New post
Avatar
0

Surely, there must be some way of adding a cue staff for a measure or two without having to add a staff to the entire score, and then spend time hiding it everywhere else!   Where can I find out how to do this?   Or is this something Make Music considers unnecessary?

Thanks, in advance, for any tips!

 

Finale 2012 on Windows 7 Pro.

7 comments

Date Votes
Avatar
0

I'm afraid this is the only way, besides an Ossia measure. The Ossia Tool is buggy and inconvenient and doesn't get my nod.

 

What I would do is add the stave, then immediately hide it (Staff Tool > Click next to the new stave > Hide Empty Staves from the menu). As they say - "Out of sight, out of mind". When you're ready, go to the location where you'd like to show the cue staff, click on the measure with the Staff Tool and select "Show Empty Staves" from the menu. It will only show on just that system. You can hide portions of this staff using a "cutaway" Staff Style.

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0

Thanks, Bruce - I appreciate the corroboration. 

I wonder why, after decades, MakeMusic would still not provide an easier alternative?   Often, the need for a cue doesn't present itself until long after the score is completed.  Having to go all the way back to a "step one" like this, when dealing with a lengthy and complex score, seems utterly crazy.  

But I'm faced with a secondary problem:  rather than 'extract parts', I have chosen to "Edit Part" within the same file, and I then print out that Part.  When I add a new blank staff -- to be used as a cue staff above the part in question -- that blank staff does not, of course, show up in the "Edit Part" document -- after all, how would Finale know to include it there?    What am I missing?

Thanks again!

 

 

 

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0


To get two staves/parts to show up in one part, you group them together using the Manage Parts dialogue.

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0

Thanks!

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0

Aha!  Thanks, J Adrian -- your screen capture hadn't shown up in what I first received from you (all I rec'd was "To get . . . Parts dialogue").  Your diagram helps a great deal! 

I see that you use Dorico . . . How does it compare? (Let me know if you'd prefer to reply to that via a private message ; - )   )

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0

You asked about Dorico. I am using Dorico to learn how to use it. It uses a much different approach than either or Sibelius. It is a very interesting approach, very creative, but for me it is not a finished product (is notation software ever really finished?) ready for production work. Although some Dorico users are using it to produce output, which is by and large attractive, here is what I find lacking (and many of these things the Dorico Team readily admits):

  1. There is no manual.
  2. Unpitched percussion has not yet been implemented at all.
  3. Cue notes have not yet been implemented.
  4. Although Dorico can do a lot automatically and has the capacity for overrides, it is ultimately not as flexible as Finale when it comes to customizing output.
  5. There is no sound-before-pitch option as Finale has in Speedy Entry.
  6. Repeats signs do not play back and text repeats (Da Capo, etc.) can only be entered as text.
  7. Although one can import Garritan sounds into Dorico, Dorico's "expression maps" (their counterpart to Human Playback) does not support them; indeed, I cannot imagine trying to produce WAV or MP3 mockups of my music via Dorico as it currently exists.

I want to make clear that I am not knocking Dorico, but for my purposes, I still have to use Finale for actual production work--composing and creating sound files as well as certain printing tasks that cannot yet be handled without strain in Dorico.

 

I expect the existence of Dorico will help make Finale a better program.

Comment actions Permalink
Avatar
0

Thanks for this perspective, J.   

I, too, have heard that the current Dorico is far from completed (eg, being restricted to only one articulation mark per note, if that's true!).  

Re. Dorico and output options:  I would have imagined that, being part of the Steinberg/Yamaha group, the DAW aspects of Dorico would be wonderful.  Many Finale users are less experienced with DAW production capabilities, but they are enormous (eg, the endless high-quality sample libraries now available).  I do my midi mock-ups in Cubase, and treat my Finale scores as something parallel but totally distinct.  

I still think Finale is a very deep program -- but I wish its business backers were as deep;  there have been some real disappointments in how MakeMusic has handled things, over the last number of years.  

Thanks for your help, earlier, and for sharing your experiences with Dorico!

 

 

 

Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.