[Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Hello! I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Enjoy! Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re:[Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Thanks, Jari! Excellent review. Good explanation of staff changes. I'll return to your review when Fin2011 arrives. Thanks for posting! Raymond Horton Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Enjoy! 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 2011 Review
On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:02 pm, Jari Williamsson wrote: I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Biggest question not answered: Is it worth getting? For new music, that is. I installed 2010 but only used it once (didn't get my money's worth there, that's for sure) -- still using 2007. Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
I find it interesting that the description of the Mult-user feature sounds like MakeMusic may have gotten it WRONG. Vista/Win7 have a major departure for where application-specific data (as opposed to user-specific data) is to be stored. To understand that, you have to distinguish 3 types of files: 1. application files -- not data, are read-only. Same data used by everyone. 2. application configuration files -- data, but for storing data that the app uses when it runs. Needs to be stored per user, since different users have different app configurations. Read/write for the user. 3. user data files -- data that belongs to a user, and is the data files for the application. Read/write for the user. Before Vista/Win7, #1 was stored in C:\Program Files and the other two were stored in the user profile. Under the user profile there were two filders, Application Data and Local Settings, the purpose of which were not always clear, and that were used differently by different application developers. To further confuse things, under Local Settings, there's an Application Data folder. These folders were actually original an effort to separate out different kinds of data used by the applications, but the guidelines for it were never quite clear, and a lot of developers got this wrong. Add to this the fact that way too many standalone Windows users were running in an administrative logon, and it was possible to get away with putting all the read/write data in the application folder (by default, C:\Program Files), which for regular user-level logons is read-only (and has been since Windows 2000, released in 1999). In fact, major software suppliers like Intuit have been writing their flagship applications based on the assumption of write access to C:\Program Files such that any user trying to run with user-level permissions only will have problems (QuickBooks requires at least Power User permissions, for instance). Vista changed that with User Access Control (UAC). UAC works kind of like most other OS's by running all apps by default with a user-level security token, and asking the user for permission when the app wants to do something that requires more than user-level permission. Vista's implementation of UAC was very noisy, i.e., it asked for way too many approvals and caused many people to turn it off (so you'd be running with a security token that was equivalent to the highest-level security group the user logon was a member of). Win7 has fixed most of that by being much more sensible about what it prompts about. Now, in addition to UAC, MS revised the permissions on the application data folders under the user profile. Before Vista, those folders were all read/write for users (since they were in the user's profile), but with Vista, this was changed so that AppData was read- only for users. Vista/Win7 added another wrinkle by reorganizing data. To quote MS's documentation (http://tinyurl.com/yccs3c = http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/b/a/3ba6d659-6e39-4cd7-b3a2- 9c96482f5353/Managing%20Roaming%20User%20Data%20Deployment%20Guide.doc ): Windows Vista also has changed the Application Data folder structure. Previous user profiles did not logically sort data stored in the Application Data folder, making it difficult to distinguish data that belonged to the machine from data belonging to the user. Windows Vista addresses this issue by creating a single AppData folder under the user profile. The AppData folder contains three subfolders: Roaming, Local, and LocalLow. Windows uses the Local and LocalLow folders for application data that does not roam with the user. Usually this data is either machine specific or too large to roam. The AppData\Local folder in Windows Vista is the same as the Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application Data folder in Windows XP. Windows uses the Roaming folder for application specific data, such as custom dictionaries, which are machine independent and should roam with the user profile. The AppData\Roaming folder in Windows Vista is the same as the Documents and Settings\username\Application Data folder in Windows XP. (this explanation also clarifies the distinction between \Application Data\ and \Local Settings\Application Data\) Thus, the fact that Jari reports that Finale has been changed to store Finale-specific settings in \Application Data\MakeMusic\ shows that either Jari is mistaken, or that MakeMusic has not fully absorbed the implications of Vista/Win7. Of course, it could be that what Jari reports is just shorthand, and that's the location for the data on WinXP and earlier, and it's stored in the appropriate location on Vista/Win7, but I worry that there's no apparent distinction between the two types of application-specific data (i.e., specific to computer vs. specific to user). This may be because Finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Enjoy! Best regards, Jari Williamsson Thanks for the review, Jari, but isn't there any criticism at all?? Barbara ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
On 6/4/2010 1:14 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: Thus, the fact that Jari reports that Finale has been changed to store Finale-specific settings in \Application Data\MakeMusic\ shows that either Jari is mistaken, or that MakeMusic has not fully absorbed the implications of Vista/Win7. Most likely, it shows that Jari is running WinXP, as his screen shots indicate. Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Digital piano/master controller recommendations?
For the curious: I went with this bundle: http://www.kraftmusic.com/catalog/keyboards/88keykeyboards/index.asp?product=5220 The only difference is that the Tascam VLA4's are discontinued, so they offered me an upgrade to the M-Audio BX5a's for an additional $75. (This is a steal -- those monitors normally go for $240/pair, and they sound great.) In my experience, Yamaha digital pianos still have the best action of any digital piano. The CP33 doesn't have the wooden keys found on the latest CP series instruments, but I've tried the CP3's graded hammer action on other keyboards and it's not bad. It's got a bit of heft to it, which I much prefer to Roland's excessively light action. Yamaha's expertise making real pianos is obviously a huge benefit here. While it obviously falls short of the big software sample libraries, I'm actually reasonably impressed with the built-in piano sounds on the CP33. I'll probably make do with the built-in sounds for now, at least until I can afford Garritan's Steinway or Synthology's Ivory. And the convenience of being able to turn on the keyboard and play immediately, without having to futz around with computer software (and without having to worry about latency) is a great benefit. The instrument is still in transit so who knows what my impressions will be once I actually get hold of the thing, but this seemed like too good of a deal to pass up. Cheers, - DJA - WEB: http://www.secretsocietymusic.org On 3 Jun 2010, at 12:21 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: Hey all, I think it is finally time to replace my Yamaha P300 digital piano, which is almost 16 years old now and is beginning to show its age -- several keys have become unresponsive, and the instrument has suddenly developed a noticeable warble on every patch. (A full factory reset did not solve the problem.) I'm thinking of going with a master keyboard controller plus software instrument -- most likely the Pro version of the Garritan Steinway, which sounds head and shoulders above everything else I've heard (based on the available online samples, at least). But I'm open to alternatives if anyone has suggestions. Where I'm most in need of advice is with regard to the keyboard controller -- I'm looking for a nice, authentically piano-like weighted action. Don't need any onboard sounds. Don't want to break the bank. I'm hoping to get a complete package (including a pair of studio monitors I can place on top of the keyboard) for under $1000 (and the Garritan software is $400). Cheers, - DJA - WEB: http://www.secretsocietymusic.org ___ 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 2011 Review
For new music? If you do a lot of music with lyrics, I'd say get it. It is much, much easier and faster to get good lyric spacing with the new version. For me, the upgrade is worth it for this improvement alone. Apart from that, the improvements in the way staff spacing is handled are very welcome, even if they may not be quite so important for a seasoned user. For new users, these changes should make staff spacing easier and more intuitive: they will never have to learn the process of optimization. I find it very useful that now you see all the music moving in real time with a staff when you move it up or down. Michael On 4 Jun 2010, at 19:02, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: On Fri, June 4, 2010 12:02 pm, Jari Williamsson wrote: I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Biggest question not answered: Is it worth getting? For new music, that is. I installed 2010 but only used it once (didn't get my money's worth there, that's for sure) -- still using 2007. Dennis ___ 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 2011 Review
On 4 Jun 2010 at 13:35, Aaron Sherber wrote: On 6/4/2010 1:14 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: Thus, the fact that Jari reports that Finale has been changed to store Finale-specific settings in \Application Data\MakeMusic\ shows that either Jari is mistaken, or that MakeMusic has not fully absorbed the implications of Vista/Win7. Most likely, it shows that Jari is running WinXP, as his screen shots indicate. But the point is that even then, it's not a fully correct implementation, as some of that application-specific data belongs in \Local Settings\Application Data\ even on WinXP (and Win2003 Server and Win2000). -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Hi David, Just to clarify, Finale 2011 stores application specific information to the following folder on Win Vista/7: C:\ProgramData\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 Anything that is user editable, Finale will write to the user's roaming folder: C:\Users\your user name\AppData\Roaming\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 Justin Phillips Notation Product Specialist MakeMusic, Inc. 7615 Golden Triangle Drive, Suite M Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3848 Direct: (952) 818-3819 Sales: (800) 843-2066 Technical Support: (952) 937-9703 Fax: (952) 937-9760 -Original Message- From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu [mailto:finale-boun...@shsu.edu] On Behalf Of David W. Fenton Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:14 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review I find it interesting that the description of the Mult-user feature sounds like MakeMusic may have gotten it WRONG. Vista/Win7 have a major departure for where application-specific data (as opposed to user-specific data) is to be stored. To understand that, you have to distinguish 3 types of files: 1. application files -- not data, are read-only. Same data used by everyone. 2. application configuration files -- data, but for storing data that the app uses when it runs. Needs to be stored per user, since different users have different app configurations. Read/write for the user. 3. user data files -- data that belongs to a user, and is the data files for the application. Read/write for the user. Before Vista/Win7, #1 was stored in C:\Program Files and the other two were stored in the user profile. Under the user profile there were two filders, Application Data and Local Settings, the purpose of which were not always clear, and that were used differently by different application developers. To further confuse things, under Local Settings, there's an Application Data folder. These folders were actually original an effort to separate out different kinds of data used by the applications, but the guidelines for it were never quite clear, and a lot of developers got this wrong. Add to this the fact that way too many standalone Windows users were running in an administrative logon, and it was possible to get away with putting all the read/write data in the application folder (by default, C:\Program Files), which for regular user-level logons is read-only (and has been since Windows 2000, released in 1999). In fact, major software suppliers like Intuit have been writing their flagship applications based on the assumption of write access to C:\Program Files such that any user trying to run with user-level permissions only will have problems (QuickBooks requires at least Power User permissions, for instance). Vista changed that with User Access Control (UAC). UAC works kind of like most other OS's by running all apps by default with a user-level security token, and asking the user for permission when the app wants to do something that requires more than user-level permission. Vista's implementation of UAC was very noisy, i.e., it asked for way too many approvals and caused many people to turn it off (so you'd be running with a security token that was equivalent to the highest-level security group the user logon was a member of). Win7 has fixed most of that by being much more sensible about what it prompts about. Now, in addition to UAC, MS revised the permissions on the application data folders under the user profile. Before Vista, those folders were all read/write for users (since they were in the user's profile), but with Vista, this was changed so that AppData was read- only for users. Vista/Win7 added another wrinkle by reorganizing data. To quote MS's documentation (http://tinyurl.com/yccs3c = http://download.microsoft.com/download/3/b/a/3ba6d659-6e39-4cd7-b3a2- 9c96482f5353/Managing%20Roaming%20User%20Data%20Deployment%20Guide.doc ): Windows Vista also has changed the Application Data folder structure. Previous user profiles did not logically sort data stored in the Application Data folder, making it difficult to distinguish data that belonged to the machine from data belonging to the user. Windows Vista addresses this issue by creating a single AppData folder under the user profile. The AppData folder contains three subfolders: Roaming, Local, and LocalLow. Windows uses the Local and LocalLow folders for application data that does not roam with the user. Usually this data is either machine specific or too large to roam. The AppData\Local folder in Windows Vista is the same as the Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\Application Data folder in Windows XP. Windows uses the Roaming folder for application specific data, such as custom dictionaries, which are machine independent and should roam with the user profile. The AppData\Roaming folder in Windows Vista is the same as the Documents and Settings\username\Application
Re: [Finale] Digital piano/master controller recommendations?
NICE-Good luck with your new setup:) PS I must be honest.I have NO discernible latency-- but yes turning it on is flipping.the controller, and a drive on plus the computer software--sequencer or standalone. On Jun 4, 2010, at 1:49 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: And the convenience of being able to turn on the keyboard and play immediately, without having to futz around with computer software (and without having to worry about latency) is a great benefit. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
On 4 Jun 2010 at 13:04, Phillips, Justin wrote: Just to clarify, Finale 2011 stores application specific information to the following folder on Win Vista/7: C:\ProgramData\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 Anything that is user editable, Finale will write to the user's roaming folder: C:\Users\your user name\AppData\Roaming\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 If that is actually correct, then it's not 100% correct. However, I'm not clear on your terminology, as you aren't maintaining the same distinctions between read-only application files, user- specific application configuration data, PC-specific application configuration data, and user data. The only thing that should be in the Roaming folder is the user-specific application configuration data. Have you checked the other folders under AppData (Local and LocalLow)? -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Jari, Fantastic! You did a great job, as usual. I left a comment on the site, the gist of it being that a list of bug fixes would be appreciated, being very important to some of us. MakeMusic doesn't even publicise complete lists (they leave off many important ones), which I don't understand since they would be such obvious selling points. That's my only negative; everything else is great! Christopher On Fri Jun 4, at FridayJun 4 12:02 PM, Jari Williamsson wrote: Hello! I've posted a Finale 2011 Review (with a few usage tips as well) on the Finale productivity tips site: http://www.finaletips.nu Enjoy! 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 2011 Review
Hi David, Here is the link to the 2011 manual's listing of file locations: http://www.finalemusic.com/UserManuals/Finale2011Win/Content/Finale/FinaleInstallationDetails.htm Justin Phillips Notation Product Specialist MakeMusic, Inc. 7615 Golden Triangle Drive, Suite M Eden Prairie, MN 55344-3848 Direct: (952) 818-3819 Sales: (800) 843-2066 Technical Support: (952) 937-9703 Fax: (952) 937-9760 -Original Message- From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu [mailto:finale-boun...@shsu.edu] On Behalf Of David W. Fenton Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 1:27 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review On 4 Jun 2010 at 13:04, Phillips, Justin wrote: Just to clarify, Finale 2011 stores application specific information to the following folder on Win Vista/7: C:\ProgramData\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 Anything that is user editable, Finale will write to the user's roaming folder: C:\Users\your user name\AppData\Roaming\MakeMusic\Finale 2011 If that is actually correct, then it's not 100% correct. However, I'm not clear on your terminology, as you aren't maintaining the same distinctions between read-only application files, user- specific application configuration data, PC-specific application configuration data, and user data. The only thing that should be in the Roaming folder is the user-specific application configuration data. Have you checked the other folders under AppData (Local and LocalLow)? -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ 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 2011 Review
On 4 Jun 2010 at 13:39, Phillips, Justin wrote: Here is the link to the 2011 manual's listing of file locations: http://www.finalemusic.com/UserManuals/Finale2011Win/Content/Finale/Fi naleInstallationDetails.htm All appears to be correctly implemented, though it doesn't account for the distinction between roaming and non-roaming data, it seems. I assume that's because there's an assumption that Finale is not likely to be installed in an environment with roaming profiles? -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Glancing through Jari's review, what catches my attention is the modification of the Staff Usage dialog box, since I use that dialog routinely (which I gather most users don't). Showing the staff label instead of just the number is nice. I also can see why they've altered the input so that you enter the difference between the staff's position and the previous staff's position. That way if you need to add space between the top two staves, it automatically bumps the rest down by the same amount. Most of my music is piano-vocal, so I've only got three staves anyway, but I can see how it would save even more time in a full score. What I very much DON'T like, if I'm reading the dialog box illustration on Jari's page correctly, is that the distance from the top staff now is not displayed at all. Even if the input is for distance between systems, can't they still display the total distance somewhere in the window so I still have it as reference? This is a downgrade for me because I use that number. As I've mentioned, I edit Staff Usage for pretty much every system in every piece I do (and if I don't edit, it's because I've made a conscious decision to leave it where it is, in which case I still know the position). Seeing the distance of the bottom staff in each system tells me how much vertical space I'm using up within the systems, so I know how much space I have remaining to fill in between systems. Without that number, I've got to add the two staff-to-staff numbers. My standard work is piano-vocal with four systems on a page, so that's the difference between four numbers and eight numbers, which is pretty much the difference between keeping track in my head or breaking out the calculator for every page. This is one more in a long line of changes that make the program more user-friendly for most users but less convenient for detail-oriented control-freaks like me. In the larger scheme of things it’s pretty minor, but it seems so unnecessary. For one thing, if anything ought to be tailored to users like me, surely it’s this dialog box. I use it all the time, but when it came up on the list a few weeks ago I got the impression many users didn’t even know it exists. I figure the rest of you just drag your staves around anyway, right? More important, I’m not even objecting to the basic UI changes. I think those are fine. I’m just mad that they have removed useful information. Why can’t they update the UI and leave the information still there for those of us who make use of it? Is it really that important to make the window look less cluttered for everyone else? I don’t expect to upgrade to v2001 anyway, but I’m curious. Where else do you go when you want to see exactly how tall a system is? I’m used to finding this in Staff Usage for the bottom staff because that's a familiar dialog box for me. Is it displayed somewhere else that I’m not thinking of? mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
On 4 Jun 2010 at 12:23, Mark D Lew wrote: This is one more in a long line of changes that make the program more user-friendly for most users but less convenient for detail-oriented control-freaks like me. For me, personally, that change is a huge help. I NEVER need to know the distance from the top staff (though the way you describe your usage of it, I might well have been better off paying attention to it). I don't drag staves -- I manually calculate the distance from the top staff for each stave. Well, to be more specific, I drag to a general location, then fix the spacing by calculating. For instance, I started a new score last night, 2 sopranos, 5 viols, and a 2-staff basso continuo. I actually started this one by copying an existing score, but if I were creating it from scratch, I'd set things by eye, then use manual calculations to figure the proper distance between the viol staves (which should all be equal). To do that, I'd set the top staff by eye, then the bottom staff by eye, then figure out what the distance should be between the intervening staves. Even the new system doesn't really change this, it just makes the calculations easier. There really ought to be a feature where you select a number of contiguous staves and tell Finale to space them evenly vertically. Or maybe a setting for a staff group, where you could set the inter- group spacing, so you could change that one number and change the whole group at once. These are the things that I think would make things a lot easier, whereas the change you are complaining about is really quite incremental. It makes the older task somewhat easier for most of us, but it's still the WRONG task! I also don't see why one shouldn't have the option to display either the between-staff distance or the distance from the top staff. It could default to the new setting. Being able to flip back and forth between the two measurements would be quite useful, I'd think. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Barbara Touburg wrote: Thanks for the review, Jari, but isn't there any criticism at all?? The points I make in the review are: * The distances that displays at staff dragging doesn't go the full way implementation-wise. * To not be able to get mid-system brackets easily seems wrong and illogical to me with the new design. * The auto-capo implementation doesn't go deep enough for some needs. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
David W. Fenton wrote: I also don't see why one shouldn't have the option to display either the between-staff distance or the distance from the top staff. It could default to the new setting. Being able to flip back and forth between the two measurements would be quite useful, I'd think. I don't mind *entering* the distance between staves. That actually makes sense to me. I just want the distance from the top to still appear. So for example if I'm in a piano vocal score and my RH staff is at -72pts and my LH staff is at -132pts (I'm used to points as my default unit, which are actually 75% points because of system reduction) and say I want to add two spaces of room between piano staves. I would select the LH staff, it would show 60pts as the distance that I can change, and -132 would appear somewhere as distance from top. I can enter 72 in place of the 60 and the -132 would update to -144. I would be completely happy with that. There really ought to be a feature where you select a number of contiguous staves and tell Finale to space them evenly vertically. I was under the impression that this function exists. Perhaps it was introduced since your latest upgrade? Or maybe I'm just remembering wrong. Most of my work is piano-vocal so I haven't had need for it since my own upgrade. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
Mark D Lew wrote: What I very much DON'T like, if I'm reading the dialog box illustration on Jari's page correctly, is that the distance from the top staff now is not displayed at all. Even if the input is for distance between systems, can't they still display the total distance somewhere in the window so I still have it as reference? I suggest you contact MakeMusic (even if you don't upgrade to Fin2011) and ask that they should keep the old way as well. Or display the distance as text as you suggested. They might expand the dialog box in a maintenance release, since staff layout is one of the focuses on Finale 2011. After all, it's just a dialog box change and it doesn't affect the file format. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
I suggest you contact MakeMusic (even if you don't upgrade to Fin2011) and ask that they should keep the old way as well. Or display the distance as text as you suggested. Yeah, I'll add it to my list. For so many years I was so far behind on upgrading it seemed almost meaningless to make feature requests. Now that I'm in v2010 I'm at least pretty close, so I'm hoping to compile a list to send in. I have other much higher priorities than this one, of course, but if it's an easy fix then that's great. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2011 Review
At 4:01 PM -0400 6/4/10, David W. Fenton wrote: There really ought to be a feature where you select a number of contiguous staves and tell Finale to space them evenly vertically. Composer's Mosaic had this capability back in about 1992, so it can't be that difficult to program. And it helped made page layout, which was NOT automatic, quick and easy. Of course there was a lot that Mosaic did NOT have, too. John -- John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music Virginia Tech Department of Music College of Liberal Arts Human Sciences Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A. 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:john.how...@vt.edu) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html We never play anything the same way once. Shelly Manne's definition of jazz musicians. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
