David W. Fenton wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 at 15:58, shirling neueweise wrote:
/12 meters
My objection to these meters is that they tell you what the
subdivision is, and give you no help whatsoever with identifying the
beat.
I would much prefer something like:
3+2+3+2+2
-
8
On Jul 13, 2005, at 3:51 AM, dhbailey wrote:
I don't think Finale is easy to use without a mouse, so I'm not sure
where your comment about hoping Sibelius being easy to use without a
mouse comes from.
We were talking about Speedy entry with qwerty. I use the mouse a lot
when tweaking
At 7/18/2005 11:43 PM, Carl Dershem wrote:
Ken Durling wrote:
At 07:57 PM 7/18/2005, you wrote:
Not a clue as to the origins of 'ax' in any case.
Well, is chops a clue?
Maybe... but then what happens when you're talking about sax players?
;)
Are you saying sax players don't have
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 Don Hart wrote:
-- Select the handle for the F sharp and nudge once, either left or right.
When I do this the F sharp and the G sharp swap position. (According to
Alfred's Essential Dictionary of Music Notation the pre-nudge position
is correct. I can't quickly find Gardner
Andrew,
Thanks for the confirmation. I just emailed MakeMusic!
Don Hart
on 7/18/05 11:56 AM, Andrew Stiller at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 17, 2005, at 4:58 PM, Don Hart wrote:
-- Select the handle for the F sharp and nudge once, either left or
right.
When I do this the F sharp
David W. Fenton wrote:
I would much prefer something like:
david, coming from you, this kind of comment is like someone who
doesn't (want to) swim and hates being in water stating his
preference for fresh water lakes over saltwater seas.
i would suggest that 3+2+3+2+2/12 is no different
At 10:47 PM -0400 7/18/05, Raymond Horton wrote:
Perhaps, but that might be supposing too much. I would think it's
just a term for a tool of the trade. (Personally, I heard axe
years before I ever heard of woodshedding.)
And barbershopers have been using woodshedding for decades, and
At 7/19/2005 11:42 AM, John Howell wrote:
At 10:47 PM -0400 7/18/05, Raymond Horton wrote:
Perhaps, but that might be supposing too much. I would think it's
just a term for a tool of the trade. (Personally, I heard axe
years before I ever heard of woodshedding.)
And barbershopers have been
Hi Rudi,
Finale's behavior in editing accidentals is weird and inconsistent, causing
edits to be a lot harder to perform than they should be. I think the
post-nudge position agreeing with Read is little more than coincidence.
Try lowering my example one octave and nudge the F sharp. Observe the
*gets ready to duck under his desk*
I'm a choral conductor myself, and I tell ya, I used to be in the same
boat you are. Why bother memorizing, when I've got it learned and I use
it only as a reference?
There are performance situations which require memorization (I used to
sing at the Minnesota
There is much to be considered on this subject.
Would you enjoy a play more with actors referring to scripts or one
with actors who had memorized the lines? Maybe this is not an exact
parallel with music performance, but there's something useful in the
comparison.
From my point of view,
On 19 Jul 2005 at 11:07, shirling neueweise wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I would much prefer something like:
david, coming from you, this kind of comment is like someone who
doesn't (want to) swim and hates being in water stating his
preference for fresh water lakes over saltwater
On 19 Jul 2005 at 8:59, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 at 15:58, shirling neueweise wrote:
/12 meters
My objection to these meters is that they tell you what the
subdivision is, and give you no help whatsoever with identifying the
beat.
I would
On 19 Jul 2005 at 13:11, Phil Daley wrote:
I can sing the music correctly the first time through, obviously, using the
music. What do I gain by spending my time memorizing the same music?
The ability to use your visual attention entirely to maintain
ensemble with the rest of the group?
At 1:11 PM -0400 7/19/05, Phil Daley wrote:
At 7/19/2005 11:42 AM, John Howell wrote:
At 10:47 PM -0400 7/18/05, Raymond Horton wrote:
Perhaps, but that might be supposing too much. I would think it's
just a term for a tool of the trade. (Personally, I heard axe
years before I ever heard of
At 7/19/2005 04:17 PM, John Howell wrote:
At 1:11 PM -0400 7/19/05, Phil Daley wrote:
I can understand that 90% of people in those groups have to learn
the music by rote, since they are clueless about actually reading
the music. But why penalize me?
Of course they do, and that's typical of
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:21:04 -0500
From: Jim Williamson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Finale] GPO trumpets
Does anyone know how the trumpets sound in the included 2006/GPO package?
I tried listening to the GPO samples on their website and thought the
trumpet was one of the worst
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 at 8:59, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 18 Jul 2005 at 15:58, shirling neueweise wrote:
/12 meters
My objection to these meters is that they tell you what the
subdivision is, and give you no help whatsoever with identifying the
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 19 Jul 2005 at 11:07, shirling neueweise wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I would much prefer something like:
david, coming from you, this kind of comment is like someone who
doesn't (want to) swim and hates being in water stating his
preference for fresh
On 7/17/05, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now where you have a problem with shifting meanings rather than with
archaic slang is with the pre-WW 2 songs that use gay simply to
mean happy, like Glitter and Be Gay and a ton of others. Don we
now our gay apparel? Not cool! Or to be
On 7/19/05, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I've also known legit choral conductors who insist on
memorization because (a) you don't really know the music inside out
until you've memorized it, (b) you can't concentrate on the
conductor's every gesture and expression when half your
On Jul 19, 2005, at 4:40 PM, Lora Crighton wrote:
I actually find it easier to focus on things like tuning balance if
I have my score, because I can see what the other parts are doing -
I have found that, also.
I'm always reading my own part at least one other. Or are you
suggesting
On 19 Jul 2005 at 17:49, Mark D Lew wrote:
I can't recall ever intentionally memorizing all parts for a choral
piece I'm singing in, but I would generally learn all four parts for
any piece where I'm the choral director, and if I later have occasion
to sing the same piece then I know all
I personally would always prefer having score in ensemble pieces, and
prefer memorization for soloists and conductors. This is also the way many
competitions are run - requiring memorization for soloists but not for
ensembles. It only makes sense, IMHO.
ken
On 7/19/05, Mark D Lew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 19, 2005, at 4:40 PM, Lora Crighton wrote:
I actually find it easier to focus on things like tuning balance if
I have my score, because I can see what the other parts are doing -
I have found that, also.
I'm always reading my
Phil Daley wrote:
At 7/18/2005 11:43 PM, Carl Dershem wrote:
Ken Durling wrote:
At 07:57 PM 7/18/2005, you wrote:
Not a clue as to the origins of 'ax' in any case.
Well, is chops a clue?
Maybe... but then what happens when you're talking about sax players?
;)
Are you
On Jul 19, 2005, at 10:37 AM, Don Hart wrote:
Finale's behavior in editing accidentals is weird and inconsistent,
causing
edits to be a lot harder to perform than they should be.
Weird yes, inconsistent no.
Every accidental has an associated horizontal offset value [*]. If
that value is
In the bad old days, singers in an opera or symphony chorus would
sometimes be given parts that included only their music with no
orchestra reduction. Sometimes it wouldn't even include all the other
choral parts. I remember that Carmina Burana used to come with one
chorus part for the mean
I know a percussionist who talks about keeping his chops in shape.
RBH
Not a clue as to the origins of 'ax' in any case.
Well, is chops a clue?
Maybe... but then what happens when you're talking about sax players?
;)
Are you saying sax players don't have chops??
At 5:55 PM -0700 7/19/05, Ken Durling wrote:
I personally would always prefer having score in ensemble pieces,
and prefer memorization for soloists and conductors. This is also
the way many competitions are run - requiring memorization for
soloists but not for ensembles. It only makes sense,
We all need to keep our chops in shape, on all our axes, so that we'll
do well on our gigs.
JS
On Jul 19, 2005, at 9:05 PM, Raymond Horton wrote:
I know a percussionist who talks about keeping his chops in shape.
RBH
Not a clue as to the origins of 'ax' in any case.
Well, is
Maybe for playing the musical saw.
On 20 Jul 2005, at 03:05, Raymond Horton wrote:
I know a percussionist who talks about keeping his chops in shape.
RBH
Not a clue as to the origins of 'ax' in any case.
Well, is chops a clue?
Maybe... but then what happens when you're
Off-topic, of course, and submitted without comment, but some may find
this LA Times editorial interesting:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-soprano11jul11,0,369179.story
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
___
Finale mailing list
33 matches
Mail list logo
