Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: arpeggios (Read 7108 times) previous topic - next topic

arpeggios

And now I need to put in a number of arpeggios. Isn't there a simple way of doing that?

Robin

Re: arpeggios

Reply #1 –
G'day again Robin,
if you only need the arpeggios to look OK, then there are a number of user fonts available to provide the required symbols as text.  Boxmark2 comes to mind, or there are my own suites that are freely available.  If you have NWC2 on CD then there is an installer for the "PardyPack" or you can download them from the Scripto OR the Noteworthy site

If you need them to sound right too, then there are a few methods but the easiest would be the arpeggiate user tool.  You still need the text entry to make it look right.

If you are new to user tools then there are some good references on the Scripto:
www.nwc-scriptorium.org

Fonts:
From the Scripto:
http://nwc-scriptorium.org/helpful.html#Fonts
PardyPack from NWC direct:
http://www.noteworthysoftware.com/uc/pardypack/

User tools:
starter kit:
http://www.noteworthysoftware.com/nwc2/usertools/
other info and tools:
http://nwc-scriptorium.org/nwc2scripts.html

IIRC the arpeggiate tool is part of the starter kit.
I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.

Re: arpeggios

Reply #3 –
Thank you for those suggestions. My attitude is the same as that about an "8va command"
When we pay for a program like this why should we have to spend time doing things in a roundabout way? I hope that the next version will allow simple arpeggionisation (!). I am entering a piano solo which uses the non-existent command dozens of times: a Victorian parlour piece which I hope to post in the scriptorium.

Re: arpeggios

Reply #4 –
Quote from: RobinKiwi –
When we pay for a program like this why should we have to spend time doing things in a roundabout way?

Here's a tip.

Compare the price of NoteWorthy Software (where you may have to do a few workarounds to achieve what you want) with say Sibelius (where you possibly will not need to worry about workarounds).

I'm quite happy to apply a few workarounds every now and again.
Rich.

Re: arpeggios

Reply #5 –
Quote from: Richard Woodroffe –
Compare the price of NoteWorthy Software (where you may have to do a few workarounds to achieve what you want) with say Sibelius (where you possibly will not need to worry about workarounds).

I'm quite happy to apply a few workarounds every now and again.
I agree with Rich here.  As an amateur musician, it isn't often I need to use workarounds and, when I do, I enjoy the challenge of figuring out how to make what I have to do as easy as possible (for perhaps in the future for similar situations).  OTOH, if I were a professional and used music software several hours each week (say as a librarian for a symphony), I might get tired of workarounds very quickly and need to use a high end product.

Check out the Tips & Tricks as well as the User Tools.  You will either learn helpful techniques or be able to install tools to do the "heavy lifting" which will now just be a few keystrokes or mouse clicks away from now on.
Since 1998

Re: arpeggios

Reply #6 –
I'm afraid I'm only interested in results, not in trying workarounds, and I dare say that applies to most people. I don't play chess or bridge either.
Yes, Sibelius is more expensive (my grandchildren use it !) but the NWC programmers have had plenty of time since the last version was released to tackle some of these niggling things. Then NWC might offer more real competition.

Re: arpeggios

Reply #7 –
Just to throw in my $.02, I know of many little nits that people have complained about for years: n-tuplets, slur appearance, grace note time-stealing, "simple arpeggionisation". They may have had a lot of time to work on these things but, as they say: time=money. If the product cost more, they could hire a programmer for each one of those tasks. At its current price, they cannot. And a small staff must set priorities on what is practical to implement. But overall, and especially for the money, I believe it is an excellent product.

Re: arpeggios

Reply #8 –
I'll agree that is remarkable value for money. I personally would pay more, especially if these minor imperfections were fixed. Having got so far, it's a shame the last 2% of the work isn't done.
Anyhow, having lots of fun with it in my olde age!

Robin

Re: arpeggios

Reply #9 –
It's a case of "You pay your money, you take your choice"

Software like Sibelius and Finale come in several versions at different prices. The cheaper versions have fewer features than the more expensive versions.

Similarly if you buy low cost software like Noteworthy, you don't expect it to have all the features of the full version of Sibelius. Which features you get or don't between the different products. On the positive side, Noteworthy have been very responsive to user requests over the years and have steadily added features that users have requested. I just had a quick look at Sibelius and Noteworthy actually has some features that Sibelius First (their economy version) doesn't (double dotted notes was one I noticed) and Sibelius First is roughly five times the cost of Noteworthy.

Noteworthy is remarkable value for money and has served me well for more than 10 years. Yes you sometimes have to use workarounds to achieve your desired result, but I expect that at the price and I think you will find the same to be true of any of the low cost music notation software. To expect otherwise is unrealistic in my view.

Geoff
Geoff Walker
Middlesbrough, UK
 

Re: arpeggios

Reply #10 –
Sibelius First also limits you to 16 total staves and 5 lyric verses per song, and it doesn't have 64th notes.