Re: [Finale] Tan: Henle engraving video
I'd love to see this but the URL doesn't work for me. It comes up in German "Die Seite wurde nicht gefunden"Which my friend tells me means site not found.Any ideas?Stan LordOn 23 Sep 2006, at 22:11, Randolph Peters wrote:If you want to see music engraving done "old school," there is a fascinating video at this URL:http://www.henle.de/video/vollversion/Notenstich_E.wmv-Randolph Peters___Finale mailing listFinale@shsu.eduhttp://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tan: Henle engraving video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q8adEIMzbso Stan Lord wrote: I'd love to see this but the URL doesn't work for me. It comes up in German Die Seite wurde nicht gefunden Which my friend tells me means site not found. Any ideas? Stan Lord On 23 Sep 2006, at 22:11, Randolph Peters wrote: If you want to see music engraving done old school, there is a fascinating video at this URL: http://www.henle.de/video/vollversion/Notenstich_E.wmv -Randolph Peters ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu mailto: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] Tan: Henle engraving video
Stan Lord wrote: I'd love to see this but the URL doesn't work for me. It comes up in German Die Seite wurde nicht gefunden Which my friend tells me means site not found. Any ideas? I just clicked on it and got the same response -- perhaps there was too much traffic for the site to bear. Or perhaps it's just a temporary glitch. Even following the link by going to the Henle homepage, selecting English as the language and clicking on Downloads and then clicking on the link they give the same file not found error. Curious -- I hope they fix things again, it's a terrific video. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Problem chapter two
My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Thanks! Barbara ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Problem chapter two
On 04.10.2006 Barbara Touburg wrote: My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Barbara, can you check the following: In the Program Options, Edit, in the Update Layout part of the window, the settings should be: Reflow Measures: Across Systems (Maintain System Locks) Reflow Systems Across Pages (active) Automatic Update Layout (active) If any of these options was set differently, this may be your problem. Make sure you save the preferences, although there may well be a bug in 2k7 where none or not all of these options are being saved in the Prefs. If this is the case, and if you are on Mac, you may have to delete your Prefs file. Come back if you need help. After you have set this, go to page 1 and Update the layout, by using the menu command in the Edit menu. See whether this cures it. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Problem chapter two
Barbara Touburg wrote: My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Thanks! Barbara ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Reinstalling Finale didn't help at all. I'm desparate! ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Problem chapter two
Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 04.10.2006 Barbara Touburg wrote: My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Barbara, can you check the following: In the Program Options, Edit, in the Update Layout part of the window, the settings should be: Reflow Measures: Across Systems (Maintain System Locks) Reflow Systems Across Pages (active) Automatic Update Layout (active) If any of these options was set differently, this may be your problem. Make sure you save the preferences, although there may well be a bug in 2k7 where none or not all of these options are being saved in the Prefs. If this is the case, and if you are on Mac, you may have to delete your Prefs file. Come back if you need help. After you have set this, go to page 1 and Update the layout, by using the menu command in the Edit menu. See whether this cures it. Johannes Johannes! You saved me! This is the first time I had to check this after installing a new version! Thanks a lot, you are the best! Three hurrays for Johannes! Pfff... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Problem chapter two
I get a message 'pagina niet gevonden' for that link. - Original Message - From: Barbara Touburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: finale@shsu.edu Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 4:19 AM Subject: [Finale] Problem chapter two My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Thanks! Barbara ___ 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] Problem chapter two
the link to that page seems to be wrong, cant be opened. please fix that and i'll be glad to give it a try. GR Barbara Touburg wrote: My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Thanks! Barbara ___ 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] Problem chapter two
Godofredo Romero wrote: the link to that page seems to be wrong, cant be opened. please fix that and i'll be glad to give it a try. GR Barbara Touburg wrote: My earlier problem was caused by Update Layout not working. Would anyone please be so kind to download my file (http://tinyurl.com/n2wqs), update the layout from page 1 and sending it back to me? I'll be working in scroll view from now (back to the middele ages) and in the mean time try to find a solution. Maybe I'll have to reinstall Finale, who knows. Thanks! Barbara Thanks, Romero, the problem is solved fortunately. Barbara ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Tan: Henle engraving video
Thanx for that Eric. Been dying to see it. Talk about knowing the music backwards! Jerry On 4-Oct-06, at 3:18 AM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q8adEIMzbso Gerald Berg ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] MusicXML 1.2 project starting soon
dc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: XML does seem to be the best standard for exchanging music notation files. Thanks! MusicXML support is up to over 60 applications now, and the quality of the translations keeps getting better over time. We are about to start development on the next version of MusicXML, version 1.2. All valid MusicXML 1.0 and 1.1 files will still be valid MusicXML 1.2 files, but we will be adding new features. The main goal is to make MusicXML a better distribution format for music notation files. If anyone is interested in participating in the MusicXML 1.2 design process, please sign up for the MusicXML e-mail discussion list at: http://www.recordare.com/lists#MusicXML Feel free to send MusicXML suggestions to me off-list if you don't want to sign up for yet another mailing list. Best regards, Michael Good Recordare LLC www.recordare.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Re: capella to Finale
dc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: CapToMusic seems to give excellent results with some files. But with others, it generates incomprehensible (for me and at least one other person) error messages, and the resulting XML files won't import into Finale. Thanks for the feedback. If you can e-mail me examples of the files that create problems off-list, I can take a look at them and forward them on to Bernd. By the way, what does the full Dolet plug-in for Finale do that the standard version doesn't do? The quick answer: - Batch import and export - MusicXML 1.1 export - Better import from Sibelius - Works with more versions of Finale - More frequent updates and bug fixes For the full answer: http://www.recordare.com/finale/dolet-upgrade.html http://www.recordare.com/finale/v3-versions.html The MusicXML version in Finale 2007 corresponds to Dolet for Finale version 3.2. Best regards, Michael Good Recordare LLC ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 3 Oct 2006 at 22:31, Éric Dussault wrote: Le 06-10-02 à 22:01, David W. Fenton a écrit : How so? It is only a problem when Finale uses the wrong enharmonic spelling. If you hit a black key you get either a flat or a sharp, according to the enharmonic mapping in place for the key in question. Music really doesn't have to be complicated to mix sharps and flats. Maybe it is unusual in baroque and pre-baroque music, but in the music of Today, even tonal, it happens all the time. I have to correct enharmonics in the music I enter via MIDI, yes, of course. Is it slower to enter via MIDI and correct the enharmonics on a second pass than doing it all at once with the computer keyboard? Absolutely not! I correct enharmonic errors on the first editing pass, the same one where I do beaming and stem direction. It's not what I call a time-saving entry method if you have to correct it afterwards. My note entry in speedy with computer keyboard is always correct the first time I enter music. I dare to believe it saves me time. That's all, really. The two passes are faster than one pass with the computer keyboard. I've done it. For 6 years I had no MIDI keyboard, so I know that the MIDI keyboard is *much* faster for me. And entry by computer keyboard still takes other passes for entering articulations and expressions, so it's not like there's much of a difference there. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On Oct 4, 2006, at 11:44 AM, David W. Fenton wrote: And entry by computer keyboard still takes other passes for entering articulations and expressions, so it's not like there's much of a difference there. -- If, like me, you are still in the habit of using Speedy Entry. The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
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; 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. DJW ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
Yeah, me too But, if you can do articulations and dynamics.I might need to check it out... Chuck Israels wrote: If, like me, you are still in the habit of using Speedy Entry. The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? Chuck ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 4 Oct 2006 at 12:19, Chuck Israels wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 11:44 AM, David W. Fenton wrote: And entry by computer keyboard still takes other passes for entering articulations and expressions, so it's not like there's much of a difference there. If, like me, you are still in the habit of using Speedy Entry. Well, I'm still on FinWin2K3, so I don't think I have the New Improved Simple Entry available to me. The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? I don't want to use the mouse when using the keyboard. Note entry is blazingly quick with a MIDI keyboard in Speedy. Even if I did it in the new Simple, I still wouldn't put in the articulations/expressions in the same pass, because that would require breaking the rhythm of entering the notes/rhythms (even if there are mouseless keyboard shortcuts mapped for articulations/expressions, which I strongly doubt). -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] MusicXML 1.2 project starting soon
Michael Good / 2006/10/04 / 02:25 PM wrote: MusicXML support is up to over 60 applications now, and the quality of the translations keeps getting better over time. How about from newer Fin version to older one, say FinMac2007 to FinMac2005? If it is possible, i.e., 2007 created file converting to 2005 format via MusicXML for distributing to students who only have 2005, then it would be very valuable. -- - Hiro Hiroaki Honshuku, A-NO-NE Music, Boston, MA http://a-no-ne.com http://anonemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On Oct 4, 2006, at 2:44 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: On 3 Oct 2006 at 22:31, Éric Dussault wrote: Le 06-10-02 à 22:01, David W. Fenton a écrit : How so? It is only a problem when Finale uses the wrong enharmonic spelling. If you hit a black key you get either a flat or a sharp, according to the enharmonic mapping in place for the key in question. Music really doesn't have to be complicated to mix sharps and flats. Maybe it is unusual in baroque and pre-baroque music, but in the music of Today, even tonal, it happens all the time. I have to correct enharmonics in the music I enter via MIDI, yes, of course. Is it slower to enter via MIDI and correct the enharmonics on a second pass than doing it all at once with the computer keyboard? Absolutely not! I correct enharmonic errors on the first editing pass, the same one where I do beaming and stem direction. It's not what I call a time-saving entry method if you have to correct it afterwards. My note entry in speedy with computer keyboard is always correct the first time I enter music. I dare to believe it saves me time. That's all, really. The two passes are faster than one pass with the computer keyboard. I've gotten to the point where I know what Finale is going to enter (sharp or flat) so I can hit 9 to enharmonically flip it without even looking, before entering the next note. I still make a second pass (for articulations and the like), but it DOES cut down on tool switching, which I find is my biggest slowdowner (made-up word!) So David, I would respectfully submit that it is possible for two people to use different work flow methods that are the fastest method for each of them. Saying that it is absolutely faster to switch enharmonics on the second pass rather than the first is not necessarily true. I do kind of wish that I had learned the new Speedy, though, as it sounds very quick for those who use it. Ten years of habit is hard to break, though. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
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. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:39 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? I don't want to use the mouse when using the keyboard. You don't have to. Articulations and expressions are entered via keyboard shortcuts which reference your own metatools. You would only have to touch the mouse if the articulation or expression you want is not assigned to a metatool. (even if there are mouseless keyboard shortcuts mapped for articulations/expressions, which I strongly doubt). Ahem. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 4 Oct 2006 at 15:45, Christopher Smith wrote: So David, I would respectfully submit that it is possible for two people to use different work flow methods that are the fastest method for each of them. Saying that it is absolutely faster to switch enharmonics on the second pass rather than the first is not necessarily true. I was intending an assumed for me in all that I wrote. Someone was trying to tell me that *for me* the enharmonics should be a problem, but my point is that it is not -- it isn't faster *for me* to use the computer keyboard, where the enharmonics can get corrected immediately. And, of course, I can correct the enharmonics while entering with the MIDI keyboard, too, since 9 is not a rhythmic value. I generally don't, because I breeze through in a rhythm about half that of actual performance, but for those who wouldn't want to miss them, you could easily do it on the spot if you know Finale's enharmonic mappings well enough. But, again, I didn't intend to say that it's faster for everyone. I was just objecting to the suggestion that enharmonic corrections made it slower *for me*, which is how I read the introduction of the issue. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
David W. Fenton wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 at 15:45, Christopher Smith wrote: So David, I would respectfully submit that it is possible for two people to use different work flow methods that are the fastest method for each of them. Saying that it is absolutely faster to switch enharmonics on the second pass rather than the first is not necessarily true. I was intending an assumed for me in all that I wrote. Someone was trying to tell me that *for me* the enharmonics should be a problem, but my point is that it is not -- it isn't faster *for me* to use the computer keyboard, where the enharmonics can get corrected immediately. And, of course, I can correct the enharmonics while entering with the MIDI keyboard, too, since 9 is not a rhythmic value. I generally don't, because I breeze through in a rhythm about half that of actual performance, but for those who wouldn't want to miss them, you could easily do it on the spot if you know Finale's enharmonic mappings well enough. But, again, I didn't intend to say that it's faster for everyone. I was just objecting to the suggestion that enharmonic corrections made it slower *for me*, which is how I read the introduction of the issue. I never got the impression that David Fenton was trying to tell anybody else what would be best for them. He was only trying to say what was fastest for him, which included flipping enharmonics. For what it's worth, David, I understood you to mean *for you* and weren't trying to tell everybody else what would work best for them. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:45 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: I've gotten to the point where I know what Finale is going to enter (sharp or flat) so I can hit 9 to enharmonically flip it without even looking, before entering the next note. Chris, have you run into trouble with this in Finale 2007? I find that for the first time, it makes a difference whether a note was originally entered as a C# or a Db. If you enter (in Speedy) a C# (with Favor Sharps on) followed by a Db (with Favor Flats on), then flip the Db and tie the notes, the tie does not take -- it will not be recognized by playback, and the accidental on the second note must be hidden manually. Check Ties and Check Accidentals does not solve the problem. This is, to put it mildly, a bit of a productivity killer. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:39 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? I don't want to use the mouse when using the keyboard. You don't have to. Articulations and expressions are entered via keyboard shortcuts which reference your own metatools. You would only have to touch the mouse if the articulation or expression you want is not assigned to a metatool. (even if there are mouseless keyboard shortcuts mapped for articulations/expressions, which I strongly doubt). How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:22 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: How do you switch between expressions and articulations? On Mac, opt-A to add an expression (or cmd-opt-shift-A to add a sticky expression that will apply to all subsequent notes until cancelled). Opt-X (or just X) to add an expression. Also: Opt-C to change clef, opt-K to change key signature, opt-T to change time signature. Clef, key sig, and time sig metatools all supported. On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:23 PM, dhbailey wrote: How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? The metatool applies to the note you just entered. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:23 PM, dhbailey wrote: Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:39 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? I don't want to use the mouse when using the keyboard. You don't have to. Articulations and expressions are entered via keyboard shortcuts which reference your own metatools. You would only have to touch the mouse if the articulation or expression you want is not assigned to a metatool. (even if there are mouseless keyboard shortcuts mapped for articulations/expressions, which I strongly doubt). How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? Davids I don't know exactly how it's done, but there are keyboard triggers for going to articulations and dynamics and, since you do it on the note you are on as you enter it, there's no need for using the mouse. This is all in the documentation, and I have watched the MM guys do it. No kidding, it's fast. The only thing that keeps me from changing my method is old work habits and dreading a new learning curve. (No small dread, irrational as that may be.) This has been around for the last two years, at least. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
See! I told you guys. Darcy, are you using this now? Chuck On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:22 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: How do you switch between expressions and articulations? On Mac, opt-A to add an expression (or cmd-opt-shift-A to add a sticky expression that will apply to all subsequent notes until cancelled). Opt-X (or just X) to add an expression. Also: Opt-C to change clef, opt-K to change key signature, opt-T to change time signature. Clef, key sig, and time sig metatools all supported. On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:23 PM, dhbailey wrote: How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? The metatool applies to the note you just entered. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:39 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it?And in fact the MM guys at the conventions say that the way they want you to use Finale now is via Simple Entry. They consider Speedy Entry to be a bit old fashioned.If I may be permitted to address the list without being thought a lurker only here to recruit for Sibelius (as was charged yesterday), I think I have some pertinent comments on this thread and will minimize Sibelius references as much as possible. When I first began to use Sib, I was a long time Finale user and, like almost everyone at the time, used Speedy Entry exclusively and (almost) always with a MIDI keyboard. At first I missed both Speedy Entry and scroll view. Then I found (with practice) how much faster I could work the Sib tools which are very like Simple Entry. I was very glad to see Simple Entry revamped in Fin04 and (although I am more comfortable in Sib) use it almost always. I frequently work on a laptop and almost always without a MIDI. I do tend to work in two passes (but not always) but that doesn't slow me down at all.While old, hard won and well practiced skills are hard to let go of, it's worth noting that Finale is now designed (according to MM reps) to be used primarily in Simple Entry. Richard Smith ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
On Oct 4, 2006, at 4:13 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:45 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: I've gotten to the point where I know what Finale is going to enter (sharp or flat) so I can hit 9 to enharmonically flip it without even looking, before entering the next note. Chris, have you run into trouble with this in Finale 2007? I find that for the first time, it makes a difference whether a note was originally entered as a C# or a Db. If you enter (in Speedy) a C# (with Favor Sharps on) followed by a Db (with Favor Flats on), then flip the Db and tie the notes, the tie does not take -- it will not be recognized by playback, and the accidental on the second note must be hidden manually. Check Ties and Check Accidentals does not solve the problem. This is, to put it mildly, a bit of a productivity killer. I have stopped using 2007, and reverted back to 2006 after completing the project I was on. There were too many inconsistencies in 2007 (including accidentals like the one you mentioned, though I never documented it as such) to make it worth my while. Plus, I couldn't get a workflow going with the linked parts, and it was taking me twice as long to do anything. I am looking forward, though, to using linked parts in the future. I have a LOT of projects where that would be SO useful! I did the same thing with 2004, never using it at all even though I paid for it, because it was just too frustrating with the half-baked features, new bugs and slow downs. Better luck next version, or maybe things will be fixed by incremental updates. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
Hi Chuck, I haven't made the switch yet. I know I should, because it will eventually be faster, once I get over the learning curve. But I'm always on deadline and I never seem to have the time to re-train myself. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:46 PM, Chuck Israels wrote: See! I told you guys. Darcy, are you using this now? Chuck On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:38 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:22 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: How do you switch between expressions and articulations? On Mac, opt-A to add an expression (or cmd-opt-shift-A to add a sticky expression that will apply to all subsequent notes until cancelled). Opt-X (or just X) to add an expression. Also: Opt-C to change clef, opt-K to change key signature, opt-T to change time signature. Clef, key sig, and time sig metatools all supported. On 04 Oct 2006, at 4:23 PM, dhbailey wrote: How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? The metatool applies to the note you just entered. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.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] Speed entry on a notebook
On 4 Oct 2006 at 13:45, Chuck Israels wrote: On Oct 4, 2006, at 1:23 PM, dhbailey wrote: Darcy James Argue wrote: On 04 Oct 2006, at 3:39 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: The MM guys I see every year at the Jazz Educator's Convention use Simple entry with a MIDI Keyboard, and that allows articulations and dynamics to be entered on the same pass with the same tool. They claim something like 40% increase in entry speed, and I have no reason to doubt them, but something in me resists re-learning my entry methods. Anyone else out there migrated from Speedy to Simple since this change? Have you found the changed method worth the trouble of learning it? I don't want to use the mouse when using the keyboard. You don't have to. Articulations and expressions are entered via keyboard shortcuts which reference your own metatools. You would only have to touch the mouse if the articulation or expression you want is not assigned to a metatool. (even if there are mouseless keyboard shortcuts mapped for articulations/expressions, which I strongly doubt). How do you tell Finale which notes to apply the metatool to if you're not using the mouse? I don't know exactly how it's done, but there are keyboard triggers for going to articulations and dynamics and, since you do it on the note you are on as you enter it, there's no need for using the mouse. This is all in the documentation, and I have watched the MM guys do it. No kidding, it's fast. The only thing that keeps me from changing my method is old work habits and dreading a new learning curve. (No small dread, irrational as that may be.) This has been around for the last two years, at least. I tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo. It feels a lot like Sibelius's standard keypad entry method. And that means I HATE IT. I don't think that way about getting the information into Finale, and that's one of the reasons I can't use Sibelius. It slows me down incredibly to think through which things I want to attach to a note after it's been entered (or before, if you can forecast that). For me (and I said FOR ME), a pass to get notes and rhythms entered is VERY FAST, and then I can go back and entered the articulations/expressions, set beam breaks, stem direction and correct enharmonics. I do all of the latter in a single pass, in fact. And that's the way I did it in Speedy with no MIDI keyboard. I just don't think in a way that allows me to be constantly switching between so many different kinds of entry. The notes and rhythms come first as a framework for the whole piece, and then the rest of the data is editing or entirely cosmetic. Perhaps I'm stuck in that mindset because I've been doing it that way for over 15 years. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] I tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo. It feels a lot like Sibelius's standard keypad entry method. And that means I HATE IT. I don't think that way about getting the information into Finale, and that's one of the reasons I can't use Sibelius. It slows me down incredibly to think through which things I want to attach to a note after it's been entered (or before, if you can forecast that). For me (and I said FOR ME), a pass to get notes and rhythms entered is VERY FAST, and then I can go back and entered the articulations/expressions, set beam breaks, stem direction and correct enharmonics. I do all of the latter in a single pass, in fact. And that's the way I did it in Speedy with no MIDI keyboard. I just don't think in a way that allows me to be constantly switching between so many different kinds of entry. The notes and rhythms come first as a framework for the whole piece, and then the rest of the data is editing or entirely cosmetic. Perhaps I'm stuck in that mindset because I've been doing it that way for over 15 years. I'm with you on this point David -- I find that I can fly through note entry and then go back and do the expressions and articulations on a second and third pass and can work very fast. Every time I have to change something while in the middle of the basic note entry, as has to happen in Simple Entry if one is trying to enter the articulations at the same time as the notes, it really slows my workflow down. What's terrific about Finale is that there are the two entry methods, simple and speedy. And speedy is what works best to my mind (for me, I'm not claiming it should be this way for anybody else) which is why I can't work quickly or efficiently in Sibelius. Just yesterday, my son was staying after school to help a young woman transpose an english horn part so she could play it on her oboe (octave displacement not being a consideration), and they were using the music department computer which has Sibelius on it. They managed to get the english horn part copied just as it was on the page and couldn't figure out how to get it changed for oboe. so they called me. Now in finale, just a couple of mouse clicks to change the key signature and have the notes transpose upward and they would have been all set in a couple of seconds. In sibelius, nowhere in the manual is there an entry for changing the key signature for music already entered. So I had to fly by the seat of my pants and triple-click to enclose the entire staff, then get three menu levels deep to the tranpose dialogue, and set things in there. took much longer. I realize that some of that was because I had to figure out how to do it without the help of the manual, but now that I know how to do it, it will still take much longer than using Finale's key signature tool. Why Finale felt they needed to make their note entry mimic Sibelius' is beyond me. But thank goodness they left speedy entry alone! Whether it's an ingrained pattern of workflow from using Finale for so long I can't tell, but I do know that it took me very little time to convert from MusicPrinterPlus to Finale and it's taken me ages to try to convert to Sibelius and I still can't do it, my mind just doesn't work that way. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
I find myself aligned with the two Davids - thinking about and entering the music more or less the way they describe as natural to them, but I can't tell if that's because Finale's Speedy Entry methods have trained me to be that way, or if Speedy just suits my way of operating. My jury will be out on the subject until I have spent some time trying out the other method. When I'll take time to do that is anybody's guess, but I will give it a try, because I've seen those MM guys (mostly Tom Johnson) fly with it. Chuck On Oct 4, 2006, at 2:43 PM, dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] I tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo. It feels a lot like Sibelius's standard keypad entry method. And that means I HATE IT. I don't think that way about getting the information into Finale, and that's one of the reasons I can't use Sibelius. It slows me down incredibly to think through which things I want to attach to a note after it's been entered (or before, if you can forecast that). For me (and I said FOR ME), a pass to get notes and rhythms entered is VERY FAST, and then I can go back and entered the articulations/expressions, set beam breaks, stem direction and correct enharmonics. I do all of the latter in a single pass, in fact. And that's the way I did it in Speedy with no MIDI keyboard. I just don't think in a way that allows me to be constantly switching between so many different kinds of entry. The notes and rhythms come first as a framework for the whole piece, and then the rest of the data is editing or entirely cosmetic. Perhaps I'm stuck in that mindset because I've been doing it that way for over 15 years. I'm with you on this point David -- I find that I can fly through note entry and then go back and do the expressions and articulations on a second and third pass and can work very fast. Every time I have to change something while in the middle of the basic note entry, as has to happen in Simple Entry if one is trying to enter the articulations at the same time as the notes, it really slows my workflow down. What's terrific about Finale is that there are the two entry methods, simple and speedy. And speedy is what works best to my mind (for me, I'm not claiming it should be this way for anybody else) which is why I can't work quickly or efficiently in Sibelius. Just yesterday, my son was staying after school to help a young woman transpose an english horn part so she could play it on her oboe (octave displacement not being a consideration), and they were using the music department computer which has Sibelius on it. They managed to get the english horn part copied just as it was on the page and couldn't figure out how to get it changed for oboe. so they called me. Now in finale, just a couple of mouse clicks to change the key signature and have the notes transpose upward and they would have been all set in a couple of seconds. In sibelius, nowhere in the manual is there an entry for changing the key signature for music already entered. So I had to fly by the seat of my pants and triple-click to enclose the entire staff, then get three menu levels deep to the tranpose dialogue, and set things in there. took much longer. I realize that some of that was because I had to figure out how to do it without the help of the manual, but now that I know how to do it, it will still take much longer than using Finale's key signature tool. Why Finale felt they needed to make their note entry mimic Sibelius' is beyond me. But thank goodness they left speedy entry alone! Whether it's an ingrained pattern of workflow from using Finale for so long I can't tell, but I do know that it took me very little time to convert from MusicPrinterPlus to Finale and it's taken me ages to try to convert to Sibelius and I still can't do it, my mind just doesn't work that way. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] Wandering augmentation dots?
List members... I seem to recall an earlier discussion of wandering augmentation dots--dots become separated from the notes they're supposed to augment. I got bitten by that a few times on a recent project. Are there reproducible steps leading to this bug? If so I'd like to know them so I can catch them at the point of their creation, rather than having to sort through 100+ pages looking at every dotted note and using the dot mover. Any ideas? Also--I am trying to remove the attachments from my posts, but I am told that it is not possible. I'm still trying to work on it.. Jim W. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots?
Silly question: Do Sibelius and Finale have a sequencer and a sampler? Thanks, John. On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 21:55:50 -0400 "Williams, Jim" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: List members... I seem to recall an earlier discussion of "wandering" augmentation dots--dots become separated from the notes they're supposed to augment. I got bitten by that a few times on a recent project. Are there reproducible steps leading to this bug? If so I'd like to know them so I can catch them at the point of their creation, rather than having to sort through 100+ pages looking at every dotted note and using the dot mover. Any ideas? Also--I am trying to remove the attachments from my posts, but I am told that it is not possible. I'm still trying to work on it.. Jim W. ___ 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] Wandering augmentation dots?
No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... Finale has a built-in softsynth and comes with SOME sampled sounds from the Garritan Personal Orchestra sound library. Finale can be used in conjunction with any VST instrument manufactured by Native Instruments (NI). Hope this helps. If you want more info, contact me off-list. Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of John T Sylvanis Sent: Wed 04-Oct-06 21:58 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots? Silly question: Do Sibelius and Finale have a sequencer and a sampler? Thanks, John. On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 21:55:50 -0400 Williams, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: List members... I seem to recall an earlier discussion of wandering augmentation dots--dots become separated from the notes they're supposed to augment. I got bitten by that a few times on a recent project. Are there reproducible steps leading to this bug? If so I'd like to know them so I can catch them at the point of their creation, rather than having to sort through 100+ pages looking at every dotted note and using the dot mover. Any ideas? Also--I am trying to remove the attachments from my posts, but I am told that it is not possible. I'm still trying to work on it.. Jim W. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... Finale has a built-in softsynth and comes with SOME sampled sounds from the Garritan Personal Orchestra sound library. Finale can be used in conjunction with any VST instrument manufactured by Native Instruments (NI). Hope this helps. If you want more info, contact me off-list. Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of John T Sylvanis Sent: Wed 04-Oct-06 21:58 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots? Silly question: Do Sibelius and Finale have a sequencer and a sampler? Thanks, John. On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 21:55:50 -0400 Williams, Jim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: List members... I seem to recall an earlier discussion of wandering augmentation dots--dots become separated from the notes they're supposed to augment. I got bitten by that a few times on a recent project. Are there reproducible steps leading to this bug? If so I'd like to know them so I can catch them at the point of their creation, rather than having to sort through 100+ pages looking at every dotted note and using the dot mover. Any ideas? Also--I am trying to remove the attachments from my posts, but I am told that it is not possible. I'm still trying to work on it.. Jim W. ___ 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] Wandering augmentation dots?
On 4 Oct 2006 at 22:12, Williams, Jim wrote: No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... But you can edit MIDI data and save the file as MIDI. That makes it a sequencer, seems to me, but maybe you have a different definition of the term. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots?
At 10:25 PM 10/4/06 -0400, David W. Fenton wrote: On 4 Oct 2006 at 22:12, Williams, Jim wrote: No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... But you can edit MIDI data and save the file as MIDI. That makes it a sequencer, seems to me, but maybe you have a different definition of the term. Yes, Finale is a sequencer. It is not a DAW (Digital Audio Workstation), the successor to the original sequencer idea. DAW and sequencer are often conflated these days, but as one who built his first sequencer based on a microcomputer in 1978, I know a sequencer when I see one. :) Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots?
Yes, David, I would have a different definition of a sequencer. I find the MIDI tool to be rather unwieldy in Finale. My definition of a sequencer would include some kind of editable piano-roll view as well as the ability to draw controller data using a mouse and edit MIDI at the event-list level. The only notation program that approaches being a decent sequence is Overture 4. It has the piano roll, an on-score MIDI editor, the ability to draw controller data, and the ability to manipulate MIDI with ease at the individual note level. It is also a full VST host...ANY VSTi, not just Native Instruments VSTi. It can also humanize reasonably well. All of this is incredibly time-consuming, if not impossible, using the Finale MIDI tool. With the advent of things like GPO and other sound libraries of all cost classes, we ought to also be seeing a movement towards a total music creation environment so it becomes unnecessary to do notation in Finale, then dump into a sequencer, then interface with the sound library, then burn the CD demo of a work. At this point, only Overture approaches this (TO ME) ideal. I know that the Notation-Only people are going to object to this, but that's where thigs are headed, and there's no law that says notation has to be compromised in order to gain playback capability. Notation is only compromised if a software manufacturer CHOOSES to overlook bugs and shortcomings of long standing...sound like anyone we know? Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of David W. Fenton Sent: Wed 04-Oct-06 22:25 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: RE: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots? On 4 Oct 2006 at 22:12, Williams, Jim wrote: No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... But you can edit MIDI data and save the file as MIDI. That makes it a sequencer, seems to me, but maybe you have a different definition of the term. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com http://dfenton.com/ David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Yes, David, I would have a different definition of a sequencer. I find the MIDI tool to be rather unwieldy in Finale. My definition of a sequencer would include some kind of editable piano-roll view as well as the ability to draw controller data using a mouse and edit MIDI at the event-list level. The only notation program that approaches being a decent sequence is Overture 4. It has the piano roll, an on-score MIDI editor, the ability to draw controller data, and the ability to manipulate MIDI with ease at the individual note level. It is also a full VST host...ANY VSTi, not just Native Instruments VSTi. It can also humanize reasonably well. All of this is incredibly time-consuming, if not impossible, using the Finale MIDI tool. With the advent of things like GPO and other sound libraries of all cost classes, we ought to also be seeing a movement towards a total music creation environment so it becomes unnecessary to do notation in Finale, then dump into a sequencer, then interface with the sound library, then burn the CD demo of a work. At this point, only Overture approaches this (TO ME) ideal. I know that the Notation-Only people are going to object to this, but that's where thigs are headed, and there's no law that says notation has to be compromised in order to gain playback capability. Notation is only compromised if a software manufacturer CHOOSES to overlook bugs and shortcomings of long standing...sound like anyone we know? Jim From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of David W. Fenton Sent: Wed 04-Oct-06 22:25 To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: RE: [Finale] Wandering augmentation dots? On 4 Oct 2006 at 22:12, Williams, Jim wrote: No, Finale is not a sequencer, nor is Sibelius... But you can edit MIDI data and save the file as MIDI. That makes it a sequencer, seems to me, but maybe you have a different definition of the term. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com http://dfenton.com/ David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ 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] Wandering augmentation dots?
On 4 Oct 2006 at 22:47, Williams, Jim wrote: Yes, David, I would have a different definition of a sequencer. Well, I'd say you're using a completely incorrect and idiosyncratic definition. I find the MIDI tool to be rather unwieldy in Finale. I don't think anyone will disagree with that. My definition of a sequencer would include some kind of editable piano-roll view as well as the ability to draw controller data using a mouse and edit MIDI at the event-list level. I have never understood how anyone could find utility in a piano-roll view of data. Drawing controller data is something I've wished for in Finale (for volume and tempo). I can't see why it wouldn't be pretty easy to implement, but MM doesn't seem interested. It's much less of an issue now with Human Playback, though. I can't see any utility whatsoever in editing MIDI data at the event- list level. It is only a substitute for a GUI that doesn't represent the actual data onscreen accurately. This is a problem with Finale's continuous data window -- there is no way to set the starts and stops precisely, only by drawing onscreen in a very primitive UI. The result is that I often have to change pedal on/off data in a sequencer that allows access to the event list. But the solution to that problem in Finale is not an editable event list -- that wouldn't work because that isn't the way Finale stores the data in the first place. The solution is to fix the UI so that the user can accurately set the controllers being represented onscreen. But this is the old WordPerfect Reveal Codes argument in a new guise (it was the inadequacy of the representation of what you got that necessitated the editing of the underlying formatting codes in the Reveal Codes windows), so I'll stop there. -- David W. Fentonhttp://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Speed entry on a notebook
dhbailey wrote: David W. Fenton wrote: [snip] I tried it out in the Finale 2005 demo. It feels a lot like Sibelius's standard keypad entry method. And that means I HATE IT. I don't think that way about getting the information into Finale, and that's one of the reasons I can't use Sibelius. It slows me down incredibly to think through which things I want to attach to a note after it's been entered (or before, if you can forecast that). For me (and I said FOR ME), a pass to get notes and rhythms entered is VERY FAST, and then I can go back and entered the articulations/expressions, set beam breaks, stem direction and correct enharmonics. I do all of the latter in a single pass, in fact. And that's the way I did it in Speedy with no MIDI keyboard. I just don't think in a way that allows me to be constantly switching between so many different kinds of entry. The notes and rhythms come first as a framework for the whole piece, and then the rest of the data is editing or entirely cosmetic. Perhaps I'm stuck in that mindset because I've been doing it that way for over 15 years. I'm with you on this point David -- I find that I can fly through note entry and then go back and do the expressions and articulations on a second and third pass and can work very fast. Every time I have to change something while in the middle of the basic note entry, as has to happen in Simple Entry if one is trying to enter the articulations at the same time as the notes, it really slows my workflow down. What's terrific about Finale is that there are the two entry methods, simple and speedy. And speedy is what works best to my mind (for me, I'm not claiming it should be this way for anybody else) which is why I can't work quickly or efficiently in Sibelius. Just yesterday, my son was staying after school to help a young woman transpose an english horn part so she could play it on her oboe (octave displacement not being a consideration), and they were using the music department computer which has Sibelius on it. They managed to get the english horn part copied just as it was on the page and couldn't figure out how to get it changed for oboe. so they called me. Now in finale, just a couple of mouse clicks to change the key signature and have the notes transpose upward and they would have been all set in a couple of seconds. In sibelius, nowhere in the manual is there an entry for changing the key signature for music already entered. So I had to fly by the seat of my pants and triple-click to enclose the entire staff, then get three menu levels deep to the tranpose dialogue, and set things in there. took much longer. I realize that some of that was because I had to figure out how to do it without the help of the manual, but now that I know how to do it, it will still take much longer than using Finale's key signature tool. Why Finale felt they needed to make their note entry mimic Sibelius' is beyond me. But thank goodness they left speedy entry alone! Whether it's an ingrained pattern of workflow from using Finale for so long I can't tell, but I do know that it took me very little time to convert from MusicPrinterPlus to Finale and it's taken me ages to try to convert to Sibelius and I still can't do it, my mind just doesn't work that way. Well said, David(s). I think this has much to do with how one thinks and prefers to work with music. I have said for some time that Sibelius thinks like I do. You guys obviously have the same response to Finale (and Speedy Entry). Why change? The software or the method is not the goal, just the tool. For whatever it's worth, David B., I agree that Finale's transposition method is more direct which is a mild annoyance for me. I often just do the transposition the old fashioned way, transpose the interval and change the key. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
