[Finale] Chromatic harmonica notaton
Hi, This is a long shot but, I was wondering if anyone might have a pre-existing set up/plug-in for creating harmonica tab and notation in Finale. Specifically, 16 hole chromatic. I'd like to be able to do a drag and drop the way you can do for fretted instruments. TIA :) _A ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
shirling neueweise wrote: [snip] before being able to even begin to work in score. as we all know, none of these skills are prerequisites to producing output in finale or sibelius. and since finale is not developed by musicians... [snip] I can agree with most of what you've said, to the little extent of what I know about Score, but I do have to take issue with this statement about Finale not being developed by musicians -- Phil Farand, who I believe started Finale, was certainly a musician, and those members of the Finale development team who have inhabited this list have certainly been musicians. Why do you make this statement that Finale isn't developed by musicians? The marketing types who seem to drive Finale's direction may not be musicians (I have no knowledge one way or the other about this) but at least some of the developers (I would suspect all or most of them) are musicians. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] Why is it that everyone assumes the purchase of Sibelius by another company means that Sibelius will be weakened? Isn't there a certain synergy involved there? Why would a company purchase Sibelius and then kill it off? [snip] I don't think it's so much a matter of the company intentionally killing Sibelius off, but more a matter of people in charge who haven't got a clue. As more layers of management get added at the top, local control gets lost. As overall corporate focus shifts, development dollars get moved from one department to another. Look at Finale and Smartmusic -- MakeMusic looks on Smartmusic as the big money-earner, not Finale. And Finale hasn't innovated anything other than the inclusion of GPO since it introduced Staff Styles (something Sibelius still hasn't come up with) -- all the rest of the improvements to Finale have come in response to Sibelius improvements. When MakeMusic was THE product of a company called Coda, it was the main focus and got all the development dollars. No longer. The same may well happen with Sibelius. The new owners may begin to look at how they can combine Sibelius into their other products, rather than allow it to follow its own, so far very successful, development path. Rather than allow Sibelius to develop the next great new feature which will send Finale's developers racing for the antacids and starting to put in longer hours, the Sibelius developers may be forced to figure out how to make Sibelius be the notation module for a sequencer, and concentrate the development dollars not on more elegant notation (spacing algorithms, hand-engraved-quality slurs and ties, ease of use, etc) but on developing a better quantization routine so that even more noodlings of know-nothing would-be-composers can be spewed forth in notation from a computer, helping them gain some sort of recognition. So whatever happens to Sibelius, it won't be an intentional killing off, but just look at what's happened with Encore, which used to be actually a major and very real competitor to Finale. If Encore ever regains any market share it'll be a miracle. For the sake of Finale improvement over the years, since it seems to improve only when kicked in the ass by Sibelius, all of us Finale users need to pray that the same fate doesn't await Sibelius. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
On Oct 14, 2006, at 4:11 AM, dc wrote: shirling neueweise écrit: i visited someone today who showed me some very decent examples by his company, created with finale, score and sibelius. i could tell which was which in most of the cases, but doubt that the average user could tell the difference. finale is far superior in dealing with complex part extraction than score or sibelius, but score's spacing is much more sophisticated. How did you recognize the different examples? Besides the fonts, of course. I've often tried to find out from Score users what was so much better, and never got any precise answers. You say the spacing is much more sophisticated, but what do you mean by that? What can you do in Score, spacing-wise, that you can't do in Finale? I had a friend who used both for professional engraving, and the only thing I ever got out of her was that she preferred Score's algorithms (?). I have never seen something I could recognise as Score output, but from visiting the Lilypond site (and other clues, like the usual engraving books) I have developed more of an eye for Finale's shortcomings in the spacing department. I am looking critically at older classical engravings now, and discovering some subtle things that I never would have noticed before. Some things Finale doesn't do well in spacing: when there is a large interval, or when the stems change direction, Finale spaces the two notes exactly the same as if there was a small interval or no stem direction change. I never realised it before, but hand-engraved parts often push the spacing a bit to make them LOOK identical, while they aren't identical according to strict measurement. Also the way spacing changes when there are accidentals - Finale doesn't do TOO badly, but it is not exactly as someone might do it in hand engraving; it changes according to density, for one thing. When there is a lot of room, Finale is actually pretty good, but it needs more and more tweaking as the density increases. Chords with large numbers of accidentals are too widely-spaced in Finale, compared to older editions. And obviously, Finale completely drops the ball as soon as lyrics are involved. Admittedly, lyrics are a thorny problem that I never have enough time to sort out properly, but I wish Finale could deal with them a LITTLE better. Now, this doesn't mean that you can't go in and get Finale's spacing looking very close to how a hand engraver would do it, but if Score can do this with less fuss, that would be a valid point in Score's favour. Perhaps someone with a fine engraver's eye will make a Score spacing plugin one day, kind of like Patterson Beams. But I bet all the engravers will STILL tweak the results! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
David W. Fenton wrote: Score (like Finale and possibly like Sibelius) has a community of plugin developmers? Not possibly like Sibelius. What Sibelius calls a plug in, Finale calls a Finalescript. If Sibelius has anything equivalent to what Finale calls a plug-in, I believe it that it is entirely developed inhouse. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
Le 06-10-14 à 07:42, Christopher Smith a écrit : I have never seen something I could recognise as Score output, but from visiting the Lilypond site (and other clues, like the usual engraving books) I have developed more of an eye for Finale's shortcomings in the spacing department. I am looking critically at older classical engravings now, and discovering some subtle things that I never would have noticed before. Hi Christopher, you have probably seen Score engraving everywhere if you ever looked at sheetmusic (pop) published by Hal Leonard in the last 15 years. I think they switched to Sibelius 3 or 4 years ago. The overwhelming majority of guitar instruction books and licks of rock groups were made with Score too. For a simple example, see the link below: http://www.scoremus.com/examples.html There is nothing special in this sample to prove anything about the spacing strengh of Score, but at least you'll have the chance to see that, without knowing it, you've seen lots of music made with Score. Éric ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re(2): [Finale] Hiding Staff Lines for Rhythmic Notation
Bill, Thanks **Leigh ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Subject: [Finale] key signatures
Thanks, I'll try it! In a message dated 10/14/06 1:01:58 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From: Jonathan Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Finale] key signatures To: finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Steve, There is no need to do all this. You are working far too hard! Set everything up with the correct key and transpositions and then simply go to the Options menu and select Display in Concert Pitch (or not as you require). Have your brass quintet template set up with the transpositions for the 2 Tpts and Hn (you only ever need to do this once), after that it's easy to flip back and forth between concert pitch and written pitch from this menu item. (A good idea is to take a piece you've already done, clear all the notes and delete the measures leaving just 2 or 3 - then you'll have everything set as you wanted from a previous score and layout including all your 'default' settings. After that you can always save and load libraries for other items you've missed) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
At 6:13 AM -0400 10/14/06, dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] Why is it that everyone assumes the purchase of Sibelius by another company means that Sibelius will be weakened? Isn't there a certain synergy involved there? Why would a company purchase Sibelius and then kill it off? [snip] I don't think it's so much a matter of the company intentionally killing Sibelius off, but more a matter of people in charge who haven't got a clue. Just a couple of cases in point. The Deagan Percussion Co. was taken over by some MBAs who were convinced that MBAs can run anything. They fired the old guys who knew the business because they were being paid too much, and hired youngsters who had no clue. Bingo: no Deagan Co. And when Baldwin moved from Cincinnati to wherever they are now, the old guys who really knew how to build pianos took retirement rather than move their families. Same result. I'm not sure about the band instrument companies like Conn that used to be in South Bend, but some of them--Conn in particular--took pride in being so assembly-line oriented that less skilled workers could be trained to produce the products. But the bottom line is that companies whose product takes years of apprenticeship and intimate knowledge to produce can't continue without that expertise. And new management, as David points out, will never have the same goals or quality control as old management did. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Odd Transposition Behavior
I often compose for symphonic band on a 10-line template I have created using Setup Wizard. Then I create a 27-staff full score (from a Finale template) and import lines (one at a time) from my condensed draft into my full score. An odd behavior occurs: each imported line that I copy/paste is a major sixth above what I had written. I noticed this behavior in Finale 06, and it persists in 07. (I’m on a Mac G5). Can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong, or how to set up my documents to avoid this, or is this a Finale quirk? Anyone else encounter this? Gerry Kirk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Odd Transposition Behavior
Since all staves transpose by the same interval regardless of how the trasposition attribute is set, my guess is that the 10 stave template is set to a major key and the 27 stave is set to minor key (or vice versa). JB In a message dated 10/14/06 12:57:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I often compose for symphonic band on a 10-line template I have created using Setup Wizard. Then I create a 27-staff full score (from a Finale template) and import lines (one at a time) from my condensed draft into my full score. An odd behavior occurs: each imported line that I copy/paste is a major sixth above what I had written. I noticed this behavior in Finale 06, and it persists in 07. (I知 on a Mac G5). ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Odd Transposition Behavior
That would be my guess, too. Christopher On Oct 14, 2006, at 2:27 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since all staves transpose by the same interval regardless of how the trasposition attribute is set, my guess is that the 10 stave template is set to a major key and the 27 stave is set to minor key (or vice versa). JB In a message dated 10/14/06 12:57:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I often compose for symphonic band on a 10-line template I have created using Setup Wizard. Then I create a 27-staff full score (from a Finale template) and import lines (one at a time) from my condensed draft into my full score. An odd behavior occurs: each imported line that I copy/paste is a major sixth above what I had written. I noticed this behavior in Finale 06, and it persists in 07. (I 知 on a Mac G5). ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: Way OT by now: Re: [Finale] Converting old files: why bother?
On 13.10.2006 Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 07:57 AM 10/13/06 +0200, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Hey? I am a Mac person, and I hate XP. You must be confusing me. Who was it kept saying one couldn't do anything with an older operating system like Win98SE? (Other than Eric.) I thought it was you... I am confusing you with someone else, then. Apologies! Well, I can't say I ever liked Win98, I never used Win98SE, and in my experience Win XP is indeed a lot more stable than Win98. Other than that I have very few opinions about WinXP, except I find it vastly inferior to MacOS X. But I don't think I would ever take sides in the Windows world at all. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: score vs. finale
uh... warning, fill your coffee mug to the brim. From: David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Score (like Finale and possibly like Sibelius) has a community of plugin developmers? Score (like Finale) has a public plugin development API? i'm not a programmer: i don't completely understand the distinction between a programme and a plugin, both for me are simply tools (of varying complexity) that are external to the built-in functionality of the programme, this is what i was referring to, sorry if it was unclear. The shortcomings I was referring to were UI and basic structural problems (like being entirely page-based, tied to a single font and having no capability for printing to anything but Postscript printers). true. there are a few choices for text fonts however. for most users this is not an issue either, the average users of finale/sibelius only use times new roman (jazz scores excepted of course) or bookman/palatino. for me this limitation is a serious problem, because i have developed my own fonts for most graphic notational details. i have to admit though, the dynamics in score, which are vector diagrammes rather than fonts (!), look wonderful. they have an elegance of character that possibly no digital font used in finale/sibelius is capable of emulating. But the UI is so horrid, almost lacking entirely. yes, of course. the windows emulation is unusable for proofing. Last time I heard, the only MIDI interface was an add-on (for MIDI keyboard input) and didn't work very well. Of course, last I heard anything about Score was 10 or 15 years ago. yeah MIDI is seriously problematic; however, the programme is not built - or seen as by its users - as a compositional assistant. the people i spoke with all consider the composing of the piece to be the job of the composer, not of the person doing the score. i have to admit i totally agree with this: despite my knowledge of finale and familiarity woith working on a computer, i actually compose on paper, and enter the score when i can no longer read through the layers of information on the MS. at least two similar editing stages usually follow. certainly this process would be a nightmare in score because of how it deals with layout, but i am still able to make a totally clean readable hand-written score without recourse to a computer when needed. so i would be able to, if i had to, prepare a finished MS for the person (me) preparing the score, in score. Score has always been good, especially with drawing slurs and ties. except that they are ALWAYS symmetrical, whcih is much more of a problem with the kinds of notational situations i come across than traditional (or pop or film) music. there are a number of similar examples... virtually everything i saw today (and most of the work i have done as well) could be done on any of the three programmes to the same level of quality - if you have the eye and patience for it. however, because of the differences in the various programmes, certain tasks take far more time to do in one or another programme. Specifics on that would be interesting. text on an angle is a joke in score and will always remain exactly as you position it. anything with heavy graphics can typically be best done in score, somewhat better in sibelius, and only with much cussing in finale. in sibelius and score you have to have enough staves for all situations which will occur in each instrumental group: vln I using 1 stave (tutti), 2 or 3 stave divisi, solo vlnI staff, gli altri staff... so far that's 8 staves, and you don't even want to know what that means for compiling parts in score... finale + TGTools deals with this excellently (if not perfectly), because you can redefine each staff/group bracket on an individual basis. in score, the staves are considered numbers (001 from the bottom staff up in each document), and the text at the beginning of the staff is only a text element. you can't change the vertical order or the horizontal positioning of the articulations in sibelius, so when you need such things, you have to define them in a different category - symbols (but of course!). dynamic/text placement is fabulous (not perfect, but really great) in finale since the massive upgrade of the text expression tool and transposing more or less works (you still have to adjust hairpins in such cases); in sibelius the texts are placed horizontally according to the metrical position in the measure and vertically according to the staff, not the note. so after transposing more adjustments are necessary in sibelius than in finale. you can't reorder the articulations in the sibelius toolpad, and there are a limited number of articulations (as well as some other elements), so you have to define extra artculations as symbols (which of course react differently than articulations). sibelius automatically changes the beam
Re: [Finale] OT Linux
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Yes, aside from the computers, there are five printers, three scanners, and a bunch of peripherals (such as a slide scanner, two cameras, a pen tablet, and many external drives) -- many without Linux drivers. Yes, that's the problem, especially if you have old products with significant life ahead of them. The possible saving is that the Linux community is large, and includes lots of clever programmers (motivated partly by the wish to save the world from the horrors of Microsoft) who can advise on the nearest available driver to what you need and what changes have to be made to fit it for your purpose. Also, other people may share your problem already and be in process of solving it. [...] I've been waiting for a Linux version that doesn't make me worry about network complexities right away. :) The networking I use now is TCP/IP-based with a server, and the Linux test run found everybody right away. As far as shared drives, I didn't go that far. It was just a test -- until Eric's email, which snapped my head back about how unacceptable XP hardware upgrades will be. [...] Vista looks like being worse. That still leaves me with 13 years of Windows software that I'm very fond of using without needing to think about each step, and of course Finale, Adobe Audition, Pagemaker, Sonar, Photoshop and other expensive programs that don't come in Linux versions. I live in hope, either of a Windows emulator on Linux that can provide an adequate environment for these programs, or (a guess, because I don't know muh about either OS) of a means of providing a Mac-like environment under Linux. The latter would be attractive only if we were about to upgrade and could change versions. Presumably that would apply to Finale, IIRC that the CD provided has both Windows and Mac versions. -- Ken Moore ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT Linux
Ken Moore wrote: Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That still leaves me with 13 years of Windows software that I'm very fond of using without needing to think about each step, and of course Finale, Adobe Audition, Pagemaker, Sonar, Photoshop and other expensive programs that don't come in Linux versions. I live in hope, either of a Windows emulator on Linux that can provide an adequate environment for these programs, or (a guess, because I don't know muh about either OS) of a means of providing a Mac-like environment under Linux. The latter would be attractive only if we were about to upgrade and could change versions. Presumably that would apply to Finale, IIRC that the CD provided has both Windows and Mac versions. I have an old friend who is a Unix programmer, but keeps Mac at home, as OSX and beyond are all basically Unix based anyway. I keep hoping for a happy blend of the two that will make Linux a viable alternative to The Monster from Redmond. cd -- http://www.livejournal.com/users/dershem/# ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] smart shape macro bug
Can anyone confirm if this is a bug? In Finale 2007 (Mac) we can no longer make macros for smart shapes. There are some predefined ones, but the user manual says we can make our own. (NOT!) Thanks for checking. -Randolph Peters ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: Way OT by now: Re: [Finale] Converting old files: why bother?
On 14 Oct 2006 at 7:31, Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 13.10.2006 Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 07:57 AM 10/13/06 +0200, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Hey? I am a Mac person, and I hate XP. You must be confusing me. Who was it kept saying one couldn't do anything with an older operating system like Win98SE? (Other than Eric.) I thought it was you... I am confusing you with someone else, then. Apologies! Well, I can't say I ever liked Win98, I never used Win98SE, and in my experience Win XP is indeed a lot more stable than Win98. Other than that I have very few opinions about WinXP, except I find it vastly inferior to MacOS X. But I don't think I would ever take sides in the Windows world at all. I urged all my clients to skip Win98 and move directly from Win95 or Win3.x to NT 4. A few of my clients didn't take my advice, and they've regretted it in the long run. I've never liked WinXP on a number of levels and have downgraded a number of clients from WinXP back to Win2K after they complained about how much they disliked WinXP. However, since WinXP SP2, things seem to be better, and I've also learned to adapt my administrative approach to the weaknesses of WinXP, so now it's working pretty well for my clients. In a corporate environment, it always worked pretty well (because in a domain controller environment the default is for no one to have anything but user-level logons, which fixes a number of the problems with WinXP). But I still don't like WinXP. But I liked Win98 less, and would say that WinXP would be a vast improvement over it. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Names of Applied Staff Styles
Hello Group, How can I tell which Staff Style is applied to a stave or a measure? I can't find anything in the manual about showing the name. I expected that if I selected a measure or a stave and right-clicked it, there would be a check mark by it's style. Thanks. **Leigh ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale
On 14 Oct 2006 at 23:44, shirling neueweise wrote: From: David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] Score (like Finale and possibly like Sibelius) has a community of plugin developmers? Score (like Finale) has a public plugin development API? i'm not a programmer: i don't completely understand the distinction between a programme and a plugin, both for me are simply tools (of varying complexity) that are external to the built-in functionality of the programme, this is what i was referring to, sorry if it was unclear. Then why do you care who makes the plugin, the Finale programmers or someone else? My point is that Finale is the best in regard to providing an open development interface for extending the basic functionality of the program as it ships from the manufacturer. This makes it much more versatile than either Sibelius (whose plugin architecture is not as open as Finale's, if I understand correctly) or Score (which has no plugin architecture at all, if I'm not mistaken). The shortcomings I was referring to were UI and basic structural problems (like being entirely page-based, tied to a single font and having no capability for printing to anything but Postscript printers). true. there are a few choices for text fonts however. But the music font is hardwired, and I've always found the open notehead to be much too small. for most users this is not an issue either, the average users of finale/sibelius only use times new roman (jazz scores excepted of course) or bookman/palatino. But the average Finale/Sibelius user would never be able to get *anything* done with Score, because the UI is so old-fashioned. Mac users wouldn't be able to use it all, of course. One of my main arguments is that Score's design and UI means that it can never be widely used by anyone but the most dedicated engravers and computer users. for me this limitation is a serious problem, because i have developed my own fonts for most graphic notational details. i have to admit though, the dynamics in score, which are vector diagrammes rather than fonts (!), look wonderful. they have an elegance of character that possibly no digital font used in finale/sibelius is capable of emulating. Are you saying that f and p in Score are not drawn with fonts? That's very weird. And of course, all Finale/Sibelius font output is vector-based, in any event, because scalable fonts are being used. Finale has never used bit-mapped fonts, ever, and certainly neither has Sibelius. So, your point makes no sense to me at all. But the UI is so horrid, almost lacking entirely. yes, of course. the windows emulation is unusable for proofing. Or for much of anything. Last time I heard, the only MIDI interface was an add-on (for MIDI keyboard input) and didn't work very well. Of course, last I heard anything about Score was 10 or 15 years ago. yeah MIDI is seriously problematic; however, the programme is not built - or seen as by its users - as a compositional assistant. That's not the point of providing MIDI input. 90% of my Finale work is not composition, but the scoring up from parts of 17th-, 18th- and early 19th-century music available only in parts. MIDI input is the method I use to get the notes and rhythms into Finale, and it's extremely fast. the people i spoke with all consider the composing of the piece to be the job of the composer, not of the person doing the score. This is a false point, as it assumes that only composers would use MIDI input. That's just not true at all. One of the reasons I can't use Sibelius is because it's MIDI input is too unwieldy for me, whereas in Finale I can fly through a piece very quickly. Score offers substantially less than Sibelius in that regard. And MIDI input really ought to be a default feature of any music notation program, seems to me. It is *music* we're printing, after all. i have to admit i totally agree with this: despite my knowledge of finale and familiarity woith working on a computer, i actually compose on paper, and enter the score when i can no longer read through the layers of information on the MS. at least two similar editing stages usually follow. certainly this process would be a nightmare in score because of how it deals with layout, but i am still able to make a totally clean readable hand-written score without recourse to a computer when needed. so i would be able to, if i had to, prepare a finished MS for the person (me) preparing the score, in score. For me, this is all completely off-base, as the composition/engraving distinction has no correlation at all with whether or not MIDI entry is helpful. Score has always been good, especially with drawing slurs and ties. except that they are ALWAYS symmetrical, whcih is much more of a problem with the kinds of notational situations i come across than traditional (or pop or film)
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
On 14 Oct 2006 at 6:13, dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] Why is it that everyone assumes the purchase of Sibelius by another company means that Sibelius will be weakened? Isn't there a certain synergy involved there? Why would a company purchase Sibelius and then kill it off? [snip] I don't think it's so much a matter of the company intentionally killing Sibelius off, but more a matter of people in charge who haven't got a clue. As more layers of management get added at the top, local control gets lost. As overall corporate focus shifts, development dollars get moved from one department to another. Look at Finale and Smartmusic Wasn't SmartMusic developed by the same team responsible for Finale? -- MakeMusic looks on Smartmusic as the big money-earner, not Finale. Sure, the razor blade model. But MM has made SmartMusic and Finale work together, so the existence of SmartMusic increases the market for Finale (i.e., if you want to create SM accompaniments, Finale provides you the tools, no?). And Finale hasn't innovated anything other than the inclusion of GPO since it introduced Staff Styles (something Sibelius still hasn't come up with) -- all the rest of the improvements to Finale have come in response to Sibelius improvements. Yep, that's true, but that may have more to do with the fact that Finale was already a mature product when Sibelius was introduced. And nobody seems to ever criticize Sibelius for matching Finale features (GPO anyone?). When MakeMusic was THE product of a company called Coda, it was the main focus and got all the development dollars. No longer. The same may well happen with Sibelius. But it's *good* that MM is diversified, and in a way that increases revenues and gets new buyers for Finale. The new owners may begin to look at how they can combine Sibelius into their other products, rather than allow it to follow its own, so far very successful, development path. Rather than allow Sibelius to develop the next great new feature which will send Finale's developers racing for the antacids and starting to put in longer hours, the Sibelius developers may be forced to figure out how to make Sibelius be the notation module for a sequencer, and concentrate the development dollars not on more elegant notation (spacing algorithms, hand-engraved-quality slurs and ties, ease of use, etc) but on developing a better quantization routine so that even more noodlings of know-nothing would-be-composers can be spewed forth in notation from a computer, helping them gain some sort of recognition. And given recent discussion on this list, this would be a *bad* thing? Wouldn't a sequencer with Sibelius-quality notational output be a Finale killer? So whatever happens to Sibelius, it won't be an intentional killing off, but just look at what's happened with Encore, which used to be actually a major and very real competitor to Finale. If Encore ever regains any market share it'll be a miracle. For the sake of Finale improvement over the years, since it seems to improve only when kicked in the ass by Sibelius, all of us Finale users need to pray that the same fate doesn't await Sibelius. I think these companies are too small to predict what will happen. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
On 14 Oct 2006 at 13:35, John Howell wrote: Just a couple of cases in point. The Deagan Percussion Co. was taken over by some MBAs who were convinced that MBAs can run anything. They fired the old guys who knew the business because they were being paid too much, and hired youngsters who had no clue. Bingo: no Deagan Co. And when Baldwin moved from Cincinnati to wherever they are now, the old guys who really knew how to build pianos took retirement rather than move their families. Same result. Software is not at all the same thing as manufacturing musical instruments. I'm not sure about the band instrument companies like Conn that used to be in South Bend, but some of them--Conn in particular--took pride in being so assembly-line oriented that less skilled workers could be trained to produce the products. But the bottom line is that companies whose product takes years of apprenticeship and intimate knowledge to produce can't continue without that expertise. And new management, as David points out, will never have the same goals or quality control as old management did. Sometimes companies with bad management are purchased by companies with better management. I don't know Sibelius's past situation or the new management, but it's theoretically possible that the product will be better managed and marketed under new management than under the old. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: score vs. finale [was: Converting...]
On 14 Oct 2006 at 10:03, Éric Dussault wrote: For a simple example, see the link below: http://www.scoremus.com/examples.html There is nothing special in this sample to prove anything about the spacing strengh of Score, but at least you'll have the chance to see that, without knowing it, you've seen lots of music made with Score. For me, the tiny noteheads of the half and whole notes stick out immediately. And, of course, the lack of professionalism in posting such a horrid graphic (but, of course, that's the fault of the web page designer, who has set the graphic size wrong; if you right click and choose VIEW IMAGE you'll see the bit-mapped graphic without the resizing artifacts). I've always thought that Score's spacing was too loose. But I'm accustomed to working with c. 1800 engraving, back when standards were *much* different from what they are today. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] smart shape macro bug
Can anyone confirm if this is a bug? In Finale 2007 (Mac) we can no longer make macros for smart shapes. There are some predefined ones, but the user manual says we can make our own. (NOT!) Thanks for checking. -Randolph Peters (For some unexplained reason this message was blank the last time I sent it.) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Names of Applied Staff Styles
At 07:15 PM 10/14/2006, Leigh Daniels wrote: How can I tell which Staff Style is applied to a stave or a measure? Select the Staff tool. Make sure that Staff | Show Staff Styles and Staff | Show Staff Style Names are both enabled. You should see a blue bar above all measures that have staff styles applied, with the name of the staff style inside the blue bar. The name may be hard to read if you are at less than 100% view size, or if the bar collides with other items on the page. It sure would make sense if there were also a checkmark next to any applied staff styles in the context menu. This would also make it easier to selectively remove a single staff style from a measure which has more than on style applied. Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] smart shape macro bug
I've had this bug also. Did you use a copy of your preference file of 2006 and renamed it 2007 before using the new version? see this thread: http://tinyurl.com/yzlruv using a freshly created preference file solved the problem for me. Le 06-10-14 à 19:59, Randolph Peters a écrit : Can anyone confirm if this is a bug? In Finale 2007 (Mac) we can no longer make macros for smart shapes. There are some predefined ones, but the user manual says we can make our own. (NOT!) Thanks for checking. -Randolph Peters ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] smart shape macro bug
That's exactly what I did. Thanks for the speedy confirmation and fix. Now I just have to start my preferences from scratch... grumble... grumble... -Randolph Peters At 8:45 PM -0400 10/14/06, Éric Dussault wrote: I've had this bug also. Did you use a copy of your preference file of 2006 and renamed it 2007 before using the new version? see this thread: http://tinyurl.com/yzlruv using a freshly created preference file solved the problem for me. Le 06-10-14 à 19:59, Randolph Peters a écrit : Can anyone confirm if this is a bug? In Finale 2007 (Mac) we can no longer make macros for smart shapes. There are some predefined ones, but the user manual says we can make our own. (NOT!) Thanks for checking. -Randolph Peters ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] HP off in 2007 bug
Does anyone notice that you can't turn off Human Playback in Finale 2007 (Mac) by using an expression? Can anyone else confirm this? -Randolph Peters ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
