John Howell wrote:
At 8:54 AM -0400 8/2/08, dhbailey wrote:
But why is this issue being raised now, when these same major
publishers have been using Finale for many years? Why wasn't the
staff-list limit lowered to 4 many years ago? That's the part that
baffles me -- did these publishers simply wake up and say "Oh, my
goodness, you know we've been crippled by all these staff lists for
all these years and didn't even know it?"
Ummm, did I miss something in all these identically-named posts, or am I
correct in saying that NO PUBLISHER HAS ACTUALLY SAID THAT THIS IS A
PROBLEM FOR THEM?!!! I thought someone just brought the possibility up
out of thin air as an apologia for MakeMusic's unannounced, unexplained,
and obviously unwanted arbitrary change. If I missed it, which publisher
is it that made that statement?
John
No, way back in this thread, this was put forth as a reason
specifically stated by MakeMusic as a reason. They
supposedly sampled a "large" number of users, which included
major publishers, and found that four was the ideal number
somehow.
The names of specific publishers was never mentioned, as I
would expect and hope, simply because any complaint or
suggestion should remain anonymous to the public at large.
What hasn't been mentioned to my satisfaction is exactly
what problems publishers would have due to large numbers of
staff lists, nor why this problem has only now come forth
when the program has not had such a restrictive limit on
staff lists before.
The solution was elegantly stated within the past few days,
to the effect that publishers who don't want more than four
staff lists, or who want the staff lists which get used to
be defined or labeled in any specific manner can simply
release Submission Guidelines which if not followed will
result in immediate return of submitted materials (provided
return postage is included). How difficult is it for Alfred
(was Warner Brothers) or Hal Leonard (the two biggest
publishers of music in the U.S. these days) to add the
following items to any list of submission guidelines:
1) all works submitted must be created using Finale
2) all works shall have only four staff lists as the
maximum, labeled as follows:
1; 2; 3; 4
2a) any works submitted with more than 4 staff lists shall
be immediately returned for revision
Why should all Finale users have to change their work-flow
because some publishers felt it was easier to get Finale
changed than to add a couple of conditions to their
submission guidelines?
That makes no sense whatsoever, so I think that MM may
simply be using that as a smokescreen to hide the true
reason for the limitation, one that they don't want to admit to.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
