Regardless of whether we all can come together on the meaning of "vaporware", wouldn't it be cool if the notation industry had a degree of standardization and openness such that we could use a mixture of tools, as the need fit? In the process of recording, I might use dedicated hardware at the live event, then run that into a DAW at home. And if I were really a studio heavy, I'd finish the project with a completely different set of mastering tools. It is all seamless.
I can imagine (i.e. dream of) an equivalent situation where I might use Finale as my base platform, but I might use Thinkware (or whatever) as a plug-in or side-by-side tool to do some sketching from a pad computer, or I might have another app that would allow me to sing some lines into my Android phone to add to the Finale score. The enemy is the proprietary silos. Somebody needs to find a way to open this up to more industry standards. Maybe MusicXML is enough of a standard -- maybe we just need to use it as the primary storage. On 9/18/2013 5:05 AM, Raymond Horton wrote: > Oh, Oh, OH! My mistake! > > My memory was running things together. Thanks for setting me straight, DJA! > > I take it all back. About the video, that is. > > I'm not sure if I retract the "100% vaporware" label, though. It still > seems to fit (actually Mr. Patterson applied it, first, but I jumped in > with both feet, partially in mouth). > > Yeah, I don't - it's still vaporware. > > Raymond Horton > Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra > Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) UMC > Composer, Arranger > VISIT US AT rayhortonmusic.com > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
