Amen, brother. My orchestra is paying almost twice per rental what we paid just 5-6 years ago. That is WAY above the rate of inflation. It is affecting what we can program.
When you pay $800 to rent a big work, it does seem reasonable to expect that the parts are error free. Most of these big expensive pieces are professionally engraved, so the readability is rarely a problem. But many of them still contain errors that the publishers have not fixed. You would think that if a publisher is renting a piece for $10,000 revenue a year (or $400,000 for the big popular ones), it shouldn't be too much to ask that they pay a professional copyist to bring it into Finale and correct all the errors. I have a slight bit more sympathy for the lesser frequently rented pieces. The two that I called out were both pieces that probably rent less than 10 times a year. One of the two is probably programmed less than once a year worldwide. On 2/20/2014 5:19 PM, David H. Bailey wrote: > On 2/20/2014 3:21 PM, timothy.price wrote: >> Craig, you make an excellent point. But as a composer, it is nearly >> impossible to be confident that our manuscripts are what musicians >> are comfortable with. There is lacking, imo, the interface between >> the good composer, and the musicians, when it comes to the >> manuscript. > But aren't composers musicians? Shouldn't they know what a readable > part looks like? Isn't that part of their education? > > [snip] >> So, who in your orchestras, is responsible for making sure that the >> manuscripts are readably clear BEFORE you get the parts and your are >> trapped into a schedule to performance? If is is new work, not only >> is the composition new, but the manuscripts are too. It is the >> musician that has to be pleased, and it is not always possible for a >> composers to have their work reviewed by every instrument player. > But good notation is good notation -- if you can't read what you wrote > then it's not good notation. And if you are able to sit down with an > instrument and play the parts, then you should know whether it's clearly > written or not. > >> Orchestras, or at least an assigned member of the orchestra, could be >> of great service in furthering new music by engaging is the process >> of notation of the piece. Just get the manuscript early and notify >> the composer of problem areas in time for them to be happily >> corrected. >> > But the orchestras are paying for this music, aren't they? The > compositions which Craig complained about were published, thus money > changed hands. The performers should not be the beta-testers for the > playability of the music. Any more than we Finale users are happy being > the unpaid beta-testers for the software. > > It is the job of a composer to know what good notation is like -- there > is no shortage of books which discuss notation (Elaine Gould's is a very > comprehensive book and costly but there are many others which cost less). > > I think it's very commendable that you will be willing to change your > printed parts and score to make them more readable, but a publisher, > once the music is printed, very rarely will change anything at all. > > And with the prices that many publishers charge for orchestral music, > especially rental music for which they have often had the notation > errors pointed out but refuse to repair the problems, the end-user is > under no obligation to do the composer's/publisher's work for them. > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
