Re: [Finale] 2009 expression question

[John Howell]

At 3:01 PM -0500 7/27/08, Richard Smith wrote:
Sibelius does the same thing as Finale in this case. But, if I may 
give a player's perspective, I really prefer having the MM rest 
broken to place a DS or similar instruction. It doesn't look as 
good, but it's much more clear to me as to where it is to occur. I 
have played lots of music that had such instructions poorly placed 
and was confusing. I think instant recognition is more important 
than graphic beauty, especially in the high pressure world of one 
rehearsal (maybe?) before performing it.


Agreed.  And that one-rehearsal paradigm happens a lot more often 
than some people would probably believe, especially those in the 
education game.




But then, this brings up one of my favorite peeves. Why, when copy 
and paste work so well, do we continue to use complicated repeat 
patterns and nested endings that only consume limited (at least in 
my case) brain power when it's most needed for making music? The 
less we are distracted from the basics of music making, the better 
the performance is likely to be. It's really time to leave the 
archaic notation shortcuts of the handwritten era behind.


Not until we can also leave page turns behind--and those are REAL 
distractions!  Yeah, it's theoretically possible now with digital 
music stands, at GREAT expense and with the  ever-resent danger of 
losing power!  Which means that it simply hasn't happened yet




Now I've made someone mad. Sorry.


Not at all.  I'm with you in theory, but as you yourself said above, 
practicality is more important than theory.


John


--
John R. Howell, Assoc. Prof. of Music
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

"We never play anything the same way once."  Shelly Manne's definition
of jazz musicians.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] Some comments re Fin09

[Claudio Pompili]

this is regarding Fin2k9's limit of 4 Staff Lists

At 12:00 -0500 26/7/08, Robert Patterson wrote:


Claudio Pompili wrote:


 I don't understand MM's logic in placing such an arbitrary

 > limit on the SL function.



snip


that said, in the Fin09 world it is difficult for me to see how
you would need 50 Staff Lists. You would have to have more than 50
expression categories, which would just confuse the heck out of me.

Nevertheless, just because I can't think of reason you should need 50
SLs is no reason for you not to need them. I'd be interested to know
what drives you to use that many.



I use lots of Staff Lists particularly in long, multi-movement works 
eg music-theatre. One piece that requires a lot of performer 
improvisation, immediately comes to mind is where I've got 10 
vocalists doubling as soloists and chorus with a small instrumental 
group of clars/vc/percussion (large array of perc. organised into 
three distrinct groups eg Latin, drum kit, and orchestral perc). For 
the most part, the notation uses a lot of unmeasured bars and 
timelines above the staves as visual/approx. indicators. Many 
sections have ritornelli ad libitum in the style of Lutoslawski. The 
conductor gives sectional cues ( up/down varieties of arrows and 
staff expressions) (eg a downbeat to begin a section that might last 
eg., for approx. 4 minutes; further instrumental cues might be given 
during the section to indicate to performers' entries/exits. Further, 
within sections, individual performers might cue each other at 
particular points in time. Similar cues/entries/exists occur in the 
vocal parts between and within soloists and chorus etc. To aid the 
performers, I included such cue marks in the score and more detailed 
cues between performers/groups in the parts. Many of the different 
groupings/orchestrations recur during the composition and warranted a 
systematic way of having sets of expressions that show/hide in the 
score and parts. To this end I used sets of categories of cues set up 
as Staff Lists that worked very well, albeit its complexity and that 
the nomenclature evolved during the course of composition so it's not 
perfect or pretty but works for me (aided consistency & saved time in 
production of parts etc). For example,



Conductor Cue1a (top TL+TLs prts)
Conductor Cue2 (TLs+ prts)
Conductor Cue3a1 (top TL Scr/Prt+Sop1 Scr/Prt)
Conductor Cue3a2 (top TL Sc/Prt+Sop1 Prt)
Conductor Cue3b (top TL+Sop2)
Conductor Cue3c (top TL+Alto1)
Conductor Cue3d (top TL+Bar1)
Conductor Cue3e (top TL+Bass1)
...to
Conductor Cue12.16b(top TL+TL Inst.Grp/Perc1/2)


OR for the 3 perc groups

Perc1.1(TL+staves Scr+Prts)
Perc1.2(staves Scr+Prts)
Perc2.1(TL+staves Scr+Prts)
Perc2.2(staves Scr+Prts)
Perc3.1(top 2 staves)
Perc3.2(bot 3 staves)

OR for vocalists/chorus

Chorus1a (Sop ,MS & Bar Scr+Prts)
Chorus1b (Sop Scr+Prts,MS & Bar Prts)
Chorus1c (Sop4 Scr+Prt)

(I've put a small GIF of a typical system at 
 where 
you can see the conductor cues indicating entries/exists in the full 
score, which is fairly sparse in visual terms)


I'll be sending a request to MM for reinstatement of unlimited SLs 
and keep my fingers x'ed

--
cheers, Claudio


Claudio Pompili
composer, sound designer, music consultant
http://www.claudiopompili.net.au/ (**2002-2003 Golden Web Award**)
Skype: claudiop_509
Australian Music Centre http://www.amcoz.com.au;
http://www.amcoz.com.au/composers/composer.asp?id=236

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

RE: [Finale] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[James Gilbert]

I don't know what I've done to my system (Vista & FireFox 2) but with both
FinWin2008 & 2009, when I press the F1 key Internet Explorer starts to load,
then closes without displaying anything and the folder containing the help
files shows up. I then click on the finale.htm file and it opens in FireFox
and all seems to work, except that I have to search for whatever it was I
was looking for -- no instant load of the help I need. The odd thing is that
when I first got Finale 2008, IE did open up the help files, and once I
changed the security settings, worked like it was suppose to. If I can
figure out what I did to get the current behavior to happen, I'll post it.

I haven't had time to give 2009 a really good going over, but so far, I'm
trying to remember why I upgraded. :)

James Gilbert
www.jamesgilbertmusic.com

> Aaron Sherber wrote:
> Finale will still insist on using IE when you press F1, as you noted,
> but this may make it easier for you to get to the manual in your
> browser of choice.
> 
> Don't forget to complain to customer support about this.
> 
> Aaron.

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[David W. Fenton]

On 27 Jul 2008 at 17:21, Aaron Sherber wrote:

> At 04:36 PM 7/27/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>  >Set the default for .chm files to Opera
> 
> Phil, as I recall, you're still on Finale 2.x or 3.x and therefore 
> don't know how the help files in 2008 and 2009 are delivered. They 
> are, in fact, a series of HTML files, no CHM at all.

Not only that, a real CHM file (which is a Microsoft format, a 
compiled format for their HTML Help format) would *not* display 
properly if opened in a web browser.

> These HTML files 
> do display fine in your browser of choice, as the original poster 
> noted, but the F1 key in Finale is hardcoded to open the files in IE, 
> and there is no way around this at the present time. The best those 
> of us who don't use IE can do is to set up alternate ways of 
> accessing the help files in our favorite browsers.

It is ridiculous that they haven't fixed this yet.

-- 
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] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[Aaron Sherber]

At 04:36 PM 7/27/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Set the default for .chm files to Opera

Phil, as I recall, you're still on Finale 2.x or 3.x and therefore 
don't know how the help files in 2008 and 2009 are delivered. They 
are, in fact, a series of HTML files, no CHM at all. These HTML files 
do display fine in your browser of choice, as the original poster 
noted, but the F1 key in Finale is hardcoded to open the files in IE, 
and there is no way around this at the present time. The best those 
of us who don't use IE can do is to set up alternate ways of 
accessing the help files in our favorite browsers.


Aaron.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] Some comments re Fin09

[Tyler Turner]

--- On Sun, 7/27/08, Bernard Savoie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> So if I need to indicate an explanation for, say all the
> clarinets (4  
> in this case), I use a staff list to define a view on the
> 1st  
> clarinet in the score and on each individual parts.
> 
> Now repeat the same scenario with all the strings, all the
> violins (I  
> & II), all the trumpets, all the trombones, all the
> horns, all the  
> brass, all the woodwinds, all the flutes... Well, you get
> the idea.
> 
> Four staff lists really won't cut it.
> 
> The only way I will be able to deal with this scenario in
> 09, it  
> seams, will be to duplicate the file once the score is
> finished and  
> copy the indications to the pertinent parts for individual
> parts.  
> This is a giant step backwards. Looks like I'll be
> evaluating using  
> '09 on a case per case basis. If I think I won't be
> needing so many  
> staff list, then fine. Otherwise, I'll stick with an
> earlier version.


No, I don't think that would be the fastest way. I would think you'd do this - 
from the score, drag apply the expression to all staves you want it on in the 
parts, all at once (using a metatool if you have one). Then drag select the 
handles of the ones you don't want visible in the score and press 
ctrl-alt-shift-U and then ctrl-alt-shift-H. That unlinks them and then hides 
them only in the score.

Tyler


  
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[p_daley]

Set the default for .chm files to Opera


 Daniel Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> I use a Windows machine for Finale, but avoid using the Internet Explorer  
> browser, in preference to Opera and, sometimes, Firefox.  Opera is my  
> default browser for HTML files, and it displays the Finale User Manual  
> fast and well. But when the User Manual is opened either from the start  
> menu or within Finale via Help it seems to insist on opening Internet  
> Explorer and I can't figure out how to change this.  Any ideas?
> 
> Daniel Wolf
> ___
> 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] Some comments re Fin09

[Aaron Sherber]

At 10:43 AM 7/27/2008, Bernard Savoie wrote:
>This limited staff list is a real bummer for me. I just finished a
>contemporary score for full orchestra where the composer had a lot of
>performance explanations, often several lines long) for individual
>instrument groups. To show these indications on all the relevant
>staves in a score is really not practical.
>
>So if I need to indicate an explanation for, say all the clarinets (4
>in this case), I use a staff list to define a view on the 1st
>clarinet in the score and on each individual parts.
>
>The only way I will be able to deal with this scenario in 09, it
>seams, will be to duplicate the file once the score is finished and
>copy the indications to the pertinent parts for individual parts.  

You could also attach the expression to each of the 4 clarinet 
staves, and then hide it in the score for clarinets 2-4. I agree that 
this may not be as simple as a staff list, but it seems easier than 
the alternate method you describe.


Aaron.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[Aaron Sherber]

At 03:24 PM 7/27/2008, Daniel Wolf wrote:
>I use a Windows machine for Finale, but avoid using the Internet Explorer
>browser, in preference to Opera and, sometimes, Firefox.  Opera is my
>default browser for HTML files, and it displays the Finale User Manual
>fast and well. But when the User Manual is opened either from the start
>menu or within Finale via Help it seems to insist on opening Internet
>Explorer and I can't figure out how to change this.  Any ideas?

This cannot be changed on Windows, and has worked this way since 
Fin2008. But you can yourself create a shortcut that opens the help 
file in Opera or Firefox, and you can create bookmarks in Opera and 
Firefox pointing to the help manual.


Finale will still insist on using IE when you press F1, as you noted, 
but this may make it easier for you to get to the manual in your 
browser of choice.


Don't forget to complain to customer support about this.

Aaron.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2009 expression question

[David W. Fenton]

On 27 Jul 2008 at 15:01, Richard Smith wrote:

> But then, this brings up one of my favorite peeves. Why, when copy and 
> paste work so well, do we continue to use complicated repeat patterns 
> and nested endings that only consume limited (at least in my case) brain 
> power when it's most needed for making music? The less we are distracted 
> from the basics of music making, the better the performance is likely to 
> be. It's really time to leave the archaic notation shortcuts of the 
> handwritten era behind.

Repeats serve two purposes:

1. to save space (back in the hand copying days of the 18th century, 
paper was very expensive, relative to today).

2. to make forms clear.

Even today, #1 can be relevant if you end up with extra page turns 
because of written-out repeats. But other than that, I would agree 
that mostly one should avoid shorthand notation.

However, I definitely *do* believe that #2 is relevant in many cases. 
Also, with certain kinds of conventional repeat structures (e.g., da 
capo aria, minuet & trio), players are going to know exactly what to 
do without having to expend any extra brain power on the process, so 
I don't think there's any harm in using those conventional repeat 
patterns.

However, the default choice ought to be to write it all out, and 
there should always be a very good and strong reason to do otherwise.

-- 
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] 2009 expression question

[Richard Smith]

Sibelius does the same thing as Finale in this case. But, if I may give 
a player's perspective, I really prefer having the MM rest broken to 
place a DS or similar instruction. It doesn't look as good, but it's 
much more clear to me as to where it is to occur. I have played lots of 
music that had such instructions poorly placed and was confusing. I 
think instant recognition is more important than graphic beauty, 
especially in the high pressure world of one rehearsal (maybe?) before 
performing it.


But then, this brings up one of my favorite peeves. Why, when copy and 
paste work so well, do we continue to use complicated repeat patterns 
and nested endings that only consume limited (at least in my case) brain 
power when it's most needed for making music? The less we are distracted 
from the basics of music making, the better the performance is likely to 
be. It's really time to leave the archaic notation shortcuts of the 
handwritten era behind.


Now I've made someone mad. Sorry.

Richard Smith
http://www.rgsmithmusic.com



Chuck Israels wrote:


On Jul 27, 2008, at 1:19 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:


On 27.07.2008 Michael Greensill wrote:
>Chuck
Boy that statement is the crux of the matter. What takes 2 seconds 
to hand copy should take the same amount of time in Finale.


Well, I believe that would indeed be asking too much as a general 
statement.


I agree, Johannes.  Mike oversimplifies the matter.  This is a trivial 
thing when done by hand - not so, the way things work in Finale 
(Sibelius too, I have since discovered), because of the need for 
attachment points in measures.  As a simple graphic symbol, in page 
view, this would also be trivial in a notation program.  A measure 
attached text block, placed when in Page View, would serve perfectly 
well.  It's when switching back and forth from score to parts, and 
Scroll View to Page View (after MM rests have been created), that the 
problem arrises, and the solution to that is probably not trivial.  
That does nothing to change my opinion that it it should be addressed 
and is long overdue.


Chuck





Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de

___
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

[Finale] 2009 User Manual Default Browser

[Daniel Wolf]

I use a Windows machine for Finale, but avoid using the Internet Explorer  
browser, in preference to Opera and, sometimes, Firefox.  Opera is my  
default browser for HTML files, and it displays the Finale User Manual  
fast and well. But when the User Manual is opened either from the start  
menu or within Finale via Help it seems to insist on opening Internet  
Explorer and I can't figure out how to change this.  Any ideas?


Daniel Wolf
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] Some comments re Fin09

[Bernard Savoie]

This limited staff list is a real bummer for me. I just finished a  
contemporary score for full orchestra where the composer had a lot of  
performance explanations, often several lines long) for individual  
instrument groups. To show these indications on all the relevant  
staves in a score is really not practical.


So if I need to indicate an explanation for, say all the clarinets (4  
in this case), I use a staff list to define a view on the 1st  
clarinet in the score and on each individual parts.


Now repeat the same scenario with all the strings, all the violins (I  
& II), all the trumpets, all the trombones, all the horns, all the  
brass, all the woodwinds, all the flutes... Well, you get the idea.


Four staff lists really won't cut it.

The only way I will be able to deal with this scenario in 09, it  
seams, will be to duplicate the file once the score is finished and  
copy the indications to the pertinent parts for individual parts.  
This is a giant step backwards. Looks like I'll be evaluating using  
'09 on a case per case basis. If I think I won't be needing so many  
staff list, then fine. Otherwise, I'll stick with an earlier version.


By the way, they have kept the ability to create multiple staff lists  
as far as repeats go. Go figure.


Bernard Savoie

On Jul 26, 2008, at 13:00, Robert Patterson wrote:


This does not mean I think MM is justified, but I understand their
reasons. That said, in the Fin09 world it is difficult for me to  
see how

you would need 50 Staff Lists. You would have to have more than 50
expression categories, which would just confuse the heck out of me.

Nevertheless, just because I can't think of reason you should need 50
SLs is no reason for you not to need them. I'd be interested to know
what drives you to use that many.


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2009 expression question

[Chuck Israels]

On Jul 27, 2008, at 1:19 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:


On 27.07.2008 Michael Greensill wrote:
>Chuck
Boy that statement is the crux of the matter. What takes 2 seconds  
to hand copy should take the same amount of time in Finale.


Well, I believe that would indeed be asking too much as a general  
statement.


I agree, Johannes.  Mike oversimplifies the matter.  This is a trivial  
thing when done by hand - not so, the way things work in Finale  
(Sibelius too, I have since discovered), because of the need for  
attachment points in measures.  As a simple graphic symbol, in page  
view, this would also be trivial in a notation program.  A measure  
attached text block, placed when in Page View, would serve perfectly  
well.  It's when switching back and forth from score to parts, and  
Scroll View to Page View (after MM rests have been created), that the  
problem arrises, and the solution to that is probably not trivial.   
That does nothing to change my opinion that it it should be addressed  
and is long overdue.


Chuck





Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de

___
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] 2009 expression question

[Johannes Gebauer]

On 27.07.2008 Michael Greensill wrote:

<>Chuck

Boy that statement is the crux of the matter. What takes 2 seconds to hand copy 
should take the same amount of time in Finale.


Well, I believe that would indeed be asking too much as a general statement.

Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale