Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Darcy James Argue wrote: What, specifically, is slowing you down in Finale? My general impression is that Sibelius is still somewhat easier to learn, but expert Finale users can work more quickly and more efficiently, especially if you make full use of third-party plugins. Back when I was a regular Sibelius user (v1.4), I found Finale MUCH faster to use -- mostly due to metatools, which were a huge advantage over Sib's methods for placing things like articulations and fingering numbers, etc. But that was years ago -- I am only just now starting to re-learn Sibelius (now up to v5.1) and I'm sure there are likely more efficient ways of working now than there were back then. I started with Sibelius2 and I also found it incredibly slower than I was able to work in Finale. But with each new version things have gotten streamlined and I find now that I can work equally fast in either program. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
TGTools is really what makes Finale shine. I can't imagine using Finale without it. On 2/19/08, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What, specifically, is slowing you down in Finale? My general impression is that Sibelius is still somewhat easier to learn, but expert Finale users can work more quickly and more efficiently, especially if you make full use of third-party plugins. Back when I was a regular Sibelius user (v1.4), I found Finale MUCH faster to use -- mostly due to metatools, which were a huge advantage over Sib's methods for placing things like articulations and fingering numbers, etc. But that was years ago -- I am only just now starting to re-learn Sibelius (now up to v5.1) and I'm sure there are likely more efficient ways of working now than there were back then. Cheers, ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
*Yawn* Yeah, you go Bob.. On 2/19/08, Bob Morabito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well said, David.. Peace, Bob Morabito ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Yep. agree whole heartedly. And in trying give both a fair hearing.. ala rather than saying Oh bugger Finale doesn't do this well or Sibelius as crap at that.. They should give both a complete se of test run and see in reality which overall works best.. Both will have advantages and both with have disadvantages. It is choosing the one that has the minimal or least negative impact that is the trick. Steve Eric Dannewitz composed the following. Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. Steve Currington wrote: I can't answer based on current experiences or should I say products but I think the answer is .. it depends on how you work and your mental processes - some of which can be modified and some is inherent in ones personality or inbred work habits. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
dhbailey composed the following. Robert Patterson wrote: Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a stupid question. But it is a question that whose answer is very individual. The only reason I chime in here is to mention that if you are not making full use of 3rd-party plugins, and also using a 3rd-party keyboard macro program, you have no idea how fast you can really go with Finale. I have no idea what the relative benefits of these products with Sib are, but with Finale they are huge. (But the learning curve is steep.) There is no need for a keyboard macro program with Sibelius because all of its functions are user-definable as keyboard shortcuts. Why Finale hasn't done this is beyond me. Although Sibelius macro's can be written and then assigned within Sib as it's own user defined keyboard shortcut. Sib comes with a bunch already and some are brilliant. Yep no real need for an external keyboard macro tool in Sib. Steve ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Christopher Smith composed the following. On Feb 19, 2008, at 7:23 PM, Adam Golding wrote: yeah i indeed tried the macro route for awhile--setting things up on finale with autohotkey and whatnot--mind you, i could never find an easy way to enter smartshapes from the keyboard--i think i would have to learn the actual plugin language to do that. On the other hand, maybe i'm just so addicted to keyboard shortcuts that I can't realize that using the mouse *could* be fast too? I have the same issues with removing articulations. For removing articulations (I only mention this for other Finale users who might be unaware, as it seems not to be useful for you since you are on Sib now) when the articulation tool is selected you can hold down the Delete key and click individual articulations, or drag around entire passages across staves to remove articulations. There was a user on here a few years ago who had done his thesis on input devices, and settled on the mouse as being the most flexible overall, in addition to being much faster than people actually thought it was. For some things like entering Smart Shape crescendos, holding down the or keys and double-clicking turns out to be very quick, while for slurs it is hard to imagine a quicker way than double-click and drag. Christopher Again it all comes back to the way an individual works and thinks. one persons click and drag is another persons keyboard press.. What do they call it.. Kinesthetic, Audial/Aural, Visual as a primary and secondary learning and usage processes?? S. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Christopher Smith composed the following. On Feb 19, 2008, at 5:33 PM, dhbailey wrote: And here all my teachers told me there were no stupid questions. :-( That's what I say to MY students. There are no stupid questions. Only stupid students. 8-) Christopher Hmm and stupid answers ;-) ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Adam Golding wrote: Eric, I have used both Sibelius and Finale. Sibelius is currently faster for me, but I know it somewhat better than Finale---further practice on finale might make it faster for me, on the other hand, further practice might be futile. I agree that each program will produce different creative results if one composes directly into it, so I should clarify that I'm probalby going to start composing in Cubase and doing a score when the composition is said and done, so I'm specifically wondering about engraving speed. For the kind of work that Adam appears to be doing, I would say that Sibelius would be the better choice. I work in both, although I'm not as fluent in Sibelius as I am in Finale. I find that I can work equally fast in either program, but the more recent developments in Finale have made it a less desirable working environment for me (having used it since version 3.5) while recent developments in Sibelius make it a lot more enjoyable working environment for me. Adam, you need to know, however, that there remain certain things which are easier in each program. Such as having independent key signatures like 2/4 and 6/8 at the same time in different staves -- Finale makes it very easy and Sibelius makes the user jump through hoops. But if you don't work on music like that it won't matter. And it is possible in Sibelius, just not as easily as with Finale. Both programs are really equal -- those who prefer one or the other do so for either of two reasons: 1) the program they like fits their working methods better; 2) the program they favor makes the musical work they do easier than the other program does. Engraving speed is really determined by the type of music you will be doing. For a large number of people in your situation Sibelius is easier from the start and remains easier. The real differences show up with more complex scores, with the advantage going to Finale, but increasingly by a narrower margin with each new release. Then there is the corporate future -- Sibelius is making huge advances in capturing the education market at all levels, enticing teachers to install it in school computer music labs, while Finale seems to have all but abandoned that market. Which means that young students are learning Sibelius and are more likely to remain Sibelius users, broadening the marketplace significantly, while Finale seems to make no apparent effort to broaden its user base. What that means is that Finale's future income is limited to corporate engraving and to current users locked into an annual upgrade subscription model, and increasingly more and more current users are reluctant to upgrade because newer Finale versions have introduced significant new problems while failing to fix some long-standing problems. Sibelius on the other hand appears to release new versions only when they're ready and not due to any pre-determined calendar model. In my opinion, Sibelius' future seems rosier than Finale's future. MakeMusic, who own and market Finale, have their business hopes pegged onto their SmartMusic Accompaniment System, which is specifically aimed at the student market and is based solely on annual subscription fees for access to the accompaniment files. Finale appears to be less significant in corporate vision. Sibelius (the company as well as the product) has been purchased by Avid, which owns M-Audio and other major music technology products, so it appears that it will have a more robust future. Only time will tell, but when making a significant investment in a software product it is important to keep the company's long-term continued health into consideration. Users of both programs likely have many files from abandoned notation programs of the past which they can't get at. A word to the wise -- when completing a project in whichever program you finally go with, save it as MusicXML in addition to the native format, which may well be the key to the future access to the pieces without having to completely re-engrave in whatever notation software we're all using 20 years from now. Finale will allow that now with no extra purchase, to do that in Sibelius you will need to purchase the Dolet plug-in from www.recordare.com. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
I can't answer based on current experiences or should I say products but I think the answer is .. it depends on how you work and your mental processes - some of which can be modified and some is inherent in ones personality or inbred work habits. I have both (NB I have not upgraded to the recent release of Finale) but do most of my work in Sibelius because I find it suits my working style best. For my work patterns and way of thinking I found Sibelius more intuitive but others on this list, that work think differently than me, would most likely suggest that Finale possibly suits them better and so the end result is that they may be quicker when using Finale. It also probably depends on the amount of work you have done in both.. This relates to the familiarity of the products and the ability to drive each more efficiently to get the end result your require. Again - Sib is far quicker for me but that is because I simply use it far more. I have to say I found I learned Sibelius far quicker. I was productive within the hour with Sibelius whereas it took far longer with Finale. maybe partly because of the reasons above. I should note that I used Finale first and then moved to Sibelius second, after about 18 months or more of solely using Finale and to be honest a I am really glad I did. Steve Currington Wellington, New Zealand Adam Golding composed the following. Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. Steve Currington wrote: I can't answer based on current experiences or should I say products but I think the answer is .. it depends on how you work and your mental processes - some of which can be modified and some is inherent in ones personality or inbred work habits. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Eric Dannewitz wrote: Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. And here all my teachers told me there were no stupid questions. :-( In defense of the question, he's really asking for opinions from experts in the field, which I would think many of us would do before leaping in to some product. I know I ask my mechanic before I go car shopping. Imagine how much business I'd give him in the future if he told me That's a stupid question -- go test drive them all and buy the one you like. Certainly he needs to test them out, and he has since replied that he HAS tried them both. And armed with that experience he simply wants some expert opinions. I don't see what's so stupid about his question. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Robert Patterson wrote: Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a stupid question. But it is a question that whose answer is very individual. The only reason I chime in here is to mention that if you are not making full use of 3rd-party plugins, and also using a 3rd-party keyboard macro program, you have no idea how fast you can really go with Finale. I have no idea what the relative benefits of these products with Sib are, but with Finale they are huge. (But the learning curve is steep.) There is no need for a keyboard macro program with Sibelius because all of its functions are user-definable as keyboard shortcuts. Why Finale hasn't done this is beyond me. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a stupid question. But it is a question that whose answer is very individual. The only reason I chime in here is to mention that if you are not making full use of 3rd-party plugins, and also using a 3rd-party keyboard macro program, you have no idea how fast you can really go with Finale. I have no idea what the relative benefits of these products with Sib are, but with Finale they are huge. (But the learning curve is steep.) On Feb 19, 2008 2:55 PM, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. Steve Currington wrote: I can't answer based on current experiences or should I say products but I think the answer is .. it depends on how you work and your mental processes - some of which can be modified and some is inherent in ones personality or inbred work habits. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
On Feb 19, 2008, at 5:33 PM, dhbailey wrote: And here all my teachers told me there were no stupid questions. :-( That's what I say to MY students. There are no stupid questions. Only stupid students. 8-) Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Eric Dannewitz wrote: Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. And here all my teachers told me there were no stupid questions. :-( In defense of the question, he's really asking for opinions from experts in the field, which I would think many of us would do before leaping in to some product. I know I ask my mechanic before I go car shopping. Imagine how much business I'd give him in the future if he told me That's a stupid question -- go test drive them all and buy the one you like. OK: how about if you asked him 'which car is the fastest?' Do you mean around the Monaco circuit, a two mile oval, or an off-road rally? ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Owain Sutton wrote: Eric Dannewitz wrote: Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. One really needs to try them out and come to their own conclusions based on how they do things. And here all my teachers told me there were no stupid questions. :-( In defense of the question, he's really asking for opinions from experts in the field, which I would think many of us would do before leaping in to some product. I know I ask my mechanic before I go car shopping. Imagine how much business I'd give him in the future if he told me That's a stupid question -- go test drive them all and buy the one you like. OK: how about if you asked him 'which car is the fastest?' Do you mean around the Monaco circuit, a two mile oval, or an off-road rally? Which I wouldn't ask him unless speed were an issue for me (with 55/65 MPH speed limit, fast isn't an issue). But I would ask his opinion about how the cars I had thought about handled, what sorts of repairs they generally need and how much they cost, which models need more repairs than others, which had the longest life. Things within his area of expertise and which I couldn't really know from a simple test drive. Which is what the person who started this was trying to do -- ask the people who use the programs which were the fastest. He described the sort of work he wants to do and was simply asking for our opinions. I have no idea why some people are getting their knickers in a twist over a simple question -- it's not like he insulted anybody's parentage or anything, yet he gets insulted and called stupid for asking such a question. If you don't like a question, hit the delete key. It does nobody any good to say that's a stupid question. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
On Feb 19, 2008, at 7:23 PM, Adam Golding wrote: yeah i indeed tried the macro route for awhile--setting things up on finale with autohotkey and whatnot--mind you, i could never find an easy way to enter smartshapes from the keyboard--i think i would have to learn the actual plugin language to do that. On the other hand, maybe i'm just so addicted to keyboard shortcuts that I can't realize that using the mouse *could* be fast too? I have the same issues with removing articulations. For removing articulations (I only mention this for other Finale users who might be unaware, as it seems not to be useful for you since you are on Sib now) when the articulation tool is selected you can hold down the Delete key and click individual articulations, or drag around entire passages across staves to remove articulations. There was a user on here a few years ago who had done his thesis on input devices, and settled on the mouse as being the most flexible overall, in addition to being much faster than people actually thought it was. For some things like entering Smart Shape crescendos, holding down the or keys and double-clicking turns out to be very quick, while for slurs it is hard to imagine a quicker way than double-click and drag. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
On Feb 19, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Adam Golding wrote: On the other hand, maybe i'm just so addicted to keyboard shortcuts that I can't realize that using the mouse *could* be fast too? I have the same issues with removing articulations. Not to dissuade you from keyboard shortcuts, but the speed of working with a mouse is highly hardware and software ballistics dependent. It can be quite fast, and it is visually intuitive. (There is no translation in your brain to understand that the keyboard shortcut is moving this thing to that place; you just visualize it and see it on the screen. I don't mean to imply that this is the only way to work but, for some, it may be quick because it is visually concrete.) A quality mouse ( I use a Logitech wireless super-duper-laser- something-or-other) and good software that makes the ballistics both fast and finely controllable go a long way to making this kind of work go smoothly. (I have Patterson Beams programmed on a mouse button: drag-enclose, or click-select, click, done - a one handed operation.) Some people find good trackballs a solution for getting across big screen areas. I used to use a terrific Kensington one and made the mistake of thinking that later versions were improvements when, in fact, they weren't. The older steel roller bearings were far superior to later teflon bearings, and I could never get the speed of response or great feel of the original pre-USB/pre-optical one. Everything about the older one suited me fine, but it became outdated, and I made the mistake of doing away with it (and the associated dongle that allowed it to communicate through a USB port). As I have said before here: I am an upgrade whore. Sometimes that works out; sometimes not. Anyway, the point is Keyboard shortcuts can be a help. I use them myself. But they don't always do everything in the most intuitive or fastest way for everyone. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Well said, David.. Peace, Bob Morabito On Feb 19, 2008, at 7:26 PM, dhbailey wrote: Eric Dannewitz wrote: Exactly. That is why it was a stupid question. I have no idea why some people are getting their knickers in a twist over a simple question -- it's not like he insulted anybody's parentage or anything, yet he gets insulted and called stupid for asking such a question. If you don't like a question, hit the delete key. It does nobody any good to say that's a stupid question. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
On Feb 19, 2008, at 4:26 PM, dhbailey wrote: If you don't like a question, hit the delete key. It does nobody any good to say that's a stupid question. I have asked a number of questions here that might have seemed (or been) stupid to anyone with more experience with the issue than I have. I am grateful for the thoughtfulness, courtesy and generosity of the responses to those questions. It makes me wish I had more to contribute. Chuck Chuck Israels 230 North Garden Terrace Bellingham, WA 98225-5836 phone (360) 671-3402 fax (360) 676-6055 www.chuckisraels.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
What, specifically, is slowing you down in Finale? My general impression is that Sibelius is still somewhat easier to learn, but expert Finale users can work more quickly and more efficiently, especially if you make full use of third-party plugins. Back when I was a regular Sibelius user (v1.4), I found Finale MUCH faster to use -- mostly due to metatools, which were a huge advantage over Sib's methods for placing things like articulations and fingering numbers, etc. But that was years ago -- I am only just now starting to re-learn Sibelius (now up to v5.1) and I'm sure there are likely more efficient ways of working now than there were back then. Cheers, - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 19 Feb 2008, at 7:23 PM, Adam Golding wrote: yeah i indeed tried the macro route for awhile--setting things up on finale with autohotkey and whatnot--mind you, i could never find an easy way to enter smartshapes from the keyboard--i think i would have to learn the actual plugin language to do that. On the other hand, maybe i'm just so addicted to keyboard shortcuts that I can't realize that using the mouse *could* be fast too? I have the same issues with removing articulations. I had originally decided to switch to finale from sibelius because of its greater playback functions (tempo-tap was a BIG deciding factor, no more having the computer coax me into abandoning rubato, and same with the detailed articulation playback options and human playback settings, and it records an audio track, and it's easy to control garritan with articulations), but after about 8 months of finding finale rather slow to use, I'm thinking, as i mentioend, of doing all my 'composing' in cubase and engraving later. Thus it might make sense to go back to faster sibelius. However if there were some way to appraoch sibelius speeds with finale it might be worth it to stay in practice with finale, in the hopes that it will 'one day' actually be the ideal sequencer/notation combination that none of these programs is... but from what you tell me, david, that's probably a pipe dream. On 19/02/2008, dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Robert Patterson wrote: Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say it is a stupid question. But it is a question that whose answer is very individual. The only reason I chime in here is to mention that if you are not making full use of 3rd-party plugins, and also using a 3rd-party keyboard macro program, you have no idea how fast you can really go with Finale. I have no idea what the relative benefits of these products with Sib are, but with Finale they are huge. (But the learning curve is steep.) There is no need for a keyboard macro program with Sibelius because all of its functions are user-definable as keyboard shortcuts. Why Finale hasn't done this is beyond me. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
But people work differently, so, say you have two people who are fluent in both, but one thinks better doing things like Finale does it, and the other thinks like how Sibelius thinks. It is really a lame question. What you really need to do, if you are really interested in it, is to download both demos, and try them out. Then YOU can figure out what works best for YOU. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in the slightest. Suppose that someone is maximally fluent in both programs--that is to say, they use each program as fast as humanly possible. It doesn't follow that they use each program at the same speed, since the maximum humanly possible speed might be different for each program. I'm pretty sure the user interface of each program imposes some upper bound. On 18/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Not in the slightest. Suppose that someone is maximally fluent in both programs--that is to say, they use each program as fast as humanly possible. It doesn't follow that they use each program at the same speed, since the maximum humanly possible speed might be different for each program. I'm pretty sure the user interface of each program imposes some upper bound. On 18/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Then stick with Sibelius. You really don't need to use TWO different programs to do notation. It would be like learning Logic and Cubase. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eric, I have used both Sibelius and Finale. Sibelius is currently faster for me, but I know it somewhat better than Finale---further practice on finale might make it faster for me, on the other hand, further practice might be futile. I agree that each program will produce different creative results if one composes directly into it, so I should clarify that I'm probalby going to start composing in Cubase and doing a score when the composition is said and done, so I'm specifically wondering about engraving speed. On 19/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But people work differently, so, say you have two people who are fluent in both, but one thinks better doing things like Finale does it, and the other thinks like how Sibelius thinks. It is really a lame question. What you really need to do, if you are really interested in it, is to download both demos, and try them out. Then YOU can figure out what works best for YOU. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in the slightest. Suppose that someone is maximally fluent in both programs--that is to say, they use each program as fast as humanly possible. It doesn't follow that they use each program at the same speed, since the maximum humanly possible speed might be different for each program. I'm pretty sure the user interface of each program imposes some upper bound. On 18/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Well, if finale could potentially be faster, it might be worth it. Users who have used both extensively and prefer finale might have some valuable workflow insights in their explanation as to why finale is faster for them. On 19/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then stick with Sibelius. You really don't need to use TWO different programs to do notation. It would be like learning Logic and Cubase. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eric, I have used both Sibelius and Finale. Sibelius is currently faster for me, but I know it somewhat better than Finale---further practice on finale might make it faster for me, on the other hand, further practice might be futile. I agree that each program will produce different creative results if one composes directly into it, so I should clarify that I'm probalby going to start composing in Cubase and doing a score when the composition is said and done, so I'm specifically wondering about engraving speed. On 19/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But people work differently, so, say you have two people who are fluent in both, but one thinks better doing things like Finale does it, and the other thinks like how Sibelius thinks. It is really a lame question. What you really need to do, if you are really interested in it, is to download both demos, and try them out. Then YOU can figure out what works best for YOU. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in the slightest. Suppose that someone is maximally fluent in both programs--that is to say, they use each program as fast as humanly possible. It doesn't follow that they use each program at the same speed, since the maximum humanly possible speed might be different for each program. I'm pretty sure the user interface of each program imposes some upper bound. On 18/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] Finale/Sibelius -- which is truly faster?
Eric, I have used both Sibelius and Finale. Sibelius is currently faster for me, but I know it somewhat better than Finale---further practice on finale might make it faster for me, on the other hand, further practice might be futile. I agree that each program will produce different creative results if one composes directly into it, so I should clarify that I'm probalby going to start composing in Cubase and doing a score when the composition is said and done, so I'm specifically wondering about engraving speed. On 19/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But people work differently, so, say you have two people who are fluent in both, but one thinks better doing things like Finale does it, and the other thinks like how Sibelius thinks. It is really a lame question. What you really need to do, if you are really interested in it, is to download both demos, and try them out. Then YOU can figure out what works best for YOU. On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not in the slightest. Suppose that someone is maximally fluent in both programs--that is to say, they use each program as fast as humanly possible. It doesn't follow that they use each program at the same speed, since the maximum humanly possible speed might be different for each program. I'm pretty sure the user interface of each program imposes some upper bound. On 18/02/2008, Eric Dannewitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't being fluent in one or the other or both really make it a moot point? On 2/18/08, Adam Golding [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can anyone fluent in both Finale 2008 and Sibelius 5 comment on which is actually faster to work in? If one isn't trying to create publishable scores, but merely trying to get scores and parts that an orchestral librarian would accept for rehearsal, I get the impression that sibelius 5 is much faster, but it's hard to tell without being fluent in both... ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
