Lee, The only time I have ever encountered a situation where music spacing capriciously changed in a part (score) other than the one I was viewing was when I inserted a bar into a (nearly) finished piece and all the parts were already (mostly) edited. It destroyed all music spacing in all parts from the inserted bar forward. I reported this as a bug and MM acknowledged it as such. Unfortunately it is in Fin12, and it is a real problem. But (in my case) it is also an extremely rare situation, and I suspect it depends on an special set of circumstances in the file. (Although I don't know what they might be.)
Other than that, another spacing situation that is unfortunately not unlinkable is note position adjustments. That means grace notes cannot be separately spaced in sc and pt. For this reason I always manually space grace notes and set the option in Music Spacing so that it never touches grace note spacing. If you are maintaining the score in one file separately from another file containing all the parts, that approach allows for complete control over your part editing while leveraging 80% of the advantage of linked parts. It is the approach I always took from 2007 until late last year, and I would probably still take it for an orchestra piece of any complexity. There is also a further shave you can make, shy of the holy grail. I am working on a piece for cl/vlc/pno now. The score is in C. The part is in A. (The question of the utility of C scores has been beaten to death on this forum, so I hope this example does not induce anyone to beat it further.) Because special tools edits cannot be unlinked, yet present quite different requirements for C vs. A, I will probably duplicate the clarinet part in a second staff, which I will use for the part whilst hiding it in the score. The cello will have the same staff in sc and pt however. In the end, linked parts is a tool that you can use to whatever extent you like. And those decisions will be dictated by the nature of the project and the tradeoffs you are willing to make. The key insight is that the value of linked parts is not all-or-nothing. On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Lee Actor <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for your comments. I'm sure many of the issues I've seen have to do > with auto-spacing being on. Still, the concept that I can make an > admittedly stupid error in one place, and not catch it for some time > because > the effect is another place entirely, makes me queasy. > > I have no doubt that one can, with enough workarounds and tiptoeing about, > make linked parts work. My question remains, what compelling reasons are > there for doing so? It still seems to me that using linked parts is more > work, not less. > > -Lee > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of > SN jef chippewa > Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2013 5:33 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Finale] Linked parts > > > >if something goes wrong, EVERYTHING goes wrong. > > despite my well known dissastisfaction with linked parts, i have to > say this is a gross exaggeration. > > >inability to have different music spacing factors in score and parts). > > this is indeed stupid, but i have resolved the problem simply by > doing EVERYTHING in the score layout first before spacing parts. > also used JW plugin space empty rests recently that was great help in > the parts once i found my ideal settings for it. > > i have a sheet on the wall in front of me with my settings for the SC > / PTs spacing so can change back and forth quickly if needed. and > another sheet nearby with the H pos. settings for individual measures > / notes where running music spacing will change them (so after i run > spacing in the PTs i can "correct" what has been undone in the SC). > > using linked parts is all about deciding how much compromise you can > accept -- in the output and/or workflow -- and where you can accept > compromises are not terribly compromising. > > in any case, you mention having a seperate score for editing of the > parts, you are in effect not really using linked parts as they are > "meant". so none of the stupidities of the current disastrous > implementation of finale's linked parts should be of any both to you > anyways...? > > >easy to inadvertently mess up a carefully laid-out part while > >working on another part of the score (mostly while adding and > >adjusting cues). > > not clear what problems you are running into, but if you make sure > many of the auto features are off you might avoid many problems: > - auto-update MM rests > - auto-spacing > - etc. > > > >inadvertently mess up the flute part while you're editing the oboe part. > > this should not normally happen, unless you forget to uncheck certain > instruments in the "select parts to affect" dialogue when doing > certain operations (layout: systems or freeze measures in x systems. > > -- > > if you can point out some specific things that are getting "messed > up", there could possibly be some simple solutions to at least some > of them. > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
