|
|
| MakeMusic Forum > Public Forums > Finale - Macintosh - FORUM HAS MOVED! > Staff size and horizontal compression questions | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
MCarlson
Registered Member
      
Date Joined Oct 1999
Total Posts : 461
| Posted 6/27/2016 1:33 PM (GMT -6) |   | I just sent an old piece (copied originally on Finale in 1990!) off to the publisher this morning, and they priced it at $50 retail. I seriously need to find a way to have it use a lot fewer pages, as I think that price will prohibit sales.
The publisher's editor suggested that I use a .25" staff size, for starters, but I don't know what that means in Finale terms (he's a Sibelius guy). I tried looking it up but only found things for Finale in percentages, not inches. Can someone clue me in there, please?
Also, he said that since the music will be enlarged slightly to fit on 9X12 paper, I don't need to worry as much as I might about the size and might, therefore, be able to to fit four systems per page rather than just three. But I don't know how small I can make it and still have it legible.
I also wondered if there is a way to compress the notes horizontally, as a lot of the notes in the piece seem farther apart from each other than they do in traditional scores. Is that possible?
Any help here would be greatly appreciated.
Mark
PS I will attach the first movement of this piece as an example.
Mark Carlson
Finale 2014d
OS 10.11.4
File Attachment :
1 Winter Visions_dfl.edit x.musx 118KB (application/octet-stream)This file has been downloaded 273 time(s). | | Back to Top | |
|
RVS Lee
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2005
Total Posts : 352
| Posted 6/27/2016 1:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Mark -
Ah the joys of scaling systems and pages!! start by playing around with the options in
DOCUMENT/PAGE FORMAT/SCORE (you can worry about the clarinet part later...) Notice options for PAGE SIZE - you want 'concert,' and for Measurement UNITS - you can switch back and forth as needed. (For instance you can set the staff size in inches, and then go back to EVPU's for easier calculations.) | | Back to Top | |
|
RVS Lee
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2005
Total Posts : 352
| Posted 6/27/2016 2:13 PM (GMT -6) | | OOPS!
There is one trick here... Changes to DOCUMENT/PAGE FORMAT/... only affect new pages (if you added an extra 12 mms. for instance.) To change the pre-existing pages, you need to use
PAGE LAYOUT/REDEFINE PAGES which will change things retrospectively. | | Back to Top | |
|
thomasmith
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2009
Total Posts : 96
| Posted 6/27/2016 2:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Mark,
I took a quick look through your piece solely for visual reasons. RVS Lee says good things above. There will be some 'playing around' that you will have to do. But be thankful that Finale is strong in this area.
You have many tools at your disposal.
More specifically, I would shoot for 4 systems per page. (after page 1) For the most part I feel like your measures per system are right on; there are a few places where you might want to tinker with getting another measure on a particular system. But beware, of course, that you need to have a plan for the ensuing measure flow changes that come after that. The many systems where there is just one measure seem like they pretty much have to stay that way. It would look too crowded any other way.
First of all, do a "Save As" version of what you will try things out on, leaving your original untouched. You can always go back to your 'urtext.'
Using the Page Layout tool, you can push systems closer together. It's very spacious right now, and I like it, but page count is a problem, right?
Using the Staff tool, you can mess with the space between the two piano staves. Consistent is nice, but you have to find vertical space where you can.
Clarinet staff can be still smaller. Remember, this is essentially a cue staff for the pianist. Try 70% and re-space your staves from there. All this can help gain that vertical space that will allow that 4th system on a page. It wouldn't look too bad having the piano staff closer to the clarinet also, where possible.
good luck.
Thomas Smith
Guitarist, Composer/Arranger, Engraver
Finale 2014.5, (and every previous version since 2.0)
2009 Millay Colony for the Arts Composer Resident
24" iMac 2.8 Ghz Intel Core Duo, 4 Gb RAM; OS 10.11.2
15" MacBook Pro, 2.8 Ghz Intel Core Duo, 4 Gb RAM
iPad running iOS 7
M-Audio Fast Track Pro Audio Interface, M-Audio Keystation 49e
www.thomasmithmusic.com
www.rhinesmithduo.com
www.milmontparkmusic.com | | Back to Top | |
|
RVS Lee
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2005
Total Posts : 352
| Posted 6/27/2016 3:06 PM (GMT -6) | | | |
|
John Ruggero
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2000
Total Posts : 820
| Posted 6/28/2016 6:29 AM (GMT -6) | | You have many non-standard things going on in your score besides the layout and might compare it to similar pieces published by publishers like Henle, Peters, Schirmer, Wiener Urtext etc. to see what is correct engraving practice. Hairpins, dynamics, and expressions are running into notes, dynamics are not centered between the staves, tempo markings don't line up, some rests are non-standard like the LH of measure 1 of the piano, the use of dotted rests in measures 8, 11, 18, wrong stem direction in the LH of 36 and 38, and it is sometimes unclear which hand plays which notes as at the end 73. Many engravers would prefer cross-beaming for at least some of the patterns that run between the hands. Gould's "Behind Bars" would be a good reference work to consult.
And unfortunately, one can't use Finale defaults and always get a first class result. For example, the shape of the default piano brace you are using is not pleasing, as you will see by comparing it to standard publications. They may be adjusted in the document options>piano braces so the "nose" is not so pushed in.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Finale 2014d (Finale 2011 as a backup) with GPO 4
Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2, Adobe InDesign CS4 SmartScore X Pro, JW Plug-ins
www.cantilenapress.com
The better the composer, the better the notation. | | Back to Top | |
|
N. Grossingink
Registered Member
Date Joined Nov 2002
Total Posts : 3991
| Posted 6/28/2016 7:17 AM (GMT -6) | | I've been looking at your file and have been using it as sort of an exercise for my own editing and engraving skills. I hope you don't mind and thank you for posting it. I think the creativity you possess as a composer is very high, and I think this piece poses considerable challenges for the engraver.
John Ruggero has offered several good suggestions. There is one thing I noticed and would like to run by you. There are many cross-staff passages in 16ths and 32nds. You have the beams either above or below the staff. I'd suggest you consider placing these beams between the bass and treble piano staves (see attached, example #2). Question to the experienced engravers - Isn't this more or less standard procedure?
In the attached example #2 there is a glaring spacing problem - the notes on the bass staff need to be moved to the left so that the stems, not the noteheads are spaced evenly.
N.
OSX Mavericks 10.9.5
Finale 2011c, 2012c for production work
Finale 2014.5
TgTools, Patterson Plugins, JW Change and Staff Polyphony, QuicKeys 4
Mac Mini 2.4 Ghz Intel, 8GB RAM
New Belgium Fat Tire Ale
1970—New York, New York: Times music critic Harold Schoenberg says, “Trombone players are like ministers—quiet, dull, very moral. Nobody ever heard of a rebellious trombone player.”Post Edited (N. Grossingink) : 6/28/2016 7:23:19 AM (GMT-5)
File Attachment :
CrossStaff.pdf 408KB (application/pdf)This file has been downloaded 160 time(s). | | Back to Top | |
|
MCarlson
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 1999
Total Posts : 461
| Posted 6/28/2016 2:05 PM (GMT -6) | | Thank you, N. Grossingink!
As I mentioned in my previous reply, the collisions of dynamics, hairpins, etc, are only present because I was seeing what it would look like to reduce the score. As for the two ways of notating the cross-staff arpeggios that you attached, I don't have a strong opinion, but maybe someone who is an official engraver will. Personally, I find these easier to read with the beams above or below, but that just depends on the specific situation, I think.
I wrote this piece in 1989-1990, and it was the first piece I copied using Finale. At a certain point, my attitude is that if it is legible and the performers don't have trouble, I'd rather go on to writing a new piece than keep re-doing the notation. The piece has been performed hundreds of times since its premiere 26 years ago, so I am going to leave that as is. But in subsequent pieces, I have done many cross-staff passages in which I have the beams are in the middle, like your example 2.
Mark
Mark Carlson
Finale 2014d
OS 10.11.4 | | Back to Top | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, December 19, 2023 7:58 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 403,820 posts in 58,165 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2023 |
|
|