Dear David,
I could not get Special Tools/Beam Adjustment to access any part that
had been extracted from a multi-part staff, and beam adjustments are
needed. You cannot go back to the score to do the editing, or to a
part with both voices, because the beam situation changes as the
number of notes on the stem changes from two to one.
This stops me dead in working in this system with multi-part staves.
I also described (or tried to) another uncontrollable situation. On
one staff line in a part, a 31 m. MM rest and a one m. pickup (with
entries) at the end of the line. Finale will make the 31 m. rest and
the one m. spread equally on the line, making the single measure look
way too wide. So you drag the bar line and fix it. Fine, if you
print right away, but go to another part and return to this one, and
take a look. The spacing has sprung back to the default. I
understand this to be a result of the fact that you are really
messing up the measure proportions in the score, so the manual
adjustment cannot be made to hold, or things would be wildly out of
proportion in the score. I can't wrap my brain around a way to
control this correctly, as long as you are working in linked parts.
Maybe I'm overlooking something, but this is forcing me back to
extracted parts. (I don't trust myself to see, or want to have to
look for, these spacing things and adjust them every time I open a
part to print it. If the layout doesn't hold, I can't use the system.)
In terms of overall time spent on Finale, it is probably more
efficient for me to duplicate edits in parts and scores, rather than
work this way. This is a disappointment to me, since I've been
working unrelentingly to learn this for the last two months and feel
that I have achieved pretty good control.
Careful what you ask for, you might get it! Well, maybe it's a good
idea to have some parts linked and only extract those that have these
problems. I haven't wrapped my brain around that one yet.
Chuck
On Oct 2, 2006, at 2:31 AM, dhbailey wrote:
My experience with the linked score/parts shows me that for single-
part-staves it is a very good thing and I am hopeful it will only
get better.
My experience with multiple-part-staves shows me that as soon as
Finale filters which notes appear on the single-staff parts that it
is possible to end up with, Finale needs to have all musical
editing done on either the original score only or on another linked
part which contains the original multiple-part-staff.
For example, it will be possible to have a score which has 2 flute
parts on a single staff, and in the create parts dialogue, to
create 3 linked parts: 1) flute 1-2 (contains all the music in the
original staff); 2) flute 1 (with the voicing options set
appropriately); 3) flute 2 (with the voicing options set
appropriately). All the page layout issues can be accomplished on
the second and third parts as I just described them, but all the
music entry issues (correcting wrong notes, adding or deleting
notes, etc) has to be accomplished on the first part I just described.
And Chuck found out just as I had done, that extracting the second
and third parts as I describe them above allows the editing work to
move ahead very nicely.
But editing the music in the first part isn't too difficult, and
all those edited changes will show up on the second and third parts
(before they are extracted, of course).
It's all a brave new world that I see a lot of great potential in.
But as with so much of Finale (and indeed with all applications
I've ever used), it forces the user to learn to think in the
program's ideal workflow. We're all so new to it that it's hard to
discover just what that work-flow is.
David H. Bailey
Chuck Israels wrote:
Thank you Dennis, I will try this.
As I was working yesterday, I finally got frustrated enough to
stop the process and extract the parts. The extracted parts
retained the work that had been done with the linked parts and
inherited the voicing characteristics that had been set up in the
parts management dialog. In balance - this element of the new
system seems to be well worked out and is more than worth learning
to use.
But as soon as the parts were extracted and I went back to working
in individual documents, things began to go smoothly and quickly.
I don't know if this is because the linked parts system is still
in its infancy, or if its characteristics simply function in ways
that slow down my work flow, but I have spent the past two months
stubbornly trying to make it work only to be mightily relieved the
moment I finally abandoned it. YMMV. I am reminded to be careful
what I wish for, I might get it!
I so much want this to work, but I'm beginning to be convinced
that it is counterproductive for my work style, and that the time
required to open and edit a few documents to make corrections is
trivial compared to the time I have spent attempting to bend this
method to my needs.
Chuck
On Sep 30, 2006, at 11:33 PM, dc wrote:
Chuck Israels écrit:
I am now trying the method David describes below for the first
time,
and I find that it works pretty well but for the fact that the
beams
are un-editable in the parts. (Special Tools will not move them.)
Since the beam placement is done in the score with two or more
notes
on the stem, the placement with only one note should be different,
and it doesn't look good to me. You cannot apply Paterson Beams
plugin in the part (or any other plugin) and going back to the
score
where there are two notes on the stem doesn't solve the problem of
how things will look in the part. Am I missing something?
You can apply Patterson Beams (and most other plug-ins) if you
use the new version of his plug-ins: you open the plug-in in
score view, switch to part view, and apply it. Quite annoying,
especially for plug-ins with settings, such as PB, because you
can't simply run it without having it "open". And then, you waste
a lot of time going from score to parts and back.
This is probably the most irritating "feature" of linked parts...
Dennis
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA 98225-5836
phone (360) 671-3402
fax (360) 676-6055
www.chuckisraels.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Chuck Israels
230 North Garden Terrace
Bellingham, WA 98225-5836
phone (360) 671-3402
fax (360) 676-6055
www.chuckisraels.com
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
