On Mar 26, 2007, at 6:39 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) I have created a rolled chord, using the articulation tool.
Most of
the time this spaces okay, but when it is at the beginning of a
bar, there
is insufficient space between and barline, the articulation and the
following notes (or more usually accidentals). The music "spacing
options"
under "document settings" appears to have no effect and I do not
want to
increase spacing options that will affect all bars. Which method
is best?
I used to do this by adding an accidental to the chord, respacing
based on that, and then removing the accidental. Seems kind of
kludgy, but I found it to be simpler and easier than the various
other methods.
2) To ensure the rolled chord works over the entire chord, I have
entered
the notes in a single stave of the piano part and used the "note
mover" to
drag them to the stave above. When the notes either side of this
join are
a step apart, Finale offsets one of them to avoid note collisions.
Unfortunately, Finale appears to be unaware that a note has been
dragged to
another stave and remains offset. I know I can fix it by entering the
notes in separate staves (and lose the playback effect). Is there an
alternative that does not involve losing the offesetting of notes
for the
whole piece?
You can keep the chords in their own staves and fix the playback of
the roll in the articulation definition. For example, if you've got
a big chord in both hands, set the "change attack" values in the LH
articulation to -256 and -128, and set the ones in the RH
articulation to -128 and 0.
One drawback to this is that you end up with multiple articulations
that look the same but have different playback definitions. If
you're a nitpicker like me it can multiply enormously, since you'll
want to work out the correct math depending on how many notes are in
each hand and besides you've already got two different arpeggio
articulations so to position them differently for chord topping on a
line vs a space. But for everyday use, you can probably get by with
just three: one from -256 to 0, for a one-handed roll; one from -256
to -128, for the LH of a two-handed roll, and one from -128 to 0 for
the RH of a two-handed roll.
Also there's no reason the playback definition has to be association
with the arpeggio symbol. You can leave the symbol with null playback
and define blank articulations for the various playback permutations.
(I don't think you can do change attack on an expression.) You may
want to do that anyway, so that you don't have to worry about your
two arpeggio symbols not aligning properly.
I think arpeggio articulations are a good candidate for plug-in
implementation. I find that I still have to do a lot of twiddling to
get them just right, but after having set up my articulations and
procedures it's a very formulaic and consistent twiddling, with no
need for dragging around and eyeballing, which suggests to me that
the whole procedure could be automated.
If I ever got around to figuring out how to write plug-ins -- on my
long wish-list, but a long ways down in priority, alas -- it would
probably be one of my first.
mdl
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
