On 4 Oct 2006 at 21:28, Daniel Wolf wrote: > David W. Fenton wrote: > > For 6 years I had no MIDI keyboard, so I know that the MIDI keyboard > > is *much* faster for me. > > The key qualification here is "for me";
I have never claimed otherwise. I was just responding to someone trying to convince me that it *wasn't* faster for *me*. > other users, with different > musical and data entry skills, as well as quite different musical > projects, will necessarily have different results. For example, when > I am simply copying a score into Finale, as opposed to composing with > the program, I find that command line entry is my fastest choice, in > spite of the command line plug-in being buried in the plug-in menu. The command-line plugin comes after the version of Finale I have, but I just tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo, which I have installed. I'm reminded of Score's input methods (though I don't have the online help to explain how to use it, so I haven't been very successful), which I always found unforgiving and obtuse. In Speedy with MIDI, I can hear what I've entered and tell immediately if it's correct, and I'm using musical means for the pitches. The command-line method requires translating musical information into Finale's code for it, and that extra step is a real problem for me (octave number is particularly problematic as far as I'm concerned -- I don't have that memorized and don't see musical utility in doing so). But again, each person has their own methods. The fact is, enharmonics do not slow me down in MIDI keyboard entry because the musical content requires multiple passes no matter what entry method you are using, unless you interrupt the flow of the method you are using, switching between keyboard and mouse. Perhaps some people can do that quickly, but I cannot. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
