It's kind of sad that Sibelius new features should precedent what we really
need, isn't it? Before a "serious" software should announce new features,
it should certainly repair non-working features (non-working for about 10
years or so.)
Sibelius can do it. Microsoft can do it. Quark can do it.
On 18:16 Uhr ronan wrote:
One thing I have been asking for for years is improved handling of
multiple time signatures. Right now the only option is that Finale
"decides" to accept one staff as the main timekeeper, then adjusts
all other staves so that the bar lines all line up. In other words,
-Original Message-
From: Kurt Gnos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: August 30, 2005 2:13 PM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: [Finale] Finale 2007 - Wishlist
Hi all,
now we got Finale 2006, we could begin to find out what we think we need in
the next version or an update.
...
I'm sure you hav
I second this opinion. I have a little sense of MM's schedule.
Surely, right now they are working on the 2006 maintenance update.
As soon as they are done with that, work will start on 2007, and
they'll start with the issues which have been raised early and often.
I have asked for Patter
Kurt Gnos wrote:
Hi all,
now we got Finale 2006, we could begin to find out what we think we need
in the next version or an update.
While I like the mixer possibilities, they are not of much use as long
as you cannot combine the new sounds with human playback, and, even
worse, as you can't sa
At 02:12 PM 08/30/2005, Kurt Gnos wrote:
>While I like the mixer possibilities, they are not of much use as long as
>you cannot combine the new sounds with human playback,
You *can* do this -- in fact, you *should*. What you cannot do is
combine Finale GPO sounds with Finale softsynth sounds.
