[Finale] printing to pdf from 2009b
Hello All, I decided to try a new project in Finale 2009b and have come across a major problem printing to PDF. I have Adobe Acrobat 9.1 (full version) installed, and am running on Vista Ultimate 64-bit. When I try to print to the Adobe PDF driver, I get an error: thunking spooler apis from 32 to 64 process has stopped working After a bit of searching, I discovered that this process is invoked when printing from a 32-bit application to a 64-bit driver. So, it seems the culprit is Vista. However, Finale 2009 is the only application that gives me this error. And, Finale 2008a prints just fine to this driver. This suggests Finale 2009 is at least partly to blame. Has anyone else with a similar setup run across this issue? Also related, it appears that the compile postscript listing command is broken in 2009 (on my setup, at least). It uses strange font references that distiller doesn't know what to do with, and generates a postscript file that is not plain text, so it is difficult to examine to see where the problem lies. Does anyone on the list use the compile postscript listing? It has never worked properly for me (it sort of works in 2008, but the actual music ends up displaced off the page with only a small portion visible on the edge). Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] printing to pdf from 2009b
Christopher Smith wrote: Are you using non-Finale fonts? I had a problem once with that on my Mac with an old, old font. I don't know what the issues could be with Vista, though. No, just Engraver and Tamburo. The other thing is, are you using any Custom arrowheads in Smart Shapes? These WILL break a PDF or PostScript output, in my case causing unreadable gibberish files to be written. It doesn't matter if the custom arrowhead is one of Finale's or from an outside font. MakeMusic is aware of this bug. To track this down, start with printing one of Finale's default files with no musical entries. If it prints, then the problem is the content. If it doesn't, then there is some darker, deeper cause. I tracked down the arrow problem by chopping my file in half, trying to print, and then chopping the non-printing part in half and trying again. Very interesting... it does look like this may be the problem. I can print isolated pages, but others cause the crash (some have custom smart shape lines). I'll have to investigate further. Thanks! Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] printing to pdf from 2009b
David W. Fenton wrote: I know that with Christopher's help you've already identified what is a likely cause, but one thing to always consider in Vista (and other versions of Windows, too) is if running Finale in one of the compatibility modes makes a difference. Thanks, David. I did give this a try, thinking along the same lines. Unfortunately, the problem was still present. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 RAM issues
Hi James, On Sun, 2006-08-13 at 17:41 -0400, James Gilbert wrote: Anyone else find that even with a computer that has 256Meg of RAM you cannot install Finale 2007?? When trying to install, I get a message that says that since I don't have 256meg of RAM (I do) the install does not continue. (The system requirments that MakeMusic advertises says nothing about having a 'minimum' of 256, just 256 minimum). Why should a notation software program require sooo much RAM in the first place? Does your motherboard have onboard video? If so, part of that 256MB is being used as RAM for your video card, resulting in the report that you don't have at least 256MB. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Mac Pro unveiled
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I can only assume people like the increasingly prettified GUIs because the designs sell. But I just want screen real estate and no distractions. From what I've seen, neither the new Mac nor the upcoming Windows provide that. (I've tried Linux; right now it seems to be the worst of both worlds.) Sorry to hijack this thread a bit, but I've got to jump in. What flavour of Linux did you try? Because if you are looking for minimal desktop setups, then Linux is the place to be. Look at FluxBox, IceWM or AfterStep. For example (and I have tried this), you can run FluxBox on top of Slackware on an old 486 and still have a reasonably responsive OS. Windows 98 won't even install. Of course if you want eye-candy, you can go with KDE or Gnome and use Xgl for the latest and greatest in OpenGL acceleration. There are lots of reasons not to use Linux, but the lack of a bare-bones desktop is not one of them. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Mac Pro unveiled
dhbailey wrote: Scott Amort wrote: Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I can only assume people like the increasingly prettified GUIs because the designs sell. But I just want screen real estate and no distractions. From what I've seen, neither the new Mac nor the upcoming Windows provide that. (I've tried Linux; right now it seems to be the worst of both worlds.) Sorry to hijack this thread a bit, but I've got to jump in. What flavour of Linux did you try? Because if you are looking for minimal desktop setups, then Linux is the place to be. Look at FluxBox, IceWM or AfterStep. For example (and I have tried this), you can run FluxBox on top of Slackware on an old 486 and still have a reasonably responsive OS. Windows 98 won't even install. Of course if you want eye-candy, you can go with KDE or Gnome and use Xgl for the latest and greatest in OpenGL acceleration. There are lots of reasons not to use Linux, but the lack of a bare-bones desktop is not one of them. How well does Finale run on Linux machines? Not at all my point - you'll even note that my last sentence was 'There are lots of reasons not to use Linux'. Lack of Finale and other multimedia apps (Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.) is certainly one of them. I was merely addressing Dennis' comment that Linux was the worst of the three operating systems concerning screen real estate and unnecessary UI distractions. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Request for Help In Identifying Excerpt (Mozart)
Hi All, I am trying to identify which Mozart piece the included excerpt is from (it has been arranged from its original). I know I should know it, but I just can't place it. If anyone out there might have a chance to take a look and help me out, I would very much appreciate it. Thanks in advance, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Request for Help In Identifying Excerpt (Mozart)
And here is the second page. Thanks! Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Compile vs. print
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: But something else is up. Just one character, an upward 16th flag, is misplaced. It's the only character that has a problem (no other flags in either direction, or other characters), and every character of the font fully validates in the font creation program (this is the modified Revere I've been working with). It has a FAN file, not that it should matter. It displays correctly. It prints correctly to the non-postscript Xerox, Canon, HP and Epson printers. It prints correctly to Postscript. But it doesn't compile or export correctly. Hi Dennis, Have you tried sending the compiled postscript listing directly to your ps printer? If memory serves, and you have your printer connected to lpt1, you can do this by issuing a: copy [filename] lpt1 at a DOS prompt on Windows. Or, I believe GSView has a Print File option. If it prints correctly, then we can at least isolate the problem to Distiller or Ghostscript instead of the postscript listing itself. Does Acrobat 3 or 5 install an Adobe PDF printer driver? Or are you printing to a file first then running it through distiller? If the latter, what printer driver are you using to print to file? What version of Ghostscript are you running? This strikes me as a bug in Distiller or Ghostscript. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Compile vs. print
Hi Dennis, On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 16:56 -0400, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I don't have a Postscript printer. I am creating PDFs for download and for my own printing on various non-PS printers. That's why the screen display and size are important -- so those folks auditioning the files can get a good, clean look and fast download. OK, so just to be certain, you are following this procedure: 1) Compile postscript in Finale, or export EPS, with AdobePS 4.5.3 printer driver 2) Running that file through Distiller (v5) and/or GS (v8.53) 3) Output has misplaced 16th note flag And, if you: 1) Print from Finale normally, to either a postscript or non-postscript printer *or* print directly to the distiller driver 2) Output has correctly placed 16th note flag As an aside, are you running Windows 98? I believe XP should have the PScript5 driver. Anyways, an experiment then: 1) Install a different Postscript printer driver - try the HP LaserJet 5000 one, or possibly the HP LaserJet 4MP 2) try compiling and/or exporting and see if the result is the same I don't know how to read the character placements. The sixteenth note's flag is the r character (114 or $72) The same flag in the same place in the score's EPS file (with the only change being the default music font, and then compiled) for Maestro and RevereFinale read respectively (two different 16th note flags shown). (r) 4.431 4602.9976 5203.5835 flup /Maestro ff 164 scf stf (r) 4.431 4604.2788 5203.5835 flup /RevereFinale ff 164 scf stf OK, so these are Postscript commands, the first one is pushing the character r (the brackets are enclosing the string literal) followed by three floating point numbers on to the stack and then executing function 'flup' on them. I'm not sure what that function is, but I would expect that those numbers are some sort of placement information (likely scale, x-position and y-position). The next line is setting the font information for Maestro/RevereFinale (ff = findfont, scf=scalefont and stf=setfont, with 164 being the scaling factor). What is interesting is that there is a discrepancy between the two examples - a (possible) x-position of 4602.9976 versus 4604.2788, which would position it slightly to the left. Is your glyph width for the 16th note flag the same for both fonts? And the glyph origin point is the same as well? Give this a try: 1) Edit the RevereFinale postscript listing and change the 4604.2788 to 4602.9976. The file is plain-text, so you can just use Notepad or Wordpad to do this. 2) Run this edited file through Distiller and/or Ghostscript and see how it affects the x-positioning. I'm just guessing on this, and flup could do something totally different, but it seems plausible. Let me know what happens. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Compile vs. print
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I used an IBM InfoPrint 5000 and an Apple 630, which are two of several PS drivers I have installed for client jobs. No change. The Postscript driver doesn't seem to affect the EPS export or PS compile anyway; even with no PS driver selected in the printer dialog, the EPS export and PS compile function. Finale seems to have its own Postscript compiler for these. Yes, I believe Finale only needs the PS printer driver to properly embed fonts. executing function 'flup' on them. I'm not sure what that function is These seem to be abbreviated descriptions of the glyph's function. I think this is flag up. Right... and there is a corresponding 'fldn'. Do you have any examples of eight note flags? Do they work correctly? 1) Edit the RevereFinale postscript listing and change the 4604.2788 to 4602.9976. The file is plain-text, so you can just use Notepad or Wordpad to do this. 2) Run this edited file through Distiller and/or Ghostscript and see how it affects the x-positioning. By adding 58 to the horizontal value, the flags place correctly. (I can also adjust the y position.) Very strange. So just to see if I could goose this thing, I went back to the original font, adjusted a few positions slightly (which I was going to do anyway), including the vertical position of this flag. I then reinstalled the font, and used the new font in all the same combinations. All the results were the same. Only this glyph malfunctions. What program did you use to create/edit the font? Is it a truetype or postscript? I have FontLab 5 installed here, if you like I could have a look at the actual font and see if I can see anything that might explain things. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale: Sharp and crisp PDFs.
dc wrote: Thanks, Allen, but I'm told it doesn't work in 2k6c, where the distilling of PS compiled by Finale with Include fonts in listing ticked gives an error message for all the fonts: Maestro PS, and the different OT text fonts. They are ALL replaced with Courier. Exporting EPS is no better. Would anyone be willing to send me a one-page PS file compiled with Finale and Win2K or WinXP, with the Maestro PS font and perhaps other PS or OT fonts? Or an EPS file? Hi Dennis, I can confirm that using Fin2K6c, on WinXP with *only* the PS version of Maestro installed generates a Postscript listing with invalid Type 1 font information. All Type 1 fonts are not found when the PS file is run through Acrobat Distiller (version 7.0.7) and are replaced with Courier. OpenType and TrueType fonts seem to work correctly, although as noted earlier in this thread, they seem to be incorrectly listed as Type 1 fonts. I used a simple example page compiled to postscript with include fonts in listing checked. It uses the Maestro PS font, and text in three different fonts - one PS, one TrueType and one OpenType. I tried to include these files (i.e. the PS and EPS), but the PS listing is almost 500k, and the EPS about the same size (too large for a post to this list without moderator approval). So, I've just included the distilled PDF. If anyone wants to look at the others, feel free to contact me off-list. Hope this helps, Scott postscript_test.PDF Description: Adobe PDF document ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale: Sharp and crisp PDFs.
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 01:42 PM 4/28/06 -0400, Scott Amort wrote: I can confirm that using Fin2K6c, on WinXP with *only* the PS version of Maestro installed generates a Postscript listing with invalid Type 1 font information. Not here. Works fine with Maestro Type 1 installed (and TTF uninstalled). I've tried various combos of Win98SE and WinXP Pro with Fin2K6c distilling either PS or EPS with Distiller 3 and Distiller 5. Interesting. Do other Type 1 fonts also embed correctly? I think I have a copy of Distiller 5 around here somewhere, perhaps I'll try that and see if it is a factor. If you don't mind, could you send me a one-page ps or eps that works for you so I can test to see if it is a distillation problem instead of a generation one? Thanks, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale: Sharp and crisp PDFs.
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: At 02:44 PM 4/28/06 -0400, you wrote: If you don't mind, could you send me a one-page ps or eps that works for you so I can test to see if it is a distillation problem instead of a generation one? Attached PS/PDF, EPS/PDF. Hi Dennis ( the other one :-) ), I think what is happening here is that you created your postscript listing/eps while you had the TrueType version of Maestro installed. Did you remove the TrueType version before or after you compiled the listing? If after, can you try uninstalling the TrueType version, then installing the PS version - then open up Finale, compile the postscript version and distill it. A few experiments here seem to show that if you compile the postscript listing with the TrueType font installed, it will correctly reference either the TrueType or PS version later on, depending upon which one is installed on your system (although the character mappings seem to be a bit off with the PS version, there is a problem with noteheads). However, if you compile it with the PS version installed, it will incorrectly reference either version. I suspect the problem is that the PS listing is mangling the PS font name. Distiller gives me errors like MSTT33456 not found, using Courier. Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale: Sharp and crisp PDFs.
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote: I removed it before. Moved it completely off the machine for the duration. I think I have solved the problem. Do you have a PostScript printer as your default? I do not. Finale seems to rely on the default printer driver to compile the PS listing. Once I switched mine to a PS driver, both the PS listing and EPS output worked perfectly. Under my regular printer, which uses PCL6, I get mangled Type 1 font names. Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Arrangement Contract Question
Thanks to everyone who took the time to respond. Clearly a loaded topic! I suppose my chief concern in all this is getting credit for my work, so I will try for a clause that reflects that. However, as was pointed out - I don't really know the composer or the works, so I should have a look first. Perhaps I might prefer just to be paid for the work :-) And yes, he may just move on to another arranger who isn't so picky. Thanks again, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Arrangement Contract Question
Hi All, This is not strictly Finale related, but this seems like a very knowledgeable group to get some advice from. I was recently sent a job description for some music arranging and typesetting services. In general, I only do engraving work, so I'm not too familiar with the legalities surrounding arrangements. Basically, the contract is from a composer to arrange and engrave 12 of his own works. What set of some alarm bells for me is the following statement in his email: The arrangement would become the property of the composer. Is this a usual requirement? Does this mean that I am essentially signing away any claim to this arrangement (i.e. the composer will not need to credit me, nor obtain my permission to use, alter or perform it)? It seems to me that the composer is looking for someone else to do his work for him and still retain ownership, but maybe I'm just not aware of how this sort of thing usually works. He is offering union rates. Any advice? Thanks very much. Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Relative units of measurement
Hi All, I'm doing a bit of research, and thought I might offer up a question to the many experienced members of the list. Type-setters use some relative units of measurement, for example, the em (equal to the same point size as the type being set) and the en (one half of an em space). I am wondering what the main relative units of measurement are in music engraving (or, if in fact any exist)? I would think equivalents to em and en would be staff line space (i.e. the vertical distance between two lines on the staff) and half-line space, but are there any width-based measurements? Perhaps the width of a notehead, or whole-note? Ultimately, I'm hoping to further develop and refine some computer algorithms for music spacing, and I'm very interested in how the traditional, non-computer engravers approached their layouts. Thanks for any assistance, Best Regards, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] OT: Relative units of measurement
On Sun, 2006-01-29 at 18:37 +0100, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Spot on. Spaces and Notehead width. (I think it is the width of a quarter note head, but that I don't know for sure.) Thanks all, for taking the time to respond. I've been meaning to take a look at the Ted Ross book for a while, now I've got a good excuse! Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
[Finale] OT: Guitar MIDI Controller
Hi All, Sorry for the off-topic post, but I thought someone on list may have some knowledge about MIDI controllers. Specifically, I have a client interested in using a guitar-based controller, like the Roland GI-20 (http://www.rolandus.com/products/details.asp?catid=6subcatid=0prodid=GI-20). I don't use MIDI very much at all, so I wasn't able to offer much advice. He intends to use it with some sequencing software (Reason) and notation software (i.e. hyperscribe with Finale) as both a means to input music, as well as a MIDI controller. Does anyone on list have any experience with this particular piece of equipment, or the notion of guitar-based MIDI controllers in general? My advice to him was to learn to play the piano, but he wasn't too keen on that! Best, Scott ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
