In addition to Brad's and Robert's examples, I'll add the following items which are much easier to deal with in an intermediate "parts" score: 1) font and position of measure numbers 2) position and format of page numbers 3) music spacing
For me these are all different in the parts than they are in the score, and it's a lot less work to do these once in the "extraction" score than for each individual part. But by far the biggest factors for me in favor of an intermediate score are the TGTools Smart Explosion, and adding cues (I work mostly with large orchestral scores). Lee Actor Composer-in-Residence and Assistant Conductor, Palo Alto Philharmonic http://www.leeactor.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf > Of Robert Patterson > > > > In my earlier reply I neglected to mention this, which is a big issue > > for me as well. > > > > The examples Brad and I have given for using an intermediate (and > temporary) copy of the score for part extraction seem to call > into question the value of linked scores and parts. In theory I > think linked scores and parts is a great idea. In practice I > worry that no implementation (esp. within a single annual cycle) > will be complete or flexible enough to be useful, other than as a > hack. If that is the case, I hate to see MM neglect other kinds > of enhancements that might be more immediately usable for a > linked parts feature of dubious usefulness. _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
