Re: [Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

Some of us offered some suggestions to Brad. RBH Christopher Smith wrote: MakeMusic doesn't run this list. There are just a bunch of interested users here. If you didn't get an answer, it's most likely that nobody knew what to tell you. For a problem of this magnitude, I would get on the

Re: [Finale] If I only had an option

FWIW, I created a "Hairpins" font specifically for this purpose. The length of the actual hairpin is fixed (but available in many lengths), but can be note-attached as a text expression, useful for fairly short hairpin situations. With the advent of multiple fonts being available since Fin2k4,

Re: [Finale] If I only had an option

Dejan Badnjar wrote: Can you imagine if Finale 2007 had an option to draw hairpins in the Smart Shape Tool/Tab Slide/Smart Line Designer so that you can be able to make all instances of dynamic changes (eg. Ppp, etc) and display them in a separate menu for selection (with metatools), applying t

Re: [Finale] If I only had an option

Note attached hairpins period would be a great thing. I still can't figure out why this hasn't already been implemented (FinMac2006d). -Scot On 8/17/06, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Dejan Badnjar wrote: > Can you imagine if Finale 2007 had an opti

Re: [Finale] test

Hello.On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:09 AM, Dejan Badnjar wrote:I have posted a topic couple of day ago that had not been delivered to everyone after joining the list. Can anyone reply if this one goes through. Thanks Dejan BadnjarMusette Desktop Music Publishing1 Eastview Cres.Orangeville, OntarioL9W

Re: [Finale] Installation diffs

The CD installation is 2 discs. Given a choice I would have chosen DVD. > -Original Message- > From: Dean M. Estabrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 09:04 PM > To: finale@shsu.edu > Subject: Re: [Finale] Installation diffs > > Tyro question, I know ... what's

Re: [Finale] Installation diffs

Tyro question, I know ... what's the diff/advantages between CD ROM and DVD installation disks? I ordered the first. Dean ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

Especially if you have a whole industry which survives on upgrades dragging on your coattails! ;-) David H. Bailey Eric Dannewitz wrote: True. But Steve also knows that to move forward you need to leave the past behind. dhbailey wrote: Phil Daley wrote: And, I'll just point out that, my

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

True. But Steve also knows that to move forward you need to leave the past behind. dhbailey wrote: Phil Daley wrote: And, I'll just point out that, my Windows Finale V3 runs perfectly on Vista. Mac users are forced to upgrade all the time . . . that's because Steve Jobs has such a long w

Re: [Finale] update staff distance

On 17.08.2006 dhbailey wrote: Can't you just use the staff tool in page view and drag the upper handle to move the bass staff down to where you need it, while still optimized? You are of course correct, my mind was just blank... Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-b

Re: [Finale] update staff distance

On 17.08.2006 Dejan Badnjar wrote: Just drag the top box down or use stuff usage box to set it to -300 from the viola stuff. I forgot about the top box. The staff usage box doesn't seem to work that way though, it seems to work from the top. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http:

Re: [Finale] update staff distance

Johannes Gebauer wrote: Is there a solution to this: I have an optimized score, and I cannot un-optimize. However, after entering figures I need more space between the lowest two systems, ie I want to set the distance between the bass staff and the viola staff to 300 EVPUs for all (optimized)

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

Phil Daley wrote: And, I'll just point out that, my Windows Finale V3 runs perfectly on Vista. Mac users are forced to upgrade all the time . . . that's because Steve Jobs has such a long way to go before his wealth will equal Bill Gates's. ;-) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] _

Re: [Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

Well, they might if you sent the request to MakeMusic. This list is completely independent of MakeMusic. To place a request for tech support with MakeMusic, you have to go to www.finalemusic.com and click on the support link and follow the appropriate links to place your request. David H. Ba

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

dc wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquarian interest is the only reason I can fathom to keep any of them around. But when you get your new Intel Mac, you can go back to any old

RE: [Finale] update staff distance

Just drag the top box down or use stuff usage box to set it to -300 from the viola stuff. Dejan Badnjar Musette Desktop Music Publishing 1 Eastview Cres. Orangeville, Ontario L9W 4X3 CANADA Tel.: (519) 942-0407 Fax: (519) 942-4417 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTE

[Finale] Finale 2007 demo available?

anyone know when? -- shirling & neueweise ... new music publishers mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

When did .mus files become cross-platform? For all files created before that date, you would have to first save all your Mac .mus files as ETF on a classic-capable Mac, and then somehow obtain a copy of the older Finale version(s) for Windows, and finally convert the ETF file to a Windows .

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On 17.08.2006 Darcy James Argue wrote: No, you can't. The MacIntels do not run Classic at all. The oldest version of Finale that will run on a MacIntel is Fin2004. Not using BootCamp. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de __

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

At 6:58 AM -0400 8/17/06, dhbailey wrote: I think that this is the dichotomy between "classical" (or Dennis's "non-pop") music and pop/jazz music. In a string quartet or a recorder consort or a brass quintet or orchestra, I agree with Johannes that it would lead to confusion. Case in point

Re: [Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

Yes... But, this list does not send automated responses. Except to say you are not a list member? That's why I wondered where he sent the original message to. At 8/17/2006 12:59 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:   MakeMusic doesn't run this list. There are just a bunch of interested users here. If yo

[Finale] update staff distance

Is there a solution to this: I have an optimized score, and I cannot un-optimize. However, after entering figures I need more space between the lowest two systems, ie I want to set the distance between the bass staff and the viola staff to 300 EVPUs for all (optimized) systems. Is there a way

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

At 8/17/2006 12:53 PM, dc wrote: >Eric Dannewitz écrit: >>I think he meant that you can use an Intel Mac, put Windows on it, and >>then, if you really wanted, run a Windows version of Finale > >Yes, that's what I meant. Actually, I don't think there's any version too >old to run under Win

Re: [Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

MakeMusic doesn't run this list. There are just a bunch of interested users here. If you didn't get an answer, it's most likely that nobody knew what to tell you.For a problem of this magnitude, I would get on the phone to MakeMusic tech support, wait through the hold, and get an answer fast.(952)

Re: [Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

At 8/17/2006 12:45 PM, Brad Nelson wrote:   I sent the message below on Monday Aug. 14.  I received an automated response from you saying I would hear back with 1 business day.  It's been 4 dayscan someone at MakeMusic give me some help? Where did you send the message to? Phil Daley

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

And, I'll just point out that, my Windows Finale V3 runs perfectly on Vista. Mac users are forced to upgrade all the time . . . At 8/17/2006 12:41 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: >It's a true statement on the Mac side. All the Macs currently being made >are Intel, and do not boot into OS 9 anymore.

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On 17.08.2006 Eric Dannewitz wrote: I think he meant that you can use an Intel Mac, put Windows on it, and then, if you really wanted, run a Windows version of Finale Which would also require ownership of such an old Windows version, which Andrew almost certainly doesn't have. Crosspl

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

On 17.08.2006 Andrew Stiller wrote: In 15 years of intensive Finale use, I have not had occasion to use the Mirror tool even once. I guess you might have had the occasion, but decided to not use it... I don't actually have to use the mirror _tool_ much, since all I do is use MassEdit to mirr

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

On 17.08.2006 Robert Patterson wrote: Don Hart: > Robert, what are your continuing concerns? Others, to what extent do you > use mirrors and how does the tool actually perform? One of the biggest was one that Johannes says has been fixed. Smart shapes did not mirror. Actually, that is not

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On 17.08.2006 dc wrote: But when you get your new Intel Mac, you can go back to any old version of Finale, way back to... what is the oldest version that will run on current versions of Windows? Only, since Andrew owns only the Mac versions, he won't actually have the Windows versions. Not s

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On 17.08.2006 Andrew Stiller wrote: Even when you update them, why would you ever discard them ie delete them? Finale files take up hardly any space. All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquarian interest is th

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

I think he meant that you can use an Intel Mac, put Windows on it, and then, if you really wanted, run a Windows version of Finale Andrew Stiller wrote: On Aug 17, 2006, at 11:45 AM, dc wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

It's a true statement on the Mac side. All the Macs currently being made are Intel, and do not boot into OS 9 anymore. Robert Patterson wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquaria

[Finale] Printing problem - garbage for noteheads!

I sent the message below on Monday Aug. 14.  I received an automated response from you saying I would hear back with 1 business day.  It's been 4 dayscan someone at MakeMusic give me some help? Brad Nelson HELP!!  I have a commission deadline due tomorrow I cannot print my score correct

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

No, you can't. The MacIntels do not run Classic at all. The oldest version of Finale that will run on a MacIntel is Fin2004. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://secretsociety.typepad.com Brooklyn, NY On 17 Aug 2006, at 11:45 AM, dc wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac old

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On 17 Aug 2006, at 12:11 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquarian interest is the only reason I can fathom to keep any of them around. I don't know about

Re: [Finale] If I only had an option

On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:54 AM, Dejan Badnjar wrote: Can you imagine if Finale 2007 had an option to draw hairpins in the Smart Shape Tool/Tab Slide/Smart Line Designer so that you can be able to make all instances of dynamic changes (eg. Pf>pp, etc) and display them in a separate menu for sel

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

Andrew Stiller écrit: >All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any >computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquarian interest is the >only reason I can fathom to keep any of them around. I don't know about that. Is the Mac line now completely Intel? PPC macs ca

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 17, 2006, at 11:00 AM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Christopher Smith / 2006/08/17 / 10:42 AM wrote: Actually, if you want to get really picky, the #9 in the "theoretically correct" version is not really correctly spelled--it should be spelled in most contexts as a b10, or Cnat. Sorry man, I

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On Aug 17, 2006, at 11:45 AM, dc wrote: Andrew Stiller écrit: All versions of FinMac older than 2K4 are absolutely unusable on any computer currently manufactured. Small or not, antiquarian interest is the only reason I can fathom to keep any of them around. But when you get your new Intel

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

to what extent do you use mirrors and how does the tool actually perform? In 15 years of intensive Finale use, I have not had occasion to use the Mirror tool even once. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Final

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

Don Hart: > Robert, what are your continuing concerns? Others, to what extent do you > use mirrors and how does the tool actually perform? One of the biggest was one that Johannes says has been fixed. Smart shapes did not mirror. I guess for me the value is not apparent. Copy and paste is much

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 17, 2006, at 10:49 AM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Christopher Smith / 2006/08/17 / 10:27 AM wrote: I certainly hope you would not spell that outline C# F G# B but rather C# E# G# B or even Db F Ab Cb but you said you avoid Cb's too. Oo, you were talking about spelling out a chord?!

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 16, 2006, at 3:09 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: On the other hand, there's very little advantage to spelling chords "properly" in the score if you've already decided to sacrifice harmonic "correctness" for linear readability. The conductor will just have to deal with it. Then there'

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

Thanks, Johannes. (Sorry, I didn't see your post before I sent mine.) Your take on this is good to know. Others? Don Hart on 8/17/06 9:22 AM, Johannes Gebauer at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 17.08.2006 Robert Patterson wrote: >> I am not a fan of mirrors. In the early years they were respon

Re: [Finale] 2K4-->2K7

On Aug 16, 2006, at 4:21 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 16.08.2006 Andrew Stiller wrote: but it feels very strange after all the trauma I continue to be going through as I discard about 5 older versions. Even when you update them, why would you ever discard them ie delete them? Finale file

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

I share this older assessment of Finale mirrors, which is akin to the lessons a one year old learns about a stove being hot. So, not caring to get burned for the last 17 years or so, I have been curious to see users on this list make mention of the mirror tool and their apparently positive experie

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

On 17.08.2006 Robert Patterson wrote: I am not a fan of mirrors. In the early years they were responsible for horrific file corruption. Although they continue to be supported, it is an old feature that has not received much attention, so they don't work very well, especially with many new feat

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

Christopher Smith / 2006/08/17 / 10:42 AM wrote: >Actually, if you want to get really picky, the #9 in the >"theoretically correct" version is not really correctly spelled--it >should be spelled in most contexts as a b10, or Cnat. Sorry man, I can't accept b10th. Did we not discuss this befo

[Finale] If I only had an option

Can you imagine if Finale 2007 had an option to draw hairpins in the Smart Shape Tool/Tab Slide/Smart Line Designer so that you can be able to make all instances of dynamic changes (eg. Ppp, etc) and display them in a separate menu for selection (with metatools), applying them as Pedal markings

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

Christopher Smith / 2006/08/17 / 10:27 AM wrote: >I certainly hope you would not spell that outline >C# F G# B > >but rather >C# E# G# B > >or even >Db F Ab Cb > >but you said you avoid Cb's too. Oo, you were talking about spelling out a chord?! Vertically? That's totally different story. Y

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 17, 2006, at 9:53 AM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Anyway, aside from Tonal Gravity thing, I just thought of the situation you all might be able to relate to. See this: And let's assume no chord names are written above since this is a part for someone,

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:31 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Christopher Smith / 2006/08/16 / 09:14 PM wrote: Even in a piece without a key signature, if you had a C#7 chord resolving to F#m, and the melody outlined the C#7 chord, how could you spell it except with an E#? Anything else would be MORE co

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

At 06:58 AM 8/17/06 -0400, dhbailey wrote: >I think that this is the dichotomy between "classical" (or Dennis's >"non-pop") music and pop/jazz music. Hey, hey, no hyphen! :) Dennis Oh, and on topic: Dam the rhursal consekwenses, just spel the notes write so they make grimatical cents. Theirs ju

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

I'm finding cues to be less & less of a problem. You basically need two staff styles. One that uses the new Alternate "Default Rest" Notation and hides everything else. Ane one that hides only the layer the cues are in. (I always use Layer 4.) Applying both in score view, you apply the former to

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 16, 2006, at 10:48 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 16 Aug 2006, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Even in a piece without a key signature, if you had a C#7 chord resolving to F#m, and the melody outlined the C#7 chord, how could you spell it except with an E#? Well, let's say

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 17, 2006, at 6:29 AM, dhbailey wrote: Christopher Smith wrote: Even in a piece without a key signature, if you had a C#7 chord resolving to F#m, and the melody outlined the C#7 chord, how could you spell it except with an E#? Anything else would be MORE confusing, not less. I und

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

dhbailey / 2006/08/17 / 06:32 AM wrote: >Are you trying to tell us that it's alright to fly in the face of >tradition, and write music the exact way you conceive of it, independent >of 500 years of harmonic evolution and chordal progressions? You sly >dog, you! :-) Ha-ha. Lydian Chromatic C

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On Aug 17, 2006, at 12:50 AM, Raymond Horton wrote: John Howell wrote: I really appreciate the comments on this question, and I am learning from them, but I just realized something. Every one of us, even those of us who know better, are assuming that 20th century bane, equal temperame

RE: [Finale] O. T. : Fiddling around?

Title: Message You'd be surprised the state a violin can get into, in some people's hands!     -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erica BuxbaumSent: 17 August 2006 14:13To: finale@shsu.eduSubject: Re: [Finale] O. T. : Fiddlin

Re: [Finale] O. T. : Fiddling around?

Even so, you wouldn't find rosin on the part of the fingerboard where you play in third position, or even fifth. Maybe for some stratospheric positions, but not those. Erica Johannes Gebauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 16.08.2006 Owain Sutton wrote:> Visible wear on the fingerboard? Certainly p

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

On 17.08.2006 Aaron Sherber wrote: At 04:02 AM 8/17/2006, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Please, please, MakeMusic, design a better solution for cue notes. A mirrored Cue notes layer would be ideal in my opinion. I think this would solve some problems and cause others. For example, it is common to

Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review

On 17.08.2006 Tyler Turner wrote: How so? If you needed an additional part, you'd create it. There would be times that you could change the staves that were in a part and preserve the work that had been done to the part from the score. I don't understand how having a linked part from the beginnin

[Finale] enharmonic spelling

This is a topic that deserves careful, case by case, consideration. I have found what I believe to be good reasons to adhere to correct "harmonic" spelling, and to abandon it sometimes in favor of easier melodic reading. I have not found that "incorrect" spelling leads to intonation difficulti

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

At 04:02 AM 8/17/2006, Johannes Gebauer wrote: >Please, please, MakeMusic, design a better solution for cue notes. A >mirrored Cue notes layer would be ideal in my opinion. I think this would solve some problems and cause others. For example, it is common to write cue notes with all notes above

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

Johannes Gebauer wrote: On 17.08.2006 A-NO-NE Music wrote: I respectfully disagree. Most of the situations I get in is where music is read on site. I avoid B#, Cb, E# and Fb on parts including chord names, but the score needs to stay correct. In my compositions, the 'correct' means psychologi

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

Darcy James Argue wrote: I agree with Raymond. For non-string players, my experience is that the relationship between the choice of enharmonic spelling and the corresponding intonation has been wildly overstated, especially when it comes to post-1900 music. As he says, a good player tunes his n

Re: [Finale] test

I got this post, and I saw the one the other day. But I didn't have an answer for you on that one, so I didn't reply. As a matter of fact, I got two different copies of that other message, one 7KB in size, the other one 10KB in size. David Dejan Badnjar wrote: I have posted a topic couple

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

John Howell wrote: At 10:48 PM -0400 8/16/06, Darcy James Argue wrote: On 16 Aug 2006, at 9:14 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Even in a piece without a key signature, if you had a C#7 chord resolving to F#m, and the melody outlined the C#7 chord, how could you spell it except with an E#? I r

Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review

Tyler Turner wrote: --- Johannes Gebauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I might be missing something, but what is wrong with having items which can be set to only display in the score, even before parts exist. Ok, an additional benefit might be to include a mechanism which could selectivly link

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

A-NO-NE Music wrote: Christopher Smith / 2006/08/16 / 09:14 PM wrote: Even in a piece without a key signature, if you had a C#7 chord resolving to F#m, and the melody outlined the C#7 chord, how could you spell it except with an E#? Anything else would be MORE confusing, not less. As I s

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

Christopher Smith wrote: On Aug 16, 2006, at 7:50 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote: Darcy James Argue / 2006/08/16 / 03:09 PM wrote: For transposed scores, I disagree. The conductor should normally have the same spelling as the players. If you make readability adjustments to the enharmonics in the pa

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

A-NO-NE Music wrote: Darcy James Argue / 2006/08/16 / 03:09 PM wrote: For transposed scores, I disagree. The conductor should normally have the same spelling as the players. If you make readability adjustments to the enharmonics in the part, those should be included in the score as well.

Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review

Johannes Gebauer wrote: I might be missing something, but what is wrong with having items which can be set to only display in the score, even before parts exist. Ok, an additional benefit might be to include a mechanism which could selectivly link them to certain parts, but as a start I'd be

Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review

--- Johannes Gebauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Creating the parts when setting up the score would > be a serious > limitation, and cause a lot of extra work later on. How so? If you needed an additional part, you'd create it. There would be times that you could change the staves that were

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

On 17.08.2006 Tyler Turner wrote: Robert or other beta testers, would you agree with this as an acceptable overall strategy (I'm very familiar with linked parts, but I'm no engraver)? As I have said before, cue notes is one of the weakest areas in Finale by far. There are a lot of problems to

Re: [Finale] Finale 2007 review

On 17.08.2006 Tyler Turner wrote: For this option to not hurt my work, it would have to have some sort of checker that I could run to hunt for items with this setting. It would be difficult enough for me to remember if I had enabled this setting for an object in one of my own scores several month

Re: [Finale] O. T. : Fiddling around?

On 16.08.2006 Owain Sutton wrote: Visible wear on the fingerboard? Certainly possible to see in a photograph if, for example, rosin has been allowed to build up on the remainder of its length. Well, depending on the age of the violin it only really tells you about the last few years. Rosin b

Re: [Finale] Enharmonic spelling and parts

On 17.08.2006 A-NO-NE Music wrote: I respectfully disagree. Most of the situations I get in is where music is read on site. I avoid B#, Cb, E# and Fb on parts including chord names, but the score needs to stay correct. In my compositions, the 'correct' means psychologically speaking, because m

Re: [Finale] test

On 17.08.2006 Dejan Badnjar wrote: I have posted a topic couple of day ago that had not been delivered to everyone after joining the list. Can anyone reply if this one goes through. Yes, you are being heard (read). A warm welcome to the list! Any chance you could switch to plain text emails

Re: [Finale] Cued Linked Parts

--- Dejan Badnjar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Has anybody cued the linked parts using the stuff > styles, which seems to be the only way to cue the > parts and preserve the "linkage" with the score? How > reliable and/or messy is it? I just don't know if I > should go for it or experiment later