On 16 Sep 2005 at 16:33, Lee Actor wrote: > Granted that Finale is not the ideal tool for playback, but if you do > use it for that and want a reasonably musical and non-robotic > performance, I think it would be hard to avoid using the tempo tool > (though maybe not necessarily for pop, some jazz styles, and music > written before 1700).
Why would anyone think that music before 1700 would not need tempo changes? Hello? Perhaps one doesn't use Chopin-style rubato, or Brucknerian ritardano, but there's plenty of ebb and flow of tempo that is appropriate in that period (especially in the 100 years immediately before 1700!). Gad, I wish there weren't so many horrid music history teachers out there, ones who haven't a clue about the music they teach and end up propagating such incredibly stupid ideas as this one. In any event, the tempo tool is too unreliable, so I use note- attached expressions to change tempos. Another trick I use to put air between phrases is to change the meter of the last measure of a phrase by adding a 32nd- or 16th-note. This works surprisingly well, actually and doesn't require any tempo alterations. I do have to mess around a little with the music spacing in some cases to hide the extra time at the end of the measure, but usually not too much. -- 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
