On 22.03.2007 A-NO-NE Music wrote:
17.
If you want to use 33, I believe you need to put both 1 and 17 to the
first measure. Do you not think?
This is interesting, since you seem to come from the same music area as
Darcy, yet you disagree...
Johannes
--
http://www.musikmanufaktur.com
Darcy James Argue wrote:
My own feeling is that measure numbers refer to measures on the PAGE. So
each individual measure, no matter how many times it is played, gets one
and only one measure number, and that number is the same number in the
score and all the parts.
This is the method that
On 22.03.2007 dhbailey wrote:
I agree with Darcy on this point. The numbers are only to locate the physical
measure on the page, so all full measures should be counted in a straight line
from the first one through the final one.
Well, even if you agree, you are still in disagreement with all
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 dhbailey wrote:
I agree with Darcy on this point. The numbers are only to locate the
physical measure on the page, so all full measures should be counted
in a straight line from the first one through the final one.
Well, even if you agree, you are still
On 21 Mar 2007 at 18:15, Chuck Israels wrote:
sometimes a
longer 1st and second ending (3 or 4 measures) does come at the
beginning of a line.
That raises an other issue -- the 2nd ending with more (or fewer)
measures than the 1st ending. In the case of *more*, I'd skip
numbering the
On 22 Mar 2007 at 3:28, dhbailey wrote:
If there are partial measures, ignoring a pickup measure at the start
of the piece, such as a 4/4 piece with a 3/4 measure and a 1/4 measure
(not marked as such because it's a 4/4 measure with a double bar or a
repeat sign) the first part of that gets a
On 22 Mar 2007 at 8:33, dhbailey wrote:
I'm basing my statements on the system which more than one orchestra
conductor has told groups I've been in concerning numbering our
measures in the old BH publications which didn't have measure numbers
in them.
If you're instructing a group of players
On 21 Mar 2007 at 20:02, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
Dood, get a Gmail acct. It's free. It's easy. It's painless ;)
It also has an authoritarian UI that doesn't allow you much leeway in
customization, and it makes actual deletion of messages harder than
it ought to be. And it means you're
On 21 Mar 2007 at 18:25, Darcy James Argue wrote:
So, in your example, the measure under the first ending is m.16, the
measure under the second ending is m.17, and the first measure
following the second ending is m.18.
I would do that in the vast majority of situations. The one exception
On 22 Mar 2007 at 0:38, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
It is actually very
common in classical music to have a second ending only in some parts
and not in others. You simply cannot number these separately.
I would say it's common in *historical* parts, but it's not a good
idea to reproduce it in
On 22.03.2007 David W. Fenton wrote:
That raises an other issue -- the 2nd ending with more (or fewer)
measures than the 1st ending. In the case of *more*, I'd skip
numbering the 1st, and number the remaining measures. In the case of
fewer, I don't know what I'd do.
Unless there is a third
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 02:57 AM wrote:
This is interesting, since you seem to come from the same music area as
Darcy, yet you disagree...
Well, measure numbering for me is for rehearsing only, and double
numbering isn't that convenient.
Go from bar 21 second time is clear. Also I'd
On Mar 22, 2007, at 8:33 AM, dhbailey wrote:
.
What is really stupid is when music has the double numbers for
repeated times, so that the same measure is measure 1 the first
time and measure 17 the second time, when calling for the group to
start at measure 17, some fool is always going
On 22.03.2007 David W. Fenton wrote:
But I still think that in a printed work, the 2nd endings should not
be numbered whenever the 2nd ending has the same number of measures
as the 1st ending.
It really makes no difference whether you print the bracket over the
same number of measures as
On 22.03.2007 David W. Fenton wrote:
It is actually very
common in classical music to have a second ending only in some parts
and not in others. You simply cannot number these separately.
I would say it's common in *historical* parts, but it's not a good
idea to reproduce it in modern
On 22.03.2007 A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Go from bar 21 second time is clear. Also I'd like to point out
calling measure number is only for where it is too far from rehearsal
letter, or it would be much clearer to say:
Go from 4 bars before [C].
You come from a different music culture. Where I
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people never agree
on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Interesting. 4 bars after [C] means we are starting at the 5th bar from
[C]. I have never experienced any confusion
At 11:05 AM 3/22/2007, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Go from 4 bars before [C].
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people never agree
on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Well, for starters, '4 before C' is unambiguous.
On 22 Mar 2007 at 11:19, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people never
agree on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Interesting. 4 bars after [C] means we are starting at the 5th
I've entered Chords above a piano part. I now want to copy 'just' the
chords to a newly created stave w/ slashes and rests for gtr/slash
rhythm chart.
I've selected copy entry items ' only chords' but it's not working.
Any suggestions?
thx,
Jim
:: j i m f i s c h e r
:: p r o d u c e r
:: m
At 9:24 AM +0100 3/22/07, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 dhbailey wrote:
I agree with Darcy on this point. The numbers are only to locate
the physical measure on the page, so all full measures should be
counted in a straight line from the first one through the final one.
Well, even if
Jim Fischer / 2007/03/22 / 11:42 AM wrote:
I've entered Chords above a piano part. I now want to copy 'just' the
chords to a newly created stave w/ slashes and rests for gtr/slash
rhythm chart.
I've selected copy entry items ' only chords' but it's not working.
Any suggestions?
It is a good
At 11:45 AM 3/22/2007, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Mar 2007 at 11:19, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people never
agree on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Interesting. 4 bars
On 3/22/07, John Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am I the only one to whom this discussion seems equivalent to
medieval theologians arguing how many angels can dance on the head of
a pin?
Heh, you should join the Bach cantatas discussion list on Yahoo, it's
a real wank fest there.
Cheerio
At 11:57 AM 3/22/2007 -0400, John Howell wrote:
So how about this for a first principle? Every measure SHOULD have
and MUST have a unique identifying number, assigned in serial order
to aid quick and accurate locating of that measure. Period. End of
statement.
Would anyone care to argue
On 22 Mar 2007 at 12:04, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 11:45 AM 3/22/2007, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Mar 2007 at 11:19, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people
never agree on what 4 bars after
On 22 Mar 2007 at 11:57, John Howell wrote:
At 9:24 AM +0100 3/22/07, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 dhbailey wrote:
I agree with Darcy on this point. The numbers are only to locate the
physical measure on the page, so all full measures should be counted
in a straight line from the
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
Would anyone care to argue against that principle? And explain why? Without
appealing to convention or other authority?
Well, for me this would make baroque dance movement numbering completely
illogical. And I actually see no reason for it.
Johannes
--
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
So how about this for a first principle? Every measure SHOULD have and MUST
have a unique identifying number, assigned in serial order to aid quick and
accurate locating of that measure. Period. End of statement.
I can already see problems when the next
On 22.03.2007 Aaron Sherber wrote:
I do understand the potential for confusion, but really it's just logic. Where
would you start if I said 1 bar after C? You wouldn't start at C, I assume --
you'd start the next bar (that is, the second bar of C). So 4 bars after C
therefore has to be 3 bars
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
Am I the only one to whom this discussion seems equivalent to medieval
theologians arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? (And why
the head, anyhow, when dancing on the point would take much more skill?!!!)
I always thought the argument was
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
Would anyone care to argue against that principle? And explain why? Without
appealing to convention or other authority?
By the same logic you could start writing out minor keys with extra an
extra raised 7th. So that G minor would have 2 flats and one sharp.
On 22 Mar 2007, at 8:47 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
But I still think that in a printed work, the 2nd endings should not
be numbered whenever the 2nd ending has the same number of measures
as the 1st ending.
So for works with long first and second endings, the conductor has to
specify Okay,
I am confident that neither Chuck nor Hiro would assign multiple sets
of measure numbers to, for instance, an open solo section, even
though the music is played multiple times. If the solo section is
just a simple repeat, each measure would get one set of numbers. Even
if a solo section is
Hi David,
Just to be clear, I agree with this -- as you say, historical forms
in which the numbering system you describe is what's expected. But I
would never recommend that this numbering system be used for a piece
of new music.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
That's a straw man. I agreed from the beginning that there are
different conventions for historical music. At first, the original
poster didn't indicate whether they were working with new music or not.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 22 Mar 2007, at 12:44 PM,
For all your comments and answers, I still don't find the solution to
my problem.
I said:
I have a score in MacFin2007c. I want to add a tuba part. I add the
part by double-clicking between the trombone section and the guitar.
I enter the music. I go to the linked part and it's a blank
Darcy James Argue / 2007/03/22 / 01:07 PM wrote:
I am confident that neither Chuck nor Hiro would assign multiple sets
of measure numbers to, for instance, an open solo section, even
though the music is played multiple times. If the solo section is
just a simple repeat, each measure would
On Mar 22, 2007, at 9:52 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
Would anyone care to argue against that principle? And explain
why? Without appealing to convention or other authority?
By the same logic you could start writing out minor keys with extra
an extra
At 01:38 PM 3/22/2007, Kim Richmond wrote:
I had already gone to Manage Parts and the Tuba part is in the list
(on both sides).
Just to be clear: If you open Manage Parts, select Tuba under Linked
Parts, and click on the Edit Part Definition Button, does Tuba show
up under Staves and
In a message dated 3/22/07 12:40:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
For all your comments and answers, I still don't find the solution to
my problem.
I said:
part by double-clicking between the trombone section and the guitar.
I enter the music. I go to the linked part and it's a blank
At 11:19 AM -0400 3/22/07, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people never agree
on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Interesting. 4 bars after [C] means we are starting at the 5th
On Mar 22, 2007, at 10:07 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
I am confident that neither Chuck nor Hiro would assign multiple
sets of measure numbers to, for instance, an open solo section,
even though the music is played multiple times. If the solo section
is just a simple repeat, each measure
On Mar 21, 2007, at 6:47 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
First and second endings always _start_ with the same measure number.
Sometimes, I imagine, they do. But always? Hardly! Nor, in my view
is such a practice desirable.
The point of measure numbers it to allow conductors and scholars to
On Mar 21, 2007, at 6:49 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 21.03.2007 Darcy James Argue wrote:
So, in your example, the measure under the first ending is m.16, the
measure under the second ending is m.17, and the first measure
following the second ending is m.18.
This is definitely completely
Hey Chuck,
Normally, only one set of numbers, but I have encountered a few
situations where I have found it useful (to me) to use two. If I
have an AABA, 32 measure repeated solo section that, for reasons of
space saving, has its first A section written as 8 measures with a
repeat (with
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Go from bar 21 second time is clear. Also I'd like to point out
calling measure number is only for where it is too far from rehearsal
letter, or it would be much clearer to say:
Go from 4 bars before [C].
You come from a different
I always use first measure of [C], second measure of [C], etc.,
which is unambiguous.
And contra Johannes, the before indications are always unambiguous.
There's no possible confusion about what measure three before [C]
refers to.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 John Howell wrote:
Would anyone care to argue against that principle? And explain why?
Without appealing to convention or other authority?
Well, for me this would make baroque dance movement numbering completely
illogical. And I actually see no reason
On Mar 22, 2007, at 11:42 AM, Jim Fischer wrote:
I've entered Chords above a piano part. I now want to copy 'just'
the chords to a newly created stave w/ slashes and rests for gtr/
slash rhythm chart.
I've selected copy entry items ' only chords' but it's not working.
Any suggestions?
On Mar 22, 2007, at 12:04 PM, Aaron Sherber wrote:
I do understand the potential for confusion, but really it's just
logic. Where would you start if I said 1 bar after C? You wouldn't
start at C, I assume -- you'd start the next bar (that is, the second
bar of C). So 4 bars after C therefore
On Mar 22, 2007, at 2:01 PM, John Howell wrote:
At 11:19 AM -0400 3/22/07, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Johannes Gebauer / 2007/03/22 / 11:05 AM wrote:
You come from a different music culture. Where I play people
never agree
on what 4 bars after C means. Do you count C as 1, or 0?
Interesting.
Woa, wait a minute.
The rehearsal letter [INTRO] is sitting on the 1st measure of the piece,
and [INTRO-17] is the 17th measure of the piece, which is 16 bars after
where [INTRO] was. 'After' means that portion has been completed. I
don't think it can be clearer than this, no?
By the way,
At 12:32 PM -0400 3/22/07, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
At 11:57 AM 3/22/2007 -0400, John Howell wrote:
So how about this for a first principle? Every measure SHOULD have
and MUST have a unique identifying number, assigned in serial order
to aid quick and accurate locating of that measure.
At 12:39 PM -0400 3/22/07, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Mar 2007 at 11:57, John Howell wrote:
At 9:24 AM +0100 3/22/07, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
On 22.03.2007 dhbailey wrote:
I agree with Darcy on this point. The numbers are only to locate the
physical measure on the page, so all full
At 12:48 PM -0400 3/22/07, David W. Fenton wrote:
[not sure what happened here]
No, no, no! It's much more like the discussion
... the discussion of whether 2000 or 2001 was the first year of the
21st century. It's all about whether you're thinking 0-based counting
or 1-based.
Yes, you're
Darcy,
I don't disagree with trying to avoid this, and maybe I should have
kept my mouth (typing fingers) shut. It is an unusual situation and
not at all normal practice for me. I have only used it when there
seemed to be real space constraints. (I know - paper is relatively
cheap
At 3:44 PM -0400 3/22/07, Christopher Smith wrote:
Now, if you were say rehearse next Saturday when today is
Thursday, half the band will show up in two days, the other half in
nine days. However, the French-Canadians will ALL show up in two
days, because the meaning of samedi prochain in
On 22 Mar 2007 at 13:11, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Just to be clear, I agree with this -- as you say, historical forms
in which the numbering system you describe is what's expected. But I
would never recommend that this numbering system be used for a piece
of new music.
Well, if you'll
On 22 Mar 2007 at 14:35, Andrew Stiller wrote:
The point of measure numbers it to allow conductors and scholars to
unambiguously refer to a particular measure without fear of being
misunderstood. That being the case, measures in first and second
endings *must* be numbered differently, one way
On 22 Mar 2007, at 6:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Mar 2007 at 13:11, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Just to be clear, I agree with this -- as you say, historical forms
in which the numbering system you describe is what's expected. But I
would never recommend that this numbering system be
On 22 Mar 2007 at 18:08, John Howell wrote:
At 3:44 PM -0400 3/22/07, Christopher Smith wrote:
Now, if you were say rehearse next Saturday when today is
Thursday, half the band will show up in two days, the other half in
nine days. However, the French-Canadians will ALL show up in two
On 22 Mar 2007 at 17:36, John Howell wrote:
You want to use
measure numbers for a DIFFERENT purpose, that of analysis rather than
rehearsal convenience.
No, I want to use them for both analytical purposes and for clarity.
I see nothing unclear about 1st ending m. 16 and 2nd ending m.
16.
FinMac2007c
This is my first project completed to the end on 2007, and I can't
see the Edit System Margins window. It must be off my screen
somewhere. How do I get it back? Same thing for Edit Page Margins
window, but that one isn't as critical. I have two monitors, but I
don't think it
John Howell wrote:
At 3:44 PM -0400 3/22/07, Christopher Smith wrote:
Now, if you were say rehearse next Saturday when today is Thursday,
half the band will show up in two days, the other half in nine days.
However, the French-Canadians will ALL show up in two days, because
the meaning of
Hey Chris,
It's not offscreen -- it's a bug caused by importing preferences
created on a PPC Mac and using them on an Intel Mac. You need to
ditch your current prefs and rebuild them from scratch.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 22 Mar 2007, at 7:59 PM,
In a message dated 23/03/2007 00:25:02 GMT Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
no matter how
clear anything is to one party, it will be totally confusing to the
other party.
And the confused party is usually a woman! :-)
Take this true scenario:
Who but a woman would
Most people think the year 2000 was the first year of the 21st
century (rather than the last of the 20th). It's not logical,
but that's what everyone believes.
Hey! Don't start that one again. (For those not present seven (!) years ago
the topic of when the millennium was to begin occupied
I've Googled this, but to no avail: what is the meaning of VOLTI. at
the end of a movement in baroque music? I suspect it means The End,
but, I rather ask here ;)
Thanks
Kim Patrick Clow
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
On Mar 22, 2007, at 8:37 PM, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
I've Googled this, but to no avail: what is the meaning of VOLTI. at
the end of a movement in baroque music? I suspect it means The End,
but, I rather ask here ;)
Turn page.
Christopher
___
Direct Italian definition means faces
Usually means to turn the page or turn over.
In Baroque music it usually meant to continue to the next piece i.e.
movement.
Trent
- Original Message -
From: Kim Patrick Clow [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: finale@shsu.edu
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007
This is my first project completed to the end on 2007, and I can't
see the Edit System Margins window.
did you close it?
have you changed your monitor resolution? if so, make it as large as
possible, and they should reappear, reposition and change to the
smaller resolution.
Crap, am I
On Mar 22, 2007, at 5:37 PM, Kim Patrick Clow wrote:
I've Googled this, but to no avail: what is the meaning of VOLTI. at
the end of a movement in baroque music? I suspect it means The End,
but, I rather ask here ;)
Perhaps you've seen V.S.? The V is volti.
It's on
Jef,
See my response. It's a know bug on MacIntel Fin2007.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 22 Mar 2007, at 9:31 PM, shirling neueweise wrote:
This is my first project completed to the end on 2007, and I can't
see the Edit System Margins window.
did you close
Thanks, Darcy. That took care of it (although I hated changing all my
display colours YET again, and it took two tries to find the Font
Annotation folder! Wild-looking slurs and wacky articulations
peppered all over until I figured it out.)
Christopher
On Mar 22, 2007, at 8:27 PM, Darcy
sorry, hadn't seen your response when i posted.
See my response. It's a know bug on MacIntel Fin2007.
- Darcy
--
shirling neueweise ... new music publishers
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] :.../ http://newmusicnotation.com
___
Finale mailing list
On Mar 22, 2007, at 7:17 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Finale] RE: NEW part
To: finale@shsu.edu
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
In a message dated 3/22/07 12:40:35 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
For all your
On Mar 22, 2007, at 9:31 PM, shirling neueweise wrote:
This is my first project completed to the end on 2007, and I can't
see the Edit System Margins window.
did you close it?
have you changed your monitor resolution? if so, make it as large
as possible, and they should reappear,
Christopher Smith wrote:
BTW, I have been in communication with tech support (new web
interface! Do we have Chuck to thank in part for this?) about the
explode music bug.
Apparently, if you are in Speedy Entry and use the 9 key to flip an
enharmonic in a chord you are entering, then try to
79 matches
Mail list logo
