Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Best deal on the Finale Program


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Klaus on July 23, 2002 at 20:23:21:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Best deal on the Finale Program posted by Mike Johnson on July 23, 2002 at 16:26:40:

With all due respect to you and with all due humble recognition of my own shortcomings as a musician, as a teacher, as an arranger, and, in a very small scale, as a composer please let me say this:

Any auto arrange functions of Sibelius, and Finale sadly also has incorporated such ones as a sales gimmick, are just there to lure those really meek (or is that weak) in mind.

People working close together with me tell, that they can always recognise music, that has been through my hands, as they have been put on my Mac equipped mostly with the newest version of Finale (2003 arrives at the end of the week).

I guess, that I am a walking bunch of clichés. But that bunch has been compiled by exactly one person, me, through 4+ decades working with music.

My graphical style very much has been determined by a desire to eliminate the obstacles of reading, that I have experienced in all of the music, typeset, engraved, or written by hand, that I have encountered over the years. That might make me sell out a bit on elegance.

My musical style has been determined by quite a lot of factors, among these:

I have played lots of old Danish, Swedish, and German marches. Many of them had great melodies and distinct harmonies. But their use of the given ensembles did not display neither fantasy, nor variation.

I have played lots of baroque music with its calls for embellishments based on the given musical structure. And baroque music is a great teacher of counterpoint.

I have studied Bach harmony quite thoroughly. Not that I can imitate him, even his best students sound as clones.

I have read piles of Mozart scores. I can even less imitate him, because he was beyond being a human, when he wrote music.

I have studied the romantics to a lesser degree.

I have studied Schönberg's atonal, but pre-serial way of setting. There is a logic, even if it hard to find.

And I have studied big-band arranging with emphasis on Thad Jones's way of setting a 5 part sax section. And jazz harmony in a backward way sheds some light on some romantic harmony.

Please note, that I have use the word "studied", not the word "understood". It has explicitly not been my goal to promote myself as being a musically educated person, but to tell that I have fought quite a bit in my strives to be one.

Exactly that fight makes me detest any shortcuts, but for one: the talent of truly gifted persons. I am not one of those, but I can recognise them, when I meet them. And believe me: they all have worked hard to develop their talents.

If I ever was presented with a computer generated arrangement, I would first kindly ask to have it removed from my music stand. If that would not happen, I would remove myself from that ensemble immediately.

Every aspect of true music is based on human art and craftsmanship, and it should stay so with all the shortcomings implied.

Does anyone among us want to hear Sibelius or Finale generated music, depending on which application any given ensemble director is using?

Computer based engraving applications should be considered graphic tools only. Even if they come with quite a few extras beyond pen, pencil, and eraser.

Klaus


Follow Ups: