QuickScribe Key Change

[sugardilly]

I hope there is a simple fix to this.

I'm using DP 5.12 and I'm using QuickScribe to notate Horn Parts.

I'm writing a song that begins in the key of E Flat and transposes to the key of E.

This means that the Alto Sax would play C and transpose to C#.

However, QuickScribe transposes the second portion to D Flat.

Does anyone know how to make it show sharps instead of flats.

Please help. This is frustrating.

[Dwetmaster]

I hope you knew that C# is Db? Most Horn Players I know prefer to read flats anyway. I've never used C# Major as a key. I don't even think it exist in contemporary theory. I might be wrong though

[dtiger]

Insert a Key Change in the conductor track. If you want every accidental to show up leave it as C major then create a custom key or scale and you can choose which way the notes appear - C# or Db, F# or Gb, etc.

[npatton]

Actually, I wish Finale did this more easily. Instead you have to do a multi-step workaround. Of course, it would be nice to just have a preference you could choose to automate it in either program.

The looks I get from horn players when I forget to change it to flats...

[Dwetmaster]

The looks I get from horn players when I forget to change it to flats...

[Frodo]

Actually, I wish Finale did this more easily.

I thought it was just me!! Why is it so complicated to get the horns from F# major (B concert) to Gb?

Insert a Key Change in the conductor track. If you want every accidental to show up leave it as C major then create a custom key or scale and you can choose which way the notes appear - C# or Db, F# or Gb, etc.

Excellent suggestion. Always start with the conductor track.

Then, in QS, use the flat/sharp icon (fourth one down on the main palatte) and click-hold over the key sig at the beginning of the bar. Lots of key sig options appear.

Also, in the QS mini menu, there are Track Options which allow one to set the transposition *display* to any interval they desire without effecting playback transposition.

[mhschmieder]

Thanks Froro; I didn't know about that first trick.

I'm still discovering things I didn't know about QuickScribe, which surely must essentially be the old Mosaic engine sitting inside DP.

I'm finding it so quick to do part extraction in QS, that I haven't been motivated to get deep into my standalone notation program yet (Notion).

But I too had been stymied by the occasional stray accidental not appearing as I preferred. I would tweak them one by one, but Frodo's hints seem a more sure-fire way of avoiding the glitches to start with.

I don't quite understand the comment about C# major not being used in contemporary theory, as I certainly see it far more often than Db major, but I'm guessing you meant in the context of parts extraction for horns?

Or do you mean outside the classical genre, where I do find that the equivalent flat key is generally preferred. There are some subtle differences from a music theory point of view, which is why convenience would trump all else outside most formal music genres.

[Frodo]

But I too had been stymied by the occasional stray accidental not appearing as I preferred. I would tweak them one by one, but Frodo's hints seem a more sure-fire way of avoiding the glitches to start with.

If you want to change the enharmonic of an individual note, you can use the same tool to click on that note and change, say a C# to a Db.

I don't quite understand the comment about C# major not being used in contemporary theory, as I certainly see it far more often than Db major, but I'm guessing you meant in the context of parts extraction for horns?

It's contextual. But for the most part, musicians would generally rather read in D-flat (5 flats) instead of C# (7 sharps) if it's all the same. Of course, when dealing with minor keys, C# minor is preferred over Db minor for obvious reasons.

Within the context of classical music, some practices are gradually being recognized as archaic. Many composers of the late 19th century and throughout the 20th century would go out of their way sometimes to avoid convention and to annoy the status quo in the name of innovation.

The issue becomes one where notes such as F natural could be called F natural until a key like C# major forces F natural to be called E-sharp as the rule and not the exception. But when I hear some composers swear that C# major sounds brighter than Db major, I tend to draw at least a dotted line on the topic. Personally, I'd rather give musicians less to think about about when reading my charts where musical comfort and accuracy are at stake.

Or do you mean outside the classical genre, where I do find that the equivalent flat key is generally preferred. There are some subtle differences from a music theory point of view, which is why convenience would trump all else outside most formal music genres.

There is indeed a "wow" factor on paper, and there's something artistically beautiful, imho, about the look of a well-dressed score. Again, for the sake of pragmatism I'll opt for a certain fun factor every time. I hear musicians say constantly that their parts would have been easier to play had it only been written out a little differently, be it the key or some other feature. I conducted the "Lord of the Rings Symphony" for Howard Shore a few times, and every time people say that the notes are actually not difficult, but reading the parts for the way they are laid out on paper is what makes it more of a challenge than it really needs to be.

The thing about doing classical masterworks is that they can be bought and purchased well in advance of any performance. This is not the case with doing sessions for film or CDs where you sit down read, record and go home.

Musicians are equipped to read fly droppings if needed, but if you ask them what they'd prefer and offer it to them you will find that rehearsals and sessions suddenly become more pleasant. Where ease of use with the charts is concerned, time is also saved by the lack of brain farts and therefore, an extra take or two may be possible in a pinch or even an extra cue or a new track could possibily be added to a session if everything reads down easily enough.

[mhschmieder]

I have been using the enharmonic trick note-by-note, so the ability to deal with it globally for the entire score is what was new for me.

I'm still fairly new to parts extraction, so it was a bit of a surprise to me at first to find that different instruments would prefer an equivalent key that is easier to read and play vs. one that relates in more "pure" musical theory terms to the score.

And I certainly agree that this matters way more. I was merely pointing out the music theory context (from my undergrad days, which are a few decades ago at this point in time and so perhaps out of step with modern practices), as a point of correction from the other poster's statement which I worried might be taken too literally by someone just starting out on notation.

Out of curiosity, does Finale either automatically make these sorts of decisions, or provide a preference for how instrument transpositions are treated? As standalone notation programs are typically geared more towards music publishing, my guess would be that they follow older traditions than DAW-centric notation such as QuickScribe.

[Frodo]

Out of curiosity, does Finale either automatically make these sorts of decisions, or provide a preference for how instrument transpositions are treated? As standalone notation programs are typically geared more towards music publishing, my guess would be that they follow older traditions than DAW-centric notation such as QuickScribe.

Finale has a Wizard that sets up score templates to automatically place instruments in whatever score order you want with transposed instruments in their proper keys with proper key sigs.

It's only with certain instances where those French horns wind up in F# major as a default that one must twiddle with a custom key signature display transposition for those particular staves. It's harder than it needs to be, imho. It's realyl something that should be doable with a click. Then again, I refuse to use Finale 2007 or 2008 for different reasons and am not sure if they've made this feature any easier than it is in Finale 2006. Right now, setting up custom key sigs involves dealing with double flats and double sharps in the key signature, then figuring out which gaggle of flats and sharps are going to properly display their enharmonic equivalents.

I'm very interested in the way Sibelius deals with this stuff because many little things in Finale become so time consuming to a fault.

[mhschmieder]

I'm printing this out and am adding it so my short pile of mini-research topics for when I can start breathing again this Sunday .

[ I have a sub gig from hell on Saturday, after two other gigs with two different bands this week, but the one on Saturday has an ever-changing set list that includes a lot of material I've never played before and will be playing with the rest of the band for the first time at the actual gig ]

I'm going to check and see how Notion handles this, as the main reason I bought it instead of Finale or Sibelius is that it is more musician-friendly; whilst the other two are more publisher-friendly in their orientation.

The lead female singer that I'm working with both in one of my regular projects and the upcoming sub gig, refuses to upgrade Finale for reasons likely similar to your own, and was happier with some of the QuickScribe notation I handed her . I am also consulting with her on whether Notion is a better solution to her basic lead-sheet needs for her jazz project.

[Frodo]

I'm going to check and see how Notion handles this, as the main reason I bought it instead of Finale or Sibelius is that it is more musician-friendly; whilst the other two are more publisher-friendly in their orientation.

The lead female singer that I'm working with both in one of my regular projects and the upcoming sub gig, refuses to upgrade Finale for reasons likely similar to your own, and was happier with some of the QuickScribe notation I handed her . I am also consulting with her on whether Notion is a better solution to her basic lead-sheet needs for her jazz project.

Yeah-- sadly, the more Finale gets an update, the more congested and coagulated much of it feels. Parts extraction is a near nightmare in version 2007. The menu now looks more like it belongs in OSX than OS9, but selecting extraction preferences led immediately to total disaster on this end. I'm really tired of throwing $200 a year at this app and am only able to use 1 version in OSX reliably.

[npatton]

Using Finale 2005 here. I don't think they've changed the "twiddle" factor in recent versions. I recently found the solution on the Make Music Finale forum, and there was no mention of a specific version in the answering post. I NEVER would have thought of the solution on my own.

Interesting discussion there regarding the direction of this thread:

http://forum.makemusic.com/default.aspx ... 36#m184336

n

[Frodo]

Using Finale 2005 here. I don't think they've changed the "twiddle" factor in recent versions. I recently found the solution on the Make Music Finale forum, and there was no mention of a specific version in the answering post. I NEVER would have thought of the solution on my own.

Interesting discussion there regarding the direction of this thread:

http://forum.makemusic.com/default.aspx ... 36#m184336

n

In the transposition for the trumpet staff, set Interval to 2, Key Alter to -10 and un-check "Simplify Key".

Indeed, npatton- and thanks for the link.

But it's SO unintuitive, isn't it?

For example, to UN-check the Simplify Key presupposes that what Finale did by default is simpler than what the user wants. If the key were already simplified, there'd be no reason for the user to even open that window at all. Simplify Key. Hmm. How about just letting the user put the staff in their desired key and leaving it at that?

Key Alter to -10. There's 5 centuries of musical convention summed up right there!! Jeez. Again, unless the key is so unusual or uncommon, the user really ought to be able to simply set an independent staff/instrument preference with a single click to change the sig to display as its enharmonic equivalent.

As it is, the key sig editor in this window doesn't even display properly before you hit OKAY, so even the GUI is misleading where the it should be foolproof.

I know--- workarounds-- whatever does the trick. That trick just includes having a long list printed out of every possible combo of enharmonic display transposition settings for every instrument where Key Alters and other settings are entirely heteromorphic than common sense endures. There must be an easier way.

[npatton]

There must be an easier way.

For what I would have to pay for updates, there should be.

As it is, I'm happy with Finale 2005. I don't get to twiddle with the new virtual orchestra stuff, but then, I didn't for the last 13 years anyway, so...

Does that make me sound old? ("When I was a kid, we didn't have all this whiz-bang stuff you punks say you need now. When we needed to transpose, we sharpened our pencils, by gum...")