>> I've often held that an ideal marriage would be some merging of Sonar and Finale, but that ain't gonna happen. >>
That's a very good analysis of what I really meant. Now we're talking. By "composition software" I understand programs that can record what I enter while scoring my symphonies, songs, sonatas. Too, they would have a sampler with which I could get instrumental, solo voices or choirs and edit them or take my own samples from pro or student singers. No, I am NOT looking for the computer to compose for me. Can a computer solve Fermat's theorem? Does a computer discover subatomic particles? Will a computer discover how to integrate the 4 fundamental forces or to unify all into a single force? I don't think so, unless we'll finally able to pack enough bistable cells plus synapses into its processor. We have some way to go. So is with music. I happen to have a wide background in both technology and music (Masters in... composition, the Schola Cantorum type :-) and another in conducting, something I still practice when have the opportunity. So I am not exactly your illiterate. It only looks that way when I talk about music software since there I am a total novice and am trying to get hold of as much info as I can before embarking on running my wallet dry. As I said before, all I want is to produce a demo CD containing 3 of my recent songs (in the Latin style). I don't even know whether they're any good. I want to produce the CD to find that out. What I am also trying to find out is cost. If software costs less then I won't have to allocate money I don't have. On the other hand, if putting the songs together, with decent realistic rendition, won't succeed, I'll have to hire singers and musicians which is very expensive. This is why I am asking people left and right about the capabilities of different software. Notation software would facilitate orchestration and editing. The complication I see intervenes when adding the voices. It's not enough to add vocal samples (I hope Finale or Sibelius can do that), but the samples must be edited in such a way that they become my melodies when "chopped" up into single notes glued back to back to form those long lines I want. Yes, the market is small, comparatively. The notation market, that is. And, in fact, we have the 2 big gorillas on the block. So nice to not have competition. If there were, things would stand in a different way. However, I think, asking for good notation, good sequencers and good samplers in the same package is only natural. These are all mainstay of music making for the diversified stylist. And why not look forward and push for bigger feats? Didn't Pierre Schaeffer, Varese, Maderna, Nono, Boulez and Ussachevsky do the same? Yeah, they did have the studios of Radio Paris, Koeln and Turin (Ussachevsly built his own at the U of Utah), but they also mobilized Nagra, Tanberg, Revox, Ampex, Philips and Siemens to do a better job in developing the technology. I remain sincerely, John. On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 17:17:23 -0400 dhbailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > John T Sylvanis wrote: > > So, in fact both are sophisticated notation packages with pseudo > > composition capabilities. Why do they cost 500-600 dollars apiece? > I am > > NOT looking for loop software, but composition software with good > > sequencing and sound font editing capabilities, doubled by > notation as a > > natural complement. In my opinion these two should have come > together > > with notation software some time ago, as Microsoft has integrated > its > > discrete Office packages already in the early '90s. > > > > Well, you're making an assumption that Finale and Sibelius have > pseudo-composition capabilities. What the heck are those? > Composition > occurs in the human mind, not in a computer. The computer helps the > > human get the ideas down on paper so that other musicians can then > reproduce them. Sequencers help the human get the sounds recorded > so > they can be played back. Neither aspect (notation or sequencing) is > > composition software, as I would use the term, although both aid in > > composition. Band in a Box and Jammer Pro are what I would call > composition programs -- no musical skill necessary, enter the chord > > symbols, select a style, click play and you've got a composition. > Heck, > with Band-in-a-Box's Melodist function you don't even have to enter > any > chords, just select a style and click MELODY and the program > generates > the chord sequence, the melody, the title. Then you can also > combine > that with the Soloist function and it will play a smoking solo if > you > wish, resulting in a complete recordable song, interesting to listen > to, > with no effort other than some mouse clicks. Now *that's* > composition > software, to my mind. > > What you describe is currently available from Sonar or Cakewalk Home > > Studio or PowerTracks Pro from pgmusic.com -- but the downside is > that > their notation packages aren't nearly as robust as Finale or > Sibelius. > You might call them composition packages (but I wouldn't) with > pseudo-notation capabilities. > > What does soundfont editing have to do with notation? Nothing. > These > are notation packages which have playback capabilities which get > better > with each new version. Microsoft may have integrated its discrete > Office packages already, but that's a vastly larger market than > music > applications which include notation and sequencing and soundfont > editing > and all the other things you might wish for. The reason that what > you > want hasn't happened is that most musicians who are heavily into > sequencing don't care about the finer points of music notation, they > > just want down and dirty notation for those times that it might be > handy, and that's just what those programs provide. And those > musicians > who care about the finer points of notation tend to be less > interested > in sequencing, since they can put their ideas very nicely into > notation. > > This is a very tiny niche market, so things don't progress as fast > as in > the huge market of office applications. > > So you have a choice -- a terrific sequencing program that has > minimal > notation capabilities or a notation program which has minimal > sequencing > capabilities. > > I do hope you're making these same complaints on the Sonar forums, > also. > :-) > > I've often held that an ideal marriage would be some merging of > Sonar > and Finale, but that ain't gonna happen. > > David H. Bailey > > [snip] > > -- > David H. Bailey > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
