On 14 Jul 2005 at 21:29, Tyler Turner wrote: > > > > > But it does *not* offer the same functionality. It > > only offers the > > ability to copy from one source to another. > > > > Well, unless I completely do *not* understand how it > > works -- the > > online documentation says it's for COPYING. That's > > great if you've > > got a model to copy from, but it still does not come > > close to the > > Sibelius functionality, which actually solves a > > problem that has > > always annoyed me about Finale's metatool drag for > > articulations. > > > > I never stated that you couldn't get the > > articulations onto the notes > > you want them to be on. Ferchrissakes, you can click > > on each note > > individually and choose the articulation from the > > selection dialog. > > But it's much faster with the shortcuts provided > > both by Finale and > > Sibelius. > > > > And Sibelius's shortcuts for this in this one > > instance provide more > > functionality than Finale's. > > > > -- > > >From your other response, I'm not sure we're on the > same page with smartfind and paint. NO. It doesn't do > what you're talking about - but it still might be > useful as a means of helping you reduce the time you > spend on entering articulations. I'm not sure I made > its usefulness clear. The source doesn't have to have > the same pitches as the various targets - only the > same rhythm. Common rhythmic motives are frequent in > most music. But maybe they aren't in yours! I just > wanted to be clear.
I don't get why there's any benefit to it beyond regular mass copy used selectively. That *also* copies between the same rhythmic values, but also has the advantage in some cases of copying to *different* rhythmic values. I just am not doing engraving where the SmartFind and Paint would save me any time whatsoever. Well, maybe once in a blue moon, but I just don't see that it would be very often for me. > Here's where I see Sibelius vs. Finale on this: Finale > gets points for having a one step application of > articulations (Sibelius does take a minimum of two). > It also gets points for having a quick way to delete > all articulations from a range of notes. Sibelius gets > points for being able to delete specific articulations > from a range of notes and for the ability to add more > than one articulation after selecting the notes only > once. In the case of non-contiguous notes, this can be > particularly handy. Finally, Finale gets points for > having an entire keyboard's set of metatools devoted > to articulations, whereas in Sibelius you're going to > flip through keypads (or sacrifice/make awkward > keyboard commands). The other Sibelius advantage is that once the notes are selected, the tool palette "loads" the items that are on those notes and allows you to change them/remove them, etc. That's quite a useful method, much easier for deleting than using the articulation deletion from the Mass Edit menu, or doing them one at a time. Now, if articulations always had handles like expressions do, then the Sibelius functionality would be blown away. The non-contiguous selection is something I've wished Finale did for a very long time. Every time I'm drag applying articulations I run into cases where it would be quite helpful. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc All non-quoted content (c) David W. Fenton, all rights reserved _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
