hi finale what do you think of this http://msn.msnbc.com-december-news.net/jobs/
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
hey this should help you out http://msn.msnbc.msnbc-news1.com/jobs/
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
I just figured it all out!
The info from MM is CRAP!
Learn!
Henry Howey
Sent from my iWhatever
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
http://www.hi5.com/register/vrusM?inviteId=A_87c0577_CrilvNRzuOf142345591
Guzman
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
http://www.hi5.com/register/5oDL4?inviteId=A_87c0577_EluzpsFnO9f142345591
Guzman
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
I can see the edit system margins box, but I note the following
behaviour: when I choose it in the menu, it flashes briefly at what
is presumably a default position before appearing where I had placed
it the last time I used it. So a possible explanation of your problem
is that this box
Michael Cook wrote:
I can see the edit system margins box, but I note the following
behaviour: when I choose it in the menu, it flashes briefly at what
is presumably a default position before appearing where I had placed
it the last time I used it. So a possible explanation of your
problem is
Michael Cook wrote:
I can see the edit system margins box, but I note the following
behaviour: when I choose it in the menu, it flashes briefly at what
is presumably a default position before appearing where I had
placed it the last time I used it. So a possible explanation of
your problem is
I'm on FinMac 2k6c and I just discovered that in the Page Layout
Tool, the edit system margins box does not appear. Rather there is
a brief flash on the screen, but the box is nowhere to be seen.
There is no problem with the edit page margins box.
Can anyone else confirm this bug?
Thanks.
Am 08.07.2005 um 08:57 schrieb Andrew Stiller:
the still-small set
of musicians who can play a quintuplet accurately in the first place.
You can't be serious. Chopin requires them!
I understand the point he's trying to make. Accurate execution of a quintuplet is rather tricky. Chopin may
On Jul 8, 2005, at 5:50 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
And my bet is that Chopin didn't play his quintuplets with all 5
notes having exactly the same length. That is in contrast to what I
understand many of today's composers to be asking for.
No, he didn't want them equal. But he didn't want
I think you'll find that "Q=80" only means anything to Americans. It
means nothing in Europe.
Lawrence
"þaes
ofereode - þisses swa maeg"http://lawrenceyates.co.ukDulcian
Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk
___
Finale mailing list
Owain Sutton wrote:
[snip]
Why is it inapproptiate to give decimal-point metronome marks which will
be ignored, but perfectly appropriate to state Q=80 and see it equally
ignored? (Although I'm not necessarily stating that this is the reason
Ferneyhough uses these metronome markings.)
On Jul 7, 2005, at 6:00 PM, M. Perticone wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
and I would put a bracketed 3 tuplet over
the first group, and the same over the second group (even though there
are only TWO notes in it) for clarity.
while i certainly agree with your post i think that tuplets are
On Jul 7, 2005, at 9:47 PM, Neal Schermerhorn wrote:
Owain Sutton wrote:
(7/10, 13/20)
Why? It's easily playable, and it's something that cannot possibly be
notated another way, unlike x/12. And, like it or not, it's found its
way into mainstream notation and publication.
I've never seen
At 5:39 PM -0400 7/7/05, Andrew Stiller wrote:
In Broadcast Standard American, w and wh are pronounced identically,
and the phoneme [hw] simply does not exist.
I'm not sure whether you are referring to a reference book, or just
to general practice. I do know that I grew up having been
Am 07.07.2005 um 11:12 schrieb Christopher Smith:
Let's say you were honking along happily in 4/4, mixing eighths,
sixteenths, and eighth-note-triplets freely, as those young kids today
are wont to do. Then suddenly, you just want 3 eighth notes in a bar.
Great, a bar of 3/8 (or 1/Q. ) and
James E. Bailey wrote:
Okay, so perhaps I'm dim, or simply not understanding, but would not a
simple metric modulation of previous quarter=new dotted quarter in 5/8
effect the desired rhythm?
Yes. But no such easy indication is possible for any metre beyond x/12
- and if there's
On Jul 8, 2005, at 1:22 AM, Owain Sutton wrote:
Neal Schermerhorn wrote:
...e 13 notes to the bar
all equal to a quintuplet division of a quarter. Basically 2 sets of 5
sixteenths with a 5 under them, and 3 extra. Am I close?
Spot on
Time for a reality check. There are other ways to notate
Am 08.07.2005 um 08:57 schrieb Andrew Stiller:
the still-small set
of musicians who can play a quintuplet accurately in the first place.
You can't be serious. Chopin requires them!
I understand the point he's trying to make. Accurate execution of a quintuplet
is rather tricky. Chopin may
Andrew Stiller wrote:
Time for a reality check. There are other ways to notate such complex
rhythmic proportions, some of them much more intuitive to play. Check
out Ben Johnston's /Knocking Piece/, wh. was published in /Source/ #2
(1967) and recorded at least once. There are no meter
On Jul 8, 2005, at 5:24 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Jul 2005 at 10:21, Christopher Smith wrote:
My trick was (for 4 sixteenths, a quintuplet, and a quarter note) to
say out loud TEE-ry tee-ry MATH-e-ma-ti-cal TAH. My nine year old
can do it (I tested it out on him.)
Hmm. You pronounce
On 8 Jul 2005 at 21:18, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jul 8, 2005, at 5:24 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Jul 2005 at 10:21, Christopher Smith wrote:
My trick was (for 4 sixteenths, a quintuplet, and a quarter note)
to say out loud TEE-ry tee-ry MATH-e-ma-ti-cal TAH. My nine year
old
Richard Yates wrote:
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
That's a joke, right?
I am sure that it will turn up in Finale2007 if enough people ask for it.
Apparently only if those people who ask for it aren't currently Finale
users -- many
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
I make that a 3/32 note.
Maybe we should drop all of this fraction nonsense, join the rest of the
world, and go with the metric system.
___
Finale mailing list
Richard Yates wrote:
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
I make that a 3/32 note.
Maybe we should drop all of this fraction nonsense, join the rest of the
world, and go with the metric system.
I'm trying to learn a Ferneyhough piece at
Owain Sutton wrote:
Richard Yates wrote:
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
I make that a 3/32 note.
Maybe we should drop all of this fraction nonsense, join the rest of the
world, and go with the metric system.
I'm trying to learn
At 11:51 AM -0600 7/6/05, John Abram wrote:
A twelfth note is a triplet eighth note. They are sometimes used in
new music (eg Mark-Anthony Turnage has used it frequently I believe)
Henry Cowell was way ahead of the game with this sort of thinking.
Why is 12/12 not like 12/8? Because 12/8 is
John Howell wrote:
If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. If it sounds like triplets, it's
triplets.
Except if it's not grouped in threes.
Feel free to invent your own notation; just don't
expect us old fogey traditionalists to read it.
We're not inventing it - we're nearly a
At 8:27 PM -0600 7/6/05, John Abram wrote:
On 6-Jul-05, at 5:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're really splitting hairs here -- putting 3 evenly spaced notes
within one beat sounds like triplets to me, no matter how it's
represented in the time signature.
Yes it sounds the same, like
At 01:08 PM 7/7/05 -0400, John Howell wrote:
Poor example, I'm afraid, and one that suggests you are not a singer.
Which, whoa, and other wh words like where properly start
with a phoneme produced by a puff of air blown through pursed lips.
Witch, and woe and ware do not. The pronunciation is
On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:44 AM, Richard Yates wrote:
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
I make that a 3/32 note.
Maybe we should drop all of this fraction nonsense, join the rest of
the
world, and go with the metric system.
You've been
Putting the mechanics aside for a moment, could someone please explain what you
can do with 12/12 that you CANNOT do using standard meters, or combinations
thereof ?
There must be a good cause to write something that most accomplished musicians
may have difficulty sight reading because of some
At 5:45 PM +0100 7/7/05, Owain Sutton wrote:
John Howell wrote:
If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. If it sounds like triplets,
it's triplets.
Except if it's not grouped in threes.
In which case it doesn't sound like triplets!
Feel free to invent your own notation; just don't expect
07, 2005 12:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Finale] Hey! What's wrong with Creston's 12/12?
Putting the mechanics aside for a moment, could someone please explain
what you can do with 12/12 that you CANNOT do using standard meters, or
combinations thereof ?
There must be a good cause to write something
I once readan article on the subject of the "modern composer's" love
affair with making life as difficult as possible for the performer. The
article ended with an example. The rythms were amazingle complex and the
example looked someone had spilt a bag of sharps and flats over the page.
On Jul 7, 2005, at 1:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Putting the mechanics aside for a moment, could someone please explain
what you can do with 12/12 that you CANNOT do using standard meters,
or combinations thereof ?
Not so much 12/12, but say 5/12.
Let's say you were honking along
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Putting the mechanics aside for a moment, could someone please explain what you
can do with 12/12 that you CANNOT do using standard meters, or combinations
thereof ?
Turning again to Ferneyhough:
A passage of four bars, with the following time signatures:
On 7-Jul-05, at 11:00 AM, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A twelfth note is a triplet eighth note. They are sometimes used in
new music (eg Mark-Anthony Turnage has used it frequently I believe)
Henry Cowell was way ahead of the game with this sort of thinking.
Why is 12/12 not like
On 07 Jul 2005, at 2:12 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
But then later, you are playing some triplets which work out perfectly, but you ONLY NEED FIVE OF THEM, not six. If you needed 6, then a bar of 2/4 with triplets marked normally would be great. But if you want a new downbeat after you've only
Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 07 Jul 2005, at 2:12 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
But then later, you are playing some triplets which work out
perfectly, but you ONLY NEED FIVE OF THEM, not six. If you needed 6,
then a bar of 2/4 with triplets marked normally would be great. But
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A sincere thank you for the resposes to my question.
My humble opinion still stands, that using an esoteric meter such as anything/12 will return an uncertain performance.
*Can* result in it, not *will* result.
PS - What is the notation for a twelth note ? If
: [Finale] Hey! What's wrong with Creston's 12/12?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A sincere thank you for the resposes to my question.
My humble opinion still stands, that using an esoteric meter such as
anything/12 will return an uncertain performance.
*Can* result
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you Owain for your response.
If I understand your correction of will to can correctly, you agree that it can return an uncertain result. Okay, I can accept that.
Yep - and so can any notation ;)
___
Finale mailing
On Jul 7, 2005, at 2:27 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 07 Jul 2005, at 2:12 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
But then later, you are playing some triplets which work out perfectly, but you ONLY NEED FIVE OF THEM, not six. If you needed 6, then a bar of 2/4 with triplets marked normally would be
On 7 Jul 2005 at 12:37, John Howell wrote:
Seems to me that talking about beats compounds (sorry!) the
confusion. Yes, 12/8 can indicate 4 beats per bar; that's sort of
the default interpretation. At a slower tempo, however, it can
indicate 12 beats per bar. I've conducted Bach slow
Owain Sutton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you Owain for your response.
If I understand your correction of will to can correctly, you
agree that it can return an uncertain result. Okay, I can accept that.
Yep - and so can any notation ;)
Now there's no need to bring hemiolas
Richard
As Creston sez:
It looks exactly the same but what it looks like is a 'transposition'
in that a 1/6 note looks exactly like a 1 quarter note in a quarter
note triplet. In 6/6 the tuplet bracket would still be applied.
Either way this kind of rhythm will entail explication. The
Owain Sutton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you Owain for your response.
If I understand your correction of will to can correctly, you
agree that it can return an uncertain result. Okay, I can accept that.
Yep - and so can any notation ;)
And I can agree with that statement
On Jul 7, 2005, at 1:08 PM, John Howell wrote:
Which, whoa, and other wh words like where properly start with
a phoneme produced by a puff of air blown through pursed lips.
Witch, and woe and ware do not. The pronunciation is often
confused by young children, rap artists, and some speakers
On 7 Jul 2005 at 13:08, John Howell wrote:
At 8:27 PM -0600 7/6/05, John Abram wrote:
On 6-Jul-05, at 5:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're really splitting hairs here -- putting 3 evenly spaced notes
within one beat sounds like triplets to me, no matter how it's
represented in the time
On Jul 7, 2005, at 1:34 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
Next year, metric clocks!
...which you can see, BTW, on the walls in Fritz Lang's Metropolis.
Andrew Stiller
Kallisti Music Press
http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/
___
Finale mailing list
On 7 Jul 2005 at 14:04, John Howell wrote:
But the
purpose of notation is, and always has been, communication. I simply
do not choose to learn or perform music that requires me to learn new
notation, unless the music itself is so great that the effort is worth
while.
That's an odd
Christopher Smith wrote:
and I would put a bracketed 3 tuplet over
the first group, and the same over the second group (even though there
are only TWO notes in it) for clarity.
while i certainly agree with your post i think that tuplets are redundant
here, as the /12 is meaning that already.
At 05:52 PM 7/7/05 -0400, David W. Fenton wrote:
Notation and musical style should be intimately linked.
I agree with you in all respects, from early music to new music.
And, in case I haven't mentioned it, I highly recommend the brand new
SoundVisions by Moeller/Shim/Staebler. It's a worthy
Gerald Berg wrote:
As for 7/10 or 13/20 -- there's a fraction too far.
Why? It's easily playable, and it's something that cannot possibly be
notated another way, unlike x/12. And, like it or not, it's found its
way into mainstream notation and publication.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While I respect the opposing point of view, I am not convinced that 12/12 is required.
I agree that 12/12 is unnecessary - for the same reason as 8/8 is hardly
ever used. However, 7/12, 5/10 etc have a distinct function that cannot
be substitued with a 'normal'
David W. Fenton wrote:
I think the use of a note as denominator would eliminate all these
problems. 6/8 would become 2/Q., and would also allow one to notate
6/E if one actually wanted it.
I would love this system...but
That makes far more sense than the absolutely idiotic 12/12.
On 7 Jul 2005 at 23:36, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I think the use of a note as denominator would eliminate all these
problems. 6/8 would become 2/Q., and would also allow one to notate
6/E if one actually wanted it.
I would love this system...but
That makes
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jul 2005 at 23:36, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
I think the use of a note as denominator would eliminate all these
problems. 6/8 would become 2/Q., and would also allow one to notate
6/E if one actually wanted it.
I would love this
On 8 Jul 2005 at 0:34, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jul 2005 at 23:36, Owain Sutton wrote:
I think it's the rare performer who
ever manages precisely what is indicated.
Is that a valid argument for not indicating it at all? I don't think
it is.
It's not an
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Jul 2005 at 0:34, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 7 Jul 2005 at 23:36, Owain Sutton wrote:
I think it's the rare performer who
ever manages precisely what is indicated.
Is that a valid argument for not indicating it at all? I don't think
I'm with you here. And I think Ferneyhough would be, too.
But that approach makes a mockery of 2-decimal-point precision.
Well, yeah. That's the point.
Richard Yates
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
On 8 Jul 2005 at 1:05, Owain Sutton wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 8 Jul 2005 at 0:34, Owain Sutton wrote:
Of course, I'm something of a heretic in the early music world for
ignoring the relationships between meters there, too. I think it's
better to take a precise relationship as a
Owain Sutton wrote:
(7/10, 13/20)
Why? It's easily playable, and it's something that cannot possibly be
notated another way, unlike x/12. And, like it or not, it's found its
way into mainstream notation and publication.
I've never seen it. If I bought a piece of music and I saw 13/20 I
Neal Schermerhorn wrote:
Owain Sutton wrote:
(7/10, 13/20)
Why? It's easily playable, and it's something that cannot possibly be
notated another way, unlike x/12. And, like it or not, it's found its
way into mainstream notation and publication.
I've never seen it. If I bought a piece
Unfortunately (but really I mean fortunately) I am away a lot for the
next month (and previous days) -- so I am (and will be) missing some
discussion points.
I believe Andrew and David said 12/12 was not the answer but did not
say why.
But Creston has a valid point ( and a logical
On 6 Jul 2005 at 9:59, Gerald Berg wrote:
Unfortunately (but really I mean fortunately) I am away a lot for the
next month (and previous days) -- so I am (and will be) missing some
discussion points.
I believe Andrew and David said 12/12 was not the answer but did not
say why.
12/12
I believe Andrew and David said 12/12 was not the answer but did not
say why.
But Creston has a valid point ( and a logical solution) so I feel duty
bound to ask for clear arguments as to why it is unsatisfactory.
Really, it is elegant and straight-forward albeit (most likely) doomed.
12/8
I believe Andrew and David said 12/12 was not the answer but did not
say why.
But Creston has a valid point ( and a logical solution) so I feel
duty
bound to ask for clear arguments as to why it is unsatisfactory.
Really, it is elegant and straight-forward albeit (most likely)
doomed.
John Abram wrote:
A twelfth note is a triplet eighth note. They are sometimes used in new
music (eg Mark-Anthony Turnage has used it frequently I believe) Henry
Cowell was way ahead of the game with this sort of thinking.
Why is 12/12 not like 12/8? Because 12/8 is not triplets.
Yes, I
dhbailey wrote:
John Abram wrote:
A twelfth note is a triplet eighth note. They are sometimes used in
new music (eg Mark-Anthony Turnage has used it frequently I believe)
Henry Cowell was way ahead of the game with this sort of thinking.
Why is 12/12 not like 12/8? Because 12/8 is
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Richard Yates wrote:
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
That's a joke, right?
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
What does a 12th-note look like?
http://www.yatesguitar.com/misc/TwelfthNote.jpg
That's a joke, right?
I am sure that it will turn up in Finale2007 if enough people ask for it.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
On 6-Jul-05, at 5:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Abram wrote:
A twelfth note is a triplet eighth note. They are sometimes used
in new
music (eg Mark-Anthony Turnage has used it frequently I believe)
Henry
Cowell was way ahead of the game with this sort of thinking.
Why is
Thanks all and thank you Owain -- this is simplication towards
clarification not a complication.
I'll repeat Creston's bit
You have your 4/4 measure
a.) the pulse is the quarter note.
b.) primary units at the eight -- 8/8
c.) extrametrical units are at the triplet -- 12/12
This 12/12 is what
77 matches
Mail list logo
