--- Darcy James Argue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 15 Jul 2005, at 2:32 PM, dhbailey wrote:
>
> > Your point being? Yes they do include those
> instruments. but if the
> > playback can't include the sax section, how will a
> reasonable
> > rendition of a band work be made?
>
> (A) With other instruments covering the saxophone
> parts, same as what I
> do know when I use GPO for jazz band scores.
>
> OR:
>
> (B) With the soundfont that FINALE provides.
>
> > The section you quoted specifically states that
> the softsynth and GPO
> > can't be used concurrently, so a band work will
> require two different
> > recordings which have to be mixed, or the band
> work will have to
> > resort to being recorded using the soundfont.
>
> That is correct. That's still much better than what
> you can get with
> Sibelius, which was the issue at stake here.
>
> > You can't use the soundfont playback at the same
> time as GPO
>
> Yes, I'm well aware of that.
>
> > So in this new upgrade which includes the GPO,
> band works have to be
> > recorded using the soundfont. Great -- I can do
> that with Sibelius,
> > too
>
> No, you cannot. Sibelius does not provide their own
> soundfont --
> Finale does (in addition to the GPO sounds).
>
> > , so I'm not quite sure what you're trying to
> point out to me. I've
> > been using soundfonts ever since my SoundBlaster
> AWE32 soundcard.
>
> This has nothing to do with your sound card. The
> instruments in
> Finale's SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont are provided
> by FINALE. They
> sound exactly the same on any decent sound card.
>
> To my knowledge, Sibelius does not provide an
> equivalent to the
> SmartMusic SoftSynth soundfont. You have to use a
> thrid-party
> soundfont (like QuickTime Musical Instruments or
> whatnot).
>
> > Playback for band works in both programs is the
> same, Finale's isn't
> > superior.
>
> That is simply false.
>
> What's better, a Finale+GPO rendition of a concert
> band work that
> contains every concert band instrument except
> saxophones (substituting
> clarinets or double-reeds on their parts, as I do
> now), or a Sibelius
> rendition of the same work with no tuba, no piccolo,
> no xylophone, and
> only eight instruments playing?
>
> - Darcy
> -----
Darcy said what I wanted to say. Seriously, a complete
ensemble where you temporarily substitute clarinets
for saxes sounds much, much better than an ensemble
where you start sticking in General MIDI brass or
woodwinds.
You're reading too much into Phil's response. The guy
apparently screwed up and didn't really understand
your question. With each new release, the support
starts getting mauled with more questions, and it
wouldn't surprise me if he's been working a lot of
overtime (probably helping out with testing/preparing
2006 as well). That doesn't change the fact that he
didn't answer your question, and it's certainly fine
for you to reply to him and let him know that.
At this point they probably don't even know for sure
which sounds will be included in the future. Since
Gary Garritan hasn't finished the jazz band or
Advanced GPO libraries, it's probably a bit difficult
to work out deals on licensing sounds from them.
I'm a band teacher. I'm a euphonium player - probably
just about the most overlooked concert band instrument
in modern sample libraries. But I'm finding Finale GPO
to be very useful for concert band renditions. I work
around the few limitations and end up with a product
that's leagues better than what I had before.
And looking at the education features offered by
MakeMusic vs. Sibelius, do you really feel that
MakeMusic isn't focusing on the band crowd?
Tyler
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
