Re: [Finale] 2006/2007 copy strangeness
A scratch staff is a staff just the same, and perhaps one of the MIDI channels assigned to 1-4 also is assigned to 5. Make sure 5 has its own MIDI channel. As for copying, make sure she looks at Items to Copy and de-select Performance Data. I don't know (because I've never tried it) but perhaps you can actually copy the MIDI assignment as well, so that when she pastes it into the scratch staff it changes that staff to the same MIDI assignment as the original. Richard On Aug 31, 2008, at 7:01 PM, Ralph Whitfield wrote: I have a friend who has posed me a question that I can't replicate. Setup: 5 staves: staff 1: Soprano/Alto - Midi channel 1, Choir Ahs staff 2: Tenor/Bass - Midi channel 2, Choir Ahs staff 3: Piano RH - Midi channel 3, piano staff 4: Piano LH - Midi channel 3, piano staff 5: scratch staff: The problem started occurring when she created the scratch staff. Every time she copies something from one of the voice staves (for cues or whatever). When she changes the midi channel and voice on the scratch staff, the midi channel and the voice changes on whatever staff she copied from. I can't for the life of me figure out how she got it this way. Any advice on how to get it back to normal operation? (Of if this is normal operation, what am I missing? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] RE: Finale 2006 support foreign fonts in lyrics?
Hi Jerry, You can get Chinese text into Finale text and lyrics. But there are extra steps involved given Finale's lack of support for Unicode. You have to set the Finale text/lyrics to be Chinese script, not Western script. On XP, you probably have to set Chinese in the language bar when using Finale. You might need to have Chinese set as your language for non-Unicode programs (Control Panel - Settings - Regional and Language Options - Advanced), but I don't think that's necessary. There were detailed instructions on how to do this somewhere in the MakeMusic forum (forum.makemusic.com), but I don't have a URL to the specific message handy. Good luck! Best regards, Michael Good Recordare LLC www.recordare.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. Hi Chuck is this happening with the same selection of music? Or is it more random? Simon Troup Digital Music Art ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
Hi Simon, It happened on two different documents. I had moved measures on them and done a bunch of other editing work. Then another grab and put selected measures in one system (or whatever the exact wording is) hangs up the whole thing. I think it's been just twice, but it may have been three times. I don't remember other common circumstances which would help to isolate the condition that makes this happen. These things happen suddenly and, unfortunately, you have not been thinking about what you've just done to provoke it, because you don't know it's going to happen. Any ideas? Chuck On Aug 8, 2005, at 3:26 PM, Simon Troup wrote: Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. Hi Chuck is this happening with the same selection of music? Or is it more random? Simon Troup Digital Music Art ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
Hmmm .. I've used the Mass Mover to move a minimum # of mm's, like 8-10 of a single part, with no prob. Are you talking about a large amount of music? Dean On Aug 8, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Hi all, Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. A bug, for sure. It has been reported. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
On Aug 8, 2005, at 3:57 PM, Dean M. Estabrook wrote: Hmmm .. I've used the Mass Mover to move a minimum # of mm's, like 8-10 of a single part, with no prob. Are you talking about a large amount of music? Dean Once a bunch (maybe a dozen or more), and once only two. It doesn't happen often, but it has happened two or three times, and I think it's buggy behavior. I'm not worried about this, I just have to make sure I save the document just before doing this kind of thing, so I can get back to the same place after quitting and re-starting Finale. BTW, after restarting Finale, everything seems to work again. Chuck On Aug 8, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Hi all, Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. A bug, for sure. It has been reported. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
Chuck Israels / 2005/08/08 / 06:06 PM wrote: Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. Just in case you had some important work that hasn't been saved, I'd wait as long as 90 minutes. In my experiences, 99% of the time it will release in 20-60 min. On very rare occasion, if spinning beachball hasn't been released after 90 minutes, I give up. Yes, I have other things to do to kill the time \(*o^)/ When you encounter it next time, open Utilities - Activity Monitor, highlight Finale then hit Opt+Cmd+S, which samples stuck process. This might take time to finish at the end of the progress bar, but you can be sure this will complete soon or later. In my experiences, this action might intercept the stuck process to release the spinning beachball. Even if not, you will get a proc sample output, which you can send it to Coda. This should help them see the problem. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
Hiro, if (when) it happens again, I will surely try this. I certainly didn't wait that long - maybe two or three minutes at most. I could even have a pleasant conversation with Margot! Thanks, Chuck On Aug 8, 2005, at 4:51 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Chuck Israels / 2005/08/08 / 06:06 PM wrote: Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. Just in case you had some important work that hasn't been saved, I'd wait as long as 90 minutes. In my experiences, 99% of the time it will release in 20-60 min. On very rare occasion, if spinning beachball hasn't been released after 90 minutes, I give up. Yes, I have other things to do to kill the time \(*o^)/ When you encounter it next time, open Utilities - Activity Monitor, highlight Finale then hit Opt+Cmd+S, which samples stuck process. This might take time to finish at the end of the progress bar, but you can be sure this will complete soon or later. In my experiences, this action might intercept the stuck process to release the spinning beachball. Even if not, you will get a proc sample output, which you can send it to Coda. This should help them see the problem. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
On Aug 8, 2005, at 6:06 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Hi all, Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. A bug, for sure. It has been reported. I agree that the fact that it happens at all is buggy behaviour, but wasn't it established that trashing the preferences cleared it up? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 crashes
I don't think so, Chris. I've done this, and I don't think they're corrupted again so soon. I will watch this, and do what Hiro suggests, if it happens again. Chuck On Aug 8, 2005, at 5:46 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: On Aug 8, 2005, at 6:06 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Hi all, Twice now, and mass mover edit to move a selected bunch of measures has caused the dreaded spinning beach ball, from which there is no exit short of a force quit. A bug, for sure. It has been reported. I agree that the fact that it happens at all is buggy behaviour, but wasn't it established that trashing the preferences cleared it up? Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 already shipping Finale to GPO question
Randolph Peters wrote: I just read on the other forum that Finale 2006 is already shipping. Now that I have your attention, I thought I'd run my question by the list again. My question applies to Finale 2005 and 2006: At 9:36 AM -0500 7/24/05, Randolph Peters wrote: When you check the option in Human Playback to optimize for Garriton Personal Orchestra, does Finale assume that ALL your staves are being played by GPO? I ask because I want to send MIDI to many different places, not just GPO. Does Finale send different instruments CC#1 instead of CC#7 for volume? (That would be disastrous!) Would it be useful to have Human Playback options for each track or stave? When you read Jari's review you'll note that he makes a point that in using VST playback (of which it appears GPO is an example) you can't use other playback devices. tyler had made such a point in some of his posts earlier as well. So it appears the answer to your question is that it won't matter but probably yes, if you're using HP (GPO optimization), since you can use EITHER gpo playback or your various other midi devices, but not both at the same time. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all of the hoopla about no saxes in GPO, If I remember correctly the Kontakt player that will be part of Finale 2006 will be able to load any NI Samples. Since the sounds that ship with Sibelius play thru their Kompakt player, I wonder if the Sibelius sounds will show up as an option in Finale's Kontakt player midi outs? That would be interesting. Then at least a tenor sax would be available. I don't believe so. I had stuck the Sibelius Kontakt Silver into Finale's VST folder, but it didn't show up as an available choice. Sibelius specifically said long ago that their player would only work with Sibelius, and I've never heard of anyone getting it to work with other software. Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With all of the hoopla about no saxes in GPO, If I remember correctly the Kontakt player that will be part of Finale 2006 will be able to load any NI Samples. Since the sounds that ship with Sibelius play thru their Kompakt player, I wonder if the Sibelius sounds will show up as an option in Finale's Kontakt player midi outs? That would be interesting. Then at least a tenor sax would be available. From what I've read on the Sibelius list, the sounds which ship with Sibelius ONLY appear to the player which is part of Sibelius -- it's supposedly a very proprietary thing. You can't use non-sibelius sounds with it, even if you own a million dollars of ni samples. But since Finale will work with ni samples, if you already own any, you can use them, just not the Sibelius ones, again, from what I've understood on postings on the Sibelius list. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Dean M. Estabrook schrieb: Ah, what I do is create a finale file, which then, for playback, goes via my MIDI to my Roland J35 Keboard, thence to my stereo amp and speaker system, whence I hear it. Sorry I didn't clarify that. Yes, but then you are not using and cannot use the Finale soundfont. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
John Bell wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 03:53, dhbailey wrote: But they list the Jazz Big Band Collection for sale (I was terribly wrong about the price -- it's a whopping $259 dollars more, and that's a special deal for Finale users!) so they could include a tickler about how they'll be releasing an update patch of the included GPO soundset to include an Alto Sax, Tenor Sax and Baritone Sax, when they are released. But there's no mention of that, so those of us who are active in the band world need to make this a $349 upgrade to get what the orchestra-centric Finale users get for $99. If there's a fairness in this I fail to see it. I agree that this is unfair. But if MakeMusic were to wait until all GPO's sounds were available to Finale users at the same price, some people would be deprived of sounds that they can now get. Yes, it's an unfair world we live in, but I see no conspiracy. John All MakeMusic has to do is to release Fianle2006 as they plan to, without the saxes, since they're not ready for release yet, and then release an update patch, like they do for the occasional interim bug-release (finale2005a, finale2005b, finale2005c, whatever), which includes an updated soundset that includes saxes. And they can pre-announce that without hurting anybody -- they're preannouncing the Garritan Jazz and Big Band Collection, and even taking pre-orders for that! If they preannounce the inclusion of saxes in an interim update to be released at the same time the Jazz and Big Band Collection is released, they won't lose band composers/arrangers who won't see anything else of major importance in this 2006 upgrade. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
dhbailey schrieb: If you want to use it for additional midi channels, you can send 16 channels to your Roland via your midi hookup and send 16 more channels through the smartmusic soundfont (you select that in the midi devices list) and then send the line-out jack to a mixer to combine with the Roland sounds before going to your stereo amp and speaker system. On the Mac this is slightly more complicated, I believe. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
dhbailey wrote: [snip] All MakeMusic has to do is to release Fianle2006 as they plan to, without the saxes, since they're not ready for release yet, and then release an update patch, like they do for the occasional interim bug-release (finale2005a, finale2005b, finale2005c, whatever), which includes an updated soundset that includes saxes. And they can pre-announce that without hurting anybody -- they're preannouncing the Garritan Jazz and Big Band Collection, and even taking pre-orders for that! If they preannounce the inclusion of saxes in an interim update to be released at the same time the Jazz and Big Band Collection is released, they won't lose band composers/arrangers who won't see anything else of major importance in this 2006 upgrade. Lest anybody think I'm just griping for the sake of it (sometimes I wonder that myself), I have sent a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] asking specifically whether saxophones will be included in an upcoming update patch to the Finale2006 release. I'll share the response with the list when I get one. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
dhbailey wrote: dhbailey wrote: [snip] All MakeMusic has to do is to release Fianle2006 as they plan to, without the saxes, since they're not ready for release yet, and then release an update patch, like they do for the occasional interim bug-release (finale2005a, finale2005b, finale2005c, whatever), which includes an updated soundset that includes saxes. And they can pre-announce that without hurting anybody -- they're preannouncing the Garritan Jazz and Big Band Collection, and even taking pre-orders for that! If they preannounce the inclusion of saxes in an interim update to be released at the same time the Jazz and Big Band Collection is released, they won't lose band composers/arrangers who won't see anything else of major importance in this 2006 upgrade. Lest anybody think I'm just griping for the sake of it (sometimes I wonder that myself), I have sent a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] asking specifically whether saxophones will be included in an upcoming update patch to the Finale2006 release. I'll share the response with the list when I get one. Here is the reply I just received from Phil at MakeMusic: [quote -- notice he couldn't take the time to make it a personal reply, with a nice greeting such as Hello, David!] Hello, At this point, it does not look like the GPO Finale Edition will be patched for Saxes. The only way to get sax sounds would be the Jazz and Big Band when it is released. Phil Sr. Customer Support Representative MakeMusic! Inc. [end quote] So much for MakeMusic's commitment to serve the educational community -- can anybody name any major concert band or jazz band or marching band works which don't include saxophones? Can anybody name publishers of concert or marching or jazz band music which doesn't include saxophones? How's a band-oriented person supposed to take advantage of the much-touted (and only significant thing in this upgrade) improvement in playback? Oh, I get it, all the people in the band world have tons of money to spend and so will willingly fork over the $250 just to get an instrument which should have been included in the upgrade! Nice to know that even in not adding any engraver-specific improvements and in their attempt to improve playback they STILL can't serve a large segment of their customer base! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005, at 6:25 AM, dhbailey wrote: So why isn't Finale going to include saxes? David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
On 15 Jul 2005, at 10:41 AM, dhbailey wrote: So much for MakeMusic's commitment to serve the educational community -- can anybody name any major concert band or jazz band or marching band works which don't include saxophones? David, are you even reading Tyler's posts? He wrote: Sibelius ships with Kontakt Silver, which includes 20 sounds. You can use 8 at a time. This makes covering large ensembles of any sort simply impossible. To turn your question right back at you, can anybody name any major concert band or jazz band or marching band works which use only 8 instruments at at time? Finale GPO doesn't have saxophones, but at least the Finale softsynth does (although you can NOT use these concurrently - you'll have to record them separately and mix them). To list the instruments Sibelius Silver has that Finale GPO does not: tenor sax, voice oohs and ahs, guitar. To list the instruments Finale GPO has that Sibelius Kontakt Silver does not, piccolo, english horn, bass clarinet, contra bassoon, tuba, marimba, xylophone, harpsichord, solo violin, solo viola, solo cello, solo bass, violin section, viola section, cello section, bass section, tremolo strings (solo and section). Neither library has soprano, alto, or bari saxes. So, major concert band or marching band works never include piccolo? Xylophone?? Tuba??? Also, if it's not on the list of 20 instruments Sib provides, you can't get it in Sibelius AT ALL. You can get saxes in Finale by using Finale's soundfont instead of GPO. It's not like you don't have options. You then went on to pooh-pooh the fact that the included snare drum has both left- and right-hand hits, which is actually *extremely important* for marching band work. Finale has been exceptionally generous with the number of GPO instruments they are bundling with FIn2k6, and if something is missing, you can always use the provided soundfont instead. In Sibelius you have no such options. It's just flat-out ridiculous for you to keep insisting that Finale playback is inferior to Sib's (and this is evidence of how Coda just doesn't care about the educational market) when Sib only includes 20 instruments and only lets you play back eight of them simultaneously. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
*tongue in cheek* Yeah, but when it does come out, it will have all those useful saxes like Contrabass, and C melody. Woohoo! Darcy James Argue wrote: David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
At 10:21 AM -0700 7/15/05, Eric Dannewitz wrote: *tongue in cheek* Yeah, but when it does come out, it will have all those useful saxes like Contrabass, and C melody. Woohoo! Darcy James Argue wrote: David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005, at 1:37 PM, John Howell wrote: Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms. John, Sibelius does not include separate classical and jazz saxophones either. In fact, it does not include separate saxophones, period -- just tenor sax. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
Darcy James Argue wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 10:41 AM, dhbailey wrote: So much for MakeMusic's commitment to serve the educational community -- can anybody name any major concert band or jazz band or marching band works which don't include saxophones? David, are you even reading Tyler's posts? He wrote: Sibelius ships with Kontakt Silver, which includes 20 sounds. You can use 8 at a time. This makes covering large ensembles of any sort simply impossible. I realize that -- that's why I'm a Finale user. To turn your question right back at you, can anybody name any major concert band or jazz band or marching band works which use only 8 instruments at at time? I realize that -- that's why I'm a Finale user. Finale GPO doesn't have saxophones, but at least the Finale softsynth does (although you can NOT use these concurrently - you'll have to record them separately and mix them). To list the instruments Sibelius Silver has that Finale GPO does not: tenor sax, voice oohs and ahs, guitar. To list the instruments Finale GPO has that Sibelius Kontakt Silver does not, piccolo, english horn, bass clarinet, contra bassoon, tuba, marimba, xylophone, harpsichord, solo violin, solo viola, solo cello, solo bass, violin section, viola section, cello section, bass section, tremolo strings (solo and section). Neither library has soprano, alto, or bari saxes. So, major concert band or marching band works never include piccolo? Xylophone?? Tuba??? Your point being? Yes they do include those instruments. but if the playback can't include the sax section, how will a reasonable rendition of a band work be made? The section you quoted specifically states that the softsynth and GPO can't be used concurrently, so a band work will require two different recordings which have to be mixed, or the band work will have to resort to being recorded using the soundfont. Also, if it's not on the list of 20 instruments Sib provides, you can't get it in Sibelius AT ALL. You can get saxes in Finale by using Finale's soundfont instead of GPO. It's not like you don't have options. You can't use the soundfont playback at the same time as GPO -- read the section you quoted, which specifically states that the soundfont and GPO can't be used concurrently. You then went on to pooh-pooh the fact that the included snare drum has both left- and right-hand hits, which is actually *extremely important* for marching band work. Finale has been exceptionally generous with the number of GPO instruments they are bundling with FIn2k6, and if something is missing, you can always use the provided soundfont instead. In Sibelius you have no such options. Not at the same time as I'm trying to use GPO. So in this new upgrade which includes the GPO, band works have to be recorded using the soundfont. Great -- I can do that with Sibelius, too, so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out to me. I've been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster AWE32 soundcard. It's just flat-out ridiculous for you to keep insisting that Finale playback is inferior to Sib's (and this is evidence of how Coda just doesn't care about the educational market) when Sib only includes 20 instruments and only lets you play back eight of them simultaneously. I'm pointing out that for band works to be played, complete with all instruments, they'll have to be played through either a soundfont and Finale's included soundfont player or through our already existing playback hardware such as midi modules. The same as Sibelius has to do, since, as you point out, their Kontakt player sucks for large ensemble work. Playback for band works in both programs is the same, Finale's isn't superior. For orchestral works, or other works which don't include sax, Finale's playback will probably be superior. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
Darcy James Argue wrote: [snip] You then went on to pooh-pooh the fact that the included snare drum has both left- and right-hand hits, which is actually *extremely important* for marching band work. [snip] Are they matched grip or traditional grip? That's important, too. :-) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Darcy James Argue wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 6:25 AM, dhbailey wrote: So why isn't Finale going to include saxes? David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. I realize that the saxes aren't ready yet. But since they are already taking pre-orders for the GPO Jazz/BigBand collection, I assume it must be getting close to being ready for release. I don't have a problem with the fact that no saxes will be included in the initial Finale2006 release. I realize that what isn't ready yet can't be released -- but since MakeMusic does issue interim update patches, my question has to do with whether an interim update patch will be issued which includes saxes. I was told it wouldn't. I'm not sure what you are basing your expectations that they'll be included in Fin2k7 on. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Darcy James Argue wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 1:37 PM, John Howell wrote: Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms. John, Sibelius does not include separate classical and jazz saxophones either. In fact, it does not include separate saxophones, period -- just tenor sax. So because the competition doesn't do something, Finale is off the hook? I do realize that when the competition DOES do something, we expect, hope, pray that Finale might follow suit, but I'm not quite sure that since the competition doesn't do something, it's alright for Finale not to do it. What ever happened to Finale trying to be a market LEADER (which by definition means doing something FIRST), instead of being a follower? Do you mean to imply that if I can convince Sibelius to improve their soundset, that Finale will follow suit and that by complaining to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm following the wrong path to getting my wish? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
On 15 Jul 2005, at 2:32 PM, dhbailey wrote: Your point being? Yes they do include those instruments. but if the playback can't include the sax section, how will a reasonable rendition of a band work be made? (A) With other instruments covering the saxophone parts, same as what I do know when I use GPO for jazz band scores. OR: (B) With the soundfont that FINALE provides. The section you quoted specifically states that the softsynth and GPO can't be used concurrently, so a band work will require two different recordings which have to be mixed, or the band work will have to resort to being recorded using the soundfont. That is correct. That's still much better than what you can get with Sibelius, which was the issue at stake here. You can't use the soundfont playback at the same time as GPO Yes, I'm well aware of that. So in this new upgrade which includes the GPO, band works have to be recorded using the soundfont. Great -- I can do that with Sibelius, too No, you cannot. Sibelius does not provide their own soundfont -- Finale does (in addition to the GPO sounds). , so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out to me. I've been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster AWE32 soundcard. This has nothing to do with your sound card. The instruments in Finale's SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont are provided by FINALE. They sound exactly the same on any decent sound card. To my knowledge, Sibelius does not provide an equivalent to the SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont. You have to use a thrid-party soundfont (like QuickTime Musical Instruments or whatnot). Playback for band works in both programs is the same, Finale's isn't superior. That is simply false. What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert band work that contains every concert band instrument except saxophones (substituting clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do now), or a Sibelius rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo, no xylophone, and only eight instruments playing? - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
n 15 Jul 2005, at 2:43 PM, dhbailey wrote: Darcy James Argue wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 1:37 PM, John Howell wrote: Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms. John, Sibelius does not include separate classical and jazz saxophones either. In fact, it does not include separate saxophones, period -- just tenor sax. So because the competition doesn't do something, Finale is off the hook? David, I would like Finale to include GPO saxophones in the next release, and I think they will. I don't think it's reasonable for them to include this in a maintenance release, which is supposed to be focused on bugfixes. I'm certainly not saying I think Finale should *never* include GPO saxophones. However, the whole point of this discussion has been a comparison between Finale's and Sibelius's playback features. You said earlier: Actually, Finale is only leagues ahead of Sibelius in terms of playback with included 3rd-party add-on, and then only for those who are orchestrally inclined, not for those who work in the band, jazz band, marching band fields. That's simply false. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
Darcy James Argue wrote: [snip] No, you cannot. Sibelius does not provide their own soundfont -- Finale does (in addition to the GPO sounds). I haven't used the Finale-provided soundfont other than to check my installation -- then I substitute one which I prefer for the Finale-provided one. , so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out to me. I've been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster AWE32 soundcard. This has nothing to do with your sound card. The instruments in Finale's SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont are provided by FINALE. They sound exactly the same on any decent sound card. To my knowledge, Sibelius does not provide an equivalent to the SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont. You have to use a thrid-party soundfont (like QuickTime Musical Instruments or whatnot). You're absolutely right that Sibelius doesn't include a soundfont softsynth, although I have made a request to them to include that. With a soundfont-enabled card (which is what I use) I can use the Finale soundfont if I wish, making both programs' playback exactly the same, simply selecting my Audigy Synth A (or B or both) in the midi devices list. Playback for band works in both programs is the same, Finale's isn't superior. That is simply false. No, it's not simply false. It may be false under default installations of both programs. And it may be false for some people, but for me the playback is the same -- playing either through my soundfont-enabled soundcard or through external midi devices. What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert band work that contains every concert band instrument except saxophones (substituting clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do now), or a Sibelius rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo, no xylophone, and only eight instruments playing? Neither is better in my estimation -- imagine sending a recording of a work you want published or performed to a potential publisher or director and having to explain that it's not actually a realistic sound becaue those extra clarinet or bassoon sounds aren't really extra clarinet or bassoon parts but are supposed to be saxes. But I said in another message, I don't think that just because Sibelius is terrible in this department that lets Finale off the hook, not if they're actively trying to be a market leader. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
--- Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 2:32 PM, dhbailey wrote: Your point being? Yes they do include those instruments. but if the playback can't include the sax section, how will a reasonable rendition of a band work be made? (A) With other instruments covering the saxophone parts, same as what I do know when I use GPO for jazz band scores. OR: (B) With the soundfont that FINALE provides. The section you quoted specifically states that the softsynth and GPO can't be used concurrently, so a band work will require two different recordings which have to be mixed, or the band work will have to resort to being recorded using the soundfont. That is correct. That's still much better than what you can get with Sibelius, which was the issue at stake here. You can't use the soundfont playback at the same time as GPO Yes, I'm well aware of that. So in this new upgrade which includes the GPO, band works have to be recorded using the soundfont. Great -- I can do that with Sibelius, too No, you cannot. Sibelius does not provide their own soundfont -- Finale does (in addition to the GPO sounds). , so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out to me. I've been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster AWE32 soundcard. This has nothing to do with your sound card. The instruments in Finale's SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont are provided by FINALE. They sound exactly the same on any decent sound card. To my knowledge, Sibelius does not provide an equivalent to the SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont. You have to use a thrid-party soundfont (like QuickTime Musical Instruments or whatnot). Playback for band works in both programs is the same, Finale's isn't superior. That is simply false. What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert band work that contains every concert band instrument except saxophones (substituting clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do now), or a Sibelius rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo, no xylophone, and only eight instruments playing? - Darcy - Darcy said what I wanted to say. Seriously, a complete ensemble where you temporarily substitute clarinets for saxes sounds much, much better than an ensemble where you start sticking in General MIDI brass or woodwinds. You're reading too much into Phil's response. The guy apparently screwed up and didn't really understand your question. With each new release, the support starts getting mauled with more questions, and it wouldn't surprise me if he's been working a lot of overtime (probably helping out with testing/preparing 2006 as well). That doesn't change the fact that he didn't answer your question, and it's certainly fine for you to reply to him and let him know that. At this point they probably don't even know for sure which sounds will be included in the future. Since Gary Garritan hasn't finished the jazz band or Advanced GPO libraries, it's probably a bit difficult to work out deals on licensing sounds from them. I'm a band teacher. I'm a euphonium player - probably just about the most overlooked concert band instrument in modern sample libraries. But I'm finding Finale GPO to be very useful for concert band renditions. I work around the few limitations and end up with a product that's leagues better than what I had before. And looking at the education features offered by MakeMusic vs. Sibelius, do you really feel that MakeMusic isn't focusing on the band crowd? Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
On 15 Jul 2005, at 3:27 PM, dhbailey wrote: Darcy James Argue wrote: What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert band work that contains every concert band instrument except saxophones (substituting clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do now), or a Sibelius rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo, no xylophone, and only eight instruments playing? Neither is better in my estimation -- imagine sending a recording of a work you want published or performed to a potential publisher or director and having to explain that it's not actually a realistic sound becaue those extra clarinet or bassoon sounds aren't really extra clarinet or bassoon parts but are supposed to be saxes. I have done exactly that, several times. Sure, it's less-than-ideal, but *every* MIDI rendition is less-than-ideal in any number of ways. It certainly hasn't been deal-breaker. Now, imagine sending a recording of a work you want published or performed to a potential publisher or director and having to explain that due to software limitations, the recording only includes 8 simultaneous instruments! - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005 at 13:03, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 6:25 AM, dhbailey wrote: So why isn't Finale going to include saxes? David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. You seem to be ignoring David's point. He certainly recognizes that MakeMusic can't ship a product that doesn't exist. But he also thinks that MakeMusic ought to make good on their promise of a complete GPO implementation by providing the missing functionality in an update. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. When Microsoft shipped Office97, Access wasn't finished yet. If you bought Office Pro, you got a certificate to redeem when Access97 came out to get the program then. David is just asking for the same thing. If next year's GPO library with saxes won't increase the cost of Finale (the upgrade price has remained stable for as long as I can remember), then it seems to me that it suggests that MakeMusic isn't paying more money to get a GPO library that includes saxophones. That means that they ought to be able to release a free update that includes the saxophones, since, surely, the increased licensing costs can't possibly be so great that it would break them. Now, if the GPO saxes don't come out until next July, there wouldn't be much point. Well, except for the minor little point that you'd have to buy the upgrade to get what ought to be included functionality. If you're one of the yearly upgraders, well, that's not an issue, but for those who are not yearly upgraders, the upshot is that they *won't* buy Finale 2006, but wait until 2007 to buy the version that will include saxes. That means that MakeMusic is automatically reducing the incentive to buy this new version, in the precise area that is just about the only significant new feature. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc All non-quoted content (c) David W. Fenton, all rights reserved ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
--- Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 2:32 PM, dhbailey wrote: Your point being? Yes they do include those instruments. but if the playback can't include the sax section, how will a reasonable rendition of a band work be made? (A) With other instruments covering the saxophone parts, same as what I do know when I use GPO for jazz band scores. OR: (B) With the soundfont that FINALE provides. The section you quoted specifically states that the softsynth and GPO can't be used concurrently, so a band work will require two different recordings which have to be mixed, or the band work will have to resort to being recorded using the soundfont. That is correct. That's still much better than what you can get with Sibelius, which was the issue at stake here. You can't use the soundfont playback at the same time as GPO Yes, I'm well aware of that. So in this new upgrade which includes the GPO, band works have to be recorded using the soundfont. Great -- I can do that with Sibelius, too No, you cannot. Sibelius does not provide their own soundfont -- Finale does (in addition to the GPO sounds). , so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to point out to me. I've been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster AWE32 soundcard. This has nothing to do with your sound card. The instruments in Finale's SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont are provided by FINALE. They sound exactly the same on any decent sound card. To my knowledge, Sibelius does not provide an equivalent to the SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont. You have to use a thrid-party soundfont (like QuickTime Musical Instruments or whatnot). Playback for band works in both programs is the same, Finale's isn't superior. That is simply false. What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert band work that contains every concert band instrument except saxophones (substituting clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do now), or a Sibelius rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo, no xylophone, and only eight instruments playing? - Darcy - Darcy said what I wanted to say. Seriously, a complete ensemble where you temporarily substitute clarinets for saxes sounds much, much better than an ensemble where you start sticking in General MIDI brass or woodwinds. You're reading too much into Phil's response. The guy apparently screwed up and didn't really understand your question. With each new release, the support starts getting mauled with more questions, and it wouldn't surprise me if he's been working a lot of overtime (probably helping out with testing/preparing 2006 as well). That doesn't change the fact that he didn't answer your question, and it's certainly fine for you to reply to him and let him know that. At this point they probably don't even know for sure which sounds will be included in the future. Since Gary Garritan hasn't finished the jazz band or Advanced GPO libraries, it's probably a bit difficult to work out deals on licensing sounds from them. I'm a band teacher. I'm a euphonium player - probably just about the most overlooked concert band instrument in modern sample libraries. But I'm finding Finale GPO to be very useful for concert band renditions. I work around the few limitations and end up with a product that's leagues better than what I had before. And looking at the education features offered by MakeMusic vs. Sibelius, do you really feel that MakeMusic isn't focusing on the band crowd? Tyler Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005 at 13:37, John Howell wrote: At 10:21 AM -0700 7/15/05, Eric Dannewitz wrote: *tongue in cheek* Yeah, but when it does come out, it will have all those useful saxes like Contrabass, and C melody. Woohoo! Darcy James Argue wrote: David, no offense, but how many times do you need this explained? Fin2k6 doesn't include any GPO saxes because at the moment, there ARE NO GPO SAXES TO INCLUDE. The Jazz/Big Band edition of GPO is NOT FINISHED YET. I expect when Fin2k7 comes out, they will include some GPO saxes for free. Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms. Well, it seems to me that this complaint is really raising the bar onf MIDI support. General MIDI includes only one sax patch for each of the main instruments of the family (soprano, alto, tenor, baritone). And I think General MIDI ought to be the point of comparison for a set of default sounds in a program. Yes, lots of GM is pretty esoteric and not essential. But the point is that the alternative to this inexpensive GPO implementation in terms of *comparable price* is a GM soundset, which is not likely to include 2 or 3 different saxophone variants (though a soundcard like mine may allow you to switch between several variants of a single GM patch). It's only when you get into better than commodity-level sound modules that you get such variation. I agree with David Bailey that it's a crime to not have *any* saxophone sounds, but it's the fault of Garritan's schedule, not MakeMusic's. That MM has no plan to rectify this drawback in Finale when Garritan releases the samples is not good, in my opinion. Some basic selection of saxophone sounds really is something that the Finale-included GPO subset ought to include. But, just as you only get one solo violin sound, I don't think you should be expecting a wide variety of alternatives for a single instrument. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc All non-quoted content (c) David W. Fenton, all rights reserved ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
Tyler Turner wrote: [snip] You're reading too much into Phil's response. The guy apparently screwed up and didn't really understand your question. With each new release, the support starts getting mauled with more questions, and it wouldn't surprise me if he's been working a lot of overtime (probably helping out with testing/preparing 2006 as well). That doesn't change the fact that he didn't answer your question, and it's certainly fine for you to reply to him and let him know that. [snip] Actually Phil did answer my question, which was whether or not we would receive an interim update patch (as MakeMusic often releases to repair/amend deficiencies in the initial release) which might include an GPO soundset updated to include saxes. I tried to show that I realized that the saxes aren't ready for release yet, but when they were ready, could we expect a patch which would include them. He informed me that there is no plan to do such a thing. Knowing that the saxes will be ready soon (why else are they offering for sale the GPO Jazz/Big Band Collection) I would think they could work out the licensing deal fairly easily, given that they already have one in place for the 100 already included sounds. I did ask him to enter my request for such an interim patch and he said he would enter it. And I will publicly apologize for lashing out against the educational slant of Finale (or apparent lack thereof) -- I'm sure many teachers find those exercises handy to print out and hand out. Just as I'm sure many teachers are turning their charts into SmartMusic Accompaniments. Guess I'm just in a grumpy mood these days -- nothing that a jar or two of Prozac won't cure. :-) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
Darcy James Argue wrote: [snip] Now, imagine sending a recording of a work you want published or performed to a potential publisher or director and having to explain that due to software limitations, the recording only includes 8 simultaneous instruments! I wouldn't do that, either. :-) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
On Jul 15, 2005, at 12:27 PM, dhbailey wrote:Neither is better in my estimation -- imagine sending a recording of a work you want published or performed to a potential publisher or director and having to explain that it's not actually a realistic sound becaue those extra clarinet or bassoon sounds aren't really extra clarinet or bassoon parts but are supposed to be saxes.You have to suspend disbelief in order to accept any of these sounds. They only remotely resemble the sound of the instruments they represent. I'd like saxophones too, but when they come, they won't sound real anyway. For me, it's not that much of a stretch to substitute a different inadequate imitation for what I hope will be a somewhat better inadequate imitation. I'm not trying to start a war here. I hope for improved samples and improved (and simple) control, as I assume many others do. But I don't think it's going to ruin the "sketch" of my musical architecture for some of the colors to be off. It's only a sketch.Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
ok, I think I'm beginning to get the picture, though my inexperience in this area blurs the concept considerably. For example, if I were to purchase GPO, and create a fin file, I don't even understand how those wonderful GPO sounds would become my mode of playback, with my present system. I'm a tyro, boys. Actually, I'm doing all this on an iMac, and I don't think it has nearly enough RAM to access the GPO system anyway. Dean On Jul 15, 2005, at 12:41 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Dean M. Estabrook schrieb: Ah, what I do is create a finale file, which then, for playback, goes via my MIDI to my Roland J35 Keboard, thence to my stereo amp and speaker system, whence I hear it. Sorry I didn't clarify that. Yes, but then you are not using and cannot use the Finale soundfont. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale As a newly diagnosed diabetic, self denial is now my ally, exercise my master. Dean M. Estabrook Retired Church Musician Composer, Arranger Adjudicator Amateur Golfer ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Being a sax player myself, I find this thread well, amusing. But seriously, there's not much out there in any sample library that comes even close to covering saxophones. The Vienna Library saxes ($265 at Sweetwater) have only tenor and soprano--no alto or bari even. Forget C-melody, bass, contrabass, etc.--you gotta be dreaming. ;-) No orchestral sample library that I know of has saxes, and believe me, I've looked. I need 'em for mockups of my "horn" arrangements. No, so far, saxes haven't been dealt with realistically in the sample library world.Lon Price, Los Angeles[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://hometown.aol.com/txstnr/On Jul 15, 2005, at 10:37 AM, John Howell wrote:Umm, am I the only one to whom it has occurred that at the very least, alto and tenor sax are ORCHESTRAL INSTRUMENTS, and are played with a sound the is quite different from a jazz sound? As are the saxes in wind ensembles. Thinking that a single set of sax samples will serve all possible uses just isn't realistic. There's no question but that they belonged in the orchestral set of samples. Somebody dropped the ball, or wasn't thinking in real world terms.___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005, at 6:11 PM, Lon Price wrote: Being a sax player myself, I find this thread well, amusing. But seriously, there's not much out there in any sample library that comes even close to covering saxophones. The Vienna Library saxes ($265 at Sweetwater) have only tenor and soprano--no alto or bari even. Forget C-melody, bass, contrabass, etc.--you gotta be dreaming. ;-) No orchestral sample library that I know of has saxes, and believe me, I've looked. I need 'em for mockups of my horn arrangements. No, so far, saxes haven't been dealt with realistically in the sample library world. Lon, GPO Jazz/Big Band will have the full range of saxophones, from sopranino through sub-contrabass, and including C-melody and mezzo-soprano saxes. (Personally, I think that's overkill, but this sounds like something you'd want to pick up.) - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
On Jul 15, 2005, at 2:07 PM, Chuck Israels wrote:You have to suspend disbelief in order to accept any of these sounds. They only remotely resemble the sound of the instruments they represent. I'd like saxophones too, but when they come, they won't sound real anyway. For me, it's not that much of a stretch to substitute a different inadequate imitation for what I hope will be a somewhat better inadequate imitation. I'm not trying to start a war here. I hope for improved samples and improved (and simple) control, as I assume many others do. But I don't think it's going to ruin the "sketch" of my musical architecture for some of the colors to be off. It's only a sketch.It seems to me that trying to use playback from Finale or Sibelius as a mockup of a large work is just asking for problems. First of all, to get a large orchestra played by GPO is gonna take a huge amount of RAM, and you're gonna need a mighty powerful computer to do it besides. If you try to record a section at a time using Human Playback, the result will be out of sync, because of fluctuations in tempo, unless there's a way to use exactly the same tempo map for each pass. If there's a way to do that in Finale I don't know about it. If you don't use Human Playback you'll get a mechanical performance. And how are you gonna put the pieces together anyway? Do you have a program that'll do that for you? Here's where the discussion gets to the big argument about what these programs should really be used for. All of these playback features being added to Finale are kinda nice to have, but I don't ever expect to be able to use Finale alone for creating a satisfactory mockup. I do find Human Playback useful, but I use it to create a MIDI file, which I then open in my favorite MIDI sequencing/audio recording software, which happens to be MOTU's Digital Performer. In DP I can record one instrument at a time if I need to, and the exact same tempo map is used for each pass. I can use a combination of sounds from my sound modules (I have 8, including two of the old Proteus/2 Orchestral modules), MOTU's Mach-5 sample player-editor, GPO, V-Samp, loops taken out of Garage Band, and on and on. After I record everything, I can mix it all down into one stereo file, and then export it in any audio format, including WAV, AIFF, SDII, or even MP3. I'm sorry, but I don't think Finale will ever give me the ability to do all of that, nor would I expect it to. After all, I've got DP for that. And if I could get MOTU to give me full-featured notation in DP, then I wouldn't need Finale or Sibelius at all. But MOTU reps have assured me that full-featured notation will never happen in DP either, so there you go.Lon Lon Price, Los Angeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hometown.aol.com/txstnr/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On Jul 15, 2005, at 3:18 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:Lon, GPO Jazz/Big Band will have the full range of saxophones, from sopranino through sub-contrabass, and including C-melody and mezzo-soprano saxes. (Personally, I think that's overkill, but this sounds like something you'd want to pick up.) - Darcy Yeah, I'm planning to get that. I wasn't aware that Gary was taking preorders. I wonder if he'll do a group buy... That GPO group buy was sweet, wasn't it?LP Lon Price, Los Angeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hometown.aol.com/txstnr/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO -- MakeMusic's reply to my request for saxophones
--- Lon Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Jul 15, 2005, at 2:07 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: You have to suspend disbelief in order to accept any of these sounds. They only remotely resemble the sound of the instruments they represent. I'd like saxophones too, but when they come, they won't sound real anyway. For me, it's not that much of a stretch to substitute a different inadequate imitation for what I hope will be a somewhat better inadequate imitation. I'm not trying to start a war here. I hope for improved samples and improved (and simple) control, as I assume many others do. But I don't think it's going to ruin the sketch of my musical architecture for some of the colors to be off. It's only a sketch. It seems to me that trying to use playback from Finale or Sibelius as a mockup of a large work is just asking for problems. First of all, to get a large orchestra played by GPO is gonna take a huge amount of RAM, and you're gonna need a mighty powerful computer to do it besides. If you try to record a section at a time using Human Playback, the result will be out of sync, because of fluctuations in tempo, unless there's a way to use exactly the same tempo map for each pass. If there's a way to do that in Finale I don't know about it. If you don't use Human Playback you'll get a mechanical performance. And how are you gonna put the pieces together anyway? Do you have a program that'll do that for you? Regarding HP, you first use the Apply HP plug-in to solidify the HP settings that you like. Then you can turn off HP and save your recordings separately. For most large files I haven't had to do this, but there has been one exception. There are free programs available for mixing the audio files together. It's a simple enough feature to be included with the free audio editors/sequencers. Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Johannes Gebauer wrote: Not to take anyone's illusions away, but I have just been trying to make the full GPO imitate a string quartet. To be honest, the only instrument that is sort of acceptable is the cello, in some registers at least. None of the violins sound remotely like solo violins to my ear, although the best one seems to be the Guaneri. I'd currently say that it is not possible to get a realistic solo violin sound out of GPO. But I am a violinist, so my standards are high. In a way I am kind of glad this is the case... I wonder, has anyone ever tried using the full version of Garritan Strings to get a better sound at all? i.e. rather than the GPO? Some of the best string reproductions I've heard are from the Vienna Symphonic Library demos. They're still nowhere as good as the real thing, but are getting closer all the time. The problem seems to be exposed strings i.e. in a chamber/non-orchestral context - the instruments tend to sound like cheap Chinese instruments. When someone works out a good vibrato algorithm that will go some way. Matthew -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.14/48 - Release Date: 13/07/2005 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Tyler Turner wrote: [snip] I'm discovering that scores which have a lot of markings for HP to interpret can sound better than a lot of the scores I hear on the GPO demo page - and that's using the Finale GPO set that comes with Finale. Do you HAVE to use HP? Nope. It's all MIDI data that Finale has access to. I just strongly suggest experimenting with it to see where it will save you time. I hope this helps. Thanks, Tyler, it certainly helps me! I have just one question concerning the GPO set that comes with Finale -- are there saxophones included? I realize that GPO is releasing a jazz-based version sometime soon, but I am hoping that since Finale has included it with the upcoming release there are saxophones included for those of us who work in the band world as well as the orchestra world. Thanks again for a thoughtful review! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Tyler Turner wrote: [snip] For most of the instruments, you get a single solo instrument and 3 ensemble instruments. Thanks for adding that -- after reading Ronald's post I was feeling a bit let-down. I am intrigued now! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
ronan wrote: [snip] I understand that will not be able to use the full GPO with Finale2006 immediately. But Gary has promised a free patch will be out soon. [snip] That's interesting, especially in light of the fact that they are offering extra-cost addon GPO versions for Finale users to buy! And no solo instruments? Interesting -- sounds like a first hit's free, now you gotta pay me to really enjoy the stuff! come-on. Get the users hooked on how good playback might be, but be sure we get more money out of them when they realize that the sounds aren't quite all they want. Oh well. At least Tyler's review in another post leaves me hopeful that playback in Fin2006 using GPO will be at least higher quality than using the smartmusic soundfont that has been include with the past few versions. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Johannes Gebauer wrote: Tyler Turner schrieb: Sections strings are solid, but I'm not sure about how well the solo strings can stand on their own or in small ensembles (string quartets, etc.). Not to take anyone's illusions away, but I have just been trying to make the full GPO imitate a string quartet. To be honest, the only instrument that is sort of acceptable is the cello, in some registers at least. None of the violins sound remotely like solo violins to my ear, although the best one seems to be the Guaneri. I'd currently say that it is not possible to get a realistic solo violin sound out of GPO. But I am a violinist, so my standards are high. In a way I am kind of glad this is the case... Johannes This is often referred to on midi windcontroller lists I subscribe to and other midi-based music groups as Home-Instrument-Bias (or HIB) where none of us are satisfied with electronic versions of the acoustic instrument we play ourselves, even though we often are pleased with electronic versions of other instruments. I am a trumpet player, and I have never (to my knowledge) heard an electronic trumpet patch that I am satisfied with, and my wife is a violinist (thus I hear good violin sounds all the time) and so I have never heard an electronic violin patch which comes close to an acoustic violin. But I have to remind myself that I'm ever only dealing with midi modules and soft-synth sounds which cost under $1000. Perhaps if I were to upgrade my computer-music studio to include something like the East-West sample set I might begin to change my mind, and were I ever able to invest $10K or $20K in a true studio setup, I might well find sounds I am satisfied with. But at the level I work at, I'm still searching. Even ensemble string sounds are unsatisfying if you've ever stood up in front of a human orchestra as conductor. Well, let me qualify that -- the sounds are unsatisfying, even if not having to deal with all the egos and attitude problems often present in human orchestras makes working at my computer that much more enjoyable! ;-) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Lee Actor wrote: Thanks, this is very helpful. It's hard to tell what's missing just from the list of patch names, e.g., Viola Section is included with Finale, but Viola Section (10 players) is only in the full GPO. Also, no Violin II section in either? [snip] Oh, no! No violin II section? How are we gonna get those primma-donnas in the first-violin section to play those parts? I can hear the griping and moaning now, to say nothing of the increase in pay that'll be required to get them to lower themselves to play the violin II parts! :-) On a different light note -- the younger son of a violinist (second violin) in the community orchestra I conducted was asked what instrument he wanted to play when he got older, he was quick to reply Second Violin! When asked why, he replied My daddy tells me it's easier! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On Jul 14, 2005, at 5:38 AM, dhbailey wrote: Well, let me qualify that -- the sounds are unsatisfying, even if not having to deal with all the egos and attitude problems often present in human orchestras makes working at my computer that much more enjoyable! ;-) Heh, heh! Have you read Frank Zappa's indictment of the orchestra as an organization? It's in his autobiography, and has been widely quoted elsewhere. It's funny, but it's also somewhat true, otherwise it wouldn't be funny. Dennis B-K posted here something on a similar topic a few years ago equally persuasive. I don't think I kept it, though. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
I talked with a rep at MakeMusic yesterday about the absence of saxophones in the GPO set that come with 2006. There will be none in the full version of GPO either, for saxophones one must purchase the jazz GPO package. Can this be a blessing in disguise?John WymanI have just one question concerning the GPO set that comes with Finale -- are there saxophones included?I realize that GPO is releasing a jazz-based version sometime soon, but I am hoping that since Finale has included it with the upcoming release there are saxophones included for those of us who work in the band world as well as the orchestra world.Thanks again for a thoughtful review!-- David H. Bailey[EMAIL PROTECTED]___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
How does one access the smartmusic soundfount for playback (not through the internal speaker) with Mac Fin 04c? Dean On Jul 14, 2005, at 2:31 AM, dhbailey wrote: ronan wrote: Oh well. At least Tyler's review in another post leaves me hopeful that playback in Fin2006 using GPO will be at least higher quality than using the smartmusic soundfont that has been include with the past few versions. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale As a newly diagnosed diabetic, self denial is now my ally, exercise my master. Dean M. Estabrook Retired Church Musician Composer, Arranger Adjudicator Amateur Golfer ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Here's the list of strings that I took directly from MaekMusic!'s site. With Finale: Viola Solo Viola: Player 1 Viola: Player 2 Viola: : Player 3 Cello: : Modern Solo Cello: : Player 1 Cello: : Player 2 Cello: : Player 3 Bass: : Solo Bass: Player 1 Solo Bass: Player 2 Bass: Player 2 Full Strings: Arco Full Strings: Pizzicato Full Strings: Tremolo Violin 1 Section: Arco Violin 1 Section: Pizzicato Violin 1 Section: Tremolo Viola Section: Arco Viola Section: Pizzicato Viola Section: Tremolo Cello Section: Arco Cello Section: Pizzicato Cello Section: Tremolo Bass Section: Arco Bass Section: Pizzicato Bass Section: Tremolo Violin: Solo Violin: Player 1 Violin: Player 2 Violin: Player 3 Here's what MakeMusic! says comes with full GPO: 1st Violin Section (12 Players) 2nd Violin Section (10 Players) Double Bass Section (7 Players) Solo Double Bass 3 Solo Gagliano Violin 3 Double Basses for Sections Solo Gofriller Cello Solo Guarneri Violin Solo Montagnana Cello Solo Pierray Cello Solo Stradivari Violin 9 Cellos for Ensembles Solo Viola 9 Violins for Ensembles Cello Section (8 Players) Viola Section (10 Players) The GPO list looks shorter, but it's not really. Solo instruments and ensembles have a key switch for pizz, tremolo, short bows, long bows, etc. Frankly, I would miss the Gagliano violin if I didn't have it. We will have to see what the quality of MakeMusic!'s more generic soloists are when F2006 arrives. Best, Ron http://www.RonaldJBrown.com -Original Message- From: dhbailey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: July 14, 2005 5:32 AM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO Tyler Turner wrote: [snip] For most of the instruments, you get a single solo instrument and 3 ensemble instruments. Thanks for adding that -- after reading Ronald's post I was feeling a bit let-down. I am intrigued now! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Dean M. Estabrook schrieb: How does one access the smartmusic soundfount for playback (not through the internal speaker) with Mac Fin 04c? Not sure how you mean. Where would the sound come out if not the internal speaker? Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
John Wyman wrote: I talked with a rep at MakeMusic yesterday about the absence of saxophones in the GPO set that come with 2006. There will be none in the full version of GPO either, for saxophones one must purchase the jazz GPO package. Can this be a blessing in disguise? Oh, definitely for me! I relish the thought of having to pay another $150 or so to get the sounds of an instrument which it is unthinkable to leave out of a quite large share of the composition/engraving field, namely Concert Band, to say nothing about Jazz Band or Marching Band. Since much of that music goes to the educational market, though, perhaps this is just Finale's way of saying, We know we've lost the educational market, so anybody who could write anything for it can go take a hike! What a wonderful thing MakeMusic (and GPO, those darlings!) have done for us all by giving us an orchestra-centric sound set, as if the orchestra is still a vibrant compositional medium or something while bands are dead as doornails and nobody every writes for them anymore. I wonder what moved them to include saxophones in their soundfonts? Blessing? You bet -- for Sibelius! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Johannes Gebauer wrote: Dean M. Estabrook schrieb: How does one access the smartmusic soundfount for playback (not through the internal speaker) with Mac Fin 04c? Not sure how you mean. Where would the sound come out if not the internal speaker? Johannes The line-out jack. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 14 Jul 2005, at 10:04 PM, dhbailey wrote: John Wyman wrote: I talked with a rep at MakeMusic yesterday about the absence of saxophones in the GPO set that come with 2006. There will be none in the full version of GPO either, for saxophones one must purchase the jazz GPO package. Can this be a blessing in disguise? Oh, definitely for me! I relish the thought of having to pay another $150 or so to get the sounds of an instrument which it is unthinkable to leave out of a quite large share of the composition/engraving field, namely Concert Band, to say nothing about Jazz Band or Marching Band. Saxophones are in the SoundFont. Just not the included GPO lite. I'm sure they would have liked to included them, but GPO Jazz/Big Band is not available yet. Also, the list of GPO instruments included in Fin2k6 is far more comprehensive than the instruments Sibelius provides, period. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005, at 03:04, dhbailey wrote:Oh, definitely for me! I relish the thought of having to pay another $150 or so to get the sounds of an instrument which it is unthinkable to leave out of a quite large share of the composition/engraving field, namely Concert Band, to say nothing about Jazz Band or Marching Band. Since much of that music goes to the educational market, though, perhaps this is just Finale's way of saying, "We know we've lost the educational market, so anybody who could write anything for it can go take a hike!" No, it's simply that GPO doesn't have saxophones, and that is, I agree, a serious lack. The Jazz Big Band Collection, which does of course have saxophones, has not yet been released. You can't blame MakeMusic for excluding instruments that are not available.John___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Wyman wrote: I talked with a rep at MakeMusic yesterday about the absence of saxophones in the GPO set that come with 2006. There will be none in the full version of GPO either, for saxophones one must purchase the jazz GPO package. Can this be a blessing in disguise? Oh, definitely for me! I relish the thought of having to pay another $150 or so to get the sounds of an instrument which it is unthinkable to leave out of a quite large share of the composition/engraving field, namely Concert Band, to say nothing about Jazz Band or Marching Band. Since much of that music goes to the educational market, though, perhaps this is just Finale's way of saying, We know we've lost the educational market, so anybody who could write anything for it can go take a hike! What a wonderful thing MakeMusic (and GPO, those darlings!) have done for us all by giving us an orchestra-centric sound set, as if the orchestra is still a vibrant compositional medium or something while bands are dead as doornails and nobody every writes for them anymore. I wonder what moved them to include saxophones in their soundfonts? Blessing? You bet -- for Sibelius! Sibelius ships with Kontakt Silver, which includes 20 sounds. You can use 8 at a time. This makes covering large ensembles of any sort simply impossible. Finale GPO doesn't have saxophones, but at least the Finale softsynth does (although you can NOT use these concurrently - you'll have to record them separately and mix them). To list the instruments Sibelius Silver has that Finale GPO does not: tenor sax, voice oohs and ahs, guitar. To list the instruments Finale GPO has that Sibelius Kontakt Silver does not, piccolo, english horn, bass clarinet, contra bassoon, tuba, marimba, xylophone, harpsichord, solo violin, solo viola, solo cello, solo bass, violin section, viola section, cello section, bass section, tremolo strings (solo and section). Neither library has soprano, alto, or bari saxes. For people who are really serious about getting good sounds for Finale, they will very soon have the option of GPO Advanced. That includes a ton of new instruments, including your euphonium and classical saxes. For the moment, Finale is leagues ahead of Sibelius in terms of playback. Tyler Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
On 15 Jul 2005, at 03:53, dhbailey wrote:But they list the Jazz Big Band Collection for sale (I was terribly wrong about the price -- it's a whopping $259 dollars more, and that's a special deal for Finale users!) so they could include a tickler about how they'll be releasing an update patch of the included GPO soundset to include an Alto Sax, Tenor Sax and Baritone Sax, when they are released. But there's no mention of that, so those of us who are active in the band world need to make this a $349 upgrade to get what the orchestra-centric Finale users get for $99. If there's a fairness in this I fail to see it. I agree that this is unfair. But if MakeMusic were to wait until all GPO's sounds were available to Finale users at the same price, some people would be deprived of sounds that they can now get. Yes, it's an unfair world we live in, but I see no conspiracy.John___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Ah, what I do is create a finale file, which then, for playback, goes via my MIDI to my Roland J35 Keboard, thence to my stereo amp and speaker system, whence I hear it. Sorry I didn't clarify that. Dean On Jul 14, 2005, at 11:44 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Dean M. Estabrook schrieb: How does one access the smartmusic soundfount for playback (not through the internal speaker) with Mac Fin 04c? Not sure how you mean. Where would the sound come out if not the internal speaker? Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale As a newly diagnosed diabetic, self denial is now my ally, exercise my master. Dean M. Estabrook Retired Church Musician Composer, Arranger Adjudicator Amateur Golfer ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
--- Lee Actor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone who is currently using GPO with Finale 2005 tell me how useful from a practical standpoint the subset of GPO that is shipping with Finale 2006 is compared to the full version? In other words, how much do you depend on the patches not included with the partial version for decent results? Also, does getting good results from GPO depend in some degree on using Human Playback? I tried it when it first came out and decided I could get better results doing my own humanizing, without the performance hit (or maybe I've just spent too much time with Finale's MIDI tool over the years). TIA. Lee Actor Composer-in-Residence and Assistant Conductor, Palo Alto Philharmonic http://www.leeactor.com The set it comes with is a good set. It's not good enough to not make me consider purchasing the full set, but I'm currently getting by without it. You might find the answer to your question depends on the style of music and type of ensemble you compose for. The included instruments cover the orchestra pretty well, with some exceptions in the percussion (like chimes). I think the woodwinds as a whole are a strong point, even compared to some other more expensive libraries. The brass can sound good in some contexts, but because you don't get the f or ff overlays, bright movie-like or fanfare sound is not easy to get - something that's better with the full GPO. Sections strings are solid, but I'm not sure about how well the solo strings can stand on their own or in small ensembles (string quartets, etc.). I'm willing to bet your impression will depend a lot on what you're used to working with. But if you don't yet own GPO, my advice is this: get Finale 2006 first and see how far it takes you. I'm actually quite pleased with the results I'm getting, but my standards may be less than yours. If you'd care to hear a large ensemble piece I've run through Finale using only Finale GPO and HP (no extra MIDI data), e-mail me privately and I'll send you an mp3. My own plan is to stick with the Finale GPO and then purchase the upgrade to GPO Advanced (skipping the normal GPO) when it arrives. It appears that it will fill in the majority of the holes in the current full product, both in terms of style and instruments. I had always been leaning towards the East West QLSO libraries, but HP in 2006 has convinced me to stick with Garritan. It just means less work for me. It will not meet your needs all the time - I'm sure of that. But I will be surprised if it doesn't give you a strong starting point. Remember that you have the Apply HP feature to add the HP data to the score, and you can use the MIDI Tool from there to tweak. But the fact that HP can automatically apply the correct data for slurs, instrument techniques (like pizz, trem, etc.), automatically alternate hand strokes for percussion instruments, add expression to long notes so they don't just sit there, interpret hairpins in a very decent manner (complete with altering both the volume AND the timbre) - this means that you are VERY likely to be in a better starting position than where you were before. I'm discovering that scores which have a lot of markings for HP to interpret can sound better than a lot of the scores I hear on the GPO demo page - and that's using the Finale GPO set that comes with Finale. Do you HAVE to use HP? Nope. It's all MIDI data that Finale has access to. I just strongly suggest experimenting with it to see where it will save you time. I hope this helps. Tyler Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Hi Lee, I am currently using the full GPO with Finale 2004--and I can't wait for Finale 2006. As I understand it, about 100 GPO instruments are included with F2006--and that means, to me, that they can be loaded directly from Finale. It seems that the GPO instruments missing from the cut down version for Finale are the solo instruments. Because there is not a direct link between Finale2004 and GPO, the way I proceed is to use Human Playback in Finale to record a midi, then import the midi in Cubasis VST where I can link it to GPO. The human playback expressions are carried over. I understand that will not be able to use the full GPO with Finale2006 immediately. But Gary has promised a free patch will be out soon. Ron Ronald J Brown http://www.RonaldJBrown.com -Original Message- From: Lee Actor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: July 13, 2005 4:36 PM To: Finale News List Subject: [Finale] 2006/GPO Can anyone who is currently using GPO with Finale 2005 tell me how useful from a practical standpoint the subset of GPO that is shipping with Finale 2006 is compared to the full version? In other words, how much do you depend on the patches not included with the partial version for decent results? Also, does getting good results from GPO depend in some degree on using Human Playback? I tried it when it first came out and decided I could get better results doing my own humanizing, without the performance hit (or maybe I've just spent too much time with Finale's MIDI tool over the years). TIA. Lee Actor Composer-in-Residence and Assistant Conductor, Palo Alto Philharmonic http://www.leeactor.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] 2006/GPO
--- ronan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Lee, I am currently using the full GPO with Finale 2004--and I can't wait for Finale 2006. As I understand it, about 100 GPO instruments are included with F2006--and that means, to me, that they can be loaded directly from Finale. It seems that the GPO instruments missing from the cut down version for Finale are the solo instruments. Because there is not a direct link between Finale2004 and GPO, the way I proceed is to use Human Playback in Finale to record a midi, then import the midi in Cubasis VST where I can link it to GPO. The human playback expressions are carried over. I understand that will not be able to use the full GPO with Finale2006 immediately. But Gary has promised a free patch will be out soon. Ron Ronald J Brown http://www.RonaldJBrown.com For most of the instruments, you get a single solo instrument and 3 ensemble instruments. Tyler Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Tyler Turner schrieb: Sections strings are solid, but I'm not sure about how well the solo strings can stand on their own or in small ensembles (string quartets, etc.). Not to take anyone's illusions away, but I have just been trying to make the full GPO imitate a string quartet. To be honest, the only instrument that is sort of acceptable is the cello, in some registers at least. None of the violins sound remotely like solo violins to my ear, although the best one seems to be the Guaneri. I'd currently say that it is not possible to get a realistic solo violin sound out of GPO. But I am a violinist, so my standards are high. In a way I am kind of glad this is the case... Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] 2006/GPO
Thanks, this is very helpful. It's hard to tell what's missing just from the list of patch names, e.g., Viola Section is included with Finale, but Viola Section (10 players) is only in the full GPO. Also, no Violin II section in either? I do mostly full orchestra stuff, and my quick-and-dirty setup is Finale with an external MIDI box (Emu Virtuoso 2000). For quality demos, I've got Sonar, Gigastudio, and high quality sample libraries, but of course that's a lot more work. If GPO can do something reasonable out of the box, I'd be interested in investing in it. And BTW, what is GPO Advanced? Couldn't find anything on the Garritan website about it. Also, it looks like HP data can be edited in Finale 2006. Does this mean it is stored as MIDI data in the file? Thanks again. -Lee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Tyler Turner Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2005 2:17 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006/GPO --- Lee Actor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone who is currently using GPO with Finale 2005 tell me how useful from a practical standpoint the subset of GPO that is shipping with Finale 2006 is compared to the full version? In other words, how much do you depend on the patches not included with the partial version for decent results? Also, does getting good results from GPO depend in some degree on using Human Playback? I tried it when it first came out and decided I could get better results doing my own humanizing, without the performance hit (or maybe I've just spent too much time with Finale's MIDI tool over the years). TIA. Lee Actor Composer-in-Residence and Assistant Conductor, Palo Alto Philharmonic http://www.leeactor.com The set it comes with is a good set. It's not good enough to not make me consider purchasing the full set, but I'm currently getting by without it. You might find the answer to your question depends on the style of music and type of ensemble you compose for. The included instruments cover the orchestra pretty well, with some exceptions in the percussion (like chimes). I think the woodwinds as a whole are a strong point, even compared to some other more expensive libraries. The brass can sound good in some contexts, but because you don't get the f or ff overlays, bright movie-like or fanfare sound is not easy to get - something that's better with the full GPO. Sections strings are solid, but I'm not sure about how well the solo strings can stand on their own or in small ensembles (string quartets, etc.). I'm willing to bet your impression will depend a lot on what you're used to working with. But if you don't yet own GPO, my advice is this: get Finale 2006 first and see how far it takes you. I'm actually quite pleased with the results I'm getting, but my standards may be less than yours. If you'd care to hear a large ensemble piece I've run through Finale using only Finale GPO and HP (no extra MIDI data), e-mail me privately and I'll send you an mp3. My own plan is to stick with the Finale GPO and then purchase the upgrade to GPO Advanced (skipping the normal GPO) when it arrives. It appears that it will fill in the majority of the holes in the current full product, both in terms of style and instruments. I had always been leaning towards the East West QLSO libraries, but HP in 2006 has convinced me to stick with Garritan. It just means less work for me. It will not meet your needs all the time - I'm sure of that. But I will be surprised if it doesn't give you a strong starting point. Remember that you have the Apply HP feature to add the HP data to the score, and you can use the MIDI Tool from there to tweak. But the fact that HP can automatically apply the correct data for slurs, instrument techniques (like pizz, trem, etc.), automatically alternate hand strokes for percussion instruments, add expression to long notes so they don't just sit there, interpret hairpins in a very decent manner (complete with altering both the volume AND the timbre) - this means that you are VERY likely to be in a better starting position than where you were before. I'm discovering that scores which have a lot of markings for HP to interpret can sound better than a lot of the scores I hear on the GPO demo page - and that's using the Finale GPO set that comes with Finale. Do you HAVE to use HP? Nope. It's all MIDI data that Finale has access to. I just strongly suggest experimenting with it to see where it will save you time. I hope this helps. Tyler ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
I really hoped Finale would get professional again and fix the EPS support after about 10 years...:-( I ordered it believing this would happen, but I guess I will have to switch to Sibelius finally... (They got it to work, so they really must be the better programmers). Sh*t! I NEED EPS SUPPORT Kurt ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
Wouldn't you think that fixes would come before features in a development cycle? Existing bugs, new bugs and new features are all addressed concurrently during the development cycle. When they start developing new features in an existing area of the program, they are often pulling open old code and fixing bugs. It makes a lot of sense to fix the bugs related to the area that you are developing in, since you are up to speed with that part of the program. With a program the size of Finale, there's a lot of relearning going on when opening up a part of the program that hasn't been worked with for a while. Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
Well, this is all speculation on my part, of course. But, first, I am talking about EPS not PDF. I can make PDFs. Even if a Microsoft competitor to EPS were only as successful as WMA vs. MP3 that would be fine with me. After all, I can make a WMA and send it to just about anyone in the world and they can play it. I cannot even make an EPS. Richard I'm actually kind of skeptical about that. I think that PDF is too well-established as a universal standard at this point. I think MS's attempt to impose their own proprietary alternative to PDF will go about as well as their attempt to impose WMA as an alternative to MP3 (i.e., not a complete failure, but far, far short of MS's goals). I am not as optimistic as you about Longhorn forcing any 'spill over' into EPS. However, if Microsoft decides to produce a competitor format to EPS then it may quickly overtake Adobe, and then the new format will be a common enough standard to _replace_ EPS purposes for us FinWin users. Richard Yates ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
Richard Yates wrote: Well, this is all speculation on my part, of course. But, first, I am talking about EPS not PDF. I can make PDFs. Even if a Microsoft competitor to EPS were only as successful as WMA vs. MP3 that would be fine with me. After all, I can make a WMA and send it to just about anyone in the world and they can play it. I cannot even make an EPS. An interesting irony is in the listing of features found in Finale 2006, as posted at their web-site: Export as EPS they claim IS supported, but only in Windows98 and WindowsME. Garritan Personal Orchestra is supported, but only in WindowsXP (plus Mac, of course). So we have our choices, have dual boot drives where we can boot into Win98 or WinME and get the graphics we need, then do a system reboot into WinXP and get the sounds we need. What a way to run a program! -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
At 10:58 AM 06/25/2005, dhbailey wrote: Garritan Personal Orchestra is supported, but only in WindowsXP (plus Mac, of course). I'd love to know why this supported in XP but not 2000. Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
Richard Yates wrote: We do not have the list of fixed issues yet, as the program is not yet finished. That list will not be available until the program is shipping. Wouldn't you think that fixes would come before features in a development cycle? Not necessarily. Program code isn't a huge bunch of discreet routines that never impact each other. The modules are called over and over again by different routines, and this process introduces some new bugs when the various modules are used in never-before-used combinations and sequences. Sometimes previously squashed bugs reappear from such things. The new features are often new modules which are easier to write than the bugs are to fix. And then there are the long-standing issues such as EPS export on the Windows side of things. If the developers haven't been able to fix it in the previous how many versions, what makes you think they've learned how for this version? No, we who use Finale intensively are not the ones that MakeMusic cares about -- it's the new user, the casual user, the one who will buy it and then maybe use it or not but at least it's another full-price new-user sale, that MakeMusic cares about. If they can satisfy us in the process, terrific. But the squashing of bugs, especially long-standing bugs, is a lot harder than introducing new features. And with enough new features, some users will never get into the program deeply enough to find the bugs. Of course, if they want to penetrate the educational market all they have to do is to give the program free to the teachers, give those teachers free training seminars, get them to understand the program and buy site-licenses for their schools, then give the school students deep discounts to capture them as Finale users. But I guess the powers that be at MakeMusic feel it's more financially safe to simply keep on turning Finale into Sibelius and hope somebody in the educational world notices. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
At 6/23/2005 08:33 PM, Richard Yates wrote: We do not have the list of fixed issues yet, as the program is not yet finished. That list will not be available until the program is shipping. Wouldn't you think that fixes would come before features in a development cycle? No, because adding new features might break existing stuff. Then you would be making fixes twice. Phil Daley AutoDesk http://www.conknet.com/~p_daley ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
On 24 Jun 2005 at 14:23, d. collins wrote: dhbailey écrit: And then there are the long-standing issues such as EPS export on the Windows side of things. If the developers haven't been able to fix it in the previous how many versions, what makes you think they've learned how for this version? I don't think it's a question of being able to fix it or not, but a question of priorities. MM probably figures that textured paper will bring them more new clients than they will lose with their broken EPS. But textured paper is incredibly easy to implement (you just change the background of your main editing windows to use an image instead of a color), while EPS export is dependent on factors outside Finale. If Sibelius, and many other Windows programs, manage to export EPS, certainly this can't be out of reach of MM's developers if they had any intention of doing so in the past five or six years. As Robert and others pointed out, we're unfortunately not their main concern. I don't mean to defend the decision to leave EPS broken -- it baffles me, too. But comparing it to a throwaway feature like textured paper, which I would actually use (because I'm currently experiencing eye-strain and having a non-white background would be helpful for that) is not really fair. In programming there are some things that are basically cosmetic features and that makes them easy to implement. But cosmetics do have a role to play in both usability and in setting the impression that users take away from the program. How many times have I noticed the difference in commitment of clients to my projects for them when I've done two different things: 1. for the first demo, used the program as is, in its half-completed state, OR 2. taken #1 and added on a few cosmetics, like an attractive graphical splash screen, and put up something of a Potemkin village UI in front of the components that have already been created. In the case of #1, they often doubt whether they're getting what they paid for, whereas with #2, they are often enthusiastic. Of course, the downside of #2 is that they sometimes think that the job is done at that point and can't understand why it's taking me so long to get the thing finished. Nonetheless, appearance is very important, even if it doesn't really matter to those of us concentrating on functionality. -- 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: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
Regarding EPS, my hope is that when they're tearing things apart to get ready for Longhorn that this will be something that needs to get addressed. It's probably going to be a nightmarish year for them with two large platform changes arriving (Longhorn and Mac Intel), and there might be some deep level stuff being redone. Regards, Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
On 24 Jun 2005 at 11:31, Tyler Turner wrote: Regarding EPS, my hope is that when they're tearing things apart to get ready for Longhorn that this will be something that needs to get addressed. It's probably going to be a nightmarish year for them with two large platform changes arriving (Longhorn and Mac Intel), and there might be some deep level stuff being redone. Longhorn is *not* going to make their lives simpler, because MS is implementing a competitor to PDF in Longhorn, and perhaps this new standard will go beyond that towards doing what EPS does. MM is going to have to decide if they will support that in Longhorn, as well as deciding if they're going to fix EPS, which probably won't be made any easier in Longhorn (it may very well be no harder, either). -- 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: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Longhorn is *not* going to make their lives simpler, because MS is implementing a competitor to PDF in Longhorn, and perhaps this new standard will go beyond that towards doing what EPS does. MM is going to have to decide if they will support that in Longhorn, as well as deciding if they're going to fix EPS, which probably won't be made any easier in Longhorn (it may very well be no harder, either). My point wasn't that it would make their lives simpler but that it could be the type of change that forces them to work with that area of the program. I didn't mention it, but I also was thinking about the special PDF competitor that Microsoft is including. If MakeMusic chooses to support that, the work they do there might very well spill over into EPS. Who knows how related the technologies will be. I would actually be somewhat surprised if working on one didn't help with the other. Tyler __ Yahoo! Mail Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
On 24 Jun 2005 at 13:10, Tyler Turner wrote: --- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Longhorn is *not* going to make their lives simpler, because MS is implementing a competitor to PDF in Longhorn, and perhaps this new standard will go beyond that towards doing what EPS does. MM is going to have to decide if they will support that in Longhorn, as well as deciding if they're going to fix EPS, which probably won't be made any easier in Longhorn (it may very well be no harder, either). My point wasn't that it would make their lives simpler but that it could be the type of change that forces them to work with that area of the program. I didn't mention it, but I also was thinking about the special PDF competitor that Microsoft is including. If MakeMusic chooses to support that, the work they do there might very well spill over into EPS. Who knows how related the technologies will be. I would actually be somewhat surprised if working on one didn't help with the other. Well, as a programmer, I'd be surprised if supporting the new proprietary MS technology did not make supporting PostScript and EPS more difficult. There certainly is unlikely to be any overlap in the codebase for handling the two. The whole reason WinFin does poorly with EPS is because Windows just doesn't provide any help for PostScript at all -- it's not a basic part of the OS as it is on the Mac. MS's new proprietary competitor for PDF/PostScript will not bring Windows any closer to the Mac in its support for PostScript formats. -- 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: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
I'm actually kind of skeptical about that. I think that PDF is too well-established as a universal standard at this point. I think MS's attempt to impose their own proprietary alternative to PDF will go about as well as their attempt to impose WMA as an alternative to MP3 (i.e., not a complete failure, but far, far short of MS's goals). - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 24 Jun 2005, at 7:42 PM, Richard Yates wrote: My point wasn't that it would make their lives simpler but that it could be the type of change that forces them to work with that area of the program. I didn't mention it, but I also was thinking about the special PDF competitor that Microsoft is including. If MakeMusic chooses to support that, the work they do there might very well spill over into EPS. Who knows how related the technologies will be. I would actually be somewhat surprised if working on one didn't help with the other. Tyler I am not as optimistic as you about Longhorn forcing any 'spill over' into EPS. However, if Microsoft decides to produce a competitor format to EPS then it may quickly overtake Adobe, and then the new format will be a common enough standard to _replace_ EPS purposes for us FinWin users. Richard Yates ___ 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] 2006 question
In a message dated 6/23/05 12:41:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does "Embeded Fonts" mean that when you send Finale files, all fonts that are in them will print correctly, whether or not they are installed in the system of the recipient of the files Chuck - I believe it refers to exported graphics. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 question
On Jun 23, 2005, at 11:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 6/23/05 12:41:59 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:Does "Embeded Fonts" mean that when you send Finale files, all fonts that are in them will print correctly, whether or not they are installed in the system of the recipient of the files Chuck - I believe it refers to exported graphics.Oh. Not a bad thing, but less than I imagined.I'll dream on.Thanks.Chuck___Finale mailing listFinale@shsu.eduhttp://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006
On Jun 22, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: the addition of better sounds will be nice. Though I just bought the whole GPO through their group buy :-/ An overall MIDI question I've had for years: If I have a snazzy set of sounds on my computer, create a MIDI file with them, and post it to the internet, will someone listening to that file over the internet hear the same sounds, or just whatever MIDI sounds their own computer has? 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] 2006 a closer look
I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. There are also Smart Shapes with the ability to enter the name of a cued instrument with Play appearing at the end of the line. (French Horn Cue...stretchable linePlay - all in one shape.) These things are quite useful to me, and not easy (though possible) to transfer from file to file. Smart Line libraries will make this a piece of cake. A little thing, perhaps, but I'm going to like it. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006
Not sure about the question: in the first place a MIDI file isn't made from sounds it' s just computer code. However, you could create a MIDI file which triggers your snazzy sounds and record the end product as a WAV or MP3 file, and post THAT and everyone would hear what you hear. Or am I missing something obvious in your question? I must be. Ken At 11:42 AM 6/23/2005, you wrote: On Jun 22, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: the addition of better sounds will be nice. Though I just bought the whole GPO through their group buy :-/ An overall MIDI question I've had for years: If I have a snazzy set of sounds on my computer, create a MIDI file with them, and post it to the internet, will someone listening to that file over the internet hear the same sounds, or just whatever MIDI sounds their own computer has? 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] 2006
Hi Andrew, MIDI files contain no audio data. They play back using whatever MIDI instruments the person playing back the file happens to have on their computer (or sound card). It's a like a player piano roll -- it plays back using the sound of whatever player piano you feed it through. If you want everyone to hear _your_ snazzy MIDI sounds, you must record an audio file and post that to the internet. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 2:42 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Jun 22, 2005, at 5:50 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: the addition of better sounds will be nice. Though I just bought the whole GPO through their group buy :-/ An overall MIDI question I've had for years: If I have a snazzy set of sounds on my computer, create a MIDI file with them, and post it to the internet, will someone listening to that file over the internet hear the same sounds, or just whatever MIDI sounds their own computer has? 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] 2006 a closer look
on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look
Isn't smart line and custom line the same thing? FWIW: My Settings Scrapbook plugin has been able to transfer custom line libraries for a couple of years at least, in versions of Finale all the way back to Fin2000. -Original Message- From: Don Hart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:06 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ 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] 2006 a closer look
No. Smart line = custom smart shape. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 4:47 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't smart line and custom line the same thing? FWIW: My Settings Scrapbook plugin has been able to transfer custom line libraries for a couple of years at least, in versions of Finale all the way back to Fin2000. -Original Message- From: Don Hart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:06 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look
So what is custom line? (I thought it too meant custom smart shape.) -Original Message- From: Darcy James Argue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:57 PM To: finale@shsu.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look No. Smart line = custom smart shape. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 4:47 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't smart line and custom line the same thing? FWIW: My Settings Scrapbook plugin has been able to transfer custom line libraries for a couple of years at least, in versions of Finale all the way back to Fin2000. -Original Message- From: Don Hart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:06 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look
I think some people were confusing custom (smart) line with lines created as shape expressions? (Or perhaps it was just me.) Anyway, I know Settings Scrapbook can already transfer custom smart shape definitions between documents, but it will still be nice to have that functionality built directly into to Fin2k6, especially since recent vintages of Finale allow an (effectively) unlimited number of custom smart lines. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 5:04 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: So what is custom line? (I thought it too meant custom smart shape.) -Original Message- From: Darcy James Argue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:57 PM To: finale@shsu.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look No. Smart line = custom smart shape. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 4:47 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't smart line and custom line the same thing? FWIW: My Settings Scrapbook plugin has been able to transfer custom line libraries for a couple of years at least, in versions of Finale all the way back to Fin2000. -Original Message- From: Don Hart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:06 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look
Robert, One and the same as far as I can tell. From the Finale manual: Custom lines To create a custom line Click the Smart Shape Tool W. The Smart Shape Palette appears. Option-click the Custom Line Tool ¿. The Smart Line Style Selection dialog box appears. Don Hart on 6/23/05 4:04 PM, Robert Patterson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So what is custom line? (I thought it too meant custom smart shape.) -Original Message- From: Darcy James Argue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:57 PM To: finale@shsu.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look No. Smart line = custom smart shape. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 23 Jun 2005, at 4:47 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't smart line and custom line the same thing? FWIW: My Settings Scrapbook plugin has been able to transfer custom line libraries for a couple of years at least, in versions of Finale all the way back to Fin2000. -Original Message- From: Don Hart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 08:06 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] 2006 a closer look on 6/23/05 1:48 PM, Chuck Israels at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just looked a little more carefully at the 2006 enhancements and found one thing that will be useful to me: Smart Line libraries. For example, Bill Duncan has created some particularly useful Smart Shape devices that include more elements than Finale has in its libraries, like an 8va sign with the usual dashed line following it but with the addition of a clearly noticeable enclosed loco included at the end of the stretchable smart line. .. Chuck, I think the Smart Line libraries will be helpful too, especially if I ever get more organized along the lines of templates and a default file. But what I wanted to point out to you is that for the above example, with the possible exception of the enclosure around loco, the custom line tool would work quite well and is very flexible. After looking at the smart line dialog box it appears enclosures aren't readily available, so maybe that was the point of touting Bill's product. I just wanted to make sure that you and others here were aware of the custom line tool and what it could do with the above example. Don Hart ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: Finale 2006
Robert Patterson wrote: This issue of long-standing bugs being fixed points up a feature listed on the website that greets me with dismay. That is the Studio View Powerful Mixer feature. Some on this list are already salivating at the thought, but for all its possible value, I believe it is a rueful step. Maybe, but on the other hand, the current situation in which we have little control over the levels of the internal sounds is just plain unacceptable. If a mixer means that we can 'zoom in' on a specific line to check it, or even make each part evenly matched (again for checking purposes), then surely that must be an improvement over having to create and edit a variety of non-printing volume expressions etc. I also hope that FinMac 2006 solves a number of the existing bugs and extra features to improve the existing user experience, for example: - being able to add standard Mac keyboard shortcuts and have them actually work, - having a Go To Bar keyboard shortcut, - larger/resizable Expression and Articulation dialog boxes, - a return to the faster implementation of the Selection Tool and keyboard nudging, - more fields in the File Info section, - non-contiguous Mass Edit selection, - a Repeat Last Action command, - text styles, - a wider range of possible starting points for Smart Shapes (e.g. boxes, hairpins), - being able to set your own default files and access them from the Setup Wizard rather than being limited to the current two, - the ability to enter articulations and slurs from within the Speedy Entry tool, - better rehearsal figures control a la Forza, - the ability to optimize staves directly from the staff tool, and optimize them away individually rather than having to change to the page layout tool and back again, etc. etc. etc., but after seeing the fifth listed new feature as Textured Manuscript Paper, my heart sank... Matthew ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Re: Finale 2006
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote: Maybe, but on the other hand, the current situation in which we have little control over the levels of the internal sounds is just plain unacceptable. My lament is that they have expanded Finale's scope: not that they have improved playback. I would have been much happier if they had partnered with an existing sequencing program to integrate the two. Or at least created a separate division within MM to develop a sequencer of their own (on its own schedule) and grown them together much as they are doing with Finale and SmartMusic. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] RE: Finale 2006 - MakeMusic's response
We do not have the list of fixed issues yet, as the program is not yet finished. That list will not be available until the program is shipping. Wouldn't you think that fixes would come before features in a development cycle? Richard Yates ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006
An overall MIDI question I've had for years: If I have a snazzy set of sounds on my computer, create a MIDI file with them, and post it to the internet, will someone listening to that file over the internet hear the same sounds, or just whatever MIDI sounds their own computer has? The latter. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006
A MIDI file is kind of like a score, really, which needs performers to make it audible - put the same string quartet parts in front of a middle school group and the Emerson Quartet and you're going to have two very different performances! Ken An overall MIDI question I've had for years: If I have a snazzy set of sounds on my computer, create a MIDI file with them, and post it to the internet, will someone listening to that file over the internet hear the same sounds, or just whatever MIDI sounds their own computer has? The latter. ___ 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] 2006
No. I have not seen nor heard anything. Where did you get this info?? Chuck Israels wrote: Hi folks, Am I the only one who has seen the announcement of Finale 2006? There's usually a lot of discussion when these things are announced, and there seem to be some significant improvements (along with the usual bells and whistles), including what looks like a real improvement in control of mass copying behavior, much more flexibility and efficiency in dealing with libraries, and some help with graphic export (something I rarely use, but would if it were easier. There's also integration with Garritan (nice for me, since I now seem to be a little part of that, and will certainly find use for the jazz sound samples), and improved Kontact integration (or so the PR seems to indicate). At least this is how things appear on the web site, if I have understood correctly. Don't know if everyone will be satisfied, but things seem to be looking up. I see no delivery date listed. Any other reactions? Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] 2006
Some info here: http://www.finalemusic.com/finale/ Fiedler Habsburger Verlag Frankfurt (Dr. Fiedler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 22.06.2005, at 21:34, Eric Dannewitz wrote: No. I have not seen nor heard anything. Where did you get this info?? Chuck Israels wrote: Hi folks, Am I the only one who has seen the announcement of Finale 2006? There's usually a lot of discussion when these things are announced, and there seem to be some significant improvements (along with the usual bells and whistles), including what looks like a real improvement in control of mass copying behavior, much more flexibility and efficiency in dealing with libraries, and some help with graphic export (something I rarely use, but would if it were easier. There's also integration with Garritan (nice for me, since I now seem to be a little part of that, and will certainly find use for the jazz sound samples), and improved Kontact integration (or so the PR seems to indicate). At least this is how things appear on the web site, if I have understood correctly. Don't know if everyone will be satisfied, but things seem to be looking up. I see no delivery date listed. Any other reactions? Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ 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] 2006
On Jun 22, 2005, at 3:28 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: Hi folks, Am I the only one who has seen the announcement of Finale 2006? There's usually a lot of discussion when these things are announced, and there seem to be some significant improvements (along with the usual bells and whistles), including what looks like a real improvement in control of mass copying behavior, much more flexibility and efficiency in dealing with libraries, and some help with graphic export (something I rarely use, but would if it were easier. There's also integration with Garritan (nice for me, since I now seem to be a little part of that, and will certainly find use for the jazz sound samples), and improved Kontact integration (or so the PR seems to indicate). They mention July 2005. I just got the email notice now. But when I tried to pre-order, Firefox kept telling me that the document contained no data. Safari works fine, though. One thing, I noticed that Garritan Jazz and Big Band Collection is announced as well, on the check out page, at US$ 199.00. From the Garritan website it costs $259. I was hoping to get a reduction since I already own the Personal Orchestra, but it looks like Finale is the key to getting a discount. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
