Re: number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!)
Wow! I finally bit the bullet and did my first plug-in/tool download. -It took ages but I finally got it into "plug-ins". Numbered measures works great- thanks Robert! Now- raise the cash to keep it! Cheers for festive season Keith in OZ - Original Message - From: Robert Patterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 1:58 AM Subject: Re: number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!) > On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 06:56:57 -0800 (PST), Mark D. Lew wrote: > > > I agree that it would be nice to have a plug-in that simply numbers the > > measures without thinking about whether they're real repeats. > > That is precisely the original reason for my Measure Numbers plugin. It numbers > the measures you tell it to. It makes no attempt to determine if they are > actually repeated. Visit > > http://www.robertgpatterson.com/.fininfo/finmain.html > > -- > Robert Patterson > > http://RobertGPatterson.com > ___ > Finale mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!)
At 6:47 AM 12/19/02, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: >I've not tried to use the repeated number plug in yet, but the question in my >mind, having read your explanation, is: > >"Why not select 'edit' for each number expression, and change the definition, >typeface, and size to your liking?" I thought I suggested that as an alternative. I did the first few that way, but the delete/replace scheme is considerably less tedious, especially if you move the numbers to the top of the expression list first. Anyway, it sounds like Robert's plug-in is an even better solution. mdl ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!)
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 06:56:57 -0800 (PST), Mark D. Lew wrote: > I agree that it would be nice to have a plug-in that simply numbers the > measures without thinking about whether they're real repeats. That is precisely the original reason for my Measure Numbers plugin. It numbers the measures you tell it to. It makes no attempt to determine if they are actually repeated. Visit http://www.robertgpatterson.com/.fininfo/finmain.html -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!)
"Mark D. Lew" wrote: > I do mostly piano-vocal scores, so I don't have much opportunity to use to > repeated measures, but I vaguely remember going through something like this > about a year ago. I also wanted to increase the type size of all the > numbers. If I recall correctly, I did the following: > > (1) Create my own set of expressions -- "2", "3", "4", etc. -- in the size > and font I want. (I had these in place in my template.) > > (2) Use the plug-in, letting it number the measures by its own logic. > > (3) After the plug-in's numbers are in place, enter the expression list. > Select all the number expressions created by the plug-in and choose > "delete". I've not tried to use the repeated number plug in yet, but the question in my mind, having read your explanation, is: "Why not select 'edit' for each number expression, and change the definition, typeface, and size to your liking?" Admittedly, this latter option would seem especially valuable if you did not already have the expressions you wanted in your template. ns ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!
At 11.54 19/12/2002 +1100, you wrote: Situation2; Horns, (again!) sustaining note for 9 measures. Apply "number repeated measures" plug-in... Hi, you may want to try out "Measure Numbers" instead, a plug-in by Robert Patterson (www.robertgpatterson.com). I use it all the time, it does a very good job and it's highly configurable. Merry Christmas Giuliano Forghieri ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
number repeated measures (was Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!)
>Horns, (again!) sustaining note for 9 measures. Apply "number repeated >measures" plug-in. Measure 2 of sustain is numbered 1, and last measure not >numbered. So I get numbers 1---7 on measures 2---8. >I can see why- strictly speaking first and last are NOT repeated measures, >because first is not tied to previous note, and last is not tied to >following note, and it is 'kludgeable'- remove ties, enter numbers, replace >ties. But surely this should be do-able? Some sort of mandatory "Number >these measures- do as your told- don't argue!" > >Any thoughts? I do mostly piano-vocal scores, so I don't have much opportunity to use to repeated measures, but I vaguely remember going through something like this about a year ago. I also wanted to increase the type size of all the numbers. If I recall correctly, I did the following: (1) Create my own set of expressions -- "2", "3", "4", etc. -- in the size and font I want. (I had these in place in my template.) (2) Use the plug-in, letting it number the measures by its own logic. (3) After the plug-in's numbers are in place, enter the expression list. Select all the number expressions created by the plug-in and choose "delete". (4) When Finale gives the warning that the expression is in use, tell it to replace the expression with the expression I created myself, at the same time incrementing the number, so that the plug-in's "1" is replaced by my "2", the plug-in's "2" is replaced by my "3", etc. It's most efficient to do this after you've got all the numbers in place and are done with the plug-in. If you use the plug-in again subsequently, it will create a new batch of numbers and you'll have to go through the replacement process all over again. The delete/replace scheme worked well for me, since I wanted to change the type size anyway. If you're happy with the size and font, you can accomplish the same thing by editing the numbers in the expression list (ie, edit "7" to "8", "6" to "7", etc.) In that case, you'll want to start at the high numbers and work down, or else you might easily get confused and make a mess of things. -- I agree that it would be nice to have a plug-in that simply numbers the measures without thinking about whether they're real repeats. It would also be nice if you had some input variables to set the size, font, starting number, increment, etc. (Or, more broadly, the plug-in can give an option of whether to test if the measures match, so that if testing is ON it will behave like the current plug-in and only number consecutive measures which are identical, and if testing is OFF it will behave like we're asking for and number all selected measures regardless. There could also be intermediate options -- for example, check that the notes match but ignore ties.) mdl ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!
At 07:54 PM 12/18/2002, helgesen wrote: >Situation 1: >Horns, 4 measures rest either side of a rehearsal mark. "Extract parts" >produces an 8 measure multi rest, with no reh'l mark. OK it's easily >fixable- (Break multi rest- create 2x4 multi rests either side of reh'l >mark). But surely theres a way of making Finale (2001) recognise the reh'l >mark on extraction? Yes? No? Another poster has pointed out that there is a "break multimeasure rest" option for expressions, but I think this wasn't introduced until 2002. In Fin2001, you need to select the measure *before* the rehearsal mark with the Measure tool, and check "Break multimeasure rest" there. >So I get numbers 1---7 on measures 2---8. >I can see why- strictly speaking first and last are NOT repeated measures, >because first is not tied to previous note, and last is not tied to >following note, and it is 'kludgeable'- remove ties, enter numbers, replace >ties. But surely this should be do-able? Some sort of mandatory "Number >these measures- do as your told- don't argue!" Unfortunately, I don't think so. The plugin only seems to catch measures which are exact duplicates. Aaron. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Coupla quick ones!
Le mercredi, 18 déc 2002, à 19:54 America/Montreal, helgesen a écrit : Situation 1: Horns, 4 measures rest either side of a rehearsal mark. "Extract parts" produces an 8 measure multi rest, with no reh'l mark. OK it's easily fixable- (Break multi rest- create 2x4 multi rests either side of reh'l mark). But surely theres a way of making Finale (2001) recognise the reh'l mark on extraction? Yes? No? Yes. I assume that your rehearsal mark is made with the expression tool. So when defining the character and font of the rehearsal mark, check the « break multimeasure rest » box. You should do it in your score long before you prepare it for extracting parts. Situation2; Horns, (again!) sustaining note for 9 measures. Apply "number repeated measures" plug-in. Measure 2 of sustain is numbered 1, and last measure not numbered. So I get numbers 1---7 on measures 2---8. I can see why- strictly speaking first and last are NOT repeated measures, because first is not tied to previous note, and last is not tied to following note, and it is 'kludgeable'- remove ties, enter numbers, replace ties. But surely this should be do-able? Some sort of mandatory "Number these measures- do as your told- don't argue!" I think this is the normal behavior of that feature. You play the first measure, and then you count the number of repeats of that same measure. Eric Dussault ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Coupla quick ones!
Situation 1: Horns, 4 measures rest either side of a rehearsal mark. "Extract parts" produces an 8 measure multi rest, with no reh'l mark. OK it's easily fixable- (Break multi rest- create 2x4 multi rests either side of reh'l mark). But surely theres a way of making Finale (2001) recognise the reh'l mark on extraction? Yes? No? Situation2; Horns, (again!) sustaining note for 9 measures. Apply "number repeated measures" plug-in. Measure 2 of sustain is numbered 1, and last measure not numbered. So I get numbers 1---7 on measures 2---8. I can see why- strictly speaking first and last are NOT repeated measures, because first is not tied to previous note, and last is not tied to following note, and it is 'kludgeable'- remove ties, enter numbers, replace ties. But surely this should be do-able? Some sort of mandatory "Number these measures- do as your told- don't argue!" Any thoughts? Cheers, to all for Christmas- Keith in hot and dry OZ. ___ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
