Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Is "Finale" the scoring software that was reviewed in Keyboard just
    a month or so ago??
    
    While it did seem to be able to produce just about any score you
    could imagine, I was decidedly unimpressed with the fact that it
    does NOT produce scores from a sequence.  
    
    For an arranger/'scorer' this SW may be the be-all, but for me
    it looked like $1000 that could be better spent...
    
    Edd

    An interesting tidbit about Coda, makers of Finale:  They did a
    huge press party at the Marriot Long Wharf on Tuesday night.
    Conflicting (!) with the Apple/DEC joint press announcement of support
    for software developers.  I was there.  This schedule conflict was
    a really strange oversight, if it was that.  They also spent a bundle
    on renting the ballroom, catering, etc.  Their handout was extremely
    fancy, color cover folding into a locking envelope, etc.
    
    It sounds like a nice product, gee, I wish we didn't have to pay
    for the hype.  I probably won't.
    
    	Eirikur
    

    RE: .1
    
    >>    does NOT produce scores from a sequence.  

    The Globe article talked about a demo with a MIDI keyboard, so it
    sounded like it would produce a score from MIDI input. That's about
    all I know about it, the article was real superficial. Anyone going
    to Macworld?
    
    Rob

    I sat through the demo of finale at MACworld yesterday.  I was quite
    impressed.  They even said that they were currently doing a port
    to the PC.  The demo included setting up the basic staff with time
    signature, key etc.  Playing a Kurzweil, through a MIDI interface
    into Fanale (which scorded it on the screen, one measure behind
    realtime).  Then the score was played back from the MAC to the
    Kurzweil. Next the demoer added some expression (like p,mf, and
    Alegero) to the score in the proper places.  He fixed some notes
    that were mis-interpted (he didn't paly a note long enough so the
    software generated an eighth-noe with an eighth-rest rather than
    a quarter note).  The piece was replayed, sounded much better. 
    Lastly, he titled the score and printed it on a Laserwriter.
    
    He briefly showed some of the products other features, and I was
    quite impressed.
    
    Dom

>    I sat through the demo of finale at MACworld yesterday.

Yesterday?? I thought MACworld was today, tomorrow, and Saturday??

I'm going to try to get there tomorrow.

I think Finale has been advertised in the keyboard Mags for about a month
or two now. $1000 is way beyond me.

/Mitch

Is this at Bayside or the WTC?

    It is at the WTC and I was able to get a couple of VIP passes for
    Industry Day which was Wed.  I looked through the stuff that they
    gave me and they claim that the PC version will be available in
    December.  I do not know the price but if it is $1K plus a Midi
    interface, this is a bit steep!  I believe that the Pc version will
    run under windows, but since Windows is not listed as a prereq.
    they must supply a runtime version.

    
    Everybody is SOOOO spoiled! $1000 IS a lot of money, but it would
    cost you more than that to have an orchestral score copied. Forget
    about trying to transcribe it from a performance....
    
    Mark of the Unicorn Composer costs several hundred dollars and is
    practically worthless unless your writing strictly diatonic music;
    if this product works as well as it sounds like it does, it's easily
    worth the money to people who write music (on paper). Obviously
    not, to people who only want to see their own music strictly for
    their own amusement.
    
    Regarding MIDI input -> written score: no computer program will
    be able to come up with the "best" notational alternative in all
    cases. It's really an art -- when do you write F F# F F# F Eb E
    -- and when do you write F Gb F Gb F D# E -- etc; this is a SIMPLE
    blues lick. Then transpose it for the alto sax!! In addition, the
    spelling of notes in a chord should make sense (harmonically) in
    the score, but the spelling of notes should make sense in a linear
    sense in the individual parts as delivered to the musicians! (i.e.,
    in the example above for a blues in C, even though Eb is the #9
    for C7 chord, you'd expect to see it written Eb in the score; however,
    the musician would probably rather see the D# resolve to E. Any
    kind of hard-and-fast rule you could come up with for this stuff
    would be hopelessly complicated and have a ridiculous number of
    exceptions.
    
    Nonetheless, it's great to just be able to put notes on paper without
    getting out the music pen, and edit and print multiple copies.
    
    Now we just need to find some musicians who can read......
    
    

    Hi 
    In college I taught myself engraving standard music copying.
    I used Rapidograph (TM) pens and crowquills and india ink (until
    I discovered drawing ink) on vellum.
    If you want to see my college scores, prepare for eyes to fall out.
    except my printing was never very good.
    Anyway, Deluxe Music Construction Construction Set for $70 is good
    enough, not engraving standard, has little problems, but
    can separate out parts, transpose any selected parts, 
    print them out with quality depending on your printer.
    It's not perfect, but is pretty good.  It lets you spell your way
    becuase you enter through the score.  It runs on the commodore
    amiga.  At least I have high confidence it prints parts, because
    it says it can and because I often display on the screen only
    one staff to work faster.
    Give it a whirl at a dealer.
    Tom  

    
    
    Sorry if this is off the subject but it didn't seem worth a new
    note and we were talking about worlds anyway? 
    
    Any other Commusicians going to Decworld next month ?
    
    				Paul.

    I just bought Finale.
    
    So far it looks pretty good, although terribly thorough!! You can
    do just about anything to anything, hence the complications.
    Fortunately, the User manual describes a "structured english" for
    doing things to help navigate your way to the desired goal. I have
    only a DX11 (ya.....yu....yah....hahaha....maha.... ) but that's
    just today, and it let's me start excercising MIDI ideas. Finale
    plays back MIDI, but is not a sequencer, and compresses that notation
    for playback.
    
    Although I'm just learning, and do not consider myself an accomplished
    musician by any stretch of the imagination, I know there is no better
    way to learn than to have questions asked, and would welcome dialog
    on this package and music notation in general. 
    
    My goal (for today) is to put some music I've had laying around into
    a publishable state.... perhaps even go so far as to actually publish
    them!!  I got Finale from Computers and Music, in San Francisco,
    and found their people to be objective, helpful, and attentive.
    They have a "store hotline",and Finale has one too. There is a book
    called "Inside Finale" that I should be getting Real Soon Now (C&M
    thinks its in second printing, hence the delay).
    
    Anyone else out there using this package???
    
    Bruce (who-is-pretty-excited-and-struggling-but-finally-having-fun)

    I use Jim Miller's personal composer, which is also one of those
    can do everything to some degree kind of packages. I like it except
    that there are some limitations as far as page width, among other
    things, that Finale is supposed to do better.
    
    I look forward to hearing how you make out with it! Initial reviews
    were that, yes, it does do most anything, but is a bear to learn
    (can take months), and has default settings that can drive you nuts
    - by that I mean it assumes that you want something done in a certain
    way, when that assumption is arbitrary, or not true for all people
    and/or situations.
    
    Anyway - having said that, I still am comsidering making that my
    next major software purchase. Do you know if it's available for
    IBM and compatibles (it was supposed to be at some point), and just
    curious what you paid for it (I read, I think under the NAMM review,
    that the price was coming down to $599.00 (from 1K).
    
    Well - good luck - it's supposed to be a powerful beast!
    Let us know how you are making outy with it!
    
    Bill

    re: 1617.12 - for IBM, how is it, cost?.....
    
    You summarized it pretty well!! It _is_ a bear to learn, and there
    _are_ arbitrary settings/setups. I read the users manual for 3 nights
    before actually doing anything, then when a friend visited and we
    tried it for 1.5 hrs.... well: I'm writing a _long_ letter to Coda!!
    
    example #1: select playback tool, Option-drag over music (you hear
    notes being played as the cursor goes over them), drag for a while,
    and _bang!_ total system freeze. I had multi-finder running.
    
    example #2: we could not ever get a transcription to occur... only
    a "trashy" transcription (Coda's words!). Document says further
    that once a transcription is done, you can click in the first of
    the targeted measures and all measures are "filled in" automagically
    -- WRONG! you have to click in EACH measure to fill that one meas
    in!! (OK, OK... its a nit!)
    
    examle #3: You can position the instrument name relative to the stave,
    but I had "Right Hand" (as the test name) positioned in such a way that
    I could not scroll the page to the right, and the name was off the
    left!!! Also, this capability is a good example of arcania in
    technique. Instead of selecting name(s) on the score image and dragging
    them to position, you need to select a tool, select an option in the
    tool dialog box which brings up another dialog box (representing your
    stave/name relation spaceing), and if you cannot see the stylized "X"
    (representing your name), you move the mouse into the box and the "X"
    appears (WRONG! you click, then move the mouse in the box). Then
    position the "X", and shut down all those dialogs. If you do not like
    the name spot, well... do it all again!!!! 
    
    There are numerous document discrepancies, it is modal (every tool is a
    mode, and there are about 20 tools -- yuch). I think modality is why
    MACers do not like it. The reference manual is tool by tool, but
    the users guide "blends" tools in a usable way -- only for elementary
    things!!
    
    My current "joke": It does not need to be copy protected -- even
    _with_ the manuals, I cannot use it!!!!
                                                                        
    OK, OK -- flame off. huff huff, puff, puff.......   I paid $520 at
    Computers and Music (San Francisco, 415-994-2909) which includes a back
    ordered book Inside Finale and shipping. Good folks - knowledgable (at
    least to me), and they helped me connect my needs to software - they
    also warned me copiously about Finale!! But it is the only package that
    does the sort of things I need notated. Further, I strongly feel this
    is going to get better (about $520 strongly!! :-)  ) -- after all, the
    things I mentioned above are user interface things, not flaws in
    overall program intention/capability -- sure its arcane BUT I CAN AT
    LEAST DO IT!! 
    
    Dunno about the IBM version.    My current thoughts are: if you
    need normal western notation, not too complicated, then use
    ConcertWare+MIDI (v5.0 is out next month). It reads standard MIDI
    files (dunno if Finale does) and v5 will have lots of elementary
    Finale stuff in it. It's quantization input is simple, but effective.
    Finale is like using Differential Equations versus add/sub/mult/div.
    
    and all this from just 1.5 hrs!!!!!!  :-) :-)

    I'd be interested in hearing what notational things you need to do that
    only Finale can handle.

    My main beef with Personal Composer is that you can't have pages
    wider than what you see on the screen. This means that if you want
    a wide conductor's score, you have to fudge it, as in printing out
    two regular size pages and physcically pasting them together, then
    photocopying the paste-up, or by using some other fudge method that you
    may come up with.
    
    Ideally, I would like a wide page option that you can print out
    as a wide page. There is supposed to be a new version of Personal
    Composer out soon - I'm hoping for something like this.
    
    The other thing that I'd really like is to be able to change the
    default for the number of measures that get created per staff line
    when you convert a MIDI recording to score. Personal Composer currently
    has a default of two measures per line that you can't change. I input
    most of my notes manually, then play back the notated score usually,
    (vs. recording in real time and converting to score) so this limitation
    doesn't affect me too much.
    
    Anyway, that's my current wish list.

    Regards!
    Bill

    re: .14 what am I doing that only Finale can do...
    
    welll....I'm not all that sure, and having to go on what others
    have said to me. I need to construct music using standard clefs,
    but meters in the 13/16, 17+23/16, and the like (for intensely curious,
    these are old Balkan/Turkish tunes). Also, one of my friends
    currently teaches music and asked if these fancy computers can print
    out score sheets using only 2 lines/stave, or 4 lines/stave, etc.
    Well, now I can say "yes". I am also notating "Non-Western" music,
    and so the staff at C&M immediately said: "Finale".
    
    An aside: the Computers& Music fellow said they tried an experiment
    and constructed a 12 line stave for guitar score, and Finale operated
    across it just fine, then they told it to convert it to 5 lines
    per stave, and it all went as expected!! (I know!You all are just
    dieing to try that!!! :-)
    
    re: .15 "page width control", "default meas/line"
                                        
    Just using the on-line help, I cannot see any way to print out score
    in Finale on some imaginary paper dimension, however I recall that
    you can set up the Chooser, or the application via Resedit to
    understand different paper stock (like graph paper from a Versatec!
    6' wide) - I refer you to the MACINTOSH notes conference. I've never
    done it.
       I get the standard dialog about paper sizes that the printer
    (Imagewriter/Laser) "knows" about. When I click on Tabloid, it looks
    wide, but there is nothing to compare it to (like a ruler!), so
    I'll have to dredge up what a tabloid dimension is.....
    
    On the 2 meas/line default: Finale lets you put in as many measures
    as you feel you need (or delete, of course), and because there is
    only 6 different ways to enter music, I could not begin to tell
    you how that affects getting your music notated!!!! :-)
    
    I am trying the HyperTool (Their words!) since it is closest to how I
    prefer to enter music: setup synth, setup Finale, either let it
    metronome or not, enter music on synth, (if you provide metronome, then
    here is where you would "replay" music and supply the beat), tell
    Finale to transcribe, and !bang! there it is. Time to edit!!! 

    In general: It's interesting to encounter a program that is "bigger"
    than I am... it makes for an interesting learning curve, and gives
    me some confidence I can grow into this package, instead of waiting
    for new releases to let me grow further.
    
    Does anyone else in COMMUSIC have Finale????

    I read the manual (gasp!) just after I enterd the previous reply,
    and discovered that Finale allows complete control over page
    structure(s). I constructed a 4 part choral (SATB) test piece (27
    measures), and the page structure took up 5 pages (mostly due to
    my overly wide spacing of the 4 staves). Once I compressed the
    music via "Use beat positioning" (instead of the default), and setup
    the measures to be as small as reasonable, it only took up a couple
    of pages. I was able to indent the 1st set of measures to allow
    the voice labels to appear on the side (nice), but discovered that
    using the obvious technique of stating the instrument name causes
    it to appear on each and every measure "segment" (where the measures
    go off the right side of the page, and get relocated to the next
    print area). Coda says use a Score Expression instead.  sigh.
    
    I also read the part about stave construction, and by golly, you
    can make up a stave that has as many or few lines as you feel like.
    In fact, the examples were for a Music Instructor who needed to
    test students on various parts of music theory by showing one/some
    parts of a score, and having them respond with the missing portions.
    Whew!
    
    You can establish default or preferred measure sizes, either by
    making 1 measure, set the size/attributes, then add more (they get
    added looking just like the first one), or use the Measure Attribute
    Tool and change each and every measure to be just the way you want
    it (haven't tried this on barred staves).
    
    Although Finale does read standard MIDI files, it seems to prefer
    having you enter the music in real time via the HyperScribe Tool,
    and finalizing (no pun intended) the results then printing the score.
    They suggested either playing it, or using another computer to generate
    the MIDI signals.  I'd like to try entering a standard MIDI file
    just to see what Finale does with it.
    
    By the way, the manual made an interesting statement: not many people
    are concerned/aware of "good" notation practices. Why??  I can
    certainly see where a sequencer gives a more immediate feedback, but I
    find it "machine readable" only. Is notation really _that_
    difficult????? 

    I've been playing with Finale some more, and just felt like sharing
    this stuff....
    
    I constructed a staff from scratch that played back an octave above the
    visual notation. It had a little "8" above the Treble Clef, like it's
    supposed to... the only thing of note was that every rest had to be
    manually shifted up to visually appear in the staff like you "expect"
    it to.
    
    I transcribed a MasterTracksPro MIDI data file into Finale, and
    formatted the notes (a waltz) into printable score in about 45 minutes.
    To clean it up for publishing, I'd probably spend a total of 4 hrs on
    it (this was about 6 pages of 4 part) - mostly on measure widths, and
    adjustments like that.
    
    I discovered that Finale's transcriber is a bit like a Porsche - alot
    of power, and hard to control. I've written a long letter to Coda on
    this.
    
    Although the sequencer in Finale is fairly good, it can't come close to
    MTP (for example) - it's single track for one thing, and it's really
    hard to punch in with any accuracy. It's sortof representative of
    Finale in general: really great idea with a difficult User Interface.
    This was in that long letter to Coda too.
       Hmmmm, I guess to get "multi-track" you'd have to do one track, and
    save the info as a transcription file (which you can do with Finale),
    then do another "track" (and save it), and so on... then notate each
    "track" ...... ugggghhhh. It was alot faster with MTP... I just said
    Tracks become staves, and let it rip.
    
    I guess it's more important to capture the sequences than it is to see
    the score, hence the relatively quiet times with notation software
    I've seen in the past 6-9 months (although the Coda newsletter keeps
    talking of pieces that CBS or somebody did with Finale). I'd sortof
    like to try notating something for somebody to see what Finale does
    with "real" music (something longer than 6 pages) -- are there any MIDI
    data files in public domain??? or does someone want to send me one as
    an experiment??
    
    Although I've still got some more learning to do with Finale, it's a
    pretty good notation package (that's actually an understatement), and
    I've switched to it completely. After reading about Karl's "Psychology
    of Recording", I'd keep MTP around for inspirations, and Finale for the
    documentation (!!)
    
    Oh yeah -- I tried Tablature staves, and came away with alot of
    suggestions for Coda... I mean, they work, but it's amazingly clumsy to
    construct. And they are a little limited. On the "good" side, I (for
    the first time) actually made a stave of 4, 5, and 6 lines (mandolin,
    guitar, and something magic with 5 strings... :-)  that worked as far
    as notation goes.
    
    Ah well... onwards!

    As a hope-to-be new user of Finale, some information about the
    Hardware/Software interface is requested.
    
    With a DECstation 316SX, 8MB, running OS/2, what MIDI interface will
    work? Whice MIDI is a good choice? Does Finale provide drivers for
    MIDIs like the Roland MPU IPC? Or does the driver come with the
    hardware? Will Finale run under OS/2 or must MS-DOS be used?
    
    This is not a complete list of questions but you get the idea.

    re: which MIDI -- Sounds like you might want to call either Finale
         CODA: (612) 854-1288
        or Computers & Music (a store in San Francisco, CA) (415) 994-2909
    
     I'd try Comp&Music first -- they were pretty darn helpful when I went
    to buy Finale for the MAC. I do not have any drivers since Finale lets
    you send down MIDI values at different times (HEX) - it's up to you to
    figure out what needs sending, and then decode/encode it into a hex
    value(s) tied with a visual representation (eg: "Flute" in the notation
    sends a patch change)

    After six months of Finale, I can report that it is better than
    chocolate. One interesting feature is that it allows output in
    encapsulted PostScript. Then you can incorporate scores into DECwrite.
    How about that!?
    
    Bruce 

    Does anybody have any experience using Finale with word processing
    and/or destop publishing packages that run on a Mac?  I'd like to be
    able to generate notation with Finale and somehow incorporate that into
    a document.  If Finale can generate encapsulated PostScript, can that
    be imported by something like Publish-It Easy?
    
    I'm a new Mac user trying to figure out what software it makes sense
    to buy...
    
    Paul

    
           Copyist DTP-Pro will write EPS or TIFF format files.
    
    
    
    

  Finale generates EPS files (maybe other formats too, can't remember)
  Should be no problem pulling it into any mainstream pub software.
  I think we've pulled it into PageMaker and maybe Word too.  We've actually
  have pulled into PC apps and converted to DDIF as well.

-Tom

    If you got the Fall '91 issue of Coda Notes, you may have noticed that
    a Finale user group is forming in New England.
    
    Today I spoke with the contact person, Joe Heary. He is collecting
    names and addresses of interested people, hopes to get enough momentum
    going for regular meetings, and would definitely like to hear from some
    more people. 
    
    You can reach him at (603)431-6539.
    
    					Val

    FWIW:
    
      I just finished a 4 measure tune on Finale using a MAC-II having 17
    verses. Now while Finale did the job of lining up the words and notes,
    the redraw time was long (appx 15 sec) and occurred each time any
    change was effected. 
       Interestingly enough, a friend suggested using Pagemaker, with
    guides under each note and use left oriented tabs to align the words in
    each verse with the notes, and only have the notes done in Finale,
    while all words are done in Pagemaker.
       I'm probably going to go that way....Pagemaker refresh is *lots*
    faster than Finale...
    
    Bruce

 Hello, my name is Fumito Kondo. I've bought Coda's Finale 2.6.1 in last 
spring. I've using Finale on Macintosh SE, system 6.0.7.1,  finder 6.1.7., 
and music resource is ROLAND MT32.  It was no problem. 
 I've satisfied to use this system.
 Recentry, I bought new Macintosh Powerbook100, 170. I've tried to use 
Finale on both of new machine Powerbook100, and 170.
 Score editing has no problem.  However, I can't play back on these new 
machine using of Finale.
 When I choose Play back tool, and click on measure, Finale will play music, 
but MT32 has error occurs with message "MIDI buffer over flow". 
 Finale can't play music correctly.  Music was almost no sound, sometime few 
sound has occurs, but it was incorrect sound from score.
I've studied for reference manual. There is a description about V1 timing 
for verious macintosh in the article MIDI setup. 

machine              V1  timing
Macintosh SE       2/200.
Macintosh SE30     2/250.
Macintosh II       2/248.
Macintosh IIx      2/230.
Macintosh IIcx     2/240.

 There is no description for new Macintosh Powerbook, because of there are 
new products.
 I've changed V1 timing to verious value, then tried to play back.
 However, I can't play music correctly.

I'd like to ask some questions bellow.

1.   Is this problem realy related to V1 timing? Is there another cause in 
     this problem?
2.   What is correct V1 value for Macintosh Powerbook100,170?

Does anyone has same experiences?
I'd like to appreciate your help.
Thank you very much in advance.
Best regards,  
                                 Fumito Kondo

 

    Fumito --
    
      As a registered owner of Finale, you should be able to contact Coda
    at (612) 854-9649 (Tech Support), and ask. I just tried to call, and
    got a busy signal, but will continue to try since I'd like to know the
    answer too.  Whoever finds out first, post it here!  :-)
    
       Do the Powerbooks require MIDI Manager from Apple to interface
    correctly??? On my MAC-II I took this out since Finale (2.6.0) burped
    on it.   Things have changed since then though!!
    
    regards -- Bruce Evans

Of course, Fumito is in Tokyo, which makes it harder (or at least more expensive)
to call.

Burns