I've been reading with interest the discussion of staff lists in Finale
2009, and I agree with Robert that the artifical limit of 4 staff lists
should be eliminated. Users should be able to create as many - or few -
staff lists as there are staff list-enabled expression categories.
The main advant
Just a comment on larger scores. I find a 17" score too long to handle
easily in rehearsal. It hangs over the end of the stand and sort of
"droops" causing the pages to be difficult to turn.
Clearly some scores really need the extra length, but I find 11x14 a
very good option for a larger scor
I am a programmer, too, and for about as long. I have encountered situations
similar to what you've described below. There may be issues with having large
staff lists (performance, field count bit size, whatever), but I can't see the
reason for 4, as opposed to say, 8 or 16. I am not in their sh
I wonder if we should be giving them some benefit of the doubt on this
subject. As a professional software designer for 35 years, it seems
entirely plausible to me that they may have faced a point where
preserving unlimited staff names, in combination with other new
features. would have taken
Seems to me that if they wanted to put in limitations for some publishing
house, it would not be unreasonable to put in a "policies" configuration where
you can select, say, the WB or B&H guidelines and styles so the various houses
get what they want. For the rest of us peons who have different
On Aug 3, 2008, at 5:34 PM, Lee Actor wrote:
I bind my 17" scores with a 14" binding, but I have it flush against
the bottom of the score and leave the 3" without a binding free at
the top. Any place will do it (but they don't have to in my case now
that I have the Akiles coil binder! Thanks NP
At 12:00 -0500 3/8/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:11:38 +0200
From: Barbara Touburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [Finale] Some comments re Fin09
To: finale@shsu.edu
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
dhbailey wr
Also, chords will enter correctly via MIDI, in the same way that
speedy and simple enter notes on transposed staves.
On Aug 3, 2008, at 3:33 PM, Christopher Smith wrote:
I never expected it. I never saw it coming. I thought I would be
complaining about this until the day I died and they prie
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice this.
The one downside is you have to undo any manual transpositions in
older scores. It would be nice if they were converted automatically.
But this is a small quibble.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 3
It's not going to do anything to your system, Eric.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 3 Aug 2008, at 6:05 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
No, I don't want it to muck up my system
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://
FWIW, I have once encountered a need to go above 4 layers. I don't remember the
context. I eventually worked around it, but everytime I subsequently wanted to
make changes to this, it was a pain. I never thought much about it, as it was
quite rare for me, but it always struck me as odd. IIRC, I
No, I don't want it to muck up my system
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM, Allen Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Have you tried the demo for yourself?
>
> On Aug 3, 2008, at 4:36 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
>
> But does that make up for all the other things in 2009?
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1
Have you tried the demo for yourself?
On Aug 3, 2008, at 4:36 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
But does that make up for all the other things in 2009?
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Christopher Smith <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I never expected it. I never saw it coming. I thought I would be
compl
> I bind my 17" scores with a 14" binding, but I have it flush against
> the bottom of the score and leave the 3" without a binding free at
> the top. Any place will do it (but they don't have to in my case now
> that I have the Akiles coil binder! Thanks NPC Imaging!) and it is
> very convenient.
But does that make up for all the other things in 2009?
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Christopher Smith <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I never expected it. I never saw it coming. I thought I would be
> complaining about this until the day I died and they pried the mouse from my
> cold, dead fing
I never expected it. I never saw it coming. I thought I would be
complaining about this until the day I died and they pried the mouse
from my cold, dead fingers (sorry, Charlton Heston).
They have FIXED the "non-transposing chord symbols for non-key-
signature transposing instrument" bug!!!
On Jul 31, 2008, at 7:52 PM, Blake Richardson wrote:
I recently came across the complete handwritten manuscript scores
to the
films ALIEN and ALIENS at the Library of Congress, and in my spare
time I'm
transcribing them into Finale (they not surprisingly won't let you
photocopy
them) wi
Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Aug 2, 2008, at 3:45 PM, John Howell wrote:
BS&T ... debuted in November '67, reformed in their best-known
configuration with David Clayton-Thomas in '69, and have bumbled along
to the present day like so many other bands, with constant changes in
personnel and conc
I am talking about Finale's Setup Wizard.
The JABB instruments are loaded via the Kontakt Player, which comes
with JABB.
I don't own the standalone Kontakt and have never tried to use it with
Finale.
On 3 Aug 2008, at 1:40 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
On 2008/08/02(土), at 後8:52, Darcy Jame
On 2008/08/02(土), at 後8:52, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Once installed, the full JABB instruments will show up in Finale's
Setup Wizard.
You are talking about Kontact Player, not Kontact, right? I have
never seen instrument.txt file that works for Kontact. This has been
really frustrating
Blake Richardson wrote:
As an aside, the reluctance of the studios to allow publication of
their
vast wealth of orchestral film scores is inexplicable to me.
I would dearly love to even examine the Dumbo score. Brilliant
orchestration, highly inventive--especially "Pink Elephants on Parade.
On Aug 2, 2008, at 3:45 PM, John Howell wrote:
BS&T ... debuted in November '67, reformed in their best-known
configuration with David Clayton-Thomas in '69, and have bumbled along
to the present day like so many other bands, with constant changes in
personnel and concept.
The 1976 _Encycl
Thanks so much--
While I'm not having problems with any other sites, I do think this
may have something to do with my ISP--optonline.net--since another
user said it worked fine for him--
(I just tried googling www.marineband.usmc.mil, and couldn't connect
to the site from there either (no
Sorry about the problems;-)
My university just switched to a MS Exchange format for email, and it plays
hell with embedded URLs;-(
Please try this time as I have a new technique for getting a URL sent to me in
an email.
http://www.marineband.usmc.mil/audio_resources/web_exclusives/index.htm#so
dhbailey wrote:
I think that MM may simply be using
that as a smokescreen to hide the true reason for the limitation, one
that they don't want to admit to.
What would that reason be, then? I can't think of one. Curious!
___
Finale mailing list
Fi
John Howell wrote:
At 8:54 AM -0400 8/2/08, dhbailey wrote:
But why is this issue being raised now, when these same major
publishers have been using Finale for many years? Why wasn't the
staff-list limit lowered to 4 many years ago? That's the part that
baffles me -- did these publishers si
26 matches
Mail list logo
