On 17 Sep 2002 at 18:28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In a message dated 9/17/02 4:45:15 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> << What the hell am I going to do here? >>
>
> You can start by calming down. Once you know how this works (or doesn't - for
> you) you can plan your approach.
The fact is, it *doesn't* work. I can only get the right result by
drag copying within the file with lyrics copying turned off.
That's a really bad alternative, but the best of it.
But, the fact that I didn't know that the copy's lyrics would be a
mirror of the original lyrics leaves my original lyrics in an
unacceptables state that I can't seem to rectify.
I've written to WinSupport and we'll see what they say.
[]
> In the situation you just described I would delete the lyric from the section
> you want to copy - copy/paste into your target document - then Undo in your
> source file to return the lyrics to their proper placement.
Copying between documents is just not a good solkution.
> >>It means that I don't get the benefit of knowing where the lyrics are
> that I'm going to change.<<
>
> If you use the Selection Tool to select the lyric in question, this will
> automatically take you to the current verse that the lyric assigned to.
>
> Articulations are duplicated for similar reasons to the lyrics issue. If they
> are truly the same, then what's the problem? I, personally, would swap them
> out (see change articulation) but that might be too much work for you.
Well, I'm simply not going to copy between files, as it makes far
worse problems than having to re-enter the lyrics.
> If Finale had to compare every articulation, lyric verse, element, etc. when
> copying between documents, imagine how awful that would be and how long it
> would take. Are you suggesting that as the alternative?
That would seem the logical thing to me. If there are apparent
duplicates (same font, same character, same positioning), then Finale
should ask me with a dialog that allows me to decide what it wants me
to do.
The number of articulation definitions is actually quite small
compared to the number of entries, so it should be able to compare
the articulations used in the source file to those in the destination
file and where Finale thinks there are duplicates ask you what to do,
with something like:
o create new (possibly duplicate) articulations/expressions
o convert the copied articulation/expressions to the exact
duplicates in the destination
o ask me for each case of:
x articulations
x expressions
x staff lists
Or something to that effect. It's not hard, really, as the number of
comparisons required is actually quite small.
Absent that, it would be nice to have a plugin that would find exact
duplicate expression/articulation definitions (exactly the same in
all respects) and that would change all instances of a chosen one of
the duplicate pair to the other, and then remove the duplicate from
the definitions. Then, at least, the cleanup process would be pretty
easy.
> We all have to learn to deal with these issues and get our jobs done. If you
> know how these things work, it will help you get through it. This is clearly
> the first time you have needed to do this, David, or you wouldn't be so
> shocked. You haven't just uncovered some hidden bug that nobody knows about -
> this is how it works and has for a very long time. I hope you can deal with
> it and get through your project.
I'm stunned that after all these years, working with lyrics is so
incredibly fraught with counter-intuitive defaults that mess up your
files beyond the end users' ability to rectify.
The whole copying mechanism overall is not nearly intuitive enough. I
still struggle with remembering how to insert a set of new blank
measures. Used to be I'd click the tool devoted to that function, or
highlight with mass mover and choose INSERT. Yes, it's more logical
to have that functionality on the measure tool, but now you've got
TWO selection tools, so the INSERT functionality ought to be in both.
But I still don't understand the logic behind mirroring lyrics BY
DEFAULT. Yes, it's an obviously useful OPTION, but as a default
behavior with no acceptable alternative for doing otherwise, it
boggles the mind.
I guess I just can't wrap my mind around the idea that something so
fundamental should be so poorly implemented in such a mature product.
--
David W. Fenton |
http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associates |
http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
