I've never scanned any music to work with in Finale, so I guess I was
envisioning more rhythm and pitch errors than the type that you mention. I
realize that if elements are showing up in the wrong tool ("ties
misinterpreted as slurs and tempo markings misinterpreted as song verse")
different problems are encountered.
In the past, I've bailed on a number of midi files and started over, but if
they had needed only 5 bars out of a hundred fixed, most in the speedy tool,
I probably would have stuck with them. I guess all errors are not created
equal.
Don Hart
on 2/9/04 9:25 PM, Craig Parmerlee at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> At 09:43 PM 2/9/2004, Don Hart wrote:
>> I would think that proofing by playback, at least in most cases, would
>> make
>> 95% accuracy work pretty well, as opposed to reentering
>> everything. Even if
>> both methods were a wash timewise, scanning would break the routine, and
>> that can sometimes be its own blessing.
>
>
> No. The problem is that you might have to take 5 actions to fix each
> problem. If a triplet is misread as a string of 8th notes with an
> extra rest inserted, you're better off wiping out that mess and
> entering it clean. Likewise for ties misinterpreted as slurs and tempo
> markings misinterpreted as song verse. I think the break even point in
> time is about 98%, but the break even point in terms of my patience is
> about 99.5%
>
> Sometimes SharpEye gets there, sometimes it doesn't. I haven't seen
> anything else even get closeto break even.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Finale mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
