Re: [Finale] Chords and enharmonics
Hi Neal, Turn off "Simplify Spelling" in the "Chord" menu. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY On 10 Mar 2004, at 12:42 AM, Neal Schermerhorn wrote: Hi, I'm relatively new to Finale and this list. I've found both helpful. I have an issue regarding getting chords to display intelligently. I'm in the key of F, here's what is happening. Gmaj7 F/G Gbmaj7 Bmaj7 is what Finale will do. I want to force Cbmaj7. Later in the same tune; Cmaj7 B7 Em Em/Eb A/C# - I want to force Em/D#. If I ask Finale to favor sharps or flats, I lose. Is there a way to tell Finale to just do what I want - without changing the key just for a "key of the moment"? I've tried re-entering the chords with my preferred spelling, it spits it back enharmonically. Thanks. Neal Schermerhorn ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Chords and enharmonics
Hi, I'm relatively new to Finale and this list. I've found both helpful. I have an issue regarding getting chords to display intelligently. I'm in the key of F, here's what is happening. Gmaj7 F/G Gbmaj7 Bmaj7 is what Finale will do. I want to force Cbmaj7. Later in the same tune; Cmaj7 B7 Em Em/Eb A/C# - I want to force Em/D#. If I ask Finale to favor sharps or flats, I lose. Is there a way to tell Finale to just do what I want - without changing the key just for a "key of the moment"? I've tried re-entering the chords with my preferred spelling, it spits it back enharmonically. Thanks. Neal Schermerhorn ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] iKey
Hey guys, I wanna thank Steve G. again for mentioning iKey -- it's *fantastic*. Words cannot describe. I've been using it for just a couple of hours already and I've already found a whole ton of stuff that it does better than QuicKeys. In addition to being much faster and much cheaper, it's also much easier to create scrolling shortcuts that actually work. In other words, it actually finds and clicks the damn button, regardless of window size or screen resolution! All you Mac OS X users, save yourselves some cash and get iKey. If you're unlucky enough to already own QuicKeys X, cut your losses and switch to iKey sooner, rather than later. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] FinMac2004, MacSupport, and speed issues
On Mar 9, 2004, at 8:48 AM, David Froom wrote: Who knew being "smart" also means being slow? Anyone with experience on old, speed-challenged computers. Any feature that is constantly updating on the fly is going to slow down the program. mdl ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Paper Redux
Cecil Rigby wrote about his favorite paper stock: here it's only available in 23x35 and I have it cut to 11x17. shouldn't lose too much, though; you should be able to get 2000 sheets of 11 x 17 from one ream of 23 x 35 I've *never* paid for cutting, and only ten bucks for wrapping! some supplier will cut stock to size for you, so you buy the stock, and pay a nominal set up charge for the cutting / wrapping... I've been looking for a replacement printer for masters and will check out this Ricoh based on what you've said I know my next printer will be the Ricoh 600 N. Based upon my calculations, the printer is cheap enough, fast enough, and durable enough for production work... ns ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Paper Redux
Hi Cecil, Weyerhaueser makes a nice acid-free natural white70# paper in 11x17 -- Cougar Opaque digital. I'm sure that would be less expensive than having 23x35 paper cut down. The Ricoh AP2610 has been discontinued, but you might be able to still find one on eBay (which is where I got mine). Keep in mind, USB printing doesn't work very well with OS X -- don't know if that's an issue for you. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY On 09 Mar 2004, at 07:08 PM, Cecil Rigby wrote: Well, that beats Hammermill's Accent Opaque 70# for sure. But I lose a good bit of weight (39 pounds!) because here it's only available in 23x35 and I have it cut to 11x17. Too bad you don't live in a little town like mine where people wanna do favors. sheesh! I've *never* paid for cutting, and only ten bucks for wrapping! I've been looking for a replacement printer for masters and will check out this Ricoh based on what you've said thanks! ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Paper Redux
On Tuesday, March 9, 2004, at 04:08 PM, Cecil Rigby wrote: I've been looking for a replacement printer for masters and will check out this Ricoh based on what you've said thanks! Refer to a recent thread for AP2610/AP2610N issues. It's not in production anymore, but you can find some decently priced on eBay... also, USB printing in Mac OS X doesn't work (at least, it doesn't work *comfortably*). In OS X it's best to use an Ethernet router. -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Paper Redux
Well, that beats Hammermill's Accent Opaque 70# for sure. But I lose a good bit of weight (39 pounds!) because here it's only available in 23x35 and I have it cut to 11x17. Too bad you don't live in a little town like mine where people wanna do favors. sheesh! I've *never* paid for cutting, and only ten bucks for wrapping! I've been looking for a replacement printer for masters and will check out this Ricoh based on what you've said thanks! Cecil Rigby [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) www.harrockhall.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [Original Message] > From: Darcy James Argue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Finale 3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 3/9/2004 6:41:51 PM > Subject: Re: [Finale] Paper Redux > > On 09 Mar 2004, at 06:12 PM, Cecil Rigby wrote: > > > Hi Darcy- > > > > do you mind telling us what the paper & shipping costs were? > > I can't remember the exact amount, and it hasn't showed up on my credit > card statement yet. The paper was something like $80 for 2000 sheets, > which I think is probably on the expensive side, but there you go. > (Plus $200 for the trimmer -- sigh. I was thinking of getting it > anyway, but still... ) > > > you're gonna be busy with that trimmer, man! go to your local > > newspaper and ask them to cut it down- smile real big and they'll do > > it for > > free a few bucks under the table to the boss and they'll > > shrink-wrap > > it, too works for me! > > Somehow, I doubt the New York Times would be willing to cut paper for > me. [grin] > > Besides, I don't own a car. I'm not going to drag 80 pounds of paper > with me anywhere, and I'm disinclined to make multiple trips. I > decided to get that massive (25") Carl rotary trimmer that does 30 > sheets of 20 lb. bond at a time -- don't know how many sheets of the > heavier stock I'll be able to do, but anyway, I'll manage. I do wish > the people at Lindenmeyr had actually *told* me that the paper wasn't > exactly 12" by 18". You would think that's the sort of thing the > client might like to know about. > > > PS- is that Ricoh AP2610 you have a duplexer? > > I bought the duplex unit for it -- it was about $200, and it hangs off > the back of the printer. So far, it's working great. > > - Darcy > > - > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Brooklyn NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Paper Redux
On 09 Mar 2004, at 06:12 PM, Cecil Rigby wrote: Hi Darcy- do you mind telling us what the paper & shipping costs were? I can't remember the exact amount, and it hasn't showed up on my credit card statement yet. The paper was something like $80 for 2000 sheets, which I think is probably on the expensive side, but there you go. (Plus $200 for the trimmer -- sigh. I was thinking of getting it anyway, but still... ) you're gonna be busy with that trimmer, man! go to your local newspaper and ask them to cut it down- smile real big and they'll do it for free a few bucks under the table to the boss and they'll shrink-wrap it, too works for me! Somehow, I doubt the New York Times would be willing to cut paper for me. [grin] Besides, I don't own a car. I'm not going to drag 80 pounds of paper with me anywhere, and I'm disinclined to make multiple trips. I decided to get that massive (25") Carl rotary trimmer that does 30 sheets of 20 lb. bond at a time -- don't know how many sheets of the heavier stock I'll be able to do, but anyway, I'll manage. I do wish the people at Lindenmeyr had actually *told* me that the paper wasn't exactly 12" by 18". You would think that's the sort of thing the client might like to know about. PS- is that Ricoh AP2610 you have a duplexer? I bought the duplex unit for it -- it was about $200, and it hangs off the back of the printer. So far, it's working great. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Paper Redux
Hi Darcy- do you mind telling us what the paper & shipping costs were? you're gonna be busy with that trimmer, man! go to your local newspaper and ask them to cut it down- smile real big and they'll do it for free a few bucks under the table to the boss and they'll shrink-wrap it, too works for me! PS- is that Ricoh AP2610 you have a duplexer? Cecil Rigby [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) > [Original Message] > From: Darcy James Argue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 3/9/2004 4:07:31 PM > Subject: [Finale] Paper Redux > > Hi gang, > > I just thought I'd follow up the paper thread and let you know what I > found. > > Mohawk makes an acid-free, natural white, smooth finish paper that > comes pre-cut in 12.375" x 18.125" sheets. It's called "Mohawk > Superfine Softwhite Smooth" and it comes in a variety of weights -- I > got the 80# weight. It comes in 2000-sheet boxes. > > I was able to order it from Lindenmeyr Munroe, who do not have a > webstore either, but at least they accept small orders from > non-corporations. I had to place the order by phone, which involved a > long game of phone tag, and to me feels only slightly less antiquated > than placing an order by mail. > > Anyway, they shipped it UPS and it arrived yesterday. it looks really, > really nice. But I wasn't expecting 12.375" by 18.125" -- Lindenmeyr > told me it was actually 12" by 18". I guess they figured it was "close > enough." (If they had a web store, I might have noticed for myself.) > Grr. So, now that I've got 2000 sheets of the stuff, I guess I'm > getting a good paper trimmer. > > I still haven't tried these sheets in my Ricoh AP2610 because at the > moment, they are too wide to fit. The Ricoh manual says it only > supports sheets up to 17" long, but I don't know if that's actually the > case. I guess I'll find out in a couple of days, once my trimmer > arrives. > > - Darcy > > - > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Brooklyn NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues
There was human playback in the original release of WinFin2004, as well as in 2004a. I got the impression by "latest Windows update" he meant 2004b. David H. Bailey Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 09.03.2004 20:28 Uhr, Raymond Horton wrote I find the latest 2004 Windows update to be considerably slower in one area - Human Playback. It takes quite a long time to compile the entire file every time, even after a very minor change to the file. How can it be slower than before, there was no Human Playback in earlier versions?? Johannes -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues
It works differently in the update that came out a few days ago. RH - Original Message - From: "Johannes Gebauer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Finale 3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 2:54 PM Subject: Re: [Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues > On 09.03.2004 20:28 Uhr, Raymond Horton wrote > > > I find the latest 2004 Windows update to be considerably slower in one > > area - Human Playback. It takes quite a long time to compile the entire > > file every time, even after a very minor change to the file. > > How can it be slower than before, there was no Human Playback in earlier > versions?? > > Johannes > -- > http://www.musikmanufaktur.com > http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de > > ___ > Finale mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues
On 09.03.2004 20:54 Uhr, Johannes Gebauer wrote > On 09.03.2004 20:28 Uhr, Raymond Horton wrote > >> I find the latest 2004 Windows update to be considerably slower in one >> area - Human Playback. It takes quite a long time to compile the entire >> file every time, even after a very minor change to the file. > > How can it be slower than before, there was no Human Playback in earlier > versions?? Sorry, I just realized that you probably meant 2004b. (We Mac users haven't got one of those yet). You should report this to MakeMusic. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Paper Redux
Hi gang, I just thought I'd follow up the paper thread and let you know what I found. Mohawk makes an acid-free, natural white, smooth finish paper that comes pre-cut in 12.375" x 18.125" sheets. It's called "Mohawk Superfine Softwhite Smooth" and it comes in a variety of weights -- I got the 80# weight. It comes in 2000-sheet boxes. I was able to order it from Lindenmeyr Munroe, who do not have a webstore either, but at least they accept small orders from non-corporations. I had to place the order by phone, which involved a long game of phone tag, and to me feels only slightly less antiquated than placing an order by mail. Anyway, they shipped it UPS and it arrived yesterday. it looks really, really nice. But I wasn't expecting 12.375" by 18.125" -- Lindenmeyr told me it was actually 12" by 18". I guess they figured it was "close enough." (If they had a web store, I might have noticed for myself.) Grr. So, now that I've got 2000 sheets of the stuff, I guess I'm getting a good paper trimmer. I still haven't tried these sheets in my Ricoh AP2610 because at the moment, they are too wide to fit. The Ricoh manual says it only supports sheets up to 17" long, but I don't know if that's actually the case. I guess I'll find out in a couple of days, once my trimmer arrives. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Accidental positioning
Yes, I can verify this, and it looks like a bug to me, too. Liudas - Original Message - From: "Lee Actor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Finale News List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 10:05 PM Subject: [Finale] Accidental positioning > Has anyone else noticed this change in behavior from FinWin 2004a to 2004b: > when Cross-Layer Accidental Positioning is checked, accidentals in hidden > layers now affect the accidental positioning in visible layers. This was > not the case in 2004a and sure seems like a bug to me. > > -Lee > > > ___ > Finale mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Accidental positioning
Has anyone else noticed this change in behavior from FinWin 2004a to 2004b: when Cross-Layer Accidental Positioning is checked, accidentals in hidden layers now affect the accidental positioning in visible layers. This was not the case in 2004a and sure seems like a bug to me. -Lee ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Mac 2004 speed issues
Steve, Great tip about iKey! You're right, it's *much* faster than QuicKeys, and only a fraction of the price. I would encourage anyone who's using OS X and hasn't yet reprogrammed all of their shortcuts in QuicKeys (which you will have to do -- QuicKeys X won't import your OS 9 shortcuts) to do it in iKey instead. I've completely given up on QuicKeys X. It's a dog. iKey -- so far, at least -- is more like QuicKeys for OS 9 than QuicKeys X is. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn NY On 09 Mar 2004, at 02:10 PM, Steve G. wrote: If it's any help, I find iKey to be much faster than Quickeys. There are some things it can't do though, for example iKeys can't hit the stop button on the playback controls while finale is playing, Quickeys can. iKeys costs $20. steve ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] FinMac 2003 Internal Playback trouble in Classic
I just upgraded my Mac G4 to OSX, and am having trouble using internal playback when running FinMac 2003 in Classic mode (external playback through my MIDI interface/synthesizer works perfectly). For internal speakers, when I hit play, I get a faint sound AND, more distressingly, no rhythmic values, just continuous pitches all of equal value. Martin Martin Banner ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues
On 09.03.2004 20:28 Uhr, Raymond Horton wrote > I find the latest 2004 Windows update to be considerably slower in one > area - Human Playback. It takes quite a long time to compile the entire > file every time, even after a very minor change to the file. How can it be slower than before, there was no Human Playback in earlier versions?? Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] WinFin 2004 speed issues
I find the latest 2004 Windows update to be considerably slower in one area - Human Playback. It takes quite a long time to compile the entire file every time, even after a very minor change to the file. Raymond Horton ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Mac 2004 speed issues
If it's any help, I find iKey to be much faster than Quickeys. There are some things it can't do though, for example iKeys can't hit the stop button on the playback controls while finale is playing, Quickeys can. iKeys costs $20. steve On Mar 9, 2004, at 12:57 PM, John Hinchey wrote: To David Froom and all, Yes, I'm finding Fin 2004 to be dreadfully slow in OS X 10.3. Enough that if I had I deadline, I would probably work in OS 9 and 2003 for the time being. I've decided to switch to simple entry from speedy entry which I used in previous versions. I really like the upgrades to simple entry and it would be great if it wasn't so darn slow to drawn the notes after I input them. I'm on a G4 dual 800 with a 1.25 gig of RAM, so I don't think it's a hardware issue. Hate to say it but Sibelius 3 and Digital Performer 4 run just fine, about the same or better in OSX 10.3. Another thing that is slowing me down is Quickeys OS X 2.1. I find Finale to be really tedious without using quickeys to wade through all of the menus. But with quickeys in OS 9, I was quite happy with Finale. But the Quickeys functions in OSX for some reason are quite a bit slower, fast than pulling all those menus down myself but still quite a bit slower than in OS 9. I understand it has something to do with Quickeys now being an app instead of an extension. By the way, I found 'auto smart word extensions' and turned that off. Where should I look for auto spacing and auto update? Best regards, John Hinchey Nashville, TN ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Mac 2004 speed issues
Edit menu. > By the way, I found 'auto smart word extensions' and turned that off. > Where should I look for auto spacing and auto update? > > Best regards, > John Hinchey > Nashville, TN > > ___ > Finale mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Mac 2004 speed issues
To David Froom and all, Yes, I'm finding Fin 2004 to be dreadfully slow in OS X 10.3. Enough that if I had I deadline, I would probably work in OS 9 and 2003 for the time being. I've decided to switch to simple entry from speedy entry which I used in previous versions. I really like the upgrades to simple entry and it would be great if it wasn't so darn slow to drawn the notes after I input them. I'm on a G4 dual 800 with a 1.25 gig of RAM, so I don't think it's a hardware issue. Hate to say it but Sibelius 3 and Digital Performer 4 run just fine, about the same or better in OSX 10.3. Another thing that is slowing me down is Quickeys OS X 2.1. I find Finale to be really tedious without using quickeys to wade through all of the menus. But with quickeys in OS 9, I was quite happy with Finale. But the Quickeys functions in OSX for some reason are quite a bit slower, fast than pulling all those menus down myself but still quite a bit slower than in OS 9. I understand it has something to do with Quickeys now being an app instead of an extension. By the way, I found 'auto smart word extensions' and turned that off. Where should I look for auto spacing and auto update? Best regards, John Hinchey Nashville, TN ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] List Behavior
Since our listserve is a LINUX beastie the new link is an attempt to disable whitemail. It's an experiment whose operation monitoring I ask members of the list to provide. Offlist reports to yours truly will be read with interest and shared with the IT person who formulates the list;-) -- Henry Howey, D.M.A. Professor of Music Sam Houston State University Box 2208 Huntsville, TX 77341 (936) 294-1364 http://www.shsu.edu/~music/faculty/howey.html Owner of FINALE Discussion List ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] FinMac2004, MacSupport, and speed issues
Hello, I have exchanged a few emails with Mac Support about speed problems in FinMac 2004. My complaints have to do with the miserable hesitation when editing SmartShapes or when editing using Special Tools. Their suggestion was that I turn off auto smart word extensions in lyrics, turn off auto spacing and auto update, turn off human playback (or set it to quicktime instruments), and lower screen resolution and number of colors. None of these worked -- I always work with spacing and update off, I don't care much about playback, and I'm not now working with lyrics. I tried lowering resolution, but it made no difference. Who knew being "smart" also means being slow? Any proposals for renaming these "smart" items? I'm posting for two reasons. First of all, those of you who are having worse speed problems than me or are working with lyrics might try their suggestions. Second, I wanted to share the last response I got from Mac Support: > The problem with editing SmartShapes and with the Special Tools are documented > and we are looking into them. I will keep your information handy. If I have an > update on this or hear about steps that could help, I will share them with > you. > > Thank you for your feedback. > > Thierry > Technical Support Representative > MakeMusic!, Inc. > Coda Music Technologies David Froom ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] VPC binding machine
I like the separating tabs, provided they are the length you need. Applying the tape is much quicker and easier than it would be with a continuous roll. In addition to the tabs, the tape is perforated at the correct length. So after applying the tape, you just pull off the tabs and the length is perfect. I you had to cut your own strips, it would take much longer per bind. > -Original Message- > From: Darcy James Argue [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2004 02:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Finale] VPC binding machine > > Hello all, > > I think I might be finally ready to get one of those VPC music binding > machines. I have a question about the binding tape though. > > Is there any advantage to getting the tape with the separating tabs vs. > the continuous roll? > > - Darcy > > - > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Brooklyn NY > > ___ > Finale mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
