Different rest position in score and linked part

[yanko]

Hi there,
I'm running into a situation that I would think would come up frequently:
I have cues that have set up to show only in the part and not in the score, using staff styles.
In the main voice in the part I have rests, which need to move down to make room for the cue.
However they move in the score as well and makes it look weird. At this time i have not found a way around this.
Any suggestions?
Yanko
(Finale 2008 for Windows)

[yanko]

Oh forgot to mention also that there seems to be no way to hide a note in only the score.

[motet]

If the measure is otherwise empty, define a staff style specifying the alternate notation "blank notation with rests" in layer 4, and unchecking everything in "show in other layers." Apply this to the score only. This will hide both the cue and the real whole rest in the score and display a default rest. This will only work for whole measures, though.

[yanko]

Thanks for writing back! Yes, what you are describing is what I use for cues in empty measures.
My problems is with measures that are not blank but still have cues, Common example is a pick up to the next measure, with cues in the first part of the pickup measure. All the rests before the pickup note need to be in different vertical positions: in the score, where there are no cues, they need to be in the default place. In the part with the cues, the rests need to move down to make room for the cues.

[michelp]

Strangely, if you move a rest in a part, it becomes orange (= unlinked), but it moves in the score as well.
This abnormal behavior should be reported to MakeMusic.

[Anders Hedelin]

You haven't considered using a separate conductor's score and parts score? That would get rid of the headache with rests in partly-cued measures at least.

I know this wouldn't be helpful if you want to be able to make a lot of changes to the music after you've created the parts (score), but I wanted to mention it all the same. There are other advantages with that method too, as a better control of font sizes in score and parts.

[yanko]

You mean two completely separate projects?

[Anders Hedelin]

Well, not entirely separate.

This is how I usually do it: When I'm satisfied that an orchestral score is as finished as it might be, I duplicate that to a 'parts score', where I can enter all the cues, and adjust font sizes of tempo marks, rehearsal marks and so on, to have them look right even there. My personal experience is that even if you use fixed sizes for tempo marks etc. in the original file it wouldn't always appear right in the parts.

[zuill]

It might depend on exactly what you have. If we could see a sample, that might help.

One way to accomplish what I think you want is to use an additional Layer. Have Layer 1 be what is shown in the score. Have Layer 4 be the cue, and then have Layer 2 be the Layer 1 duplicate notes. In thee Score, only show layer 1 and hide the other 2 Layers. In the Part, Hide Layer 1 and only Show layers 2 an 4. You can adjust the rests in Layer 2 to accommodate for notes in Layer 4. None of that will show in the Score, and Layer 1 is hidden in the part.

Zuill

[yanko]

Oh wow, thanks! This totally did the trick. A bit complicated but it works and the results are exactly what I wanted,
Thanks!
Yanko
(I suppose I shouldn’t bring up the situation where both the main voice and cue have two layers each to begin with Just kidding.

[zuill]

Well, then you also have an additional voice for each layer. With Piano music, which often has extra rhythms on only one beat, using Voice 2 saves a lot of headaches. Just another Finale Tool that someone had enough sense to invent.

I know my workaround can be tedious, but sometimes tedious is better then nothing.

Zuill

[Anders Hedelin]

FWIW I think your solution is brilliant, Zuill. I would gladly use it if I weren't accustomed to the 'conductor's/parts-score' model for better control of font sizes.

[motet]

Great work-around. Copy/Move Layers should help.

Maybe it's time MakeMusic revisted cues. I spend a lot of time on them, which could be automated. Ever since expressions were redone in Finale 2009, I think it was, the Cue Notes plug-in assigns the cue label to all layers, so it doesn't get scaled, is thus too big, and must be fixed by hand. I think it uses the full staff name for the label, which is not ideal. Duplicate labels are created and dumped into the Miscellaneous category.

The TGTools cue plug-in has the same problems. If you put in a custom label, it remembers that, so is slightly better.

Ideally, when adding a cue, hiding it in the staff would be handled automatically. Choosing an attractive placement of the Layer 1 rests could be automatic, too. I don't know if cues could be built in to Finale somehow, but if not, the plug-in could at least be fixed and even taught to implement Zuill's method for non-empty measures.

[zuill]

Oh forgot to mention also that there seems to be no way to hide a note in only the score.

That's probably true. You can Unlink a note and then slide it off the page (Horizontally) in the Score. The note will still show in the Part in the normal spot.

Zuill

[zuill]

Strangely, if you move a rest in a part, it becomes orange (= unlinked), but it moves in the score as well.
This abnormal behavior should be reported to MakeMusic.

Unlinking is primarily for horizontal adjustments, not vertical. This is sometimes needed to fine tune positioning of notes when there might be a need (maybe a part has an accidental not in the score and the rest might be too close.

Zuill

[zuill]

Rethinking this whole thing, my talk of Voice 2 led me to explore what might be an easier solution, not involving an extra Layer. You can enter a duplicate rest in Voice 2 (V2). Then unlink the rests between Score and Part. Now, move the V2 rest off the page in the Score, and move the V1 rest off the page in the Part. When you adjust the V2 rest vertically in the part, it won't matter in the Score, as that rest has been moved into oblivion off the page. This approach might save some time, depending on how many rests we are talking about.

Zuill

[michelp]

Thank you, Zuill. You are correct. No problem when the rests are moved horizontally in the part, only vertically.

[motet]

How do you unlink a rest or note?

[michelp]

My experience is that it can only be done in a part, with limitations.
In a part, the only way to unlink a note or rest is to move it. It will become orange, but I don't see any contextual menu (to select or unselect "Show" for instance).
As explained by Zuill, only horizontal moves will appear in the score.

[zuill]

How do you unlink a rest or note?

Special Tools/Note Position Tool. Right Click the handle and the option is there. No need to move it first. You can Relink it there as well. This can be done in the Score or the Part.

Zuill

[yanko]

While on the cue subject, does anyone know how to reduce the 8va smart shape in a cue? Articulations and note expressions scale with the notes, but not smart shapes.
Yanko

[motet]

How do you unlink a rest or note?

Special Tools/Note Position Tool. Right Click the handle and the option is there. No need to move it first. You can Relink it there as well. This can be done in the Score or the Part.

Zuill

Never knew any of this. It looks like the unlinking must be done in the score, any moving must be done with the Note Position tool, and they are unlinked with respect to horizontal position only. If you repitch or resize a note, for example, or change vertical position of a rest, it affects both part and score.

Very clever solution to the problem at hand--bravo!

[motet]

While on the cue subject, does anyone know how to reduce the 8va smart shape in a cue? Articulations and note expressions scale with the notes, but not smart shapes.
Yanko

I guess you could always omit the smart shape from the cue and then add a custom one in which you reduce the point size by an appropriate amount, e.g. Maestro 18 is about 80% of Maestro 24.

Something like this?