Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 03.12.2006 John Howell wrote: The problem, as I understand it, is that the big boys reprint only when and if they can see continuing demand sufficient to offset the setup expenses of reprinting and the anticipated cost of storage for those large print runs. Actually, a lot of larger publishers do not reprint as such. Instead they resort to typical printing on demand technology. I have seen both Peters and Bärenreiter editions which were nothing else than photocopies. Very often the score is still printed traditionally, while the parts are photocopies. It seems that the publishers do this when the EOF of an edition has been reached, yet they don't have a new edition out. Ie Peters parts for the Brandenburgs. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 03.12.2006 Kim Patrick Clow wrote: I did not use the words print on demand as a demeaning phrase, or in pejorative sense. So if you were offended, my apologies. Maybe a less offensive phrase would be non traditional publisher methods would be less offensive. But no matter how we define such desktop publishing; it's not the traditional method of how editions are published. In which way do they differ? Except for the more modern production process using computers for the engraving, and modern print machines for the print run it is exactly the same as it was in the 18th century. In fact many editions in the 18th century hat smaller print runs. Printing on demand means that every ordered copy is printed separately. That is a completely different way of publishing which is only possible with modern technology. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Exactly! Petrucci's print runs were of the of the order of magnitude of a couple of hundred copies maximum, and Telemann's (two hundred plus years later) were quite certainly no larger. EFF Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) www.habsburgerverlag.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 04.12.2006, at 09:08, Johannes Gebauer wrote: In which way do they differ? Except for the more modern production process using computers for the engraving, and modern print machines for the print run it is exactly the same as it was in the 18th century. In fact many editions in the 18th century hat smaller print runs. Printing on demand means that every ordered copy is printed separately. That is a completely different way of publishing which is only possible with modern technology. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] PS
I Do Not do C score! Vivian Adelberg Rudow New: 20th ASCAP Plus Award CALL FOR PEACE, flute and tape, performance An Die Musik, Baltimore Composers Forum, December 1, 2006, 8:00PM, Sara Nichols, flute, FREE. THE SKY SPEAKS, Clouds, Peabody Singers Chorus, mezzo soprano, cello, percussion and piano, Edward Polochick, conductor, Peabody Conservatory of Music, Thursday, March 29, 2007, 7:30PM, Griswold Hall www.vivianadelbergrudow.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Sorry
Last post was meant for one person, not the list Vivian ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Transposing
On 03.12.2006 Will Denayer wrote: Bach, for example, never wrote transposing instrumental parts, but did use different clefs for high, medium and low instruments. (Yes, i know about his brass parts, and about chorton and kammerton, but please don't complicate things at this point!) Well, in that case your above statement is simply not true. 1) Bach wrote for Oboe da Caccia. It is true that he used a clef to do the transposition for him, but they are still in effect transposed parts. 2) and more important: In the Weimar canatas _all_ the wind parts are transposed parts, since the organ pitch was a tone higher, so this was compensated by writing transposed wind parts. In the Leipzig Cantatas the organ parts are transposed parts, for the very same reason. The difference is that the strings were tuned high in Weimar, and low in Leipzig, and they are always written non-transposed. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
John Howell wrote: On 12/3/06, Eric Fiedler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In principal, all publishers print on demand, on demand, the difference being the size and frequency of the print runs. Our print runs average between 300 and 400 copies, which, while certainly not in the same league with the big boys, can't really be described as print on demand. The problem, as I understand it, is that the big boys reprint only when and if they can see continuing demand sufficient to offset the setup expenses of reprinting and the anticipated cost of storage for those large print runs. Which leads to some hard-headed business decisions that leave us all facing a situation of Permanently Out Of Print for things that we would gladly pay for if we could. THAT is what print-on-demand is supposed to do away with, accepting higher printing costs in exchange for never going out of print. John And in my mind should be written into the copyright law -- anything for which the copyright owner wishes to receive copyright protection must be available for sale at reasonable cost (can be higher than the original cost but not in any order of magnitude above 3x) or the copyright lapses and the work enters the public domain. If the copyright has been assigned to a publisher it reverts first to the original author(s) who have a chance to make the work available again, but should they fail to do so within one year, the copyright lapses forever and the work enters the public domain. The copyright is supposed to promote the progress of science and useful arts by allowing creative people the sole right to profit from their works for a limited time. If the works are no longer available but are still protected by copyright, this does absolutely nothing to promote the progress of science and useful arts. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
A-NO-NE Music wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / 2006/12/03 / 04:31 AM wrote: However, when I use Finale I am forced to use the show in concert pitch option because when I enter a note for a transposed instrument, let's say a written F for horn (sounding Bb) the note that Finale plays isn't the real note, the Bb, but a concert F. I am frustrated with this, too. Like you said, it is very important to think in transposed notation, or it is very difficult to imagine the fingerling limitations and how the range will sound :-( How other people are dealing with this? May be I need to switch from long-accustomed-Speedy to never-tried-Simple? Just turn off the play as entered or moved option in Speedy. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: And in my mind should be written into the copyright law -- anything for which the copyright owner wishes to receive copyright protection must be available for sale at reasonable cost (can be higher than the original cost but not in any order of magnitude above 3x) or the copyright lapses and the work enters the public domain. If the copyright has been assigned to a publisher it reverts first to the original author(s) who have a chance to make the work available again, but should they fail to do so within one year, the copyright lapses forever and the work enters the public domain. Personally I think the implications of such a law would eventually completely destroy any copyright legislation. Anyone who invests work into something for which he can claim copyright, should have any right to withdraw the copyrighted material from the market, and not be forced to make it public. Anything else would defeat the object of copyright legislation and bring us back several centuries. Just my opinion. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
Hi David, Yes, hearing nothing solves the problem of hearing the wrong note, but it's sometimes useful to be able to hear the correct note as it's being entered. Finale's way of doing it just seems crazy and unhelpful to me. Thanks, Lawrence ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:39 AM, dhbailey wrote: And in my mind should be written into the copyright law -- anything for which the copyright owner wishes to receive copyright protection must be available for sale at reasonable cost (can be higher than the original cost but not in any order of magnitude above 3x) or the copyright lapses and the work enters the public domain. If the copyright has been assigned to a publisher it reverts first to the original author(s) who have a chance to make the work available again, but should they fail to do so within one year, the copyright lapses forever and the work enters the public domain. Wow! I find that one a little hard-nosed. How about this; works that are not currently in print but are still in copyright are subject to fair use, meaning you could make a photocopy if you can't find a copy for sale? At least this way the composers and publishers wouldn't lose their right forever to exploit the darn thing. There is a tangentially related issue being thrashed out in Canadian courts right now. A Jewish woman is suing her ex-husband for not giving her a religious divorce, even though him agreeing to that was part of the original civil divorce. She had won at first, then lost on appeal, on the grounds that Canadian courts cannot decide religious issues. If this appeal is upheld, then I might lose my right to sue a church if they don't pay me for a musical service. I understand religious services are already considered to be part of fair use, long with certain educational situations, with regards to performance and copyright, and I never understood the exemption. Do composers and publishers of religious or educational works not have the right to the same protection as creators of secular or entertainment works? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Need help German-English
I need the following translation checked, perhaps a native English speaker with some German can tell me whether this is correct and comprehensible: German: Abdämpfen der Subkontra-B Saite durch Finger oder Radiergummi an der Stelle 7:6, gleichzeitiges Anschlagen der Saite mit einem weichen Vibraphonschlägel: Der 7. Naturton erklingt zusammen mit dem B. English Damping of the subcontra-B flat string at the 7/6 position with finger or rubber and simultanous striking of the string with a soft vibraphone stick: The 7th harmonic sounds together with the basic B flat. (This is piano technique). Is there another word for Schlägel? Thanks for any help. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: And in my mind should be written into the copyright law -- anything for which the copyright owner wishes to receive copyright protection must be available for sale at reasonable cost (can be higher than the original cost but not in any order of magnitude above 3x) or the copyright lapses and the work enters the public domain. If the copyright has been assigned to a publisher it reverts first to the original author(s) who have a chance to make the work available again, but should they fail to do so within one year, the copyright lapses forever and the work enters the public domain. Personally I think the implications of such a law would eventually completely destroy any copyright legislation. Anyone who invests work into something for which he can claim copyright, should have any right to withdraw the copyrighted material from the market, and not be forced to make it public. Anything else would defeat the object of copyright legislation and bring us back several centuries. Just my opinion. But it becomes public anyway eventually, when the copyright term runs out. There has to be some tradeoff -- currently copyright laws are all one-sided, giving total power to those who own the copyrights, with no benefits to society whatsoever if that material isn't made available to the public. Just as governments take control of physical properties which are abandoned and make them available again to the public in some manner or other, so, too, governments should have the same ability in the case of intellectual properties. But whatever I think doesn't matter, since I can't offer Congress more money than the vested interests can, and we all know that Congress is for sale to the highest bidder, so there really isn't any fear of my views becoming reality. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 Christopher Smith wrote: How about this; works that are not currently in print but are still in copyright are subject to fair use, meaning you could make a photocopy if you can't find a copy for sale? At least this way the composers and publishers wouldn't lose their right forever to exploit the darn thing. This would completely defeat the object of a copyright. You can't have half a copyright, either you give the copyright owner the right to decide, or you take it out of his hands completely. Here is a good example why this whole thing would never work: Several years ago I had a web page with a Finale Tutorial. After a while I decided I didn't want it online any more. In today's world, a web page is in fact a publication. If your out of print copyright rule would be in place, anyone could now come along and copy my old, long forgotten webpage, and hand it to other people. I would not like that at all. I had very good reasons for taking the site down, and because I own the copyright, I can make that decision just by myself. I for one certainly do not like the idea of my work becoming publicly available when I make a decision to not publish it anymore. And I grant that same decision to anyone else, too, be it a big company or a lone person. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Christopher Smith wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:39 AM, dhbailey wrote: And in my mind should be written into the copyright law -- anything for which the copyright owner wishes to receive copyright protection must be available for sale at reasonable cost (can be higher than the original cost but not in any order of magnitude above 3x) or the copyright lapses and the work enters the public domain. If the copyright has been assigned to a publisher it reverts first to the original author(s) who have a chance to make the work available again, but should they fail to do so within one year, the copyright lapses forever and the work enters the public domain. Wow! I find that one a little hard-nosed. How about this; works that are not currently in print but are still in copyright are subject to fair use, meaning you could make a photocopy if you can't find a copy for sale? At least this way the composers and publishers wouldn't lose their right forever to exploit the darn thing. There is a tangentially related issue being thrashed out in Canadian courts right now. A Jewish woman is suing her ex-husband for not giving her a religious divorce, even though him agreeing to that was part of the original civil divorce. She had won at first, then lost on appeal, on the grounds that Canadian courts cannot decide religious issues. If this appeal is upheld, then I might lose my right to sue a church if they don't pay me for a musical service. I understand religious services are already considered to be part of fair use, long with certain educational situations, with regards to performance and copyright, and I never understood the exemption. Do composers and publishers of religious or educational works not have the right to the same protection as creators of secular or entertainment works? Sure, they have the same protections right now, at least under U.S. copyright law. Educational fair use doesn't include school concerts held outside the normal school day (8-3 or whatever the school day is scheduled for), and religious fair use doesn't include performances outside a service of worship (the inclusion of a prayer or two does not turn a performance into a worship service). And secular music can be used during a church service without there having to be paid a performance royalty just as religious music can be so used. I would agree that my position is hard-nosed, and that having permission to photocopy given de facto if copies aren't available for sale, with a per-copy fee paid to the copyright owner. If that would be codified into law, I'd think that was a good compromise. But as for hard-nosed, aren't the current copyright laws a bit hard-nosed? Sometimes it takes hard-nosed opposition to get hard-nosed things changed. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: But it becomes public anyway eventually, when the copyright term runs out. There has to be some tradeoff -- currently copyright laws are all one-sided, giving total power to those who own the copyrights, with no benefits to society whatsoever if that material isn't made available to the public. That's what copyright is about. It has very little to do with benefit to society, it is something the copyright owner _owns_ and that's what it is there for. Just as governments take control of physical properties which are abandoned and make them available again to the public in some manner or other, so, too, governments should have the same ability in the case of intellectual properties. But that's precisely the difference, copyright is not physical, so there is no need to give anything back. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
dc wrote: Johannes Gebauer écrit: Anyone who invests work into something for which he can claim copyright, should have any right to withdraw the copyrighted material from the market, and not be forced to make it public. Anything else would defeat the object of copyright legislation and bring us back several centuries. Of course. Aynone who has something published should also have the right to suppress it for any reason. On the other hand, it is only normal, if a publisher is no longer able or willing to sell a published works, that the rights should revert to the author of the work. This is the case in all contracts in France. But it doesn't remain suppressed forever -- when copyright law runs out, it is no longer suppressable unless all copies of it everywhere are destroyed. So all my proposal does is to shorten the time frame within which that entry into the public domain occurs. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Need help German-English
Schlägel = mallet, I believe. I would say Damp the rather than Damping of the and strike the rather than striking of the. It turns the sentence into an imperative statement, which I believe the German already is. Johannes Gebauer wrote: I need the following translation checked, perhaps a native English speaker with some German can tell me whether this is correct and comprehensible: German: Abdämpfen der Subkontra-B Saite durch Finger oder Radiergummi an der Stelle 7:6, gleichzeitiges Anschlagen der Saite mit einem weichen Vibraphonschlägel: Der 7. Naturton erklingt zusammen mit dem B. English Damping of the subcontra-B flat string at the 7/6 position with finger or rubber and simultanous striking of the string with a soft vibraphone stick: The 7th harmonic sounds together with the basic B flat. (This is piano technique). Is there another word for Schlägel? Thanks for any help. Johannes -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Need help German-English
One other thing. In the US (but not Britain), rubber as a noun is a slang term for condom. Instead, I would say pencil eraser. Robert Patterson wrote: Schlägel = mallet, I believe. I would say Damp the rather than Damping of the and strike the rather than striking of the. It turns the sentence into an imperative statement, which I believe the German already is. Johannes Gebauer wrote: I need the following translation checked, perhaps a native English speaker with some German can tell me whether this is correct and comprehensible: German: Abdämpfen der Subkontra-B Saite durch Finger oder Radiergummi an der Stelle 7:6, gleichzeitiges Anschlagen der Saite mit einem weichen Vibraphonschlägel: Der 7. Naturton erklingt zusammen mit dem B. English Damping of the subcontra-B flat string at the 7/6 position with finger or rubber and simultanous striking of the string with a soft vibraphone stick: The 7th harmonic sounds together with the basic B flat. (This is piano technique). Is there another word for Schlägel? Thanks for any help. Johannes -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 12/4/06, Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Printing on demand means that every ordered copy is printed separately. That is a completely different way of publishing which is only possible with modern technology. I'm not the one making these definitions, it's just what I've been told from library staff and friends who have published the traditional method as to what the perceptions are about print on demand. So please, don't kill the messenger ;) But I do believe perhaps you're focused completely on the printing itself as the definition of what maybe could be defined as traditional versus non traditional publishing. There's a lot more to the process than than just the physical act of having the ink hit the paper. Traditional publishers have the resources for editorial staff, book promotion, some like Barnes and Noble here in the United States even have a distribution system for their own in house publishing (usually in this case for reprints for public domain books such as Dickens). There is also the stigma, that if you have to print the material a non-traditional way-- then the material just can't be any good. I completely disagree with that opinion-- that maybe slightly true for books in the fiction genre-- but for classical music editions, it's just patently false. I think P.O.D. and desktop publishing is revolutionary; and it's very exciting! As the buyer at Patelson's told me, the dust hasn't settled yet. For example, there is a wonderful group in Japan that's performing and recording all of the Wanhal symphonies. The conductor of the ensemble gets copies of manuscripts, edits them in Sibelius, has them performed; and then records the concerts (which are in turn used for CDs, then sells them on eBay. He also prints scores and parts for sale. All of this is made possible completely via current technology. Pretty exciting stuff I believe, because no one was even at the discussion stages for even a limited Wanhal edition. Johannes mentioned how some of the big boy's don't reprint editions. Case in point: Barenreiter for some unknown reason, will not reprint Telemann's Table Music (the edition from their Telemann anthology urtext series that's been in progress since the 1950s). I don't know why the reasons for that being discontinued, but I find it remarkable that such a staple for baroque music, would not be available. I only found out about this item's being out of print, when I went to special order it. Thanks for an very engaging discussion ;) Have a great day, Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Need help German-English
Johannes, rubber eraser would perhaps be better than rubber alone, which can have other, misleading (!) meanings, particularly to American ears. Mallet is the usual term for Schlägel. Cheers! EFF Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) www.habsburgerverlag.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 04.12.2006, at 14:58, Johannes Gebauer wrote: I need the following translation checked, perhaps a native English speaker with some German can tell me whether this is correct and comprehensible: German: Abdämpfen der Subkontra-B Saite durch Finger oder Radiergummi an der Stelle 7:6, gleichzeitiges Anschlagen der Saite mit einem weichen Vibraphonschlägel: Der 7. Naturton erklingt zusammen mit dem B. English Damping of the subcontra-B flat string at the 7/6 position with finger or rubber and simultanous striking of the string with a soft vibraphone stick: The 7th harmonic sounds together with the basic B flat. (This is piano technique). Is there another word for Schlägel? Thanks for any help. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
At 03:28 PM 12/4/06 +0100, Johannes Gebauer wrote: That's what copyright is about. It has very little to do with benefit to society, it is something the copyright owner _owns_ and that's what it is there for. Oh, not here. US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Kim Patrick Clow wrote: . But the bottom line she said, libraries will NEVER order material from a publisher's website. This is simply not true. If a library wants a Stockhausen score, they order from Stockhausen's website. Two publishing ventures with which I have some association, Frog Peak Music and Material Press, both do extensive library sales, and orders via web sites are standard. _Billing_ is typically done via Post, but that's a different matter. Daniel Wolf Frankfurt ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 12/4/06, Daniel Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is simply not true. If a library wants a Stockhausen score, they order from Stockhausen's website. Two publishing ventures with which I have some association, Frog Peak Music and Material Press, both do extensive library sales, and orders via web sites are standard. I qualified my statement later, the staff at Columbia's Music library doesn't order materials directly from P.O.D. publishers or individual's websites, just via distributors. Thanks! Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 04.12.2006 Christopher Smith wrote: How about this; works that are not currently in print but are still in copyright are subject to fair use, meaning you could make a photocopy if you can't find a copy for sale? At least this way the composers and publishers wouldn't lose their right forever to exploit the darn thing. This would completely defeat the object of a copyright. You can't have half a copyright, either you give the copyright owner the right to decide, or you take it out of his hands completely. Here is a good example why this whole thing would never work: Several years ago I had a web page with a Finale Tutorial. After a while I decided I didn't want it online any more. In today's world, a web page is in fact a publication. If your out of print copyright rule would be in place, anyone could now come along and copy my old, long forgotten webpage, and hand it to other people. I would not like that at all. I had very good reasons for taking the site down, and because I own the copyright, I can make that decision just by myself. I for one certainly do not like the idea of my work becoming publicly available when I make a decision to not publish it anymore. And I grant that same decision to anyone else, too, be it a big company or a lone person. Johannes That's the problem with all this copyright stuff -- it's definitely not a black and white issue. Where would someone find a copy of your old web-page, if you've taken it down? If it's archived somewhere, I do hope you've sued that place for infringing your copyright. If there are no copies available anywhere, how would my scenario change your situation? Nobody could get your web-page. Any violations to your copyright which have occurred are actionable since they occurred while you were still making your copyrighted material available. How do you currently handle previously sold copies of your works should you decide to no longer make it available to the public? Say, for instance, you publish a composition which you are later embarassed by and decide not to make available anymore by removing it from publication. You can't reclaim all extant copies, so you still don't have much control over your material. People who purchased it can still perform it. It can still be rehearsed. People can still find it, hear it, and if it had already been recorded once, they can make as many different recordings of it as they wish and you can't stop them, at least in the U.S. Can you think of a way around the totally financial decisions whereby a company which has aggressively marketed and published copyrighted materials for which they either own the copyright or have licensed it from the copyright owner, most likely without time limit, ultimately decided to remove that material from publication? The author, at least in the U.S., has no power to force publication even if he/she desired it, so no matter whether there is a market for that material the decision has been made to discontinue publication, and nobody has any power to change the situation. Can you suggest a solution to that scenario? I'll be the first to admit that my suggestion has huge flaws in it. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Need help German-English
I believe that this would accurately convey the playing instructions: Touch the subcontra-B flat string at 1/7 of the string length with a finger or a rubber eraser while simultaneously striking the string with a vibraphone mallet. The 7th harmonic should sound together with fundamental B flat. I chose touch instead of mute, because mute would suggest stopping the tone rather than selecting the harmonic by dividing the string. And 1/7 is a clearerdes indication of desired he string length. DJW I need the following translation checked, perhaps a native English speaker with some German can tell me whether this is correct and comprehensible: German: Abdämpfen der Subkontra-B Saite durch Finger oder Radiergummi an der Stelle 7:6, gleichzeitiges Anschlagen der Saite mit einem weichen Vibraphonschlägel: Der 7. Naturton erklingt zusammen mit dem B. English Damping of the subcontra-B flat string at the 7/6 position with finger or rubber and simultanous striking of the string with a soft vibraphone stick: The 7th harmonic sounds together with the basic B flat. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
dc wrote: dhbailey écrit: So all my proposal does is to shorten the time frame within which that entry into the public domain occurs. Well, doing away entirely with copyright would only shorten the time frame also. And bring us back a few centuries, as Johannes said. True, but I'm not suggesting eliminating copyright entirely -- just that it should be (in my opinion) a bargain between the creator and society, which it isn't now. The bargain ought to be that if the material is to be protected, it should be available. But of course, not everybody shares my view of what copyright should be. Probably that's a good thing. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Kim Patrick Clow wrote: On 12/4/06, Daniel Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is simply not true. If a library wants a Stockhausen score, they order from Stockhausen's website. Two publishing ventures with which I have some association, Frog Peak Music and Material Press, both do extensive library sales, and orders via web sites are standard. I qualified my statement later, the staff at Columbia's Music library doesn't order materials directly from P.O.D. publishers or individual's websites, just via distributors. Two of the three publishers listed above don't go through distributors, and they have had orders from Columbia. Just shows you that the important issue is the content, not the manner of distribution. I know that in the case of Material Press, when we were approached by distributors, they required a discount well below our costs, so we had the choice of keeping reasonable prices and distributing exclusively by ourselves or raising all the prices to accomodate a middleman. We chose the former. DJW ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 03:28 PM 12/4/06 +0100, Johannes Gebauer wrote: That's what copyright is about. It has very little to do with benefit to society, it is something the copyright owner _owns_ and that's what it is there for. Oh, not here. US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. Dennis And by keeping something for which protection is sought from being available, there is no progress of science and useful arts at all, merely one-sided greed: It's mine, all mine, and you can't have any of it. BUT, be sure that your government protects my rights. Maybe if there were a property tax on copyrights, just as there is on physical property: Any works which aren't available for sale to the public but which are protected by copyright shall pay an annual tax of $xx to maintain that copyright. So that copyright owners pay for that copyright protection in one of two ways: either by making the material available or by paying an annual tax. Perhaps some budgets could be balanced on this! (I doubt it!) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 12/4/06, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 03:28 PM 12/4/06 +0100, Johannes Gebauer wrote: That's what copyright is about. It has very little to do with benefit to society, it is something the copyright owner _owns_ and that's what it is there for. Oh, not here. US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. Dennis For a great interview on this subject: http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/archives/20/siva_vaidhyanathan.html Siva Vaidhyanathan has written a wonderful book on copyright issues Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity (New York University Press, 2001) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
At 10:38 AM 12/4/06 -0500, dhbailey wrote: That's the problem with all this copyright stuff -- it's definitely not a black and white issue. Where would someone find a copy of your old web-page, if you've taken it down? If it's archived somewhere, I do hope you've sued that place for infringing your copyright. It might be on the Wayback Machine: http://www.archive.org/web/web.php They archive pages unless denied by robots.txt or asked to remove a page. This doesn't directly relate, but affects tethered software other protected software: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/1201_recommendation.pdf Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
A few years back I was a ringer in a viola section. The work being rehearsed was Rimsky-Korsakov's Russian Easter Overture. The trombone section was absent. The conductor asked if anyone had trombone cues to play during the famous chant section. The cues were in the viola part. I was the only viola player able to read the part IN THE BASS CLEF! If you want your viola parts played, write them in the alto clef. Traditionally, when the viola part shifts into third position or higher on the A-string, the treble clef is used. Ergo, treble clef is not an issue for the violists but bass clef or the transposing Treble/Tenor clef is not a useful option. Guy Hayden, Music Director and Conductor St. Stephen's Strings Newport News, VA USA ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 12/4/06, Daniel Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Two of the three publishers listed above don't go through distributors, and they have had orders from Columbia. Just shows you that the important issue is the content, not the manner of distribution. I know that in the case of Material Press, when we were approached by distributors, they required a discount well below our costs, so we had the choice of keeping reasonable prices and distributing exclusively by ourselves or raising all the prices to accomodate a middleman. We chose the former. Then the library staff I spoke to were unaware of this. Maybe instructors or a professor made the purchase from their dept budgets for a library purchase? But congrats on being able to get Columbia to purchase the materials. But you do mention one stimga that seems to hamper any product from Lulu.com being carried by traditional book stores; the cost via P.O.D. is considerably higher (typically about 20 percent) than the traditional methods. And that's enough for some distributors to not carry the items. Thanks much! Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
At 10:41 AM 12/4/06 -0500, Kim Patrick Clow wrote: Siva Vaidhyanathan has written a wonderful book on copyright issues Copyrights and Copywrongs: The Rise of Intellectual Property and How It Threatens Creativity (New York University Press, 2001) Yes, this is an excellent book -- though a little polemical sometimes. I think Lawrence Lessig is the man when it comes to these issues. With all the books and copyright law documents in my library, I should go back get a copyright law degree. :) Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Ludwig
Hello Johannes and John, Great explanation. I never heard about it before, very interesting. There seems to be a chess program which can also notate music - take a look at www.chessbase.com. I didn't read it yet, I had no time, but it looks interesting. Best regards, Will Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
At 11:17 AM +0100 12/4/06, Eric Fiedler wrote: Exactly! Petrucci's print runs were of the of the order of magnitude of a couple of hundred copies maximum, and Telemann's (two hundred plus years later) were quite certainly no larger. EFF One thing to keep in mind is that a good many publications, including some of Telemann's, were by subscription. In other words, the composer knew in advance exactly how many copies to print (and probably had the $ in hand, as well). The study of the Parisian music printer, Pierre Attaignant in the mid-16th century points out that the cost of paper was very high, and a printer who misjudged his market could go bankrupt quickly. But Petrucci is a good example of something else as well. Since he printed from movable type, any reprinting (which he did for his most popular publications) involved the whole expense of setting up the pages just as it did for the first printing, which is the problem for modern publishers as well. (I would think they could keep the film from the first printing, but apparently not.) 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
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: That's the problem with all this copyright stuff -- it's definitely not a black and white issue. Where would someone find a copy of your old web-page, if you've taken it down? If it's archived somewhere, I do hope you've sued that place for infringing your copyright. That's nonsense. Anyone could have made a private copy of the web site (and many have). It only becomes illegal as soon as anyone publishes the website without asking my permission. If there are no copies available anywhere, how would my scenario change your situation? Nobody could get your web-page. Any violations to your copyright which have occurred are actionable since they occurred while you were still making your copyrighted material available. There are probably quite a few copies around, and how could I stop that. it was once publicly accessible. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: Can you think of a way around the totally financial decisions whereby a company which has aggressively marketed and published copyrighted materials for which they either own the copyright or have licensed it from the copyright owner, most likely without time limit, ultimately decided to remove that material from publication? No, I cannot think of a way around this, nor do I think I want one. If the copyright owner makes the decision to no longer publish something, that's totally up to him. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: But it doesn't remain suppressed forever -- when copyright law runs out, it is no longer suppressable unless all copies of it everywhere are destroyed. So all my proposal does is to shorten the time frame within which that entry into the public domain occurs. The time frame, although certainly artificial, is thought to give a life-span for exploiting the copyright. That's enough of a compromise. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 04.12.2006 dhbailey wrote: Can you think of a way around the totally financial decisions whereby a company which has aggressively marketed and published copyrighted materials for which they either own the copyright or have licensed it from the copyright owner, most likely without time limit, ultimately decided to remove that material from publication? The other issue about all this, is even though printed scores are no longer in print-- what would happen to the publishing rights for other formats of this music-- ringtones for cellphones are a big business, what about recordings that use printed versions of the music before the publisher withdraws printed editions. Who would get the royality checks? I'll restate what the librarian at Colubmia told me-- for the large music publishers, the money is in part rentals, and publishing rights for other formats besides print. She maybe wrong on that, but it certainly makes sense to me. But I agree with idea if the copyright owner withdraws their material from print, then it should somehow revert to public domain. Thanks much! Kim Patrick Clow ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Indeed! But of course a similar system is also in place today, at least with regard to publications in a series. Libraries and other musicological institutes usually subscribe to a series (if you're lucky), thus allowing the distributor to know roughly how many copies of a particular number to order, and this information is then passed on to the publisher, allowing him to predict the size of print runs fairly accurately. But all this is of course not handled nearly so personally today as it was by Telemann; it must have been nice — and was certainly both a powerful promotional tool and a promoter of a sense of musical community — to be able to print the names of the subscribers on the inside cover of the individual publications. Music historians like it too and mourn the fact that not more publishers thought of it; wouldn't it be nice to know (more about) who ordered Petrucci's publications? Or Attaignant's? EFF Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) www.habsburgerverlag.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 04.12.2006, at 18:16, John Howell wrote: One thing to keep in mind is that a good many publications, including some of Telemann's, were by subscription. In other words, the composer knew in advance exactly how many copies to print (and probably had the $ in hand, as well). ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
At 10:27 PM -0800 12/3/06, Mark D Lew wrote: On Dec 2, 2006, at 9:52 AM, dhbailey wrote: If you don't understand the clef, then set the viola staff to be either treble or bass clef and enter the music in a manner you do understand and then when it's all entered go back and change the clef to the alto clef. This is sound advice, except that I'd recommend the treble clef that's an octave down -- ie, the same one you'd use for the tenor section in a chorus. This is more viola-friendly than getting stuck in the mindset of treble vs bass. Mark: I have to admit that after reading this I was prepared to castigate you soundly!! Then I read to the end and discovered that you were not advocating putting tenor-G clef in front of the violists after all, but using it as a crutch for the engraver. The only problem with that is that it can drive pianists crazy, since it doesn't fit into their little world of treble and bass clefs. This is especially a problem with playing from open choral score. It can be learned, but an inexperienced pianist will trip all over it! My musical experience is overwhelmingly in voice, chorus and piano, and I suspect that's true for Jacki as well. Although I do understand the alto clef, and I'm reasonably well educated about how to write for strings, I simply don't do it often enough to be facile with the alto clef. On the rare occasions I do write for strings, my habit is to use the 8vb treble clef for the viola, from which I can imagine that I'm writing for a highly idiosyncratic quartet of voices. Then when I'm done I switch the tenor to alto clef and tidy up the page as necessary. Yes, this is an appropriate use of the tenor-G clef. In my early music editions, I often have to make two versions of the tenor part, one in alto clef for my violas and one in tenor-G clef for my recorders. (Easy enough when the computer can do most of the work!) On Dec 2, 2006, at 10:47 AM, John Howell wrote: Some people erroneously call the alto clef a viola clef. Guilty as charged. Yes, I know the proper name, and I've had plenty of occasions to read C clefs -- perusing orchestra scores, reading from old-fashioned choral scores. Nevertheless, I still like to call it the viola clef. So sue me. HEY, I won't sue you, but watch out for those trombonists lurking in the wings!! 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] Human Playback trick
The Problem: Some of my GPO violin staves were not using the Key Switching function within Human Playback even though they should have. In HP preferences the options said that Strings should use the KS when encountering tremolo, but it didn't. KS worked fine in other tracks. (I quadruple checked that I had the right settings and instruments. That wasn't the problem.) The Solution: Instead of relying on HP to recognize that violins 1 was a String instrument and be treated accordingly, I just copied the string command for tremolo (in HP preferences) and labelled it Violins: tremolo and told it to apply to any staff containing the word violins. Success. Background: I know that playback isn't a concern for many on this list. But if you are like me and have to work on a piece for months at a time as a composer or arranger, it feels better to make the program do what it is capable of doing. Some sounds jar too much while others make a reasonable facsimile. Over a long period, I find that it is worth it to tweak the playback to make it sound more realistic. -Randolph Peters FinMac 2007 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 10:38 AM 12/4/06 -0500, dhbailey wrote: That's the problem with all this copyright stuff -- it's definitely not a black and white issue. Where would someone find a copy of your old web-page, if you've taken it down? If it's archived somewhere, I do hope you've sued that place for infringing your copyright. It might be on the Wayback Machine: http://www.archive.org/web/web.php They archive pages unless denied by robots.txt or asked to remove a page. This doesn't directly relate, but affects tethered software other protected software: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/1201_recommendation.pdf But isn't that illegal without the consent of the copyright owners? So if Johannes is worried that my proposition for amending the copyright laws would hinder his ability to remove his intellectual property from circulation, shouldn't he be suing such sites and demanding that they not only remove his pages from their archives but prove that they have paid for an audit which shows beyond a doubt that his intellectual property has been deleted beyond the ability of anybody to reconstruct it? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 4 Dec 2006 at 10:48, dhbailey wrote: Maybe if there were a property tax on copyrights, just as there is on physical property: Any works which aren't available for sale to the public but which are protected by copyright shall pay an annual tax of $xx to maintain that copyright. So that copyright owners pay for that copyright protection in one of two ways: either by making the material available or by paying an annual tax. That would never work, of course, as the Walt Disney party in Congress has way too much power. But it does raise an interesting possibility, which is government liquidation auctions for failure to pay the copyright tax. Somehow, it seems to me that there ought to be some obligation to distribute an edition unless it's impossible to do so, or an allowance for doing otherwise. Obviously, it would be unfair to force a publisher to do a new print run in order to supply one copy (or any number of copies). It would also be wrong to force reprinting of editions that have problems (such as the Dover edition of Mendelssohn's piano chamber music, which was first published in the 70s and then was withdrawn, apparently because the editions used were somehow no longer legally redistributable in the US market). But I don't quite understand how publishers would not benefit from some system that currently exists for paying photocopying fees to academic journals for academic use. That system works very well, and it brings in revenue to the journals while not being a terrible burden for students and instructors. However, as with the RIAA and digital downloads, copyright holders have the right to make stupid decisions about their intellectual property. Right to control copying implies the right to do so against one's own best interests. -- 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] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 4 Dec 2006 at 10:56, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 10:38 AM 12/4/06 -0500, dhbailey wrote: That's the problem with all this copyright stuff -- it's definitely not a black and white issue. Where would someone find a copy of your old web-page, if you've taken it down? If it's archived somewhere, I do hope you've sued that place for infringing your copyright. It might be on the Wayback Machine: http://www.archive.org/web/web.php They archive pages unless denied by robots.txt or asked to remove a page. But if Johannes found his page archived there he can get it removed by taking simple actions, so I see no problem there. This doesn't directly relate, but affects tethered software other protected software: http://www.copyright.gov/1201/docs/1201_recommendation.pdf But that's a different set of issues -- in that case, the data that *you* own (and the intellectual property it represents) is tied up in proprietary binary file formats that become useless once the tethered software cannot be used. This is increasingly going to be a big problem for the digital music DRM schemes, where you end up buying rights to the same music over and over again (assuming the copyright holders continue to offer the music for licensing). -- 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] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 4 Dec 2006 at 12:16, John Howell wrote: At 11:17 AM +0100 12/4/06, Eric Fiedler wrote: Exactly! Petrucci's print runs were of the of the order of magnitude of a couple of hundred copies maximum, and Telemann's (two hundred plus years later) were quite certainly no larger. EFF One thing to keep in mind is that a good many publications, including some of Telemann's, were by subscription. In other words, the composer knew in advance exactly how many copies to print (and probably had the $ in hand, as well). The study of the Parisian music printer, Pierre Attaignant in the mid-16th century points out that the cost of paper was very high, and a printer who misjudged his market could go bankrupt quickly. Printing from engraved copper plates had completely different economics than printing from musical type. You didn't have enough type to keep the already-set pages around, so once you had the pages set, you had to print all the copies you'd ever need, as they type would need to be re-used for a different editions (or even for different pages within the same publication). With copper plates, you could run off as many as you needed at any point, and never have to worry too much about exceeding demand. My memory is that André c. 1800 did print runs as small as 25 and 50. But Petrucci is a good example of something else as well. Since he printed from movable type, any reprinting (which he did for his most popular publications) involved the whole expense of setting up the pages just as it did for the first printing, which is the problem for modern publishers as well. (I would think they could keep the film from the first printing, but apparently not.) (I should read to the end of a post before replying) I don't see that the print setup costs for modern printing technology are going to be any different than the print setup costs for copper plate engraving. It's mostly a matter of scheduling what you're going to be using the equipment to print and having the materials on hand, rather than needing to recreate some part of the masters for reprinting. -- 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] O.T. Self publishing issues
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: It might be on the Wayback Machine: http://www.archive.org/web/web.php They archive pages unless denied by robots.txt or asked to remove a page. That's quite interesting. I just did a search on my web page: Search Results for Jan 01, 1996 - Dec 04, 2006 1996 0 pages 1997 0 pages 1998 1 pages Dec 06, 1998 1999 4 pages Feb 20, 1999 Apr 18, 1999 Apr 29, 1999 Nov 09, 1999 2000 7 pages Apr 11, 2000 Apr 19, 2000 Apr 22, 2000 May 20, 2000 Jul 08, 2000 Oct 18, 2000 Oct 18, 2000 2001 5 pages Apr 20, 2001 May 18, 2001 Aug 04, 2001 Oct 19, 2001 Dec 03, 2001 2002 4 pages Feb 02, 2002 Apr 14, 2002 Sep 28, 2002 Nov 20, 2002 2003 6 pages Feb 09, 2003 Apr 03, 2003 Jun 09, 2003 Jul 17, 2003 Oct 02, 2003 Dec 25, 2003 2004 5 pages Apr 15, 2004 May 18, 2004 Aug 29, 2004 Sep 21, 2004 Nov 29, 2004 2005 5 pages Feb 07, 2005 Feb 12, 2005 Mar 09, 2005 Apr 06, 2005 Dec 01, 2005 2006 2 pages Mar 03, 2006 Mar 13, 2006 Phil Daley AutoDesk http://www.conknet.com/~p_daley ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Need help German-English
Dampen the B-flat string with the finger or with a large eraser at the 7th harmonic position, and strike the string with a soft vibraphone mallet. The 7th harmonic should sound together with the fundamental (Bb). -- dampen should happen before striking, not simultaneously, to absolutely avoid the open string sounding for even a fraction of a second; specify large eraser so noone tries with a tiny pencil eraser; subkontra prefixes generally aren't needed in english, it is here self-evident (there is i assume only one Bb-tuned string? if not, use low Bb string) i find it much better/clearer in such cases to indicate what to do, not what is done. prescriptive rather than descriptive (after the fact) notation. -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] 2007 DUPLICATING LAYOUTS
Dear Listers, Forgive me this question, that answer which is probably well-known and obvious to all who are now using Fin2007. I have not converted from my 2005b as I am waiting to the maintenance up-date which should be out very soon (is it out yet?). I have a student where I teach Jazz Composition at USC. She has basically been studying Finale with me this past semester. She has Finale 2007 and last week we finally got to the Linked Parts, me having no experience with that new feature of Finale. Well, we got the first part and made the format changes necessary. Now, the question is: How do you model all the other parts after the first? It must be in Manage Parts under the Format menu, but we couldn't come up with the effective answer, even after referring to the online Help section. Can you give me some help here? All the best, KIM R ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2007 DUPLICATING LAYOUTS
If you are in Page Layout, and use the menu in there, there is an option to Apply to Score/Part, and it brings up a box where you can select what parts you want the layout applied to. So, if you get a layout for like Alto 1 looking the way you want it, you then go Page Layout-Edit System Margins, then Apply to Parts/Score. And the same for Page Layout. Works really well I think. And you can have it generate part names by going to Text Tool-Insert Part/Score Name. Kim Richmond wrote: Dear Listers, Forgive me this question, that answer which is probably well-known and obvious to all who are now using Fin2007. I have not converted from my 2005b as I am waiting to the maintenance up-date which should be out very soon (is it out yet?). I have a student where I teach Jazz Composition at USC. She has basically been studying Finale with me this past semester. She has Finale 2007 and last week we finally got to the Linked Parts, me having no experience with that new feature of Finale. Well, we got the first part and made the format changes necessary. Now, the question is: How do you model all the other parts after the first? It must be in Manage Parts under the Format menu, but we couldn't come up with the effective answer, even after referring to the online Help section. Can you give me some help here? All the best, KIM R ___ 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
Re: [Finale] 2007 DUPLICATING LAYOUTS
Kim Richmond wrote: Dear Listers, Forgive me this question, that answer which is probably well-known and obvious to all who are now using Fin2007. I have not converted from my 2005b as I am waiting to the maintenance up-date which should be out very soon (is it out yet?). I have a student where I teach Jazz Composition at USC. She has basically been studying Finale with me this past semester. She has Finale 2007 and last week we finally got to the Linked Parts, me having no experience with that new feature of Finale. Well, we got the first part and made the format changes necessary. Now, the question is: How do you model all the other parts after the first? It must be in Manage Parts under the Format menu, but we couldn't come up with the effective answer, even after referring to the online Help section. Can you give me some help here? The same sort of page layout settings which used to be in the old Extract Parts dialog are present in the Manage Parts dialog. As far as I have seen, there isn't any magic make all the other parts match this part button to click, so you have to set things such as page margin, distance between staves, etc. in the manage parts dialog. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2007 DUPLICATING LAYOUTS
Dear Kim, Eric's response is correct, as far as it goes, but if you want to use the method that I used to use, emptying, re-filling, and re-naming parts, you have to extract them into separate files, losing the advantages of the linked score and parts. Sorry - that's just the way it is. I have mixed feelings about this, since there is a lot of time to be saved when writing certain kinds of music and using this template method. There are other situations in which having linked parts is a terrific advantage - when many edits need to be made. Chuck On Dec 4, 2006, at 12:06 PM, Kim Richmond wrote: Dear Listers, Forgive me this question, that answer which is probably well-known and obvious to all who are now using Fin2007. I have not converted from my 2005b as I am waiting to the maintenance up-date which should be out very soon (is it out yet?). I have a student where I teach Jazz Composition at USC. She has basically been studying Finale with me this past semester. She has Finale 2007 and last week we finally got to the Linked Parts, me having no experience with that new feature of Finale. Well, we got the first part and made the format changes necessary. Now, the question is: How do you model all the other parts after the first? It must be in Manage Parts under the Format menu, but we couldn't come up with the effective answer, even after referring to the online Help section. Can you give me some help here? All the best, KIM R ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
At 2:29 PM -0500 12/4/06, dhbailey wrote: John Howell wrote: [snip] Yes, this is an appropriate use of the tenor-G clef. In my early music editions, I often have to make two versions of the tenor part, one in alto clef for my violas and one in tenor-G clef for my recorders. (Easy enough when the computer can do most of the work!) Just out of curiosity, which recorder would you use the tenor-G clef for? The tenor, which is usually the best choice for tenor parts. Not always, but usually. In fact, in renaissance music the clef used is usually an accurate signal as to the range of the part. The tenor recorder and alto recorder are written at sounding pitch, so that should be a normal treble clef. The Soprano recorder and sopranino recorder sound an octave higher, so they should use the treble clef with the 8 above it. While you are correct, I find that the most useful way to THINK about it is that the recorder family (the modern family, that is) sounds at 4' pitch, one octave above the voice parts for which they are named. Since organ pitches are not normally notated in the octave they actually sound, it becomes a question not of where the recorders SOUND but how they are NOTATED. (The great consort--tenor, bass, greatbass and contrabass--is a wonderful sound, but only for renaissance bore recorders. Baroque bore recorders are too weak in the bottom 5th to get the right sonority.) The alto is the dead clam in the collection of shells. It's quite true that solo music and consort music specifically intended for alto recorder is notated at pitch. When reading from a vocal score, however, or a generic renaissance score where I am assigning instruments according to the ranges and what instruments I have available, my alto players may need to read up an octave. (Just one of the little challenges, along with having to know both F and C fingerings and having to crawl through various C clefs from time to time!) I often have to choose between using a soprano, playing in its lower range, or an alto, playing in its upper range, for a given part (which may have been intended for viol in any case!), and I make my choice according to the tone quality I think works best. The bass and great bass recorders are most frequently written in bass clef, although the bass recorder should have an 8 above the bass clef to indicate that it's sounding an octave higher. I generally don't use the superscripts, because recorder players know perfectly well what they're playing, but yes, to be pedantic that would be correct, as would using superscripts for the soprano, sopranino and 15va for the garklein. As I say, I'm asking out of curiosity because I've been out of early music groups for a long time so I may be unaware of more recent trends. That doesn't make you a bad person. Most engravers have no clue about recorder notation, period. In one of the Broadway shows we've done in the past several years (can't remember which one), there are passages in one of the Reed books for recorder without specifying the size. Obviously soprano is intended, but it is notated at pitch, up an octave in an octave no recorder player is used to seeing, and I'll bet that those passages are invariably played on piccolo, as we did them. 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] telemann manuscripts
Could anyone tell me where the manuscripts of Telemann'sorchestral works are kept (and better still, whether facsimiles are available). I am particuarly interested in his works using horns. Thanks, Lawrence ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
On Dec 3, 2006, at 8:39 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: it is very difficult to imagine the fingerling limitations Usually under 10 cm. Let 'em grow for another year and they'll be ready for the pan. ;- Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
John, I am in awe of your obvious knowledge and love of recorders et al. My interest came from joining a recorder septet (sop, 2 desc, 2 alto, 1 ten(me!), 1 bass. This was in 1956 whilst attending Kneller Hall (Royal Military School of Music)in Whitton (Twickenham. UK) To be honest I joined because the alternative on Wed afternoon was Area Beautification- (picking up litter and Cig butts for 2 hours)for all those with no 'ensemble' practice. Ah- memories. Cheers K in OZ Keith Helgesen. Director of Music, Canberra City Band. Ph: (02) 62910787. Mob 0417-042171 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Howell Sent: Tuesday, 5 December 2006 8:09 AM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation At 2:29 PM -0500 12/4/06, dhbailey wrote: John Howell wrote: [snip] Yes, this is an appropriate use of the tenor-G clef. In my early music editions, I often have to make two versions of the tenor part, one in alto clef for my violas and one in tenor-G clef for my recorders. (Easy enough when the computer can do most of the work!) Just out of curiosity, which recorder would you use the tenor-G clef for? The tenor, which is usually the best choice for tenor parts. Not always, but usually. In fact, in renaissance music the clef used is usually an accurate signal as to the range of the part. The tenor recorder and alto recorder are written at sounding pitch, so that should be a normal treble clef. The Soprano recorder and sopranino recorder sound an octave higher, so they should use the treble clef with the 8 above it. While you are correct, I find that the most useful way to THINK about it is that the recorder family (the modern family, that is) sounds at 4' pitch, one octave above the voice parts for which they are named. Since organ pitches are not normally notated in the octave they actually sound, it becomes a question not of where the recorders SOUND but how they are NOTATED. (The great consort--tenor, bass, greatbass and contrabass--is a wonderful sound, but only for renaissance bore recorders. Baroque bore recorders are too weak in the bottom 5th to get the right sonority.) The alto is the dead clam in the collection of shells. It's quite true that solo music and consort music specifically intended for alto recorder is notated at pitch. When reading from a vocal score, however, or a generic renaissance score where I am assigning instruments according to the ranges and what instruments I have available, my alto players may need to read up an octave. (Just one of the little challenges, along with having to know both F and C fingerings and having to crawl through various C clefs from time to time!) I often have to choose between using a soprano, playing in its lower range, or an alto, playing in its upper range, for a given part (which may have been intended for viol in any case!), and I make my choice according to the tone quality I think works best. The bass and great bass recorders are most frequently written in bass clef, although the bass recorder should have an 8 above the bass clef to indicate that it's sounding an octave higher. I generally don't use the superscripts, because recorder players know perfectly well what they're playing, but yes, to be pedantic that would be correct, as would using superscripts for the soprano, sopranino and 15va for the garklein. As I say, I'm asking out of curiosity because I've been out of early music groups for a long time so I may be unaware of more recent trends. That doesn't make you a bad person. Most engravers have no clue about recorder notation, period. In one of the Broadway shows we've done in the past several years (can't remember which one), there are passages in one of the Reed books for recorder without specifying the size. Obviously soprano is intended, but it is notated at pitch, up an octave in an octave no recorder player is used to seeing, and I'll bet that those passages are invariably played on piccolo, as we did them. 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 mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On Dec 4, 2006, at 3:09 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: I have seen both Peters and Bärenreiter editions which were nothing else than photocopies. Very often the score is still printed traditionally, while the parts are photocopies. It seems that the publishers do this when the EOF of an edition has been reached, yet they don't have a new edition out. Ie Peters parts for the Brandenburgs. Decades ago I bought a copy of Henry Cowell's Air and Scherzo from Schirmer, who were even then selling many seldom-ordered pieces on a POD basis. The Cowell piece (score and sax part) was a photocopy of the original AMP edition, rubber-stamped Copied by Schirmer. The particular specimen they copied even included hand-written corrections! Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
On Dec 4, 2006, at 1:27 AM, Mark D Lew wrote: I'd recommend the treble clef that's an octave down -- ie, the same one you'd use for the tenor section in a chorus. This is more viola-friendly than getting stuck in the mindset of treble vs bass. The practical range of the viola is from tenor c to a''', that is, from four ledger lines below the treble staff to four ledger lines above it. In that regard, then, the viola fits the treble clef better than any other, including the alto. In actual practice the viola spends most of its time in the bottom half of its range, which fits the alto considerably better than the treble and would also fit the transposing treble (guitar) clef. The use of alto clef for this instrument is a historical accident. Starting from scratch--if the inst. were invented today--it would be a treble-clef instrument dipping occasionally into the bass. Four ledger lines below the treble clef is no big deal, as any clarinettist or marimba player can tell you. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] telemann manuscripts
On 12/4/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could anyone tell me where the manuscripts of Telemann'sorchestral works are kept (and better still, whether facsimiles are available). I am particuarly interested in his works using horns. I can help answer a question finally! Hooray! ULB in Darmstadt has a lot of Telemann's manuscripts. In fact one of Telemann's last Ouvertures featuring horns, written for Landgraf Ludwig VIII of Hessen-Darmstadt (ruled 1739-1768), is a wonderful piece. There aren't many autograph copies of any Telemann instrumental pieces, which is unusual, according to Telemann expert, Steven Zohn. Dr. Zohn believes quite a few of Telemann's instrumental autographs vanished immediately after his death, because they aren't mentioned in the estate auction. Unfortunately, for the Telemann pieces that are archived in Darmstadt, all the orchestral parts were destroyed in a bombing raid during WW2, so we're quite lucky that the scores survived. If you want the direct emails of library staff at Darmstadt, I can forward to them you off list, if you wish! Hope this helps. Good luck! Kim -- Kim Patrick Clow There's really only two types of music: good and bad. ~ Rossini ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
I dealt with one small publishing house and asked if a score were available for one particular work. The person I was dealing with said that normally there wasn't, but then nipped into the back room, photocopied the handwritten manuscript score and sold me that! POD at its most literal eh? All the best, Lawrence ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:48 AM, dhbailey wrote: Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. And by keeping something for which protection is sought from being available, there is no progress of science and useful arts at all, merely one-sided greed: It's mine, all mine, and you can't have any of it. BUT, be sure that your government protects my rights. By the same reasoning, I would argue that there should be a cap (say $1M) on the amount a work may earn for its creator under copyright. Anything above that, and the item goes PD. I would also argue that no copyright should be ownable by an institution, but only by one or more specific, named human beings. Many of the abuses being complained of here would go away were this latter suggestion to be enacted. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Catching Flash videos from the net
Here http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=animusicsearch=Search are some awesome music animations. Is there a way to save them locally? Barbara ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
One million??? How much money does one need to live out his life without any other income?? Or am I from Holland? Andrew Stiller wrote: On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:48 AM, dhbailey wrote: Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: US Constitution, Article I, Section 8: The Congress shall have power [...] To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. And by keeping something for which protection is sought from being available, there is no progress of science and useful arts at all, merely one-sided greed: It's mine, all mine, and you can't have any of it. BUT, be sure that your government protects my rights. By the same reasoning, I would argue that there should be a cap (say $1M) on the amount a work may earn for its creator under copyright. Anything above that, and the item goes PD. I would also argue that no copyright should be ownable by an institution, but only by one or more specific, named human beings. Many of the abuses being complained of here would go away were this latter suggestion to be enacted. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ 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
Re: [Finale] OT Transposing
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:55:17 +0100 (MET) From: Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1) Bach wrote for Oboe da Caccia. It is true that he used a clef to do the transposition for him, but they are still in effect transposed parts. == Does anyone know how the original violino piccolo part in Brandenburg Concerto No. 1 is notated? And am I correct in assuming that the trumpet (or horn) part in No. 2 is written in C rather than F? Regards, Michael Lawlor mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: Need help German-English
ah just thought of something. if you strike the string at another 7th harmonic node the harmonic will NOT sound. corrected text follows. also, just a clarification, you don't need to specify 1/7 or 2/7 or 6/7 the string, because the individual bassist will choose the node (there are 6) which allows the note to speak the best in any case, or is easiest to perform in relation to other music performed before and after this thing. it can be useful to indicate whether or not the eraser should be released following striking the string: if you do, the projection will be better, but more of the fundamental will creep in, which will be more or less noticeable depending on the dynamic; if you leave it on, it will retain/sustain the more dampened sound, but will fade out much more quickly. also, position should be avoided, because it can suggest fingering position. i'm such a geek. -- Dampen the B-flat string with the finger or with a large eraser at the 7th harmonic node, and strike the string (avoid other 7th harmonic nodes) with a soft vibraphone mallet. The 7th harmonic should sound together with the fundamental (Bb). -- shirling neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On Dec 4, 2006, at 6:07 PM, Barbara Touburg wrote: One million??? How much money does one need to live out his life without any other income?? Or am I from Holland? Andrew Stiller wrote: I would argue that there should be a cap (say $1M) on the amount a work may earn for its creator under copyright. Anything above that, and the item goes PD. I chose that value arbitrarily, setting it on the high side so as to avoid any controversy that it might be too low. I will say however that if I am 25, have a dependent spouse and 3-4 kids, and never create anything else of value, then no, $1M is not, these days, too much to support 2 of us for life and the kids till their majority. The principle I was arguing would IMO still be valid if the cap were 1/10 as much. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT Transposing
On Dec 4, 2006, at 7:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know how the original violino piccolo part in Brandenburg Concerto No. 1 is notated? Treble clef, transposing (violin in Eb!) The horns are in F, transposing. And am I correct in assuming that the trumpet part in No. 2 is written in C rather than F? The part is transposed. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
On Dec 3, 2006, at 4:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, when I use Finale I am forced to use the show in concert pitch option because when I enter a note for a transposed instrument, let's say a written F for horn (sounding Bb) the note that Finale plays isn't the real note, the Bb, but a concert F. I'm afraid this is enough to trash my train of thought and I really don't understand why Finale does it this way. Maybe others prefer it, I don't know. Thank you! That's what I thought I was hearing as I was entering notes on the transposed instruments! So - during note entry, Finale plays the note incorrectly (non-transposed) - but when you hit play on the playback controls, then it does play each transposed instrument correctly...? I thought I was going nuts there for a minute! - Jacki ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On Dec 4, 2006, at 4:49 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Anyone who invests work into something for which he can claim copyright, should have any right to withdraw the copyrighted material from the market, and not be forced to make it public. Anything else would defeat the object of copyright legislation and bring us back several centuries. That depends, of course, on what you consider to be the object of copyright legislation. It so happens that the object of copyright legislation under U.S. law is constitutionally defined, and that object is very different from what you're suggesting here and state more explicitly in a later post: That's what copyright is about. It has very little to do with benefit to society, it is something the copyright owner _owns_ and that's what it is there for. That may be what it's there for in European countries, but America's founders explicitly rejected the idea of copyright as intellectual property. By default, if you publish something, the government is not empowered to prevent anyone else from copying it as much as they like (because of the First Amendment). Of course the same founders also recognized that such a complete lack of protection would have a chilling effect on any publishing industry, and for that reason they wrote into the constitution the section that Dennis B-K quoted. Article I, section 8 specifically empowers the Congress to enforce copyright (and patent) protection, but only as a means of securing the general public interest in promoting publication and other sharing of information. In theory, therefore, copyright laws are only constitutional in America if they are designed to protect the public interest, not the interest of the copyright holder -- in theory, but not always in practice. For several decades now Congress has been passing laws which clearly are intended to benefit the copyright holder while for constitutional purposes hiding behind the legal fiction that their purpose is still to promote publishing. This contradiction is one of the two big reasons why American copyright law is in need of major reform. (The other, even larger reason is that dramatic progress in information technology has rendered many of the law's underlying assumptions obsolete.) Recent efforts to align American law with European law have only exacerbated the problem. I, for one, believe that America's constitutional principle of public interest is sound, and superior to the idea of intellectual property. If and when America finally gives its copyright law the major overhaul that it needs, I hope that principle is used as the primary guideline -- even if that means we have to part ways with European law on this issue. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:54 AM, John Howell wrote: Mark: I have to admit that after reading this I was prepared to castigate you soundly!! Then I read to the end and discovered that you were not advocating putting tenor-G clef in front of the violists after all, but using it as a crutch for the engraver. Yes, as a crutch for string-impaired engravers like myself. If I were actually advocating presenting the tenor-G clef to the violist I would surely deserve your castigation! mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
At 9:24 AM -0500 12/4/06, dhbailey wrote: Sure, they have the same protections right now, at least under U.S. copyright law. Educational fair use doesn't include school concerts held outside the normal school day (8-3 or whatever the school day is scheduled for), Actually that isn't what the Fair Use wording says at all. If I recall correctly from memory, it says during the normal course of instruction. If evening concerts or other concerts outside the normal school day are accepted by the school district or music department as normal instruction in ensemble classes (and equivalent to exams, in my opinion!), they are not disqualified from the educational Fair Use exemption from performance royalties. At least that is how I always interpreted the wording. Your other points are quite correct. To Christopher Smith, who asked, Do composers and publishers of religious or educational works not have the right to the same protection as creators of secular or entertainment works? I would just point out that this goes directly back to the fact that under the 1909 law, performance royalties were payable only for public performance for profit. That loophole is one that the Music Publishers Association REALLY wanted to close, but the people they were dickering with were representatives of MENC and NASM (I don't know about the religious side of the discussions), and they forced the publishers to compromise on very limited and very specific Fair Use wording. NO ONE may profit from such educational performances, or if there is profit it must be used exclusively for educational or charitable uses. And as David correctly pointed out, Fair Use only applies to music used in religious services, not to anything that happens inside a church. 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
RE: [Finale] Orchestral Notation
At 8:49 AM +1100 12/5/06, keith helgesen wrote: John, I am in awe of your obvious knowledge and love of recorders et al. My interest came from joining a recorder septet (sop, 2 desc, 2 alto, 1 ten(me!), 1 bass. This was in 1956 whilst attending Kneller Hall (Royal Military School of Music)in Whitton (Twickenham. UK) To be honest I joined because the alternative on Wed afternoon was Area Beautification- (picking up litter and Cig butts for 2 hours)for all those with no 'ensemble' practice. Ah- memories. Cheers K in OZ I can't top THAT story! But when my wife was asked to start teaching recorder classes at Indiana University, she taught them under an ensemble course number because there was no course number for recorder instruction. Well, as soon as the organ majors (who had to take an ensemble each semester, of course) found out that they could satisfy their ensemble requirement by taking a class they might actually be able to USE, they started signing up for it. She had some VERY good students! 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
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
Mark D Lew wrote: This contradiction is one of the two big reasons why American copyright law is in need of major reform. Don't hold your breath expecting any significant reform. It is highly unlikely that the granted extensions of the protected period (i.e. those in the disastrous Sony Bono Millenium Copyright Act) can be changed; that would put Congress in the position of taking back rights to property that they had previously granted, and that is probably politically impossible in the US these days. Yes, intellectual property law is a mess these days, but having messed up badly last time, and having done so in a bi-partisan way, there's little legislative enthusiasm for wading into the mess. The only hope is for piecemeal small legislative changes and judicial restrictions, but that will probably require a generational change in the composition of the courts. DJW ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. Self publishing issues
On 05.12.2006 Darcy James Argue wrote: Wow. I can't agree with this at all, especially with regard to sound recordings, where most often it's the record company, not the artist, that owns the copyright on the recording. That's a problem with the contract between the artist and the company, not with the copyright legislation. If a record company decides to remove a recording from the market (or goes under, or whatever), then I think copyright on that work should revert to the artist, who can then do whatever she chooses with it. Currently, this is something that one has to negotiate with the record company, and they are most often extremely reluctant to include this kind of provision. It can also be difficult to get them to honor this provision even if it *is* included in the contract -- this is what happened with Knitting Factory Records. Artists who had out-of-print recordings on that label had to sue in order to get their masters back, even though it was explicitly spelled out in the contract that once a recording had gone out of print, the masters must automatically revert to the artist. Again, if the artist, for whatever reasons, decided to transfer his copyright to the company, the company has every right to do with the recording whatever they choose to do. The problem is the contract, not the copyright. I don't believe corporations ought to have the right to unilaterally remove a recording from the market without the consent of the artist. Then don't sign the contract. You won't get a recording out on a larger label either, but this has nothing to do with copyright legislation. I own a little CD label (well, I own half of it) and I certainly would not want any law in place where when I, for whatever reason, let a CD go out of print (whether temporarily or permanently) anyone else can come along and reissue it. Yet this is precisely what you are asking for. I agree that a lot of things are wrong in the relationship between artists and record companies, but that has nothing to do with copyrights themselves, in fact if anything copyright legislation would have to become much stricter to prevent this. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
