Yes Tim, I think I can agree with you here. My objection to this thread, is I believe many people were wanting it to become more of a full-fledged sequencer on the order of Performer and Logic. However, better implementation of what it does provide would not be a horrible thing.
But please everyone, Finale has always been the big gun for notation and that's where Coda should continue to spend most of its focus. When you want the big gun in sequencers, that's provided by other programs. Finale: The Art Of Music Notation. Harold On Tuesday, July 16, 2002 3:05 PM, Tim Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Harold, > >I do and don't agree with you. When I want to make a nice MIDI demo of a >piece I notated in Finale, I certainly export the MIDI into Digital >Performer, or some other sequencer and do it there. And, likewise, I don't >use Performer for notation. > >However, Finale _already has_ a thorough MIDI implementation that is useful >to many people (including myself) for a variety of reasons--most of which >involve playback of the score while it is in process. The problem is that >it is buggy and not always easy to use. If the interface for modification >of MIDI data were simpler and more reliable, then I suspect all of >us--including those whose focus is on notation output--would make better use >of it. > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
