On 24/11/2007, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 24, 2007, at 2:59 PM, Adam Golding wrote: > > > thanks for your helpful responses everyone--chris, by "any others > > you need?" > > do you mean other combined articulation? yeah, well on a first > > glace it > > doesn't have stacatissimo+accent for instance or any triple > > articulations > > such as mezzo-staccato accent. i know i can add these symbols but > > now i'm > > scratching my head as to what will happen to human playback if i > > start doing > > that, especially with all the different interpretation styles > > (playback > > accuracy is top priority for me here) > > You can make an articulation out of a shape, which can contain two or > more different characters. You can resize the shape, which helps a lot. > > Some fonts have some different characters for articulations, like > three dots (three dots plus a slur is one of the defaults, as I'm > sure you saw). I use Bill Duncan's Articulations font, which has most > of what I need. You will probably have to look around a bit. Try some > of the default fonts included with Finale before you start going too > far afield, though! Many engravers have gone the whole hog and bought > Fontographer to make up their own glyphs for things they need. Jef > chippewa appears to be the reigning king of this. I haven't gone that > far, though. > > Playback is part of the articulation definition, so there is no > problem with most situations.
hrm perhaps i'm confused, but i was under the impression that human playback ignores these definitions, and makes its own decisions based on what articulation it is, and that this functionality would be broken if i randomly switched to another font... > About triple articulations; hmm, I'm > not even sure how Human Playback would play that WITHOUT the > articulation, so I'm stumped. hmm? mezzo-staccato accent is about 75% the length and a bit louder, eh? Often playback solutions involve > putting a playback passage into another layer which is hidden, then > muting the layer that shows. This is too much kludging for me, since > I rarely need excellent playback. On occasion I actually create a > dummy staff with things I need when I don't want to clutter up my > score with playback items. I don't include this staff in my score > definition, though, or else I delete it before printing. yeah definitely too much kludging for me as well--basically i need finale to interpret my notation as well as possible, and then i'll compose complete piecs jsut with notation, and only at the end export to a sequencer *or* tweak with midi tool etc. at the end. TGTools has some additional playback utilities as well. i'm also of the impression that i can't mix these with human playback Sometimes what I HAVE done, though, is to turn off the articulation > playback (say, for an inverted V accent), and make up my own blank > articulation that ONLY has playback in it. I can assign this wherever > I need it, even on top of another accent, and it won't show. Human > playback would ignore any articulation it doesn't recognize (like one > of your fabricated shapes) so you can get the playback you need with > invisible articulations or hidden playback layers. hmm that would be a very useful strategy in the end tweaking stage, i'll probably try it Christopher > > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
