Hi Craig, I think you will find a lot of people on this list who disagree with you about the desirability of "capturing that last 1% of engraving sophistication." (Starting with whether it is actually 1% or more like 10% or more.) To give but one example, having an application that could apply something like Patterson Beams by default, without having to invoke a plug-in, would be hugely attractive to me and to a great many other people.
The fact is that the quality of music notation generated by the average user of Finale or Sibelius is still extremely poor. Having music notation software that was designed from the ground up to quietly guide the novice user towards more professional-looking results, while also allowing experienced engravers room to customize, would be incredibly advantageous. I've had the opportunity to try StaffPad briefly, and while I agree it is extremely impressive, it's not remotely an engraving tool. It's an input tool. It certainly meets the needs of lots of people who only require an input tool. But IMO there is still plenty of room in the market for a serious engraving tool. At least, I hope there is! Cheers, - DJA ----- WEB: http://www.secretsocietymusic.org On May 12, 2015, at 1:39 AM, Craig Parmerlee <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/9/2015 9:26 AM, David H. Bailey wrote: >> Please excuse the cross posting and apologies to those who will receive >> this update to my previous StaffPad review multiple times. >> >> I know that for users of Sibelius and Finale, regular updates of the >> software are very important and in recent years have been less than >> overwhelming as corporate politics and financial problems have gotten in >> the way of offering real improvements to the software. > > Thanks for these updates. The speed of their execution is most impressive. > > Several days ago, I listened to this extensive interview with Daniel > Spreadbury. > https://youtu.be/VBhPyTNkXKI > > My take-aways were: > > 1) This effort is still years from producing a commercial product. They > don't have much of a GUI at present, for example. > > 2) The Steinberg team seems totally obsessed with the finest intricacies > of extreme engraving, and doesn't seem to care nearly as much about > things like improved playback and integration with the rest of the > modern musician's workflow. > > I have nothing against somebody trying to reach the karma of engraving, > but I must admit I don't find that of much practical use. Some of their > ideas would be broadly usable, such as more of a rules-based approach to > how rhythms are notated. But I was left with a feeling that this is an > enormous amount of effort to put into a program that endeavors to > capture that "last 1 percent of engraving sophistication". I would have > thought there are very few people in the world that would be heavily > motivated by that last 1% -- probably fewer than 1000 copyists. > > Of course, if the Steinberg program advances notation that last 1% AND > also does many other things better, then it will be of interest. But it > is hard for me to reconcile the scope of the Steinberg effort with the > very impressive delivery of Staffpad function by what appears to be a > much smaller team over a much shorter time period. > > I realize these are apples and oranges, but nonetheless, Staffpad is the > most impressive thing I have seen in the field in a decade. > > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: > [email protected] _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: [email protected]
