Re: [Finale] PARTS Managing
Kim, Have you tried deleting the existing parts from the list, then create a new set of parts? Vince Leonard www.finalebook.com www.sibeliusbook.com ** It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance. (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf000301) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
Good points Ray-- I also have been deeply affected by the availability of music on line, and using the computer for composing.. Many years ago, I decided to try to compose..but had NO idea how to progress. My idea then--which I STILL follow-- was to, as TOTALLY as possible, keep myself from listening to ANY older music..so as NOT to sound dated, in my musical speech, gestures, etc... I would guess my cut off point was the 1920's. Sounds drastic, but it has really helped me.. I had many of the CRI, Nonesuch recordings-many which I picked up for 99 cents at record stores-(eg Boulez Structures-) Now with the Internet (and sites like http://www.dramonline.org/, which has many ( I believe to eventually be all of the old CRI catalog recordings) and other sites eg http://musicmavericks.publicradio.org/, and streaming performances, from overseas, etc ,I can stay abreast of what's going on, and totally immerse myself in a way unimaginable to me. It's as the commercial says."priceless." I have often felt that many works (the Copland and Carter Piano Sonatas immediately come to mind) where later in the work, it seems to just fall apart.-- and being a "Monday morning quarterback.composer" I wonder what they were thinking!! Both composers and their musical material were EXCELLENT, so my thoughts are that these and many works suffered from the composer NOT being able to sit back-- SOLELY as a critically listening member of the audience-- and hear his work played back, as many times as needed during the composing process. They would either be involved playing it, or reading from score, which would divert their attention away... But SOLELY as a listener to our works--which we can now do with computer playback, and a good mockup--its so much easer to hear, find and fix areas of pitch, and gesture fatigue, form problems etc., and the flow of the piece from beginning to end can really be judged, Just some thoughts. Bob Morabito. On Mar 8, 2008, at 3:29 PM, Ray Horton wrote: - but the gain has been tremendous. And the new technology, at which we can share rare recordings by MP3 around the world in seconds - is fantastic. And as far as the new technology for composers - it has freed me, who is both a terrible pianist and could never get an ink pen to work worth a darn. Back when I had to copy stuff out by hand I got a fraction of the music written that I do now, and it wasn't played as much, and the music wasn't as good. (I love the ability to play it back.) And I still keep sketches, some in pencil and some on the computer, if anybody but myself ever wants to look at them. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
On Mar 8, 2008, at 3:29 PM, Ray Horton wrote: Yes, Sousa was right: "These talking machines are going to ruin the artistic development of music in this country. When I was a boy...in front of every house in the summer evenings, you would find young people together singing the songs of the day or old songs. Today you hear these infernal machines going night and day. We will not have a vocal cord left. The vocal cord will be eliminated by a process of evolution, as was the tail of man when he came from the ape." Man, this is my week for Sousa quotes! I came across this one earlier in the week and thought it was fantastic imagery for great music (and great art in general): "A good march is as free of padding as a marble statue." Man, I loved that quote! Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
AW: AW: [Finale] No scrolling playback 2008 Vista
Hi, the problem seems to have gone away. Maybe I had been using too many resources, or my notebook was sick, or whatever. Today I tried again, and scrolling playback worked fine, also in page view. Thanks for the help, anyway, Kurt > -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im > Auftrag von dhbailey > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. März 2008 10:38 > An: finale@shsu.edu > Betreff: Re: AW: [Finale] No scrolling playback 2008 Vista > > As a followup thought, try UNchecking the box, starting playback, then > go back into the dialog and check the box again. With the quirks that > are in Finale these days, perhaps that will do the trick. There's no > logical reason why it shouldn't work. I haven't read of others having > a > problem with scrolling playback on Vista. > > Just a thought . . . > > David H. Bailey > > > > Kurt Gnos wrote: > > Yep, have it checked, and it's quite a fast notebook, Duo 2.0 GigaHz, > 2 GB > > RAM. > > > > Kurt > > > >> -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- > >> Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Im > >> Auftrag von dhbailey > >> Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. März 2008 20:50 > >> An: finale@shsu.edu > >> Betreff: Re: [Finale] No scrolling playback 2008 Vista > >> > >> Kurt Gnos wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> while on my desktop pc running xp scrolling during playback, in > page > >> view, > >>> is no problem, on my notebook running Vista it just does not seem > to > >> work. > >>> It just doesn't scroll at all. > >>> > >>> Any hints? > >>> > >> In your notebook installation, do you have scrolling playback > enabled? > >> Click on the Speaker icon to the right of the metronome setting to > get > >> to the Playback Settings dialog and be sure there is a check in the > box > >> labeled Scrolling Playback. > >> > >> > >> -- > >> David H. Bailey > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> ___ > >> 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 > > > > > -- > David H. Bailey > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] PARTS Managing
Can someone solve this problem for me? I have a score that consists of Vocal, Piano, Bass and Drums. I add the staves (above those) for big band. When I was through inputting all the entries, I go to Manage Parts, then Generate Parts. All parts are generated except for bass and drums. They are found, however, in a folder in the Available Instruments list in the Part Definition. How can I make these separate parts (they are now contained within the piano part). If I select the Piano part on the left, Piano (and it's folder) do not show up on the right. Any ideas? I'm sure there's a simple way to do this. All the best, KIM R ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
The lighthouses were pretty, though. RBH Kim Patrick Clow wrote: On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Ray Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: And as far as the new technology for composers - it has freed me, who is both a terrible pianist and could never get an ink pen to work worth a darn. Back when I had to copy stuff out by hand I got a fraction of the music written that I do now, and it wasn't played as much, and the music wasn't as good. (I love the ability to play it back.) And I still keep sketches, some in pencil and some on the computer, if anybody but myself ever wants to look at them. Exactly! Well except I'm not a composer, but it's the same situation. These baroque pieces I'm working on, I asked piano players to give a run through for me, because I wanted to hear something I had labored on for days upond days with pencil and paper. The music was too complex for them. Finale / Sibelius gives me the chance to hear the music in a way that was NOT possible. It's opened doors in such a big way for me. I could never be doing my research if not for the PC. Thanks for your thoughts Ray! Kim ___ 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] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
On Sat, Mar 8, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Ray Horton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And as far as the new technology for composers - it has freed me, who is > both a terrible pianist and could never get an ink pen to work worth a > darn. Back when I had to copy stuff out by hand I got a fraction of the > music written that I do now, and it wasn't played as much, and the music > wasn't as good. (I love the ability to play it back.) And I still keep > sketches, some in pencil and some on the computer, if anybody but myself > ever wants to look at them. Exactly! Well except I'm not a composer, but it's the same situation. These baroque pieces I'm working on, I asked piano players to give a run through for me, because I wanted to hear something I had labored on for days upond days with pencil and paper. The music was too complex for them. Finale / Sibelius gives me the chance to hear the music in a way that was NOT possible. It's opened doors in such a big way for me. I could never be doing my research if not for the PC. Thanks for your thoughts Ray! Kim ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
Firat, I agree with nearly everything you three are saying. But this conversation reminds me of a group discussion I was a part of , some years back, one in which a lady older than I was wistfully saying that the last lighthouse on some island somewhere had closed, and it was a shame, etc. etc., and everyone was agreeing with her that all the old things were going away and all the new things were no good, etc. etc. Finally I felt forced to interject that probably the reason the lighthouses were closing was that that there were now better ways to keep ships from crashing onto the shore, and that most of the time the reason new technology replaced old technology is that it is actually better. Yes, Sousa was right: "These talking machines are going to ruin the artistic development of music in this country. When I was a boy...in front of every house in the summer evenings, you would find young people together singing the songs of the day or old songs. Today you hear these infernal machines going night and day. We will not have a vocal cord left. The vocal cord will be eliminated by a process of evolution, as was the tail of man when he came from the ape." Recordings have devalued and replaced live music to a degree even he could never have imagined - but the gain has been tremendous. And the new technology, at which we can share rare recordings by MP3 around the world in seconds - is fantastic. And as far as the new technology for composers - it has freed me, who is both a terrible pianist and could never get an ink pen to work worth a darn. Back when I had to copy stuff out by hand I got a fraction of the music written that I do now, and it wasn't played as much, and the music wasn't as good. (I love the ability to play it back.) And I still keep sketches, some in pencil and some on the computer, if anybody but myself ever wants to look at them. (John, there _are_ available copies of the different MS of books of the Bible, BTW. And many good translations will have good notes of the significant differences, also, but that is another subject, as you say. And all of the apocryphal books are out there, also. It's not nearly as sinister as you are making it out to be. Go to a good seminary library.) Raymond Horton John Howell wrote: At 7:00 PM -0500 3/6/08, Christopher Smith wrote: On Mar 6, 2008, at 6:16 PM, Kim Patrick Clow wrote: Some even suggest that the concept of the album is pretty much dead. Oh, I forgot to add: In the case of jazz albums, some of the most accurate and well-written jazz scholarship appears (appeared?) on album covers. Reducing these albums to collections of mp3's reduces their value considerably for the usual well-informed jazz listener who considers the reading almost as important as the listening! Personnel lists, dates, producer notes, technical notes; all these are invaluable information that is largely lost to the mp3 generation. Yes, and literary scholarship is changing as well, as authors adopt word processing rather than making longhand drafts, and earlier drafts are trashed or overwritten. Same thing with composers, at least those who now work directly to their computers. The times, they are a-changin', and these are minor adjustments that go along with those changes (although they might not seem so minor to specialists!). Case in point. I just did a program of music from the Roman de Fauvel of 1316. That was a bitterly satirical poem first written in about 1310. It survives in 12 copies, each hand-written of course, and each having differences from the others, some minor, others including entire new sections. But the single manuscript from 1316 is unique in also containing over 120 musical examples, carefully chosen to comment on and amplify the story line. The invention of printing started us on the road to standardization, and mass production technology took us further along that long road. Don't even get me started about all the varying versions of the books of the Bible, from which the present "approved" books were selected by a committee in the 4th century, and even then the Hebrew, Catholic, and Protestant versions have significant differences. John ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] A question about accidentals
If yours is an "Urtext edition" (or bettter a "critical" edition), do exactly as you have. Keep accidentals unless they actually conflict with modern rules. Add cautionarys where they help to clarify, but put them in brackets, or make them smaller. Some publishers, like Henle, use square brackets for anything editorial, while they use round brackets only to distinguish separate sources. However, this gets rather "cluttered" at times. If you are preparing a purely practical edition ymmv. 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] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
At 10:30 PM -0600 3/7/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting how much confidence a group of musicians is putting in record
company executives to know and deliver "what's good." Who here has not had
the experience of having music thrown in the trash without being
considered by some executive type or other gatekeeper? Certainly not a way
to discern its quality. When you realize what kind of marketing philosophy
drives so many artistic executives ("if they bought it once let's sell it
to 'em again") it's absolutely specious to assert that it's artistic
quality that moves them. I'm very thankful to find the independent artists
of all types who can get their work out to me and the rest of the public
without being censored/straightjacketed by some who "knows better." It
does occasionally happen.
Hi, Aaron, and please don't misread my comments. I was simply
describing The Way It Used To Be, since I was deeply immersed in it
back in the '60s, and pointing out both the good and bad of the
emerging paradigm. And yes, it was a kind of censorship. That went
on the negative side of the ledger. But yes, they at least had the
opportunity to exercise high standards. That went on the positive
side. And yes, of course, their definition of "quality" meant
"marketability." How could it be otherwise? Unless you're happy
with believing that "If the music business was a business it couldn't
stay in business!"
Boils down to, there's good and bad in everything.
John
--
John R. Howell
Virginia Tech Department of Music
College of Liberal Arts & Human Sciences
Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240
Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034
(mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] A question about accidentals
On Mar 7, 2008, at 5:51 PM, John Howell wrote: In my opinion it is NEVER a mistake to clarify something that might cause confusion. Your mileage may differ. Yes it very well may. Sometimes the clarification adds another layer of confusion, like my point earlier about parentheses or not. The parentheses make it clear that it is a cautionary accidental, but at the expense of readability. As I see in my student's arrangements sometimes, they often write long explanations in text when a short marking like "simile" or "alto lead" would do. They think they are eliminating confusion, but they actually are adding some! There are other aspects to this question as well relating to readability. The very stylised fonts used in music for dynamics and time signatures are far from being the most legible choices, but we know immediately what they mean, and in fact less-stylised font choices for these items are actually LESS easy to identify for experienced readers. Sometimes a "belt and suspenders" treatment is the way to go, like marking "D.S. al coda, no repeats" and then marking at the repeat "no repeat on D.S." as well. Other times it only adds to the confusion, like marking "pizz" at the beginning of a passage and then marking it again later in the passage. It makes the player think they missed an "arco" marking somewhere and generates time-wasting questions at rehearsal. These are difficult questions to deal with. Knowing the target audience helps, but at times even they don't know what would work best. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] O.T. The Internet and the Democratization of Music Publishing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting how much confidence a group of musicians is putting in record
company executives to know and deliver "what's good." Who here has not had
the experience of having music thrown in the trash without being
considered by some executive type or other gatekeeper? Certainly not a way
to discern its quality. When you realize what kind of marketing philosophy
drives so many artistic executives ("if they bought it once let's sell it
to 'em again") it's absolutely specious to assert that it's artistic
quality that moves them. I'm very thankful to find the independent artists
of all types who can get their work out to me and the rest of the public
without being censored/straightjacketed by some who "knows better." It
does occasionally happen.
No, actually in spite of my comments on the record companies' filtering
of what was available, I have never thought they always knew or
delivered what I considered "good." I know they missed a whole lot of
stuff and for whatever egotistical or political or legal reasons there
is a whole lot of terrific stuff which they refused to deliver.
But my point is/was that I never had access to that other stuff, so I
didn't have to spend my time wading through all the stuff the record
companies didn't release to find the good stuff.
With the internet I DO have access to all the stuff that labels won't
release. The problem is that I don't have any more hours in my day, nor
years in my life than I probably would have had back in the 60s when I
was in my LP-buying heyday.
Sturgeon's law applies everywhere (as many of us have already pointed
out) but if there are 1000 albums released every year, it's possible to
sift through them to find what I like. If there are 1,000,000 songs
released on everybody's individual web-sites and at iTunes and CDBaby
and CDnow and Facebook and MySpace, I just don't have the time to go
through them all to find the good stuff.
The total pile of available material has mushroomed exponentially to the
point that I don't even bother trying to find new stuff anymore because
so much (90%) of it is crap and I just don't have the time. Yes the
record companies weren't always the best arbiters of what was good, but
at least they made the available pile of stuff to sift through manageable.
It all comes down to time -- I've got what I feel are much better things
to do with my time than to search the internet in the hopes of finding
the next Louis Armstrong or the next Bob Dylan or the next Beethoven.
--
David H. Bailey
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
