hello mr. smith, nice solution, faster than the other one. thank you very much for your help. kindest regards, marcelo
----- Original Message ----- From: Christopher BJ Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: M. Perticone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 11:28 AM Subject: RE: [Finale] orchestral efficiency - more > At 9:57 AM -0300 7/12/02, M. Perticone wrote: > >hello list, > > > >i need to solve something closely related to this thread. > > > >i would put two parts in a single staff, say, flutes I/II. but some passages > >are too way polyphonic and complex, so sharing the same staff would result > >in a messy layout. i know i can write those parts in two different staves, > >and at last, optimizing would hide the the non-used staff. but as you can > >see, i would have to accomodate those parts in a single page, and a problem > >with staves names remains, as the first staff will say flutes I - II, and > >the other one, flute II. is there a better choice or procedure? > >thanks in advance for any advice, > > > >regards, > >marcelo > > > Two ways. > > 1) my preferred way. > > Staff style, where only the abbreviated name is changed to Fl. I and > everything else is the same. Apply it to the top staff whenever the > parts split to two staves. This is great for instrument changes, too, > like flute to piccolo, etc. > > 2) the old way, for users of pre-staff styles versions of Finale > > You can edit the staff names of systems that have been optimised, on > a system-by-system basis, without it changing the names of EVERY > system. Only optimises systems can do this, as any editing normally > changes EVERY system name. This can be a big drag if there are 57 > examples to change. Thank goodness we have staff styles now (see > method 1). > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
