Re: [Finale] tambourine sound
Thank you very much! Will do as you suggested. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 22, 2014, at 5:28 PM, Jan Angermüller j...@angermueller.com wrote: Open the Score Manager and select your tambourine staff. Set Notation Style to Percussion and select Maracas, Tambourine Shakers in the Percussion layout selection dialog, then click on Select. Back in Score Manager set the Perc. MIDI Map of the tambourine staff to General MIDI and assign SmartMusicSynth as Device. When using MIDI playback (and not VST Playback), assign MIDI channel 10 to the tambourine staff in the Score Manager. When you now enter into the staff with speedy note entry, you should be able to enter and to hear maracas, tambourine and shakers notes. If you want to have tambourine only, you can edit the Maracas, Tambourine Shaker settings above and delete everything except Tambourine. Better make a duplicate of the original notation style before deleting. If you are not using SmartMusicSynth or any General MIDI playback engine, you may need a different Perc.MIDI Map and a different notation style. Best regards, Jan Am 21.01.2014 18:37, schrieb dr.a.s. weinstangel: Fin2012, Win 8.1. I am trying to assign one staff to tambourine sound. It is delightful to find that, say, in the Brush drum kit that would be MIDI note number 83, and in the Electronic drum kit it would be number 54, but I have no idea how to assign that globally to the whole staff. Sliding the note with the mouse gives me all possible sounds, except what I need here. Please help! Dr.A.S.Weinstangel sasha.weinstan...@utoronto.ca NEW! cel.647-292-4605 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Anybody having any success with scanning?
I do not know which scanners exactly will work, and if it works for you, great. Tom Johnson of MakeMusic has a list of about 2 scanners that work. Contact him at MM and he will be happy to share his list with you When I scan, I import only time sigs, key sigs and notes from a score. Not dynamics or other expressions. No multi measure rests as they get imported as empty measures, just like the score. I then create a new score in Finale and copy the notes from the scanned version into the new file and then enter expressions, etc. If you are expecting to scan a score or sheet music and have everything created perfectly, then don't bother. If you are looking for the quickest workflow, then scanning should be part of your arsenal. It's not always the solution, but used properly, it can be a time saver. Terry Vosbein vosbein.comhttp://vosbein.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Anybody having any success with scanning?
I don't expect perfection, but I think it is reasonable to expect that I shouldn't have to make edits to every single measure where the scanning software has missed something important (ties, repeats, slurs, articulations, got the rhythms wrong, etc.) On 1/23/2014 5:14 PM, Vosbein, Terry wrote: I do not know which scanners exactly will work, and if it works for you, great. Tom Johnson of MakeMusic has a list of about 2 scanners that work. Contact him at MM and he will be happy to share his list with you When I scan, I import only time sigs, key sigs and notes from a score. Not dynamics or other expressions. No multi measure rests as they get imported as empty measures, just like the score. I then create a new score in Finale and copy the notes from the scanned version into the new file and then enter expressions, etc. If you are expecting to scan a score or sheet music and have everything created perfectly, then don't bother. If you are looking for the quickest workflow, then scanning should be part of your arsenal. It's not always the solution, but used properly, it can be a time saver. Terry Vosbein vosbein.comhttp://vosbein.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Anybody having any success with scanning?
After a very frustrating start a couple of years ago, I am now scanning music into Finale with a reasonable level of success. I am using a Canon scanner set to 300 dpi greyscale, but I do not scan directly into Finale. That's what I used to do and it was very frustrating and led to more additional effort to clean up the files than it would have taken me to key the notes in by hand. I would do it that way if there were only one or two pages at most in the piece. What I now do is to scan each page and save it as a TIF file. I then edit each page in Photoshop to make the ledger lines perfectly horizontal, crop and remove extraneous material (like pencilled in markings, smudges and a lot of the stuff that the software is not going to be able to do anything with anyway but can get confused by) and I use the levels tool in Photoshop to increase the contrast so the notes and ledger lines are really black and the background is really white. I then save the TIF file. If I am lucky, and the publisher of the music has written each part on its own staff and each system has the same number of staves, I can import the TIF files into Finale and begin music recognition. That usually works, with some limitations. If I am not lucky and there are different number of staves in the systems on subsequent pages, I have to do the music recognition in chunks and later put the music back together by copy and paste or drag and drop techniques after adjusting the individual chunks so they have the same number and arrangements of staves within systems. A lot of work, but less than entering the notes by hand. The limitations are several and very frustrating: 1) For some reason, the music recognition software cannot count and occasionally puts more notes into the measure than really fit. Usually, the notes bleed off into the next measure and are difficult to remove. In this case, I enter a new measure stack just after the mistake (that shows up the notes bleeding over into the next measure) and edit it by hand, often having to delete the whole measure and enter the notes by hand. Sometimes you get a measure that seems to contain all the extra notes without bleeding over. In those cases if I select the time signature tool and click on the measure I discover (for example) that instead of 4/4 time, the measure is actually in 8/4 time and the little box on the bottom saying show it as 4/4 is checked. WHY? If it showed me 8/4, I would have a clue it messed up. 2) Accidentals tied into the next measure are ALWAYS messed up. I have to check each one individually by deleting the tie, correcting the first note in the second measure and finally, reentering the tie. This is particularly insidious because it looks right, but plays wrong. Perhaps if I were only interested in printing the music after entering it, this would not matter, but playback is critical to my use of Finale. 3) The music recognition software invariably gets confused if there are different numbers of staves per system throughout the composition. Places where the publisher is saving paper by scrunching two parts into one stave and then separating them into two staves on another page when things get complicated, or a solo part that gets its own staff on the pages it appears, and the staff is not printed elsewhere. Can't handle it. That is why I do my music recognition in batches of pages all having the same configuration of staves, add staves if needed, and then put the stuff back together within Finale. All this said, if I am careful, do a good job cleaning up the scans in Photoshop and avoid confusing the software with a lot of staff per system changes, the scanning does save me a lot of time compared to hand entry of the notes. I just wish someone at Finale would clean up the code so it interpreted tied accidentals correctly. Clif Ashcraft ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Anybody having any success with scanning?
Clif, Thanks for sharing. That's a different approach than I had considered. I may give that a try this weekend. I am struck by the observation that part of your process involves things that are absolutely inexcusable for today's software to not already deal with. Specifically, straightening the page and and using optimal contrast should be easily within the scope of today's software. This isn't hyper-intelligence. These features are absolutely routine in the publishing world -- and have been for over a decade. I agree that the manual scrubbing of elements likely to foul up the process might require a higher level of intelligence if the software were to do that automatically. In my present project, the music is simple enough that by the time I Photoshop it, I'd be better off just entering the music manually, but in more complex scores, your procedure might be just the ticket. CP On 1/23/2014 9:09 PM, Clif Ashcraft wrote: After a very frustrating start a couple of years ago, I am now scanning music into Finale with a reasonable level of success. I am using a Canon scanner set to 300 dpi greyscale, but I do not scan directly into Finale. That's what I used to do and it was very frustrating and led to more additional effort to clean up the files than it would have taken me to key the notes in by hand. I would do it that way if there were only one or two pages at most in the piece. What I now do is to scan each page and save it as a TIF file. I then edit each page in Photoshop to make the ledger lines perfectly horizontal, crop and remove extraneous material (like pencilled in markings, smudges and a lot of the stuff that the software is not going to be able to do anything with anyway but can get confused by) and I use the levels tool in Photoshop to increase the contrast so the notes and ledger lines are really black and the background is really white. I then save the TIF file. If I am lucky, and the publisher of the music has written each part on its own staff and each system has the same number of staves, I can import the TIF files into Finale and begin music recognition. That usually works, with some limitations. If I am not lucky and there are different number of staves in the systems on subsequent pages, I have to do the music recognition in chunks and later put the music back together by copy and paste or drag and drop techniques after adjusting the individual chunks so they have the same number and arrangements of staves within systems. A lot of work, but less than entering the notes by hand. The limitations are several and very frustrating: 1) For some reason, the music recognition software cannot count and occasionally puts more notes into the measure than really fit. Usually, the notes bleed off into the next measure and are difficult to remove. In this case, I enter a new measure stack just after the mistake (that shows up the notes bleeding over into the next measure) and edit it by hand, often having to delete the whole measure and enter the notes by hand. Sometimes you get a measure that seems to contain all the extra notes without bleeding over. In those cases if I select the time signature tool and click on the measure I discover (for example) that instead of 4/4 time, the measure is actually in 8/4 time and the little box on the bottom saying show it as 4/4 is checked. WHY? If it showed me 8/4, I would have a clue it messed up. 2) Accidentals tied into the next measure are ALWAYS messed up. I have to check each one individually by deleting the tie, correcting the first note in the second measure and finally, reentering the tie. This is particularly insidious because it looks right, but plays wrong. Perhaps if I were only interested in printing the music after entering it, this would not matter, but playback is critical to my use of Finale. 3) The music recognition software invariably gets confused if there are different numbers of staves per system throughout the composition. Places where the publisher is saving paper by scrunching two parts into one stave and then separating them into two staves on another page when things get complicated, or a solo part that gets its own staff on the pages it appears, and the staff is not printed elsewhere. Can't handle it. That is why I do my music recognition in batches of pages all having the same configuration of staves, add staves if needed, and then put the stuff back together within Finale. All this said, if I am careful, do a good job cleaning up the scans in Photoshop and avoid confusing the software with a lot of staff per system changes, the scanning does save me a lot of time compared to hand entry of the notes. I just wish someone at Finale would clean up the code so it interpreted tied accidentals correctly. Clif Ashcraft
