Re: [Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Jari Williamsson]

AFAIK, it's the REVERSE direction that's the problem for Dorico?

Once the data is in Dorico, you'll loose most of it trying to get it 
elsewhere.



Best regards,

Jari Williamsson



On 2019-01-29 04:27, Craig Parmerlee wrote:

OK, here are the results
Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b
Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9

I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING.  All I did was:

1) Open Dorico
2) Import your XML file
3) Print score
4) Print parts

That all took about i minute.  I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF 
creator which is really very nice and extremely fast.  But one 
shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also did


5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file.  That took 
about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico.


The layouts aren't perfect.  I'd certainly edit them a little.  But a 
key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any 
editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal.



On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote:

Hi Craig,
thanks for volunteering to do a little test.
Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long. 
Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in 
this XML file.
Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result 
(for test purposes).
But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a 
good result.

Thanks again,
Thomas
PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Craig Parmerlee]

Thanks, Geraldo.

I will keep that in mind.  My only concern is that if this is system 
tempo or tempo markings (i.e. text that will appear for all players), it 
has to be on the downbeat or else it will break up multi-measure rests.




On 1/30/2019 1:35 PM, Gerardo Delgado wrote:

  I can move the elements manually to relieve the stacking,

but the staffs remain spaced apart.  They don't adjust themselves after
I relieve the stacking.  So I may have to adjust some of the staff
spacing manually.


Hi Craig.

I am working in some projects with Dorico and in cases like that I move the
texts ("Trumpet solo" o "legato") in Write Mode in order to assign them to
other elements (for instance, a neighbour note or rest). It makes the
staves to respace automatically. Then, in Engraving Mode, I move the text
to the proper place. Generally, no further manual staff spacing is required.

Kind regards.

Gerardo Delgado
Musician, Music Editor, Conductor
Buenos Aires, Argentina


El mié., 30 ene. 2019 a las 3:01, Craig Parmerlee ()
escribió:



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Gerardo Delgado]

>  I can move the elements manually to relieve the stacking,
but the staffs remain spaced apart.  They don't adjust themselves after
I relieve the stacking.  So I may have to adjust some of the staff
spacing manually.


Hi Craig.

I am working in some projects with Dorico and in cases like that I move the
texts ("Trumpet solo" o "legato") in Write Mode in order to assign them to
other elements (for instance, a neighbour note or rest). It makes the
staves to respace automatically. Then, in Engraving Mode, I move the text
to the proper place. Generally, no further manual staff spacing is required.

Kind regards.

Gerardo Delgado
Musician, Music Editor, Conductor
Buenos Aires, Argentina


El mié., 30 ene. 2019 a las 3:01, Craig Parmerlee ()
escribió:

> It seems that Dorico did not include some (maybe all) text expressions
> in its import.  When I ran the XML into Finale, the text expressions
> show but mostly collide with other elements.  Dorico doesn't really have
> "text expressions" in the same sense that Finale uses them.  With
> Dorico, you have regular text (single staff) and system text (applies to
> all staves).  Dorico also has tempo markings and playing techniques.
>
> The things people put into text expressions in Finale would go either
> into regular text , tempo markings or playing techniques with Dorico,
> and evidently there is no such conversion in the XML importer.  But had
> those elements been brought in through the import, they would not have
> collided. By default, nothing collides.  You can forcibly make elements
> collide by manually placing them in ENGRAVE mode, or you can disable the
> "avoid collisions" property.  I have heard of some cases where this
> doesn't perfectly avoid collisions, but I have never seen any collisions.
>
> There is a downside, however.  I tend to use a lot of rehearsal marks,
> and I also often include either a tempo marking or system text at the
> same barline where the rehearsal mark is placed.  For example, rehearsal
> mark C might also say "Trumpet solo".  In those cases, the collision
> avoidance seems to stack these elements vertically.  It doesn't collide,
> but it may place the staffs very far apart in order to avoid the
> collision.  I can move the elements manually to relieve the stacking,
> but the staffs remain spaced apart.  They don't adjust themselves after
> I relieve the stacking.  So I may have to adjust some of the staff
> spacing manually.
>
> But a key point is that by default, the parts are all completely
> playable, even if not ideally laid out. If you are racing to get a piece
> done in time for a rehearsal, you don't have to leave an extra hour or
> two to fiddle with parts just to make them playable.
>
>
> On 1/30/2019 12:08 AM, Raymond Horton wrote:
> > Impressive results! Thanks for sharing!
> >
> > ​Raymond Horton
> > Composer, Arranger
> > Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) United Methodist Church
> > Retired Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra, 1971-2016
> > Visit us at rayhortonmusic.com
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019, 10:28 PM Craig Parmerlee  wrote:
> >
> >> OK, here are the results
> >> Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b
> >> Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9
> >>
> >> I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING.  All I did was:
> >>
> >> 1) Open Dorico
> >> 2) Import your XML file
> >> 3) Print score
> >> 4) Print parts
> >>
> >> That all took about i minute.  I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF
> >> creator which is really very nice and extremely fast.  But one
> >> shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also
> did
> >>
> >> 5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file.  That took
> >> about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico.
> >>
> >> The layouts aren't perfect.  I'd certainly edit them a little.  But a
> >> key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any
> >> editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote:
> >>> Hi Craig,
> >>> thanks for volunteering to do a little test.
> >>> Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long.
> >>> Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in
> >>> this XML file.
> >>> Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result
> >>> (for test purposes).
> >>> But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a
> >>> good result.
> >>> Thanks again,
> >>> Thomas
> >>> PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side.
> >>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >> ___
> >> Finale mailing list
> >> Finale@shsu.edu
> >> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> >> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.e

Re: [Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Craig Parmerlee]

It seems that Dorico did not include some (maybe all) text expressions 
in its import.  When I ran the XML into Finale, the text expressions 
show but mostly collide with other elements.  Dorico doesn't really have 
"text expressions" in the same sense that Finale uses them.  With 
Dorico, you have regular text (single staff) and system text (applies to 
all staves).  Dorico also has tempo markings and playing techniques.


The things people put into text expressions in Finale would go either 
into regular text , tempo markings or playing techniques with Dorico, 
and evidently there is no such conversion in the XML importer.  But had 
those elements been brought in through the import, they would not have 
collided. By default, nothing collides.  You can forcibly make elements 
collide by manually placing them in ENGRAVE mode, or you can disable the 
"avoid collisions" property.  I have heard of some cases where this 
doesn't perfectly avoid collisions, but I have never seen any collisions.


There is a downside, however.  I tend to use a lot of rehearsal marks, 
and I also often include either a tempo marking or system text at the 
same barline where the rehearsal mark is placed.  For example, rehearsal 
mark C might also say "Trumpet solo".  In those cases, the collision 
avoidance seems to stack these elements vertically.  It doesn't collide, 
but it may place the staffs very far apart in order to avoid the 
collision.  I can move the elements manually to relieve the stacking, 
but the staffs remain spaced apart.  They don't adjust themselves after 
I relieve the stacking.  So I may have to adjust some of the staff 
spacing manually.


But a key point is that by default, the parts are all completely 
playable, even if not ideally laid out. If you are racing to get a piece 
done in time for a rehearsal, you don't have to leave an extra hour or 
two to fiddle with parts just to make them playable.



On 1/30/2019 12:08 AM, Raymond Horton wrote:

Impressive results! Thanks for sharing!

​Raymond Horton
Composer, Arranger
Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) United Methodist Church
Retired Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra, 1971-2016
Visit us at rayhortonmusic.com

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019, 10:28 PM Craig Parmerlee 
OK, here are the results
Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b
Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9

I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING.  All I did was:

1) Open Dorico
2) Import your XML file
3) Print score
4) Print parts

That all took about i minute.  I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF
creator which is really very nice and extremely fast.  But one
shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also did

5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file.  That took
about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico.

The layouts aren't perfect.  I'd certainly edit them a little.  But a
key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any
editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal.


On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote:

Hi Craig,
thanks for volunteering to do a little test.
Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long.
Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in
this XML file.
Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result
(for test purposes).
But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a
good result.
Thanks again,
Thomas
PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side.



---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Raymond Horton]

Impressive results! Thanks for sharing!

​Raymond Horton
Composer, Arranger
Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) United Methodist Church
Retired Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra, 1971-2016
Visit us at rayhortonmusic.com

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019, 10:28 PM Craig Parmerlee  OK, here are the results
> Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b
> Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9
>
> I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING.  All I did was:
>
> 1) Open Dorico
> 2) Import your XML file
> 3) Print score
> 4) Print parts
>
> That all took about i minute.  I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF
> creator which is really very nice and extremely fast.  But one
> shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also did
>
> 5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file.  That took
> about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico.
>
> The layouts aren't perfect.  I'd certainly edit them a little.  But a
> key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any
> editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal.
>
>
> On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote:
> > Hi Craig,
> > thanks for volunteering to do a little test.
> > Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long.
> > Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in
> > this XML file.
> > Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result
> > (for test purposes).
> > But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a
> > good result.
> > Thanks again,
> > Thomas
> > PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side.
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML

[Craig Parmerlee]

OK, here are the results
Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b
Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9

I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING.  All I did was:

1) Open Dorico
2) Import your XML file
3) Print score
4) Print parts

That all took about i minute.  I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF 
creator which is really very nice and extremely fast.  But one 
shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also did


5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file.  That took 
about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico.


The layouts aren't perfect.  I'd certainly edit them a little.  But a 
key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any 
editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal.



On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote:

Hi Craig,
thanks for volunteering to do a little test.
Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long. 
Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in 
this XML file.
Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result 
(for test purposes).
But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a 
good result.

Thanks again,
Thomas
PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico and Sibelius

[David H. Bailey]

On 1/26/2019 2:42 PM, Howey, Henry wrote:

I have both. They make files that are just files. It’s a strength to some, to 
me a deal breaker.

Finale means that once the notes are entered, I can use them in a variety of 
ways.

Henry Howey
Sent from my iWhatever




I'm confused -- finale just makes files also.  All three notation 
products produce their own proprietary format, they can produce midi 
files and they can produce MusicXML files and they can export their 
notation as graphic files.


I don't see how Finale files are any more versatile, or how Sibelius and 
Dorico files are any less versatile than Finale files.


The one edge that Finale has (and I consider it only a very tiny edge) 
is that it can produce SmartMusic files.  Since I don't use SmartMusic 
and I am not producing files for others to use with SmartMusic, it's a 
meaningless tiny edge to me.


But then maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean, which wouldn't 
surprise me.


--
*
David H. Bailey
dhbaile...@comcast.net
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico and Sibelius

[Howey, Henry]

I have both. They make files that are just files. It’s a strength to some, to 
me a deal breaker.

Finale means that once the notes are entered, I can use them in a variety of 
ways.

Henry Howey
Sent from my iWhatever
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Craig Parmerlee]

Personally I would appreciate if my various plug-in vendors all supplied 
VST3 implementations.  It makes things cleaner.  That isn't just a 
Dorico issue.  VST2 will soon have its 20th birthday.  VST3 has been out 
there almost a decade.  It is high time that vendors move forward.


By the same token, Steinberg should embrace the ARA extensions to VST3.  
It is only hurting Cubase to not offer the richest Melodyne experience.  
I certainly agree that Steinberg should not be so proprietary.  But I 
don't want them to go out of business.  That strikes me as an astounding 
statement to be made on a forum that is very interested in music 
notation.  We have, on one hand, a company that has made a huge 
investment in modernizing the world of notation.  And we have another 
company that has made minimal investments in the past decade.  If I had 
to choose a company to survive, it would be the one that is investing in 
the technology.


I believe it is a moot point.  There are no indications whatsoever that 
Peaksware ever intends to make a significant investment in its product.  
They seem to be focused on SmartMusic.  Nobody should be surprised by 
that.  Simply go back and read the Peaksware announcement at the 
acquisition time.  It is perfectly clear in hindsight that the CEO was 
talking only about SmartMusic and not Finale when he went on about 
"deliberate practice".  This was what the company already did for 
athletics with TrainingPeaks.  It clearly is the only product they have 
much interest in from MakeMusic.

https://www.scoringnotes.com/news/makemusic-joins-peaksware/

And note this acquisition from 2015.  Again, it is all about 
SmartMusic.  Finale simply is not a key product for the company now.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150709005064/en/MakeMusic-Acquires-Weezic

If Peaksware were serious at all about Finale, the company would have 
given us a road map years ago.  Doesn't it seem a little peculiar that 
Dorico would have gone through its entire development life cycle. and 
several major releases since Peaksware acquired MakeMusic, and not a 
single word in terms of how the company intends to position against 
Dorico?  So really, I would not wish the more innovative company to go 
out of business.  It isn't likely anyway considering they are owned by 
Yamaha.





On 7/12/2018 5:05 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:

On Thu, July 12, 2018 1:45 pm, Steve Schow wrote:

Steinberg has had a strict stance
on copy protection for a very long time with Cubase and has documented very
well that this is just how it is, and how it will always be.  Of course of
Steinberg goes out of business, which is unlikely to happen any time soon

Based on their very recent attempt to bludgeon users into VST3 licenses by
revoking VST2 licenses, I am absolutely never touching a Steinberg product. I
can only hope they go out of business.

Now let's please concentrate on Finale.

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

On Thu, July 12, 2018 1:45 pm, Steve Schow wrote:
> Steinberg has had a strict stance
> on copy protection for a very long time with Cubase and has documented very
> well that this is just how it is, and how it will always be.  Of course of
> Steinberg goes out of business, which is unlikely to happen any time soon

Based on their very recent attempt to bludgeon users into VST3 licenses by
revoking VST2 licenses, I am absolutely never touching a Steinberg product. I
can only hope they go out of business.

Now let's please concentrate on Finale.

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Steve Schow]

That is very very unlikely to ever change.  Steinberg has had a strict stance 
on copy protection for a very long time with Cubase and has documented very 
well that this is just how it is, and how it will always be.  Of course of 
Steinberg goes out of business, which is unlikely to happen any time soon, then 
who knows..but overall…it just is what it is.  If you want to use their stuff, 
you have to use an elicensor dongle and that is not ever going to change.

I am hugely not a fan of dongles either, and have held a similar stance as you 
for a very long time and still do, but recently I decided to buy VSL products, 
which are even more strict then steinberg…and I just decided it was worth it to 
me to get the dongle and just deal with it like any other product that isn’t 
perfect.  I have hardware keyboards that have strange quirks and things I have 
to work around also…it just is what it is. Yes my life would be easier without 
it, but its not the end of the world, and if you want to use that product, then 
it may be worth it.  It was for me with VSL.  Since I already have a dongle 
plugged into my machine anyway, I decided to give Dorico a try also.


> On Jul 3, 2018, at 12:37 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz  
> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, July 3, 2018 1:53 pm, David H. Bailey wrote:
>> 1) Very strict anti-piracy!
> 
> Yes, this is the deal-breaker for me. No company is trustworthy, especially
> about their future, and Steinberg's continued use of user-punishing protection
> is unacceptable. I don't use any of their protected products.
> 
> Plus, they're not a US company, so in this political era and with changes both
> here and in the EU, there's no telling what will happen to cross-border
> authorization. I'm staying away until they change that policy.
> 
> Dennis
> 
> 
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[David H. Bailey]

On 7/3/2018 10:47 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
[snip]> Similarly, most of the appearance-related things are controlled 
by rules
(aka preferences).  They are extraordinarily numerous.  I think Dorico 
has broken new ground in organizing vast numbers of options. Practically 
all of the options are displayed in panels that have useful graphical 
representations of what the option does.  And here's a key point that 
may not immediately be apparent.  These preferences windows are 
"MODELESS".  That is a technical term that simply means you can leave 
the options window open while you are editing your score.  Let's say you 
have two or three monitors.  You can open some preferences on your 
secondary monitor while the score is open on your primary monitor. You 
can make changes in the options and observe how this changes the look of 
the score instantly.  This is one of those points of elegance that gives 
a real feeling of empowerment while using the program.

[snip]

Craig is spot-on in his assessment that Dorico has broken new ground in 
the vast number of options it allows the user to set and tweak while in 
the middle of doing other things.  This gives the user an amazing amount 
of control over how the program works and how the output and on-screen 
presentation appear.


In fact the vast number of user-adjustable options can be very daunting 
to a new user.  Fortunately the defaults that Dorico installs with are 
very good and for many users they may never need changing.  But for the 
critical engraver working on projects for publication, sometimes trying 
to emulate exactly a printed arrangement, these options give the user 
much greater control than either Finale or Sibelius give.


Craig uses the words "elegance" and "empowerment" and they are perfect 
descriptions of what Dorico allows the user.


All these options are very nicely helped by daily visits to the Dorico 
forum at steinberg.net.  There are so many options that it can be hard 
for a new user to wrap their head around just what options can be 
adjusted and where in the program to find those settings.  But reading 
questions and answers posted by other users at the forum and by 
experimentation with what is being discussed a new user can quickly 
learn a lot.


In fact, visiting the forum may be a perfect spot to begin for a person 
considering trying Dorico.  Read through the questions and answers and 
find out what a lot of users are already doing in Dorico and you might 
learn things that get you considering to try Dorico or convince you it's 
not going to be a good fit for you.  And the free trial, coupled with 
daily perusing of the forum, can be a perfect way to begin to get a feel 
for the program.  Remember, though, that just as with Finale and 
Sibelius, a mere 30 days (unless you can devote several hours every day 
to working with the program) will not be enough to fully learn all that 
the program can offer you.


For me, using Dorico and Sibelius and Finale, I still find Sibelius the 
best fit.


For many long-time Finale users who have their workflow mastered and who 
can do all that they want there is no need to investigate Dorico (or 
Sibelius).


Thanks again for starting this discussion, Craig!

One can hope that just as the appearance of Sibelius in the Windows/Mac 
music engraving software arena helped jolt Finale out of complacency in 
its development and forced it to try to match many of Sibelius's 
developments, one can hope that the appearance and apparent early 
success of Dorico will help both Sibelius and Finale to work harder on 
development for new versions that will offer more value for future upgrades.


--
*
David H. Bailey
dhbaile...@comcast.net
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Craig Parmerlee]

Regarding the questions about Dorico support and how typical this is of 
Steinberg in general, I'd say Dorico is the anomaly here. Steinberg has 
a reputation for being a bit arrogant.  As a relatively recent Cubase 
user, I'll say that I didn't find Steinberg warm and fuzzy, but there 
are enough people working with the product to get your questions 
answered.  All these products depend heavily on community support.


Dorico is a special case because it is a brand new product that has a 
very steep learning curve.  Because of this, Daniel's team is working 
exceptionally hard to make sure the early users are successful.  I do 
not expect that level of attention to continue as the product matures.


I found the dongle mildly irritating.  I wasn't that put off by the idea 
of a dongle.  I was mainly put off because it it s PROPRIETARY dongle in 
a world that has industry-standard dongles available.  And that seems 
rather typical of Steinberg.  So I have two dongles.  It isn't a big 
deal.  I never touch them.  I figure as a paying customer, it is in my 
interests that everybody else also pays for the product rather than 
being pirates.  If the dongle helps Steinberg reduce piracy, I'm OK with it.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Craig Parmerlee]

I agree with everything David has said, especially "Dorico is not for 
everybody."  Certainly there are some rough spots and missing pieces 
that are deal breakers for some people today.  My personal deal-breakers 
were addressed in 2.0, but others have different needs.  And even if 
Dorico could do 100% of what everybody could ever want, that doesn't 
mean everybody should convert.  That is very much a personal decision 
and I am not here to pump Dorico or to attack Finale.  My only purpose 
is to give something of a 'Dispatch from the battlefront" in case others 
are thinking about moving at some stage and don't want to take the time 
to work through the 30-day demo right now. And really, 30 days is not 
nearly enough to understand or appreciate any product like this.


I would like to amplify David's comments about the 5 modes (Setup, 
Write, Engrave, Play and Print).  To me, this is a very coherent way of 
looking at things.  It is conceptually similar to Finale's decision to 
require you to work in a particular tool (articulations, speedy entry, 
expressions, lyrics, etc.) at any moment.  It is just that Dorico 
divided it along different dimensions.  While in Write mode, you can do 
all the note entry, articulations, expressions and so on.  In Engrave 
mode, you tweak the layout (only if necessary, and often, little is 
necessary). And while in Engrave mode, you cannot change notes by 
accident. Personally I had no difficulty grasping that work flow.  The 
difficulty is in remembering all the things you can do in Write mode.


A subtle, but to me, very revealing aspect of this era of technology is 
that it is practically real time.  You can switch between the 5 modes 
instantaneously -- even while playback is underway.  You can change 
window zoom and vertical scroll while playback is underway.  Perhaps 
this does not make a big difference in productivity, but I think it 
represents a major advancement -- almost like going from DOS commands to 
a GUI.


Similarly, most of the appearance-related things are controlled by rules 
(aka preferences).  They are extraordinarily numerous.  I think Dorico 
has broken new ground in organizing vast numbers of options.  
Practically all of the options are displayed in panels that have useful 
graphical representations of what the option does.  And here's a key 
point that may not immediately be apparent.  These preferences windows 
are "MODELESS".  That is a technical term that simply means you can 
leave the options window open while you are editing your score.  Let's 
say you have two or three monitors.  You can open some preferences on 
your secondary monitor while the score is open on your primary monitor.  
You can make changes in the options and observe how this changes the 
look of the score instantly.  This is one of those points of elegance 
that gives a real feeling of empowerment while using the program.


Likwwise, Play mode is quite similar to what most DAWs deliver today -- 
albeit a small fraction of "full DAW capability".  A key point is that 
you can contour the sound in Play mode, with your changes happening 
interactively -- just like with full DAWs.


The message here is that this really is a clean slate approach using 
technologies from 2018.  It isn't fair to either Finale or Dorico to try 
to do a point-by-point comparison.  Dorico is an altogether different 
experience.



On 7/3/2018 1:53 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:

Thanks, Craig, for this great review.

Regarding the playback of D.S., D.C., Fine, Coda, etc. -- when I first 
started working with Sibelius (version 2.11) it couldn't handle 
playback of those either.  But eventually it came (I can't recall if 
it was with version 3, 4 or 5).  Since Daniel Spreadbury was leading 
the development on Sibelius and is leading the development in Dorico I 
have faith that the playback of such things will happen soon in Dorico 
as well.


There are still two major aspects about Dorico that people who haven't 
investigated it yet need to be aware of in my opinion since they might 
be deal-breakers for some people:
1) Very strict anti-piracy!  Product activation takes place in either 
of two ways -- by use of a USB dongle (costs extra) which can then be 
moved from computer to computer so it can be installed on as many 
computers as the user wants but only one installation at a time can be 
used; or by use of the e-licenser software, whereby you activate the 
installation on a particular computer using software.  Then when you 
want to use the program on a different computer you have to 
de-activate it on the first computer and then activate it on the 
different computer.  That all entails being connected to the internet, 
whereas the USB dongle doesn't.  Both systems are a pain in the butt, 
but I can say that should a computer crash and need something major 
replaced like a motherboard, the Steinberg web-site is fast and easy 
to navigate to re-enable the software activation.
2) Very different appro

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

On Tue, July 3, 2018 1:53 pm, David H. Bailey wrote:
> 1) Very strict anti-piracy!

Yes, this is the deal-breaker for me. No company is trustworthy, especially
about their future, and Steinberg's continued use of user-punishing protection
is unacceptable. I don't use any of their protected products.

Plus, they're not a US company, so in this political era and with changes both
here and in the EU, there's no telling what will happen to cross-border
authorization. I'm staying away until they change that policy.

Dennis


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[David H. Bailey]

 is radically different from the mode of operation deeply 
ingrained in long-term Finale users.  Many of us have learned Finale 
over a span of 10 or even 20 years.  There is a big learning curve with 
any product of this complexity.  There are many resources for Dorico 
information (help pages, a comprehensive manual, YouTube videos, monthly 
Facebook live sessions etc.)  The product is evolving so quickly that 
none of these sources is definitive and up to date.  So the user is on 
his or her own to assemble one's own best practices and workflow.  In my 
case, I started compiling a Word document of tips and techniques for 
everything I do regularly.  Otherwise I would not be able to remember 
most of it. Over the course of the month, this document has grown to 
about 30 pages and 100 procedures, but I don't have to refer to it very 
often now.


The heavy Dorico user relies on PC keystrokes and shortcuts. These can 
be hard to remember until you develop muscle memory. Once you have that, 
I think productivity with Dorico is far greater than Finale because 
Dorico takes care of so many of the tedious details automatically.  For 
example, there is an "Engraving" mode in Dorico where you can make your 
final layout changes.  With Finale, this part of the process often 
represented 20% of my time.  Layout decisions with Dorico are far beyond 
Finale and Sibelius.  I have done some projects that literally required 
no layout changes whatsoever.


There has been practically no investment in Finale functions most of the 
past decade, and I believe we should not expect much from the company. 
People who are completely satisfied with what Finale does for them today 
may have no reason to look at Dorico.  People who spend many hours per 
week doing composing, arranging or engraving really can increase their 
productivity (and possibly income) by learning Dorico.  I do think there 
is a threshold of use needed to make it worthwhile to take on this new 
learning curve.


The big issue is this.  Almost everything Dorico does is more productive 
and more elegant than the equivalent processes in Finale.  While Dorico 
probably does 90% of the things you can do with Finale today (and a 
great many things you cannot easily do with Finale,) that last 10% can 
be a real roadblock.  I have not seen a comprehensive list of the things 
that a Finale user would not be able to accomplish in Dorico, but here 
are a few examples.


* Playback in general is not advanced.  There is no support for D.S., 
D.C. and similar variations.  You can engrave these with text symbols, 
but playback will not recognize that.


* There is no ability to set swing in playback

* If you are heavily dependent on Staff Styles in Finale, there is no 
real equivalent (other than the slash regions and bar-repeat regions, 
and they don't have the flexibility associated with Finale Staff Styles)


* Chord support in Dorico is light years ahead of Finale and you can 
really fly through that part of a project that requires chord symbols. 
However, it is very difficult to have different chord spellings for 
different instruments.


There are more issues.  I'm not trying to be comprehensive. However, I 
have reached the point that I am so much more productive with Dorico 
that I probably will not be creating any new Finale projects.


A couple more observations to wrap up.  There many bugs in Version 2.0. 
The Steinberg team is large and heavily engaged in fixing these things. 
There should be a patch release out in the next few weeks that will 
bring the product up to a normal "stable production" level.  Also, there 
is a very active, and growing, user community, and that definitely helps.





On 6/2/2018 12:45 AM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:

On 5/31/2018 3:40 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:
While I'm disappointed that the major thrust of Dorico version 2 
seems to be scoring to video, I realize that's a very large and 
growing segment of the notation/composition software market so it 
should be a means to even better cementing Dorico's future.


I did the free trial of Dorico 1.  I used it to do a re-transcription 
of several orchestral pieces that had multiple movements ("flows" in 
Dorico-speak) and some irregular meter / beat patterns.  It was slow 
going because of the learning curve but I was struck at how well the 
music layout happened, almost completely automatically.  I find myself 
spending many hours fiddling with Finale parts to get them to lay out 
reasonably.  It is clear to me that Dorico does many things (including 
layout) better and will save a lot of time.


However, for me, I must have slash notation and rhythmic notation 
because mostly I do jazz band arrangements.  And those things were not 
there in Dorico 1.  The final release of Dorico 1 included chord 
symbols, and they did a fantastic job with that -- much more coherent 
than Finale.


Dorico 2 adds slash and rhythmic notation, 

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Lawrence David Eden]

r / beat patterns.  It was slow going 
>> because of the learning curve but I was struck at how well the music layout 
>> happened, almost completely automatically.  I find myself spending many 
>> hours fiddling with Finale parts to get them to lay out reasonably.  It is 
>> clear to me that Dorico does many things (including layout) better and will 
>> save a lot of time.
>> 
>> However, for me, I must have slash notation and rhythmic notation because 
>> mostly I do jazz band arrangements.  And those things were not there in 
>> Dorico 1.  The final release of Dorico 1 included chord symbols, and they 
>> did a fantastic job with that -- much more coherent than Finale.
>> 
>> Dorico 2 adds slash and rhythmic notation, so I bought the crossgrade and am 
>> now working on my first jazz band project.  It is unfortunate that the 
>> product does not play back DS al coda, but that is not required in this 
>> project.
>> 
>> Anyway, I actually wanted to respond to your comment about video being the 
>> focus of 2.0.  Certainly that is part of it.  But a big portion of the 
>> "video support" is a better structure for varying tempos, and this can be 
>> useful even without video.  And this tempo business has been one of the most 
>> troublesome parts of Finale playback.  It seems we have been told more than 
>> a year ago that this was a big focus of Finale development, yet we haven't 
>> seen anything in that time.
>> 
>> Apart from video, I'd say there was a major effort to address 
>> jazz/pop/commercial writers as noted above.  And also there was a big focus 
>> on playback.  That is not just the Note Performer integration.  They also 
>> have added depth to the "DAW portion" of Dorico with support for automation 
>> curves and unlimited controller functions.  This adds to the existing 
>> capabilities for MIDI editing separate from the notation itself (e.g, if a 
>> note sounds just a little too long, you can change the MIDI very easily 
>> without having to change the notation)  These things add up to major 
>> advancements.
>> 
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>> 
>> ___
>> Finale mailing list
>> Finale@shsu.edu
>> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
>> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
> 
> 
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Craig Parmerlee]

 The final release of Dorico 1 included chord 
symbols, and they did a fantastic job with that -- much more coherent 
than Finale.


Dorico 2 adds slash and rhythmic notation, so I bought the crossgrade 
and am now working on my first jazz band project.  It is unfortunate 
that the product does not play back DS al coda, but that is not 
required in this project.


Anyway, I actually wanted to respond to your comment about video being 
the focus of 2.0.  Certainly that is part of it.  But a big portion of 
the "video support" is a better structure for varying tempos, and this 
can be useful even without video.  And this tempo business has been 
one of the most troublesome parts of Finale playback.  It seems we 
have been told more than a year ago that this was a big focus of 
Finale development, yet we haven't seen anything in that time.


Apart from video, I'd say there was a major effort to address 
jazz/pop/commercial writers as noted above.  And also there was a big 
focus on playback.  That is not just the Note Performer integration.  
They also have added depth to the "DAW portion" of Dorico with support 
for automation curves and unlimited controller functions.  This adds 
to the existing capabilities for MIDI editing separate from the 
notation itself (e.g, if a note sounds just a little too long, you can 
change the MIDI very easily without having to change the notation)  
These things add up to major advancements.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu



___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Craig Parmerlee]

On 5/31/2018 3:40 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:
While I'm disappointed that the major thrust of Dorico version 2 seems 
to be scoring to video, I realize that's a very large and growing 
segment of the notation/composition software market so it should be a 
means to even better cementing Dorico's future.


I did the free trial of Dorico 1.  I used it to do a re-transcription of 
several orchestral pieces that had multiple movements ("flows" in 
Dorico-speak) and some irregular meter / beat patterns.  It was slow 
going because of the learning curve but I was struck at how well the 
music layout happened, almost completely automatically.  I find myself 
spending many hours fiddling with Finale parts to get them to lay out 
reasonably.  It is clear to me that Dorico does many things (including 
layout) better and will save a lot of time.


However, for me, I must have slash notation and rhythmic notation 
because mostly I do jazz band arrangements.  And those things were not 
there in Dorico 1.  The final release of Dorico 1 included chord 
symbols, and they did a fantastic job with that -- much more coherent 
than Finale.


Dorico 2 adds slash and rhythmic notation, so I bought the crossgrade 
and am now working on my first jazz band project.  It is unfortunate 
that the product does not play back DS al coda, but that is not required 
in this project.


Anyway, I actually wanted to respond to your comment about video being 
the focus of 2.0.  Certainly that is part of it.  But a big portion of 
the "video support" is a better structure for varying tempos, and this 
can be useful even without video.  And this tempo business has been one 
of the most troublesome parts of Finale playback.  It seems we have been 
told more than a year ago that this was a big focus of Finale 
development, yet we haven't seen anything in that time.


Apart from video, I'd say there was a major effort to address 
jazz/pop/commercial writers as noted above.  And also there was a big 
focus on playback.  That is not just the Note Performer integration.  
They also have added depth to the "DAW portion" of Dorico with support 
for automation curves and unlimited controller functions.  This adds to 
the existing capabilities for MIDI editing separate from the notation 
itself (e.g, if a note sounds just a little too long, you can change the 
MIDI very easily without having to change the notation)  These things 
add up to major advancements.


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[David H. Bailey]

 of any style is amazingly easy to use.

Note spacing algorithms are quite good. I find only a very few things I need to 
fix.

General layout control — what goes where on what page — is a bit hard to learn, 
but once you have it, the control you have is astonishing.

Cross-measure beaming is a snap. This (and other things) arise from Dorico not 
thinking in terms of measures, but flows of notes. It knows the rules — but you 
can change or insert meter changes at any time — or work without meter — and 
Dorico rebeams properly. And, of course, things can be overridden.

Keyboard shortcuts are customizable — all of them. So I changed them to match 
my Finale habits, and had to learn very few (to match the Dorico conception for 
things like tuplets, dynamics, and a few other things). I find I was able, 
after doing a short piece or two, to get my speed up to my Finale speed.

Every user wants different things. For me, the last two deal-breakers are:

You can’t have two (or more) instruments on a single staff and then break them 
out into separate parts in the parts layout. I’m shocked that this is still so, 
given that they clearly want to sell to people doing large ensemble 
composing/arranging. I HAVE to assume this will be fixed soon, but it seriously 
isn’t there — and there is no easy workaround (other than separate files).

Playback doesn’t read trills nor string harmonics (tremolos are fine). I am led 
to believe that NotePerformer is as good as Garritan? I don’t know this first 
hand, but that’s what people say (actually, they say it is better). That’s now 
being integrated (though a separate purchase), so, generally speaking, playback 
should be good. They provide a way to use Garritan, but it is not simple to do, 
and I’ve not figured out how to get Garritan to work as well as is does with 
Finale. Dorico people acknowledge that the problems with all of this are on 
their end.

I paid for the first version because I want to support their efforts and 
continuing development. I believe Steinberg was forcing them to release this to 
prove they were going to start to recoup their investment. I bought the upgrade 
because I want to continue supporting them, and every release so far has been a 
big step forward. They are getting close.

The other reason I paid up is that I got a great deal — academic cross-grade — 
on the initial purchase. On the upgrade, they had shown that they have 
committed themselves to fix things continuously, acknowledge the shortcomings, 
and release multiple, substantial improvements for free for a good long time 
(about a year?). They also have fabulous communication — especially Daniel 
Spreadbury and John Barron, both of whom are looped completely into the 
development of the program, both of whom are completely honest (and humble), 
and both of whom seem to respond within minutes to queries that come in 24/7.

My two cents,
David Froom
  
___

Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu




--
*
David H. Bailey
dhbaile...@comcast.net
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Doug Walter]

I’m not anywhere near switching, but I’ve been following Dorico’s development 
with more than a little interest. Such informative posts like this one are 
quite useful and much appreciated - thanks for such a detailed, 
well-thought-out, well-stated comparison and review.

Doug

> On May 31, 2018, at 11:18 AM, dfr...@smcm.edu wrote:
> 
> I bought Dorico when it came out, and have been learning it, on and off. 
> Generally, I’ve stopped when I encounter a problem, confirm with John Barron 
> or Daniel Spreadbury that my problem is something not yet addressed. Then, 
> when an update comes out (there have been 3 or 4 free updates — this one was 
> paid), I take it up again. Rinse and repeat.
> 
> There is nothing Dorico does that Finale can’t do. I began with Finale at 
> 1.0, so I know its DNA, and can usually guess what to do to solve whatever 
> needs solving. That said, there are some remarkable things about Dorico, and 
> it may indeed by my go-to program. But not yet.
> 
> The font is beautiful. The default notation and layout choices — all of which 
> can be overridden — are almost all really smart ones. So, generally speaking, 
> out of the box, things look great. The program is stable and launches 
> quickly. You get only one computer-based license, and if you want to move 
> from computer to computer regularly, you need to put the license on a dongle. 
> You don’t need a dongle if you can use it on only one computer.
> 
> Things that are faster in Dorico:
> 
> The new divisi, which is quite good. The same method can handle ossias. Also 
> pianos adding and dropping staves. Quick to implement, easy to use, easy to 
> edit.
> 
> Pedalling (piano and vibes) of any style is amazingly easy to use.
> 
> Note spacing algorithms are quite good. I find only a very few things I need 
> to fix.
> 
> General layout control — what goes where on what page — is a bit hard to 
> learn, but once you have it, the control you have is astonishing. 
> 
> Cross-measure beaming is a snap. This (and other things) arise from Dorico 
> not thinking in terms of measures, but flows of notes. It knows the rules — 
> but you can change or insert meter changes at any time — or work without 
> meter — and Dorico rebeams properly. And, of course, things can be overridden.
> 
> Keyboard shortcuts are customizable — all of them. So I changed them to match 
> my Finale habits, and had to learn very few (to match the Dorico conception 
> for things like tuplets, dynamics, and a few other things). I find I was 
> able, after doing a short piece or two, to get my speed up to my Finale speed.
> 
> Every user wants different things. For me, the last two deal-breakers are:
> 
> You can’t have two (or more) instruments on a single staff and then break 
> them out into separate parts in the parts layout. I’m shocked that this is 
> still so, given that they clearly want to sell to people doing large ensemble 
> composing/arranging. I HAVE to assume this will be fixed soon, but it 
> seriously isn’t there — and there is no easy workaround (other than separate 
> files). 
> 
> Playback doesn’t read trills nor string harmonics (tremolos are fine). I am 
> led to believe that NotePerformer is as good as Garritan? I don’t know this 
> first hand, but that’s what people say (actually, they say it is better). 
> That’s now being integrated (though a separate purchase), so, generally 
> speaking, playback should be good. They provide a way to use Garritan, but it 
> is not simple to do, and I’ve not figured out how to get Garritan to work as 
> well as is does with Finale. Dorico people acknowledge that the problems with 
> all of this are on their end.
> 
> I paid for the first version because I want to support their efforts and 
> continuing development. I believe Steinberg was forcing them to release this 
> to prove they were going to start to recoup their investment. I bought the 
> upgrade because I want to continue supporting them, and every release so far 
> has been a big step forward. They are getting close.
> 
> The other reason I paid up is that I got a great deal — academic cross-grade 
> — on the initial purchase. On the upgrade, they had shown that they have 
> committed themselves to fix things continuously, acknowledge the 
> shortcomings, and release multiple, substantial improvements for free for a 
> good long time (about a year?). They also have fabulous communication — 
> especially Daniel Spreadbury and John Barron, both of whom are looped 
> completely into the development of the program, both of whom are completely 
> honest (and humble), and both of whom seem to respond within minutes to 
> queries that come in 24/7.
> 
> My two cents,

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[dfr...@smcm.edu]

I bought Dorico when it came out, and have been learning it, on and off. 
Generally, I’ve stopped when I encounter a problem, confirm with John Barron or 
Daniel Spreadbury that my problem is something not yet addressed. Then, when an 
update comes out (there have been 3 or 4 free updates — this one was paid), I 
take it up again. Rinse and repeat.

There is nothing Dorico does that Finale can’t do. I began with Finale at 1.0, 
so I know its DNA, and can usually guess what to do to solve whatever needs 
solving. That said, there are some remarkable things about Dorico, and it may 
indeed by my go-to program. But not yet.

The font is beautiful. The default notation and layout choices — all of which 
can be overridden — are almost all really smart ones. So, generally speaking, 
out of the box, things look great. The program is stable and launches quickly. 
You get only one computer-based license, and if you want to move from computer 
to computer regularly, you need to put the license on a dongle. You don’t need 
a dongle if you can use it on only one computer.

Things that are faster in Dorico:

The new divisi, which is quite good. The same method can handle ossias. Also 
pianos adding and dropping staves. Quick to implement, easy to use, easy to 
edit.

Pedalling (piano and vibes) of any style is amazingly easy to use.

Note spacing algorithms are quite good. I find only a very few things I need to 
fix.

General layout control — what goes where on what page — is a bit hard to learn, 
but once you have it, the control you have is astonishing. 

Cross-measure beaming is a snap. This (and other things) arise from Dorico not 
thinking in terms of measures, but flows of notes. It knows the rules — but you 
can change or insert meter changes at any time — or work without meter — and 
Dorico rebeams properly. And, of course, things can be overridden.

Keyboard shortcuts are customizable — all of them. So I changed them to match 
my Finale habits, and had to learn very few (to match the Dorico conception for 
things like tuplets, dynamics, and a few other things). I find I was able, 
after doing a short piece or two, to get my speed up to my Finale speed.

Every user wants different things. For me, the last two deal-breakers are:

You can’t have two (or more) instruments on a single staff and then break them 
out into separate parts in the parts layout. I’m shocked that this is still so, 
given that they clearly want to sell to people doing large ensemble 
composing/arranging. I HAVE to assume this will be fixed soon, but it seriously 
isn’t there — and there is no easy workaround (other than separate files). 

Playback doesn’t read trills nor string harmonics (tremolos are fine). I am led 
to believe that NotePerformer is as good as Garritan? I don’t know this first 
hand, but that’s what people say (actually, they say it is better). That’s now 
being integrated (though a separate purchase), so, generally speaking, playback 
should be good. They provide a way to use Garritan, but it is not simple to do, 
and I’ve not figured out how to get Garritan to work as well as is does with 
Finale. Dorico people acknowledge that the problems with all of this are on 
their end.

I paid for the first version because I want to support their efforts and 
continuing development. I believe Steinberg was forcing them to release this to 
prove they were going to start to recoup their investment. I bought the upgrade 
because I want to continue supporting them, and every release so far has been a 
big step forward. They are getting close.

The other reason I paid up is that I got a great deal — academic cross-grade — 
on the initial purchase. On the upgrade, they had shown that they have 
committed themselves to fix things continuously, acknowledge the shortcomings, 
and release multiple, substantial improvements for free for a good long time 
(about a year?). They also have fabulous communication — especially Daniel 
Spreadbury and John Barron, both of whom are looped completely into the 
development of the program, both of whom are completely honest (and humble), 
and both of whom seem to respond within minutes to queries that come in 24/7.

My two cents,
David Froom 
 
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Robert Patterson]

I mean, Finale is capable of producing all the results shown in the "Smart
Staff Management" video. But the U.I. for doing it can be quite laborious.


On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:26 AM, Will Roberts 
wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> Sure, I found it here:
>
> https://www.dorico.com/new-in-2/
>
> Looks like it's on YouTube here:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp8qDzPA77A
>
> I also saw some worked-through examples in the review on Scoring Notes.com.
>
> I'm right in saying that Finale has nothing like this, right? Or did I
> miss the memo?
>
> Best,
> -WR
>
> --
>   Will Roberts
>   whrcompo...@fastmail.fm
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
> > Could you send a link to the demo? I would be interested in seeing how
> > sting divisi are handled.
> >
> > On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:11 AM, Will Roberts 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Did anybody else get an email from Steinberg yesterday about the new
> > > version of Dorico? I tried the first version out about a year ago but
> > > didn't buy it at the time. Interested to check it out again now.
> > >
> > > The main new features are for composing to picture and playback
> > > automation, which doesn't interest me, but it looks like the slashes
> and
> > > ditto bars are pretty neat. For me the thing that looks really
> interesting
> > > is the way string divisi is handled – I would love to have a tool like
> that
> > > in Finale. Maybe it's already possible and I'm just too dumb to figure
> it
> > > out!
> > >
> > > No trial version yet, though, so I can't see if it works as well as the
> > > demos make it look!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > -WR
> > >
> > > --
> > >   Will Roberts
> > >   whrcompo...@fastmail.fm
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Finale mailing list
> > > Finale@shsu.edu
> > > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
> > ___
> > Finale mailing list
> > Finale@shsu.edu
> > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> >
> > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Will Roberts]

Hi Robert,

Sure, I found it here:

https://www.dorico.com/new-in-2/

Looks like it's on YouTube here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp8qDzPA77A

I also saw some worked-through examples in the review on Scoring Notes.com.

I'm right in saying that Finale has nothing like this, right? Or did I miss the 
memo?

Best,
-WR

-- 
  Will Roberts
  whrcompo...@fastmail.fm

On Thu, May 31, 2018, at 7:01 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
> Could you send a link to the demo? I would be interested in seeing how
> sting divisi are handled.
> 
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:11 AM, Will Roberts 
> wrote:
> 
> > Did anybody else get an email from Steinberg yesterday about the new
> > version of Dorico? I tried the first version out about a year ago but
> > didn't buy it at the time. Interested to check it out again now.
> >
> > The main new features are for composing to picture and playback
> > automation, which doesn't interest me, but it looks like the slashes and
> > ditto bars are pretty neat. For me the thing that looks really interesting
> > is the way string divisi is handled – I would love to have a tool like that
> > in Finale. Maybe it's already possible and I'm just too dumb to figure it
> > out!
> >
> > No trial version yet, though, so I can't see if it works as well as the
> > demos make it look!
> >
> > Best,
> > -WR
> >
> > --
> >   Will Roberts
> >   whrcompo...@fastmail.fm
> >
> > ___
> > Finale mailing list
> > Finale@shsu.edu
> > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> >
> > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico 2

[Robert Patterson]

Could you send a link to the demo? I would be interested in seeing how
sting divisi are handled.

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 5:11 AM, Will Roberts 
wrote:

> Did anybody else get an email from Steinberg yesterday about the new
> version of Dorico? I tried the first version out about a year ago but
> didn't buy it at the time. Interested to check it out again now.
>
> The main new features are for composing to picture and playback
> automation, which doesn't interest me, but it looks like the slashes and
> ditto bars are pretty neat. For me the thing that looks really interesting
> is the way string divisi is handled – I would love to have a tool like that
> in Finale. Maybe it's already possible and I'm just too dumb to figure it
> out!
>
> No trial version yet, though, so I can't see if it works as well as the
> demos make it look!
>
> Best,
> -WR
>
> --
>   Will Roberts
>   whrcompo...@fastmail.fm
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico 2

[Will Roberts]

Did anybody else get an email from Steinberg yesterday about the new version of 
Dorico? I tried the first version out about a year ago but didn't buy it at the 
time. Interested to check it out again now.

The main new features are for composing to picture and playback automation, 
which doesn't interest me, but it looks like the slashes and ditto bars are 
pretty neat. For me the thing that looks really interesting is the way string 
divisi is handled – I would love to have a tool like that in Finale. Maybe it's 
already possible and I'm just too dumb to figure it out!

No trial version yet, though, so I can't see if it works as well as the demos 
make it look!

Best,
-WR

-- 
  Will Roberts
  whrcompo...@fastmail.fm

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[Lawrence David Eden]

I agree!  Go for it, David.

Larry Eden


> On Sep 2, 2017, at 5:31 AM, SN jef chippewa  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> david, it sounds to me like you should write an article or blog entry 
> comparing the pros and cons of the three programmes ;-)
> 
> -- 
> 
> neueweise -- fonts for new music (and traditional) notation
> http://newmusicnotation.com/fonts.html
> 
> shirling & neueweise  |  http://newmusicnotation.com
> new music notation  +  arts management  +  translation
> [FB] http://facebook.com/neueweise  |  [TW] http://twitter.com/neueweise
> 
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico -- chord symbol tool for graphics?

[David H. Bailey]

On 9/2/2017 5:26 AM, SN jef chippewa wrote:
> 
> i watched the video chuck mentioned and wonder if it could be hacked
> to provide a nice way to build a new music symbols library.  normally
> i would do this with multiple text expressions, or (yuck!) as a
> multi-component shape expression; both these approaches are
> unsatisfying.
> 
> for example, if you set the foundation (A, for example) to a snare
> drum character, you could have various manifestations of   additional
> symbols replaced to show (for example) snare sticks striking the
> instrument in various ways: e.g., ord, with butt, hoop crack, stick
> on stick rim shot... so instrument symbols assigned to the notes and
> playing techniques to the suffixes.
> 
> would be a pain in the ass to do this in finale's chord editor, but
> it looks like the graphic approch in dorico would make this a breeze,
> no?
> 
> it would be awesome if you could change the angle of the symbols...
> add to that the possibility to add lines, shapes and you would
> essentially have a mini graphics editor inside the software.
> 

I just did a brief checkout of the video and tried some things in Dorico 
and you are correct that it is very easy to add various glyphs and 
graphics to chord symbols (or change them entirely to show the example 
Jef mentions) although I'm not sure how one would access such a chord 
symbol without editing each instance of it in the score while entering 
the music. You can simply enter a C chord and then in the Engrave mode 
double-click that particular instance and edit it to show whatever you 
wish without changing any other instance of the C chord (unless you make 
your changed version the default for that project).  I suppose one could 
enter a very obscure chord symbol, edit it to show what you want and 
then make that the default appearance for that chord symbol in the 
project and then simply enter that obscure chord every time you want 
that pictogram shown.  You can add glyphs from any existing font and you 
can add graphics and then resize them.  What you can't apparently do is 
to add your own hand-drawn line in the editor.  Neither can you rotate 
any of the items added in a chord symbol.  So it's sort of a 
mini-graphics editor but not complete.  However if you create your own 
graphics with the rotated items outside of Dorico you can use them 
inside this editor.

This is a great example of how the Dorico development team is slowly but 
surely making the program potentially the most powerful music engraving 
programming available.  However it does raise the question of what 
percentage of people working with notation programs actually need or 
want that deep a level of editing.  Obviously they think/hope enough for 
the Dorico team to put development time into it.

But for those who do need/want such deep editing capabilities, I think 
Dorico is well on its way to taking over Finale's long-held position as 
the most powerful notation program.

-- 
*
David H. Bailey
dhbaile...@comcast.net
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[SN jef chippewa]

david, it sounds to me like you should write an article or blog entry 
comparing the pros and cons of the three programmes ;-)

-- 

neueweise -- fonts for new music (and traditional) notation
http://newmusicnotation.com/fonts.html

shirling & neueweise  |  http://newmusicnotation.com
new music notation  +  arts management  +  translation
[FB] http://facebook.com/neueweise  |  [TW] http://twitter.com/neueweise

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico -- chord symbol tool for graphics?

[SN jef chippewa]

i watched the video chuck mentioned and wonder if it could be hacked 
to provide a nice way to build a new music symbols library.  normally 
i would do this with multiple text expressions, or (yuck!) as a 
multi-component shape expression; both these approaches are 
unsatisfying.

for example, if you set the foundation (A, for example) to a snare 
drum character, you could have various manifestations of   additional 
symbols replaced to show (for example) snare sticks striking the 
instrument in various ways: e.g., ord, with butt, hoop crack, stick 
on stick rim shot... so instrument symbols assigned to the notes and 
playing techniques to the suffixes.

would be a pain in the ass to do this in finale's chord editor, but 
it looks like the graphic approch in dorico would make this a breeze, 
no?

it would be awesome if you could change the angle of the symbols... 
add to that the possibility to add lines, shapes and you would 
essentially have a mini graphics editor inside the software.

-- 

neueweise -- fonts for new music (and traditional) notation
http://newmusicnotation.com/fonts.html

shirling & neueweise  |  http://newmusicnotation.com
new music notation  +  arts management  +  translation
[FB] http://facebook.com/neueweise  |  [TW] http://twitter.com/neueweise

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[David H. Bailey]

I bought Dorico when it first came out and have installed every upgrade 
as it was announced, and I think it's a great piece of software but for 
my uses it has some severe limitations, many of which are my own and not 
the program's.

I'm not sure what you mean by "20th/21st century notation" since in my 
experience there is such a wide array of notational devices, many 
invented by a single composer and never moving beyond that, some of them 
graphical, some of them in my experience incomprehensible, with others 
more expansions of traditional notation, and a huge amount of it simply 
the same traditional notation from the 18th and 19th century.

Since my notational needs are pretty much 100% traditional notation I 
can't speak to the ability to use more experimental notation.  But there 
is a great forum at Steinberg.net which is free to join and that would 
be the best place to ask since there are people who are making great use 
of Dorico for completing new projects and publishing their works.

My background:  I started out doing computer music notation with 
MusicPrinterPlus version 3 for DOS and when that program no longer would 
work, I made the jump to Finale version 3.25, and have bought 
practically every annual upgrade along the way.  I bought the crossgrade 
to Sibelius for Windows version 2.11 and bought the upgrades as they 
came out but didn't really start using it for projects until version 5, 
when I finally sat down and learned Sibelius from scratch instead of 
trying to adapt my Finale work-flow to Sibelius.  Ever since then I have 
been using Sibelius as my primary notation software but have stopped 
buying upgrades since verson 7.1.3.  That is still the app I use for 
most of my notational needs.

I find there is much to like about Dorico and much which is overly fussy 
in my opinion.  I will admit that I have yet to sit down and really 
learn Dorico as I should, which is something I intend to do this fall. 
I find their use of "flows" confusing but I find their separation of the 
whole computer notation process into different "modes" to be helpful. 
They have Setup (similar to but not the same as the new score wizards in 
either Finale, Sibelius or MuseScore), Write (where the music itself is 
entered), Engrave (where how the music actually will look on the page is 
finalized), Play (self-explanatory), and Print (also self-explanatory).

Their music entry in the Write mode is very refreshing -- a person can 
simply start entering the music (pitch and rhythm) without regard for 
meter, measures, etc.  That way a person can be inspired to create a 
melodic line if so desired before worrying about meter, key, placement 
of barlines, etc.  And then a person can play around with different 
meters and the program will re-notate what has been entered.  I believe 
they call that "modeless entry."

It's what happens after that that is where I get bogged down.  At the 
bottom of the screen is a narrow bar with an up-pointing arrowhead, and 
what is displayed when that is clicked differs depending on what has 
been clicked on in the music.  It's sort of like the "Inspector" in 
Sibelius.  The confusing thing to me so far about this is that I can't 
remember what information will be shown, or what I can do with it all. 
Dorico has much which can be adjusted (like Finale) and that freedom can 
bring confusion with it until a person has learned the program through 
intense usage.  And so far there isn't a very complete user manual.  The 
user can keep that panel open but then it eats up screen real-estate so 
less of the score is shown.

Dorico can't do polymetric music where the length of the beat varies 
from staff to staff -- independent meters where the barlines don't line 
up from staff to staff is the norm.  That means that a quarter-note in 
one staff equals a quarter note in another staff regardless of the two 
time signatures.  Thus a section with 2/4 in some staves against 6/8 in 
other staves has all the 8ths moving at the same speed rather than 
different speeds, keeping the 2 beats in each of the different meters 
constant.  They will supposedly add that capability "in an upcoming 
upgrade" but the precise version number or date hasn't been indicated yet.

There's a lot Dorico does very nicely and a lot which I find to be very 
unintuitive (which I realize simply means that I haven't wrapped my head 
around their processes yet).

Anybody who wants to learn more about what Dorico can and can't do 
should join the Steinberg.net Dorico forum and ask specific questions 
about your notational desires/needs.  At this point someone on that 
forum, whether any of several Steinberg employees (including Daniel 
Spreadbury, the brains behind Dorico) or any of the many current Dorico 
users, will most likely have an answer.  There is also an online manual 
which can also be downloaded in PDF format for offline reading, at:


One final point which many people

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[Jan Angermüller]

 >they posted a video of their chord symbol editor, and it is vastly 
superior to Finale’s.
I use a JW Lua plugin to do similar things with chords in Finale.
https://elbsound.studio/chord-style-changer.php

Jan

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[Chuck Israels]

I haven’t seen those things, but they posted a video of their chord symbol 
editor, and it is vastly superior to Finale’s.

They seem to be serious and dedicated.

Chuck


> On Sep 1, 2017, at 3:45 PM, James Gardner  wrote:
> 
> Hello Finale list
> 
> Has anyone here been checking out/using Dorico?
> 
> Interested to hear your thoughts on its engraving fine-tuning, horizontal 
> spacing, handling of 20th/21st century notation etc.
> 
> Playback aspects are of little interest to me.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Jim
> 
> -- 
> James Gardner
> 
> 3 Sylvan Valley Avenue
> Woodlands Park
> Titirangi
> Auckland 0604
> NEW ZEALAND
> 
> http://composersedition.com/composers/jamesgardner
> 
> ph (landline): + 649 817 6508
> ph (cellphone): + 64(0)21 169 2493
> 
> 
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Chuck Israels
cisra...@comcast.net
(360) 201-3434

8831 SE 12th Ave.
Portland OR 97202






___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico

[James Gardner]

Hello Finale list

Has anyone here been checking out/using Dorico?

Interested to hear your thoughts on its engraving fine-tuning, horizontal 
spacing, handling of 20th/21st century notation etc.

Playback aspects are of little interest to me.

Cheers

Jim

-- 
James Gardner

3 Sylvan Valley Avenue
Woodlands Park
Titirangi
Auckland 0604
NEW ZEALAND

http://composersedition.com/composers/jamesgardner

ph (landline): + 649 817 6508
ph (cellphone): + 64(0)21 169 2493


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

David,

Thanks for the info -- though as you might expect, I don't find this
comforting. I have Finale's dual-install option (one desktop, one laptop) not
only for emergencies, but also when I'm on the road, including teaching.
That's where the Steinberg tether collapses for me. No way I'm carrying around
a precious dongle, which is required to make Dorico portable. These things
disappear in seconds in a school situation, "just because". I've even had my
flexible rollup keyboard stolen -- from my shared office.

So two installs are pretty much essential. I can accept activation (though I
prefer to know that there's an escrowed key system outside a manufacturer's
control), but never Steinberg's level of tether. No product can be *that*
good.

Finale it is for now!

Dennis


On Tue, October 25, 2016 9:45 am, David H. Bailey wrote:
> I had an emergency over the weekend which both proves and disproves
> Dennis's worries.
>
> My motherboard and main hard-drive crashed so I lost my e-licenser and
> had to reinstall it.  That program is the one that Steinberg uses for
> anti-piracy protection for all its programs.  When I reinstalled the
> e-licenser program it generated a new serial number for itself based on
> my current motherboard (and not the hard drive).  So I was up the
> proverbial creek regarding using Dorico and any other Steinberg products
> (I have WaveLab and Cubase Elements 8).
>
> I did submit a support case report to Steinberg yesterday morning but I
> hadn't heard anything from them by this morning so I posted a "help"
> message on the Dorico forum at steinberg.net.  I got an instant reply
> which asked whether I had tried the reactivation available through my
> account at Steinberg.  I hadn't, so I tried it.
>
> It took all of about 30 seconds to reactivate all my Steinberg products
> on my computer with the new motherboard and new e-licenser installation,
> once I knew what to do.  I simply clicked the "reactivate" button next
> to the appropriate product, entered the serial number from the new
> e-licenser installation and immediately I had a new activation code I
> could copy/paste into the e-licenser, then click the "get license"
> button and the product was activated.
>
> It's taken me much longer to type this than it took to reactivate all
> three software products.   If I had known this, I could have been using
> Dorico again Saturday evening once I had rebuilt my computer with the
> new motherboard.
>
> All this is without the dongle, in software on this computer.  And
> should I want to move to another computer, I can simply install the
> e-licenser there, get the new serial number and reactivate the software.
>So it can be a back-and-forth process as often as I would like, since
> activating a product in a new e-licenser installation de-activates it in
> the old e-licenser installation.
>
> But since I only have one computer I'll be using Dorico on at the
> moment, it's not an issue for me.  Were I to have two computers which I
> wanted to work with Dorico on I'd simply invest in the dongle and move
> that between the computers.
>
> Now all I'm left with from the disaster is trying to get my ewql
> libraries reactivated.  That, I'm afraid, seems as if it will take a lot
> longer (if ever).  But since this is the first computer I've had that
> could actually make good use of these ewql libraries, I don't have any
> projects which rely on them so if it takes a while it's no big deal.
>
> It was very easy getting a new activation from both Sibelius and Finale
> so I can continue to use them on my laptop as well as my new desktop.
>
> So the software protection aspect of Dorico really isn't a big deal.
>
> David H. Bailey
>
>
>
> On 10/22/2016 7:58 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
>> Just a warning that Dorico uses Steinberg's awful protection system: either
>> a
>> hardware dongle or a dongle-free download option that allows only one
>> install.
>>
>> I will never put my work into the hands of this kind of system. I've watched
>> others with dongles see deadlines pass waiting for a replacement for a
>> failed
>> dongle. And even the dongle-free system, without a second install, means any
>> failure that requires using a backup computer is impossible.
>>
>> I know some people have accepted this kind of corporate control of their
>> work,
>> but I'm not one of them. I've campaigned against this nonsense for years.
>> I'm
>> sorry Dorico is infected with it, because it appears that otherwise I'd try
>> using it.
>>
>> I'll stay with Finale's dongle-free, two-computer authorization.
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>> Two of my old pieces on protection:
>> 2003: 
>> 1997: 
>>

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Giovanni Andreani]

Good news to hear, David. It recalled to me when my Mac's motherboard stopped 
working (happened twice in 12 months and Apple changed them both times at no 
cost). I had to reactivate Finale after contacting the support office because 
It hadn't (obviously) been deactivated, and that took a while; I remember one 
of their first responses stating that the support team doesn't work on weekends 
(fair enough). Once reactivated I was constantly accompanied by the 
activation-request window opening every single time I launched Finale, and all 
that until the following upgrade was released.

Giovanni

> On 25 Oct 2016, at 15:45, David H. Bailey 
>  wrote:
> 
> I had an emergency over the weekend which both proves and disproves 
> Dennis's worries.
> 
> My motherboard and main hard-drive crashed so I lost my e-licenser and 
> had to reinstall it.  That program is the one that Steinberg uses for 
> anti-piracy protection for all its programs.  When I reinstalled the 
> e-licenser program it generated a new serial number for itself based on 
> my current motherboard (and not the hard drive).  So I was up the 
> proverbial creek regarding using Dorico and any other Steinberg products 
> (I have WaveLab and Cubase Elements 8).
> 
> I did submit a support case report to Steinberg yesterday morning but I 
> hadn't heard anything from them by this morning so I posted a "help" 
> message on the Dorico forum at steinberg.net.  I got an instant reply 
> which asked whether I had tried the reactivation available through my 
> account at Steinberg.  I hadn't, so I tried it.
> 
> It took all of about 30 seconds to reactivate all my Steinberg products 
> on my computer with the new motherboard and new e-licenser installation, 
> once I knew what to do.  I simply clicked the "reactivate" button next 
> to the appropriate product, entered the serial number from the new 
> e-licenser installation and immediately I had a new activation code I 
> could copy/paste into the e-licenser, then click the "get license" 
> button and the product was activated.
> 
> It's taken me much longer to type this than it took to reactivate all 
> three software products.   If I had known this, I could have been using 
> Dorico again Saturday evening once I had rebuilt my computer with the 
> new motherboard.
> 
> All this is without the dongle, in software on this computer.  And 
> should I want to move to another computer, I can simply install the 
> e-licenser there, get the new serial number and reactivate the software. 
>   So it can be a back-and-forth process as often as I would like, since 
> activating a product in a new e-licenser installation de-activates it in 
> the old e-licenser installation.
> 
> But since I only have one computer I'll be using Dorico on at the 
> moment, it's not an issue for me.  Were I to have two computers which I 
> wanted to work with Dorico on I'd simply invest in the dongle and move 
> I had an emergency over the weekend which both proves and disproves 
> Dennis's worries.
> 
> My motherboard and main hard-drive crashed so I lost my e-licenser and 
> had to reinstall it.  That program is the one that Steinberg uses for 
> anti-piracy protection for all its programs.  When I reinstalled the 
> e-licenser program it generated a new serial number for itself based on 
> my current motherboard (and not the hard drive).  So I was up the 
> proverbial creek regarding using Dorico and any other Steinberg products 
> (I have WaveLab and Cubase Elements 8).
> 
> I did submit a support case report to Steinberg yesterday morning but I 
> hadn't heard anything from them by this morning so I posted a "help" 
> message on the Dorico forum at steinberg.net.  I got an instant reply 
> which asked whether I had tried the reactivation available through my 
> account at Steinberg.  I hadn't, so I tried it.
> 
> It took all of about 30 seconds to reactivate all my Steinberg products 
> on my computer with the new motherboard and new e-licenser installation, 
> once I knew what to do.  I simply clicked the "reactivate" button next 
> to the appropriate product, entered the serial number from the new 
> e-licenser installation and immediately I had a new activation code I 
> could copy/paste into the e-licenser, then click the "get license" 
> button and the product was activated.
> 
> It's taken me much longer to type this than it took to reactivate all 
> three software products.   If I had known this, I could have been using 
> Dorico again Saturday evening once I had rebuilt my computer with the 
> new motherboard.
> 
> All this is without the dongle, in software on this computer.  And 
> should I want to move to another computer, I can simply install the 
> e-licenser there, get the new serial number and reactivate the software. 
>   So it can be a back-and-forth process as often as I would like, since 
> activating a product in a new e-licenser installation de-activates it in 
> the old e-licenser installation.
> 
> But since 

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

I had an emergency over the weekend which both proves and disproves 
Dennis's worries.

My motherboard and main hard-drive crashed so I lost my e-licenser and 
had to reinstall it.  That program is the one that Steinberg uses for 
anti-piracy protection for all its programs.  When I reinstalled the 
e-licenser program it generated a new serial number for itself based on 
my current motherboard (and not the hard drive).  So I was up the 
proverbial creek regarding using Dorico and any other Steinberg products 
(I have WaveLab and Cubase Elements 8).

I did submit a support case report to Steinberg yesterday morning but I 
hadn't heard anything from them by this morning so I posted a "help" 
message on the Dorico forum at steinberg.net.  I got an instant reply 
which asked whether I had tried the reactivation available through my 
account at Steinberg.  I hadn't, so I tried it.

It took all of about 30 seconds to reactivate all my Steinberg products 
on my computer with the new motherboard and new e-licenser installation, 
once I knew what to do.  I simply clicked the "reactivate" button next 
to the appropriate product, entered the serial number from the new 
e-licenser installation and immediately I had a new activation code I 
could copy/paste into the e-licenser, then click the "get license" 
button and the product was activated.

It's taken me much longer to type this than it took to reactivate all 
three software products.   If I had known this, I could have been using 
Dorico again Saturday evening once I had rebuilt my computer with the 
new motherboard.

All this is without the dongle, in software on this computer.  And 
should I want to move to another computer, I can simply install the 
e-licenser there, get the new serial number and reactivate the software. 
   So it can be a back-and-forth process as often as I would like, since 
activating a product in a new e-licenser installation de-activates it in 
the old e-licenser installation.

But since I only have one computer I'll be using Dorico on at the 
moment, it's not an issue for me.  Were I to have two computers which I 
wanted to work with Dorico on I'd simply invest in the dongle and move 
that between the computers.

Now all I'm left with from the disaster is trying to get my ewql 
libraries reactivated.  That, I'm afraid, seems as if it will take a lot 
longer (if ever).  But since this is the first computer I've had that 
could actually make good use of these ewql libraries, I don't have any 
projects which rely on them so if it takes a while it's no big deal.

It was very easy getting a new activation from both Sibelius and Finale 
so I can continue to use them on my laptop as well as my new desktop.

So the software protection aspect of Dorico really isn't a big deal.

David H. Bailey



On 10/22/2016 7:58 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
> Just a warning that Dorico uses Steinberg's awful protection system: either a
> hardware dongle or a dongle-free download option that allows only one install.
>
> I will never put my work into the hands of this kind of system. I've watched
> others with dongles see deadlines pass waiting for a replacement for a failed
> dongle. And even the dongle-free system, without a second install, means any
> failure that requires using a backup computer is impossible.
>
> I know some people have accepted this kind of corporate control of their work,
> but I'm not one of them. I've campaigned against this nonsense for years. I'm
> sorry Dorico is infected with it, because it appears that otherwise I'd try
> using it.
>
> I'll stay with Finale's dongle-free, two-computer authorization.
>
> Dennis
>
> Two of my old pieces on protection:
> 2003: 
> 1997: 
>
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico

[Howey, Henry]

I bought it. It's certainly raw. And they are not interested in making the 
conversion to it seamless.

The biggest disappointment is security. The dingle is still very much part of 
their setup. And it's not advertised.

Since I try to keep up with the state of our art, I think I need to give it a 
look.

I do lots of early music, and the lack of a lunga disappoints. Dorico has at 
least two; however, they explain nothing.

Henry Howey
Sent from my iWhatever
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Dennis Bathory-Kitsz]

Just a warning that Dorico uses Steinberg's awful protection system: either a
hardware dongle or a dongle-free download option that allows only one install.

I will never put my work into the hands of this kind of system. I've watched
others with dongles see deadlines pass waiting for a replacement for a failed
dongle. And even the dongle-free system, without a second install, means any
failure that requires using a backup computer is impossible.

I know some people have accepted this kind of corporate control of their work,
but I'm not one of them. I've campaigned against this nonsense for years. I'm
sorry Dorico is infected with it, because it appears that otherwise I'd try
using it.

I'll stay with Finale's dongle-free, two-computer authorization.

Dennis

Two of my old pieces on protection:
2003: 
1997: 


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

On 10/21/2016 11:11 PM, Blake Richardson wrote:
> Wish they had a demo version (perhaps with "print" and "save" disabled) so 
> you could try it out before spending a chunk of cash on it.
>
[snip]

According to the developers on the Dorico forum at Steinberg, that is in 
the works in the next few months so be patient and in the meantime 
monitor the messages here and join the forum at steinberg.net.

One word of caution about the forum at steinberg.net -- there are a lot 
of people who bought the software expecting something different from 
what Dorico currently is.  Some people on there have even admitted they 
expected it to be like Sibelius only better.  Dorico is quite different 
from Sibelius (or Finale or MuseScore or Notion) so new users need to 
enter the Dorico world with their eyes open.  It's a brand new program 
and needs to be approached from the point of view of a complete 
beginner.  People should not buy it expecting to get a finished project 
out the door in a few days.

Because of that misunderstanding on the part of some of the people who 
have bought Dorico, there have been some very negative messages posted 
on the forum at steinberg.net.  It's important that people reading the 
forum trying to get a sense about whether they want to take the plunge 
need to filter through the messages and decide which ones are people 
frustrated because they didn't do careful enough research about what 
they were getting and which ones are people with genuine major issues 
(blue screens, sudden crashes of Dorico, failure to produce sounds or 
print, etc.)

Steinberg, especially Daniel Spreadbury and his team, have been very 
upfront about what is missing in this initial release along with what 
they will be adding in updates in the coming months.

I have had Dorico crash on me once over the perhaps 100 times I've 
started the program in the past few days (I haven't had large chunks of 
time to work with it, so I've started it up when I've had 5 or 10 
minutes to play with it).  That's not to minimize the problems that 
others have had with constant crashes or other problems but rather to 
let people know that not everybody is having the issues which are being 
reported.  Of course, if you are one of those people it would be very 
very frustrating.


-- 
*
David H. Bailey
dhbaile...@comcast.net
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Blake Richardson]

Wish they had a demo version (perhaps with "print" and "save" disabled) so you 
could try it out before spending a chunk of cash on it.

On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:00 AM, finale-requ...@shsu.edu wrote:

> From: Raymond Horton 
> Subject: Re: [Finale] Dorico?
> Date: October 19, 2016 2:45:38 PM PDT
> To: 
> 
> 
> Very interesting from the review, thank you. I will keep an eye on it,
> personally but not purchase now
> 
> Raymond Horton
> Composer, Arranger
> Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) United Methodist Church
> Retired Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra, 1971-2016

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Kenneth Moore]

On Wed, 19 Oct 2016, Eric Dannewitz  wrote:

> Or when it can open/import Finale files

Steinberg claim it imports Music XML.  I've exported that from Win 
Finale 2014 for a Sibelius user to import, which he did successfully.

Ken Moore
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Raymond Horton]

Very interesting from the review, thank you. I will keep an eye on it,
personally but not purchase now

Raymond Horton
Composer, Arranger
Minister of Music, Edwardsville (IN) United Methodist Church
Retired Bass Trombonist, Louisville Orchestra, 1971-2016


On Oct 19, 2016 1:41 PM, "Ryan"  wrote:

> It was just released today. Here's a review.
>
> http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/dorico-is-here-a-review/
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Eric Dannewitz 
> wrote:
>
> > Or when it can open/import Finale files
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 19, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Michael Lawlor  >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico
> > > notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with
> > > Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when
> it
> > > gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
> > >
> > > Michael Lawlor
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Finale mailing list
> > > Finale@shsu.edu
> > > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Finale mailing list
> > Finale@shsu.edu
> > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> >
> > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
> >
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Giovanni Andreani]

I'm going for it as well: the cross-grade offer isn't going to last for ever 
and it looks to me Dorico is going to grow out into a valid alternative to what 
the actual workflows -to which we are used to- demand

Giovanni Andreani

> On 19 Oct 2016, at 19:48, David H. Bailey  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I took the plunge -- figured I'd get in on the ground floor.
> 
> I've installed it, activated it (I hate the Steinberg activation 
> process!) and have only dabbled a tiny bit.
> 
> Definitely a different workflow from either Finale or Sibelius, but 
> given the shaky nature of Finale's upgrades (anybody really happy with 
> Finale25?) and Sibelius/Avid's shaky financial standings and less than 
> wonderful upgrade to version 8 (not many on the Sibelius group at 
> yahoogroups have upgraded past 7.5), I thought it might be smart to see 
> what the potential is.
> 
> Definitely a 1.0 product -- important things are missing but according 
> to the Dorico publicity they are promised in updates coming over the 
> next several months.
> 
> It'll take some adjustment in my workflow and thought processes, but 
> heck I've already mastered Finale (to a point) and Sibelius (to a point) 
> so it shouldn't be too hard to learn a new program.  I tried Notion and 
> found it very much lacking and definitely not the serious music 
> engraving program I need.
> 
> So I'll see how things go with Dorico.
> 
> I've started a yahoogroup for it:  dor...@yahoogroups.com if anybody 
> wants to check it out.
> 
> And there are the forums at Steinberg which anybody can join.
> 
> It'll be an interesting next few months definitely!
> 
> David H. Bailey
> 
>> On 10/19/2016 1:30 PM, Michael Lawlor wrote:
>> I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico
>> notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with
>> Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it
>> gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
>> 
>> Michael Lawlor
>> 
>> ___
>> Finale mailing list
>> Finale@shsu.edu
>> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
>> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> David H. Bailey
> dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
> http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

On 10/19/2016 1:35 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
> Or when it can open/import Finale files
>

Heck, as witnessed by the many discussions on failed file openings by 
later versions of Finale, not even Finale can open/import Finale files 
all the time!  Don't let that stop you!  ;-)


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

On 10/19/2016 1:35 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote:
> Or when it can open/import Finale files
>

Heck, as witnessed by the many discussions on failed file openings by 
later versions of Finale, not even Finale can open/import Finale files 
all the time!  Don't let that stop you!  ;-)


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

I took the plunge -- figured I'd get in on the ground floor.

I've installed it, activated it (I hate the Steinberg activation 
process!) and have only dabbled a tiny bit.

Definitely a different workflow from either Finale or Sibelius, but 
given the shaky nature of Finale's upgrades (anybody really happy with 
Finale25?) and Sibelius/Avid's shaky financial standings and less than 
wonderful upgrade to version 8 (not many on the Sibelius group at 
yahoogroups have upgraded past 7.5), I thought it might be smart to see 
what the potential is.

Definitely a 1.0 product -- important things are missing but according 
to the Dorico publicity they are promised in updates coming over the 
next several months.

It'll take some adjustment in my workflow and thought processes, but 
heck I've already mastered Finale (to a point) and Sibelius (to a point) 
so it shouldn't be too hard to learn a new program.  I tried Notion and 
found it very much lacking and definitely not the serious music 
engraving program I need.

So I'll see how things go with Dorico.

I've started a yahoogroup for it:  dor...@yahoogroups.com if anybody 
wants to check it out.

And there are the forums at Steinberg which anybody can join.

It'll be an interesting next few months definitely!

David H. Bailey

On 10/19/2016 1:30 PM, Michael Lawlor wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico
> notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with
> Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it
> gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
>
> Michael Lawlor
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[David H. Bailey]

I took the plunge -- figured I'd get in on the ground floor.

I've installed it, activated it (I hate the Steinberg activation 
process!) and have only dabbled a tiny bit.

Definitely a different workflow from either Finale or Sibelius, but 
given the shaky nature of Finale's upgrades (anybody really happy with 
Finale25?) and Sibelius/Avid's shaky financial standings and less than 
wonderful upgrade to version 8 (not many on the Sibelius group at 
yahoogroups have upgraded past 7.5), I thought it might be smart to see 
what the potential is.

Definitely a 1.0 product -- important things are missing but according 
to the Dorico publicity they are promised in updates coming over the 
next several months.

It'll take some adjustment in my workflow and thought processes, but 
heck I've already mastered Finale (to a point) and Sibelius (to a point) 
so it shouldn't be too hard to learn a new program.  I tried Notion and 
found it very much lacking and definitely not the serious music 
engraving program I need.

So I'll see how things go with Dorico.

I've started a yahoogroup for it:  dor...@yahoogroups.com if anybody 
wants to check it out.

And there are the forums at Steinberg which anybody can join.

It'll be an interesting next few months definitely!

David H. Bailey

On 10/19/2016 1:30 PM, Michael Lawlor wrote:
> I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico
> notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with
> Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it
> gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
>
> Michael Lawlor
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Ryan]

It was just released today. Here's a review.

http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/dorico-is-here-a-review/


On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:35 AM, Eric Dannewitz 
wrote:

> Or when it can open/import Finale files
>
>
> > On Oct 19, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Michael Lawlor 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico
> > notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with
> > Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it
> > gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
> >
> > Michael Lawlor
> >
> > ___
> > Finale mailing list
> > Finale@shsu.edu
> > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> >
> > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>
>
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico?

[Eric Dannewitz]

Or when it can open/import Finale files


> On Oct 19, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Michael Lawlor  wrote:
> 
> I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico 
> notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with 
> Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it 
> gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.
> 
> Michael Lawlor
> 
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
> 
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu


___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico?

[Michael Lawlor]

I was wondering if anyone has been looking at Steinberg's Dorico 
notation programme and if it is making them think about the future with 
Finale.  It seems like something that might be worth considering when it 
gets to version 2.0 or 3.0.

Michael Lawlor

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[Craig Parmerlee]

I suppose it is still subject to change, and there could always be 
special offers, but they have indicated the crossgrade price will be 
$299 Euros.  See https://www.steinberg.net/en/products/dorico.html

It appears the first release will not have chord support and will not 
have much or anything in the "human playback" area.  I view the first 
release as non-production -- an opportunity to learn the software if one 
is interested in that.  I guess people who don't care about playback and 
who don't use chords might be able to use the first release more 
productively.


On 5/19/2016 3:38 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:
> On 5/19/2016 10:39 AM, Matthew Naughtin wrote:
>> I saw the demo of Dorico at the Major Orchestra Librarians' Organization
>> conference in Helsinki this week. Looks very promising, and many of us
>> librarians had little flecks of drool on our chins afterward. The
>> interface is clean and logical, and the work flow makes more sense in
>> some ways than Finale or Sibelius. It will be 64-bit native, so should
>> go fast.
>>
>> The presenter Daniel Spreadbury admitted that it's still a work in
>> progress and there are lots of details to be ironed out before the
>> official release. I expect that the chord symbol issue will be worked
>> out before then, and Daniel said that the crossgrade price wasn't set in
>> stone as of now. One attraction for me is that evidently a version of
>> the Cubase sequencer and Steinberg sound libraries will be incorporated
>> in the program.
>>
>> Definitely worth a look, at least in a demo version, and I'll be
>> interested to see how well my Finale and Sibelius files migrate.
>>
>
> I'm looking forward to the release of Dorico.
>
> Daniel has said in the Dorico forum at steinberg.net that the migration
> will have to be by way of MusicXML and he said that probably it will be
> best to keep working on projects which are nearing completion in their
> original programs rather than trying to migrate them.  He mentioned that
> if page layout has begun on the project, definitely keep it in its
> native program because that information doesn't translate over MusicXML.
>   But if projects are fairly new and still in the data entry stage and
> not at the page layout stage, then MusicXML should migrate them well.
>
> It's good to hear from someone who has seen Dorico in action -- it has
> sure sounded as if Daniel and his team have spent a lot of time
> rethinking the workflow that should be best for most users.  And I'm
> eager to see the new music font in action!
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us -- especially the part where he
> said the crossgrade price isn't fixed in stone.  I'd love it to be $100
> or more cheaper than the initially listed price!
>
>

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

Re: [Finale] Dorico

[David H. Bailey]

On 5/19/2016 10:39 AM, Matthew Naughtin wrote:
> I saw the demo of Dorico at the Major Orchestra Librarians' Organization
> conference in Helsinki this week. Looks very promising, and many of us
> librarians had little flecks of drool on our chins afterward. The
> interface is clean and logical, and the work flow makes more sense in
> some ways than Finale or Sibelius. It will be 64-bit native, so should
> go fast.
>
> The presenter Daniel Spreadbury admitted that it's still a work in
> progress and there are lots of details to be ironed out before the
> official release. I expect that the chord symbol issue will be worked
> out before then, and Daniel said that the crossgrade price wasn't set in
> stone as of now. One attraction for me is that evidently a version of
> the Cubase sequencer and Steinberg sound libraries will be incorporated
> in the program.
>
> Definitely worth a look, at least in a demo version, and I'll be
> interested to see how well my Finale and Sibelius files migrate.
>

I'm looking forward to the release of Dorico.

Daniel has said in the Dorico forum at steinberg.net that the migration 
will have to be by way of MusicXML and he said that probably it will be 
best to keep working on projects which are nearing completion in their 
original programs rather than trying to migrate them.  He mentioned that 
if page layout has begun on the project, definitely keep it in its 
native program because that information doesn't translate over MusicXML. 
  But if projects are fairly new and still in the data entry stage and 
not at the page layout stage, then MusicXML should migrate them well.

It's good to hear from someone who has seen Dorico in action -- it has 
sure sounded as if Daniel and his team have spent a lot of time 
rethinking the workflow that should be best for most users.  And I'm 
eager to see the new music font in action!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us -- especially the part where he 
said the crossgrade price isn't fixed in stone.  I'd love it to be $100 
or more cheaper than the initially listed price!


-- 
David H. Bailey
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com
http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu

[Finale] Dorico

[Matthew Naughtin]

I saw the demo of Dorico at the Major Orchestra Librarians' Organization 
conference in Helsinki this week. Looks very promising, and many of us 
librarians had little flecks of drool on our chins afterward. The 
interface is clean and logical, and the work flow makes more sense in 
some ways than Finale or Sibelius. It will be 64-bit native, so should 
go fast.

The presenter Daniel Spreadbury admitted that it's still a work in 
progress and there are lots of details to be ironed out before the 
official release. I expect that the chord symbol issue will be worked 
out before then, and Daniel said that the crossgrade price wasn't set in 
stone as of now. One attraction for me is that evidently a version of 
the Cubase sequencer and Steinberg sound libraries will be incorporated 
in the program.

Definitely worth a look, at least in a demo version, and I'll be 
interested to see how well my Finale and Sibelius files migrate.

Matt Naughtin

___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu