|The original version of this page can be found at : http://forum.makemusic.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=50825|
|Posted By : ChiGuardian - 10/30/2002 2:53 PM|
I'm currently a Sibelius user and am considering switching to Finale. The blurb for Finale 2003 says it can handle multiple simultaneous time signatures on different staves.|
So far, in the demo, I've only discovered how to do this where the bar lines always align.
I would like to do this where the beats align. E.g. one staff in 2/4, the other in 5/4, filled with quarter notes, the quarter notes are lined up and play simultaneously. The bar lines do not line up except for every other bar of 5/4 lining up with every fifth bar of 2/4.
Is this possible to do with Finale? If so, that will cinch my decision to switch from Sibelius.
|Posted By : guser - 10/30/2002 3:50 PM|
No, the barlines have to line up in Finale. |
You can fake the effect by having hidden time signatures, hidden barlines, dummy graphical barlines, etc., but it's a major headache.
|Posted By : cliffdzihner - 10/31/2002 5:51 AM|
You can make it look convincing, it's just a lot of work. |
|Posted By : Fugato - 10/31/2002 6:28 AM|
> From: "Cliff D. Zihner"
> You can make it look convincing, it's just a lot of work.
Not so much "Cliff", not so much...
If you want to have a sight on topic "Polyrythmic Measure + MIDI conflict"
you'll find a pretty easy solution.
On the other hand, I invite you to look at:
which is another file I created in Fin 2003, with full explanations.
It's in french, but I can offer a kind of translation in my "basic" english.
( Maybe you should not discourage a Sibelius user to switch to Finale)?
PS: I disagree A LOT, with Anonymous who wrote "No, it's impossible"
May I suggest him to improve his practice with Finale?
And tell who he is before pretending Finale is not able to do it?
I insist Finale does it!and well!
And I sign my mails...
PS2: Cliff, your email address doesn't exists, how to write straight to you?
|Posted By : cliffdzihner - 10/31/2002 7:52 AM|
Cool, I'd like to see how you do it. They took away my email because I wasn't using it enough! I'm going to try to create another one now at the same address. If you want, try it again later today.|
|Posted By : gregory - 10/31/2002 10:58 AM|
Michel, bravo pour votre astuce. Je n'ai jamais pensé de faire parait, mais c'est vraiment excellent. Quand j'ai vu votre exemple, j'ai compris tout de suite que vous avez utilisé staff styles... encore bravo.|
|Posted By : Fugato - 10/31/2002 11:51 AM|
I'm not sure it's a good idea to write in french on this forum, if you look for a french Forum, you can also join us in TGtools...
Anyway, thanks for your congratulation.
I post you a french message straight to your @ address.
|Posted By : Thimple - 10/31/2002 2:37 PM|
As you can see from this thread, there are many varied comments. The great thing about Finale is that you can basically do anything, although sometimes it might be one or two steps extra. Checking S*******'s forum regularly, I just laugh all the time at the amount of 'workarounds' the support people give there. Almost half the new posts I read there closes with "We are thinking about that for a future version...in the meantime, do these 25 steps". You have to do workarounds for even what seems the most simple things. For instance, playback of D.S. al Coda only requires 12 steps as a workaround!!! Using a plugin requires you to save your file in case you wish to undo!! The list goes on...
Regarding your multiple time signature question, is can be done, and Michael gave some very helpful advise. To me, having used Finale for many years, this is a relatively simple task to accomplish, because I've taken the time to learn to use the program properly.
|Posted By : a dude - 10/31/2002 8:08 PM|
I agree with what you've said, but your final sentence, "To me, having used Finale for many years, this is a relatively simple task to accomplish, because I've taken the time to learn to use the program properly," is a troublesome one.
I, and many other users of Finale, have learned how to use the program properly. There is very little that I can't get Finale to do. But—and I'll bet my hat that a lot of people will agree with me here—a complicated operation like trying to create multiple time signatures with non-aligned measures really has nothing to do with "knowing how to use the program properly", for two reasons:
1) It's not something that's going to come up very often in the average user's experience, and
2) Doing it is a bit tricky.
Something else that's been asked several times on this forum: How to engrave a church hymn so that the last measure of a system shows only three beats and no bar line, with the fourth beat showing on the next line. It's not the hardest thing in the world to do, but it requires quite a few steps.
Or how do you show a time signature of 2/4, with 6/8 in parentheses after it?
These and many other operations in Finale are not necessarily the kind of things that people will figure out on their own, even if they know the program reasonably well. That's why forums like this one are an excellent resource. With so many brains to pick, even the "experts" learn new things all the time.
PS: If you really want to see some in-depth knowledge of computers and applications, surf on over to the Adobe user forums.
|Posted By : Fugato - 10/31/2002 10:21 PM|
Al, I'd like to come back on what you wrote:|
>But-and I'll bet my hat that a lot of >people will agree with me here-a >complicated operation like trying to create >multiple time signatures with non-aligned >measures really has nothing to do >with "knowing how to use the program >properly", for two reasons:
>1) It's not something that's going to come >up very often in the average user's >experience, and...
Well, in a certain way, you are quite right, except this "tricky" thing has been asked to me more than 12 times this month!
(French Forum in TG Tools,Private Mails,Hotline French service, a.s.o.)
I agree that not happened really often in the past, but I see that the request is increasing....This should suggest Coda to dive into thinking of it, no?
>2) Doing it is a bit tricky.
I would have preferred: a "little bit tricky".
>Something else that's been asked several >times on this forum: How to engrave a >church hymn so that the last measure of a >system shows only three beats and no bar >line, with the fourth beat showing on the >next line.
Al, I'm not sure I completely understand your sentence, but if is what I think, it's covered with only 2 easy operations:
1-Measure Tool / Select last measure of System / Edit measure;check Allow horizontal Split point / Back to measure, click 3rd anchor to "install" (dble.clk) split point in frame.
2- Mass "Edit" tool /select 4th beat & down arrow to send 4th beat into next system.
I repeat: I presume it's what I understood.
>It's not the hardest thing in the world to >do, but it requires quite a few steps.
If we agree on this, it's not "few steps", but only 2.
Even a dancer can consider a "two-steps" is not so difficult...;-]]
>These and many other operations in Finale >are not necessarily the kind of things that >people will figure out on their own, even >if they know the program reasonably well.
Absolutely true Al...
>That's why forums like this one are an >excellent resource.
No doubt on this!
>With so many brains to pick, even >the "experts" learn new things all the time.
Al, I promised a "Stumpery" score to you, it's coming soon.
Best Regards, all of You...
|Posted By : Mark Stringer - 10/31/2002 11:52 PM|
What I still don't understand from an example like Michael's was the problem of multi-measure rests. I recently had to do a score to the final scene from Götterdämmerung, which similarly has some instruments in 3/2 and simultaneously others in 6/8, on 6/8 being equal to one beat in 3/2. If I used the hidden time/independent time signature tricks like Michael, then instruments in either the 6/8 or 3/2 groups would wind up with completely wrong numbers of multimeasures, as that doesn't take the display signature and combined measures via invisible bar lines into account. In desperation I wound up making three scores: one with michael's trick for the conductor, then one with only the 6/8 instruments, and one with only the 3/2 instruments, both with proper time signatures and barlines, for the extraction of parts. (at any rate, the multimeasure problem is a nightmare for rehearsal, since someone would have 2 3/2 measures and another would have 6 6/8 measures. But so it was in the original German parts from 1876!)|
Is there an easier work around for this problem?
|Posted By : Fugato - 11/1/2002 1:50 AM|
>What I still don't understand from an >example like Michael's was the problem of >multi-measure rests.|
At least, you understood a limit of the trick.
For multi-measure rest, it's just another tricky thing you have to use, after part extractions.
I will not discuss it here, it'd surely complicate the topic.
> I recently had to do a score to the final scene from Götterdämmerung...
I saw that excellent topic:
I think this should better need "classical" engraving but mentioning extra editorial indications.
Of course, it's absolutely not my idea to pretend Wagner was not able to write nor compose correctly!
You can also find this kind of things in Manuel de Falla, too...and many more.
I'm happy to see this topic as enough success to wake up a lot of you, maybe Coda?
To my point of view, I think it would be much better to set the score with aligned bars, this solves the measure numbering problem.But I was asked to do differently.
Another way to avoid this is to "number" multi-zones but not measures, regarding to rehearsal problems.
Then, an intelligent conductor could explain in details, where or when to play for each section.I hope so...
I would like to precise two points:
1-I proceed this way to answer this question,it was asked to produce this result, I just gave it.
2-If you, (I mean all persons on the forum), accept to consider me as a "serious" Finale user, (supposed to be welcome here as the others),would you please note my name is MICHEL, not Michael. Just for detail.
> Is there an easier work around for this >problem?
For the moment, I think of it.As soon as I'll find, be sure I'll let you know.
With all my respect to all of you.
Michel "Fugato" Savary
|Posted By : Mark Stringer - 11/1/2002 3:05 AM|
Michel le Sérieux:|
Mea culpa mea maxima culpa. My eyes need proofreaders.
Mark, not Marc, nor Mac the Knife.
|Posted By : Fugato - 11/1/2002 3:12 AM|
You're welcome, Mark|
|Posted By : Mark Stringer - 11/1/2002 3:14 AM|
>Of course, it's absolutely not my idea to pretend Wagner was not able to write nor compose correctly!|
Well, all I can say is after engraving it all, I wondered how on earth Hans Richter rehearsed it in 1876 since the passage in question is both hellishly virtuosic and hellishly difficult to tune (read: Wagner Tubas). Once you've stopped, there's no way to tell people where to start because everyone has different measure numbers.
And then I had to rehearse myself with a Czech orchestra (I speak NO Czech) and after two rehearsals professionals were STILL tripping up on the beat patterns which didn't correspond to their individual parts.
So, I WOULD suggest that Wagner would have been much better served being a bit less clever and a lot more practical and write in ONE meter.
It would have at least made Coda's life much less embarrassing (a classical score that can't be engraved??)
On another note: Engravers beware: independent time signatures tend to wreak havoc on Note Spacing. Just have struggled with the Schumann Violin Concerto in Finale, where Violas and 2nds need a hidden 12/8 time signature which throws the note spacing of the other 2/2 parts in complete disarray. And independent time signatures can in certain instances render TGTools Special Part Extraction useless.
PS: since Finale is stumped by Wagner, is it any wonder that Wagner is not in the Spell Check for this forum??
|Posted By : Fugato - 11/1/2002 3:29 AM|
>So, I WOULD suggest that Wagner would have >been much better served being a bit less >clever and a lot more practical and write >in ONE meter.|
It's exactly what I wanted to say.
(Please avoid to write"Michel le sérieux", this sounds quite unfriendly & sarcastic in french, except if you had a good reason for hating me)
|Posted By : Ric - 11/1/2002 5:01 AM|
I'd like to take a look at Michel Savary's trick for multiple time signatures, but I'm stuck with Finale 2001 or 2002 at most, so I cannot see the MUS file (it's for 2003).|
If it contains text explanations besides the music, would some kind soul make a PDF of it and post it here so that I can read it?
|Posted By : a dude - 11/1/2002 5:21 AM|
1-Measure Tool / Select last measure of System / Edit measure;check Allow horizontal Split point / Back to measure, click 3rd anchor to "install" (dble.clk) split point in frame.|
2- Mass "Edit" tool /select 4th beat & down arrow to send 4th beat into next system.
Yeah, on second thought, this wasn't the best example in the world. Splitting a measure used to be much more difficult in earlier versions.
In my defense, though, I was typing that at 2:00 AM!
|Posted By : hughmckee - 11/9/2002 1:09 PM|
At the risk of being declared an incompetent newbi: I suggest that the problem exists only for the conductor. Each player will see only their extracted parts.|
|Posted By : Benjamin Tubb - 11/10/2002 9:22 PM|
Yes you can make MULTIPLE time signatures independent of each other per staff; however their measure bars will still be in alignment [and playback-synced to equivalent durations!]. To get an "out-of-alignment" effect between staves, you would have to use the hidden bar-lines and use one time sig. while displaying another options of the Staff Tool. This all is covered in Chapter 12 of the User Manual.|