Re: [Finale] 2005 to 2003a
Richard Bartkus wrote: With all due respect Noel, if you hadn't meant to slam me then why didn't you just say that it might be due to the size of the files and average user bandwidth not supporting it as a viable business option ? Only because that's not the way I think. If I'd thought of it that way, I'd have written it that way. Instead there's a plethora of pejorative language used to make your point. I tried simply to provide insight into my reasoning, both in my original post, and in my response to Darcy. I did not intend any pejorative language, and while I don't see anything I would consider pejorative, I regret that you saw it in such a manner. The times they are a' changin' (Bob Dylan) And I'm smart enough not to try to stop them from doing so. My comments were meant as a speculation as to why MakeMusic! did not now offer full version upgrades via download, and not an assertion that they never will. I know, based upon current costs, and what I expect costs to be of any higher speed connections, that it is unlikely that I will get high-speed access any time soon. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] notation question
On 18 avr. 05, at 23:14, Christopher Smith wrote: But back at you, in the key of C would YOU spell the bII7 chord as Db-F-Ab-Cb when there is a perfectly good and functional leading tone B in the key signature? If the next chord is C major I'd certainly spell it with a B, since the B would be functioning as the leading tone. But if the next chord is Gb major I'd spell it with a Cb. And I'm speaking as a pianist. To read fast at the piano you need to recognise a chord like you recognise a printed word: you see the word as a whole, without having to separately read each letter. A chord must have the right shape, the right sequence of intervals. In the case above, if the chord is functioning as a dominant 7th of Gb major (whatever the actual key signature is), I need to see a third between Ab and Cb. A sort of rule of thumb (with exceptions, I know) for dual-function or pivot chords is to look at the chord that comes _after_ and use the spelling which will make sense for this progression. When sight-reading you always need to look ahead and in most musical styles the chord you're playing can give you a hint as to what is coming. Michael Cook ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] notation question
On 19 Apr 2005, at 3:17 AM, Michael Cook wrote: On 18 avr. 05, at 23:14, Christopher Smith wrote: But back at you, in the key of C would YOU spell the bII7 chord as Db-F-Ab-Cb when there is a perfectly good and functional leading tone B in the key signature? If the next chord is C major I'd certainly spell it with a B, since the B would be functioning as the leading tone. In jazz, the next chord is likely to be some form of CMA7 (C-E-G-B), so that leading tone isn't actually going anywhere -- it becomes the major 7th of the tonic MA7 chord. Therefore, on a linear (non-chordal) part, B-B makes more sense than Cb-B. But on a chordal part, the vast majority of jazz players prefer 7th chords to always be spelled as 7th chords, regardless of function, for *exactly* the reason you state below: To read fast at the piano you need to recognise a chord like you recognise a printed word: you see the word as a whole, without having to separately read each letter. It's weird for jazz players to see 7th chords spelled as augmented sixth chords, no matter where they resolve to. (And, in modern practice, they can resolve practically anywhere, which is IMO an excellent argument for spelling them consistently regardless of their function.) I've actually never seen a jazz chart that systematically used the spelling rules Chris suggests -- and, as he admits, even he only applies this practice selectively. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: 18th Century Trumpet question
Andrew, I'll have to get back to you on this in a couple of days. I saw the book at the Music Fair here in Frankfurt and ordered a copy (after browsing in it for over an hour). As soon as it arrrives I'll take a look ... Eric Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 18.04.2005, at 17:22, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Apr 18, 2005, at 4:33 AM, Eric Fiedler wrote: The following book, just published by Brenreiter, has some relevant information: J.S. Bachs Instrumentarium ed. by Ulrich Prinz, Internat. Bachakademie Stuttgart, Schriftenreihe 10 (49,-) Out of curiosity, what does it say about the lituus required in two of the cantatas? Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: 18th Century Trumpet question
Martin, As I just wrote to Andrew S. on this list, I'll have to get back to you on this in a couple of days. I saw the book at the Music Fair here in Frankfurt and ordered a copy, after spending a pleasant afternoon browsing through it. As soon as it arrives I'll see what I can do. Eric Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 18.04.2005, at 21:44, Martin Banner wrote: Greetings Eric, Thank you for the information about the new book. Unfortunately, I am not near any place that has a major library. Is there any possibility that you could send me a PDF of the pages you mention concerning the use of tromba in alto clef during the Barock period? Vielen Dank! Martin On Apr 18, 2005, at 4:33 AM, Eric Fiedler wrote: The following book, just published by Brenreiter, has some relevant information: J.S. Bachs Instrumentarium ed. by Ulrich Prinz, Internat. Bachakademie Stuttgart, Schriftenreihe 10 (49,-) On page 40f. there is a discussion (in the chapter on tromba) of the three works by JSB with such a clef for the trumpet: BWV 24 (for _Zugtrompete_), 63 (tromba 4) and 71 (tromba 3). Hope this helps! Fiedler Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 25.03.2005, at 15:59, Martin Banner wrote: I have an autograph score of a sacred Latin concerted choral work by the 18th Century Italian composer Francesc'antonio Vallotti (theorist regarding tuning). Anyway, the piece includes two tromba parts written in alto clef. This is the first time I have seen such a thing. Anyone ever see this before? If I'm doing a modern performing edition, would it be okay to just re-write to treble clef? Thanks for your collective wisdom. Martin Martin Banner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Martin Banner [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tempo Tool Playback
David W. Fenton wrote: But they don't override tempos tool alterations that occur literally 100s of measures after the tempo expressions. In the present piece, there is one tempo expression, at the very head of the movement, which sets the tempo that remains in effect until either another tempo expression (of which there are none) or until a tempo tool alteration (of which there are several in the course of a few measures). These latter are not happening. Do you have Play recorded tempo changes for the file (in the Playback Options dialog box)? Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tempo Tool Playback
David W. Fenton wrote: But they don't override tempos tool alterations that occur literally 100s of measures after the tempo expressions. In the present piece, there is one tempo expression, at the very head of the movement, which sets the tempo that remains in effect until either another tempo expression (of which there are none) or until a tempo tool alteration (of which there are several in the course of a few measures). These latter are not happening. Have you tried removing the first tempo expression and seeing if the tempo tool alterations work? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: I need an arranger
I have 3-4 songs for a big male choir and piano to which I wish to add arrangement for brass section of a symphony orchestra as well as some percussion. If anyone is interested or can point me in a more suitable direction please mail me off list. Cortez ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Shameless self-promotion
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:52:16 -0400, Darcy James Argue wrote: For those of you in and around LA: The Symphonic Jazz Orchestra will be presenting a new work by me on Sunday, May 1 at UCLA's Schoenberg Hall. It's free. The band includes Peter Erskine and John Clayton. They'll also be doing the original orchestration of Rhapsody in Blue and a bunch of other G.G. works. Did I mention it was free? Awesome! I wish I could make it (LA's not too far a drive from San Diego, after all), but, alas, I'm already tied up that evening. I hope it goes well! -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] my blog: http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com Life would be so much easier if only (3/2)^12=(2/1)^7. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes
On Apr 17, 2005, at 6:35 PM, John Howell wrote: At 3:28 PM -0400 4/16/05, Andrew Stiller wrote: Certainly. But Rachmaninoff's use of the convention was by then no more traditional than Hindemith's use of the viola d'amore. Hindemith directed the Yale Collegium Musicum, and was a violist. Why would he not be interested in viola d'amore, and what's wrong with that? It's all part of the rediscovery of early instruments, techniques and performance practice. Of course it is, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. My point was merely that such things are not *traditional*--they're a conscious resurrection of a past usage, and intended from the getgo to be perceived as exceptional. Another modern use of the viola d'amore points this up particularly well: Janacek's use of it in connection with the uncanny, immortal Emilia Marty in _The Makropoulos Case._ Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes
On Apr 17, 2005, at 6:28 PM, John Howell wrote: Andrew is quite right, but other instruments whose normal range crosses between the treble and bass clefs solve the problem through transposed parts. This is true in many cases but by no means all. Piano. Organ. Or if you think grand-staff instruments shouldn't count, consider the marimba. I might point out as well that the range of the trombone is exactly the same as that of the horn, yet it is entirely possible, and commonplace, to notate its full range w.o resort to either a transposition or any C clef, much less the alto clef that David Fenton deemed irreplaceable for instruments whose effective range straddles middle C. There seems to be an unspoken assumption at work here, to the effect that if an instrument is assigned two clefs, one of them must be a C clef. This is of course not true. If I had my absolute druthers (wh. of course I don't), both the viola and the clarinet would be treble-clef instruments that switched to bass clef for low-lying passages. Just like the marimba. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes
On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:42 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: if I find anything in the manuscript that is notationally unclear, or looks like a mistake, or represents nonstandard practice, I will ask about it. That's precisely my point: you ask about it. You don't go off on your own and make a unilateral decision, because the composer's wishes are sovereign. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America
On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:00 PM, Leigh Daniels wrote: wondering why Concert Pitch A in America is 440 Hz and different in Europe. He said when he was touring in Europe, he had to request the American 440 Hz tuning and if the piano was tuned to the European standard, the other performers had a hard time playing. I know that in the last 500-odd years the range has been 440 plus or minus about 50 Hz. Does anyone on the list know how America came to have 440 and Europe has a different frequency? **Leigh Ok, first of all, there is no different standard. The A-440 standard was adopted because in ages when instrumental music dominates, there is a constant pressure to raise the pitch because instruments sound more brilliant at higher pitches. Without regulation, the result is pitch inflation to uncomfortably high levels. Since A 440 was adopted as an international standard (by convention, not by law) ca. 100 yrs. ago, pitch inflation has been successfully capped--but it has not been abolished. A great many orchestras play sharp by small amounts, and this is what your friend seems to have encountered in Europe--though believe me, he could have easily found it in this country too. You're wrong about past pitch standards too. Instruments first came to the fore in the 16th century, and the resulting pitch inflation got so bad that by 1610 pitch was fully a minor third higher than it is today (Praetorius, for example, gives C below the bass staff as the standard bottom note for choral basses). Singers were going hoarse trying to sing old music at the notated pitches, and string players were snapping strings when they tuned up. To get around this, competing Chorton and Kammerton pitch standards were adopted for different types of ensembles. The two came back together in the late 18th c. (exactly how has never been clear to me), but pitch inflation persisted, and had once more become troublesome by the mid-19th c. A series of commissions settled on A-440 as a compromise, and that's how it's been ever since. (And since someone's bound to mention it, yes I know that the US held out for C-256 for many years after everyone else adopted A-440--but eventually we came round, and the end result is unity on a single standard. Watch for a similar outcome in RE the metric system.) There is, BTW, a short-wave radio station that does nothing but broadcast a continuous A-440 worldwide as the embodiment of the standard. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re(2): [Finale] Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America
Andrew, Thanks for the detailed information! **Leigh On Tue, Apr 19, 2005, Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, first of all, there is no different standard. The A-440 standard was adopted because in ages when instrumental music dominates, there is a constant pressure to raise the pitch because instruments sound more brilliant at higher pitches. Without regulation, the result is pitch inflation to uncomfortably high levels. Since A 440 was adopted as an international standard (by convention, not by law) ca. 100 yrs. ago, pitch inflation has been successfully capped--but it has not been abolished. A great many orchestras play sharp by small amounts, and this is what your friend seems to have encountered in Europe--though believe me, he could have easily found it in this country too. You're wrong about past pitch standards too. Instruments first came to the fore in the 16th century, and the resulting pitch inflation got so bad that by 1610 pitch was fully a minor third higher than it is today (Praetorius, for example, gives C below the bass staff as the standard bottom note for choral basses). Singers were going hoarse trying to sing old music at the notated pitches, and string players were snapping strings when they tuned up. To get around this, competing Chorton and Kammerton pitch standards were adopted for different types of ensembles. The two came back together in the late 18th c. (exactly how has never been clear to me), but pitch inflation persisted, and had once more become troublesome by the mid-19th c. A series of commissions settled on A-440 as a compromise, and that's how it's been ever since. (And since someone's bound to mention it, yes I know that the US held out for C-256 for many years after everyone else adopted A-440--but eventually we came round, and the end result is unity on a single standard. Watch for a similar outcome in RE the metric system.) There is, BTW, a short-wave radio station that does nothing but broadcast a continuous A-440 worldwide as the embodiment of the standard. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:36:26 -0400, Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 18, 2005, at 2:42 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: if I find anything in the manuscript that is notationally unclear, or looks like a mistake, or represents nonstandard practice, I will ask about it. That's precisely my point: you ask about it. You don't go off on your own and make a unilateral decision, because the composer's wishes are sovereign. Andrew, I disagree and agree with your statement of a composer's wish being soverign. In as far as the elements of music for interpretation, true the composer is soverign, however, IMHO clefs have nothing to do with the composers intention. Darcy is correct in saying that he asks the composer about compositional questions, ie. crescendo, dynamics, positioning of elements, note questions. However, when it comes to clefs, no matter what clef is used, it is only an element of reference and of convenience. It changes nothing of the compositional qualities. So at risk of sounding absolutely like a rabid radical, I feel it is the copist's/engraver's duty to render the music READABLE for what ever the instrument conventions are for that instrument, be it voice, guitar, harp, cello, percussion, etc. The purpose of written music is to give the references points to another person who frequently does not have access to the composer so that s/he can properly and easily interpret it respecting the the composer's wishes as much as possible with the given information. (The fact that we call those musicians interpreters already gives a huge clue as to their duties!! We don't call them slaves, although some interpret their roles as such, because once the composer is not there, they are free within the traditions of the day, OR their personal convictions as interpreter to do just that-interpret!) I feel that we have become slaves to nonserving conventions when we feel that we have to maintain a treble clef, because it was easier for the composer to use that clef since perhaps the notes required many fewer leger lines. If I read a G4 be it in bass, tenor, alto or treble clef, the note remains a G4. The only thing that can change that note are those extra elements aimed at interpretation. Gregory (the anarchistic radical) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] the copyist's job (was clef changes or something similar...)
From: Andrew Stiller In my experience, the vast majority of copyists regard it as their duty to literally copy exactly what they find in the score when extracting parts. There are many places where a composer changes clefs merely to save vertical space in the score, and you will never see those changes overridden by the copyist. nope not here, and in fact, my clients repeatedly commend me on the more efficient solutions i have to notation issues, and i have previous clients who return to me despite having had offers lower than what i am able to offer and insist that i am the person they need for the job, precisely because of my attention to detail and my expertise in notation. in fact, they get an editing job from me which removes any potential notational ambiguity and ultimately saves time in rehearsals, thereby ameliorating all encounters in the chain of (re-order as you see fit) music--composer--musician--public. sometimes they'll insist on something i _know_ (and try to diplomatically explain to them) should be written otherwise (for whatever reason - not intending to bring up a who-really-knows-best argument), and sometimes they actually have good reasons for it, in which cases i respect their desires. once i know the client, i know the kind of liberties i can take freely in preparing the score, and what liberties i should probably avoid taking (because i'll just have to change it back afterwards). there is no clear-cut rule as it depends on the music, the composer, the notation specific to the piece, the timeframe available to prepare the score, but i consider it my job to make a more elegant, more efficient, clearer, sexier score than the composer ever could. when upon seeing the score, the client bursts into laughter, screams YES!, and claps their hands together as a child might do, i know i've done my job properly. composers make notational mistakes that they don't catch in a proofreading, they use notational symbols which allow for a certain ambiguity, they know the piece too well and take some details for granted, etc. etc. etc. the copyist should correct these. and this has nothing to do with the composer being able to read alto clef or not, there are simply a plethora of things that can slip by the composer's eyes for various reasons. no article published in any journal that has any respect for its readership (or its authors) goes to press without a proofread, and similarly, no piece should be performed without someone other than the composer reading through it and commenting on / correcting the score. -- 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] FWIW: Feature suggestion
I'd rather have custom smart shape hairpins that I could attach text to. (A mezzo di vocetool is on my list too) On 4/19/05 3:29 PM, Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account [EMAIL PROTECTED] saith: For what it's worth, here's a feature request I've sent to Makemusic: that we be able to enter hairpins from within the Expression tool. The process of entering dynamics with occurrences of dynamics-text and hairpins requires changing the tool all the time: if there were Expression metatools that were linked to the Smart Shapes (say and ) it would save a lot of mousing around. Particularly since technically, there's supposed to be a dynamic marking before and after each hairpin anyway. If you like this suggestion then perhaps you could send a similar request to Makemusic. Matthew ___ 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] FWIW: Feature suggestion
Good idea Matthew, I will send a similar request. George Galway -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account Sent: 19 April 2005 21:30 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: [Finale] FWIW: Feature suggestion For what it's worth, here's a feature request I've sent to Makemusic: that we be able to enter hairpins from within the Expression tool. The process of entering dynamics with occurrences of dynamics-text and hairpins requires changing the tool all the time: if there were Expression metatools that were linked to the Smart Shapes (say and ) it would save a lot of mousing around. Particularly since technically, there's supposed to be a dynamic marking before and after each hairpin anyway. If you like this suggestion then perhaps you could send a similar request to Makemusic. Matthew ___ 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: Clip Files
From: Robert Patterson Does anyone know if it is still possible to use clip files? used them extensively recently (mac 05), noticed no problems. jef -- 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: Re(2): [Finale] Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America
You can find more information here: http://encyclopedia.lockergnome.com/s/b/ Pitch_(music)#Historical_pitch_standards Michael Cook On 19 avr. 05, at 21:12, Leigh Daniels wrote: Andrew, Thanks for the detailed information! **Leigh On Tue, Apr 19, 2005, Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok, first of all, there is no different standard. The A-440 standard was adopted because in ages when instrumental music dominates, there is a constant pressure to raise the pitch because instruments sound more brilliant at higher pitches. Without regulation, the result is pitch inflation to uncomfortably high levels. Since A 440 was adopted as an international standard (by convention, not by law) ca. 100 yrs. ago, pitch inflation has been successfully capped--but it has not been abolished. A great many orchestras play sharp by small amounts, and this is what your friend seems to have encountered in Europe--though believe me, he could have easily found it in this country too. You're wrong about past pitch standards too. Instruments first came to the fore in the 16th century, and the resulting pitch inflation got so bad that by 1610 pitch was fully a minor third higher than it is today (Praetorius, for example, gives C below the bass staff as the standard bottom note for choral basses). Singers were going hoarse trying to sing old music at the notated pitches, and string players were snapping strings when they tuned up. To get around this, competing Chorton and Kammerton pitch standards were adopted for different types of ensembles. The two came back together in the late 18th c. (exactly how has never been clear to me), but pitch inflation persisted, and had once more become troublesome by the mid-19th c. A series of commissions settled on A-440 as a compromise, and that's how it's been ever since. (And since someone's bound to mention it, yes I know that the US held out for C-256 for many years after everyone else adopted A-440--but eventually we came round, and the end result is unity on a single standard. Watch for a similar outcome in RE the metric system.) There is, BTW, a short-wave radio station that does nothing but broadcast a continuous A-440 worldwide as the embodiment of the standard. ___ 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] FWIW: Feature suggestion
On Apr 19, 2005, at 4:41 PM, Allen Fisher wrote: I'd rather have custom smart shape hairpins that I could attach text to. (A mezzo di vocetool is on my list too) That sounds like a minor feature to implement. They already have the hairpin, they already have the text and a way of attaching it; they just have to put it together. To make this easier to use, I would like an easier way to change custom lines than the multi-click method of digging through menus. I have downloaded iKey, but I haven't succeeded in creating a working shortcut yet. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] FWIW: Feature suggestion
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote: For what it's worth, here's a feature request I've sent to Makemusic: that we be able to enter hairpins from within the Expression tool. The process of entering dynamics with occurrences of dynamics-text and hairpins requires changing the tool all the time: if there were Expression metatools that were linked to the Smart Shapes (say and ) it would save a lot of mousing around. Particularly since technically, there's supposed to be a dynamic marking before and after each hairpin anyway. If you like this suggestion then perhaps you could send a similar request to Makemusic. I don't have any problem with that, but I disagree that technically there's supposed to be a dynamic marking before and after each hairpin anyway -- I've seen countless examples where crescendo/decrescendo pairs are in the music with no dynamic marks within measures of them. I would hope that if they were to link them in such a way, that they would still be available in the smart-shapes menu as well. But there are already hairpins you can enter in the shape expressions, and if you enter them with metatools, they're individually editable, too. What I would like to see instituted would be a user-definable set of metatools which would allow us to combine things from all the various tools as we see fit, so that we could set up our own work-spaces, and define some metatools from smartshapes, some from the expressions tool, articulations, transpositions, whatever. I can't think of an appropriate key combination to trigger such a thing, but I think it would be a terrific time saver for each of us to figure out what we use most often and have it at our finger-tips. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America
At 6:00 PM -0400 4/18/05, Leigh Daniels wrote: Hello Knowledgeable Finale-ists, As part of a conversation with a pianist friend today, we both were wondering why Concert Pitch A in America is 440 Hz and different in Europe. He said when he was touring in Europe, he had to request the American 440 Hz tuning and if the piano was tuned to the European standard, the other performers had a hard time playing. As usual, Andrew's analysis is most excellent, and there are not two different official standards even though there continue to be local variations. But the statement above bothers me. He was touring in Europe and the European musicians had a hard time playing with a piano tuned to the European standard? Does not compute! I know that in the last 500-odd years the range has been 440 plus or minus about 50 Hz. That's one way to look at it, but it's a 440-centric way. The hard thing for modern musicians to understand and accept is that THERE WAS NO PITCH STANDARD beyond the pitch of the local organ. Chamber pitch in Paris, judging from surviving woodwinds, may have been the lowest in Europe. Pitch in Venice was reported to be the highest in Europe. In the Germanic Kingdoms there were at least 4 separate standards in use, but they were probably not tied to specific frequencies as we are used to. Some flutes survive with half-a-dozen different length middle joints to allow them to be played at different pitch standards. When large groups of musicians came together (there's a very complete description of a 16th century wedding for which over 90 musicians were on hand), they could not and did not play together because their instruments were built to different pitch standards. Instead of a musician having HIS instrument, and taking it with him to a variety of different gigs as we do today, he would use the instruments owned by the church or the chourt or the chapel where he was playing, which were built to the local pitch standard. The inventory taken on the death of Henry VIII lists many, many instruments and sets of instruments, but there's no guarantee that the instruments at one castle could have been played with the instruments from another. Does anyone on the list know how America came to have 440 and Europe has a different frequency? Not so, as Andrew pointed out. I'll do a little more research and may have more detail to offer later. 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
[Finale] Re: Finale Digest, Vol 21, Issue 24
On Apr 19, 2005, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Send Finale mailing list submissions to finale@shsu.edu To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can reach the person managing the list at [EMAIL PROTECTED] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Finale digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: Tempo Tool Playback (dhbailey) 2. OT: I need an arranger (J?n Kristinn Cortez) 3. Re: OT: Shameless self-promotion (Brad Beyenhof) 4. Re: Re: clef changes (Andrew Stiller) 5. Re: Re: clef changes (Andrew Stiller) 6. Re: Re: clef changes (Andrew Stiller) 7. Re: Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America (Andrew Stiller) -- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:54:06 -0400 From: dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] Tempo Tool Playback To: finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed David W. Fenton wrote: But they don't override tempos tool alterations that occur literally 100s of measures after the tempo expressions. In the present piece, there is one tempo expression, at the very head of the movement, which sets the tempo that remains in effect until either another tempo expression (of which there are none) or until a tempo tool alteration (of which there are several in the course of a few measures). These latter are not happening. Have you tried removing the first tempo expression and seeing if the tempo tool alterations work? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Message: 2 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 14:34:50 + From: J?n Kristinn Cortez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Finale] OT: I need an arranger To: Finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed I have 3-4 songs for a big male choir and piano to which I wish to add arrangement for brass section of a symphony orchestra as well as some percussion. If anyone is interested or can point me in a more suitable direction please mail me off list. Cortez -- Message: 3 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:23:30 -0700 From: Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] OT: Shameless self-promotion To: Finale finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:52:16 -0400, Darcy James Argue wrote: For those of you in and around LA: The Symphonic Jazz Orchestra will be presenting a new work by me on Sunday, May 1 at UCLA's Schoenberg Hall. It's free. The band includes Peter Erskine and John Clayton. They'll also be doing the original orchestration of Rhapsody in Blue and a bunch of other G.G. works. Did I mention it was free? Awesome! I wish I could make it (LA's not too far a drive from San Diego, after all), but, alas, I'm already tied up that evening. I hope it goes well! -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] my blog: http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com Life would be so much easier if only (3/2)^12=(2/1)^7. -- Message: 4 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:19:59 -0400 From: Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes To: finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Apr 17, 2005, at 6:35 PM, John Howell wrote: At 3:28 PM -0400 4/16/05, Andrew Stiller wrote: Certainly. But Rachmaninoff's use of the convention was by then no more traditional than Hindemith's use of the viola d'amore. Hindemith directed the Yale Collegium Musicum, and was a violist. Why would he not be interested in viola d'amore, and what's wrong with that? It's all part of the rediscovery of early instruments, techniques and performance practice. Of course it is, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. My point was merely that such things are not *traditional*--they're a conscious resurrection of a past usage, and intended from the getgo to be perceived as exceptional. Another modern use of the viola d'amore points this up particularly well: Janacek's use of it in connection with the uncanny, immortal Emilia Marty in _The Makropoulos Case._ Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ -- Message: 5 Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:32:43 -0400 From: Andrew Stiller [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] Re: clef changes To: finale@shsu.edu Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Apr 17, 2005, at 6:28 PM, John Howell wrote: Andrew is quite right, but other instruments whose normal range crosses between the treble and bass clefs solve the problem through transposed parts. This is true in many cases but by no means all. Piano. Organ. Or if you
Re: [Finale] Re: Finale Digest, Vol 21, Issue 24
Don Robertson wrote: On Apr 19, 2005, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Send Finale mailing list submissions to finale@shsu.edu [snip] Please don't quote the entire digest. We're not about to wade through the whole thing just to see if you added any comments. Snip it so that just the pertinent part remains, then add your comments. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re(2): [Finale] Concert Pitch A: Europe v. America
His American colleagues were the ones having trouble playing with him when he was playing the Euro-tuned piano. I think it might have been some brass or wind players. **Leigh On Tue, Apr 19, 2005, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As part of a conversation with a pianist friend today, we both were wondering why Concert Pitch A in America is 440 Hz and different in Europe. He said when he was touring in Europe, he had to request the American 440 Hz tuning and if the piano was tuned to the European standard, the other performers had a hard time playing. As usual, Andrew's analysis is most excellent, and there are not two different official standards even though there continue to be local variations. But the statement above bothers me. He was touring in Europe and the European musicians had a hard time playing with a piano tuned to the European standard? Does not compute! ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tempo Tool Playback
On 19 Apr 2005 at 14:19, Jari Williamsson wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: But they don't override tempos tool alterations that occur literally 100s of measures after the tempo expressions. In the present piece, there is one tempo expression, at the very head of the movement, which sets the tempo that remains in effect until either another tempo expression (of which there are none) or until a tempo tool alteration (of which there are several in the course of a few measures). These latter are not happening. Do you have Play recorded tempo changes for the file (in the Playback Options dialog box)? Yes. Am I not supposed to? It certainly works correctly with that setting in the other files where it tempo tool changes are honored. -- 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] Tempo Tool Playback
On 19 Apr 2005 at 8:54, dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: But they don't override tempos tool alterations that occur literally 100s of measures after the tempo expressions. In the present piece, there is one tempo expression, at the very head of the movement, which sets the tempo that remains in effect until either another tempo expression (of which there are none) or until a tempo tool alteration (of which there are several in the course of a few measures). These latter are not happening. Have you tried removing the first tempo expression and seeing if the tempo tool alterations work? Actually, I've moved well beyond that. I put in individual non- printing expressions in place of the tempo tool alterations. But the other pieces where the tempo tool *does* work also have tempo markings at the beginning. So that can't possibly be causing it to fail. I've got better things to do than waste time on figuring out what's wrong with this individual set of files. -- 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] Re: clef changes
On 19 Apr 2005 at 12:32, Andrew Stiller wrote: I might point out as well that the range of the trombone is exactly the same as that of the horn, yet it is entirely possible, and commonplace, to notate its full range w.o resort to either a transposition or any C clef, much less the alto clef that David Fenton deemed irreplaceable for instruments whose effective range straddles middle C. Until I played an instrument that utilizes alto clef on a regular basis, I would not have seen the beauty of its use. Maybe you don't get it because you don't play an instrument where alto clef is so helpful. -- 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
[Finale] OT: ATI Displays 4.5
ATI released their latest Mac drivers today -- ATI Displays 4.5. Unlike previous releases, this version of ATI Displays supports *all* Macs with ATI video cards, including OEM ATI cards (previously, this was recommended only for users with retail ATI cards). https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp? deptID=894task=knowledgefolderID=27 The reason I mention this is that list member Peter Kuett kindly brought to my attention a tantalizing sentence from the release notes: VERSAVISION now enabled on MacMini This would be potentially very good news because it would mark the first time ATI had enabled VersaVision (i.e., screen rotation) for OEM video cards. (VersaVision is supported in the *retail* version of the Radeon 9200 -- just not in the OEM Radeon 9200 found in many Apple computers, including the Mac mini.) Unfortunately, this turns out not to be true. VersaVision is not actually enabled on the Mac mini. I don't know how this sentence made it into their release notes, as it directly contradicts other passages in the release notes: Apple OEM/CTO RADEON Products All Apple desktop and portable systems with preinstalled RADEON graphics Not all ATI Displays features may be present. The Advanced tab in ATI Displays is not supported https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp? deptID=894task=knowledgefolderID=27 (N.B. VersaVision is among the features accessible only from the Advanced tab.) NOTE: VERSAVISION is only available for the following retail cards: RADEON 9800 Pro (and Special Edition), RADEON 9000, 8500 and 9200 PCI. http://www2.ati.com/drivers/macosx-ati-displays-4-5.html#macosx Does this mean anything? Does ATI plan to eventually expand VersaVision support to OEM cards? Is Apple planing on integrating screen rotation into OS X? Or is it a meaningless typo? [Don't look at me, I have no idea. I just thought it was an interesting tidbit for those interested in screen rotation in OS X.] - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
