At 01:38 PM 7/12/02 -0800, Mark D. Lew wrote:
>My current problem is that something is turning the "auto-arrange" back on.
>I think maybe it's related to a system freeze up I'm getting from one of
>my other applications. It seems like it's only after I reboot that the
>icons have re-aligned thems
At 9:25 AM 07/12/02, David W. Fenton wrote:
>Of course, it would all depend on how it was implemented, as there
>are any number of pitfalls to deal with. But just because it's
>possible to do it *wrong* does not mean it's impossible to do it
>*right*. So much of the objection to the mere suggesti
At 7:19 AM 07/12/02, David H. Bailey wrote:
>You can at least rename them so it seems a lot less kindergarten-ish.
>They do both have to remain on the desktop, but you can put your bottom
>row of icons with their names just hidden by the toolbar. I put the ones
>I never use but can't get rid of do
On 12 Jul 2002, at 7:19, David H. Bailey wrote:
> You can at least rename them so it seems a lot less kindergarten-ish.
> They do both have to remain on the desktop, but you can put your
> bottom row of icons with their names just hidden by the toolbar. I put
> the ones I never use but can't get
On 12 Jul 2002, at 6:38, David H. Bailey wrote:
> What DOES show clearly is that some people find Sibelius' method of
> making the user work easier to deal with, while others find Finale's
> method of making the user work. And the reverse is true, as witness
> the large number of faithful, mostl
At 12:35 AM 7/12/02 -0800, Mark D. Lew wrote:
>Is there a way I can remove the "My Computer" and "Neighborhood Network"
>icons from the Desktop. I figured out how to get rid of "My Documents",
>even though I could trash it directly, but the same trick isn't working for
>these other two.
Search f
You can at least rename them so it seems a lot less kindergarten-ish.
They do both have to remain on the desktop, but you can put your bottom
row of icons with their names just hidden by the toolbar. I put the ones
I never use but can't get rid of down there. The icons show but the
names are
David W. Fenton wrote:
[snip]
> I read his posts as an explanation of some of the things Sibelius
> does well, posted here as a way of pointing out what Finale might do
> better.
>
> The "rush to pounce" mystifies me -- it's as if people felt some kind
> of personal investment in Finale tha
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
> Just be careful with those characters. Some applications crash when trying
> to open files other than alphanumeric characters; it's a common bug in
> applications whose heritage dates from 8.3 filenames.
Thanks for the tip, but I my use of long filenames is almost e
On 11 Jul 2002, at 0:33, Mark D. Lew wrote:
> At 11:42 AM 07/11/02, Richard Walker wrote:
>
> >Why the rush to pounce?
>
> I think the rush to pounce has something to do with your insistence on
> coming on to the Finale list and telling us that Sibelius works better
> than Finale does.
I have
I wouldn't object to improvement in this area, either. Adding a more
intuitive interface to the midi area of Finale would certainly make it
far more attractive to many people who currently don't like the program.
And it wouldn't even require any reworking of the current capabilities!
Just a
On 10.07.2002 16:05 Uhr, Robert Patterson wrote
>> The Sibelius method of understanding what arco means after a
>> pizzicato and automatically switching to the appropriate patch seems so
>> obviously superior
>
> Until, as eventually with any automation, its assumptions are not what you
> want.
On Thursday, July 11, 2002, at 01:16 AM, Mark D. Lew wrote:
> What I really hate, however, is that certain punctuation
> characters which were available to me in Mac filenames are off
> limits in Windows filenames!
FWIW, when you eventually move to OS X, there are a few
constraints that app
Hello Richard,
> Now, where the real power comes in is that Sibelius has
> included a "reset instruments" command, so I can create a file
> using my preferred patches, and when I send it to you, you can
> click a button to reset everything to play back on your
> preferred patches. (Philip, di
At 12:16 AM 7/11/02 -0800, Mark D. Lew wrote:
>What I
>really hate, however, is that certain punctuation characters which were
>available to me in Mac filenames are off limits in Windows filenames!
I think this is in keeping with the long tradition of reserved characters.
That's why some Mac file
Mark D. Lew wrote:
[snip]
> Petty as it seems, this is probably what I dislike most about Windows. (It
> used to bother me that the stuff on the desktop insists on lining up from
> the top left, when I'd rather move some of them over to the bottom right,
> but I've pretty much gotten over that.
Richard Walker wrote:
> on 02.7.11 10:25 AM, David H. Bailey at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>>And this is being touted as "better" than the way Finale does it? To
>>get back to regular trumpet you can't type-into-score senza sordino?
>>You have to type "arco trumpet" and then remember to hi
At 11:42 AM 07/11/02, Richard Walker wrote:
>Why the rush to pounce?
I think the rush to pounce has something to do with your insistence on
coming on to the Finale list and telling us that Sibelius works better than
Finale does.
If Sibelius is better suited to your needs, that's fine. All of u
At 10:04 AM 07/10/02, David W. Fenton wrote:
> I imagine that the filename length limits on the Mac make
>this something of a challenge. Personally, I hate extremely long
>filenames, because the whole concept of it requires placing meta
>information in the file's name, which violates my concepts
on 02.7.11 10:25 AM, David H. Bailey at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> And this is being touted as "better" than the way Finale does it? To
> get back to regular trumpet you can't type-into-score senza sordino?
> You have to type "arco trumpet" and then remember to hide it before
> printing?
>
> Th
All,
Thanks to everyone for a *very* illuminating discussion on how Midi is used
within scoring. I learned a great deal about different styles. Being an old
event list guy, I find everything else ambiguous or hard to remember. But
it's refreshing to learn how many different techniques have develo
Richard Walker wrote: "The neat thing about this
is that it is all editable by the user. To behonest,
it's not a pretty job, but it is doable. What I did
was to load adefault set of about 75 patches into my
GigaStudio rig, saving them as aperformance file for
future use. (Yes, it takes a while
Here's how Sibelius does the patch-switching trick.
Each playback device has its own "soundset" within Sibelius. This is just a
text document that lists every patch on the instrument with all of the
bank/patch numbers to locate it in the device.
Following the patch list are "groups" that list wh
> What is not addressed in the statements from the Sibelius users is what
> happens to the arco and pizz patch changes if I choose to use a non-GM
> midi module, or if the arco and pizz patches I prefer are in higher
> banks than the basic 128 patches of the GM standard?
>
>
> Would I be able to
" If I want to make a string run sound realistic by extending the note durations of each note, the closest I can come quickly is to put a slur over the music. Of course, I can't have separate playback definitions for my slurs, so if I do this, ALL of my slurs will make notes playback at 120% durat
On Wednesday, July 10, 2002, at 06:39 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
>> However, I most certainly wouldn't want to have the current
>> capabilities gelded just because someone else hasn't
>> read/understood the documentation.
> This is what bothers me about most discussions like this.
> There se
Sibelius does have some clever defaults, such as making trills and crescendos play back. But it has some serious limitations when compared to Finale in regards to MIDI. For people doing serious MIDI work who need to produce a professional sounding result, Finale IS superior to Sibelius... no questi
On Wed, 10 July 2002, "David W. Fenton" wrote
>
> It is not a zero-sum game.
What is a zero sum game is the amount of developer time available to Coda. If
they spend time working on x they cannot spend time working on y.
>
> I am simply suggesting that improvements be made, not that existing
On 9 Jul 2002, at 20:50, Robert Patterson wrote:
> "David W. Fenton" wrote:
> > quadrupling the number of metatool keys
>
> Gracious. I just can't let this go by. Occasionally I have gone back to
> Fin97 to avoid re-editing an old doc. It is the SLAG MINES! (Single
> undo, lotsa bugs that have s
David W. Fenton wrote:
> On 9 Jul 2002, at 23:10, Philip Aker wrote:
>
>
>>On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 05:08 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
>>
>>
>>>And in the expression list, there's no way to tell the
>>>difference between "arco" (violin), "arco" (viola), "arco"
>>>(cello) and "arco" (bass
On 9 Jul 2002, at 19:32, Philip Aker wrote:
> However, I most certainly wouldn't
> want to have the current capabilities gelded just because
> someone else hasn't read/understood the documentation. I equate
> the complexity of Finale's Midi to the amount of piano chops
> required to play a 3
On Wed, 10 July 2002, "David W. Fenton" wrote
> The Sibelius method of understanding what arco means after a
> pizzicato and automatically switching to the appropriate patch seems so
> obviously superior
Until, as eventually with any automation, its assumptions are not what you want.
I think t
On 10 Jul 2002, at 11:13, Colin Broom wrote:
>
> > > Much as I have to coment on regarding MIDI in Finale, I like the fact
> that I
> > > *can* assign a patch change to a pizz. indication if I so please, but
> that I
> > > have several other options available to me as well, such as switching
> >
At 09:41 AM 7/10/02 -0400, David W. Fenton wrote:
>Very well, but it nonetheless requires multiple instances of a single
>expression. The Sibelius method of understanding what arco means after a
>pizzicato and automatically switching to the appropriate patch seems so
>obviously superior that I
On 9 Jul 2002, at 23:10, Philip Aker wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 05:08 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
>
> > And in the expression list, there's no way to tell the
> > difference between "arco" (violin), "arco" (viola), "arco"
> > (cello) and "arco" (bass).
>
> That is only true in preh
Richard Walker writes:
> easy
> scripting language that brings expansion within the realm of the ordinary
> user who has neither the time nor the patience to master C++ before creating
> plug-ins.
OK, go ahead and create a MusicXML exporter or importer by using the
built-in macro language! Or t
> > Much as I have to coment on regarding MIDI in Finale, I like the fact
that I
> > *can* assign a patch change to a pizz. indication if I so please, but
that I
> > have several other options available to me as well, such as switching
> > channels, tranposition, etc. One only has to set up the
On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 05:08 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
> And in the expression list, there's no way to tell the
> difference between "arco" (violin), "arco" (viola), "arco"
> (cello) and "arco" (bass).
That is only true in prehistoric versions of Finale. Now we type
arco and the doe
On 9 Jul 2002, at 23:34, Colin Broom wrote:
> - Original Message -
>
> > Haven't you missed Richard's point?
> >
> > The point was automatic interpretation of those expressions, so that the
> > strings switch to Pizzicato and back to Arco, just because the
> > expressions are there.
>
>
On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 05:33 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
>> I didn't mention that I agree that Finale's implementation of
>> these features could be made more user friendly "(no fussy
>> expression dialogs)" because I'm already adept at using them
>> the way they are and I'd rather Coda'
Harold Owen wrote:
> I think the perfect application would give you the easy way to
> standard needs while giving you complete control over details, should
> you need alternate solutions.
Indeed it would perfect. Have you never wondered why few if any such
apps exists?
Personally, I would like t
"David W. Fenton" wrote:
> quadrupling the number of metatool keys
Gracious. I just can't let this go by. Occasionally I have gone back to
Fin97 to avoid re-editing an old doc. It is the SLAG MINES! (Single
undo, lotsa bugs that have since been fixed, no staff styles.) And only
9 metatools. Invar
Concerning "pizz" and "arco" David Fenton writes:
>There simply aren't enough numbers on the keyboard to make metatools work
>for this kind of thing.
Now that it's possible to assign metatools to just about all the keys
on the qwerty keyboard, I've used "p" to enter pizz and "a" to enter
arco
On 9 Jul 2002, at 16:30, Philip Aker wrote:
> I didn't mention that I agree that Finale's implementation of
> these features could be made more user friendly "(no fussy
> expression dialogs)" because I'm already adept at using them the
> way they are and I'd rather Coda's development time be s
At 08:12 PM 7/9/02 -0400, David W. Fenton wrote:
>In any event, quadrupling the number of metatool keys isn't exactly user-
>friendly, since how in the world could one keep track of so many
>different shortcuts?
My own solution is to use only the tools I need for a given score. The ones
that are
On 9 Jul 2002, at 14:55, Robert Patterson wrote:
> "David W. Fenton" wrote
>
> > But who would waste a metatool on pizzicato/arco, when you'd need 1 pizz
> > and an arco for each of the string patches you had in use (assuming they
> > aren't all orchestral)?
>
> Me, for one. As I said, I don'
On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 01:36 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
>>> ... I can switch between pizzicato, mute, solo, tutti, and
>>> arco/nat samples just by typing the words above the staff (no
>>> fussy expression dialogs)...
>> is a great request and I think you should send it over to
>> MacS
on 02.7.9 10:15 PM, Jari Williamsson at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Richard Walker writes:
>
>> I just load my orchestra into GigaStudio, open a new document,
>> choose my weapons, and away I go
>
> Which is exactly what I can do in Finale as well
> Although you can't. Yet...
Well, I'm sure y
- Original Message -
> Haven't you missed Richard's point?
>
> The point was automatic interpretation of those expressions, so that the
> strings switch to Pizzicato and back to Arco, just because the
> expressions are there.
Much as I have to coment on regarding MIDI in Finale, I like
On 9 Jul 2002, at 13:56, Robert Patterson wrote:
> Eventually the Finale user figures out that s/he can assign metatools to the
> most common expressions. Metatools are far more efficient than typing in (or
> pointing and clicking). Thus while Finale clearly (in this intance) takes longer
> to le
On 09.07.2002 22:56 Uhr, Robert Patterson wrote
> Eventually the Finale user figures out that s/he can assign metatools to the
> most common expressions. Metatools are far more efficient than typing in (or
> pointing and clicking). Thus while Finale clearly (in this intance) takes
> longer
> to l
You're right that was the main point, but being able to type them directly
into the score rather than going through all that bothersome tool-switching
and dialog-navigating is also a boon.
The really neat thing, however, is that the same "pizz" entry selects the
proper samples for the 1st violins
On 09.07.2002 22:08 Uhr, Philip Aker wrote
>> ... I can switch between pizzicato, mute, solo, tutti, and
>> arco/nat samples just by typing the words above the staff (no
>> fussy expression dialogs)...
>
> is a great request and I think you should send it over to
> MacSupport. Since we can alrea
> On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 04:50 AM, Richard Walker wrote:
>
> > ... I can switch between pizzicato, mute, solo, tutti, and
> > arco/nat samples just by typing the words above the staff (no
> > fussy expression dialogs)...
>
Without commenting on the main MIDI playback issue, which is on
On 9 Jul 2002, at 13:08, Philip Aker wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 04:50 AM, Richard Walker wrote:
> > ... I can switch between pizzicato, mute, solo, tutti, and
> > arco/nat samples just by typing the words above the staff (no
> > fussy expression dialogs)...
>
> is a great request a
On Tuesday, July 9, 2002, at 04:50 AM, Richard Walker wrote:
> (Just curious: did anyone ever figure out that drawing thing?)
Yes (1991).
> Finale has its good points, but flexible MIDI implementation is
> not among them.
It's reasonably flexible, just not user friendly compared to the
ins
Johannes Gebauer writes:
> Will we Mac people see any of your goodies?
Regarding the Accurate Playback component, I don't release it publically
on any platform yet.
However, I hope to be able to port the Settings Transfer component
(currently in beta on Windows) to FinMac2003 fairly soon.
B
On 09.07.2002 15:15 Uhr, Jari Williamsson wrote
> Richard Walker writes:
>
>> I just load my orchestra into GigaStudio, open a new document,
>> choose my weapons, and away I go twiddle-free to create
>> music and listen to a decent approximation of
>> it, using the samples I like.
>
> Which i
Richard Walker writes:
> I just load my orchestra into GigaStudio, open a new document,
> choose my weapons, and away I go twiddle-free to create
> music and listen to a decent approximation of
> it, using the samples I like.
Which is exactly what I can do in Finale as well (appart from the
G
To tell you the truth, I'm not so sure I should duck for cover.
I've been playing with Sibelius, and its MIDI implementation is brilliant.
It's more than just the mixer window (which is entertaining for about 2
minutes). Unlike Finale, in Sibelius I've been able to customize default
patches for e
60 matches
Mail list logo
