Let's say you are in 4/4 time and want to do a rhythm that is 8th-quarter-quarter-quarter-8th. Most people consider it incorrect for a quarter to span the half bar. You can set the rule in Dorico that notes cannot span half-bars. In that case, the middle quarter would automatically be changed to a pair of 8ths, tied. And if you decided to delete the beginning 8th to put everything on the beat, Dorico would automatically re-combine those 8ths into a quarter because it no longer spans the half bar. Basically Dorico treats the presentation as a separate function from the note itself, with the presentation managed automatically based on the context. You would rarely have to concern yourself with beaming or ties. It is all automatic. You can override if you really want to, but usually it is best to let the program apply the conventional rules automatically.
I had another case where Finale degrades from release to release. At one point, the cautionary accidentals plug-in started producing completely wrong results (related to transpositions as I recall). They eventually fixed that, I think, but then it became evident that anytime you ran that plug-in, it could mess up the beaming and ties for measures completely out of the plug-in range. This is the sort of thing that is extremely tedious in Finale -- wastes hours of time, and it just can't happen in Dorico because of the operation I described above. On 4/19/2018 2:39 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: > Leaving aside what happened with BIAB, how is Dorico more automatic than > Finale with respect to beams and ties? (I don't doubt it is. I'm just > curious how.) I tend to distrust a lot of automation, unless it can be > overridden on a case-by-case basis. > > What I expect the company that owns Finale to do is to continue addressing > pain points. That's what I hope they'll do anyway. Address enough pain > points and I suppose it won't matter if it's on the vanguard. I'm not sure > I even know what "state of the art" means. > > Are there notations Finale won't do that it should? Absolutely: multihandle > smart shapes, for example. And I believe Dorico *does* that, at least for > slurs. Finale should have added it years ago, and there is nothing > precluding them from adding them now. But that's not revolutionary change. > Is there a notation Finale won't do that requires revolutionary change? I'm > not sure. What might it be? > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 1:20 PM, Craig Parmerlee <cr...@parmerlee.com> > wrote: > >> I used BIAB harmonization a lot, especially to get a quick draft of an >> arrangement. I usually re-harmonized manually for the final copy, but it >> was a very useful way to get something going quickly. >> >> Over time, this degraded. Eventually it became very destructive, as >> whenever you would run the tool on a range of measures, it would mess up >> the beaming for other measures on the same instrument, even measures not in >> the selected range. Because of this rather serious bug, it really isn't >> productive to keep a version of F2012 installed to be able to run the BIAB >> plug-in. >> >> And that bug illustrates a difference between a 1980s era program like >> Finale and a modern program like Dorico. In Dorico, the beaming and ties >> are completely automatic, following the notation rules you establish. If >> you move notes around in time, the music automatically re-casts itself to >> be notated correctly with regards to beams and ties. Every year that >> Finale does nothing, it gets another year behind the state of the art. It >> seems doubtful to me Finale will ever return to anywhere close to the state >> of the art. Moreover, I don't see any indication the company even >> considers that a goal. >> >> >> >> >> On 4/19/2018 1:46 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: >> >>> Tempo tool and BIAB were significant features? Color me surprised. I'd be >>> interested to know if others found them to be significant. Personally I >>> never used BIAB even once, and the Tempo Tool only rarely and only up >>> until >>> Human Playback was a thing. But I admit I'm not that fussy about playback. >>> Obviously ymmv. >>> >>> FWIW: I recompiled JW Tempo for 64-bit macOS. It works just fine in >>> MacFin25. (Basically, the Tempo Tool was removed from the F25 U.I. but not >>> the underlying support for tempo changes.) It's a free download on my >>> website if you think it might be useful. I always found it to be more what >>> I wanted out of tempo changes than the Tempo Tool. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Craig Parmerlee <cr...@parmerlee.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Tempo tool. BIAB harmonization. >>>> >>>> On 4/19/2018 9:10 AM, Robert Patterson wrote: >>>> >>>> Which functionality was lost v25? I've been on it so long I forgot. >>>>> >>>> --- >>>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >>>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Finale mailing list >>> Finale@shsu.edu >>> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale >>> >>> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: >>> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
