On 27 Aug 2005 at 21:16, Darcy James Argue wrote: > On 27 Aug 2005, at 8:26 PM, dhbailey wrote:
> > Maintaining two different files for two different playback engines > > -- didn't I mention that need a while back and was pooh-poohed as > > being too negative? > > Yes --at the time, I hadn't investigated unpitched percussion yet. I > apologize. This is thornier than I thought. I don't think it should require maintaining two different files. All you need to do is maintain two different sets of staves in your score, one set for GPO percussion, and one set for GM percussion. Yes, that's some work, but not nearly as much work as maintaining two complete files. And it's only relevant if you *need* both. I think the number of people who would need to maintain compatibility with both forms of playback is very small. If you use GPO on your own system, converting to GM for distribution to someone else or the production of a GM MIDI file should simply be the last step in the process. Or, alternatively, if during the working process you need to share GM with somebody, you work with GM, and create the GPO version as the last step, in order to produce the GPO demo. I just can't conceive of circumstances where one would need to have a re-iterative process of maintaining both GM and GPO versions of percussion while still working on the file. One or the other is going to be the final target playback format, while the other one is going to fall by the wayside once the project is finished, seems to me. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
