[Finale] Another Finale shortcut (OS X)
This has become an essential piece of information since the copyable staff lists in 2005 (whose workings I have yet to fathom). If you do not use this Shift/C command, you end up with extraneous score expressions all over the place, and they come form anywhere in the score, even if you copy from one extracted part to another. Let me make that clear: you have a score expression in part A; you copy from part B into part C, and score expressions from part A appear gratuitously in part C (along with extra copies of all the score expressions in part B). I can't figure out why that happens, but you can avoid it by using the Shift/C dialog and selecting only what you want to copy. The only shortcoming I find to using this method is that there is no way to copy measure attached smart shapes along with the entries, so you loose hairpins when copying from part to part - something of an irritation, in my book. Chuck Dear Chuck and Matthew, This baffles me also. The 3 selection check boxes you get on 'copy and filter' put smart shapes and score expressions into the same category, therefore NOT allowing any real filtering. This destroys the whole idea of having a filter in the first place if you ask me - as you can't. BTW, if you hold down opt and shift while in the edit menu you get to do the filter to a clip file, but this still doesn't give you the result of filtering out any score expression but leaving in the smart shapes. Another thing that I find confusing is the reference to the smart shapes (attached to measures) which is in the first check box and then the smart shapes (attached to notes) which is in the third check box, which you actually get into and can make selections from. What's the difference here? I reckon Make Music has made an error in this menu item, because if you highlight a measure with Mass Mover and go to Mass Edit menu to select 'Copy Measure Items' you get to select all the different items from the lists under both Measure Items and Entry Items - something I use a lot when copying music across staves within the same file (in fact I would love this selection to be enabled and 'saved' as a preference...and yes, I've requested it to MM many times!)). I believe that this should happen under the filter menu choice but doesn't - probably a bug. Another annoyance, one which I have written up to MM, contains a similar fault when you use metatool 2 (explode music) with Mass Mover. You'll get staff expressions and slurs that go across to the 'expolded parts but not any hairpins - strange, but a bug also I think? Jonathan ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] backwards conversion from 2005 to 2004
d. collins wrote: Not only [has Coda not] made this promise [of backwards write compatibility], but they have always implied the contrary, as confirmed by the interviews I read. That's precisely my point. Of course, such a feature adds to the complexity of the program, but I recall Tobias saying this would even be doable with a plug-in, so it can't be that much of problem. I don't know how much of a problem it would be, either, and I don't remember Tobias writing this, but if he did, I know just enough about programming and software design that it is simpler to write a plug-in to strip out later features, than to build software to have the capability to do it or not to do it. As for the size of the software, I find this a rather amusing argument considering the rest of your post on the size of hard disks and on the necessity of keeping several versions of Finale... Or were you joking? This is partly a matter of comparing apples and oranges. The standard size of hard drives has increased ten fold in about three years and about ten fold in the three years before that. In 1999, a 1 GB hard drive was immense. Furthermore, six years ago, the size of memory available for operating systems and softare use was probably 100 times smaller than is commonplace today. Second, it is my experience that doubling the size of a software program squares the complexity of programming (and more importantly, debugging it), so that I submit that adding backwards write compatibility would be adding orders of magnitude more difficulty in debugging and maintaining it. Comparing the new, bigger capacity hard drives, with the increase program size, is a bit like comparing the addition of a new filing cabinet, with writing a longer essay, in that both adding the larger hard drive, and the new filing cabinet are trivial compared with developing a larger computer program, or writing a longer essay. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] inconsistency with margins while printing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone---I'm printing a big band score using landscape format, 8 measures to a page. I found that the score prints the first 9 pages with about a 3 or 4 inch margin on the right side of the page, which means the 8 measures are slightly crowded. The last 8 pages of the score prints with about a half inch margin on the right side and looks absolutely perfect. Why the discrepancy? Thanks in advanceBrian I'm not exactly sure why the discrepancy, but I suspect you decided to change the page size after you had entered about 9 pages of music. First thing I'd try, is to go to the first page on which the page margins are what you want, select the page layout tool, double click on one of the handles of the page margins on that page, and in the dialog box that opens, select the all pages option, and then click the apply, or OK buttons. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Another Finale shortcut (OS X)
On Mar 2, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Jonathan Smith wrote: This baffles me also. The 3 selection check boxes you get on 'copy and filter' put smart shapes and score expressions into the same category, therefore NOT allowing any real filtering. This destroys the whole idea of having a filter in the first place if you ask me - as you can't. BTW, if you hold down opt and shift while in the edit menu you get to do the filter to a clip file, but this still doesn't give you the result of filtering out any score expression but leaving in the smart shapes. You are absolutely right. Another thing that I find confusing is the reference to the smart shapes (attached to measures) which is in the first check box and then the smart shapes (attached to notes) which is in the third check box, which you actually get into and can make selections from. What's the difference here? I can explain this. Note-attached Smart Shapes are usually slurs, glisses, trills, etc, which are similar to articulations or note-attached text expressions for me. Measure-attached Smart Shapes are hairpins, which is what one usually wants to copy along with measure-attached text expressions, however not brackets, pedal markings, 8va signs, which are the other measure-attached Smart Shapes. Perhaps there should be a separate option to copy hairpins rather than all measure-attached Smart Shapes. I reckon Make Music has made an error in this menu item, because if you highlight a measure with Mass Mover and go to Mass Edit menu to select 'Copy Measure Items' you get to select all the different items from the lists under both Measure Items and Entry Items - something I use a lot when copying music across staves within the same file (in fact I would love this selection to be enabled and 'saved' as a preference...and yes, I've requested it to MM many times!)). I believe that this should happen under the filter menu choice but doesn't - probably a bug. Another annoyance, one which I have written up to MM, contains a similar fault when you use metatool 2 (explode music) with Mass Mover. You'll get staff expressions and slurs that go across to the 'expolded parts but not any hairpins - strange, but a bug also I think? This is one of the reasons TG Tools takes the place of the Finale built-in functions. If I would have this kind of fussiness to deal with afterwards, I use TG Tools instead, which saves me mucho time. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] inconsistency with margins while printing
On Mar 2, 2005, at 2:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone---I'm printing a big band score using landscape format, 8 measures to a page. I found that the score prints the first 9 pages with about a 3 or 4 inch margin on the right side of the page, which means the 8 measures are slightly crowded. The last 8 pages of the score prints with about a half inch margin on the right side and looks absolutely perfect. Why the discrepancy? Thanks in advanceBrian___ It's normal for the first system of a score to have a larger indent to accommodate the complete instrument names. I can't speculate as to why the first 9 are like this (maybe you used an old score as a template that only had 9 pages, all set like this?), but it is easy to change. There are two possibilities: that the page margins are different for the first 9 pages, or that the system margins are different. You can tell at a glance which one you have to change, because the page margins show up as dotted lines, too as soon as you select the Page Layout Tool. If the left-hand Page Margin line is 3 or 4 inches over too far, then that is the problem. If the left-hand system handle is over too far, then the System Margins is the problem. This is to change the System Margins: Page Layout tool>Page Layout Menu>Systems>Edit Margins. Go to the system that looks right to you, as you will be copying its settings. Click somewhere inside the dotted-line box around the system. Let's say that it is System 10 (on page 10, in your score.) In the box that opened up when you first selected Edit Margins, it says Values for System 10. These are the values that you are going to apply. Change System> enter 1 through 9. If you want to leave the first system indented, enter 2 through 9. Click Apply. All should be well now. If you find you need to change just ONE system (like the first one) you can just drag the upper-left-hand handle to the right or left to change the indent. Use my method to change more than one, to be consistent. This is to change the Page Margins: Actually, I don't need to go completely through it, because it is the same dialogue box as the System Margins. Just select first: Page Layout tool>Page Layout Menu>Systems>Edit Page margins and everything else is the same. Oh, yes, afterwards Update Layout while on Page 1, just to be sure! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
At 3:33 + 2/03/2005, Simon Troup wrote: Professional applications don't need multiple choices of icons types, or different desktop choices. One simple, well designed set of icons would suffice. The whole rosewood desktop and vellum paper idea borrowed from sibelius is totally unnecessary and just bloats the app. I think it actually 'cheapens' the application. You don't see options like these in Photoshop or ProTools. How right you are. Here Finale gives me the possibility of customizing something I don't need to customize (I still use the traditional icons because they're the only ones that remind me which layer I'm in by showing the whole Simple palette in the layer colour). I'm still waiting for really useful custom interface options such as a palette or toolbar where I can put a selection of expressions or articulations. Here's what Jef Raskin (who sadly died a few days ago) had to say about customizable interfaces: My take-away on this issue is that if we are competent user interface designers so that our interface is already nearly optimal, most personalizations can only make the interface worse. Therefore, we must be sparing and deliberate in offering user customizations. If a user can, by a few judicious choices, really improve the interface, we probably have done a poor job. Anyone involved with designing user interfaces should take some time to read Raskin's words of wisdom on the subject. Have a look at http://www.jefraskin.com : it's worth the visit anyway, being packed full of fascinating reflections on all sorts of subjects. Michael Cook ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tied note starting a coda
how do I start a coda with a tied note? The note in question is both tied over from the previous measure AND tied to the next measure, so my old kludge of tying it right then editing the tie in Special Tools to go backwards won't work. Create a unison in a second layer, tie both notes and kludge one of them. Thanks, Andrew, that seems to be the easiest solution. I just heard back from Gary in MacSupport; and that was the solution he suggests as well. I answered back that perhaps opt = on the Mac should create a backwards tie on ANY note, whether or not it starts a second ending. This would be a Martha Stewart-like Good Thing, IMHO. Christopher I agree completely, and have CCd Macsupport accordingly. This would be a truly elegant and desirable extension of an already extant function. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Fwd: [Public Knowledge] Trouble Locating Copyright Owners? Tell the Copyright Office Your Story
I thought the following might be of interest to some list members. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ Begin forwarded message: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: March 1, 2005 5:14:49 PM EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Public Knowledge] Trouble Locating Copyright Owners? Tell the Copyright Office Your Story Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Are you an artist, author, musician, or filmmaker? Maybe you're a scholar or librarian? If so, have you ever wanted to use a copyrighted work but been unable to locate the owner to clear the rights? It's a problem that happens all too often, and not only does it affect your work, but it also orphans the original owner's work. It's an unfortunate side effect of current copyright law that diminishes everyone's ability to create, innovate, and educate. Fortunately, we have good news: The U.S. Copyright Office wants to make it easier to locate copyright holders, and it's asking for the public's help. Before the Copyright Office can *address* the problem, it needs to gather evidence that there *is* a problem. This is where you come in: tell your story to the Copyright Office. Public Knowledge along with a number of other like-minded organizations have created Ophanworks.org: an easy way for you to submit your story to the Copyright Office. Now is your chance to tell the Office what personal difficulties you've had when trying to clear rights. To get started, go to: http://www.orphanworks.org Never tried to clear rights? Maybe you know someone who has. Forward them this message or visit: http://www.orphanworks.org to send them an email. You can always learn more about the problem of orphan works and the U.S. Copyright Office's notice, by visiting Public Knowledge's website: http:/www.publicknowledge.org/issues/ow == Public Knowledge collaborated with the EFF to set up orphanworks.org as a resource for everyone to facilitate public participation in copyright policy. If you'd like to support this and future efforts, please make a contribution: http://publicknowledge.org/donate == Thanks for participating! Your friends at Public Knowledge February 28, 2005 ___ PublicKnowledge mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] For subscription information, or to unsubscribe, visit: http://lists.publicknowledge.org/mailman/listinfo/publicknowledge or send e-mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] GPO Jazz/Big Band Edition ETA
I know Chuck and a few others on this list have been wondering about this: http://northernsounds.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31632 We're still aiming to complete the libary in April. If only Tom would stop adding more instruments! Gary Garritan - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Another Finale shortcut (OS X)
Dear Jonathan, I agree and am somewhat baffled that this hasn't come up more often in this discussion group. I think there are a number of people who use similar part extraction methods who must find this irritating. I don't know if this will get repaired in 2006, but I am ever hopeful. I do remember speaking with one tech support person who seemed to agree that the selection in the filter box clumped dissimilar things together in a way that is less than useful. I will forward this to a person at MM who I think will be likely to pay attention. Chuck On Mar 2, 2005, at 12:48 AM, Jonathan Smith wrote: This has become an essential piece of information since the copyable staff lists in 2005 (whose workings I have yet to fathom). If you do not use this Shift/C command, you end up with extraneous score expressions all over the place, and they come form anywhere in the score, even if you copy from one extracted part to another. Let me make that clear: you have a score expression in part A; you copy from part B into part C, and score expressions from part A appear gratuitously in part C (along with extra copies of all the score expressions in part B). I can't figure out why that happens, but you can avoid it by using the Shift/C dialog and selecting only what you want to copy. The only shortcoming I find to using this method is that there is no way to copy measure attached smart shapes along with the entries, so you loose hairpins when copying from part to part - something of an irritation, in my book. Chuck Dear Chuck and Matthew, This baffles me also. The 3 selection check boxes you get on 'copy and filter' put smart shapes and score expressions into the same category, therefore NOT allowing any real filtering. This destroys the whole idea of having a filter in the first place if you ask me - as you can't. BTW, if you hold down opt and shift while in the edit menu you get to do the filter to a clip file, but this still doesn't give you the result of filtering out any score expression but leaving in the smart shapes. Another thing that I find confusing is the reference to the smart shapes (attached to measures) which is in the first check box and then the smart shapes (attached to notes) which is in the third check box, which you actually get into and can make selections from. What's the difference here? I reckon Make Music has made an error in this menu item, because if you highlight a measure with Mass Mover and go to Mass Edit menu to select 'Copy Measure Items' you get to select all the different items from the lists under both Measure Items and Entry Items - something I use a lot when copying music across staves within the same file (in fact I would love this selection to be enabled and 'saved' as a preference...and yes, I've requested it to MM many times!)). I believe that this should happen under the filter menu choice but doesn't - probably a bug. Another annoyance, one which I have written up to MM, contains a similar fault when you use metatool 2 (explode music) with Mass Mover. You'll get staff expressions and slurs that go across to the 'expolded parts but not any hairpins - strange, but a bug also I think? Jonathan ___ 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
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
Hi Robert, Outside is the principal player, and that part appears on top. Chuck On Mar 2, 2005, at 9:35 AM, Robert Patterson wrote: I have an question for the general wisdom of the list. When a string section uses inside/outside divisi, I understand that this implies it is a 2-part divisi where each half is played by a player on each stand. What I don't know is, does the inside or the outside part appear on top in the part? And which is the section principal player: inside or outside? ___ 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
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
From the inside/outside terminology, I had inferred that this was probably the case. What about situations where the string section rearranges so that the 2nd violins face the 1st violins? Do the 2nd violins reverse their usual orientation or do they maintain it? In this situation is the outside actually sitting on the inside or the outside? -Original Message- From: Owain Sutton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2005 05:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi Outside = top part Principal = outside Also, the inside player is responsible for page turns, which can have a bearing on their positioning. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
On 2 Mar 2005, at 14:24, Michael Cook wrote: How right you are. Here Finale gives me the possibility of customizing something I don't need to customize (I still use the traditional icons because they're the only ones that remind me which layer I'm in by showing the whole Simple palette in the layer colour). Thanks Michael for that tip -- I will now always keep the Simple palette open for that one reason. John ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
This is generally true. However, sometimes the outside player must turn. I recently completed engraving a work with divisi throughout. At one point the outside players had a rest while the inside were playing. At that point it is necessary for outside to turn. I think the same thing happens in Holst's St. Paul Suite, although in that place it may have been a peculiar situation where inside/outside were exchanged for rhythmic security. Guy Hayden - Original Message - From: Owain Sutton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; finale@shsu.edu Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 12:50 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi Outside = top part Principal = outside Also, the inside player is responsible for page turns, which can have a bearing on their positioning. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
Simon Troup / 05.3.2 / 10:33 PM wrote: I don't know how many of you have used Indesign - I've been using it a lot recently and every time I go back to Finale the whole interface feels ... well ... 1980's! I don't usually do 'me to' but this one is very true. One thing Finale really bothers me is how window is open. It gets behind tool bar. Page new is not centered, etc, etc. Why do I have to resize window every time I open, is the one frustrates me most. At least you should be able to control how window is open by setting up the default file. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
I generally agree with what Simon said. I wish Finale would take the palette icons from the Globe set (is that Mac only?), which are by far the best-designed palette icons currently available, and make the following changes: 1) Make them all grayscale -- with an option to override that with the item and/or current layer color (i.e., the way the Traditional palette works). 2) Remove the chintzy globe effect. 3) Tighten the grouping -- make the boxes squares again and pack them closer together, so that the palette is roughly the same size as the Traditional set. 4) Improve the current tool highlighting effect so it looks more like the effect used in the palettes in Adobe applications. 5) Add an option to dock the palette in the Mac version. (The Mac version of Microsoft Office actually does an excellent job of letting you dock tool palettes [or toolbars as they call them] anywhere you like.) As you can see, basically I just want them to replace the antiquated, ugly icons in the Traditional set with the much more professional-looking icons in the Globe set, but stripped of the actual globe highlight effect. I actually end up using the Globe icons, despite all its shortcomings (needlessly increased size, etc), because the icons in the traditional set are so ugly, they hurt my eyes. The palettes in Finale have been going steadily downhill ever since they introduced color to them. Coda really needs to take a look at the interface design for InDesign CS for OS X and just emulate that. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 01 Mar 2005, at 10:33 PM, Simon Troup wrote: I have a particular view on the interface, I'm wondering how much empathy there is out there for the same ideas. I'll just say what I think, feel free to disagree. Professional applications don't need multiple choices of icons types, or different desktop choices. One simple, well designed set of icons would suffice. The whole rosewood desktop and vellum paper idea borrowed from sibelius is totally unnecessary and just bloats the app. I think it actually 'cheapens' the application. You don't see options like these in Photoshop or ProTools. The finale interface is just too big, the palettes could be a lot smaller. I'd like to see some effort go into some of the ideas used by Adobe - clickable palettese drawers that zoom back to just tabs on the screen, palettese wells that can hold clusters of paletteses that expand on mouse-over. Docking paletteses. All this would add to screen real estate and make the application more useable rather than merely customisable. If I set up all the current icons on screen they take up a massive amount of space! Customising should be about ergonomics, not style. I don't know how many of you have used Indesign - I've been using it a lot recently and every time I go back to Finale the whole interface feels ... well ... 1980's! -- Simon Troup Digital Music Art - Finale IRC channel server: irc.chatspike.net port: 6667 channel: #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] backwards conversion from 2005 to 2004
On 2 Mar 2005 at 5:05, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: d. collins wrote: Not only [has Coda not] made this promise [of backwards write compatibility], but they have always implied the contrary, as confirmed by the interviews I read. That's precisely my point. Of course, such a feature adds to the complexity of the program, but I recall Tobias saying this would even be doable with a plug-in, so it can't be that much of problem. I don't know how much of a problem it would be, either, and I don't remember Tobias writing this, but if he did, I know just enough about programming and software design that it is simpler to write a plug-in to strip out later features, than to build software to have the capability to do it or not to do it. This is simply not true. Look at how word processing software (which I will agree is much simpler than Finale's file format) implements backward (and sideways, to other file formats) write compatibility: by adding file filters. These are little programs that translate from one format to another. The main application only has to be re-engineered to talk to these translation programs. Keep in mind that when you open a Finale file in any version of Finale, you're not actually editing the original file, but a copy in memory. When you open a file from an earlier version, the memory copy is translated from the old to the new format, without a name. Now, a translator layer would only have to take the memory version and write it back in the older file version. This means that certain features would be dropped, since they weren't supported by the old file format. Word and Excel warn you about this, but the losses are much less significant than what you'd have in Finale. So, there'd have to be some thought go into how to inform the user of what is lost, and also of situations where the conversion is probably going to mess things up. My guess is that the vast majority of situations where backward write compatibility would be useful is with near versions, such as 2K4 and 2K2. It's not like there are too many people out there exchanging files with other Finale users who are using Finale 97 or earlier. So, you're not talking about the *huge* changes that go all the way back to the beginning of time, Finale-wise, but just the changes in file format for a few versions back. Now, to do this *really* well, it would probably be a good idea to re- engineer the Finale file format. One solution would be to keep multiple versions of a file in the same file (Excel implemented this in the 97 version), and then the program would need to keep track of changes in the one version that affect structures in the other version. This works well in Excel precisely because its file format is already structured with content and structure stored separately, as well as with redundancy (formulas are stored, but the results of those formulas are also stored). Those kinds of things apply less well to a database format. But what *can* be done with databases is to restructure your data storage structures to make them easier to be backward compatible. One method for doing this is that when you add a feature that requires a file format change, instead of altering the existing data structure, instead add a *new* data structure linked to the old data structure, and have that new structure store the data for the new feature. A messier way to accomplish this would be to have the old file format in one file and the things unstorable in the old format stored in a second file, and then have the translator be smart enough to recombine (with the caveat that you're going to lose things if you do things like, for instance, deleting frames in the old version). This is all complicated, but it's all *separate* from the main application *if* Finale has been properly designed in the first place. As for the size of the software, I find this a rather amusing argument considering the rest of your post on the size of hard disks and on the necessity of keeping several versions of Finale... Or were you joking? This is partly a matter of comparing apples and oranges. The standard size of hard drives has increased ten fold in about three years and about ten fold in the three years before that. In 1999, a 1 GB hard drive was immense. . . . Malarkey. Dell was supplying 20GB hard drives as standard in 1999. I own just such a machine, bought in Fall of that year. Indeed, even in beginning of 1996, Dell was shipping standard workstations with 2GB hard drives, as I went cheap and downgraded to 1GB (my machine was ordered at the end of 1995, shipped in the first week of 1996). And I had a client who bought a number of Dell workstations between 1997 and 1998 and they all had 4-6GB hard drives -- and those were cheap, low-end workstations. . . . Furthermore, six years ago, the size of memory available for operating systems and softare use was probably 100 times
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
On 2 Mar 2005 at 13:42, A-NO-NE Music wrote: One thing Finale really bothers me is how window is open. It gets behind tool bar. Page new is not centered, etc, etc. Why do I have to resize window every time I open, is the one frustrates me most. At least you should be able to control how window is open by setting up the default file. I don't understand people who don't work with child windows maximized. Why would you want all that blank space in the parent window? Of course, the Mac works completely differently from the MDI on Windows, so maybe you're a Mac user and complaining about something different. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
Most programs nowadays let you download skins and stuff as an option if you don't like the default visual items. Yet some of them can be easily made by anyone who knows how (they're usually png images). Maybe people at Finale can make things like icons, wallpapers or even cursors optionally customizable thru internet downloads. Rafael Junchaya ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
Robert Patterson wrote: From the inside/outside terminology, I had inferred that this was probably the case. What about situations where the string section rearranges so that the 2nd violins face the 1st violins? Do the 2nd violins reverse their usual orientation or do they maintain it? In this situation is the outside actually sitting on the inside or the outside? Yes, they reverse, so the principle is where the cello principal would normally be. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
Guy Hayden wrote: This is generally true. However, sometimes the outside player must turn. I recently completed engraving a work with divisi throughout. At one point the outside players had a rest while the inside were playing. At that point it is necessary for outside to turn. I think the same thing happens in Holst's St. Paul Suite, although in that place it may have been a peculiar situation where inside/outside were exchanged for rhythmic security. Yes, fair enough, there's exceptions. One piece which takes this to an extreme is Roy Harris's third symphony, which has a long arpeggio-based passage with both violin sections divided into fours. The music's very cleverly composed laid out to ensure that the page turns across the eight individual lines are evenly staggered, with the parts that need to drop out being covered elsewhere. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
On 2 Mar 2005 at 14:37, Rafael L. Junchaya wrote: Most programs nowadays . . . Most? *boggle* I have three programs on my computer that have skins (Mozilla, Firefox (which is really one program in a certain sense, but their skins are not cross-compatible because of completely different UI architectures), and Winamp). I don't use anything but the default skins because: I DON'T CARE. Who has the time to test out various skins? And my experience with Winamp skins showed that they aren't just cosmetic -- they can crash the program. . . . let you download skins and stuff as an option if you don't like the default visual items. Yet some of them can be easily made by anyone who knows how (they're usually png images). Maybe people at Finale can make things like icons, wallpapers or even cursors optionally customizable thru internet downloads. I hope no one at Makemusic considers wasting even one minute of time on skinning Finale. What a complete and worthless waste of time that would be. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
Maybe people at Finale can make things like icons, wallpapers or even cursors optionally customizable thru internet downloads. This is the sort of thing I'd want to avoid. This isn't a lightweight instant messaging application, or an MP3 player - it's supposed to be the finest music engraving application money can buy, a top line professional application. To my mind Finale is (huge development budget aside) the Adobe Photoshop of music notation. The problem is the chintzy (thankyou Darcy!) interface makes it look more like CoolKidz PhotoBodger. All this customisation is a reaction to Sibelius, and to my mind development in the wrong direction. I want a modern interface, not net curtains and fancy lamp shades. -- Simon Troup Digital Music Art - Finale IRC channel server: irc.chatspike.net port: 6667 channel: #Finale - ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] JW Divider for OSX
Hello! Tobias has just ported JW Divider to OSX (Finale 2004-2005 for Mac). http://www.jwmusic.nu/freeplugins/ According to Tobias, the small arrow controls don't fully work, so don't report that. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] JW Divider for OSX
Yay THANK YOU, TOBIAS. (JW Space Systems is coming too, right? Please???) - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 02 Mar 2005, at 3:12 PM, Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! Tobias has just ported JW Divider to OSX (Finale 2004-2005 for Mac). http://www.jwmusic.nu/freeplugins/ According to Tobias, the small arrow controls don't fully work, so don't report that. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ 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 Interface, palettes
Maybe I am on my own here, but quite honestly I couldn't care less about the look of the Finale palettes. I still use the Traditional set, simply because it is the smallest. I hope MM is going to repair all the other bugs before they start yet again to change the look of palettes and spend all that time on new icons. Johannes Darcy James Argue wrote: I generally agree with what Simon said. I wish Finale would take the palette icons from the Globe set (is that Mac only?), which are by far the best-designed palette icons currently available, and make the following changes: 1) Make them all grayscale -- with an option to override that with the item and/or current layer color (i.e., the way the Traditional palette works). 2) Remove the chintzy globe effect. 3) Tighten the grouping -- make the boxes squares again and pack them closer together, so that the palette is roughly the same size as the Traditional set. 4) Improve the current tool highlighting effect so it looks more like the effect used in the palettes in Adobe applications. 5) Add an option to dock the palette in the Mac version. (The Mac version of Microsoft Office actually does an excellent job of letting you dock tool palettes [or toolbars as they call them] anywhere you like.) As you can see, basically I just want them to replace the antiquated, ugly icons in the Traditional set with the much more professional-looking icons in the Globe set, but stripped of the actual globe highlight effect. I actually end up using the Globe icons, despite all its shortcomings (needlessly increased size, etc), because the icons in the traditional set are so ugly, they hurt my eyes. The palettes in Finale have been going steadily downhill ever since they introduced color to them. Coda really needs to take a look at the interface design for InDesign CS for OS X and just emulate that. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 01 Mar 2005, at 10:33 PM, Simon Troup wrote: I have a particular view on the interface, I'm wondering how much empathy there is out there for the same ideas. I'll just say what I think, feel free to disagree. Professional applications don't need multiple choices of icons types, or different desktop choices. One simple, well designed set of icons would suffice. The whole rosewood desktop and vellum paper idea borrowed from sibelius is totally unnecessary and just bloats the app. I think it actually 'cheapens' the application. You don't see options like these in Photoshop or ProTools. The finale interface is just too big, the palettes could be a lot smaller. I'd like to see some effort go into some of the ideas used by Adobe - clickable palettese drawers that zoom back to just tabs on the screen, palettese wells that can hold clusters of paletteses that expand on mouse-over. Docking paletteses. All this would add to screen real estate and make the application more useable rather than merely customisable. If I set up all the current icons on screen they take up a massive amount of space! Customising should be about ergonomics, not style. I don't know how many of you have used Indesign - I've been using it a lot recently and every time I go back to Finale the whole interface feels ... well ... 1980's! -- Simon Troup Digital Music Art - Finale IRC channel server: irc.chatspike.net port: 6667 channel: #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 -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] JW Divider for OSX
I just thought, is Tobias going to do JWTimeSig, too? Because, if he is, it may be worth getting the bugs out, first. Back in OS 9 days when I last used this plugin it didn#t handle situations with different t/s for display correctly. I have no way to test this anymore, but I know there were some problems. Anyway, thanks to both of you for working on this, that's excellent news! Johannes Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! Tobias has just ported JW Divider to OSX (Finale 2004-2005 for Mac). http://www.jwmusic.nu/freeplugins/ According to Tobias, the small arrow controls don't fully work, so don't report that. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] JW Divider for OSX
Darcy James Argue wrote: (JW Space Systems is coming too, right? Please???) All the most used JW freeware PIs will most probably be ported. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
On 2 Mar 2005 at 21:24, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Maybe I am on my own here, but quite honestly I couldn't care less about the look of the Finale palettes. I still use the Traditional set, simply because it is the smallest. I hope MM is going to repair all the other bugs before they start yet again to change the look of palettes and spend all that time on new icons. I agree with you 100% and also use the traditional icons (the others are just plain ugly). But I would disagree on one point: it's probably *extremely* easy to design icon sets. I'm sure it's something they farm out in terms of graphical design, and the interface for displaying and choosing them is already in place. Adding an icon set probably doesn't even take any programming, and is likely just a matter of updating a list of icon sets available. All that said, it's still a compete waste of time and money as far as I'm concerned, even if it is only a little time and a little money. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] JW Divider for OSX
My mother thanks you, my father thanks you, my clients thank you, and me, well, that goes without saying... No it doesn't. THANK YOU! We love you, and if you ever need your car washed, baby sitting, a hot meal, a beer, you know where to go. Christopher On Mar 2, 2005, at 3:17 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: Yay THANK YOU, TOBIAS. (JW Space Systems is coming too, right? Please???) - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 02 Mar 2005, at 3:12 PM, Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! Tobias has just ported JW Divider to OSX (Finale 2004-2005 for Mac). http://www.jwmusic.nu/freeplugins/ According to Tobias, the small arrow controls don't fully work, so don't report that. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: FYI
From: Christopher Smith the shape designer can hold at least 11488 shapes... I would send that one on to MacSupport, just for a laugh. i'm not laughing... at least not unnervously. ack. -- shirling neueweise \/ new music notation specialists mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
At 5:35 PM + 3/2/05, Robert Patterson wrote: I have an question for the general wisdom of the list. When a string section uses inside/outside divisi, I understand that this implies it is a 2-part divisi where each half is played by a player on each stand. What I don't know is, does the inside or the outside part appear on top in the part? And which is the section principal player: inside or outside? In standard orchestral seating (1st and 2nd violins together stage right) the concertmaster and principal 2nd are on the outside (the rightmost) chair. Cello and viola principals are on the outside (the leftmost) chair. Principal bass is generally farthest downstage. Outside always takes the top in a 2-part divisi, inside the bottom. It's all automatic. Anything more divided than that, the principal player in each section makes the determination of who plays what. 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
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
At 6:17 PM + 3/2/05, Robert Patterson wrote: From the inside/outside terminology, I had inferred that this was probably the case. What about situations where the string section rearranges so that the 2nd violins face the 1st violins? Do the 2nd violins reverse their usual orientation or do they maintain it? In this situation is the outside actually sitting on the inside or the outside? Outside still means outside--closest to the audience. Yes, the 2nds would reverse their seating, and so would whoever is placed next to the 1sts. 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
Re: [Finale] backwards conversion from 2005 to 2004
David W. Fenton wrote: Keep in mind that when you open a Finale file in any version of Finale, you're not actually editing the original file, but a copy in memory. When you open a file from an earlier version, the memory copy is translated from the old to the new format, without a name. The existence in Options Program options other options of a checkbox, open older documents as untitled, which seems to be checked by default, but which, since this behavior has never been a problem for me, I have never explored, caused me to suspect that your assertion as written above, may not be true. I would have better served, instead of writing six years to write a short period of time. I don't think you really understand modern software architecture. You're right. I probably don't. In fact, I know just enough to make myself appear foolish in messages such as the preceding ones in my thread. I also don't know how much time it takes how many programmers to design an application like Finale from the ground up, but I do suspect that the time involved in person years is significant, and that therefore, if we are to continue to have Finale available at the modest prices we pay (and I know some may not feel that the greater part of $100.00 we pay for the upgrade each year qualifies as modest, but I do) each year, some of the initial decisions that were made when FIN 1.0 and 128, or 256 K were the total amount of memory, and hard drives were measured in MB instead of GB are going to continue to plague us. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
Maybe I am on my own here, but quite honestly I couldn't care less about the look of the Finale palettes. I still use the Traditional set, simply because it is the smallest. I hope MM is going to repair all the other bugs before they start yet again to change the look of palettes and spend all that time on new icons. Hi Johannes. I think you're agreeing in part with what I said - getting back what I called screen real estate. The fact that you couldn't care less about the style shows what a waste of development resources those things are, just another menu item that doesn't need to be there. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] backwards conversion from 2005 to 2004
On 2 Mar 2005 at 15:00, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: Keep in mind that when you open a Finale file in any version of Finale, you're not actually editing the original file, but a copy in memory. When you open a file from an earlier version, the memory copy is translated from the old to the new format, without a name. The existence in Options Program options other options of a checkbox, open older documents as untitled, which seems to be checked by default, but which, since this behavior has never been a problem for me, I have never explored, caused me to suspect that your assertion as written above, may not be true. I see no reason why that would control anything other than whether the copy in memory is unnamed or retains the name. Again, that's not at a level that is entwined within the actual process of conversion. It's entirely external to the actual conversion process. I would have better served, instead of writing six years to write a short period of time. I don't think you really understand modern software architecture. You're right. I probably don't. In fact, I know just enough to make myself appear foolish in messages such as the preceding ones in my thread. I also don't know how much time it takes how many programmers to design an application like Finale from the ground up, but I do suspect that the time involved in person years is significant, and that therefore, if we are to continue to have Finale available at the modest prices we pay (and I know some may not feel that the greater part of $100.00 we pay for the upgrade each year qualifies as modest, but I do) each year, some of the initial decisions that were made when FIN 1.0 and 128, or 256 K were the total amount of memory, and hard drives were measured in MB instead of GB are going to continue to plague us. They've bitten the bullet over the years and re-engineered many problematic components of Finale. They just can't do it all at once. Also, they have to choose things that make Finale more marketable, and I'm afraid people who need multiple versions of Finale (under the current setup) are vastly outnumbered by those who get by just fine with only one (i.e., who don't have to exchange data with people using different versions). -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] TAN: String divisi
Perhaps this is an Early Music thing, but I have played in orchestras, where the 2nds (on the right side) chose to have the principal on the inside. But it's not common practice. Johannes John Howell wrote: At 6:17 PM + 3/2/05, Robert Patterson wrote: From the inside/outside terminology, I had inferred that this was probably the case. What about situations where the string section rearranges so that the 2nd violins face the 1st violins? Do the 2nd violins reverse their usual orientation or do they maintain it? In this situation is the outside actually sitting on the inside or the outside? Outside still means outside--closest to the audience. Yes, the 2nds would reverse their seating, and so would whoever is placed next to the 1sts. John -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
Greetings all, mailing list newbie here. Glad to have found this. The latest version of Finale I am familiar with is 2002, having refused to upgrade beyond that until they fixed some of the basic notational problems in Finale that always seemed to get overlooked -- the eternal problems with tuplet placement, hairpins, disappearing measures, etc --in favor of "composer's assistant" nonsense. As someone who looks at these programs largely as notational tools, I got frustrated. In any case, I stuck it out with 2002 until recently, when I was finally convinced by friends to try Sibelius. I've been working with version 3.1.3 for about 2 months. Certainly things are superior in Sibelius when it comes to the user interface and certain formatting issues (at least in comparison to Finale 2002). But at the end of the day I am most concerned about what comes out of my printer, and Sibelius doesn't even begin to approach the professional look that I can get(after much hair-pulling) out of Finale. And I am frustrated again, because the response in the Sibelius forums is constantly "no, you can't do that (yet)." Anyway: I'm wondering if I can get some feedback on where things stand with Finale 2005 as regards the many problems I am familiar with in F2002, and I'm wondering what the NEW frustrations might be with 2005 (again, as regards notation -- I do not use these programs' composing tools orsound-file generating tools.)At this point I'd considering upgrading if I thought that 2005 was honestly better than 2002. If there is somewhere on the internet where someone has actually documented these things, that would certainly suffice. I don't want to take up too much bandwidth here! ;-) Thanks, Jeffery ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
David W. Fenton / 05.3.2 / 02:33 PM wrote: I don't understand people who don't work with child windows maximized. Why would you want all that blank space in the parent window? Of course, the Mac works completely differently from the MDI on Windows, so maybe you're a Mac user and complaining about something different. You are right. You don't know Mac. Mac WindowServ is not like Win, no parent frame. For that, there is no child windows a la Windows. It is not a matter of the API. In fact, I think Trakton renders full frame, but I can't use it since it crashes with Waves VST. Now, why I don't want Finale go full screen on my desktop, besides it gets under Toolbar (ack!), is that I print system log as well as vm_stack on my desktop. I keep the bottom part of desktop visible all the time. This way, as soon as system log reports something wrong, such as house clock (in my case DTP) goes south, I would know before something bad happen. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
David W. Fenton / 05.3.2 / 04:31 PM wrote: That's one of the advantages of the Windows approach (and one of its drawbacks, too) -- you can run your parent application at 1/2 the screen and then run your document windows fully maximized within the parent window. OK, I admit. I envy Windows for this and alt+hotkey :-) I do have FinaleWin2005, y'know, but I am more comfortable how Mac GUI look. Same goes to Adobe products. Yes, under MacOS, the window position is supposed to be written to pref file every time an app closes. Why Finale doesn't do that, is beyond me :-( ... Back in System7 era, I often saw a pref 'remember window position' on many apps. I don't see them anymore. Huh! -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway: I'm wondering if I can get some feedback on where things stand with Finale 2005 as regards the many problems I am familiar with in F2002, and I'm wondering what the NEW frustrations might be with 2005 (again, as regards notation -- I do not use these programs' composing tools or sound-file generating tools.) At this point I'd considering upgrading if I thought that 2005 was honestly better than 2002. If there is somewhere on the internet where someone has actually documented these things, that would certainly suffice. I don't want to take up too much bandwidth here! ;-) I have no interest in S~ myself, exactly because of the you can't do that in S~ responses I've seen in various forums over the years which I have been able to do trivially in Finale, so I don't look often. In response to a question about comparisons of Sibelius and Finale, I discovered recently that the MakeMusic! website does show a direct, feature by feature comparison with and unnamed leading competitor, but that Sibelius does not see any particular value of providing the same objective data, instead, seeming to prefer unsubstantiated testimonials. Tuplets and expressions were dramatically redesigned in 2004 and 2005, but beyonhd that, I'd suggest that you prepare a list of questions about areas you formerly found problematical, and post that to this list; it will in no way (at least not to me) be a waste of bandwidth. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If there is somewhere on the internet where someone has actually documented these things, that would certainly suffice. Go to the Finale tips site, click on Other Texts. There you have in-depth reviews of Finale 2002, Finale 2003, Finale 2004 Finale 2005. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, mailing list newbie here. Glad to have found this. The latest version of Finale I am familiar with is 2002, having refused to upgrade beyond that until they fixed some of the basic notational problems in Finale that always seemed to get overlooked -- the eternal problems with tuplet placement, hairpins, disappearing measures, etc -- in favor of composer's assistant nonsense. As someone who looks at these programs largely as notational tools, I got frustrated. In any case, I stuck it out with 2002 until recently, when I was finally convinced by friends to try Sibelius. I've been working with version 3.1.3 for about 2 months. ... Anyway: I'm wondering if I can get some feedback on where things stand with Finale 2005 as regards the many problems I am familiar with in F2002, and I'm wondering what the NEW frustrations might be with 2005 (again, as regards notation -- I do not use these programs' composing tools or sound-file generating tools.) At this point I'd considering upgrading if I thought that 2005 was honestly better than 2002. I'm in a position similar to you, regarding my requirements. I use Finale as a tool to created scores, and only that. Playback et al is of no interest to me. If 2002 is the last version you've tried, you'll find some important improvements - in particular tuplets are better (but still not great). Browsing this list will show up particular gripes with other tools, such as text blocks etc. The improved Expression tool in 2005 is saving me huge amounts of time - alignments of expressions are now automated (and that automation is fully adjustable), so things that I used to waste time on getting looking 'just so' can now be predetermined. I guess the problem that we 'serious notators' face is that we're a tiny minority of Finale users, and Finale users are one small section of the market for notation software. For MakeMusic to spend time sorting the things we'd like to see improved means taking time away from the development of what appear to us to be frivolous extras, but actually function as selling-points for the software. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
An often-overlooked area of improvement in Finale versions is the interface for plugins. Both Finale 2003 and Finale 2004 included significant improvements that greatly expanded the power of plugins. Finale 2003 allowed plugins to detect and operate on multiple open documents. Finale 2004 offered more accurate means for a plugin to activate Finale's menu commands. This, for example, greatly improved some of TGTools plugins. My biggest reason for moving to Fin03 from Fin02 was plugin power. I can't imagine going back now. A possible *deterrent* to adopting any version of Finale after Fin03 is the copy protection scheme. Mild compared some, it does nevertheless require you to contact Makemusic to register, which will be a problem if Makemusic is no longer there in the future. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
On Mar 2, 2005, at 4:58 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Yes, under MacOS, the window position is supposed to be written to pref file every time an app closes. Why Finale doesn't do that, is beyond me :-( I had a hard time with the new coloured buttons in OSX when I first started. I couldn't figure out what they were supposed to do, as they all behaved differently in different applications. Darcy told me that the green button was supposed to maximise the window to the borders of the window contents, but that is not true with the two apps I use most often: Appleworks and Finale. Appleworks always makes the window the size of an 8-1/2 X 11 page, no matter what the contents are or what magnification they are at, and Finale always mazimises to the size of the desktop, no matter what the contents of the window are. Safari seems to depend on what site I am on. No wonder I had trouble at first! Chirstopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
On Mar 2, 2005, at 4:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Greetings all, mailing list newbie here. Glad to have found this. The latest version of Finale I am familiar with is 2002, having refused to upgrade beyond that until they fixed some of the basic notational problems in Finale that always seemed to get overlooked -- the eternal problems with tuplet placement, Tuplets are greatly improved with 2005. Still a couple of small issues with the number placement, especially with large intervals under the tuplet, but tuplets that start with a rest or a low note align WAY better than before. hairpins, What did you see wrong with the hairpins? They behave perfectly well as far as I can see. I use TG Tools plugins to help align everything, so maybe I'm spoiled. Automatic expression placement is new and fantastic as well. disappearing measures, I've never seen that. What is that? I have occasionally seen measures APPEAR to vanish, but that is usually because I had a multi-measure rest where I later entered notes, and forgot to turn off the rest. etc -- in favor of composer's assistant nonsense. As someone who looks at these programs largely as notational tools, I got frustrated. In any case, I stuck it out with 2002 until recently, when I was finally convinced by friends to try Sibelius. I've been working with version 3.1.3 for about 2 months. Certainly things are superior in Sibelius when it comes to the user interface and certain formatting issues (at least in comparison to Finale 2002). But at the end of the day I am most concerned about what comes out of my printer, and Sibelius doesn't even begin to approach the professional look that I can get (after much hair-pulling) out of Finale. And I am frustrated again, because the response in the Sibelius forums is constantly no, you can't do that (yet). Anyway: I'm wondering if I can get some feedback on where things stand with Finale 2005 as regards the many problems I am familiar with in F2002, and I'm wondering what the NEW frustrations might be with 2005 (again, as regards notation -- I do not use these programs' composing tools or sound-file generating tools.) At this point I'd considering upgrading if I thought that 2005 was honestly better than 2002. You sound like a fairly serious user. Many of the issues with Finale's built-in functionality are addressed with 3rd-party plugins, some of which will no doubt make you clap your hands and giggle like a child when you first use them (that was my reaction, in any case). They are definitely worth the shareware price, and the time it will take to learn them, though you can try them out first for free. This list is a great resource as well. Many times when I have been frustrated by some seeming lack of functionality, someone on this list has just the trick to make it doable. If you have specific questions, we can answer them. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] New Real Book font
Hi, Does anyone know which is the font used in the New Real Books? Thanks, Roger ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale Interface, palettes
Hi Chris, Presumably the Zoom button in AppleWorks doesn't zoom to an 8.5x11 page if you have a different page size selected for the active document? If not, that's a bug. With Safari, the zoom button takes you to the minimum width specified by the web page, and the minimum height needed to display the site's entire contents (or full-screen height if, as with most websites, you need to scroll down to read it all). If you click it again, it will normally toggle back to wherever it was before you hit the zoom button. If any portion of the window has been dragged off-screen, the zoom button will also reposition the window so that it fits entirely on the screen. You can test all of this on a web page that has a relatively narrow width and short height, like, for instance, the home page of: http://davedouglas.com/ I don't find this confusing at all. Moreover, the behavior in OS X is for the most part extremely similar to the way the zoom button in Mac OS has always worked. The widget *looks* different now (green circle instead of a square inside a box) but the behavior is virtually identical. It's certainly identical behavior in Finale -- the zoom button works exactly the same in OS X as it did in OS 9 and earlier. You'll notice that if you click the Zoom button in Mail, it always maximizes the window. That's because modern plain-text emails don't have a fixed width -- they wrap to the user's window width. Finale's behavior is similar -- it always maximizes when you click the Zoom button, because in scroll view, there's no fixed width, and Finale's programmers didn't want the Zoom button to behave differently depending on whether you are in scroll view or page view. I'm fine with that, because all of my Finale windows are maximized all of the time. What *is* broken is that Finale doesn't follow OS X conventions for remembering window placement, and for stacking (not cascading) new windows when the current (or default) window is maximized. Quite apart from the fact that Finale ignores OS X conventions here, it's an incredible pain in the ass when you open up a set of 18 parts and have to maximize 17 of them. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 02 Mar 2005, at 8:03 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: On Mar 2, 2005, at 4:58 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Yes, under MacOS, the window position is supposed to be written to pref file every time an app closes. Why Finale doesn't do that, is beyond me :-( I had a hard time with the new coloured buttons in OSX when I first started. I couldn't figure out what they were supposed to do, as they all behaved differently in different applications. Darcy told me that the green button was supposed to maximise the window to the borders of the window contents, but that is not true with the two apps I use most often: Appleworks and Finale. Appleworks always makes the window the size of an 8-1/2 X 11 page, no matter what the contents are or what magnification they are at, and Finale always mazimises to the size of the desktop, no matter what the contents of the window are. Safari seems to depend on what site I am on. No wonder I had trouble at first! Chirstopher ___ 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 Real Book font
Hi Roger, The first New Real Book was hand-copied. Subsequent editions (Vol. 2, Vol. 3, the Standards Real Book, etc.) were done with some kind of music notation software, possibly Finale. However, their fonts were developed in-house, and they are proprietary to Sher Music Co. They are not available to the general public. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 02 Mar 2005, at 8:52 PM, Roger Julià Satorra wrote: Hi, Does anyone know which is the font used in the New Real Books? Thanks, Roger ___ 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/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
On 2 Mar 2005 at 20:18, Christopher Smith wrote: disappearing measures, I've never seen that. What is that? I have occasionally seen measures APPEAR to vanish, but that is usually because I had a multi-measure rest where I later entered notes, and forgot to turn off the rest. Well, that does strike me as the kind of problem that no intelligent application should allow to happen. Notes in measures should automatically break multi-measure rests, without the user being required to do anything. I also think that staff optimization should not be something that you have to remove and then re-apply. If you insert new measures, or insert data in previously empty measures (or you clear/hide previously populated measures), if you've got optimization turned on, it should automatically cause the system to re-optimize. I think it's crazy that the optimization information is stored with the absolute system rather than as a global setting that automatically updates the optimization when conditions change to warrant it. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius and Finale 2005/Finale 200x comparison
David W. Fenton wrote: I also think that staff optimization should not be something that you have to remove and then re-apply. If you insert new measures, or insert data in previously empty measures (or you clear/hide previously populated measures), if you've got optimization turned on, it should automatically cause the system to re-optimize. I think it's crazy that the optimization information is stored with the absolute system rather than as a global setting that automatically updates the optimization when conditions change to warrant it. Just for the record, I just had to optimize many parts out of the score, which weren't empty at all. This was possible because the optimization information is stored with the absolute system, and is in fact manually accessable. I do not wish this to be changed, simply because the way it works is ideal for the work I do. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
