I think there is still about a two week window while Dell will still ship XP
I bought my system over a year ago, and Dell refused to give me XP. Told me there were no issues with Vista (HA!). I cancelled my order after I found a system for a few hundred bucks less (still with Vista unfortunately) and it was still shipped - arrived the next day! Grrrr...
The easiest way (for me anyhow) is to use a visible muted staff and a hidden playback staff. Percussion often has rolls, flams, and other rudiments, and those need to be written out completely for the MIDI to play it properly, but you certainly wouldn't want to see all of those 32nd notes and double-dotted 8th notes...
I would love to be able to put all articulations (including staccato) outside the staff automatically. Currently, I add them as text. Very time-consuming (and annoying).
I prefer the look of the slurs in version 1, but I want them not to be parallel to the staff, and I want them to be able to be placed on "the wrong side" of the note when need, and some "handles" would be lovely also.
This discussion is somewhat long for me to read right now (it's been quite some time since I've been here...), so I'm just kinda glancing through it, but it seems to me (and I could be so wrong) that if your muted grace notes were unmuted and tied to the main note, then no "hiccups" would result. I hope I haven't missed the point, either. Can't test right now (borrowing yet another computer...) and don't know how soon I'll get back here. HTH
But I think Kevin was talking about a real-world effect, not a MIDI effect.
Yes, Bill, that's what I meant.
Sorry it's been taking so long to get back here lately. I am swamped with work, and I have been substitute teaching full time so there's less time for me to get my own work done. And being in a different room every day with a different computer doesn't help...
t's just started snowing in London (in March for goodness sake!)
I remember waking up to over 2 inches on May 9th when I was in high school. Leaves had already come out - weight of snow had bent all of the trees to the ground. On the way home from school it was 64°F, no trace of wetness on the ground. Ah, New England...
Digital whiteout has worked quite well for me. I have a dings fonts consisting of various-sized rectangles, along with a few blank spaces that are narrower than the normal space. I insert a string of characters and spaces ("yûyûyûyûyûyû" for example) highlighted white, justified right. If the slur/tie is in the staff, the staff lines will also get "whiteouted." Layering is one way to compensate for it, but I also have staff lines included in the font and add those as well. Be nice if I didn't have to go through all that, though.
...I wonder how it compares to real life? ...In concert bands we often have up to 8 flautists, because they are very quiet...
In real life, have a flute play a simple melody in its lowest range (F above middle C and below). Now try the same tune with more flutes in unison. It's actually quieter for some reason.
I too leave the active staff frame turned off. I find it's an annoyance. As long as I've set the active staff colour differently from the inactive ones, I don't need the frames.
Ditto. In fact, I've forgotten it even existed until I used my wife's system at work and found that she has it on...
Mm, sometimes it's hard to get the right vertical position for a text based notehead.
I have a font suite which I was developing, but when Lawrie released his, I just quit working on mine. Mine does have the smaller scaled (cue size) heads, which are in "perfect" vertical alignment.
Quote
The leger lines are bit large on the second method.
I also have smaller scaled leger lines (check No Leger Lines for the notes in question.).
Quote
Normally you would show your ordinary whole, half and quarter rests, usually moved lower on the staff to get out of the way, and just write the cues above them. Your way would likely work best on a layered staff.
I insert the rests as text, and avoid layering (I really can't stand the "left bar line" that results when layering. It's not a problem in a score, or a piano part, but in a single-line part - GRRRR!).
Quote
The beams are too thick...
how could I not notice that!
Quote
...and the spacing too wide.
If some of the notes are made invisible (say, the middle two of a group of four sixteenths), they will not take up space.
BUT WOULDN’T IT BE GREAT NOT TO HAVE TO DO ANY OF THIS?
With the introduction of headless notes and adjustable stem length, I would assume that all that is necessary is to shorten the stem length, and remove the noteheads and add smaller heads as text. This keeps everything properly aligned and maintains proper beaming. Or am I missing something? [I have not been able to upgrade to v.2 since the HD crash (so I can't check it myself) and all of the events which have followed it... life is just so hectic right now that I can't even visit The Forum more than once per week anymore...]
I kinda like it, too. I had to mute the flute, though, because it's too loud on my system and the tone color seems out of place (on my system). Would like to hear it live. Particularly like that the guitar part is in three-four (though it's written in four-four as are the other parts).
funny thing that my dad's name is also David, except he's Dave and I'm David. Then we have 5 Davids at work...
My orchestra has many Davids: conductor, 1st violin, 2nd violin, cello, bass (well, that's a woman's surname, but still...), 2 horns (not 2nd horn, but two horn players named Dave), tuba, and a percussionist. When we need extra brass (for Respighi or whatever), there's two more, and when we need saxes, there's another. We should be called The Dave David Orchestra.
None in my big band, however. There we have 2 Garys, 2 Mikes, 2 Joes, and for a time we had 2 Keiths and 2 Kevins.
A useful extension of the concept would be to have Ctrl+G D take you to Section D Even better if the program got that info from the topmost displayed staff no matter what staff you were on.
Part of the problem with right alignment is when a line is stretched because the last measure gets bumped to the next line, the text items need to be adjusted with more padding.
1) Have you checked other editions of the Ravel concerto? Maybe this was a printer's error?
The score that our conductor purchased and the score that came with the parts (two different scores) have the same notation.
Quote
2) ... Are there notes anywhere about what he said about this passage?
Nope.
Quote
3) What are the dynamics? That might give a clue as to whether he wanted both sticks simultaneously....or it might not. The timbre would be subtly different, and that might have been what he was after, instead of extra volume.
Full orchestra at f or ff , depending on the instrument. And I had thought about the timbre angle as well.
Quote
Any percussion players out there who have actually played this work?
That would be helpful. I am a trombonist, but there is only one trombone part and we're lettin' the new guy play it, so I'm helping out in the short-handed (literally...) percussion section.
I align at the next bar line, justify center. When a rehearsal number/letter lands at the start of a line, I align best fit, justify right. If I need to repage something, I need to re-do the number. Not the best method I suppose, but "old dogs..." [maybe I'll try something like Lawrie's method {can't see it any more, so I'm not sure it is Lawrie's...}]
Quote
APB in northeastern CT
Seems we in The Quiet Corner tend to go by initials.
Just returned from youtube. Only video which the snare drummer is visible (camera's always on the soloist for some reason...) has him playing in the normal fashion (but then again, he seems to miss an entrance or two in other places...). Here's the video [it's about 1:06 into it]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_deXX8bvD8
Ravel - Concerto for Piano and Orchestra, first movement, rehearsal number 2, snare drum part. Drum has been playing with stems up prior to this measure. Suddenly the notes are stem up and stem down, with no indication as to what this means (no additional instrument either - each instrument is on its own line). This continues until rehearsal number 3, where it reverts to stems up only. Any thoughts?
Wow, didn't see that comin'. The dot on a dotted note is an augmentation dot - "to make bigger." Isn't that the "opposite" of a staccato dot? Seems oxymoronic to me.
Quote
Dotted 8th takes less horizontal space. Might add a page, or put a page turn or special ending in an awkward place.
I can usually find ways around that (one of them thanks to Rick!).
Quote
If part of an established rhythm pattern, I think I'd rather see the pattern stay the same.
It's not part of an established pattern, it's how the pattern is established (and then it disappears purty quick).
Quote
16th/8th/16th is not one of my favorites.
Mine either, so I'd like the first option I gave.
Quote
Players reading a single staff may prefer K.A.T.'s method, but piano players have different needs.
It's in all the strings and winds.
Also, I've always thought of the intro to the "Odd Couple" as swing eighths, or maybe twelve-eight time.
I'm glad to see K.A.T. used 64ths; means I wasn't too out to lunch. You can use triplets on 32nds if you want to get something a little slower than 64ths but faster than 32nds.
Of course the choice of note would depend upon the tempo of the piece - I've needed to change them to eighths once...
I agree with Bill's Reply nr.6, except what I've done is not <pg dn> twice but once, and then enter - which then means ctrl+Z to get rid of the note I just entered. And yes, the problem has probably been here all along, at least as far back as I can remember. And I'm still on 1.75 (long story...).
Just ran across another example of "silly" notation. Dotted-eighth and sixteenth with a staccato dot on the dotted-eighth note. Just use an eighth note with a sixteenth rest and a sixteenth note (or a sixteenth note, eighth rest, and sixteenth note, whatever seems more appropriate).
Bill, your comment is "spot on" about the notation at K. You're on the same page as Sammy Nestico. (Don't let notes cross the major subdivisions of the bar.)
I've seen this rule broken SO many times - and every time we sight-read a chart with this type of error, somebody can't get through the section without blowing it. Every time. Sometimes even after we know the chart, somebody blows it. Another thing that causes problems (mostly sight-reading, but again, sometimes after) is the notation in the Tenor part at E (among other places). The second half of the bar is triplets, and the following bar has a-triplet-at-the-end-of-the-bar-that-someone-forgot-to-put-a-3-on - ohcrapitsjustabunchofeighths areyoustoppingbecauseofme? Every time. But the worst thing might be a few bars before that, with all that F natural/F# junk. Call it a G flat, will ya? Every time.
I want to insert a master repeat open & closed inside a measure...
And why would you want to do that? I can see the need for it on a hidden staff (done it myself a few times), but then that wouldn't be a problem with the measure count. It's just not done in real music.
...adjust the stem length so the beam is at the same height on both staffs. ...this can be done in both programs.
Well, it can't be done directly in v.1, but by adjusting the height of the hidden rests, it can be done - that workaround had slipped my mind (stress...).
Once you create one (I have one that's about two ocatves with naturals on every note, for that "white-key" effect), save it as a separate file and copy&paste it each time you need it. And yes, use a hidden staff.
Wow, can't believe I've been away from the Forum this long (dang holiday stress!)... Not yet having version 2, I can't check out the Clip, and I'm not quite fathoming the note for version 1.75. One of the other problems that I couldn't recall at the time of the last post was that Layering causes a "barline" on the left end of the staff, something I cannot tolerate (it's not a problem in a score, just a single-line part).