The following 8th notes (treble clef)
b (on 1st top ledger line), g, e, g, (all same octave), beamed together
(beam below).
Should this beam be horizontal, or slanted (down, obviously)?
I can't really find a similar case in Ross.
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
I'd say horizontal. I don't know of any theoretical rule here, but to
me the slanted beam just doesn't look right.
Michael Cook
On 5 Nov 2005, at 12:55, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The following 8th notes (treble clef)
b (on 1st top ledger line), g, e, g, (all same octave), beamed
together
That was my impression, too. Only, the publisher has just send me a file
back, asking lots of such situations to be slanted. Looks very strange
to me, but what can I do?
Johannes
On 05.11.2005 Michael Cook wrote:
I'd say horizontal. I don't know of any theoretical rule here, but
to me the
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
Looks very strange
to me, but what can I do?
You aren't going to find any rulebook that tells you whether that beam
should be slanted or not. Is this not a case where you make the customer
pay? Obviously, I don't know the details of your contract, but if it
were
On Nov 5, 2005, at 6:55 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The following 8th notes (treble clef)
b (on 1st top ledger line), g, e, g, (all same octave), beamed
together (beam below).
Should this beam be horizontal, or slanted (down, obviously)?
I can't really find a similar case in Ross.
In
On 05.11.2005 Robert Patterson wrote:
You aren't going to find any rulebook that tells you whether that
beam should be slanted or not. Is this not a case where you make the
customer pay? Obviously, I don't know the details of your contract,
but if it were me, any edits requiring significant
On Nov 5, 2005, at 6:55 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The following 8th notes (treble clef)
b (on 1st top ledger line), g, e, g, (all same octave), beamed
together (beam below).
Should this beam be horizontal, or slanted (down, obviously)?
If you mean this literally, that is, B above the
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
That was my impression, too. Only, the publisher has just send me a file
back, asking lots of such situations to be slanted. Looks very strange
to me, but what can I do?
Until you've cashed their check, nothing except make them slanted.
I'd vote for horizontal as
On 05.11.2005 Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Nov 5, 2005, at 6:55 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The following 8th notes (treble clef)
b (on 1st top ledger line), g, e, g, (all same octave), beamed
together (beam below).
Should this beam be horizontal, or slanted (down, obviously)?
If you mean
Hi Johannes,
Flat looks better to my eyes because the figure seems centered around
one note, even though the last note is lower than the first, and the
flat beam expresses that. I even tried entering a descending figure
afterward, in order to see if that influenced my response - making
On 5 Nov 2005 at 8:07, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 05.11.2005 David W. Fenton wrote:
Even with mirrors?
Or even just waiting until the piece is finished and just copying
the data to separate staves?
Of course, it it's only for proofreading playback, I can see why you
wouldn't want
On 5 Nov 2005 at 10:03, Chuck Israels wrote:
Flat looks better to my eyes because the figure seems centered around
one note, even though the last note is lower than the first, and the
flat beam expresses that. I even tried entering a descending figure
afterward, in order to see if that
On Nov 5, 2005, at 11:40 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 5 Nov 2005 at 10:03, Chuck Israels wrote:
Flat looks better to my eyes because the figure seems centered around
one note, even though the last note is lower than the first, and the
flat beam expresses that. I even tried entering a
On 05.11.2005 Chuck Israels wrote:
My taste in this has been deeply influenced by the combination of
using Johannes' recommended settings and Patterson Beam settings,
and it took me a while to get used to the overall flatter look (and
sometimes shorter stems) that this produces. Now I am
On 05.11.2005 David W. Fenton wrote:
Johannes and Dennis C., and any others who edit older music, do you
think there's anything in the beaming angle of the original sources
that might be worth preserving?
No.
Do you also try to preserve the
beaming breaks and reversed beams?
Beaming
After cleaning Registry, my wife's FinWin2005b is working fine except it
is constantly loosing MIDI both in and out, the out being Finale
SoundFont, by the way. If it were just 'in' then I'd look for MIDI
interface and input device, but I am certain that is not the issue at
this point.
I rather
At 05:10 PM 11/5/2005, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
I don't want to do this. I want to wipe C: only then reinstall Win2KJP
from the installer CD as NTFS.
You can do that. The Win2K CD allows you to format a partition as NTFS.
My guess is I'd need Win32 boot floppy
disk which also supports CD-ROM
A-NO-NE Music wrote:
After cleaning Registry, my wife's FinWin2005b is working fine except it
is constantly loosing MIDI both in and out, the out being Finale
SoundFont, by the way. If it were just 'in' then I'd look for MIDI
interface and input device, but I am certain that is not the issue
Aaron Sherber / 2005/11/05 / 05:37 PM wrote:
You can do that. The Win2K CD allows you to format a partition as NTFS.
Well, true, but the problem comes before that. Even though my Win2KJP
installer CD is bootable, it is still DOS, meaning it won't see the
current NTFS partition. The D: is FAT32
At 06:11 PM 11/5/2005, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Aaron Sherber / 2005/11/05 / 05:37 PM wrote:
You can do that. The Win2K CD allows you to format a partition as NTFS.
Well, true, but the problem comes before that. Even though my Win2KJP
installer CD is bootable, it is still DOS, meaning it won't see
On 5 Nov 2005 at 17:10, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
This is Thinkpad T20. I need to wipe clean and scratch install
Win2KJP. Here is the problem I always get. DOS can't do NTFS. If I
install as FAT, when I convert it to NTFS later, MBR screws up and I
get BSD with a bogus message telling me
On 5 Nov 2005 at 18:11, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Aaron Sherber / 2005/11/05 / 05:37 PM wrote:
You can do that. The Win2K CD allows you to format a partition as
NTFS.
Well, true, but the problem comes before that. Even though my Win2KJP
installer CD is bootable, it is still DOS, meaning it
On 5 Nov 2005 at 18:25, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 06:11 PM 11/5/2005, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Aaron Sherber / 2005/11/05 / 05:37 PM wrote:
You can do that. The Win2K CD allows you to format a partition as
NTFS. Well, true, but the problem comes before that. Even though
my Win2KJP installer
Thanks Allen,
I was talking about the bug that seem to erase data randomly after
inserting measures at the end of a document or important mass edit
operations, as reported by Hiro, Masao Iikura, Chuck Israels and
Javier Ruiz.
From your response, you seem to be talking about the overwrite
Just to make this clear to all - I have not seen the data erasing bug
- rather I've had Finale crashes (in 2006). I using 2006a - I've had
no problems so far except for an occasional strange behavior when
copying entries from one staff to another in another transposition
where the stem
Chuck Israels / 2005/11/05 / 11:08 PM wrote:
copying entries from one staff to another in another transposition
where the stem direction and tie direction is wrong. If anyone else
sees this, please let us know. I'm not reporting it until I'm sure
it's not document specific.
Yes, I have
On 5 Nov 2005 at 22:36, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
David W. Fenton / 2005/11/05 / 08:00 PM wrote:
Again, I don't see any purpose in reformatting. Just install a fresh
copy of Windows in a new folder, alongside the old one.
On my Macs, I like zero-formatting to map out bad sectors. It's just
This will definitely be of interest to anyone interested in MusicXML,
manuscript-style music fonts, or Clinton Roemer's book, The Art of
Music Copying:
http://roemer.sourceforge.net/
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://homepage.mac.com/djargon
Brooklyn, NY
28 matches
Mail list logo
