The likelihood that the Steinberg product will both A) meet its (unoffiicial mind you) release date target and B) be the be-all, end-all notation product some are touting it as is highly unlikely. I don't mean to sound like I would be unhappy if it happened, but I've been around this track too many times before.
If they are saying now 18 months, then if it is one of the extremely few planned software projects lucky enough to actually see the light of day, 36-48 months is a more likely release time frame. And while it will do some one thing the developers are determined to revolutionize far better than Fin or Sib, we'll be lucky if the overall feature set is 75% of what Fin and Sib have. And even that one revolutionized thing will probably only target a specific user subset. There is something enticing about a clean slate: a fresh architecture on contemporary toolsets. But the reality is, by the time you bring a large software project to market, your toolset that was so new at the beginning has been superceded and your wonderful flexibile program architecture has been utterly compromised by real-world demands. When it comes to software, I have far greater faith in incremental change. The incremental changes in both Fin and Sib are actually pretty revolutionary when you consider them over the last 10-15 years. I am sorry to see Sib sidelined because it could slow the pace of change in Fin. Meanwhile, I hold out little hope for a software product whose only output so far is a couple of blog posts. I hope I'm wrong. BTW: Personally, I would see the many remaining notation deficiencies addressed before turning Finale into a DAW program. Maybe the various DAW companies (like MOTU) could be persuaded to support MusicXML? (Do they already? The only reason I say this is someone said they were using MIDI files.) On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz < [email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, November 20, 2013 2:39 pm, Eric Dannewitz wrote: > > Audio editing.....not sure if that is a biggie. Finale does have, I > think, the > > ability to include/record audio. But how many people actually use that? > > I'm not sure. I certainly do, and have for years. I have scores that > include > electronic sections that need to show as waveforms, fx tracks, include > synth > instrument versions, etc. It would be a great boon for scoring, say, to > include and EDIT sound effects and music right in-score -- think of Vegas, > with its music generator. The whole score could be built in place instead > of > swapping out to an audio application, bringing it back, stretching or > shrinking, transposing, etc. > > > What I'd like to see is way way better midi/notation integration. I'm > still > > amazed at the poor midi output Finale generates when I dump a score out > of it > > and load it into Digital Performer or Logic. > > INTEGRATION with them, exactly, so that edits in Logic or Sonar would > appear > in the Finale score, in the audio file, and multi-vice-versa. > > Dennis > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
