At 1/8/2006 03:51 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Jan 2006 at 20:40, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 22:30, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 10:19 PM 1/7/2006, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The
Phil Daley wrote:
[snip]
I, for one, am perfectly capable of using Windows with no mousing at
all.
You must never use a drawing program, some programs will not work
without a mouse.
I have no idea how to use Finale without a mouse, let alone a drawing
program.
--
David H. Bailey
dhbailey wrote:
Phil Daley wrote:
[snip]
I, for one, am perfectly capable of using Windows with no mousing at
all.
You must never use a drawing program, some programs will not work
without a mouse.
I have no idea how to use Finale without a mouse, let alone a drawing
program.
At 1/9/2006 06:59 AM, Owain Sutton wrote:
dhbailey wrote:
Phil Daley wrote:
[snip]
I, for one, am perfectly capable of using Windows with no mousing at
all.
You must never use a drawing program, some programs will not work
without a mouse.
I have no idea how to use Finale without
Phil Daley wrote:
At 1/9/2006 06:59 AM, Owain Sutton wrote:
dhbailey wrote:
Phil Daley wrote:
[snip]
I, for one, am perfectly capable of using Windows with no mousing at
all.
You must never use a drawing program, some programs will not work
without a mouse.
I have
On 9 Jan 2006 at 7:15, Phil Daley wrote:
At 1/9/2006 06:59 AM, Owain Sutton wrote:
The point is that *Windows*, and
Windows-certificated software, can be used with a keyboard alone.
Third-party software which does not follow MS's specifications
(probably a deliberate decision in the
On 7 Jan 2006 at 22:30, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 10:19 PM 1/7/2006, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable -- we just don't have an equivalent to the Cmd-Click
master access you have on
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 22:30, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 10:19 PM 1/7/2006, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable -- we just don't have an equivalent to the Cmd-Click
master
On 8 Jan 2006 at 20:40, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 22:30, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 10:19 PM 1/7/2006, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable -- we
Owain Sutton / 2006/01/08 / 03:40 PM wrote:
And I vaguely remember hearing that
one requirement is that all functionality is available through keyboard
commands alone, so that any peripheral that can create keyboard commands
can be used.
This is true, written in MS GUI Guideline loud and
I use Microsoft Word 2001 for Mac. In this version, at least, I can put
*any* command in *any* menu. I can even create a new menu and call it
what I like. Of course this lets me do really stupid things: just for
fun I tried adding Quit, Undo and Bold to the View menu: it
works! If I wanted I
Ken Moore wrote:
Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fuck you on the Stockholm syndrome. I think you seriously need to
change careers if you don't think doubling has something to do with
Transpose
Shan't then. It took me a long time to find octave doubling, and I
agree with David,
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Which makes me wonder, if it were possible to design a range checker
which could render an opinion on the efficacy of ranges for a
variety of player abilities, e.g., H.S., College, Professional. I
happen to have a range chart (hard copy) which is broken down
Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:43 PM, Ken Moore wrote:
Shan't then. It took me a long time to find octave doubling, and I
agree with David, it's not intuitive. Dennis B-K's suggestion makes a
lot of sense to me. It's what Finale would have been like if it had
been
Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 at 14:04, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And it seems to me that there oughtn't be any reason not to have
such a menu choice in both locations.
But if you
Owain Sutton wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
Really, though, there IS a limit to how intuitive a complex program
like Finale could be.
Why?
No, I don't think it's an antagonistic comment. I think it's a valid
question. Music notation, while complex, isn't *that* complex. The
Chuck Israels wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:08 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
Really, though, there IS a limit to how intuitive a complex program
like Finale could be.
Why?
No, I don't think it's an antagonistic
On Jan 7, 2006, at 2:30 AM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Christopher Smith / 2006/01/06 / 06:54 PM wrote:
Right now I am trying to come up with some mnemonic to associate with
the F though ' (apostrophe) for choosing tools. None of those keys has
a strong mental attachment in my mind to the tools I
On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:20 PM, John Howell wrote:
At 4:22 PM -0500 1/6/06, dhbailey wrote:
Andrew Stiller wrote:
Not to mention the fact that some flutes actually *can* play a low
Bb.
I wasn't aware of that -- I've only encountered flutes which play to
low B. Cool!
I'm not sure you
At 6:13 PM -0500 1/6/06, Stephen Peters wrote:
John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
With respect, that is SO simplistic! It's an orchestrator's job not
only to know the extreme limits of range, but to know the limits for
different levels of players AND TO KNOW THE SPECIFIC SOUND OF EACH
This is true.
There are a number of things in the Finale Menu I never use, and there
are things that I use all the time I wish were right there. I think if
they designed some sort of user definable menu where you can choose
which items you want in it, the order, and perhaps command key/hot
Woohoo, I'm there!
dhbailey wrote:
We could start a Finale Users With Stockholm Syndrome group! ;-)
[snip]
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Yes, that is annoying. But you don't think that a power user wouldn't
benefit from some sort of ability to create custom menus or power menus?
I mean, one might need to RTM or RTFM to do it, but it could be a really
productive thing. I'd love to have Note Spacing right there, with a key
stroke
But if I wanted to click on an icon, why wouldn't I just click on the
icon in the Tool palette? Instead of cmd-click, then point and click,
I would just point and click.
Christopher
I am sure I am not the only person on this list who has customized my
master tool palette to include only a
On 1/7/06, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The things I use a lot are Music Spacing, and respell notes, and Fit
Music. Fit music has a key command associated with it, but the others
you have to go into the menu and find.
That's not true for Music Spacing-- You can select a passage in
On Jan 7, 2006, at 10:56 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
It wouldn't surprise me to find that, now that low B natural has
become standard for professionals (it wasn't, back then), that the low
B flat has become rarer, or vanished altogether from new models.
The heavy classical symphony players
No way! Really? Wow, learn something new every day. Maybe if I had read
the manual.naw..
Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/7/06, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The things I use a lot are Music Spacing, and respell notes, and Fit
Music. Fit music has a key command associated with
Yeah, I attended a masterclass with Peter Lloyd, who was principle Flute
with the London Symphony
http://www.larrykrantz.com/plloyd.htm He pretty much said the same thing
about low B foot flutes.
Christopher Smith wrote:
The heavy classical symphony players with the local orchestras here
On Jan 7, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
But if I wanted to click on an icon, why wouldn't I just click on the
icon in the Tool palette? Instead of cmd-click, then point and click,
I would just point and click.
Christopher
I am sure I am not the only person on this list who has
This keyboard shortcut does NOT appear next to the menu item, like most
of the shortcuts do (at least, not in the Mac version.) I don't know
why, but it should. Then not only you, but everyone else who had missed
it would have seen it after accessing the menu for the 8,439th time...
At 4:46 PM -0800 1/6/06, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
I'm not saying that any of those options is a good one or a bad one
(personally, I'd go for the complete user-oriented overhaul); I'm just
thinking about the ramifications of the various choices.
If anyone remembers the late, and VERY unlamented,
At 12:42 PM 1/7/2006, Andrew Stiller wrote:
But if I wanted to click on an icon, why wouldn't I just click on the
icon in the Tool palette? Instead of cmd-click, then point and click,
I would just point and click.
Christopher
I am sure I am not the only person on this list who has
On Jan 7, 2006, at 1:47 PM, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 12:42 PM 1/7/2006, Andrew Stiller wrote:
I am sure I am not the only person on this list who has customized my
master tool palette to include only a (large) subset of Finale's
tools.
I rely on the cmd-click feature to access those tools
Christopher Smith / 2006/01/07 / 10:00 AM wrote:
But if I wanted to click on an icon, why wouldn't I just click on the
icon in the Tool palette? Instead of cmd-click, then point and click, I
would just point and click.
Ah, because I hide tool pallet :-)
--
- Hiro
Hiroaki Honshuku,
Christopher Smith / 2006/01/07 / 12:48 PM wrote:
The heavy classical symphony players with the local orchestras here
(including the Montreal Symphony) all claim that the low B joint ruins
a flute's tone and response in high-end flutes. When they have to play
a low B in a concert, they pick up
On 7 Jan 2006 at 8:16, dhbailey wrote:
How about the equally valid musical concept of thickening of the
texture? Doubling a line is often used to thicken the texture of a
passage, so why don't we include that as yet a third way to arrive at
the same program feature?
You are conflating two
On 7 Jan 2006 at 8:22, dhbailey wrote:
Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 at 14:04, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And it seems to me that there oughtn't be any reason not to have
such
On 7 Jan 2006 at 8:28, dhbailey wrote:
don't like ctrl-s for save? Change it to whatever you want. Hate
using the numeric-keypad for selecting note values? Change them. I
recently discovered that (my new year's resolution was to get to know
Sibelius better) and I simply assigned the same
On 7 Jan 2006 at 13:06, Christopher Smith wrote:
This keyboard shortcut does NOT appear next to the menu item, like
most of the shortcuts do (at least, not in the Mac version.) I don't
know why, but it should. Then not only you, but everyone else who had
missed it would have seen it after
On Jan 7, 2006, at 5:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
While it would certainly be nice to have user-definable keyboard
shortcuts beyond the existing metatools, such a feature could never
solve problems of bad UI design. In fact, it would only solve one UI
problem, and that's giving quick access
On Jan 7, 2006, at 5:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 13:06, Christopher Smith wrote:
This keyboard shortcut does NOT appear next to the menu item, like
most of the shortcuts do (at least, not in the Mac version.) I don't
know why, but it should. Then not only you, but everyone
dhbailey wrote:
Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Which makes me wonder, if it were possible to design a range
checker which could render an opinion on the efficacy of ranges for
a variety of player abilities, e.g., H.S., College, Professional. I
happen to have a range chart (hard copy)
At 02:53 PM 1/7/2006, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Michael Cook / 2006/01/07 / 04:39 AM wrote:
I use Microsoft Word 2001 for Mac. In this version, at least, I can put
*any* command in *any* menu.
I stand corrected. I see the feature as the first time. On the other
hand, I have never ever received
Phil Daley wrote:
I have received over 50 responses from MS about various issues.
I too have had excellent support from MS. As much as I may adore the
concept of open-source software, I cannot deny that when I've needed to
deal with MS support, it's been prompt, knowledgable, and
Phil Daley / 2006/01/07 / 06:58 PM wrote:
I have received over 50 responses from MS about various issues.
Maybe because you are on Windows? Back then, they had no phone number
listed to call so I had to call the headquarters to find someone will
talk to me. I was so upset just installing
At 02:19 PM 1/7/2006, Christopher Smith wrote:
Hey, I'll trade you my Mac's customisable tool bar for your Windows'
keystroke-for-every-single-mother-lovin'-menu-item! 8-)
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable -- we just don't have an equivalent to the Cmd-Click
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 02:19 PM 1/7/2006, Christopher Smith wrote:
Hey, I'll trade you my Mac's customisable tool bar for your Windows'
keystroke-for-every-single-mother-lovin'-menu-item! 8-)
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable
At 10:19 PM 1/7/2006, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jan 2006 at 19:40, Aaron Sherber wrote:
Hmm, not sure what you mean here. The WinFin toolbar *is*
customizable -- we just don't have an equivalent to the Cmd-Click
master access you have on Mac. And the keystroke shortcut (I assume
you mean
I certainly agree with all of you who say that the Finale user
interface needs a lot of improvement, but is Octave Doubling such a
big problem? For all those who don't think it should be grouped with
Transposition, where would you want to see it?
Michael
bill wrote:
God, I can just imagine it. A treble clef-shaped annoying looking thing
that would say things like:
It looks like you're about to type an anacrusis. Would you like some help
with that?
Cleffy has noticed some parallel 5ths or octaves in your score. Would you
like him to correct
Michael Cook wrote:
I certainly agree with all of you who say that the Finale user interface
needs a lot of improvement, but is Octave Doubling such a big problem?
For all those who don't think it should be grouped with Transposition,
where would you want to see it?
How about a separate
dhbailey wrote:
And we can all wear bracelets embossed with W.W.I.D. for What Would Igor
Do -- we know what he did when confronted with such a complaint about
the Rite of Spring (only the suggestion was to place the problematic
line in the English Horn part) -- he got rid of the
At 04:57 PM 1/6/06 +, Owain Sutton wrote:
How about a separate 'doubling' menu option, which could offer a range
of utilites, such as doubling in a different layer, etc.?
Yes indeed.
Maybe my post was too long and nobody got that far. :) But that's what I
was getting at yesterday when I
On 1/6/06, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Transposition with expanded options. Canonic utilities with
expanded options. Hmmm... and suddenly, there is the idea for
a new item that covers both (discoverable from multiple paths)
that is a linear motion modification activity.
For all those who don't think it should be grouped with
Transposition, where would you want to see it?Michael
I'd be happy to see it in the Utilities menu in mass mover. That's
often where I look for strange things.
Mike Greensill
www.mikegreensill.com
At 09:19 AM 1/6/06 -0800, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
However, the problem with doing a UI
overhaul is that certain people are already used to the musically
illogical placement of features.. we noticed the problem when Show
Active Layer Only changed menus from from View to Options.
If features were
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:12 AM, dhbailey wrote:
By the way, Sibelius has an annoying feature (luckily it is user
switchable!) which colors any notes which are out of normal range for
a particular instrument. So if you label a particular line Flute and
then write a low Bb, they get colored
Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:12 AM, dhbailey wrote:
By the way, Sibelius has an annoying feature (luckily it is user
switchable!) which colors any notes which are out of normal range for
a particular instrument. So if you label a particular line Flute and
then write a low
Yeah ... as I normally work in a Concert Score, as it's a lot easier
to hear, I would be dealing with a very colorful screen.
Dean
On Jan 6, 2006, at 11:06 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:12 AM, dhbailey wrote:
By the way, Sibelius has an annoying feature (luckily it is
Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:12 AM, dhbailey wrote:
By the way, Sibelius has an annoying feature (luckily it is user
switchable!) which colors any notes which are out of normal range
for a particular instrument. So if you label a particular line
Flute and
Yeah, this does sound like a good thing. Perhaps we'll see it happen in
Finale 2007? I agree that the Check Range plugin is annoying, it would
be much easier to see them highlighted/selected.
Stephen Peters wrote:
Actually, this is one of my favorite features in Sibelius. Yes, it's
annoying
On 6 Jan 2006 at 9:19, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Transposition with expanded options. Canonic utilities with
expanded options. Hmmm... and suddenly, there is the idea for
a new item that covers both (discoverable from multiple paths)
Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:12 AM, dhbailey wrote:
By the way, Sibelius has an annoying feature (luckily it is user
switchable!) which colors any notes which are out of normal range for
a particular instrument. So if you label a particular line Flute and
then write a low
At 4:22 PM -0500 1/6/06, dhbailey wrote:
Andrew Stiller wrote:
Not to mention the fact that some flutes actually *can* play a low Bb.
I wasn't aware of that -- I've only encountered flutes which play to
low B. Cool!
I'm not sure you could buy one today, unless it's completely
Which makes me wonder, if it were possible to design a range
checker which could render an opinion on the efficacy of ranges
for a variety of player abilities, e.g., H.S., College,
Professional. I happen to have a range chart (hard copy) which is
broken down in a similar manner.
Dean
At 2:48 PM -0800 1/6/06, Dean M. Estabrook wrote:
Which makes me wonder, if it were possible to design a range
checker which could render an opinion on the efficacy of ranges
for a variety of player abilities, e.g., H.S., College,
Professional. I happen to have a range chart (hard copy) which
John Howell wrote:
With respect, that is SO simplistic! It's an orchestrator's job not
only to know the extreme limits of range, but to know the limits for
different levels of players AND TO KNOW THE SPECIFIC SOUND OF EACH
SUBRANGE WITHIN THAT RANGE, if not each individual note. You
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 at 9:19, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
[T]he problem with doing a UI
overhaul is that certain people are already used to the musically
illogical placement of features..
To me, [this] looks like a commitment to the status quo, or
Brad Beyenhof wrote:
[T]he problem with doing a UI
overhaul is that certain people are already used to the musically
illogical placement of features..
The assumption that *adding*
a new approach always entails completely removing the old method is
completely unwarranted.
So you want
On 6 Jan 2006 at 14:04, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And it seems to me that there oughtn't be any reason not to have
such a menu choice in both locations.
But if you follow that logic to its conclusion, you'll put discovery
paths to each
On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:43 PM, Ken Moore wrote:
Shan't then. It took me a long time to find octave doubling, and I
agree with David, it's not intuitive. Dennis B-K's suggestion makes a
lot of sense to me. It's what Finale would have been like if it had
been designed by musicians rather than
Christopher Smith wrote:
Really, though, there IS a limit to how intuitive a complex program like
Finale could be.
Why?
No, I don't think it's an antagonistic comment. I think it's a valid
question. Music notation, while complex, isn't *that* complex. The
arrangement of the notation
On 1/6/06, Owain Sutton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brad Beyenhof wrote:
[T]he problem with doing a UI
overhaul is that certain people are already used to the musically
illogical placement of features..
The assumption that *adding*
a new approach always entails completely removing the old method
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
Really, though, there IS a limit to how intuitive a complex program
like Finale could be.
Why?
No, I don't think it's an antagonistic comment. I think it's a valid
question. Music notation, while complex, isn't
On 6 Jan 2006 at 20:08, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
[]
If your comment was intended to say there's a limit to how
intuitive an interface such as that of Finale can be, then that's a
different matter.
I honestly don't see the difference.
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6 Jan 2006 at 14:04, Brad Beyenhof wrote:
On 1/6/06, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And it seems to me that there oughtn't be any reason not to have
such a menu choice in both locations.
But if you follow that logic to its
I honestly don't see the difference. Finale is one of the most powerful
notation programs on the planet, and its interface reflects that.
Balancing off getting things right without our input against giving us the
power to change things is VERY complex! Sibelius maybe takes things out of
Another idea would be to allow a user to customize their own interface.
You can pick what items you want in the menu, and what menu they are in,
etc.
I think like Microsoft Office does this? Or something like that. So,
like if you never use the MIDI menu in Finale, you could tell it to
On Jan 6, 2006, at 5:08 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Owain Sutton wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
Really, though, there IS a limit to how intuitive a complex
program like Finale could be.
Why?
No, I don't think it's an antagonistic comment. I think it's a
On Jan 6, 2006, at 6:22 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Another idea would be to allow a user to customize their own
interface. You can pick what items you want in the menu, and what
menu they are in, etc.
Man, I could go for that!
Chuck
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA
Eric Dannewitz / 2006/01/06 / 09:22 PM wrote:
Another idea would be to allow a user to customize their own interface.
You can pick what items you want in the menu, and what menu they are in,
etc.
You can't do this. This will cause a huge pain in technical support.
I think like Microsoft
Christopher Smith / 2006/01/06 / 06:54 PM wrote:
Right now I am trying to come up with some mnemonic to associate with
the F though ' (apostrophe) for choosing tools. None of those keys has
a strong mental attachment in my mind to the tools I need most often,
except maybe StaFf with F, and
Eric Dannewitz wrote:
I just really believe that of the programs I've used, Finale does have
an excellent index and manual. If I can't figure it out, I can refer
to the manual and find it. Sometimes you have to rethink what you are
asking for, or what it is called, but I have yet NOT to find
Apple's iLife stuff, and Pages are great examples of programs that
require scant reading to get them to work.
Comparing Pages with Finale isn't really a fair comparison, Pages just
isn't that complex a program. It would be better to compare Finale with
the Pro apps like Finale Cut Pro or Logic.
At 1/5/2006 11:09 AM, Colin Broom wrote:
That sounds more like the kind of thing you might get in Sibelius, as they
have a bigger tendency to want to tell users how their music should look.
God, I can just imagine it. A treble clef-shaped annoying looking thing
that would say things like:
It
On 4 Jan 2006 at 23:41, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
But my point, to repeat, is that the program should make these
straightforward features clear without needing help files or manuals.
Force a choice, for example, with a radio button ([move notes to
transposed position] [copy notes to
On 4 Jan 2006 at 20:49, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
But my point, to repeat, is that the program should make these
straightforward features clear without needing help files or
manuals. Force a choice, for example, with a radio button ([move
notes to transposed
To double a line up an octave? Transpose totally comes to mind. What
else would you be doing? I mean, from a musical point of view, I'd say
to myself yeah, that line would be really cool doubled up an octave.
Then I'd go, ok, I'll TRANSPOSE it up an octave. And low and behold,
there is a
On 4 Jan 2006 at 22:04, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Now I am confused as to what the original question/problem was.
Using transpose to transpose a line and keep the original notes? . .
.
That's precisely the problem here -- you've redefined my original
problem to match the Finale map.
I had no
Eric Dannewitz / 2006/01/05 / 03:38 PM wrote:
To double a line up an octave? Transpose totally comes to mind. What
else would you be doing?
I'd say Mas Mover.
--
- Hiro
Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA
http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com
Per my last email, it does belong where it is. I'd say if you polled all
the people on here, or any musician, it makes perfect sense to have
transpose and a check box to keep the notes there.
Why would I want things in multiple places? I don't see how that would
be a help. I think of Finale
On 5 Jan 2006 at 12:38, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I agree that the functionality should be user discoverable
instead of requiring going to the manuals.
But the question is: where does the functionality I needed belong
in the program? It seemed like a Composer's
On 5 Jan 2006 at 12:38, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I agree that the functionality should be user discoverable instead
of requiring going to the manuals.
But the question is: where does the functionality I needed belong in
the program? It seemed like a Composer's
Whatever man. I think you need some serious time out. You want a
freaking menu item called Double this line?? My God.
Fuck you on the Stockholm syndrome. I think you seriously need to change
careers if you don't think doubling has something to do with Transpose.
Of course, it seems you do
Hmm, well, I suppose that a little check box along with all those other
in Mass mover might be cool. I'd think it's more a note mover thing.
Though, quite honestly, I don't think I've ever used Note Mover...
A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Eric Dannewitz / 2006/01/05 / 03:38 PM wrote:
To
If you read the FUCKING manual in the index under DOUBLING it says it
right there!!!
Doubling see TRANSPOSITION dialog box 27-46
I think it is YOU sir that has Stockholm syndrome. You are too freaking
stubborn to see that you are absolutely dumb. Finale's index gave you at
least TWO ways to
On Jan 5, 2006, at 4:31 PM, Don Hart wrote:
Transpose... is in the mass edit menu of the Mass Mover tool; two of
the
default Mass Mover metatools are devoted to this feature (7and 9). -
Don
Actually, it's four (6 through 9) and they aren't assigned until the
first time you invoke them.
Ahem.
If we can all get along with expressions and smart shapes and
tuplets--none of which are musical terms--and if we can get along
with articulations that do not include slurs, then we can get along
with preserved original notes when transposing.
Jeez, people, it ain't rocket science--or
At 12:38 PM 1/5/06 -0800, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Seriously, it makes sense where it is. It doesn't make sense at all to
move it somewhere else.
But it makes sense to re-think things that have caused confusion.
In David's thinking, octave doubling is not transposition, and indeed it is
not (even
Christopher,
Thanks for the clarification. I did know those four slots were
programmable. I reached my quick (and inaccurate) conclusion about default
settings when I opened a new file and found the arrangement I described.
Also, I always have to reset 7 and 9 in my template, which I'm not sure
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
