Hiding cues in the score
Moderators: Peter Thomsen, miker
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Cues in layer 4. How do you handle this? A staff style? How does that affect "hide empty staves"? Is it worth the trouble, or should I make a separate copy of the score? I'd of course prefer not to have to resort to this.
- zuill
- Posts: 4418
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:35 pm
- Finale Version: Finale 2011-v26.3.1
- Operating System: Windows
Staff Style is how I do it. Hide empty staves with the staff tool is not the way. Hide and Collapse with a Staff Style is what to use.
Zuill
Zuill
Windows 10, Finale 2011-v26.3.1
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Hiding the cues and hiding the staves are two separate things, though. Sometimes (often) a cue in in a system I want preserved in the score. Other times I indeed want to hide the staff itself of a system. From what you're saying it sounds like I have to address every situation on an individual basis. I was hoping to hide layer 4 in the score and have "hide empty staves" in the staff tool work as if layer 4 weren't there.
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
So, I tried using "Blank notation with rests"--no rests! Also, the cue is in treble clef for a bass clef instrument. I don't want to see the treble clef in the score. How do I accomplish that?
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
I thought I'd try a staff style with a "transposition" "set to clef" and I get this.
What am I missing? Surely putting cues in parts is a very common thing. Can someone save me before I punt and make a separate file?- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Meanwhile, next question:
I'm creating two versions of a trumpet part, one in A and one in C, from a single staff. I apply staff styles to effect the proper transpositions. When I put cues in this staff, the whole rests in layer 1 are shifted up or down according to the transposition. I would like them to be at the same level in both parts. Is there any hope?
I'm creating two versions of a trumpet part, one in A and one in C, from a single staff. I apply staff styles to effect the proper transpositions. When I put cues in this staff, the whole rests in layer 1 are shifted up or down according to the transposition. I would like them to be at the same level in both parts. Is there any hope?
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Here's a sample file with the cue-hiding dilemma. The goal is for flute cue in the bassoon part to be absent from the score, with blank measures with rests instead, and for there to be no clef changes in the score. No fair using measure attributes to suppress clefs, since that could conceivably be a problem in a real-world score.
- Attachments
-
- cue.musx
- (86.66 KiB) Downloaded 144 times
- zuill
- Posts: 4418
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:35 pm
- Finale Version: Finale 2011-v26.3.1
- Operating System: Windows
I'm not sure this works for you, but in order to have the whole rests in the cues be independent of the default position needed for the score, I put the whole rests in Layer 4, voice 2. I've used this technique quite often.
Zuill
Zuill
- Attachments
-
- cue revised.musx
- (85.49 KiB) Downloaded 159 times
Windows 10, Finale 2011-v26.3.1
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
Ah, most clever--bravo! More evidence you can do anything you want with Finale despite it's shortcomings. Who knew "blank notation with rests" would be influenced by real rests underneath, or that blanking something out nevertheless could leave clefs behind.
- zuill
- Posts: 4418
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2016 9:35 pm
- Finale Version: Finale 2011-v26.3.1
- Operating System: Windows
Default rests only show when there is nothing in the measure. Real rests is something in the measure, so that explains that. As far as the clefs, it might just be part of the way things are programmed. Unchecking them takes care of the first clef in your sample. Extending the style by one measure takes care of the second. Thank goodness for Voices. One of Finale's most powerful and underused (by many users, anyway) tool.
Zuill
Zuill
Windows 10, Finale 2011-v26.3.1
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
"When all is said and done, more is said than done."
- motet
- Posts: 8292
- Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
- Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
- Operating System: Windows
I guess what's really needed is "blank notation with rests - all layers", that it, cover up anything that's there, as if the measures are empty.
With your solution, I guess putting the rests in voice 2 could be automated: apostrophe 7 ] apostrophe 7 ] ...
It looks like you then adjusted both horizontal and vertical positions of the rests. Vertical is straight-forward with JW Change; Horizontal, I'm not so sure.
But of course this is much, much harder than it should be. This is very common for orchestral music, and a big piece has enough cues that it needs to be automated. Do Sibelius and Dorico handle this better? If Daniel Spreadbury is reading, take note, Daniel!
With your solution, I guess putting the rests in voice 2 could be automated: apostrophe 7 ] apostrophe 7 ] ...
It looks like you then adjusted both horizontal and vertical positions of the rests. Vertical is straight-forward with JW Change; Horizontal, I'm not so sure.
But of course this is much, much harder than it should be. This is very common for orchestral music, and a big piece has enough cues that it needs to be automated. Do Sibelius and Dorico handle this better? If Daniel Spreadbury is reading, take note, Daniel!