Re: [Finale] OT Horn question
Beethoven chose bassoon for a symphony 5 repeated section (a key problem for hand horns). Szell re-wrote it for horns. Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S®4, an ATT 4G LTE smartphone Original message From: Peter Taylor Date:05/17/2014 5:25 PM (GMT-06:00) To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: [Finale] OT Horn question Advice please. I'm doing a rush job (as always!) to prepare wind parts from a composer's printed manuscript, which is in concert pitch throughout (and so reduced in size that I need a magnifying glass). The band due to play it has only one horn at present and I'm having to cue the other three horns onto other instruments where necessary. In one place where the horns are not covered, their notes have + articulation marks above them. What does this mean and what is the effect on the sound? The notes are close to middle C so I have a wide choice of instruments to cue them to. What would be the most suitable band instrument to imitate this sound? Thanks Peter ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
Re: [Finale] repeating a section in only one line
Please don't! Just copy and paste. Repeats are a relic from the days when evrything was hand copied. The don't save you time and are rarely needed today. Ones like you describe only serve to confuse performers. Sent via the Samsung GALAXY S®4, an ATT 4G LTE smartphone Original message From: arabus...@austin.rr.com Date: 01/02/2014 7:16 PM (GMT-06:00) To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: [Finale] repeating a section in only one line In my current project I want to notate repeat signs in individual parts without their showing up in all the parts. How does one do this? I am running Finale 2014 under Windows 8. Aaron J. Rabushka ___ 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] Help from UK friends
As a public school music teacher I am eligible for a grant for summer travel for educational purposes and am preparing a grant application for travel to the UK. This will be June-July 2013 and will be about 4 or 5 days in and around London followed by about 10 days in Scotland. Since this grant is for teacher travel that will enhance the teacher's classroom, the main purpose will be musical but I would also like to be around some interesting photographic areas. I had originally planned the trip for this summer but postponed it because of the Olympics. The focus of the time in London will be music of the English Renaissance. I would like to visit existing sites, study scores in museums, and attend traditional Evensong services in old cathedrals with good choirs. I'm in need other suggestions as well. Perhaps a good day trip outside London. I'm looking for ways to get the most out of my short time in there. The Scottish portion of the trip will be to follow in the path of Mendelssohn's 1829 trip from Edinburgh to Mull. I'd also like to visit Skye while in the Hebrides. How long does it take to get from Mull to Skye? What are areas around Oban or Ft. William that might be interesting? Does anyone know of summer music festivals in this part of Scotland that would be interesting? I know about Mull's Mendelssohn festival which will be central to my time there. Although music of the renaissance and Mendelssohn are the main focus, other music is also of interest including traditional English and Scottish music. Thanks to all for reading this long post and any suggestions made. Richard Smith ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Notation readability research?
As someone who has performed lots of hand written music (and prepared a fair amount myself), I want to comment on this thread. I'm sorry I was unable to reply earlier. I have never understood the use of the jazz fonts. When I was a hand copyist, the goal was to look as much like printed music as possible. I do find most of the jazz fonts very readable and understand that there may be some psychological advantage for jazz musicians. I'm not sure it matters in commercial music. I actually prefer 2 parts on a page; I like to know what my second is doing. I know MOLA doesn't approve, but I really like to see both parts. However, I dislike three (or more) per page. The typical piano playing arranger reads these as chords and sees no problem with it. But an orchestral musician who must pick out the middle voice(s) has a very difficult time. A pet peeve of mine is music with unnecessary ties in the middle of a bar because the other voice (or layer) has a different rhythm and the engraver didn't take time to move the parts to different layers. In music with 2 parts per page, accidentals moving from one voice (or layer) to the other should always be marked. Orchestral musicians (unlike the piano player arranger) are only reading one line and will miss the second accidental in the bar. Someone remarked that hairpins were not missed but text was. Very true. The hairpins are more obvious and usually more accurate. Also, when sight reading, they are likely to be higher on the list of priorities. As to time sigs, bigger is probably better. My favorite is the number over the beat note, ala Carl Orff. Unfortunately neither Finale or Sibelius do that well and I rarely see it anymore. I think that kind of meter sig is much more precise. Enough for now. This is already to long and it's late. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Christopher Smith wrote: On 20-Oct-08, at 20-Oct-08 12:01 PM, Daniel Wolf wrote: There is quite a bit of formal research into the readability of text fonts. For music copying and engraving, it appears that there is quite of bit of hearsay and very little research about readability, much of it fairly hardened into rules about notation style, particularly in commercial music, for example the inkpen-styled fonts preferred in much jazz or show charts. Is anyone aware of any actual research along these lines that might be useful in improving score design, typography and layout? Sorry I can't shut up on this topic, but there are a couple of aspects of standard notation that I always thought could use some improvement. For example, I find standard-sized time signatures to be too small for their importance. Maybe this is the jazz and show side of me coming through, but in my JazzFont defaults I have always increased the size of the numerals in the time signatures by about 50%, which has greatly cut down the number of misreadings, especially when the time changes are coming fast and furious. Unfortunately in engraved-style notation, these numerals are in a stylised font that does not take well to being enlarged. I think the stylised font is a good idea, I just wish we could enlarge it without making it bolder at the same time. Engraver Time is a great idea for scores (where they are even smaller to the eye!) but we need them larger in parts, too. Repeats. We can put wings on them, but many publishers reject them in engraved music, except in the case of jazz arrangements, where the convention has caught on. I think they are needed, as they are too easily missed otherwise. Ditto for DS signs and the coda sign, which are rather small by convention for their importance. Any others that any of you have noticed? Christopher ___ 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] Notation readability research?
A very interesting observation. Back at the end of the last century, I remember thinking how precise and elegant my Finale work looked (Fin 98). But on one job, I found it difficult to read one my own works. My (nearly 50 year old at the time) eyes were having trouble distinguishing ledger lines from staff lines. Then I noticed that my early Sibelius work was easier to read. The staff lines were slightly thicker. So I changed my Finale defaults to thicker lines. When Fin 2000 came out, Finale's defaults had been changed to the same thicker staff lines I had started using. One thing that I left off of the previous post is the tie that is spaced so poorly that it looks more like a dot than a tie. It's especially bad in poor light. I think that's more likely with Finale than Sibelius, but I have seen both do it and any engraver who puts out something like that should be ashamed! Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Carl Dershem wrote: Ah. Something I can comment with some experience and intelligence on. The jazz font is darker, making it easier to read in poor lighting conditions. I find it MUCH easier to see on a badly lit bandstand than the maestro font. That said, it is by no means ideal, but for the price, better for me. There are other, better commercial fonts out there, but they are beyond my meagre means. :( cd ___ 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] Notation readability research?
I really like the French parts also, except for those darn quarter rests. They really throw me! I agree that two parts on the same staff need to not cross and should be rhythmically similar. I should have been more clear. I am also a horn player and have the same reaction to the 13, 24 setup. I hate it and it always causes confusion. Richard Smith Robert Patterson wrote: Richard Smith wrote: I actually prefer 2 parts on a page; This is good practice if and only if the 2 parts appear on separate staves, as with, e.g., orchestral parts for French works. (I believe it was Durand who did this fairly consistently, but I am not certain.) However, some of the French publishers had an aggravating (and, fortunately, uncommon) practice of putting slashes in the 2nd part when it doubled the first part. This is *entirely* unacceptable, and furthermore there is no reason for it in the age of computers. Combining 2 parts on a single staff is always a shortcut. These parts certainly can be quite servicable, but it is not best practice, at least for orchestra parts. Where it becomes particularly sticky is if the parts cross, or if they dovetail. The players are much more likely to take it into their heads to rearrange it to their liking if they see it all on one staff. I speak as one who has done so on numerous occasions because my colleagues were uninterested in playing the notation as given. (I am not the principal.) I am thinking particularly of passages where a melody tosses quickly back and forth between two players. If it is all in one part, it is much simpler to read if both play it all, but that of course kills the effect. The part the player sees should always encourage the player to play what the composer wrote, but in this case it does not. What is truly aggravating, speaking as an orchestra horn player, is when the 1st and 3rd parts appear together on the pages of one part, and the 2nd and 4th appear together on another (irrespective of the number of staves). Do not do this if you want your parts played correctly. 1st and 3rd player are used to reading the top line, while 2nd and 4th are used to reading the bottom. If the middle two players are not paying attention to the upper left corner (imminently possible) then you may only get only your 1st and your 4th part, both doubled. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] MAKEMUSIC greed strikes again
Actually there is an application called StarPlay. http://www.starplaymusic.com/index.php . It is a similar practice/assessment aid but lacks Smartmusic's ability to adjust tempo to the the student. It doesn't have the extensive content that SmartMusic does, but it has a video component that can be very nice, works great with Sibelius, and has a very clean interface. It's worth a look. It also has the advantage of being free. You pay only for content. And, unlike Smartmusic, you don't have to pay to use your own stuff. It's worth a look. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: But Sibelius does not work with Smartmusic. And they do not offer anything like it...as far as I know. Back on topic...makemusic did increase the price of a Smartmusic subscription, but as the library of songs keeps going, it is totally worth it (even though it has a klunky interface). But I did try some Smartmusic exercises I made back in Finale 2006 and they open in smartmusic 11 On Sep 18, 2008, at 7:40 PM, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And in the meantime Sibelius is offering a $99 cross-grade to Sib 5 until the end of the month. Three guesses whose marketing department is most on the ball, and best understands which side their bread is buttered on!!! John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences 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 We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ 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
Re: [Finale] Score Binding Question (OT)
Without revealing too much, I'm thinking in of breaking the band into 8 choirs with semi-antiphonal seating around the stage and front of the hall as well as a good deal of pitched percussion (including handbells) to vary the sound of each choir. Like I said, I'm planning but have no group to perform it so its kind of a back burner thing that someday will get done. I hope. Richard Smith Andrew Stiller wrote: On Aug 4, 2008, at 2:21 PM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: FORTY part choral piece ...? My curiosity is piqued ... what is it? Presumably the famous (and very good) Spem in alium nunquam habui of Thomas Tallis. I'm not sure how you could transcribe it for band without losing the stereo effects that make a big part of its effect. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://www.kallistimusic.com/ ___ 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] Score Binding Question (OT)
From a guy who has spent 30 years directing marching bands: Ya gotta be kiddin'!! RGS Richard Yates wrote: FORTY part choral piece ...? My curiosity is piqued ... what is it? Presumably the famous (and very good) Spem in alium nunquam habui of Thomas Tallis. I'm not sure how you could transcribe it for band without losing the stereo effects that make a big part of its effect. Andrew Stiller Use a marching band? ___ 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] Score Binding Question
No I mean 11x14. Like I said, it's not a standard print size (although I have seen music printed in that size) but it is a standard photograph size. And could easily be produced at any local copy shop or from a wide format printer. For those that don't know, photographers and printers speak of aspect ratio meaning the ratio of the vertical to horizontal sides. 11x17 is roughly the same aspect ratio as a legal size sheet, just bigger. Meaning it's rather long and skinny so if you need lots of staves and therefore a longer score, it's a good choice but, in my experience, rather unwieldy in rehearsal. 11x14 is similar in aspect ratio to letter, 8x10 (a photo size) and 9.5x12. It's a bit more squarish. The result is that for scores that fit a letter size sheet well but the print is just too small to be practical, an 11x14 score will allow you to increase the print size significantly while being almost as easy to handle as a letter size score. If your score needs more staves, like my planned wind band transcription of a 40 part choral piece, you probably will have to make a bigger score than anything that can be easily handled. Maybe such a piece needs a full score for study/reference and a somewhat condensed score from which to conduct! Richard Smith John Howell wrote: At 11:20 PM -0500 8/3/08, Richard Smith wrote: Just a comment on larger scores. I find a 17 score too long to handle easily in rehearsal. It hangs over the end of the stand and sort of droops causing the pages to be difficult to turn. Clearly some scores really need the extra length, but I find 11x14 a very good option for a larger score. It fits the stand nicely so that the pages turn easily and the aspect ratio allows for larger print while leaving the format very similar to a letter size score. It's not a standard size (although it is a standard size for photographs) but it's easy enough to just print 11x17 and trim 3 from the bottom of the paper. Just a thought... Hi, Richard. Do you mean legal size? 8.5 x 14? A double spread in that case would be 14 x 17, not 11 x 14. Or maybe I'm just confused. Just for reference, the standard desk height for Manhasset stands is 12.5. Only one of their stands is larger, the #54 Regal by Manhasset Conductor's Stand, with a desk that's 32 wide x 15.5 high. But some other companies' conductor stands (including those used in our school district) are also larger, and quite able to support 17 scores. John ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Score Binding Question (OT)
Spem in Alium (Tallis) is the correct answer. But I say planned because it's not progressing much and I don't have anyone to play it anyway. Richard Smith John Howell wrote: There's only one that I know of, but I'm blanking on the composer. (Tallis? English, at least, and composed for eight 5-part choirs to be performed in a specific octagonal building. Acoustic surround sound!) I've never studied it, since I've never had the forces to attempt doing it! I do understand that another, even larger work has been recently rediscovered, but I can't remember that story either. There are, of course, polychoral pieces by both the Gabriellis (uncle and nephew) and Michael Praetorius that might have involved 40 performers, with 2 on a part, but no others written in 40 (more-or-less) individual parts. John At 11:21 AM -0700 8/4/08, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: FORTY part choral piece ...? My curiosity is piqued ... what is it? Dean On Aug 4, 2008, at 10:34 AM, Richard Smith wrote: (snip) wind band transcription of a 40 part choral piece, Richard Smith Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home When I am working on a problem, I never think about beauty. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong. R. Buckminster Fuller ___ 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] Score Binding Question
Well, I'm not sure it's too far a journey from the original topic. I think those involved in music preparation need to be thinking about the practical realities of rehearsal and performance. In my experience as both a horn player and a conductor, much music is prepared without considering the performers. My guess is that's because of limited ensemble performance experience of those who prepared the music. I agree about having some extra room on the stand. I like the Manhassett double post conductor's stand. I don't know the model name off hand, but it's wide and has a double lip. To me it's just about perfect. Bigger stands, like the big Wenger drawing board size stands, seem to place a barrier between the ensemble and me that I don't like. In rehearsal, I also like to keep a second stand (or small table) to the side for those additional things that are always needed. Richard Smith Aaron Sherber wrote: Okay, now we're getting totally away from binding issues, but since you bring it up As a conductor, I like my workspace to be comfortably larger than my scores. I always keep a spare baton on my desk, and in rehearsal I'm likely to keep a pencil, some index cards, and maybe a rehearsal schedule or list of spots to hit. I guess you're right that an 11x14 score may just barely fit on one stand (though technically I think it extends slightly past the stand on all three sides), but it doesn't leave me room for any of my other work implements, and so it's a non-starter for me. Two stands side-by-side is a better compromise, if a large desk isn't available. Aaron. ___ 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] Score Binding Question
Just a comment on larger scores. I find a 17 score too long to handle easily in rehearsal. It hangs over the end of the stand and sort of droops causing the pages to be difficult to turn. Clearly some scores really need the extra length, but I find 11x14 a very good option for a larger score. It fits the stand nicely so that the pages turn easily and the aspect ratio allows for larger print while leaving the format very similar to a letter size score. It's not a standard size (although it is a standard size for photographs) but it's easy enough to just print 11x17 and trim 3 from the bottom of the paper. Just a thought... Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Lee Actor wrote: I bind my 17 scores with a 14 binding, but I have irgert flush against the bottom of the score and leave the 3 without a binding free at the top. Any place will do it (but they don't have to in my case now that I have the Akiles coil binder! Thanks NPC Imaging!) and it is very convenient. Christopher Why not bind the entire 17 length, which the Akiles CoilMac can do easily? As for the coil itself, you must already be using 36 coils to make your 14 binding, so getting two 17 lengths from one 36 coil works out well. As far as I know, Kinko's only stocks 12 coils, which is one of the reasons (among several) that I bought an Akiles CoilMac several years ago and can do all my score production in-house. The only time I ever go to Kinko's any more (besides FedEx) is now and then to have a ream of 11x17 paper cut to 11x14. Lee Actor Composer-in-Residence and Assistant Conductor, Palo Alto Philharmonic http://www.leeactor.com ___ 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] 2009 expression question
David, my comments are meant to be of a general nature. Clearly there will be exceptions where page turns or other considerations make standard repeats a good choice. I am not as concerned with standard repeats as the complicated nested patterns that are customized for a piece need special instructions on the part (and often in rehearsal). I have seen far too many of these and they are almost always unnecessary and confusing. As a general rule, I consider repeats to be a remnant of the hand written days. But there are certainly cases in which they are justified. Certainly a DS placed over or near the ending barline of a mm repeat is clear. But I have seen large DS markings stretched out over an entire bar (or more) These can be very unclear. If you stretch one of those over a mm repeat that has been compacted to make it fit a page, you have real potential for error. Careful workers will, of course, not make this error. But one of the deceptive things about our modern software is how good (superficially) it can make sloppy work look. dhbailey wrote: Richard Smith wrote: Sibelius does the same thing as Finale in this case. But, if I may give a player's perspective, I really prefer having the MM rest broken to place a DS or similar instruction. It doesn't look as good, but it's much more clear to me as to where it is to occur. I have played lots of music that had such instructions poorly placed and was confusing. I think instant recognition is more important than graphic beauty, especially in the high pressure world of one rehearsal (maybe?) before performing it. But then, this brings up one of my favorite peeves. Why, when copy and paste work so well, do we continue to use complicated repeat patterns and nested endings that only consume limited (at least in my case) brain power when it's most needed for making music? The less we are distracted from the basics of music making, the better the performance is likely to be. It's really time to leave the archaic notation shortcuts of the handwritten era behind. Often D.S. or D.C. instructions leave us with a 1-page part, which is about half as expensive to print as a 2-page part would be, and quite often that D.S. or D.C. section before the Fine or the Coda is only a couple of lines. Why should we make a 2-page part for only a couple of lines? Musically, it's easy to get people to play the same section the same way (if that's what's desired) if they're looking at the same printed music. Often when looking at even the same music on a different part of the page, it doesn't come out the same way. Finally, try printing a piece which is through-composed with no repeats, 1st-2nd endings or D.S./D.C. on a march-size piece of paper for a marching band which doesn't memorize its music. Go ahead, I dare you. :-) As to the breaking of a multi-measure rest just so show that the D.S./D.C. instruction is at the end of that rest, everybody I've ever met musically knows that it goes at the end of the multi-measure rest, and that if it were to go anywhere else, there would be a shorter multi-measure rest with that instruction at the end. I've never run into any musicians, even elementary school 1st-year students, who needed the D.S. or D.C. over a measure rest which was separated from a multi-measure rest. You didn't make me mad, but don't sell those old-fashioned repeat structures short and don't sell your musicians short in their ability to cope with them. Anybody who can't understand them has no business calling themselves a musician anyway. :-) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius is doing it again
Sibelius 5 works the same as 4 with regard to instrument brackets; you can place thin sub-brackets within any bracketed instrument sets. Braces will collide with brackets so should not be used together. Fine if thats the setup you need but if you need more flexibility or nested braces, Sibelius is not a good choice. This is especially true if you are trying to recreate historical editions that have other bracketing schemes. That having been said, there are also things that Finale cannot do. Working on some piano reductions for a client who insisted on Finale, I needed to be able to reassign voices (or layers) on a note by note basis so that rhythms that were not identical could be correctly notated in a single staff. My Finale (o5) would not allow that (it was a simple, straightforward task in Sibelius). Discussions with MM tech support and the Toms at a convention confirmed that Finale would only allow voice reassignments on a complete bar but not a single note. I had to re-enter several bars from scratch to get the desired result. I am not aware if later Finale versions have corrected this, but, since I expect to upgrade this year, I'll find out. The fact is that both programs have things they do well and others that are awkward or not directly possible. We should be grateful for two very through choices. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Robert Patterson wrote: On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:31 AM, dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't think of anything which is possible in Finale which isn't possible in Sibelius these days, Sib4 could not even do something as trivial as nested instrument brackets. Can Sib5 do these? ust as there are probably things possible with Sibelius which are not possible (or are difficult) in Finale, ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius is doing it again
Well, I can place brackets (heavy vertical line with or without wings) inside of or outside of sub-brackets (the thin bracket) by changing the distance from staff in the House styleEngraving rulesbrackets menu. I can also move the braces (the curly, piano style bracket) so they are outside of the bracket and do not collide, and I can place a sub-bracket within braces without a main bracket. Or within a bracket. I could place braces inside either brackets of sub-brackets. The limitation appears to be in putting a second bracket, sub-bracket, or brace inside of another one. I can only set the distance from staff once for each type of line. But I could use the CreateLines menu to nest other sub-brackets. The same could probably be done in the symbols menu and, in either case, custom brackets could be created if needed in the House styleEdit lines or House styleEdit symbols menus. I don't have a Rite of Spring score at hand but a quick review online showed some editions with sub-brackets outside of brackets (the Sibelius default) and braces outside of brackets (not the default but easy to accomplish). As to my voicing problem, the fastest way to do the job was to combine several staves into one and then edit the new stave to create a treble or bass piano staff. Sometimes conflicting rhythms would cause non-standard ties and other debris. What I then needed to do was edit the voices or layers (Sibelius only uses voices but they can change note to note) so that the rhythms were notated in a more standard way. In Sibelius, I could simply highlight a note and change it's voice (layer) assignment which was very direct. But the customer insisted on Finale which would only allow me to make voice changes on a bar to bar basis. Layers were no help either. In most cases, the bar had to be rewritten from scratch. Not a huge problem but, from my standpoint, a limitation of finale. I don't relate this to complain but to say that the current state of both softwares is that most anything can be done but the worker's experience and preferred working method makes one or the other better for that person. RGS Robert Patterson wrote: Richard Smith wrote: Sibelius 5 works the same as 4 with regard to instrument brackets; you can place thin sub-brackets within any bracketed instrument sets. But you can't further nest the sub-brackets, right. So the Rite of Spring score is not readily possible. If I can't even get past template creation in Sib before running into a limitation not present in Finale, why should I believe there aren't many others? I needed to be able to reassign voices (or layers) on a note by note basis so that rhythms that were not identical could be correctly notated in a single staff. I'm not sure I get what you are talking about. How does V1/V2 not accomplish this? (Layers are complete bars, but V1/V2 is note by note.) My point is not whether a notation is straightforward. My point is the Sibelius has things (or at least 1 thing) it cannot do *at all* short of manually sizing and assigning graphics. These days there is very little notation Finale cannot accomplish some way. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius is doing it again
The extra brackets from the lines menu are a bit of a kludge. These are basically horizontal lines that are attached to notes but can be turned into vertical. They do not move with the staff and would have to be inserted individually on each page. I think, if that was needed, I'd do it the very last thing after all of the music was written and the score formatted. If I was doing lots of music that needed that, I might do it in Finale or try to alter a text style that is attached to the beginning of the staff. When I was doing those piano reductions, I tried imploding in both Finale and Sibelius. The initial result from Finale was cleaner looking than that of Sibelius but was harder to clean up into a finished product. These reductions were from string quartets and had many independent rhythmic lines. A reduction from something more chordal would not present the same problem for either program. My Finale experience goes back to v.2. I started Sibelius with v.1.0 (1999 I think) and have enjoyed watching Finale respond to Sibelius and Sibelius to Finale. It's definitely happened both ways though I think Sibelius has influenced Finale more than Finale has Sibelius. I suspect that MMs yearly subscription, (opps I meant upgrade) cycle has severely hampered major upgrades and improvements to the software. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Robert Patterson wrote: In Finale, you can nest brackets (in my case, desk brackets) arbitrarily deep. These automatically reconfigure themselves as needed, both in terms of depth and in terms of length, based on the group settings and the optimization. The last time I tried Sib (v4 demo), you could only go one level deep. If the Create-Lines menu can create lines that authomatically attach to staves, so the regardless of how far apart the staves are on each system they stretch the correct length, that would be at least a start. But I doubt if that solution would allow them to disappear when the group has fewer than 2 staves on a given system. It sounds like Sib definitely has a nice UI for changing voices. I'd have to see your example to understand whether V1/V2 brings anything to the table. The Toms have a tendency to overlook V1/V2 as a legacy feature (hence the failure fully to support it in the new expression tool). But without massive improvement, layers simply are no substitute in certain situtions. Finale also has a implode music feature and a plugin that creates a piano version of choral parts. I have no idea if either would have produced useful results in your case. In my experience they are of limited usefulness. My biggest problem with MM these days is that they continue to use Sib as a yardstick for success. The new expression UI is a great case in point. Achieving something that looks and behaves (apparently) similar to Sib was good enough for them. They exhibited little interest in leap-frogging. For example, now that we see the assignment point, why can't we drag it where we want (rather than the expression)? Why doesn't the context menu have all the assignment options in it? MM has many smart people who can think of all kinds of useful features beyond what Sib is doing, but matching Sib appears to be good enough for them. It used to be the other way around. (Sib used Fin as a yardstick.) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius is doing it again
I agree whole heartedly Robert. Most of the complaints and insults hurled at both programs are long outdated. I am glad that in the last 2 or 3 years the platform wars seem to have subsided. Since Fin05 I think the difference in most cases is mainly one of preferred working method rather than capability. I am eager for the day when music is delivered to the client or publisher via .PDF and our choice of software is insignificant. Richard Smith Robert Patterson wrote: Since then, though, it seems Finale has mostly been influenced by Sib. But I still become very impatient with Sib users who denigrate Finale without knowing anything that's happened to it in the last 10 yrs. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius to Finale
If all you have is the file, MIDI may be your best choice, or you might find a Sibelius user who will print the file to PDF and return it to you so you can scan it. If you want, contact me privately and I'll do that for you. If you have Sibelius, you could buy the Music XML plug in from Recordare http://www.recordare.com/default.asp to convert the file to Finale's format. This is your best choice. Otherwise you might find a Sibelius user with the Music XML plug in to convert it for you or you might try printing the file and then scanning. Hope that helps Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Fiedler wrote: I know this has been discussed many times on this list, but ... A client has just sent us a huge Sibelius file to be worked on. What is the best way to get it into Finale with as much detail as possible being saved in the transition? (so a MIDI-solution would only be a solution if all else fails ...) Thanks in advance for any bits of collective wisdom you could send this way. Eric Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) www.habsburgerverlag.de [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ 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] Cheap, easy notation apps?
As others have suggested, Noteworthy Composer seems to be a favorite among vocal people and elementary music teachers. Many of the vocal sites have music for download in the NWC format. There's a free NWC reader that's somewhat like Scorch for Sibelius. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Paul Hayden wrote: I have a friend who sings in a non-professional choir and he would like to buy a Windows platform notation program that is inexpensive (say, less than $100US) and easy to use. He would be using it mostly for 4-part choral music (including lyrics) with keyboard accompaniment. He does not have a MIDI keyboard, so he'd like to use the computer keyboard for note input, if possible. I'm not up on the various incarnations of Finale (Allegro, PrintMusic, Songwriter) and Sibelius (Student), so I'm not sure what to recommend. Any suggestions -- not just Finale and Sibelius products -- would be much appreciated. TIA Paul Hayden Magnolia Music Press 6319 Riverbend Blvd. Baton Rouge, LA 70820 Voice Pre-arranged fax: 225-769-9604 www.paulhayden.com ___ 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] Ottava bassa
That was true 2 or 3 generations ago but this horn player has no problem with key signatures and doesn't know anyone who does. Those guys must live in a very small musical world. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com http://horn.rgsmithmusic.com Christopher Smith wrote: But your point about classical players spending a lot of time with 19th C parts is valid, as that certainly informs their expectations. I have gotten complaints from classical orchestral horn players, for example, for handing out parts with key signatures. Apparently in some orchestras that program mostly classical warhorses they can go most of the season without ever seeing a part with a key signature, and consider the inclusion of one on a horThat n part to be an error! Yet it is a perfectly normal and correct convention in post 19th C music. The trumpet and timpani players (who see similar parts in pre 20th C repertoire) apparently are better-rounded players, because they deal with the key signatures without so much as a raised eyebrow. christopher ___ 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] Web site rennovation
There was an additional problem with the logo because it was a .png and IE6 doesn't do .png well. So I have now deleted the logo as a separate element entirely and made it a part of the background. This solves my .png problem as well as the conflicting links. Yes it is iTheme. I didn't spend any money on it and did it all myself. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com A-NO-NE Music wrote: A-NO-NE Music / 08.4.24 / 0:56 PM wrote: I was under the impression you used ThemeSnap, correct? My mistake. You used iTheme. I didn't know this one. I took a look at your logo hyperlink problem. I have a feeling you can solve the problem by making logo hight smaller. Use the original iTheme logo for size reference. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Web site rennovation
Thanks for the kind words, Barbara. I've been having quite a good chuckle at the Finale specific suggestions. I can think of some fun replies but it's far too easy to be misunderstood on the internet and my wife says my sense of humor is too dry anyway. Actually yours may be a good suggestion for an article. If anyone wants to write it and send it to me, I'll take a look at it. And I'll give credit to the author. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Barbara Touburg wrote: A very nice site, Richard. I suggest adding a page Why I Use Finale Notation Software though. :) Richard Smith wrote: There was an additional problem with the logo because it was a .png and IE6 doesn't do .png well. So I have now deleted the logo as a separate element entirely and made it a part of the background. This solves my .png problem as well as the conflicting links. Yes it is iTheme. I didn't spend any money on it and did it all myself. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ 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] Web site rennovation
Thanks for looking around and for the comments. The music link on the nav bar should work. The problem is that the Logo is a default link to the home page and I have not yet seen how to disable it. It's so close to the nav bar that it's easy to click the logo instead of the nav bar. You are the second person to suggest the drupal contact module so I'm looking into it. Thanks. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com A-NO-NE Music wrote: Richard Smith / 08.4.23 / 7:25 AM wrote: Crass commercialism here. I've been engaged in a major renovation of my web site, http://www.rgsmithmusic.com. I would appreciate anyone who will go give it a look. Comments are welcomed heartily. Drupal! Where is Finale logo? :-) Your main nav Music has no link. I was wondering why you don't use Drupal's Contact form module? Static email address and phone number will be crawled. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] CONVERTING Sib to Fin
Music XML is best but you will have to buy the Dolet for Sibelius (about $120). Printing the Sib file and then scanning might be a better solution than MIDI. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Noel Stoutenburg wrote: Kim Richmond wrote: Is there a way to convert Sibelius files into Finale files? I forget how if I once knew. Not directly, except through MIDI. ns ___ 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] TAN: Annoying Sibelius bug
John Howell wrote: I do hate the automatic justification feature, but I seem to be the only one who does. Filtering seems to be a majorly useful feature, but I haven't figured it out either. It's like anything else: What you use regularly you learn to use efficiently. What you DON'T use regularly can be hard to remember, and I confuse easily! The auto justification can be a little unsettling at first. You can turn it off, if you wish. Go to House StyleEngraving RulesStaves. Under staff justification set the percentiage to 100%. That will turn it off and then you can drag the staves around by hand all you want. You might also want to see the selection of rulers under view menu to help you be precise as well as using the graph paper from the paper selections in the preferences menu. But, I suggest working with the auto justification for a while first. Once you get a feel for what it's doing, you'll feel like you are in control again and then you may like it. Page layout is, to me, the way in which Sibelius and Finale differ the most. I've have grown to prefer Sibelius' approach but I didn't at first. You might also learn the tools under the layout menu. There you can force a system or a page break exactly where you want it. You can also force a bar to the next line by highlighting the barline and hitting enter. The filter is great tool. It can save lots of time and tedious mouse clicks. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: Annoying Sibelius bug
Hi Darcy, I don't have any help for your text problem, but you should post that to the Sibelius List, http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/ Daniel Spreadbury from Sibelius monitors that list and knows every bug and other intimate detail of Sibelius. He also prefers to work on a Mac. If your text problem is on record anywhere at Sibelius, Daniel will know. And the other folks on that list are helpful, too. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Darcy James Argue wrote: Hi Johannes, So far, I only have one client who insists on Sibelius, so I am still learning the ropes. (I used to be pretty good with SIb 1.4, but obviously a lot has changed since then!) I will definitely post about my experience with Sib once I have a better handle on the program. So far, it's been a real mix of gee, that's really nice, I wish Finale did that and this should not be so hard -- I can't believe how annoying and frustrating it is to do this one simple thing. Some examples of the latter would be positioning gliss lines, or trying to reduce the default bottom margin below the allowable threshold, or trying to figure out how far from the page edge a bit of Title text is, or Sibelius's insistence on using spaces and millimeters exclusively in its dialog boxes. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 11 Mar 2008, at 5:30 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Hi Darcy, I don't have the answer, however, since you seem to be using Sibelius now, I'd love to hear your experience and in depth comparison. 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 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius vs Finale
It depends on what your trying to accomplish. Sibelius provides brackets and sub brackets as well as keyboard type braces. The bracket and the brace can be used together but will collide and I have not found a way to move either from the default horizontal position. They are easily adjustable vertically, just grab an end and pull. The sub-bracket works well for isolating staves within a bracketed set but tying to install a second bracket (instead of the sub-bracket) inside the first results in only an extra wing or two being visible. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com dc wrote: I remember Robert saying nested brackets weren't possible in Sibelius. Is this still true? Dennis ___ 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] Desktop versus laptop survey
Mostly desktop for the serious work. The laptop is for classroom and quick work. My desktop sounds much better, has more resources and is faster so I prefer to work on it. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Chuck Israels wrote: I'm in the desktop camp. Chuck On Dec 12, 2007, at 9:29 PM, Henry E. Howey wrote: I think we need a list survey of laptop versus desktop usage. I, for example, have both, but my laptop is my real machine upon which I do 60-70% of my work. If my observation of an observed group of undergraduate students is accurate, they are closer to 90% in laptop usage. Henry Howey Professor of Music Sam Houston State University Box 2208 Huntsville, TX 77341 (936) 294-1364 http://www.shsu.edu/music/faculty/howey.php Owner of FINALE Discussion List ___ 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 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Question About Proper Notation
Four dotted eighths (or four quarters in duplet). You want to make both the beat and the duple feel clear. The tied version obscures the beat slightly so you have to use precious (limited in my case) mental energy for something other than pure music making. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Jacki Barineau wrote: Hi, Everyone... I'm notating a song in 6/8 time and in one spot it has syncopated rhythm, and I'm not sure which way is the proper way to notate it! There are 4 notes in the measure, each getting 1.5 counts - would this be portrayed with 4 dotted-eighth notes? Or would you do dotted-eighth, 16th-tied-to-8th, dotted-eighth, 16th-tied-to-8th? Thanks! Jacki ___ 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] Finale 2008 and Beyond
I have visited bandmusicdirect.com and downloaded the Finale Viewer. My browser (IE as recommended on the site for PC) will not display music. I get blank staves and music playing. Other than that, it look very much like Scorch. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Noel Stoutenburg wrote: dhbailey wrote: But it is interesting that they dumped Sibelius' Scorch plug-in in favor of Finale's. I just wish that MakeMusic would be more open about such things, more encouraging, adopt more of a look at us and all the places where Finale is heading these days attitude for the general public. It's a huge success for them if they can get Hal Leonard to convert all their scores to Finale. Why isn't anybody from MakeMusic trying to help us feel there's a brighter future! I found out about it by reading the publicly available press releases on the MakeMusic! website, and mentioned it in this forum back in January. On the other hand, a brief web search returned this result (among others) from BandFolio.com, with a copyright notice at the bottom reading ©2002-2007 and with the following in their FAQ: * What happened to the Finale Viewer? The Finale Viewer, a plug-in designed to view and listen to Finale files in a web browser, is no longer supported by Finale, and is not compatible with the most recent browsers. We have removed the MUS files from our server, and replaced them with mp3 and wma audio files. * The former plug-in known as Finale Viewer was very much like Scorch, and I suspect was Finale's response to a Request for a proposal from Hal Leonard, and when HL decided to go with Scorch instead of Finale viewer, support was dropped. Finale Viewer is back as the software needed for the purchaser end of an e-commerce transaction for delivery of sheet music scores. Where Bandfolio.com says Finale Viewer is no longer supported, it would now be better to write that the name Finale Viewer has been assigned to a different item of software. ns ___ 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] dealing with file corruption
The navigation tools can be re-mapped. However, I would first want to get acquainted with Sibelius' defaults. They are quite good and remapping might result in the loss of other good keyboard features. Remapped shortcuts can also be saved to a personalized set so the defaults are not changed and can always be recovered easily. RGS David W. Fenton wrote: On 28 Nov 2007 at 22:32, Richard Smith wrote: Don't know. I haven't tried that. You can re-map a lot of things but that strikes me as one that might not work. I'll play a little and let you know what I find. I agree it seems a little unusual but remember that if the zoom is set for page width the entire length of the page won't be displayed so that way you get both horizontal and vertical movement. Unless I had a portrait monitor, I'd never want to use it, except (as in Finale) for actually laying out the page. What I'd really like is a notation program that had intelligent navigation around the page, say, Ctrl-Down/Up would take you the next/previous system. It would take some thought, but if there were some way to keep a full system onscreen (within reason, of course -- if you're working on an orchestral piece, that's going to require a really big monitor to be of any use), and then navigate to the next full system, that would be a big time saver. Does anyone understand what I mean here? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] dealing with file corruption
With apologies for answering Sibelius questions on the Finale list, just set the page view to page width (or so). Then home will go to the previous page, end to the next page, while adding shift will go to the first and last pages respectively. The page up and page down keys should get you up and down the page as needed. Having first used Sibelius with version 1 after years of Finale use, I, too, missed scroll view. But, after a few days, I adapted and have not missed it since. In fact I tend to work in Finale in page view as well and have used Sibelius' new Panorama (scroll) view very little. But that's just me, others will, no doubt, have different experiences. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com ThomaStudios wrote: While I would generally agree with this, I've been learning Sibelius for the past 5 weeks or so, having jumped on their cross-grade sale back in October. And while I always have worked initially in Finale using scroll view, I haven't as yet even tried it in Sibelius. And to be honest, I'm really not missing it. I will say the method of work in Sib is quite different and that's been my first major hurdle. The one thing about their page view that I don't like is a lack of a keyboard command to go from page to page or back to the top. Maybe I just haven't found it yet. But all in all, in my quite limited exposure thus far, it's quite usable and viable alternative to Finale. J D Thomas ThomaStudios On Nov 28, 2007, at 11:45 AM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: Well, I think Sibelius is now very, very close to being an easy switch for an experienced Finale user. Now that they have a scroll view was really the last glaring defect in getting stuff done in Sibelius in my view. I don't know how people worked or work in that silly pageview mode they have. ___ 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] dealing with file corruption
Don't know. I haven't tried that. You can re-map a lot of things but that strikes me as one that might not work. I'll play a little and let you know what I find. I agree it seems a little unusual but remember that if the zoom is set for page width the entire length of the page won't be displayed so that way you get both horizontal and vertical movement. RGS David W. Fenton wrote: On 28 Nov 2007 at 17:24, Richard Smith wrote: With apologies for answering Sibelius questions on the Finale list, just set the page view to page width (or so). Then home will go to the previous page, end to the next page, while adding shift will go to the first and last pages respectively. The page up and page down keys should get you up and down the page as needed. Can these be mapped in Sibelius (without QuickKeys or something similar) to keys that make more sense? That is, something like PageUp/Down navigates you from one page to the next, home/end takes to the top and bottom of the current page, Ctrl-PageUp/Down or Ctrl- Home/End takes you to first/last page. Using PageUp/Down for anything but moving from one page to the other seems to me to make little sense at all. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: Rests in compound meters
I want to see 6/8 at sight so I don't miss it. My brain is old and I have to do a lot of sight reading :) Richard Smith Robert Patterson wrote: I tend to prefer legibility over consistency. If there is quarter note at the beginning of the bar, I would probably write 4 8r 4r 8. But if there is only the 8th at the end of the bar I would probably write 4r-dot 8r 8r 8. Many reference books advocate not using dotted quarter rests in 6/8, but I have come to disagree with them in many situations. On 11/6/07, Aaron Sherber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, I'm curious as to how you feel about notating sub-beat rests in compound meters. In particular, something like a 6/8 bar with two eighths of silence and an eighth pickup to a dotted quarter on beat 2. Should the rests at the beginning of the bar be two eighth rests, or a quarter rest? Gardner Read seems to come down fairly unequivocally in favor of a quarter rest here, but when I see it on the page, it looks a little funny; I keep wanting to play the eighth on beat 2. At the same time, a series of eighth rests can be disorienting, like this in 6/8 (q=quarter note, e=eighth note, r=eighth rest): q r r r e Those three eighth rests can visually be hard to parse. On the other hand, I find this far preferable if the 6/8 is in 6 rather than 2. I suspect this is one of those things where people feel very strongly about their own preferred method, and I'm not looking to start a religious war over it. But I am interested in hearing different approaches. Thanks, Aaron. ___ 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
Re: [Finale] very OT notation (burn before reading!)
Hey! We're a fun bunch!! RGS Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Imagine that ... a lively conversation among horn players! Dean On Nov 3, 2007, at 9:53 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: On 11/2/07, Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: there is a lively discussion among horn players about whether the 4th horn solo in the 3rd mvt of Beethoven 9 was written for valve horn. And yet, John Ericson, very eloquently, dispassionately, perspicaciously, and convincingly thinks it was not. Majority does not rule in these matters. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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] very OT notation (burn before reading!)
Robert Patterson wrote: But even in much more recent history, where the composer is well-known, questions abound. Here are two thorny ones from the world of horn music. Brahms wrote is horn trio for the natural horn, but because it was so difficult without valves, and because valve-horn playing was so well-established by then, most performance in his lifetime were probably on valve horn. Conversely, Schumann wrote his Concertstuck for the absolute bleeding edge of technology (for his time): valved horns. But valve horns then were so crude, and the skill of playing them so fresh, that in early performances the most difficult top part was probably played on natural horn. (The most objective and informed expert I know on valve vs. natural horn practice is John Ericson, who I believe is at Arizona State.) Just a couple of observations from a horn player. 1. The first part on the Concertstuck is so high, on an F horn it's almost all open anyway. When you play on the open horn that way, it's more like singing than playing because it's all lip and ear. Today it's usually played with a triple horn or a descant double so valves are more necessary. 2. Somewhere else in this thread someone suggested that the Brahms 2nd Symphony parts in B natural would not be possible without valves. On the contrary, the hand horn is simply crooked in B and played as in any other key. No transposition is needed until valves are involved. 3. Interestingly, there is a lively discussion among horn players about whether the 4th horn solo in the 3rd mvt of Beethoven 9 was written for valve horn. Most think that it was. Here we're only talking about 2 or 3 years after the first (very crude) valves. Talk about bleeding edge!! Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com http://horn.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Some Questions...
Christopher Smith wrote: Am I to understand that these answers will serve as ammunition for you in a discussion you are presently having with a client? 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Not at all. I just thought the discussion would be interesting. So many work in so many different ways and my own world is too small. It's good to see other thoughts. RGS ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: AW: [Finale] Sibelius 5 - Second impressions
You can select the articulation from the keypad at the same time as the rhythm. But I find that awkward unless you just need a few isolated articulations. For me, articulation is most seamlessly applied to entire regions (select any number of measures) rather than note by note. I also stop entering notes from scratch and begin a copy, paste, and edit routine as soon as possible. If you copy a passage that's already articulated, attaching articulations becomes moot. This is another case of Sib and Finale being differently abled. You can get to the same result but the path may be much different and some may prefer Finale's while others prefer Sibelius'. Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: I, so far, find Sibelius extremely backwards. Like putting articulations on notes after I enter them. Still can't figure that out. Nor if you decide you want to change an instrument on a score. So far, I've tried to do two trios with Sibelius, but ended up going back to Finale cause it was just not working very well for me John Howell wrote: At 10:25 PM +0100 10/30/07, Kurt Gnos wrote: David, John, thanks for the quick and competent answers. Well, apart from the crashes, I get a quite good impression. And I am glad you two are here to answer all my future Sibelius questions. I must say, generally the user interface it quite nice and much more modern than Finale, and the output is flawless, which much less fiddling than in Finale. So I guess I am a candidate to switch, sooner or later... Kurt: David is competent, I'm still very much learning. But you might want to subscribe to the SibList at [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's much like this list, not an official Sibelius list, with the crucial difference that a Senior Product Manager for Sibelius, Daniel Spreadbury, monitors the list and answers questions quickly and honestly. John ___ 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: AW: [Finale] Sibelius 5 - Second impressions
Eric this may be what you want. 1. Right click on a blank part of the page for the context menu. At the bottom of the menu is other. Open that up. 2. Select change instrument 3. Pick an instrument from the list. 4. Click the now blue (=loaded) arrow where you want to change the instrument. You will get a transposition and key and/or clef change as needed as well as a text instruction to the performer to change to the instrument. 5. If you want to change the stave for the entire score, click in the left margin just to the left of the staff. It will change the staff and look as if the new instrument had been the choice fromt he beginning. I think that having multiple ways of doing things has a lot to do with familiarity. I really like Sibelius' step time entry. There are so many ways to enter music that I am constantly changing my approach to fit the particular circumstance. Conversely, I find Finale's Speedy Entry restrictive but many of the workers on this list would certainly disagree. These two are just differently abled and the versatility is good for us all. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: John Howell wrote: Nor if you decide you want to change an instrument on a score. I assume that you mean same staff, change to a different instrument, perhaps change clef or transposition, rather than the scenario David explained. I know it can be done, but not how because I haven't had to learn it yet. Either way. Seems like you can't do it easily in Sibelius. You have to create a new staff and then copy all the stuff over? You can't just click the staff and change it? Seems non-intuitive to me. All notation is complex. (Don't forget that it was originally developed by monks using feathers!!!) But any program has to deal with those complexities. Some do it better than others, but I don't EVER expect any programmer or team of programmers to come up with exactly the same way of approaching things. Well, ideally, they should have multiple ways of doing it. One path is not always the best path. That is one thing that is great about Finale is that it generally has a number of ways to do what you want it to do. ___ 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] Some Questions...
Since, from the tone of the list recently, the religious war between Finale and Sibelius seems to be waning as both packages mature and since world wide communications and data sharing have become so instant, I have some questions for the list. What are your thoughts and why? 1. Have we gotten to the point where .PDF is the best way to deliver music to clients and publishers or should editable data files (Finale, Sibelius or others) continue to be expected. 2. Should publishers publishers out source engraving work as needed or is in house engraving a better choice? 3. Do e-mails and attachments (along with occasional phone calls) make long distance (even international) work practical. 4. Should publishers who want to do editing and final engraving in house be reasonably expected to have software and engravers for both Sibelius and Finale? 5. How many publishers expect engraving to be done (usually) by the original composers/arrangers? Many of us work in very different parts of the music preparation or publishing fields and may have quite different perspectives. Since our requirements can be very different, I thought your responses might provide an interesting discussion. Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: AW: [Finale] Sibelius 5 - Second impressions
It sounds like your cursor was resting on some musical element when you right clicked. You got the menu that opens when you are pointing to a specific element. It's much shorter. To get the longer list of options, you have to point to a blank space on the page. Then there is a context menu with other at the bottom of the list. When you open the other item you will find Instrument change. The same menu is also in the create drop down menu on the menu bar at the top of the page. I just right click because it's more convenient. This menu, either as a context or a drop down from the menu bar, has most of the controls you normally need. You just learn to look there first. Hope that helps. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: Right clicking does not bring up any context menu that has OTHER in it. I get Cut, Copy, Paste, Delete, Capture Idea, Voice, Hide/Show, Color and Apply Color... However, in the menu, there is Other buried under Create.. Sibelius 5.1...frustrating.. Richard Smith wrote: Eric this may be what you want. 1. Right click on a blank part of the page for the context menu. At the bottom of the menu is other. Open that up. 2. Select change instrument 3. Pick an instrument from the list. 4. Click the now blue (=loaded) arrow where you want to change the instrument. You will get a transposition and key and/or clef change as needed as well as a text instruction to the performer to change to the instrument. 5. If you want to change the stave for the entire score, click in the left margin just to the left of the staff. It will change the staff and look as if the new instrument had been the choice fromt he beginning. I think that having multiple ways of doing things has a lot to do with familiarity. I really like Sibelius' step time entry. There are so many ways to enter music that I am constantly changing my approach to fit the particular circumstance. Conversely, I find Finale's Speedy Entry restrictive but many of the workers on this list would certainly disagree. These two are just differently abled and the versatility is good for us all. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ 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] Sib 5 Playback
Opps. Wrong address. http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Richard Smith Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Hi Richard ... thank you for the response. Well, the Reference book is built into Sib as a menu item, unless you mean something different. If you do, then, yes, I would love the PDF. I haven't downloaded 5.1 yet, because I'm still awaiting my Registration # from Sibelius. I think I would have to be fully registered to do the download. Who knows, maybe working on the new version will solve the problems. Let me get this straight ... when you play the Sib essential sounds through your computer's speaker system, the sound quality is just as good as when you are playing your files through fin/GPO/NI/AU mode, as opposed to the basically soft synth sounds I am getting on Sib 5 ... right? And if so, what in the world is going on with my situation? Thanks again, Dean On Oct 25, 2007, at 8:43 PM, Richard Smith wrote: Do you have the reference book? If not, e-mail me and I will send you a .PDF version of it. There are almost 100 pages about the playback and sound. In Sib 4 we had a much simpler sound system. I have the Sibelius GPO (the entire GPO library optimized for Sib) that did a wonderful job in Sib 4. It was an add on for Sib. Now, in 5.1 (have you downloaded the update?), my GPO has been converted to stand alone GPO (no extra fee) and all works well but it is a bit more complicated than before. But if a MIDI idiot like me can get it, anyone can. :) Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I've been going though it over and over with Daniel and another Sib man, so far, everything seems to be installed and in the correct folders. The path from the Kontakt 2 Library to the needed files in the Ap Folder seems to be in place ... so far, at least, the answer is not forthcoming. The Sib guys are really working hard to try and solve it. Thanks, Dean On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:16 PM, dhbailey wrote: Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I'm using Kontkt 2, the right hand panel in the set up window, at Daniel's suggestion, reads kontakt 2 VST, with the sound sets reading Sib essential sounds. This is the only combination, that I've found, at least, that the program will allow to make any playback possible. His original suggestion was to have that panel read,Kontakt 2 VST, with GPO selected as the sound set. All that did was to constantly bring up the message, when I tried to play anything back or enter a note, Kontakt 2 file can not be found. Please check to see it was loaded correctly into the Library. Then, when the OK radio button is pushed (the only otion), the message just keeps reappearing, causing me to force quit the AP. Nope, as it is, it sounds just like the old fin softsynth stuff. So, I dunno. I certainly appreciate your time in responding to this. Do you have the full GPO on your computer, or just the fin package? Thanks, Dean [snip] I do not have the full GPO, but in addition to the FinaleGPO stuff, I have the SibeliusGPO stuff (which is part of the Sibelius Sounds Essentials stuff). Are you sure that it all got installed when you installed Sibelius? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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 Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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] Sib 5 Playback
You are, of course, correct. The reference is included in the help menu. My Finale is 2005 so I have no direct experience with Finale and GPO but I can say that my Sibelius sounds *much* better than what I used to get from MIDI alone or from the, now outdated, small sample library (Kontakt Silver) that was included beginning with Sib 3. If you want to here what GPO could do, even in Sib 4, go to my website, http://rgsmithmusic.com, and play the MP3 of my band piece Lament and Exhultation. It is a direct recording of Sibelius playing a GPO sound file. I think you can download the 5.1 upgrade, delete your 5.0, install the 5.1 and use your present install code for 5.1 but please check with Sib's tech support before doing that. 5.1 fixed many things from 5.0 and you really should get it (it's free). Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Hi Richard ... thank you for the response. Well, the Reference book is built into Sib as a menu item, unless you mean something different. If you do, then, yes, I would love the PDF. I haven't downloaded 5.1 yet, because I'm still awaiting my Registration # from Sibelius. I think I would have to be fully registered to do the download. Who knows, maybe working on the new version will solve the problems. Let me get this straight ... when you play the Sib essential sounds through your computer's speaker system, the sound quality is just as good as when you are playing your files through fin/GPO/NI/AU mode, as opposed to the basically soft synth sounds I am getting on Sib 5 ... right? And if so, what in the world is going on with my situation? Thanks again, Dean On Oct 25, 2007, at 8:43 PM, Richard Smith wrote: Do you have the reference book? If not, e-mail me and I will send you a .PDF version of it. There are almost 100 pages about the playback and sound. In Sib 4 we had a much simpler sound system. I have the Sibelius GPO (the entire GPO library optimized for Sib) that did a wonderful job in Sib 4. It was an add on for Sib. Now, in 5.1 (have you downloaded the update?), my GPO has been converted to stand alone GPO (no extra fee) and all works well but it is a bit more complicated than before. But if a MIDI idiot like me can get it, anyone can. :) Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I've been going though it over and over with Daniel and another Sib man, so far, everything seems to be installed and in the correct folders. The path from the Kontakt 2 Library to the needed files in the Ap Folder seems to be in place ... so far, at least, the answer is not forthcoming. The Sib guys are really working hard to try and solve it. Thanks, Dean On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:16 PM, dhbailey wrote: Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I'm using Kontkt 2, the right hand panel in the set up window, at Daniel's suggestion, reads kontakt 2 VST, with the sound sets reading Sib essential sounds. This is the only combination, that I've found, at least, that the program will allow to make any playback possible. His original suggestion was to have that panel read,Kontakt 2 VST, with GPO selected as the sound set. All that did was to constantly bring up the message, when I tried to play anything back or enter a note, Kontakt 2 file can not be found. Please check to see it was loaded correctly into the Library. Then, when the OK radio button is pushed (the only otion), the message just keeps reappearing, causing me to force quit the AP. Nope, as it is, it sounds just like the old fin softsynth stuff. So, I dunno. I certainly appreciate your time in responding to this. Do you have the full GPO on your computer, or just the fin package? Thanks, Dean [snip] I do not have the full GPO, but in addition to the FinaleGPO stuff, I have the SibeliusGPO stuff (which is part of the Sibelius Sounds Essentials stuff). Are you sure that it all got installed when you installed Sibelius? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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 Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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
Re: [Finale] Sib 5 Playback
Do you have the reference book? If not, e-mail me and I will send you a .PDF version of it. There are almost 100 pages about the playback and sound. In Sib 4 we had a much simpler sound system. I have the Sibelius GPO (the entire GPO library optimized for Sib) that did a wonderful job in Sib 4. It was an add on for Sib. Now, in 5.1 (have you downloaded the update?), my GPO has been converted to stand alone GPO (no extra fee) and all works well but it is a bit more complicated than before. But if a MIDI idiot like me can get it, anyone can. :) Richard Smith http://rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I've been going though it over and over with Daniel and another Sib man, so far, everything seems to be installed and in the correct folders. The path from the Kontakt 2 Library to the needed files in the Ap Folder seems to be in place ... so far, at least, the answer is not forthcoming. The Sib guys are really working hard to try and solve it. Thanks, Dean On Oct 25, 2007, at 12:16 PM, dhbailey wrote: Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Yeah, I'm using Kontkt 2, the right hand panel in the set up window, at Daniel's suggestion, reads kontakt 2 VST, with the sound sets reading Sib essential sounds. This is the only combination, that I've found, at least, that the program will allow to make any playback possible. His original suggestion was to have that panel read,Kontakt 2 VST, with GPO selected as the sound set. All that did was to constantly bring up the message, when I tried to play anything back or enter a note, Kontakt 2 file can not be found. Please check to see it was loaded correctly into the Library. Then, when the OK radio button is pushed (the only otion), the message just keeps reappearing, causing me to force quit the AP. Nope, as it is, it sounds just like the old fin softsynth stuff. So, I dunno. I certainly appreciate your time in responding to this. Do you have the full GPO on your computer, or just the fin package? Thanks, Dean [snip] I do not have the full GPO, but in addition to the FinaleGPO stuff, I have the SibeliusGPO stuff (which is part of the Sibelius Sounds Essentials stuff). Are you sure that it all got installed when you installed Sibelius? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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] Sib 5 question
The demo version doesn't come with the sample library that the full version does. This is apparently because of the expense of licensing the third party samples as well as an attempt to keep the download size somewhat reasonable; the sample library is over 3GB. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: I downloaded the Sib 5 Demo, so that I could get used to it before mine arrived. Is it normal, that in the Demo version, I can't get it to play back using the Kontakt II player? I activated it, but nada. Dean Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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] Sibelius for Finale users
Sorry. Try this one. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/message/33713. RGS Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 14.10.2007 Richard Smith wrote: I am a long time Finale user (since v.2) currently using 2005. I am also experienced with Sibelius (since v.1) which is my preferred program. Since so many on this list are investigating Sibelius, may I draw your attention to this thread on the Sibelius list http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/messages Richard, could you post that link again? The one you sent just leads to the general list messages, and since we haven't a clue what the thread is about we don't know where to look. Johannes ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius for Finale users
David, I'm sorry if I offended you. It was not my intent to insult Finale our your working method, merely to say that while Speedy Entry is for many (myself included) the most efficient manner of working with Finale, Sibelius works best with keyboard step time entry methods. I realize that Finale had Simple Entry long before Sibelius hit the US but it was little more than a clumsy point click novice method. It was only when Sibelius developed really useful step time entry that Finale began to modify Simple Entry into the very productive tool it has become today. Even in my Finale 2005, the Simple Entry methods are clumsy compared to Sibelius. I am told it's gotten much better in later versions. This is not to insult Finale; I think we've all become used to seeing good ideas migrate from one software to another. Think how many things have changed in the last 5 years in all software fields. Heck, Sibelius now has Panorama view. We all know where that idea came from. I know you prefer the Finale interface. You have written that in response to me before. I respect that and know you're not the only one. It would be a boring world if we were all the same. My purpose in that thread was simply to try and smooth the way for those trying Sibelius out. I posted it on the Sibelius list because I thought it inappropriate on this one and I hoped to get other Sibelius users to contribute their experiences. Please accept my apology for any misunderstanding. Richard Smith David W. Fenton wrote: On 14 Oct 2007 at 7:59, Richard Smith wrote: Sorry. Try this one. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/message/33713. Sorry, but for a thread to begin with this: Sibelius' keyboard entry routines are what Finale has been trying to copy for several years. This just by no stretch of the imagination a true statement. Simple Entry existed before Sibelius existed. Yes, it has been significantly changed, but in ways that are organic to the evolution of GUIs and increased processing power in the computers funning Finale. That the solutions to some of those problems may be nearly identical is due to the fact that the task is pretty much identical. And the advice to loose [sic] the Speedy Entry habit is going to be very off-putting to those like me who are very fluent in it. The point is that Sibelius is not as versatile as Finale in terms of providing options for music entry. Bad-mouthing Finale doesn't change the fact that Sibelius is more limiting, and enforces a single way of working, whereas Finale offers choice. Yes, the two programs are different. But trying to say that Sibelius's limited methods are just better than Finale's is not going to win converts to Sibelius. It's going to make Finale users defensive and suspicious of the rest of the advice. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Sibelius for Finale users
I am a long time Finale user (since v.2) currently using 2005. I am also experienced with Sibelius (since v.1) which is my preferred program. Since so many on this list are investigating Sibelius, may I draw your attention to this thread on the Sibelius list http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/messages Richard Smith ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius for Finale users
Sibelius 5 comes with about 3GB of samples called Sibelius Sounds Essentials. It includes GPO, Garriton JABB, Concert and Maching Band, Virtual Drumline, and World Music. It also has VST/AU support so you can also use other sample libraries. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Well, if this post gets out there, since I had no responses to my query inre what sorts of playback sounds were available in Sib 5, and after finally having found some of the info on the Sibelius product description, I went ahead the coughed up the $80 and ordered one. I'd still like to know from those who have now used both fin and Sib 5, are there more options for library sounds in sib than in fin, and if so, what is the relative quality of said sounds? Looking forward to playing around with it and seeing what it can do. The user friendly tech support will be a welcome change, especially for one not particularly technically gifted, as you have do doubt perceived by this time. While I'm at it, I do want to thank all the folks who have helped me get through the learning curve on mac fin oo7 (Shaken, not stirred, thank you very much). With Gratitude, Dean On Oct 13, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Richard Smith wrote: I am a long time Finale user (since v.2) currently using 2005. I am also experienced with Sibelius (since v.1) which is my preferred program. Since so many on this list are investigating Sibelius, may I draw your attention to this thread on the Sibelius list http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/messages Richard Smith ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Dean M. Estabrook http://deanestabrook.googlepages.com/home Don't worry about the end of the world, it's already tomorrow in Australia. Charles Shultz ___ 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: Finale '08
Bruce Clausen wrote: On Fin's side, I don't yet see in Sib the ability to tweak things, e.g. hairpins, expression placement, slurs, etc., but this may be that I haven't yet found the means of doing so. So far, I believe that Sib is more the way I like to work . . . but it is way too soon for a really informed judgment. Bruce Clausen Look in the properties window (ctrl+alt+p) for individual adjustments of highlighted elements and under House StylesEngraving Rules (ctrl+shift+e) for global adjustments. While Sibelius is different form Finale, I think you'll find plenty of ways to tweak things. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Bill Duncan's Templates and Sibelius
Try contacting the Yahoo Sibelius list at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/ and the and the Sibelius help forum at http://www.sibelius.com/cgi-bin/helpcenter/chat/chat.pl?groupid=3guest=1 Both of these lists are populated by some very experienced users and monitored by some high level Sibelius officials who are very knowledgeable about Sibelius and very willing to help. You may yet find a solution spur some future development. Sibelius is usually very responsive to users needs. Richard Smith http://www.rgsmithmusic.com Leigh Daniels wrote: I was curious what Sibelius support would say if I said the only thing keeping me from switching to Sibelius was a body of work I have which is based on Bill Duncan's templates. Below is the exchange. So, for now, I'll have to stay with FinMac 2007c. **Leigh Hi, I don't think this will be possible in Sibelius at present. The formatting of the chord symbols isn't that flexible to begin with. In addition, these chords are being interputed as technique text rather than chord symbol text so it's really not going to work. Sorry. Hi Tom, I've attached an archive which contains an XML file, a Finale file and a PDF of what the printed version should look like. Chord symbols are in Layer 4. I've included an example file and PDF of complex chord symbols as well. Thanks for taking a look at this. **Leigh On Tue, Sep 25, 2007, Sibelius USA Technical Help [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Product: Version: Platform (search): Platform (form): Mac Language: Search type: Days: Exact: Search terms: Serial: demo Name: Leigh Daniels Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Extra info supplied: Hi, I am a Finale 2007c user who is interested in switching to Sibelius. The one thing keeping me from doing that is that I have a set of templates developed for Finale by engraver Bill Duncan. NPC Imaging is selling the templates: http://tinyurl.com/3anjpe I have tried to import into Sibelius 5 some work I've done using Bill's templates, but using the MusicXML export I have not been able to get anything that doesn't require a lot of work to restore to it's origianl form. I am hoping you can suggest a way to make this work and I am happy to provide a sample file if that would help. I know there are quite a few other people using Bill's templates who would likely switch to Sibelius because many of them are pretty fed up with MakeMusic's poor support and apparent unwillingness to fix bugs of many years standing. Thanks. **Leigh Hi, There are limitations to the conversion from MusicXML but generally the files convert fairly well. If you'd like to send me an example XML file I'll be happy to take a look. Give me some of the specific things that are not correct in the conversion and I'll see what if anything can be done. Best Regards, Tom Betts \ ___ 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: AW: [Finale] Wishlist for Finale 2009
Sibelius will read XML but a plug-in must be bought to write XML. A pain. However, Sibelius 5 will read and write in Sibelius 4, 3 2 formats. I now use Sibelius 5 and manage site licenses in my school district for both Sibelius 4 3. File sharing is not a problem and our older machines are able to run a version that suits them. My latest Finale is 2005. I really need an upgrade but folks on this list complain so much that I just soldier on with 05 :). However, I understand that currently Finale will not write to previous formats. I can not imagine why. That strikes me as just more of the arm twisting that MM does to make sure they renew your yearly subscription. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Noel Stoutenburg wrote: Kurt Gnos wrote: At the moment there don't even exists a Finale Notepad 2008, so nobody but Finale 2008 users can use my files. If history repeats itself, Finale Notepad 2k8 will be forthcoming in the next few weeks. I *really* miss the file compatibility most because I do a lot of stuff in teams - projects for choir, for band, and it was so much easier if we could exchange and open our files instead of relying on PDFs and starting from scratch, or going through the pains of using midi files (they ARE a pain if you have to use them with Finale). It would be *so* nice if you could just open it on any computer having an adequate software running, as you can with doc-file or power-point-files, or PDFs. That would be the sign of real professionality for me. ... I'm [content] if I can open them on any actual PC or Mac using Finale or Sibelius. Well you can, using the facilities of Music XML, and while at one time Finale files were open enough that Sibelius was able to read some Finale files, Sibelius has always used a proprietary data format, and to my knowledge has never released it, behavior that Finale is unfortunately coming to mimic. Light version of music XML has been shipped with Finale for several releases, but I don't know about S~. ns ___ 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] Finale Workshop
My latest Finale installation is 2005. Compared to my first Finale (v. 2), in which Simple was useless and Speedy was the only way to go, it is vastly improved. Compared to my Sibelius (any version) Fin 05's Simple is still a little clumsy, but then Simple entry really is the Sibelius way to work. I got to talk with the Toms recently at a convention and have been told that in Fin 08 the Simple tools have again been improved and that they have completely revamped the copy/paste routines which are the other part of the Simple package. If this is true, then Finale's work flow will become much like that of Sibelius; enter data once, copy, paste and edit. It is very fast but a big change for people who have been using Speedy for years. The problem is some of workers just don't think that way and will always find Simple clumsy. Others will just not want to learn new ways when the old ones work just fine, thanks. If your really interested in learning to use Simple well, the best way is probably to give yourself a project (something in which you are not pressed for time or working for a client) and just make yourself do it with Simple, no Speedy. Kind of a bite the bullet sort of thing. When you finish, you'll probably know if the method is for you. With so many of the most experienced Finale workers heavily invested in Speedy, I don't see how it can ever be taken out of Finale no matter how much MM might want to. Unless there is some wish for corporate suicide. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 8/9/07 9:31:12 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Did they then explain why MakeMusic seems to have abandoned Speedy Entry, which I have found can be quite efficient and entirely computer-keyboard-centered if desired, as their suggested method of entry, in favor of Simple Entry which requires mousing? Actually, they did. The keyboard shortcuts in Simple are now so comprehensive, and the new Selection Tool so versatile, that mousing is increasingly less necessary (if that makes any sense). They also said that eventually they plan to make Simple Entry so easy and powerful that they can phase out Speedy altogether. Crap! I'm screwed! I find Simple so slow and counterintuitive that I can't deal with it at all! All the commands are different, and some that I need a lot aren't there! Well, I feel the same. I've tried simple a few times with no real success. But I can't tell if that's a problem of the interface, or simply the fact that I have used Speedy since Finale v.1. Greg Hamilton - a fine copyist/engraver in Vancouver, with whom I am regularly in touch, says that he recently took a few hours (or maybe days, I don't know) to teach himself Simple and now finds it quicker and prefers it. I plan to take a drive up to visit sometime next week to get a hands on lesson. For an old dog like me, it will take a slow and careful re-training to adapt to a new method, and the biggest obstacle (I think) will be rhythmic value first, pitch second (even though I believe rhythm takes precedence in my musical perceptions). All I can do is make a good attempt and report on the results. When I see Tom Johnson use Simple, it goes faster than I normally work - maybe faster than I think. Chuck Chuck, When you try it be on the lookout for a few things; Rests, Tom's demos usually don't include much in the way of rests and they can take an extra keystroke when values change. A quarter rest, eighth rest eighth note, and half rest can take up to seven keystrokes in SimpleNote instead of four in Speed. Unintentionally entered notes. (Sometimes the manuscript, or the mail, can hit the keys and enter notes when I'm not looking at the screen or aware of where the entry caret is located. This may be more of a copyist concern but occasionally I have to stop to check a note or chord in a manuscript and I like not having to exit note entry to do it. I do recommend learning the re-pitch feature, I use it from time to time. Simple Note can be very effective in certain situations so it is worth the effort to familiarize yourself with it but I'm still using Speedy for most of my work. Tom J is just a well oiled machine! ;-) Vince Leonard www.finalebook.com ** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour ___ 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] Brahms and inspiration
I have seen it written that Dvorak returned from a visit with Brahms quite upset because Brahms was such a great man and he believes in nothing, absolutely nothing. I don't know how reliable that is but it certainly puts the Brahms discussion in a different light. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Raymond Horton wrote: Andrew Levin wrote: David, Regarding the Brahms quote, I think it's in this book: Talks with Great Composers: Candid Conversations with Brahms, Puccini, Strauss, and Others by Arthur M. Abell. New York: Carol Publishing Group, Citadel Press, (1955), 1994, 182 pp. ISBN 0-8065-1565-1. Very interesting reading, if you believe it No one but Brahms could have the ego presented in that interview. And there is much more in the Brahms interview than his theology (which any orthodox Christian would have to label as heresy) - there is his much on his method manner of composition and inspiration and his assessment of his contemporary composers. Brahms, speaking at a time when his friend Joachim (also a part of the interview) had to take gigs with the contract stipulation that he not play the Brahms Concerto because the work was so disliked, knew exactly what his place would be in fifty years time, as well as his less-talented contemporaries. This was the reason for his requirement in delay of publication. The Puccini interview is both heart-wrenching and hilarious. All the interviews are interesting. The 50-year interval demanded by Brahms before publication made for an interesting juxtaposition. Abel, who as a young man spoke at length with Brahms, Greig, and these other 19th century greats, wrote his foreword in the early 1950s, and in it speaks of the new atomic age. Remarkable. As to whether this book can be trusted as authentic, it is definitely 19th century scholarship at best. The accounts of the interviews are written by Abell in English, with a words here and there given in the original tongue. I did find one mention on-line where Ragtime musicologist (attempting to debunk a mention by another Brahms biographer Abel had reported to him that the composer had expressed an interest in early ragtime) Edward Berlin says: Abell’s reported talks with various composers -- Puccini, Grieg, Richard Strauss, as well as Brahms -- though they undoubtedly took place, are highly suspect in terms of content. http://www.edwardaberlin.com/disc.htm The above site is interesting on the possibility of Brahms interest in early ragtime, and has this other helpful quote on the relationship between Brahms and Abell. Mr. Arthur M. Abell, an American violinist, was one of the few who could make the Master talk intimately about his own work. /The Unknown Brahms/, by Robert Haven Schauffler (1933), pp. 176-177. The last quote quote came many years before the publication of Abell's book, of course. Here's another take on the book: http://rogerbourland.com/blog/2006/06/27/did-brahms-really-say-that/ RBH ___ 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] Brahms, Dvorak and Ragtime
There is a little swing figure in Brahms 2nd Piano Concerto. In the clarinets. I remember the giggles from their section when it was first discovered in rehearsal. That pre-dates the swing band by, what, 50 years? Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Raymond Horton Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 12:46 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Brahms, Dvorak and Ragtime Aaron Rabushka wrote: Aaron J. Rabushka who still doesn't like the Brahms violin concerto and wonders what would've happened had ragtime fallen into the hands of Tchaikovsky (bigoted as he was) or Dvorák That's what came to my mind, when I read that possible quote of Brahms concerning the rhythms of ragtime, is that his friend Dvorak's rhythms were sometimes not that far from rags already. RBH ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.8/941 - Release Date: 8/7/2007 4:06 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.11.8/941 - Release Date: 8/7/2007 4:06 PM ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Goodbye Finale
You can make Sibelius have a Speedy Entry, sort of, but it doesn't work as well as Finale's. But then MM doesn't want you to work in Speedy. They consider it old fashioned. They want you to learn the simple entry tools they copied (none to well) form Sibelius. Sibelius works best with simple entry. And it's very good at it. It works much more seamlessly than Finale (at least as of 2005 which is my latest Finale). It took me very little time to decide that Sibelius' simple entry was better *for me* than Finale's speedy (which I like a great deal). Sib's playback is extremely good and gets better with each version. How many people really use any type of real time entry? I found it easier in Sibelius than in Finale but the best real time entry I have used was in (now long gone) Music Printer Plus. I rarely use MIDI with Sib because it works so well with keyboard (not mouse!!) entry. With Finale. I feel much more need for MIDI. Your right about the more advanced methods needing keyboard rather than mouse entry. Sibelius has extensive keyboard shortcuts and the manual urges users to avoid the mouse and learn the keyboard. If you like numbers, you can make those kind of changes and when you find ones you like, you save them as a house style for your future use. You may prefer Finale's power tools to those of Sibelius, but to suggest that there are none in Sibelius is just incorrect. If you like Finale, it's the best tool for you . If you like Sibelius, it's the best tool for you. For some music one or the other is a better choice. Some people think like Finale and some (me included) think like Sibelius. Really, both of these tools are so developed we ought to just choose the one that suits us the best and deliver the final copy as a .PDF; and stop fussin' because someone else makes a different choice. Sorry to be so long. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Steve Schow wrote: Well, isn't there really more to it than that? Does Sibelius have the equivalent of speedy entry? How is Sibelius's Hyperscribe mode? How is Sib's Human playback? Perhaps for simple entry, it may be about as efficient as Finale and its simply a matter of learning the program, but the true finale power users use the power-tools that exist in Finale to be hyper-efficient at how fast they can enter music into the score. My impression is that Sibelius lacks some of that power-user capability. It very well may be able to format a score with a lot of flexibility...but if you have use the mouse to do everything than the simple fact is that a super power-user Sib user will not ever be quite as efficient as a super power-user Finale user. That's the impression I have. A lot of users are not destined to become super power-users, and perhaps Sibelius is more straightforward for them. But its not clear to me that Sib has the same level of support for super power-usage, as does Finale. I'm also a big fan of being able to specify things numerically...precisely...rather than nudging things around with my mouse until it looks pretty good. That is easy to do with the mouse, but HORRIBLY manual and creates carpal tunnel syndrome too! ___ 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] Goodbye Finale
On the contrary, I work with both Finale and Sibelius and I learn useful things on this list. My first Finale was version 2 and I have used 3.5, 97, 2003, and 2005. I haven't decided about 2008 yet but it's probably about time to upgrade. My first Sibelius was 1.0 and I have had every version since. So I know them both pretty well. However I have grown tired of Sibelius users charging Finale with being clumsy and Finale users saying Sibelius is not capable of serious work. Neither charge is true anymore (if they ever were). It is just a personal choice as to which of these really sophisticated tools best suits your personal needs and working method. That's why I think electronic delivery of music should be by .pdf rather than a music data file. I'll be glad when that is more common. Then the choice of engraving tool will matter less. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Steve Schow wrote: Richard it sounds like you are wasting your time on this mail-list. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Smith Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2007 11:08 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Goodbye Finale If you like Finale, it's the best tool for you . If you like Sibelius, it's the best tool for you. For some music one or the other is a better choice. Some people think like Finale and some (me included) think like Sibelius. Really, both of these tools are so developed we ought to just choose the one that suits us the best and deliver the final copy as a .PDF; and stop fussin' because someone else makes a different choice. man/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
Re: [Finale] Re: Goodbye Finale
Henry E. Howey wrote: Also, I really need SMARTMUSIC, and it only works with 5inale. So does MM. That's why SmartMusic is only compatible with Finale. By the way, why should I pay for a SmartMusic subscription, ostensibly to be able to use licensed content, and not be paid a license fee by Finale when I use my own content? Just wondering :) Richard Smith www.rgsmthmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Sibelius
I use both and much prefer Sibelius. Others will differ and, this being a Finale list, most will prefer Finale. Given the maturity of both programs, it's really which one you prefer. However Sibelius is quite different from Finale. There is a Yahoo Sibelius list at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sibelius-list/. The Sibelius tech support forum is also very helpful. It's at http://www.sibelius.com/cgi-bin/helpcenter/chat/chat.pl?groupid=3guest=1 http://www.sibelius.com/cgi-bin/helpcenter/chat/chat.pl?groupid=3guest=1 Both lists are very helpful and actively monitored by Sibelius officials. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Bruce E. Clausen wrote: To All: I'm considering switching to Sibelius from Finale06, after having tried out the demo for Sib5. I'm not sure if this is a case of the grass being greener. Mu uses are as composer and self-publisher. What is the collective wisdom on this proposed switch? I would really appreciate your comments. Also, is there a listserv for Sibelius where I might lurk and find out what the current users are experiencing? Thanks to everyone. Bruce E. Clausen, Ph.D. ___ 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] Finale 2008 now shipping
I do use Sibelius, primarily, but also use Finale. I have not updated Finale since 2005. I really need to but passed up last year because of the complaints. I hear of lots of improvements. I hope 2008 is/becomes stable enough to use. The yearly upgrade (subscription?) cycle is not serving Finale users well. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: There really should be a boycott movement for them. I don't use Sibelius, but at least they were upfront in saying what was new and what had been fixed. I imagine that also, as was the case in the last version, if you use SmartMusic, and want to create exercises, that files generated from 2008 won't work in SmartMusic 10. Again, I'm passing for a while on this update. dc wrote: Colin Broom écrit: Isn't it earlier than usual? But when will they spill the beans on the bugs that have been fixed. And those that haven't... I find it pretty irritating that after waiting in vain for 2007a, 2007b, 2007c to fix the hyphen bug they won't even tell us if it is fixed or not in 2008. Dennis ___ 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
Re: [Finale] New Question
I agree with you, Raymond. I'm only slightly older than you and have used Finale since 1991 and Sibelius since 1999. I don't think it's as much a generational issue as a sign of the different ways we all think and work. What I find with Finale (and to an even greater extent with Sibelius) is that I write more improvisationally. I try different things, have several versions working in different directions at the same time and other things that are simply not practical with pen and paper. It's more immediate, rather like jazz improv. I have talked to others who have had the same response but there are certainly those for whom the software is merely an engraving tool at the end of the process. What concerns me is the number of younger workers who do not have command of the fundamentals before beginning to work with software. Not just in music, but in all computer aided fields, it is necessary for the human, not the machine, to be in charge. Incidentally, I find that I am less aware of the computer when working in Sibelius than in Finale, but that is, again, a difference in the way I think as compared to others. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Raymond Horton wrote: I'm a boomer (age 54) and write only a few sketches on paper. I work nearly everything out on the computer, being a poor pianist, although I occasionally have some good original ideas working with a pencil away from anything. Working on the computer is fairly slow, but the result is a nearly full score (sometimes three trumpets on one line, explode them later, etc.). Raymond Horton Andrew Stiller wrote: I think that Beethoven and Mozart would have used Finale if it were available back in their day. This is definitely a generational issue. When I started using Finale in 1991 there was still a whole generation of composers out there who never used a computer for anything, and saw no point in adopting the new technology. Most of them are dead now. My generation, the boomers, mostly use Finale as an engraving tool--that is, we compose on paper (using piano to test chords, counterpoint etc.), then when everything is done, use Finale to make the fair copy and extract the parts. I realize that the vast majority of younger composers work directly in Finale, but I confess I cannot even conceive how that could be done smoothly, since I, at least, would find myself constantly distracted by engraving issues (supressing cautionary this'n'that between movements, frinstance) that have no bearing on the act of composition itself. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://www.kallistimusic.com/ ___ 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
RE: [Finale] berlioz notation programme
When my English ancestors came here in the 1630s, my Cherokee ancestors were already here. My Scots-Irish, Irish and Dutch ancestors got here just in time to fight the armies of King George (III). I am about as American as it gets. I have no relatives (at least that I know of) in any other country. I am a Native-American and not just because of my Cherokee ancestry. But my history is very different from many other equally American people. Human history is full of migrations, expansions, occupations, enslavements and other types of cultural change. Ask my Irish ancestors about their treatment at the hands of my English ancestors. American culture is a combination of all of the people who have settled here for whatever reason and it's different from region to region. It is not absent. Some Americans should stop trying to be European and be themselves. Rant over. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Howell Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 3:12 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] berlioz notation programme At 8:02 AM -0400 5/27/07, dhbailey wrote: We have an American culture? (said with tongue in cheek) After Johannes' post I was thinking Gee, I wish we *had* a culture which we could protect! I think it was Gandhi who, when asked about Western Culture, commented that, It would be a wonderful idea! The American culture has never been monolithic and I don't see the Spanish language threatening what has never existed. I do see it as threatening American citizens' ability to communicate effectively with each other, and I fear that when a country's citizens can no longer effectively communicate with each other, the ability to function as a country is threatened. Case in point. I grew up 30 miles north of Seattle. If there was any defining ethnicity there it was scandinavian. Lutefisk and leftse were not consumed in quantity, but were sung about by such as Stan Boreson, and the nearby Smorgasbord was a real treat after church on Sunday. Last time I spent several weeks' time there, big changes. No sign of scandinavian culture, but entire shopping centers where all the signage was in Korean without translation. Now there have always been a good number of orientals in the Pacific Northwest (making it the only place my wife could buy shoes that fit!), but that kind of thing is self-ghettoization and really surprised me. We think of Roanoke as being quite multicultural, and have festivals to celebrate it, and our campus is extremely international in character, but not with businesses that don't welcome English-speakers. 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 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.0/821 - Release Date: 5/27/2007 3:05 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.0/821 - Release Date: 5/27/2007 3:05 PM ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: musical note values in OZ?
Christopher Smith wrote: As F# and Eb are the least-used notes according to a three-year survey commissioned by the Minister, they will be the ones to be deleted. Christopher Eb is the least used?? Did the survey not include band music? And F#? They must have forgotten the church orchestras as well!! Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Mp3 Files
I record GPO playback in Sibelius but I am sure Finale is very similar. Then I convert the sound file to mp3. You can hear the results on my website. Listen to the recording of my Lament and Exultation at: http://www.rgsmithmusic.com/Lament.htm I use CoolEdit 2000 for the mp3 conversion but I'm sure there are many other software choices for this chore. It is not a difficult process and sounds quite like the original GPO version. The only limiting factor is how small you want the mp3 to be. Even at the lowest quality, it is vastly superior to MIDI and the GPO percussion instruments (real sampled rolls, bar chimes, ect.) are convincing. Hope this helps. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 30/11/2006 17:10:27 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: So, as I just asked Darcy privately, if I convert the WAV file to MP3, and upload that to my web page, will it play back with GPO quality It should do, yes, within the limitations of the recipients sound system, after all, if I understand it correctly (and let's be honest, I usually don't!) then it's simply a recording of the sounds produced by GPO. Cheers, Lawrence ___ 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] Mp3 Files
Many soundblaster cards have a similar function. It's called What-U-Hear. But you'll have to record through another app. Just about anything will do, even the recorder that comes with the soundblaster. Richard Smith Andrew Stiller wrote: On Nov 29, 2006, at 9:51 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: There is a utility on the Mac called Wire Tap that captures anything coming out of the speakers as a sound file. Where is it? How do I access it? 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] MP3 files
But not everyone works the same way you do, has the same tools to work with, or has the same goals and requirements from a notation program. If Finale just focuses on your set of needs, they will make their already small market even smaller. Finale has to try an produce a tool for many different uses and working methods. Because of this, we will all probably find parts of the software we don't need. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kurt Gnos wrote: I was somewhat astonished by this discussion, as I was astonished by the energy Coda/MakeMusic invests in Finale's playback capabilities. First question: What do you need playback for? I use it for proof reading. Basta. So I haven't ever needed Finale's save to wav or save to mp3. If I want it performed, I get it played by real instruments. I checked it out just in case, and it worked fine. If you want to put an mp3 besides some graphics to sell your Finale files on a web site, I think it's useful to have a midi file or an mp3. I don't think a potential buyer minds wether it's by the smart sound soft synth or GPO Finale or full GPO, it's also a kind of proof reading. Maybe I would use GPO more if it wouldn't take so long to open the Finale files using it. I want to drink coffee when I want to, not just because I'm waiting until the sounds are loaded. And be honest - they are better than smart sound, but they are not good. If I really need a good sounding output and I can not use real instruments I go to Nuendo or Cubase and use various real instruments and soft synths (maybe including GPO for some sounds) to get it sounding better. Use a decent reverb (e. b. Waves IR). For piano, use the Grand or ivory. And so on. I'd prefer MakeMusic concentrating on things we need more urgently than better playback. For example: I still need most of my Finale time for correcting the layout. How about Finale doing these things right? Good spacing, no collisions of symbols and notes, usable lyrics, distances between verses, in short, a nice score. And postscript output is still somewhat erratical. Hey, Finale should be a professional score printing program. Think it sounds professional? I mean, for example, listen to the chords playback. I always have to mute it in all occurring voices to prevent vomiting... Finale isn't a sequencer, and - in my opinion - doesn't need to be, there are a lots of better programs out there to do that. I use Finale to write scores. Problems - if you need the playback: Swing, and setting tempo when using it often doesn't work. I think this is more important to fix than playback sounds. Phrasings often play back wrong. I have a score with staccato accents playing back legato... I think it much more important to get those things fixed than getting other sounds. You really need the playback? There are many programs and sound cards out there that let you record the sound coming out of your computer, so it will be easiest to do this - it will sound just (as bad) as it comes out of Finale. Use smart sound or soft synths, GPO or Vienna - WYHIWYG (what you hear is what you get). E. G. If you have a recent Creative Sound Card, you just can record your what you hear-channel. Just my 10c Kurt ___ 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] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
Does this require the full Kontakt player or will the Finale version (or Sibelius) work. Richard Smtih -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darcy James Argue Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 4:19 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?] On 08 Oct 2006, at 5:09 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: Again, this is something that is very easily done with the VAR1 and VAR2 commands in the Kontakt Player. Could you explicate that a bit, please? VAR1 and VAR2 are controllers in the Kontakt Player that allow you to control the amount of randomization given to intonation and timing. Nothing need be done in the Finale score at all -- these are knobs you tweak in the Kontakt Player. The goal is to produce a band sonority, with massed instruments on a part (say 6 each for 3 clarinet parts and the same for trumpets). You would simply load six clarinets (using as many different player variations as possible) into the Kontakt Player, assign them all to the same channel, and then tweak the VAR1 and VAR 2 knobs to your liking. No hidden staves are necessary. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
Thanks, Darcy. Your analogy was perfect and I did find the var 1 2 knobs. I have much to learn about GPO an appreciate your help. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darcy James Argue Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 5:35 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?] Richard, Just to clarify the terminology: there is no such thing as the full Kontakt player. There's Kontakt Player and then there's Kontakt. Kontakt Player is included in Finale (as well as the Garritan Instrument Libraries), and supports VAR1, VAR2 etc. Kontakt is a full-blown sampler, sold separately. Perhaps an analogy will help: Kontakt Player is to Kontakt as Acrobat Reader is to Acrobat. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 08 Oct 2006, at 6:28 PM, Richard Smith wrote: Does this require the full Kontakt player or will the Finale version (or Sibelius) work. Richard Smtih ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.407 / Virus Database: 268.13.1/466 - Release Date: 10/7/2006 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
We've all heard that band but then we have heard an orchestra sound like that too. I challenge you to find that sound from the Dallas Wind Symphony, the Tokyo Kosei Wind Orchestra, or any of the really fine university ensembles. Some really good music by some respected composers is being written for wind ensemble and many composition students are being advised that the best way to hear one's music performed is to write for band, not orchestra. I know it was meant as a joke, but, having spent 30 years working with bands, I really would like to see old stereotypes and prejudices go away. My question is what will GPO Wind Ensemble have in it that's not in GPO Orchestra. Saxophones and some expanded percussion? I would be content with a civilized classical sax sound. I think everything else I need is in GPO orchestra. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christopher Smith wrote: On Oct 7, 2006, at 11:10 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote: Garritan Wind Ensemble is an upcoming project. Wow! Really? I suppose you have an inside line on this? Christopher (It shouldn't be TOO good, or it will lose the realism. Squeaky clarinets, honky oboes (or else an out of tune muted trumpet), a completely overpopulated but still inadequate flute section, trumpets that crack every second note, horns that crack EVERY note, justifiably timid trombones, saxes that overrun the rest of the woodwind section etc., are part of the wind ensemble experience! And maybe the expanded Human Playback in Finale could take advantage of the new sound set and have the percussionists miss every second entrance and enter a 16th note early or 16th note late alternatively when they do come in. I can see it now: the Charles Ives' Country Band plugin!) 8-)=) (BIG grin!) ___ 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] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
The distinctions are not always clear. The wind ensemble's connection to the band should not be obscured but the the connection to older wind music is also important. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Are we talking about bands or wind ensemble? Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought there was a difference. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
That's a good point. I suppose I think to much in live terms. Of course doubling could be accomplished by hidden, duplicate staves. I think all I would want that's not in GPO is a good set of concert (not pop) saxophones, cornets and/or flugel horns, and euphonia that sound like euphonia rather than English baritones. That, I guess, is more of a wind ensemble library than a band with lots of extra doubling. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com But for samples, wouldn't you want a completely different sound? WHile they can play the same repertory, they amount of section doubling is drastically different between the two ensembles. Or so I've always thought. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
You're right, of course. Doubling the same instrument is just a waste of resources. Egg on my face! I think, for my purposes, I would prefer a wind ensemble to a larger concert band set up because of the greater clarity (much like the real world). Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Surely not. Using the same patch for multiple staves does not sound anything like a the same number of actual players, each of which has an individual sound. I guess a well-designed chorus controller would give some variety here, which is what chorus was designed for to begin with, but I'm not sure if it would be enough to capture the difference very well. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
I seem to be having trouble with language. When I said instruments, I meant samples, not different samples of the same instrument. Sorry for being unclear. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Not at all. As I mentioned, in Garritan instruments, doubling the player variations (i.e. Flute Player 1 and Flute Player 2) gives authentic unisons and is not a waste of resources at all. David doesn't use Garritan instruments so the comments he made were not applicable to Garritan libraries. Where you erred is when you suggested that multiple, hidden staves were necessary for doubling -- they are not. For doubled staves, you can simply load multiple instruments or player variations and assign them to the same channel. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ 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] Garritan [was: Finale/Sibelius as sequencer/sampler?]
Whether or you consider the sax a part of the orchestra or not, I have yet to hear a sampled sax sound that couldn't totally destroy all of the other instruments. In my concert band scores, usually replace the sax sounds with clarinet so I can preserve some balance. I would love a sampled classical sax sound instead of the aggressive pop/jazz sound which is all I have been able to find. On the other hand, if I wrote for jazz bands, I would probably like what's available. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Eric Dannewitz wrote: Then go edit Wikipedia. However, I doubt they will take your edit. You just said standard additional instrument. It's not a standard instrument, but an additional instrument. Get it? Ok, really slow now.Standard...ADDITIONALinstrument. So, yeah, they will ADD a saxophonist or two if needed, but they are not part of the core/traditional/standard orchestra. So, like, if I go to the San Francisco Orchestra page.. http://www.sfsymphony.org/templates/orchmain.asp?nodeid=65 They don't have a saxophonist listed, though I'm sure they will hire some if needed. John Howell wrote: At 12:11 PM -0700 10/6/06, Eric Dannewitz wrote: I don't believe saxophone is included in an orchestra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orchestra You missed the asterisk! But in this case, Wikipedia fails to be all things to all people, although it certainly tries hard. Saxophone is a standard additional instrument, and experienced orchestra managers know perfectly well that they need to have a depth chart of sax players just as they do for every other instrument. I don't believe that the London Symphony Orchestra has saxophones in it. Then I guess they don't play Ravel, Debussy, or Gershwin as they were intended to be played. Someone mentioned a very early use by Meyerbeer, but hey, he was an opera guy, so what can you expect!?!! John ___ 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] Speed entry on a notebook
dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] I tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo. It feels a lot like Sibelius's standard keypad entry method. And that means I HATE IT. I don't think that way about getting the information into Finale, and that's one of the reasons I can't use Sibelius. It slows me down incredibly to think through which things I want to attach to a note after it's been entered (or before, if you can forecast that). For me (and I said FOR ME), a pass to get notes and rhythms entered is VERY FAST, and then I can go back and entered the articulations/expressions, set beam breaks, stem direction and correct enharmonics. I do all of the latter in a single pass, in fact. And that's the way I did it in Speedy with no MIDI keyboard. I just don't think in a way that allows me to be constantly switching between so many different kinds of entry. The notes and rhythms come first as a framework for the whole piece, and then the rest of the data is editing or entirely cosmetic. Perhaps I'm stuck in that mindset because I've been doing it that way for over 15 years. I'm with you on this point David -- I find that I can fly through note entry and then go back and do the expressions and articulations on a second and third pass and can work very fast. Every time I have to change something while in the middle of the basic note entry, as has to happen in Simple Entry if one is trying to enter the articulations at the same time as the notes, it really slows my workflow down. What's terrific about Finale is that there are the two entry methods, simple and speedy. And speedy is what works best to my mind (for me, I'm not claiming it should be this way for anybody else) which is why I can't work quickly or efficiently in Sibelius. Just yesterday, my son was staying after school to help a young woman transpose an english horn part so she could play it on her oboe (octave displacement not being a consideration), and they were using the music department computer which has Sibelius on it. They managed to get the english horn part copied just as it was on the page and couldn't figure out how to get it changed for oboe. so they called me. Now in finale, just a couple of mouse clicks to change the key signature and have the notes transpose upward and they would have been all set in a couple of seconds. In sibelius, nowhere in the manual is there an entry for changing the key signature for music already entered. So I had to fly by the seat of my pants and triple-click to enclose the entire staff, then get three menu levels deep to the tranpose dialogue, and set things in there. took much longer. I realize that some of that was because I had to figure out how to do it without the help of the manual, but now that I know how to do it, it will still take much longer than using Finale's key signature tool. Why Finale felt they needed to make their note entry mimic Sibelius' is beyond me. But thank goodness they left speedy entry alone! Whether it's an ingrained pattern of workflow from using Finale for so long I can't tell, but I do know that it took me very little time to convert from MusicPrinterPlus to Finale and it's taken me ages to try to convert to Sibelius and I still can't do it, my mind just doesn't work that way. Well said, David(s). I think this has much to do with how one thinks and prefers to work with music. I have said for some time that Sibelius thinks like I do. You guys obviously have the same response to Finale (and Speedy Entry). Why change? The software or the method is not the goal, just the tool. For whatever it's worth, David B., I agree that Finale's transposition method is more direct which is a mild annoyance for me. I often just do the transposition the old fashioned way, transpose the interval and change the key. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tan: Henle engraving video
A religious war wasn't my intent either. I'm pretty sure either app works very well. As the video shows, we are lucky to have both. I remember (vividly), as both a copyist and a performer, the pen and ink days and am glad that's past. Someone commented about line thickness. After working a bit with my first Sib version, I noticed that I could read in performance it more easily than my current (v.98) Finale files. The Finale lines were so delicate that it was difficult to separate ledger lines from staff lines. I set the Finale lines thicker and solved the problem. When the next Finale version came out, I noticed that the default line thickness had been changed to something more like Sib's. Do you mean nested (curly) brackets or braces? It is easy to get nested braces but, the last time I tried, the bracket was not available. While I prefer the brace and consider them (roughly) equivalent, I know that others may not and some publishers may not. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Robert Patterson wrote: Hoping not to continue a religious war, I offer the fact that I never could get past the template setup in Sib. because it apparently lacks nested desk brackets. (As in, e.g., The Rite of Spring). begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tan: Henle engraving video
Robert Patterson wrote: Curiously, one aspect of engraving a computer may never be able to emulate is the slight human imperfections that give hand-engraved scores the charm of human touch. Other than this, I think the video is correct in stating that computers will achieve the same results. I would argue that Finale (and possibly Sib) are already nearly capable of it. The one remaining shortcoming is long slurs. However, with Finale (and probably also Sib) it still requires human expertise to know how to space the staves and plan the spacing and page breaks. The computer is merely a tool. Some on this list may have seen Lilypond which is open source software (as in free) that tries to emulate those little imperfections and get something closer to hand engraving. I haven't used it but the video certainly shows the reason behind it.http://lilypond.org/web/ I am a long time (v.2) Finale user but prefer Sib. I would say both are definitely capable of the same result, minus the human imperfections. Interestingly, one of the minor reasons I prefer Sib. is because Finale output, to me, often looks too mechanical. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Score order
That's certainly true. Those of us in the back could go for several days without those fussy reeds. They're far too concerned with silly things like notes and intonation. :) Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Carl Dershem wrote: Well, anything that keeps the woodwinds at a distance from the brass can't be all bad. :) cd begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Score order
This is interesting. I have never considered putting choir anyplace except at the bottom, like an orchestra without strings. I'm interested to hear your reasons for other positions. Out of curiosity, I opened a new score in Sibelius using a concert band template and then added a choir. Sibelius placed them at the bottom. I know this is a the Finale list but this machine is waiting on a reformat and Finale is temporarily uninstalled. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic. [EMAIL PROTECTED] dhbailey wrote: Christopher Smith wrote: Either top or bottom seems to be common - strict classical procedure calls for the choir to be placed above the strings in the orchestra, which would most probably translate as at the bottom of a concert band score. But there seem to be variants in score order these days, especially in concert band music, which seems to be written overwhelmingly for the educational market. Speaking with my conductor's hat on now, I prefer to see the chorus in the middle of the score, between the saxes and trumpets. begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: Hard copy backups (was Re: [Finale] Lawrence)
I certainly didn't mean to imply this was a legal opinion. The point was that current copyright laws are unreasonable and regressive in the light of modern technology. I just think changes are needed. Richard Smith John Howell wrote: At 3:53 PM -0500 8/23/06, Richard Smith wrote: In my opinion (certainly not a legal one) copying to replace or protect legally purchased music is exactly analogous to copying a CD to protect the legally purchased original. Publisher a recording companies do themselves a disservice and appear greedy when they insist otherwise. Arguing from analogy is never realistic and would seldom, I imagine, impress a court. Not even the various rights in the copyright bundle are handled the same. John begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: Hard copy backups (was Re: [Finale] Lawrence)
In my opinion (certainly not a legal one) copying to replace or protect legally purchased music is exactly analogous to copying a CD to protect the legally purchased original. Publisher a recording companies do themselves a disservice and appear greedy when they insist otherwise. I agree that much of the current copyright law is antiquated and does not reflect the current state of technology (both music and printing) nor the way many today work (or would prefer to work). It is the publishers who want to do business as they did 50 years ago that cause this. My music is sold with a license to copy parts (but not scores) as needed for the original purchaser. In addition, I make site licensing available for large institutions with multiple performing organizations. See this link for a complete description. http://www.rgsmithmusic.com/Copyright.htm For several years I have been of the opinion that the present publishing model is outdated. Music goes out of print because of expenses of printing, storing, and marketing large print runs. For institutional use, it makes much more sense to print on demand from a .PDF or other electronic file. Publishers would dramatically reduce their expense, music dealers would not have to stock so much music that may or may not sell, and musicians would no longer see music go out of print. A music store's business would change to marketing popular music and musical books for mass consumption, earlier works not published electronically, and digital files of other works. Dealers could also profit from printing (for an additional fee) digital files for customers that don't want to print their own (or can't). I'll be glad when the laws reflect present reality. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Darcy James Argue wrote: Keith has only ever been talking about his own use. But he (and others) have assumed that legally, he must re-purchase a set of replacement parts, and that re-engraving or photocopying the deteriorating parts would be a violation of copyright. This seems wrong to me on principle, but then again, much of copyright law does. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 23 Aug 2006, at 1:33 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Aug 22, 2006, at 8:36 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: Can someone explain why, legally, Keith can't just photocopy or re-engrave the deteriorating parts? For his own use, he absolutely can. The only problem is if he made a copy for somebody else who had not purchased the original. 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 begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard org:R.G. Smith Music Engraving Publishing email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT Performance Announcement
For those in the Milwaukee area, I am pleased to announce that I have received word from Mike Keegan that he will be performing my composition *Introit for Solo Horn *twice in the coming days. One performance will be at St. Mark's Episcopal Church, September 24th, for my horn recital, and the other will be at the Cathedral of St. John the Evangelist, October 18th from 12:15-12:45 P.M. My sincerest thanks to Mike for his interest in this piece. For those interested, the music can br reviewed on my website at www.rgsmithmusic.com http://www.rgsmithmusic.com . Richard Smith RG Smith Music Engraving Publishing www.rgsmithmusic.com http://www.rgsmithmusic.com begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
My Finale experience goes back about 1991 or so. I remember when nearly everyone used speedy entry nearly all of the time. Finale's new simple entry is indeed quite good. I hesitate to point out that simple entry was a response to Sibelius' note entry methods (v. 2004 I believe). When I upgraded to 2005 it was specifically to get simple entry. I respond to Finale much as you do to Sibelius. I think it's just that I am more familiar with Sibelius. Having customized Finale to reflect your own manner of working is best. Similarly I have programmed Sibelius keyboard commands for my laptop to accommodate the absence of the number keypad. This is exactly what I mean when I say Sibelius thinks like me. In your case, it sounds like Finale thinks more like you. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tyler Turner wrote: --- Richard Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think I was unclear about the Keypad in Sibelius. Most of the time (laptop on the go excluded) I use the 10 key pad on the keyboard. Clicking on the toolbar on the screen is slower. The features I like to have close at hand are almost all on the top tab on the keypad (or in the right click context menu). Others working differently or with different musical requirements might have a different experience. In general, Sibelius works better with more keyboard and less mousing and has extensive keyboard shortcuts. Keyboard shortcuts are a big reason that I prefer Finale to Sibelius. The keypad system in Sibelius is not as efficient as Simple Entry in Finale. There are some elements that Sibelius allows to be entered via keystroke that Finale does not, but these are not the most common elements. For the most common elements, Finale's system is faster. (and actually, for the other elements, I've created my own system for working with Finale that is more efficient than Sibelius). Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
I think I was unclear about the Keypad in Sibelius. Most of the time (laptop on the go excluded) I use the 10 key pad on the keyboard. Clicking on the toolbar on the screen is slower. The features I like to have close at hand are almost all on the top tab on the keypad (or in the right click context menu). Others working differently or with different musical requirements might have a different experience. In general, Sibelius works better with more keyboard and less mousing and has extensive keyboard shortcuts. I find Finale's many toolbars, icons, sub-menus, and pop-ups more frustrating. But that's just me and the way I like to work. Interesting that you mention the difficulty with decomposing combined parts. I had to do a job recently that involved making keyboard reductions from some string quartet pieces. This was a Finale job. Finale would not let me reassign the layer (or voice) of individual notes so that dissimilar rhythms could live happily in the same bar. Only the entire measure could be reassigned. Posts to this list and MMs tech support confirmed that Finale was unable to do what was needed. Sibelius would easily do it but the customer had to have Finale. Much of the job had to be re-input from scratch. I agree with David Baily. While some of us work frequently with both programs, most everyone has a (strong) preference. I think that's because one of the two comes closer to the way we think about music. I'm glad both are so mature and capable. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] David W. Fenton wrote: On 13 Aug 2006 at 8:25, dhbailey wrote: Curiously though, there are also some heavy-hitter Sibelius users (admittedly not many) who don't like it either and who use Sibelius' wonderful key-mapping feature to map most of their most commonly used keypad commands to qwerty-keyboard commands. The biggest of these (and maybe some others) came to the current Sibelius versions from the old Acorn computers, which apparently had a different interface. Even though I'm a keyboard person, I don't find keyboard shortcuts in visual programs like Finale to be terribly helpful. My problem with the keypad UI is that the freedom in the visual interface has been sacrified to the limits of the keyboard. Of course, perhaps it's because I think of the onscreen keypad as a toolbar, and I'm frustrated that too many of the things on the toolbar are in hard-to-reach locations (I keep all my main Finale toolbars active at all times). Secondly, it's modal, which means the same location onscreen has different meaning for each tab. This can be OK, but in this case, it just gets in the way of my being able to remember what's what. The one thing that I really liked about the Sibelius UI was the note selection, where you could ctrl-click individual notes to add them to a selection and then use the keypad to apply multiple things to the group of notes at once. This non-contiguous selection is something I'd *really* like to see in Finale. It would make the decomposition of combined parts much easier, for instance. begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Logic to Finale
I'm not sure Sibelius is better than Finale at midi import. Both seem to make quite a mess of it. in my experience, Sibelius seems to leave more debris around while Finale gives a cleaner initial look but tends to truncate complex data. MusicXML is very effective but, unlike Finale, Sibelius requires you to buy the full plug-in to export MusicXML. So if you don't have the plug-in, this may not be a good choice. Importing MusicXMLis, however, free and has become the best method for moving from Finale to Sibelius. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] David W. Fenton wrote: On 13 Aug 2006 at 20:34, dhbailey wrote: Does Logic work with MusicXML? If it does (www.recordare.com should be able to tell you if it does) have your friend export the file as MusicXML, as it is so much more accurate than Finale's midi import. Isn't Sibelius much better with MIDI import? If so, and it's available, what about importing the MIDI into Sibelius, then exporting to XML for import into Finale. Lots of steps, but might be easier if the software is all available. begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
Say two violin staves are to be combined into one treble clef piano part. In one measure, violin one plays dotted quarter, eighth, and half notes. Violin two plays two half notes. After the two are combined, the second violin part has become dotted quarter tied to eighth followed by half. These kind of errors are common with either Finale or Sibelius when combining several parts on one stave. I would like the first two beats of the measure to have the second violin part in voice 2. I don't want the entire bar in voice 2 because it's a piano part and I don't want unneeded stems hanging around. Finale will let me reassign the music's voice *but only a measure at a time. *I cannot select a *single note* in Finale and change it's voice or layer independently of the other notes in the measure. In Sibelius I can select the half note in the second violin part and change it's layer without changing the rest of the bar. That's what I was referring to. In this particular job I frequently had to rewrite voice 2 from scratch because I could not change just the individual notes that needed changing. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tyler Turner wrote: --- Don Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Richard, I may not totally understand the difficulties your job presented, but layers can easily be reassigned if view active layer only is selected, and all four layers are not in use (doable, but not what I'd describe as easy when all layers are busy). I believe that there is also a plugin to convert voices to layers but I have never used it so I can't really comment on that. Don Hart My first thought, assuming the notes were in a single layer and he wanted to split some of them out to a second layer, was that perhaps explode music or TGTools part extraction could have been used to get them to a second staff. Or perhaps something with the Notemover Tool, moving them to a different staff. But the people on this list are all-too-familiar with these solutions, so if they didn't find the solution, there probably wasn't a good way to do it in Finale. This is an area where Sibelius is ahead. Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
If I understand your question, Sibelius will allow you to select a note or entire passage and, with one click, convert it into a cue. You can also easily turn off the sound in the passage (or note by note if you prefer). You could also copy a passage into a new staff by highlighting the passage and (single click) pasting into the new staff. Sibelius copy and paste is much less intrusive than that of Finale. Then select the pasted passage and convert it into a cue (with a single click). There is, however, no provision for mirrors. Mirrors are a really handy Finale feature. Instead, I would save the copy to cue routine for a last step to avoid double editing. I frequently use copy as a final step to achieve results very similar to mirrors. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 12.08.2006 dhbailey wrote: I just wish that Finale could come up with some major new notation feature FIRST, instead of always waiting for Sibelius to do it and then see how they can reverse-engineer it and adapt it to Finale. Here is my favourite for such a unique feature (or does Sibelius already offer it?): Automatic Cue notes, by means of a cue note layer (similar to mirrors), which can also be used while there are real notes on the staff, and which only require me to drag and drop (or something similar) from source to destination. I currently waste more time with cue notes than with any other notational detail. My second one is a functioning figured bass tool inclusive basic playback. But I think Sibelius is already much better for this than Finale is at the moment. Johannes begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
Yes. On the keypad (under the second tab) there is a button the toggles between full size and cue size. Select any note or passage, click the button and it becomes a cue. Click it again and it's full size. Disabling the sound (if you want) is a second step found in the properties panel. Again, just a single click for any selected note or passage. If your not familiar with Sibelius, the keypad is an on screen representation of the ten keypad on a full size keyboard. The buttons may be clicked on screen with the mouse or selected at the actual keyboard. There are selectable five tabs on the keypad and the cue note switch is under the second. The entire process can be carried out (except note selection) without a mouse. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 12.08.2006 Richard Smith wrote: If I understand your question, Sibelius will allow you to select a note or entire passage and, with one click, convert it into a cue. You can also easily turn off the sound in the passage (or note by note if you prefer). Does this mean that Sibelius can define notes as cues? That sounds like the first step of what I imagine. Finale doesn't actually know anything about cues, it just knows small notes in a different layer, which is not quite the same... Johannes begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
I think different people think and work differently and this is why a feature some like is deplored by others. Although I had almost 10 years of successful Finale experience before moving primarily to Sibelius, I much prefer the way Sibelius works. I have frequently said it seems to think more like me. Perhaps Finale thinks more like you do. I think this is why we have to very mature and very capable notation packages that are quite different from each other. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] David W. Fenton wrote: On 12 Aug 2006 at 15:31, Richard Smith wrote: If your not familiar with Sibelius, the keypad is an on screen representation of the ten keypad on a full size keyboard. The buttons may be clicked on screen with the mouse or selected at the actual keyboard. There are selectable five tabs on the keypad and the cue note switch is under the second. The entire process can be carried out (except note selection) without a mouse. I find this interface incredibly difficult, as I'm constantly having to switch between the different keypads to find what I want (which never seems to be on the tab that I expect). This is one of the reasons I find Sibelius difficult to use -- it just seems to me to be a false limitation of the GUI because of a binding to the keyboard. begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review
I haven't yet ordered 2007 yet (waiting for the dust to settle). But I have been working with linked parts (in Sibelius) for about a year. If Finale's take on this technology is similar, the advantages are huge. Having all of the parts and score in a single file makes a much more efficient work flow than many of you yet realize. Being able to edit parts and score at the same time is also very important and helps eliminate mistakes. The discussion about splitting a double part into individual parts is interesting . Sibelius will not do this (yet) without extracting into separate parts (files). I know everyone works differently and has different needs but, as a player, I usually prefer two parts on a page instead of one. It gives me a better idea of what's going on and helps me balance more closely with my section. The only exception is if the parts are vastly different from each other or if there are more than two parts. More than two parts per page is VERY difficult to sort out (especially at sight). The middle note is hard to see and accidentals shifting between voices get missed. Sometimes keyboardist arrangers don't get this because they read chords rather than extract a single line. May I suggest that a better method might be simply to have the number of voices on a score stave be the same as those on a part? Sometimes the new tools make old ways less useful. I also think, in many cases, we need to re-think the use repeat patterns instead of copying repeated sections into through composed music. But that's another subject (about which I know there can be strong feelings!) Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Robert Patterson wrote: it sounds like the only advantage of linked parts is that they're all in one big file. This is a much bigger advantage than you credit it for. Working from one file allows you to a) switch instantly between part views (much faster than opening/saving/closing separate files). b) work in score view to update several parts at once. For example, if you are changing a 'B' to a 'C', if you have several parts playing the same thing, you can copy/paste much more quickly because it is all within one file. c) make global changes once. This is anything from changing the title of the piece to inserting or deleting measures. You may think of it as only a small advantage, but I see it as a huge advantage over what we have now. MM would like you to believe that you can keep you score and parts in one file, and they have made great strides in that direction. For many projects it probably is possible. All I'm saying is that even those projects for which it is not possible can still benefit from the linked parts features. Most of mine probably fall in the latter category. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Horn website
This may be slightly of topic but I have just posted a new website for my private horn students at http://www.rgsmithmusic.com/horn/. The site has some Scorched resources as well as other (I hope) interesting material. Although it is intended for young horn students, I think others might be interested. I would like your thoughts about content, design, ect. as well as any errors you might find. Thanks for helping to beta test my site. -- Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Robert King
Come on, fellas. LET IT DIE!! Richard Smith -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kim Patrick Clow Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 11:47 AM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Robert King On 7/14/06, Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, until he has been convicted the charge is unproven. Well yes, that's stating the obvious, isn't it? I never said he was guilty or innocent, I merely posted the fact he was charged. Whatever the case, and I am no great fan of Robert King, I really don't see why this kind of garden fence topic should have any room on this list. Overreacting a bit? Besides,.*I am* afan of Robert King. I'd assumed there are other fans of his on the list (after all, the list is bigger than your personal tastes Johannes). And in earlier posts,I've covered the reasons why I posted the King story. ( i.e. his connection to the Sawkins case againt Hyperion Records, major force in the early performance groups, his many recordings, his movie scores, all make it newsworthy on a mailing list that has many connections to classical music). I could understand had I posted about a random news story about someone absolutely not connected to music in any form or fashion. But that'ssimplyNOT the case.Andas I mentioned earlier, feel free to delete the post if you found it that irksome or bothersome. Kim Patrick Clow There's really only two types of music: good and bad. ~ Rossini -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.7.1/348 - Release Date: 5/25/2006 -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.7.1/348 - Release Date: 5/25/2006 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] printers
Christopher Smith wrote: On Jul 7, 2006, at 5:22 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 06.07.2006 Richard Smith wrote: My Canon (inexpensive) office/photo printer (i860) has pigment black ink for text (and music) work and dye photo black and color for photos and other color work. Archival studies have shown pigment inks to be very stable. They will last as long as a laser. If your using a pigment ink, you should be more concerned about the life of the paper than the ink. Most of the Epson printers also use pigment ink. This is not the problem with ink. The problem is smudging when the ink is touched with sweaty fingers. And in the case of brass players, dripped on by leaky water keys... Christopher The Epson printers are pretty much waterproof and my Canon is much better than older inkjets. I think this is becoming less of a problem; because of their use in photography, big things are happening with inkjets. Has anyone ever seen a laser print flake off, stick to another surface, or transfer to other paper? Lasers have problems too. In any case, this is a good argument (among others) for selling a master set of parts and a license for the original purchaser to copy. I would like to find a printer (laser or inkjet) that will let me print 11x14 booklets for scores. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] printers
could find an economical method of printing larger scores and parts, say 9x12, but the laser printing world only seems to go to 11x17, and the larger formats are inkjet and therefore less stable on the page. My Canon (inexpensive) office/photo printer (i860) has pigment black ink for text (and music) work and dye photo black and color for photos and other color work. Archival studies have shown pigment inks to be very stable. They will last as long as a laser. If your using a pigment ink, you should be more concerned about the life of the paper than the ink. Most of the Epson printers also use pigment ink. I know this is where I differ from most of the folks on this list but I LIKE the way a good ink jet printer prints parts. The ink settles down into the paper like a piece printed with a press and looks great. Laser prints seem to float on top of the paper which I don't like (I think it looks too modern for me :) ). Large scores on smaller paper are a different matter. The reduced size of the music seems to reduce the resolution past the point of acceptability with an ink jet. I don't care for 11x17 (too long for the stand) or legal size scores (not much of an improvement over letter size). I do like 11x14 paper for scores. Since my music is sold with a license to copy, I provide letter size parts. If you have longer works, want the music printed a little bigger, or want to discourage copying, you might prefer 9x12 for parts (11x14 is a little unmanageable on a player's stand). If you want to print parts 2-up or as booklets, many of the better ink jets will print on paper that is 13 x 19 (with pigment ink) and you could order paper from a supplier rather than buy it at an office supply. It is true that most ink jets cost more to operate than lasers. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Online orchestration course from Garritan
Garritan is sponsoring an online, interactive orchestration based on the classic orchestration book by Rimsky-Korsakov. Read about the course on the Garritan web site : http://www.garritan.com/or go directly to the course site at: http://www.northernsounds.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=77 Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Layout for ABA form
Thanks, Don. One of my jobs is to play in a large church orchestra. We have, in fact, played quite a few of your fine arrangements. As I'm sure you know, it is common in church music for orchestral parts not to have the same rehearsal numbers or same repeat layout as the choral part which can create serious rehearsal problems. This is, I suppose, because of the practice of farming out orchestral arrangements to others but I don't think that excuses carelessness. As an orchestral musician, I thank you for your diligence. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Don Hart wrote: There is a situation where I've felt compelled to use a repeat in spite of the circumstances you mention. It's when I've been hired to orchestrate and record a choral piece that is already in print or well on its way. For the sake of future live performances (the publisher offers the score and parts) I try to keep the orchestration road map the same as that of the octavo/book, even though I would write things out any other time. Sometimes things need to be so drastically different that I will write out a section twice and number, e.g. 33a-40a for the repeat of 33-40. A couple of jobs for a particular composer of children's musicals stick out in my mind. Don Hart on 5/28/06 3:20 PM, Christopher Smith at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some of the circumstances that work against a repeat are: If the performer needed to turn a page backwards, I would avoid the repeat. If there are any kind of complex instructions, like Tacet 3rd X, Play 2nd X only, 8va 2nd X, etc., that do not apply consistently to the entire iteration, then I would avoid the repeat. If a part is meant to be sight read with no rehearsal, like touring shows and stage acts that hire local musicians, I would avoid a repeat. If I had a long 2nd ending, then a 3rd ending, I might avoid a repeat just to avoid, as Hiro says, "the performer jumping around" either in frustration or while looking for the next passage he is to play. At least with a coda I can indent it and space it lower to draw the eye to it. Harder to do with an ending. If I am saving four measures or less, no repeat. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Layout for ABA form
If I may be permitted to yank this thread in another direction, I am convinced that in many (certainly not all) cases, the use of repeats, endings, DS, al Coda, al Fine, ect. is obsolete. Current practice is often stuck in the habits of previous centuries and does not reflect the capabilities of our software. Finale or Sibelius (even most of the toy notation programs) eliminate the need for repeats to save the engraver's time. Just copy and paste (and edit as needed). In most cases, the performers appreciate not having to sort out a road map and the performance is usually better because the musicians are more focused on actual music making. As an active orchestral musician, I see all kinds of repeats. Some are very complex and non -standard. Most of us would rather they go away. We would rather turn pages, provided the page turns are reasonable (also easy with modern software). I'm a horn player. I need both hand to play but still prefer music without repeats. I know some publishers will insist on saving paper, some engravers are duplicating editions that require repeats, and some musicians find the form easier to see with repeats. Nevertheless, I think all engravers should seriously consider using them less often. Please see my article at: http://www.rgsmithmusic.com/Obsolete_Notation.htm Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com begin:vcard fn:Richard Smith n:Smith;Richard email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] url:http://www.rgsmithmusic.com version:2.1 end:vcard ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Wireless mice
I use a Logitech wireless laptop scroll mouse that has a receiver that plugs into a USB port on my laptop (a PC). No cords in my laptop bag! It works great. It was about $30-35 from office depot and is very easy on batteries. I recently taught a day long Sibelius class at a local university. The students (mostly music faculty) were all using was all Macs supplied by the university. I was given a Mac to use. My Logitech mouse worked fine in the Mac laptop and all of the functions (except one unique to Windows) were exactly the same and no special installation was needed. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christopher Smith wrote: On May 26, 2006, at 2:50 PM, dhbailey wrote: D. Keneth Fowler wrote: I do hate to ask the same question twice, but I can't find all the good info several of you gave me not too long ago regarding wireless mice. The old track ball has outlived its usefulness and it is time to move on. If those out there who use a wireless would tell me again what you use and what feature(s) influenced your choice I would be most grateful. Thanks very much. I promise not to lose your replies. Man, I hate getting old. :- I use the Microsoft Wireless Comfort Keyboard and Mouse -- the keyboard is version 1.0a and the mouse is the Microsoft Wireless Mouse, version 2. They came as a set in a white-box (OEM) at a screwdriver shop for about $60. They have terrific battery life, and work like a charm. The only down-side is that if you ever need to stop your computer booting at the setup screen, you need to keep a cabled keyboard and mouse around to attach and use, since the wireless stuff only works once the drivers are loaded in windows. Not the case for Mac, which has built-in generic drivers so the mouse will work with no installation. To get the cool proprietary software tricks, you will probably need to install the driver, but I didn't. Christopher ___ 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] TAN: processional music, recommendation wanted
Not the era you asked for but try these two: Opening of the Variations on a Theme by Haydn (Brahms) Coda of the Finale to the Mendelssohn Scottish Symphony (#3) Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com Mark D Lew wrote: I want to tap the collective knowledge of the List for a personal project. As a few of you know, I'm getting married in two weeks. In spite of my usual advocacy of live music, from the days when I too was a professional musician, we're going with recorded music. One thing we haven't found yet is the right piece for processional music. Ericka loves the well-known Pachelbel canon in D. Objectively, I too think it's a great piece, and it suits our needs in almost every respect. The one problem is that I've heard it so many times that for me it carries of a connotation of generic wedding ritual, which is (1) not a really positive feeling for me and (2) something I would never be able to personally connect to and think of as really ours. So in brief, we're looking something that has the essential qualities of the Pachelbel canon but which is obscure enough that thousands of other couples haven't already discovered it. If you have some favorite piece that you've always felt would be a perfect wedding processional, I'm inviting you to recommend it. It can't, however, be *too* obscure. The chosen piece has to be something we can get on a digital recording, and it needs to be something we can listen to before buying. My standard strategy is to borrow CDs from the public library for auditioning, but for those out there who like to send clips, I promise not to complain if you fill up my email inbox with binaries for this purpose. Other possibly pertinent information: * Aside from basic structural features (tempo, etc), what most appeals about the Pachelbel canon is the sense of quiet joy that wells up in it. As a counter-example, one of the also-ran candidates, Bach's Air on a G String, had the right pace and general mood but was deemed to be too solemn and introspective and not celebratory enough. * I'm basically thinking in terms of the 1650-1750 era, with some sort of standard chamber music instrumentation, but I'm not stuck on that, if some other era or style can accomplish the same goals. * The wedding will be outside, in a lovely garden-like setting. There will be about 70 guests, including lots of young children. Our procession will be non-standard, with bride and groom entering simultaneously from different directions and meeting in the middle. thanks mdl ___ 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
