That's fine -- I suppose you never have to revise your scores after you hear them? Never change the dynamics? Never decide to add a ritard because it would sound nice, after you heard the piece without the ritard?
I am very happy for everybody who pretends to be deaf like Beethoven when they compose. I am not like that. I am not a Mozart. I can't conceive of scores complete in my head and write them down perfectly so I don't ever want to change a note. (Come to think of it, Mozart couldn't do that either, I distinctly remember seeing some corrections and revisions in some manuscript facsimiles.) Your teacher could have told me that all he/she wanted to and it still wouldn't make me perfect in my composing, and never want to change a note after hearing it performed. Heck, Beethoven, Mozart, Mendelssohn, Schubert, all the greats of the composing world went back and made changes after hearing what worked and didn't work in concert. Why be so arrogant and proud about not wanting to hear it in your studio BEFORE you put it in front of musicians? If that is your cup of tea, and you can do it and never make any revisions, then God bless you and good luck! I can't do it, and I don't feel I should have to notate the entire thing in a notation program and not be able to hear things reasonably represented, including dynamics. Why should I have to go to a different program and then manually place the same dynamics I have already placed in Finale? Why should I even have to go to a different window and muck about with the midi tool, just to get crescendi to play back properly, when I have entered them as I want them in the score already? The fact of the matter is that Finale CAN play those things back, as long as I take a bit of extra time. I remember when word extensions used to be like that and then Coda made them more automatic and easy to work with. Are you suggesting that since they were already possible that Coda shouldn't have wasted development dollars on improving their implementation? I rarely enter music with lyrics, so to me development money spent improving the lyrics tool or word extensions is wasted. But you don't see me complaining that Coda shouldn't be spending time on improving that aspect, since I realize it is important to many Finale users, even though it isn't important to me. Why do you take that attitude with improving the midi implementation already in place in finale? Just because you don't use it is no reason to assume that many others don't use it, too, and may even find it the most helpful part of the program. But what the heck, maybe my new shipment of Prozac will arrive any minute now and I won't care about anything. ;-) Bob Florence wrote: > I remember my teacher telling me: "You have to see with your ears and hear > with your eyes". I don't use a piano or Finale's playback. Forgive me if I > sound arrogant. I am in complete agreement with Harold Stienhardt. > > Bob Florence > > Harold Steinhardt wrote: > > >>On Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:43 PM, David H. Bailey >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>>Finale is NOT just a page-layout program for engravers, it is also a >>> >>>tool used by arrangers and composers who want to hear how what they >>> >>are >> >>>working on sounds >>> >>> >>If an arranger or a composer does not know what it will sound like >>BEFORE notating it, then they do not know their art/craft very well. If >>they don't already know what it will sound like, how do they >>determine what to write in the first place? >> >>Finale: The Art Of Music Notation. >> >>Harold >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Finale mailing list >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale >> > > -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
