I am talking about the smart cue notes plugin that is part of Finale
(not TGTools, though I think Tobias programmed the plugin, too).
Johannes
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account schrieb:
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The smart cue notes plugin doesn't cut it for me, it causes more
trouble than it
On 07 Jul 2005, at 7:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
No, it wouldn't.
Yes, I knew you'd object. I'm actually pretty sympathetic to your view,
but I also have good reason to believe a multi-file equivalent to
Dynamic Parts (perhaps implemented by plug-ins -- e.g., Update score
based on this
On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:47 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
The problem Andrew describes has nothing to do with libraries, and it
is even a problem going from OS 9 to OS X. To my knowledge there is no
easy work around.
Please enlighten me as to what Andrew is talking about.
Whatever it is, if
On 08 Jul 2005, at 12:25 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
My concern is that I have never heard of any Mac application in which
two different Page Setup configurations could be applied
simultaneously to the same file,
Yes you have -- Sibelius 4.0.
and I therefore wonder whether it might prove
On 8 Jul 2005 at 3:42, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 07 Jul 2005, at 7:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
No, it wouldn't.
Yes, I knew you'd object. I'm actually pretty sympathetic to your
view, but I also have good reason to believe a multi-file equivalent
to Dynamic Parts (perhaps
Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 1:02 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
It seems to me self-evident that linked parts are the way Finale
should have been designed from the beginning. ...The data
file is a database, and there are various report views for showing
that data and subsets of that
On 8 Jul 2005 at 12:25, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:47 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
The problem Andrew describes has nothing to do with libraries, and
it is even a problem going from OS 9 to OS X. To my knowledge there
is no easy work around.
Please enlighten me as to
On 6 Jul 2005, at 20:30, Darcy James Argue wrote:
There is no New Window menu item on the Mac.
Where are you looking? This menu item has been in every version of
Finale I've had, from 3.0 to 2005b. It's in the Window menu.
Michael Cook
___
On 07 Jul 2005, at 3:21 AM, Michael Cook wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005, at 20:30, Darcy James Argue wrote:
There is no New Window menu item on the Mac.
Where are you looking? This menu item has been in every version of
Finale I've had, from 3.0 to 2005b. It's in the Window menu.
I stand
Mark D Lew wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 3:46 AM, dhbailey wrote:
And I fail to see how this linked score/parts would not benefit
practically every Finale user.
Well, it wouldn't benefit me, since I almost never extract parts. My
work is about 99% piano-vocal or choral, so there's never any
If a plugin has trouble doing cue notes, why would it be any easier in the
native program? If you care how the cue notes look, no automation MM is likely
to come up with is like to be good enough. If you don't care, then TGTools is
sufficient, although there are a few tweaks that would be
Robert,
I don't think you quite understood what I am after. I find the basic
concept of how cue notes are included in the first place very short
sighted. Simply adding them to a free layer is always going to cause all
sorts of problems. What I want is a separate cue notes layer.
The reason
I do see what you are after (a cue note layer). I just don't see enough added
benefit to enough users that it will happen. That said, from what I've seen
starting in Fin04, MM has laid the groundwork for more than 4 layers. Whether
they ever implement them remains to be seen.
Obviously, you
On Jul 6, 2005, at 1:02 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
It seems to me self-evident that linked parts are the way Finale
should have been designed from the beginning. ...The data
file is a database, and there are various report views for showing
that data and subsets of that data
Then the only
On 7 Jul 2005 at 17:57, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
I don't think you quite understood what I am after. I find the basic
concept of how cue notes are included in the first place very short
sighted. Simply adding them to a free layer is always going to cause
all sorts of problems. What I want is a
David W. Fenton schrieb:
I've always felt that the key to a sensible implementation of cue
notes was in the MIRROR feature.
But nobody uses that because it's all bollixed up and doesn't really
work.
If they fixed that, it would give you a lot of what you desire with
linked cue notes. If
Robert Patterson and Johannes Gebauer have raised some excellent points
about the feasibility of a single-file solution for Dynamic Parts in
Finale. There is also the issue of a possible additional performance
hit if Finale were to implement live updating as Sibelius does.
What about a multi
On 7 Jul 2005 at 16:24, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 1:02 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
It seems to me self-evident that linked parts are the way Finale
should have been designed from the beginning. ...The data file is a
database, and there are various report views for showing
On 7 Jul 2005 at 17:50, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Robert Patterson and Johannes Gebauer have raised some excellent
points about the feasibility of a single-file solution for Dynamic
Parts in Finale. There is also the issue of a possible additional
performance hit if Finale were to implement
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
The smart cue notes plugin doesn't cut it for me, it causes more trouble
than it is worth in my experience.
Johannes, I'm interested in the problems you've had with this - are you
using the one in the TGTools set? Because I find this to be an absolute
time-saver in
On 8 Jul 2005 at 1:09, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
David W. Fenton schrieb:
And while we're at it, would it be asking too much to figure out
some way to transfer page setup data between platforms? I realize
the operation is done completely differently in Mac vs. Windows, but
information is
half-assed Dynamic Parts
(and Video Sync) options that were only pale imitations of Sibelius
features. I think the way to go is the way Finale went with Human
Playback (which had a rocky start but which I now find indispensable)
-- Finale should try to out-do Sibelius's implementation, at least
One more thing occurs to me -- what about multi-part staves?
As far as I can tell, Sib 4.0 has no good way of handling these via
Dynamic Parts -- if your score has Clarinets 1 2 on the same staff,
you can't use Dynamic Parts to extract them to separate staves.
This would be an area where
of parts as a separate View in *the same window* -- hence
my idea of Parts View and Score View.
When you use Special Parts Extraction, when you switch from scroll view
(score) to page view (part), it doesn't spawn a new document window.
When Finale implements Dynamic parts, I would like
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Okay, that's a good idea. Let's see if we can flesh something out
on-list before submitting.
***CLIPPED*
Wow, totally AGREE on all this!!
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
you switch from scroll
view (score) to page view (part), it doesn't spawn a new document
window. When Finale implements Dynamic parts, I would like it to
follow that model instead of the Sibelius model.
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
Another thing,
(Sorry, I'm on a roll here.)
Weirdly, the sample file in Sibelius that highlights the Dynamic Parts
feature (an alto sax concerto by Richard Payne) also highlights a
potential snag in the feature in the very first measure.
Flutes 1 2 have an 8va marking (to avoid collision
Darcy James Argue wrote:
[snip of great description of linked score/parts]
Looking over this list, I guess what it comes down to is that almost
every aspect of Sibelius's implementation of this feature is either
absolutely necessary or (like copy layout) extraordinarily desirable.
The only
-assed Dynamic
Parts (and Video Sync) options that were only pale imitations of
Sibelius features. I think the way to go is the way Finale went
with Human Playback (which had a rocky start but which I now find
indispensable) -- Finale should try to out-do Sibelius's
implementation, at least
On 6 Jul 2005 at 2:58, Darcy James Argue wrote:
The only thing aspect that's a bit of a frill is the split-screen
Part-Score view. That's a bit of a frill, and I could live without
it.
Outside of the demo showing how changes to notes in either view show
up in the other window, and how the
It would probably benefit most people, but as of now I don't see how
it could handle large scores with divisi on one staff (or alternating
with one or several parts in the score depending on the situation)
for winds and brass instruments.
I normally duplicale my score to make the changes
On 6 Jul 2005 at 3:28, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Using the switch between full score and part button in Sibelius
works exactly way I would like my proposed Parts View and Score
View to work in Finale.
On the other hand, directly selecting a part from the dropdown menu in
Sibelius (when Full
), it doesn't spawn a new document
window. When Finale implements Dynamic parts, I would like it to
follow that model instead of the Sibelius model.
Well, I think it should work the same way as New Window within a
document works -- it opens a new document window showing the same
document, and you can
At 12:04 PM 7/6/05 -0400, Eric Dussault wrote:
It would probably benefit most people, but as of now I don't see how
it could handle large scores with divisi on one staff (or alternating
with one or several parts in the score depending on the situation)
for winds and brass instruments.
This
Yeah. I agree. Thinking about it, if I do changes, it is AFTER parts are
extracted, after they have been proof played. That is when someone
goes You know, this would be better. Or that looks funny.
If Finale does part linking/dynamic parts, or whatever you want to call
it, it needs to be TWO
At 12:19 PM 07/06/2005, Andrew Stiller wrote:
Of all the long list of proposed features that follows, I'm not at all
sure I feel a need for *any* of them. Darcy is asking for a profusion
of new dialog boxes and windows, whereas I would have thought it
obvious that any dynamic parts linking
On 6 Jul 2005 at 9:30, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
If Finale does part linking/dynamic parts, or whatever you want to
call it, it needs to be TWO way. If you make a change in the part, or
in the score, they BOTH get updated.
Given that the pre-Sibelius 4 discussions of linked parts here
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 9:30, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Given that the pre-Sibelius 4 discussions of linked parts here in
this forum revolved around the idea of implementing them by extending
Special Part Extraction, where does the idea that it *wouldn't* be
two-way by default
On 06 Jul 2005, at 12:19 PM, Andrew Stiller wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 2:58 AM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
. Let's see if we can flesh something out on-list before submitting.
• First, Special Part Extraction would need to be revamped to be able
to save independent an layout for each
Yeah, the demo that Sibelius has, it looks like you can change notes,
dynamics and page layouts. But what about all the other stuff? Text
blocks? Different fonts? Slurs? articulations? Can you move these around?
Darcy James Argue wrote:
The proposed features that follow are, to me, essential
At 01:28 PM 07/06/2005, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Because the name, SPECIAL PART EXTRACTION means, to me, it's going to be
UNLINKED from the score. Hence the name, extraction.
Erm, in current Speical Part Extraction in Finale, nothing is
unlinked. Any changes you make in Special Part Extraction are
On 06 Jul 2005, at 12:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 3:24, Darcy James Argue wrote:
When you select a Dynamic Part in Sibelius, it spawns a completely new
window. . .
But not an *independent* one -- it's a child window of the parent
Finale window. This seems to me exactly
On Jul 6, 2005, at 10:02 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:It seems to me self-evident that linked parts are the way Finale should have been designed from the beginning. The spawing of individual independent files, while perhaps dictated by the realities of computer processing power at the time Finale
On 06 Jul 2005, at 2:10 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Yeah, the demo that Sibelius has, it looks like you can change notes,
dynamics and page layouts. But what about all the other stuff? Text
blocks? Different fonts? Slurs? articulations? Can you move these
around?
RE: Text blocks, it seems to
Oh, you know, I think I have EXTRACT Parts and Special Part Extraction
grouped together. They are different.
Aaron Sherber wrote:
Erm, in current Speical Part Extraction in Finale, nothing is
unlinked. Any changes you make in Special Part Extraction are
reflected in the score.
I agree that
Eric wrote:
Yeah, the demo that Sibelius has, it looks like you can change
notes, dynamics and page layouts. But what about all the other
stuff? Text blocks? Different fonts? Slurs? articulations? Can you
move these around?
I got tired of reading all this stuff here today and not being
Darcy wrote:
In Sibelius -- at least on Mac -- you can't compare two parts
side-by-side. You can only have the score window plus one dynamic
part open at any one time.
That's not true. You can resize the document windows and position them next to
each other. I also went digging in the
On 6 Jul 2005 at 10:28, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 9:30, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
Given that the pre-Sibelius 4 discussions of linked parts here in
this forum revolved around the idea of implementing them by extending
Special Part Extraction, where does
On 6 Jul 2005 at 14:30, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 06 Jul 2005, at 12:10 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 3:24, Darcy James Argue wrote:
When you select a Dynamic Part in Sibelius, it spawns a completely
new window. . .
But not an *independent* one -- it's a child
On 06 Jul 2005, at 7:16 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 14:30, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Well, I don't know how XP works so I can't comment on that end of it.
But on the Mac, there is no such thing as a child window.
Sure there is. Any document window spawned by Finale is a
On 6 Jul 2005 at 19:38, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 06 Jul 2005, at 7:16 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 6 Jul 2005 at 14:30, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Well, I don't know how XP works so I can't comment on that end of
it. But on the Mac, there is no such thing as a child window.
Sure
On Jul 6, 2005, at 3:46 AM, dhbailey wrote:
And I fail to see how this linked score/parts would not benefit
practically every Finale user.
Well, it wouldn't benefit me, since I almost never extract parts. My
work is about 99% piano-vocal or choral, so there's never any parts to
extract.
On 6 Jul 2005 at 18:12, Mark D Lew wrote:
On Jul 6, 2005, at 3:46 AM, dhbailey wrote:
And I fail to see how this linked score/parts would not benefit
practically every Finale user.
Well, it wouldn't benefit me, since I almost never extract parts. My
work is about 99% piano-vocal or
53 matches
Mail list logo
