel much like the caring and supportive community so many have
claimed this list to be.

If your reply was more light-hearted than that, John, then I apologize --
but it's too hard to read into people's "tone of voice" on e-mail, and I
have had too many listserv experiences (here, the Logic-Users forum, heck
even the listserv for my homeowners' association) with people who take far
too many liberties while typing on a keyboard that they wouldn't dream of
when talking to a person face to face.

-- Mike





On 1/28/05 10:35 AM, "John Howell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> At 9:50 AM -0500 1/28/05, Michael L. Meyer wrote:
>> Hi Jari --
>> 
>> It was the Oxford University Press choral (with piano/orchestral reduction)
>> score of Vaughan Williams' Dona Nobis Pacem.  The copyright says 1936,
>> renewed 1964, but it seems very much to me to be a computer-engraved score
>> -- despite the dates.
> 
> Gee, I didn't know there was a version of Finale for Babbage Engine!
> 
> Before computer "engraving" people did pretty well scratching or
> punching on metal plates, and that was real "engraving."
> 
> John
> 



_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to