Does the Ossia Tool work in v26?

General notation questions, including advanced notation, formatting, etc., go here.

Moderators: Peter Thomsen, miker

User avatar
Djard
Posts: 919
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 2:23 am
Finale Version: Finale 26
Operating System: Windows

Post by Djard » Thu Nov 11, 2021 3:12 am

In v2012, I would use the Ossia Tool to add a simpler or more challenging alternative to a measure or two in a score. But version 26.3 automatically transposes the source measure down one octave and does not permit the source measure to be altered without mirroring the changes in the ossia measure, thus defeating the purpose of adding an ossia measure.

I would like to use the Ossia Tool and not labor with the option of adding a smaller staff system and hiding all the empty staffs. I also prefer not to use the graphics option as the placed graphic tends to disappear when editing other parts of the score. Has anyone else been able to successfully use the Ossia Tool in v26? Below are the steps that I used. I would be grateful if someone could point out where I might be overlooking something.

1. Write the simpler alternative for the ossia in the regular ("source") staff.
2. Ossia Tool (Advanced Tools palette) -> double-click in the source measure -> select items to display -> scale to 70% -> OK.
3. Increase "Measure Width" to align with source measure -> OK.
4. Drag the floating measure to location above the source measure.
5. Erase contents of source measure and write the more complex notation. You should now have a smaller measure above the source measure, offering the reader a simpler alternative to the part.

Attached is a document, wherein Finale imposes unwanted transposition and does not permit altering the source measure without altering the ossia measure.
Attachments
Ossia.musx
(101.03 KiB) Downloaded 54 times


User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 827
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:41 am
Finale Version: Finale 25.5
Operating System: Mac

Post by John Ruggero » Thu Nov 11, 2021 3:50 am

I don't have v. 26, and this is not the answer your want, but I gave up on the ossia tool long ago. Adding another smaller staff and then hiding and masking what is not needed is less tedious and produces much better results.
2020 M1 Mac mini (OS 12.6) Finale 25.5, Dorico, Affinity Publisher, SmartScore 64 Pro, JW Plug-ins, TG Tools, Keyboard Maestro
www.cantilenapress.com

"The better the composer, the better the notation."

User avatar
motet
Posts: 8324
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:33 pm
Finale Version: 2014.5,2011,2005,27
Operating System: Windows

Post by motet » Thu Nov 11, 2021 4:37 am

What John said. I tried it at one point and found it buggy and inadequate.

User avatar
johnmouse
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2016 12:10 pm
Finale Version: 27
Operating System: Windows

Post by johnmouse » Thu Nov 11, 2021 10:52 am

I have v. 26. No, it doesn't work; at least not to my satisfaction. It has never worked and this "feature" should have been dumped years ago since MM can't fix it.

User avatar
Peter Thomsen
Posts: 6646
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 6:47 pm
Finale Version: Finale v27.4
Operating System: Mac

Post by Peter Thomsen » Thu Nov 11, 2021 12:52 pm

My guess is that the Ossìa Tool has remained in Finale to ensure, that the newest Finale versions can open (very) old Finale documents, that use the Ossìa feature.
Mac OS X 12.6.9 (Monterey), Finale user since 1996

User avatar
Djard
Posts: 919
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 2:23 am
Finale Version: Finale 26
Operating System: Windows

Post by Djard » Thu Nov 11, 2021 11:27 pm

I acquiesced to the option of adding another staff system, resizing it then hiding and collapsing the blank staffs. I recall now using this option years ago, rarely adding an ossia passage. The adding a blank staff option won me over in that it allows editing after placement and is stable (doesn't disappear like the graphic option). Ii also lets me hide part of a measure, such as when the alternative to the music in the primary staff commences in the middle of the measure.

But I think I figured out why the Ossia Tool behaves the way I described earlier: it requires an independent source measure that must be hidden somewhere in the score, which I think is rather lame.

Post Reply