Re: [Finale] Linked parts--yes or no?
On 03.07.2009 shirling neueweise wrote: Yes. However, if you have either of these: - hairpins this depends on the nature of your score. you can selectively hide in SC and PTs if there are only a few problematic places. hairpins are not the general problem johannes suggests. I find them so problematic that even a single hairpin would be enough to make me use single files. You cannot use the same hairpins in the score and the part, unless the spacing is identical. - cues i have posted a couple of times before a way to use staff styles to get around this problem in linked parts. normally i would look it up and re-post but it's late and i'm drunk. check the archives. I know there are work arounds, but for me they are simply not worth the hassle. I tried this myself at first, but I am much happier using two files. The great benefit of having linked parts, for me, is something else: I can make pre-production parts from the score file, before I have completely finished the work. Only in the last stages I separate the score and the parts file, to have flexibility of changing hairpins in the parts and adding cue notes. After that at least I only have to make corrections in two files, instead of many as I had to before. Johannes ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tile pages
I can test this with Preview without a printer attached to the computer. In the Page Setup dialog I set the paper size for Any Printer. In the print dialog there's a menu which usually shows Copies and Pages: when I click on this menu I am able to choose the Finale 2008 option which gives the possibility of tiling pages before pressing the Preview button. Alternatively, you could choose Compile PostScript Listing in the File menu. This also gives the option of tiling pages. On 2 Jul 2009, at 23:54, josue moreno wrote: Sorry, it was my fault, I was told that I have to go back to Finale 2004 and I didn't check properly. Anyway, itdoesn't work exactly the same.I guess tile pages is printer dependent and I can't test it with preview, so I will have to wait until have access to the printer.Thank you very much and sorry for the noise.Josué. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: Comparing notation systems
Johannes wrote: Sure, but the fact remains, that the look of their examples suffers tremendously because of the silly treble clefs, at least imo. I was interested in the rationale for the clef design for Lilypond's Feta font, so I looked through the developers' list archives. It turns out that the treble clef has changed a fair amount over time, and there is plenty of discussion about it. The current version — with the rather curved main up-down stroke — is intended to match 19th century prints. Which prints in particular they mean, I haven't been able to establish. In any case, there are earlier versions of Feta with near-vertical main stroke. Daniel Wolf ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Exploding Music
Version and platform? We can't verify the problem here unless we know that. Artics are supposed to stay with the notes, and since 2009 dynamics are supposed to be passed on with the new STAVES, not the notes. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:16 AM, terry cano wrote: When I exploded the stave the articulations and dynamics did'nt remain with the notes. Is there a setting or is it do it manually ie copying Terry ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Linked parts--yes or no?
Christopher Smith wrote: But you lose the essential (for me) feature of being able to make corrections and changes in ONE place only and have them apply to the parts and score simultaneously. I have to say I find this claim to be somewhat disingenuous. While it is true that some corrections and changes need only be made in one place, such corrections and changes are the very easiest to do twice. If you do any major revisions (removing or adding measures, for example) you will likely find yourself still making changes to the page layout for every part individually, and these are the most tedious, time-consuming changes associated with revisions. Neither approach avoids those. Balance that limitation against the extraordinary number of extra steps required to keep the parts in the same file with the score. Adding cues is a *major* pain as are clef changes that occur in either or score or part but not the other. Also consider the compromises you must make in the quality of output. Hairpins can only be positioned correctly in either the score or the part but not both. Same goes for special tools mods. (And don't even ask about splitting parts that appear on a single score staff!) Given all that, I can't see any sense in it. A separate file containing all the parts is definitely the best way to go in my book. You give up very little with respect to making revisions, and you gain tremendously in time saved creating the score and parts and also in quality of output for all. Of course, diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks applies. Both approaches exploit the linked parts feature, and both are superior in almost every way to the old extracted parts method. -- Robert Patterson Listers, Is it possible to use later versions of Finale without utilizing linked parts? If I went from FinMac 2K4 to 2K7, for example, would part creation in both versions be the same or does the user have to learn new routines for the later version? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Exploding Music
Win XP Ver 2008 --- On Fri, 7/3/09, Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca wrote: From: Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca Subject: Re: [Finale] Exploding Music To: finale@shsu.edu Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 7:03 AM Version and platform? We can't verify the problem here unless we know that. Artics are supposed to stay with the notes, and since 2009 dynamics are supposed to be passed on with the new STAVES, not the notes. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:16 AM, terry cano wrote: When I exploded the stave the articulations and dynamics did'nt remain with the notes. Is there a setting or is it do it manually ie copying Terry ___ 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] Linked parts--yes or no?
On Jul 3, 2009, at 11:09 AM, Lawrence David Eden wrote: Christopher Smith wrote: But you lose the essential (for me) feature of being able to make corrections and changes in ONE place only and have them apply to the parts and score simultaneously. I have to say I find this claim to be somewhat disingenuous. While it is true that some corrections and changes need only be made in one place, such corrections and changes are the very easiest to do twice. If you do any major revisions (removing or adding measures, for example) you will likely find yourself still making changes to the page layout for every part individually, and these are the most tedious, time-consuming changes associated with revisions. Neither approach avoids those. Balance that limitation against the extraordinary number of extra steps required to keep the parts in the same file with the score. Adding cues is a *major* pain as are clef changes that occur in either or score or part but not the other. Also consider the compromises you must make in the quality of output. Hairpins can only be positioned correctly in either the score or the part but not both. Same goes for special tools mods. (And don't even ask about splitting parts that appear on a single score staff!) Given all that, I can't see any sense in it. A separate file containing all the parts is definitely the best way to go in my book. You give up very little with respect to making revisions, and you gain tremendously in time saved creating the score and parts and also in quality of output for all. Of course, diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks applies. Both approaches exploit the linked parts feature, and both are superior in almost every way to the old extracted parts method. -- Robert Patterson Listers, Is it possible to use later versions of Finale without utilizing linked parts? If I went from FinMac 2K4 to 2K7, for example, would part creation in both versions be the same or does the user have to learn new routines for the later version? There IS new material to learn. Extracted parts have to go through the same new part creation process that linked parts do. If you use the Setup Wizard, most of the work is done for you, but if you open a pre-2007 file in 2007 or later, you have to create the parts, then extract them. It's not hard, you just have to read the manual. I actually don't suggest that, unless there is something radically different between the parts that is unavoidable. I have had to extract a part once in a while because I needed something different that I couldn't easily change from the other parts, but the farthest I have gone is to have a separate score file and parts file, but all the parts in the parts file were linked. It really is great! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Linked parts--yes or no?
Amen to this ... saved me many hours. Dean Robert Wrote: A separate file containing all the parts is definitely the best way to go in my book. You give up very little with respect to making revisions, and you gain tremendously in time saved creating the score and parts and also in quality of output for all. Canto ergo sum And, I'd rather be composing than decomposing Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Linked parts--yes or no?
On 7/3/2009 11:32 AM, Christopher Smith wrote: There IS new material to learn. Extracted parts have to go through the same new part creation process that linked parts do. If you use the Setup Wizard, most of the work is done for you, but if you open a pre-2007 file in 2007 or later, you have to create the parts, then extract them. It's not hard, you just have to read the manual. Just to clarify, the process is actually very simple. If you open a pre-2007 file and go to Extract Parts, you'll see that there are no parts listed. All you have to do, in most cases, is press the button that says Generate Parts. Then your parts magically appear in the dialog, and you can extract them. In some cases, you'll have to go into the Manage Parts dialog and make some changes before extracting. The reason for all of this is from Fin2007 on, an extracted part is nothing more and nothing less than a saved copy of a linked part. So in order to extract parts, Finale first creates the linked parts (if you haven't already) and then saves each one to its own file. If you have no interest in the conveniences of linked parts, you don't need to actually work with them at all. You can pretend they're not even there and just work with the extracted copies. Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Linked parts--yes or no?
On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:11 PM, Aaron Sherber wrote: On 7/3/2009 11:32 AM, Christopher Smith wrote: There IS new material to learn. Extracted parts have to go through the same new part creation process that linked parts do. If you use the Setup Wizard, most of the work is done for you, but if you open a pre-2007 file in 2007 or later, you have to create the parts, then extract them. It's not hard, you just have to read the manual. Just to clarify, the process is actually very simple. If you open a pre-2007 file and go to Extract Parts, you'll see that there are no parts listed. All you have to do, in most cases, is press the button that says Generate Parts. Then your parts magically appear in the dialog, and you can extract them. In some cases, you'll have to go into the Manage Parts dialog and make some changes before extracting. The reason for all of this is from Fin2007 on, an extracted part is nothing more and nothing less than a saved copy of a linked part. So in order to extract parts, Finale first creates the linked parts (if you haven't already) and then saves each one to its own file. If you have no interest in the conveniences of linked parts, you don't need to actually work with them at all. You can pretend they're not even there and just work with the extracted copies. You may have to create multi-measure rests, too. There are a few little details that screwed me up briefly when linked parts first came out. Only briefly, though. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Exploding Music
If you were on Mac, I would say first of all restart the computer and see if the problem is still there. Many little inconsistencies clear up after a restart (I hope this is the same for PCs). If it is still there, open a tech support case and include the file. There may be corruption. Explode music is supposed to include those items. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 11:27 AM, terry cano wrote: Win XP Ver 2008 --- On Fri, 7/3/09, Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca wrote: From: Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca Subject: Re: [Finale] Exploding Music To: finale@shsu.edu Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 7:03 AM Version and platform? We can't verify the problem here unless we know that. Artics are supposed to stay with the notes, and since 2009 dynamics are supposed to be passed on with the new STAVES, not the notes. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:16 AM, terry cano wrote: When I exploded the stave the articulations and dynamics did'nt remain with the notes. Is there a setting or is it do it manually ie copying Terry ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Exploding Music
Check your filter. This is almost certainly the problem. Cheers, - Darcy - djar...@earthlink.net Brooklyn, NY On 3 Jul 2009, at 12:18 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: If you were on Mac, I would say first of all restart the computer and see if the problem is still there. Many little inconsistencies clear up after a restart (I hope this is the same for PCs). If it is still there, open a tech support case and include the file. There may be corruption. Explode music is supposed to include those items. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 11:27 AM, terry cano wrote: Win XP Ver 2008 --- On Fri, 7/3/09, Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca wrote: From: Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca Subject: Re: [Finale] Exploding Music To: finale@shsu.edu Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 7:03 AM Version and platform? We can't verify the problem here unless we know that. Artics are supposed to stay with the notes, and since 2009 dynamics are supposed to be passed on with the new STAVES, not the notes. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:16 AM, terry cano wrote: When I exploded the stave the articulations and dynamics did'nt remain with the notes. Is there a setting or is it do it manually ie copying Terry ___ 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] Re: Comparing notation systems
On 3 Jul 2009 at 10:09, Daniel Wolf wrote: I was interested in the rationale for the clef design for Lilypond's Feta font, so I looked through the developers' list archives. It turns out that the treble clef has changed a fair amount over time, and there is plenty of discussion about it. The current version with the rather curved main up-down stroke is intended to match 19th century prints. Which prints in particular they mean, I haven't been able to establish. In any case, there are earlier versions of Feta with near-vertical main stroke. This is one of the issues with open source software projects that you see all the time -- they don't have new ideas of their own, they are copying from or reacting to the implementations in the past. This means that in many cases, the open source project retains structural mistakes in thinking inherent in the models they use (or anti-models, if you will). When you choose a model instead of rethinking the problem from scratch, you end up with problems of imperfect modelling -- e.g., the copy is worse than the original because, even though it rectifies some of the problems in the original, it fails to implement many of the aspects that the persons doing the copying failed to notice. -- 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] Exploding Music
I actually thought about that...unfortunately not last night when in front of Finale. Thanks Terry --- On Fri, 7/3/09, Darcy James Argue djar...@earthlink.net wrote: From: Darcy James Argue djar...@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [Finale] Exploding Music To: finale@shsu.edu Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 9:40 AM Check your filter. This is almost certainly the problem. Cheers, - Darcy - djar...@earthlink.net Brooklyn, NY On 3 Jul 2009, at 12:18 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: If you were on Mac, I would say first of all restart the computer and see if the problem is still there. Many little inconsistencies clear up after a restart (I hope this is the same for PCs). If it is still there, open a tech support case and include the file. There may be corruption. Explode music is supposed to include those items. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 11:27 AM, terry cano wrote: Win XP Ver 2008 --- On Fri, 7/3/09, Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca wrote: From: Christopher Smith christopher.sm...@videotron.ca Subject: Re: [Finale] Exploding Music To: finale@shsu.edu Date: Friday, July 3, 2009, 7:03 AM Version and platform? We can't verify the problem here unless we know that. Artics are supposed to stay with the notes, and since 2009 dynamics are supposed to be passed on with the new STAVES, not the notes. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 12:16 AM, terry cano wrote: When I exploded the stave the articulations and dynamics did'nt remain with the notes. Is there a setting or is it do it manually ie copying Terry ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Device not found + OS X F2009 = no recent files
I wonder if anyone else has experienced this error, and whether it occurs in Finale 2010? Basically if you don't have a device attached that Finale is expecting, it gives an error message, and neither opens the file that you double-clicked to open nor lists any recent items in the File menu. Matthew ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Device not found + OS X F2009 = no recent files
Happens every time with me, whenever my Ozone isn't plugged into my iBook when I start up Finale. I shrug and double-click the file again. Same in 2010. Christopher On Jul 3, 2009, at 8:34 PM, Matthew Hindson (gmail) wrote: I wonder if anyone else has experienced this error, and whether it occurs in Finale 2010? Basically if you don't have a device attached that Finale is expecting, it gives an error message, and neither opens the file that you double-clicked to open nor lists any recent items in the File menu. Matthew ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
