TubeNet

my pops orchestra asked me to take some scores that a former (now deceased) director had written many years ago and put them on finale to print new parts and a more user friendly score. the Originals are getting very tattered and are hand written manuscript which has some issues.

While I do a lot of arranging for schools and personal use in my bands, i have not done a lot of professional music printing or typesetting. What is the usual fee for this? This would be for a full orchestra and the arrangement is about 260 measure long (a medley of 50's tunes).
k

You may want to consider approx $10 a page. I haven't had any complaints of that price from clients and it feels fine on this end as well.

Just a thought.

snorlax wrote: I generally start from a base of 15 cents a "frame" (occupied measure) for score, half that for parts.
Orchestra parts should be on 9.5x12.5" paper if your orchestra follows MOLA guidelines.
Before starting, ask your librarian if your orchestra follows the guidelines found here
Even if it doesn't follow the guidelines, they are nice guidelines and well worth following.
If your orch. doesn't follow those guidelines, and this is just a casual job, then good ol' 8.5x11" will do ok. 11x14" seems to be acceptable for scores. I use 11x17 and have it cut down.
I haven't done any orchestra stuff lately, but these guidelines still hold pretty much.
Before starting, plan in advance as to how you are going to do divisi lines (ok in score, not in parts) with linked parts if you are using 2007 or more recent. A little setup time up front will make for a smoother experience.
Jim W.

I charge a few ways:

1. $30.00 per hour
2. A flat estimate after looking at the job
3. By the page $10.00 per part and $20-30.00 per score or piano page

I very rarely use option three and have never charged by the frame that Jim mentions above.

I wouldn't worry about paper size in this case. More often I am getting requests for 8.5x11 only. This is due to deadlines and files being sent digitally at the last second. I have also had many complaints about larger sizes not fitting in file cabinets so I just don't do it anymore unless requested or a score needs the space.

As Jim said, a little planning can go a long way! Planning now will save a tremendous amount of time so you may want to opt. for payment option 2 or 3.

If you have not worked on engraving projects in the past, as Jim suggests go through the MOLA guidelines and check out a few books as well:

http://www.npcimaging.com/books/Books.htm" target="_blank

The Ted Ross book may be the best place to start as it is accepted in music music publishing or engraving houses.

And now back to work on a 41 page band chart that is due for a rehearsal tomorrow at 8:30 AM,

I generally charge by the frame myself. It seems most who do this for a large company don't. The thing I saw with charging by the page is that someone could, unlikely but possibly, ask for more music on the page than there should be to save a penny. Frame is easily calculated with Finale features, but some frames do take more work than others, and sometimes, you're cheating yourself, and other times, you're cheating them. The other problem with this is you can't make an up-front estimate. Well, you can, but it takes a lot of time counting each frame individually.

I do have a few jobs where I have agreed on a price before, but most of my clients never minded whatever I was going to charge. It just seems to work as a good system for me, so I don't mind.

Nick

I get the frame payment method, but what if someone sends along a Finale or Sibelius file to clean up. Do you still charge by the frame?

I have started to go to the "here is the price" method. I win some and lose some, but after a while you get pretty good at estimating a price after looking over a score. I did a full band chart a while back and I thought it would pay much more than it did. After totaling up the hours, I realized it took much less time than anticipated. Basically because of strict deadlines I have gotten quite speedy with Finale which actually cuts down on my salary. Bummer

I use PhotoScore Ultimate with Sibelius to scan in scores that I need to correct or modify. It has gotten really pretty accurate and I see that it now has a manuscript feature. Has anyone used it with manuscript? This could really save some time converting a manuscript score to print, if it works.

snorlax wrote:

BVD Press wrote:I get the frame payment method, but what if someone sends along a Finale or Sibelius file to clean up. Do you still charge by the frame?

Bryan, I won't clean up anyone else's mess. Sometimes it takes more time to do that than to hand-enter from manuscript. Seriously, I've only been asked to do it once, and it was an abomination, so I demurred.

I take files from some people and have gotten used to how they work. For many, I have to print before starting any work so I can at least figure where they put the dynamics, etc. because they used the wrong tool.... So much fun I can hardly take it...

ANd now back to a 23 minute woodwind quintet due tomorrow in the AM,

What is "crash"? I use Sibelius.

tbn.al wrote:What is "crash"? I use Sibelius.

Wow! Sibelius must have a LOT of catching up to do.

"Crash" has been a feature of Finale since ver. 1.0.

snorlax wrote:Bryan,
Since you do so much Finale work, I have a few questions for you...or anyone else who does a lot of Finale work...

1. How often do you adjust Finale's spacing?
2. How often do you adjust slurs?
3. Do you use TG Tools and/or Patterson's Plugins?
4. Do you do parts on 8.5x11 paper, or do you use 9x12 and/or 9.5x12.5?
5. Do you do your own comb binding or do you farm it out?
6. Do you use the VST hosting function?
7. What--if anything--is your most common crash?

1. I don't adjust the spacing too often, but as the note durations get smaller the spacing tends to deteriorate. The spacing after augmentation dots in not very consistent which is quite bother every now and then.

2. I feel slurs are pretty good, but from system to system I adjust constantly. Also if you have large leaps of notes connected by beams manual adjustments are needed quite often. In cases such as these, I turn of the "engraver slurs" and adjust to my needs.

3. I use TG constantly, but not the Patterson plugins. When MakeMusic released 2009 and the TG Tools did not work, it destroyed workflow and I was back to 2008...

4. Everything is 8.5x11 or 11x17. The only exception being large band or orchestral scores, but those are on 11x14 or 17x11.

5. I do the comb binding here. Printing I do here and farm out. It depends upon how many copies I need etc.

6. No VST here at all.

7. I generally crash when I do things to fast. Most of the time I can get Finale to crash after closing one file and opening another one too quickly.

Anyone have any thoughts on the new Expression setup in 2009? I will reserve comment so I don't influence one way or another, but I am curious what others think about it.

I can definitely get Sibelius to crash as well so they ar not as far behind Finale as one might think!

That's it for now,

Bryan,

What kind of printer do you have to print on 11x 17 paper? I would like to print two-page parts on a single sheet rather than have to tape two pages together. Also it would help with larger scores. Right now the largest I can do are 8.5 x 14.

k

ken k wrote:Bryan,

What kind of printer do you have to print on 11x 17 paper? I would like to print two-page parts on a single sheet rather than have to tape two pages together. Also it would help with larger scores. Right now the largest I can do are 8.5 x 14.

k

Not cheap, but I highly recommend them:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... ebouchon-20

I have an older model I picked up off Ebay I use for covers. You might find something here:

http://shop.ebay.com/items/_W0QQ_dmptZB ... 0&_osacat=0

Other than being faster, the HP5000 and HP5100 have the same features as the new models. The one I had before the new model decided it had literally had enough and just crapped out one day. I got much more than anticipated out of it and can't recommend them enough.