Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 13, 2005, at 3:51 AM, dhbailey wrote: I don't think Finale is easy to use without a mouse, so I'm not sure where your comment about hoping Sibelius being easy to use without a mouse comes from. We were talking about Speedy entry with qwerty. I use the mouse a lot when tweaking layout, etc., but I enter all the music with pretty much zero mousing. That's what I like about Speedy qwerty. Back when I was active (haven't done much Finale at all lately...), I'd type for pages without a mouse, never looking at the keyboard, and barely even looking at the screen. It's like touch-typing. That's why I love Speedy qwerty. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Richard Smith wrote: These explanations are very wordy but if you play with it, I think you will find Sibelius easy to use without a midi. I work quickly on both my desktop and my laptop without midi. Just give yourself a little time to get adjusted to Sibelius before making a judgment. Finale methods won't work so you have to build new habits. What you just described is extremely similar to the Simple Entry keyboard method. Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Mark D Lew wrote: On Jul 12, 2005, at 9:18 PM, Richard Smith wrote: These explanations are very wordy but if you play with it, I think you will find Sibelius easy to use without a midi. And without a mouse, too, I hope. I work quickly on both my desktop and my laptop without midi. Just give yourself a little time to get adjusted to Sibelius before making a judgment. Finale methods won't work so you have to build new habits. Not making a judgment at all. But I'm content where I am right now and am not looking to pay money for an upgrade OR a cross-grade. I don't think Finale is easy to use without a mouse, so I'm not sure where your comment about hoping Sibelius being easy to use without a mouse comes from. Any windows/mac program will involve mousing. Perhaps you are asking about the relative amount of mousing that's required. I think that speedy entry in Finale, where you can work along without a mouse once you have clicked to enter the editing frame, and you use only the computer keyboard without the numeric keypad, isn't quite possible in Sibelius. I do know that in Sibelius you can access any of the items on the visible panel of the toolbar which resembles the numeric keypad simply by pressing the appropriate key on the numeric keypad. But this becomes a bit harder with a notebook, where you have to use the FN key to access the numeric keypad. I don't think it's insurmountable but will take some experimentation to find yourself a manageable workflow. For some, playing with the Sibelius demo to the point where actual workflow is accomplished and begins to feel comfortable may be too much effort to put into a program they aren't likely to purchase. Just as Sibelius users who may be interested in Finale will find the same level of learning required to get comfortable enough to get a realistic feel for the program to be more than they want. Just remember that you won't have a fair opinion of Sibelius, just as Sibelius users trying Finale won't have a fair opinion of Finale, and try to keep an open mind based on the many users each program has and the output from each program, much of which is ending up in professional publications. I know I have been guilty of expressing such poor opinions of Sibelius (which were undeserved at the time I expressed them, and are becoming ever less deserved as the program improves significantly with each release) and I also realize many Sibelius users have been equally guilty of expressing poor opinions of Finale which were (and remain) undeserved. They are two different programs which require different approaches to getting the notation into the computer and onto paper. The best comparison between the data-entry processes between the two programs is that they're kinda similar but different. Different enough to require relearning. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 03:52 AM 7/13/2005, you wrote: Sibelius asks that you define these properties of a note before you enter the note itself. Not true. I use Sibelius (as well as Finale) regularly, and I never input in this manner. I always enter the notes first and then everything else afterwards. Just as in Finale, it is a simple matter to do mass entry of articulations, mass copying of expressions, etc. I don't see that either program has the advantage here. Finale is a bit more flexible, but Sibelius' tremendous copy facility closes the gap quite handily. Ultimately, both programs are going to get you where you need to go. But one will put a smile on your face when you open it up every day, the other, less so. There is no predicting this. Each person has to find out for themselves, and a lively exchange of information helps this processs. I know many of you are tired of these Sibelius references on a Finale list, but the benefits overall far outweigh the inconvenience of hitting the delete key. The discussion has been informational for both programs, weeding out mis-information, and galvanizing ideas for a better version of Finale in the future, which is something we all want. In spite of some of the intense exchanges that have taken place here, I see nothing but good health here, and I will now go drink to all of yours (orange juice of course, it's a bit early in the day!). Dan Carno Daniel Carno Music Engraving Services Quality work in Sibelius, Finale, and Score 4514 Makyes Road Syracuse, New York 13215 (315) 492-2987 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 06:51 AM 7/13/05 -0400, dhbailey wrote: I think that speedy entry in Finale, where you can work along without a mouse once you have clicked to enter the editing frame, and you use only the computer keyboard without the numeric keypad, isn't quite possible in Sibelius. I see. This is the feature I use 100% for note/rest input, and once the speedy frame is chosen, I never touch the mouse except when the bass-clef bug bites. In Finale, it's time lost every time I have to use a mouselike tool (and I have a left-hand trackball and right-hand mouse and pen tablet for different purposes). I used to have a voice command interface (back in Windows 3.1), but didn't get one after moving away from the old OS. I only used the interface for Finale, actually, because I could automate most of the repetitive commands. So put a couple of strokes back in the Finale column for its computer keyboard interface. (Anybody use a voice interface under Windows? Any good?) Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Dan Carno wrote: Not true. I use Sibelius (as well as Finale) regularly, and I never input in this manner. I always enter the notes first and then everything else afterwards. Just as in Finale, it is a simple matter to do mass entry of articulations, mass copying of expressions, etc. FWIW, that wasn't what Tyler reffered to. He talked about the input mode only. The discussion has been informational for both programs, I obviously missed that part. ;-) weeding out mis-information, Not true at all! Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 06:51 AM 7/13/05 -0400, dhbailey wrote: I think that speedy entry in Finale, where you can work along without a mouse once you have clicked to enter the editing frame, and you use only the computer keyboard without the numeric keypad, isn't quite possible in Sibelius. I see. This is the feature I use 100% for note/rest input, and once the speedy frame is chosen, I never touch the mouse except when the bass-clef bug bites. Ditto here. This is probably the thing keeping me in Finale the most these days, since I find the speedy entry to be such a marvelous tool for entering data, and I just can't make my mind work in the mode required for Sibelius (or Finale's Speedy Entry, for that matter). -- Stephen L. Peters [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG fingerprint: A1BF 5A81 03E7 47CE 71E0 3BD4 8DA6 9268 5BB6 4BBE I'm through accepting limits, 'cause someone says they're so. Some things I cannot change, but 'til I try I'll never know. -- Wicked ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 13 Jul 2005 at 9:37, Jari Williamsson wrote: Richard Smith wrote: These explanations are very wordy but if you play with it, I think you will find Sibelius easy to use without a midi. I work quickly on both my desktop and my laptop without midi. Just give yourself a little time to get adjusted to Sibelius before making a judgment. Finale methods won't work so you have to build new habits. What you just described is extremely similar to the Simple Entry keyboard method. With the exception of the extraordinarily confusing entry palette that maps the keypad to 5 completely different meanings (about half the defaults being things I would never use, ever), depending on the MODE. This is a case where Sibelius is more modal than Finale, and it's a bad one, since it causes the meaning of keystroke commands to change according to something that can only be identified by looking at the screen. And it's similar to *Simple Entry*, not Speedy using the QWERTY keyboard. With the latter, you don't do nearly as much mousing, nor do you constantly have to switch modes to get to the shortcuts you want. Of course, some the keypad shortcuts switch to the kinds of modes that Finale does have (like the articulations shortcut), so it's partially as modal as Finale. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc All non-quoted content (c) David W. Fenton, all rights reserved ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
--- Dan Carno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Snip At 03:52 AM 7/13/2005, you wrote: Sibelius asks that you define these properties of a note before you enter the note itself. Not true. I use Sibelius (as well as Finale) regularly, and I never input in this manner. I always enter the notes first and then everything else afterwards. We were specifically discussing the simultaneous entry of notes and other elements. And I was talking about more than just articulations and expressions. Sibelius DOES ask you to specify the accidentals and augmentation dots before entering the notes. This is not optional unless you backtrack to the note, a method which is obviously not efficient. There are good reasons to get good in Finale at inputting some elements on the fly. I always input clef changes, time sig changes, and key changes on the fly from within Simple Entry. And with uncommon articulations and expressions - the ones that would leave me hunting back through the score to find the location of, I also enter these within Simple Entry. *F to enter a fermata is a reflex for me. As is x4 for a forte. If I'm entering a lot of articulations or dynamics, I usually enter them all at once with their respective tools. But for the occasional one, Simple Entry is faster. For anyone who uses the Speedy Entry Caps Lock (non-MIDI entry), I strongly recommend learning Simple Entry. There is just no way that Speedy can keep up with Simple for entry without a MIDI keyboard. It requires far more keystrokes. Regards, Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 04:01 PM 7/13/2005, you wrote: Sibelius DOES ask you to specify the accidentals and augmentation dots before entering the notes. This is not optional unless you backtrack to the note, a method which is obviously not efficient. Hello Tyler, Well, this brings us right back to the point I have been making for years on this list. Both programs have a combination of annoyances and features. If the features column for you is longer than the annoyances, then you make your choice and *find ways to work around the annoyances. Discussions like this help us root out those annoyances to see if there are congenial solutions. For example, in Sibelius, I have 1-key macros for each accidental aug. dots. Each macro goes back, adds the required character and flips back to entry position, waiting for the next note; as fast simple as Finale. *F to enter a fermata is a reflex for me. For me tooin BOTH Sibelius and Finale. We all can come to terms with both the Angels and the Devils in our work, one way or another. Dan Carno __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale Daniel Carno Music Engraving Services Quality work in Sibelius, Finale, and Score 4514 Makyes Road Syracuse, New York 13215 (315) 492-2987 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 9, 2005, at 8:12 AM, Ken Durling wrote: Not sure I understand this. Sib's whole basis seems to me to be basically similar to Speedy Entry, using a MIDI keyboard and the keypad. And I certainly find it speedy! I realize there are differences, but not huge. For many of us Speedy Entry means Speedy entry using the Qwerty keyboard. I assumed that's what Matthew meant. Does Sibelius have a good method of entry with the Qwerty keyboard? If not, that would be a big negative for me. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 13 Jul 2005, at 05:05, Mark D Lew wrote: For many of us Speedy Entry means Speedy entry using the Qwerty keyboard. I assumed that's what Matthew meant. Does Sibelius have a good method of entry with the Qwerty keyboard? If not, that would be a big negative for me. You can easily find the answer to a question like this by downloading the demo. Sibelius has an input method using the computer keyboard, more similar to Finale's Simple than to Speedy. Michael Cook ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Mark D. Lew asked: Does Sibelius have a good method of entry with the Qwerty keyboard? If not, that would be a big negative for me. Sibelius has always had an elegant set of keyboard entry tools They appear to have been the model for the ones introduced in Finale 2004. After an initial adjustment, I think you'll find them more versatile and more flexible than Finale's. A brief synopsis: There is tool bar that (usually, but it's moveable) hangs out at the lower right of the screen This pad is a visual representation of the ten key pad of the full size keyboard. Users may select with a mouse, directly from the ten key (if present) or program their own keyboard shortcut. This pad contains rhythms, articulations, bowings, ect. They are easy to select. Highlight a measure or a beat by a mouse click (no speedy entry window is needed), select a rhythm (it will stay elected until another selection is made) type a pitch from the keyboard (or touch a midi key), and the note is entered. You can navigate between notes with the left and right arrows. While a note is highlighted, it can be moved up or down with the arrow keys, displaced an octave (ctrl arrow up or down), re-pitched by re-entering the keyboard pitch, added to with the top row number keys (3 adds a third up, shift 3 a third down, 4 a fourth up, ect), and repeated by pressing R. Back space creates a rest from a note. Articulations, bowings, accidentals, grace notes, tremolos, ect. can all be added to a highlighted note(s) with a single touch to the ten key pad. Just remember that if the mouse cursor is blue, it's loaded and if you click it, it will drop it's load. Escape will unload it and ctrl-z will undo any accidents. Sibelius copies and pastes quickly. Any highlighted note, other musical element, or passage can be pasted either with standard windows copy commands (ctrl c,x,v) or even easier by pressing the middle mouse button (or wheel) while pointing to the new location with the mouse. The same thing can be done by pressing the left and right mouse buttons simultaneously. To copy with the mouse you may make an easily found change in the preferences menu but I think Sib 4 uses the middle button copy as the default. Usually the best method for Sibelius is enter data once, copy, paste and edit. These explanations are very wordy but if you play with it, I think you will find Sibelius easy to use without a midi. I work quickly on both my desktop and my laptop without midi. Just give yourself a little time to get adjusted to Sibelius before making a judgment. Finale methods won't work so you have to build new habits. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 12, 2005, at 9:18 PM, Richard Smith wrote: These explanations are very wordy but if you play with it, I think you will find Sibelius easy to use without a midi. And without a mouse, too, I hope. I work quickly on both my desktop and my laptop without midi. Just give yourself a little time to get adjusted to Sibelius before making a judgment. Finale methods won't work so you have to build new habits. Not making a judgment at all. But I'm content where I am right now and am not looking to pay money for an upgrade OR a cross-grade. mdl ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
We've been doing this as long as I can remember... On 7/10/05 4:33 AM, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] said this: I'm afraid you are sorely mistaken: http://www.finalemusic.com/store/specialoffers.aspx ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
And very cynical Americans... On 7/10/05 4:59 PM, Christopher Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] said this: Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. -- Allen J. Fisher Quality Assurance Developer MakeMusic! Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.makemusic.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:59 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Sheesh, everyone! It was a JOKE! Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. Maybe it's something about the e-mail medium, but except for puns and items with clear joke markers in their phrasing, jokes I get on this list always go right past me. In this case, I thought Chris had inadevertently written Finale when he meant Sibelius. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 11, 2005, at 10:41 AM, Andrew Stiller wrote: On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:59 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Sheesh, everyone! It was a JOKE! Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. Maybe it's something about the e-mail medium, but except for puns and items with clear joke markers in their phrasing, jokes I get on this list always go right past me. In this case, I thought Chris Lawrence. Darcy and I are the Canadians who got the joke, Lawrence Yates is the British dude who made the joke. had inadevertently written Finale when he meant Sibelius. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
That was exactly my thought, too, and I was trying to be funny - well that didn't quite work... Johannes Andrew Stiller schrieb: On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:59 PM, Christopher Smith wrote: Sheesh, everyone! It was a JOKE! Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. Maybe it's something about the e-mail medium, but except for puns and items with clear joke markers in their phrasing, jokes I get on this list always go right past me. In this case, I thought Chris had inadevertently written Finale when he meant Sibelius. Andrew Stiller Kallisti Music Press http://home.netcom.com/~kallisti/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 11/07/05, Allen Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/10/05 4:33 AM, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] said this: I'm afraid you are sorely mistaken: http://www.finalemusic.com/store/specialoffers.aspx We've been doing this as long as I can remember... However, it isn't as aggressively marketed as a Sibelius trade-up. Sure, Sibelius is in the small-print list of products that can be traded in, but there's no large-print TRADE UP FROM SIBELIUS NOW! banner on the front page of finalemusic.com like the aimed-sqarely-at-Finale offer from Sibelius. I'm sure Sibelius offers trade-in offers for many other notation products as well, but they're very much trying specifically to get Finale users to switch. -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] my blog: http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com Life would be so much easier if only (3/2)^12=(2/1)^7. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 7/9/05, Noel Stoutenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is also the issue of just how accurate Sibelius' claim of 1 users switching from Finale to Sibelius really is. I would expect that it is true that 1 users took advantage of the competitive upgrade; however, this was painless, as C/N/M keeps track of their own user base and ships out upgrades based upon its own records, there is no penalty to sending in the distribution CD (especially if you send in an older redundant version, or first burn a back-up copy). Several years ago I sent in the required cd/title-page (whatever) and received a competitive upgrade to Sibelius. (I sent in the previous year's CD, so I didn't need to burn a copy or anything. In general, I don't burn copies except for FLOSS software, where it is the norm.) I would also note that in the various forums in which I participate, since the first of the year, I have seen by actual count, a dozen different users who wrote to the lists, saying that they had originally used Finale, had switched to Sibelius, been disenchanted, and had switched back to using Finale because of Sibelius' shortcomings. I don't know that I became disenchanted (per se), but (because my composition projects are very irregular) several months passed after the upgrade to Sibelius. When I needed to engrave something, I needed to do it in a hurry, and Finale was what I knew best. Since that time, I have upgraded my Win/XP computer, and noticed the other day that I hadn't reinstalled Sibelius. (In the back of my mind I seem to recall that I had to phone Sibelius when I activated my upgrade version, and decided that I wasn't up to waiting on hold for awhile, then trying to convince them that I'm not a thief, that I really did upgrade my Duron 800 to an Athlon64, etc., etc. ... So my Sibelius CD remains on the shelf. I guess that means I'm not really a Sibelius convert ( ... yet?). --T ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Technoid said: Since that time, I have upgraded my Win/XP computer, and noticed the other day that I hadn't reinstalled Sibelius. (In the back of my mind I seem to recall that I had to phone Sibelius when I activated my upgrade version, and decided that I wasn't up to waiting on hold for awhile, then trying to convince them that I'm not a thief, that I really did upgrade my Duron 800 to an Athlon64, etc., etc. ... So my Sibelius CD remains on the shelf. There's no long wait or intense explanation. They are very nice and the process is usually fast and painless. Richard Smith www.rgsmithmusic.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 10 Jul 2005, at 12:22 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: First, while Sibelius offered a competitive discount to Finale owners, to my knowledge, C/N/M has never offered Sibelius users a competitive discount. I'm afraid you are sorely mistaken: http://www.finalemusic.com/store/specialoffers.aspx Now, owners of most notation programs can trade in their master disk and get Finale for only $199! The following programs apply: Encore, Rhapsody, Overture, Cubase Score, Sibelius, Score, Mosaic, MusicPrinter Plus, Musicator, Nightingale, Notion and FreeStyle. Sequencing software such as Cakewalk, Performer, Logic, Cubase, MasterTracks Pro and Vision do not qualify. Download the Finale Competitive Trade-up Order Form Mail the form, your Master Disk from a qualifying program and send to MakeMusic! This is exactly the same price Sibelius offers to Finale users. I believe Coda introduced this offer shortly after Sib introduced their own competitive cross-grade price. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
However, from reading your post it seems there is a small but important difference: with Finale you have to hand in your Sibelius master disk. As far as I understood the Sibelius offer does not require this, it just requires proof of ownership. Perhaps I am wrong? Johannes Darcy James Argue schrieb: On 10 Jul 2005, at 12:22 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: First, while Sibelius offered a competitive discount to Finale owners, to my knowledge, C/N/M has never offered Sibelius users a competitive discount. I'm afraid you are sorely mistaken: http://www.finalemusic.com/store/specialoffers.aspx Now, owners of most notation programs can trade in their master disk and get Finale for only $199! The following programs apply: Encore, Rhapsody, Overture, Cubase Score, Sibelius, Score, Mosaic, MusicPrinter Plus, Musicator, Nightingale, Notion and FreeStyle. Sequencing software such as Cakewalk, Performer, Logic, Cubase, MasterTracks Pro and Vision do not qualify. Download the Finale Competitive Trade-up Order Form Mail the form, your Master Disk from a qualifying program and send to MakeMusic! This is exactly the same price Sibelius offers to Finale users. I believe Coda introduced this offer shortly after Sib introduced their own competitive cross-grade price. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
John Howell wrote: At 9:28 AM -0500 7/9/05, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't the fundamental problem here that the pie is not getting bigger? Sibelius had the luxury of learning from Finale's mistakes. Its original features list was a litany of Finale's (then) shortcomings. Apparently its entire reason for existing and strategy for growth was to be the answer to Finale's problems. I can't tell you how many Sib users who have told me flat-out this was their reason for using Sibelius: notably Sib's posterchild, John Rutter. I ask this quite honestly because I don't know the answer. Was there actually a situation of competition with Finale in the UK when Sibelius was being developed? Or was it simply a case of parallel development? As I recall, Sibelius was originally developed for a computer platform only used in the UK--Acorn?--and thus had no possible market in the U.S., while Finale had no version that could compete on that platform. You may be completely correct if you're talking about what they did when they were preparing their Windoze and Mac versions, bringing them directly into competition with Finale, but it doesn't seem that the original impetus to develop the program was direct competition. You're accurate in your depiction, John. But the Acorn market was way too small a market for the company to grow with and they needed to get into the Windows and Mac markets, which is why they made the switch. There are still complaints on the Sibelius list from long-time Sibelius users, who were using the Acorn version concerning some things which were possible on that version but aren't possible yet on the Win/Mac version of Sibelius. But it was obvious from the first Win/Mac version of Sibelius that they were aiming at the disgruntled Finale user or those who had stayed away in droves due to the hard learning curve of the early versions of Finale. The Finn brothers actively marketed version 1 of Sibelius for Win/Mac to such a user base. And it worked, it worked very well and forced Finale to play catchup. Other than Staff Styles, I can't think of any recent major upgrade to Finale that hasn't seemed to be a response to Sibelius features. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Robert Patterson wrote: [snip] I don't agree about a big showdown. Both programs will more likely stumble and muddle along in their respective directions. Honestly, I can't believe so many grown adults are so worked up over software marketing hype (which sfaict is the only thing anyone has seen about these linked parts). [snip] The linked parts aren't just marketing hype -- they're actually working in the demo version. You can even enter your own score and use the linked parts, it's not some hocus-pocus of marketing hype, the way that demos of things like MicNotator were (has anybody ever gotten that to work efficiently and accurately?) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Robert Patterson wrote: [snip] There was that ultra-expensive Synclavier system that some were working on in Dartmouth in the early eighties. This certainly predated Finale, and it may have been a precursor to Sib. But I don't think it bore much resemblance to the Mac/Win program that came out in the 90s. The folks who developped the Synclavier system, if I remember correctly, are the same folks who developped Graphire Music Press. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes Gebauer wrote: However, from reading your post it seems there is a small but important difference: with Finale you have to hand in your Sibelius master disk. As far as I understood the Sibelius offer does not require this, it just requires proof of ownership. Perhaps I am wrong? All I had to do for my cross-grade to Sibelius was send in the original first page of my Finale manual, not the installation CD. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Noel Stoutenburg wrote: I have not explored in any detail, the Sibelius software patents, and if there are any that relate to items like dynamic parts linking, or house styles I have no inside knowledge, but I think it is highly unlikely MM will be hesitant to implement dynamic parts linking due to patents. The prior art already existed in Mosaic, and anyway it is an idea that has been around longer than any of them, in spreadsheets for example. (Multiple views of the same data.) I am also skeptical that any meaningful patent prevents Finale from implementing house styles. Without knowing anything about Sib's structure, I nevertheless feel confident in asserting they are probably utterly different. I suspect house styles were designed in for Sibelius whereas for Finale I know they were not. Finale's best answer to house styles will likely be some expanded form of control over its libraries along (perhaps) with soft-assignment of attributes. (The only such soft assignment feature now is the music font in FinMac, which appears at the top of the font list. FinWin does not have this feature.) The barriers to both D.P. and H.S. are almost certainly technical and financial rather than legal. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
dhbailey schrieb: Johannes Gebauer wrote: However, from reading your post it seems there is a small but important difference: with Finale you have to hand in your Sibelius master disk. As far as I understood the Sibelius offer does not require this, it just requires proof of ownership. Perhaps I am wrong? All I had to do for my cross-grade to Sibelius was send in the original first page of my Finale manual, not the installation CD. That confirms what I am saying, no? Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
To my comment, First, while Sibelius offered a competitive discount to Finale owners, to my knowledge, C/N/M has never offered Sibelius users a competitive discount. Darcy James Argue wrote: I'm afraid you are sorely mistaken: to which I can only note, that it's not the first time I've experienced the mistaken feeling. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 10 Jul 2005, at 13:53, dhbailey wrote: Why not let the Finale developers spend a bit more time on each upgrade (as it was in the older days) and give us a more substantial upgrade? They could charge a bit more (like Sibelius does) for each of their non-regular upgrades, to provide essentially the same income flow, just spaced out differently and providing upgrades which are more appealing to a larger number of Finale users. That sounds like an excellent idea. For each upgrade the developers have to take large portions of the program apart and put them back together again, having integrated the new features. I think a lot of the development time is spent just making the old features work again. For a small development team working on a program as complicated as Finale, an update a year is just not efficient. Put very roughly: with a yearly cycle, the developers might be spending about 6 months on the taking apart and putting back together phases and 6 months on developing the new features. With a two year-cycle, they might still be spending about 6 months on the taking apart and putting back together phases but they'd have 18 months for developing the new features. There's another thing to consider: many users prefer not to purchase the upgrade every year anyway: they will wait another year or two until the latest version really seems to represent a substantial improvement on the one they're using. My bet is that MakeMusic would gain in the long run by not releasing a Finale 2007 next year and bringing out a real must-have update a year or so later. Michael Cook ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, All the best, Lawrence "þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg"http://lawrenceyates.co.ukDulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, All the best, You've joined it, this message came through it. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
RE: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 7:05 PM To: finale@shsu.edu Subject: Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question... Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, All the best, Lawrence þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg http://lawrenceyates.co.uk Dulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Michael Cook schrieb: My bet is that MakeMusic would gain in the long run by not releasing a Finale 2007 next year and bringing out a real must-have update a year or so later. I would agree with you, except that I think MakeMusic cannot afford to let Fin2k6 stand against Sibelius 4 for two years with the danger of having to compete against Sibelius 5 with the next update. Sibelius 4 is going to make a huge impression, and MakeMusic has to work really hard in my opinion to catch up with 2k7. I have seen too many software wars end like this. One competitor comes out with that bit of edge over the other, and the other one reacts to slowly. Market gone. One more update, then abandoned software. Happens all the time. Now is not the time to put in a years rest. Next year maybe. But 2k6 is not enough of an update to last for two years. No way. On a much smaller scale I am currently seeing something similar happening with two competitors on the sync with PocketPC market. I bought this application in March. When Tiger came out it became incompatible. The update was promised for June. The competitor came out in May. The update has still not surfaced. Lots of people are jumping ship. I am going to buy the competitor next week unless they deliver. If I make that step I am gone, and will never look at that piece of software again. Lost customer. Bad publicity. No new customers. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
What? You mean another one? Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, All the best, Lawrence þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg http://lawrenceyates.co.uk http://lawrenceyates.co.uk/ Dulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk http://dulcianwind.co.uk/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Guys, Lawrence was making a JOKE -- that with all the recent Siblelius talk, one might think this was a Sibelius list. (Kinda spoils the joke if you have to explain it.) - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 10 Jul 2005, at 4:06 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: What? You mean another one? Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, All the best, Lawrence þaes ofereode - þisses swa maeg http://lawrenceyates.co.uk http://lawrenceyates.co.uk/ Dulcian Wind Quintet: http://dulcianwind.co.uk http://dulcianwind.co.uk/ -- -- ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 9 Jul 2005 at 23:22, Noel Stoutenburg wrote: It occurs to me, too, that there is an aspect to some of these things that may affect certain items. I have not explored in any detail, the Sibelius software patents, and if there are any that relate to items like dynamic parts linking, or house styles, it may be that MakeMusic! may choose to ignore these items for the duration of the patent, rather than risk an expensive lawsuit in which they are charged with infringement. Er, is the Dynamic Parts featured patented, not just trademarked as a term? If so, it seems that it's a bad patent, given that there was prior art long before Sibeilus even existed. Where do you get the patent idea related to dynamic parts? -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
dhbailey wrote: They've already reduced their development department for Finale so they could put more developers to work on MakeMusic. Can you please include some proof to this statement? Best regards, Jari Williamsson ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is wonderful for the continued growth and survival of MakeMusic, but it doesn't bode so well for Finale, I'm afraid. They've already reduced their development department for Finale so they could put more developers to work on MakeMusic. One thing that I am surprised at, though, is their continued upgrade-a-year scheduling for Finale, since they've got a great subscription model working well to guarantee an income flow for SmartMusic. Why not let the Finale developers spend a bit more time on each upgrade (as it was in the older days) and give us a more substantial upgrade? They could charge a bit more (like Sibelius does) for each of their non-regular upgrades, to provide essentially the same income flow, just spaced out differently and providing upgrades which are more appealing to a larger number of Finale users. I think they've actually increased the number of people on the Finale development staff. Regarding SmartMusic eventually supporting the development of Finale, I believe that's still the plan. Tyler Sell on Yahoo! Auctions no fees. Bid on great items. http://auctions.yahoo.com/ ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On Jul 10, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: What? You mean another one? Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, Sheesh, everyone! It was a JOKE! Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 10 Jul 2005 at 20:58, Michael Cook wrote: [re: non-annual upgrades of Finale:] There's another thing to consider: many users prefer not to purchase the upgrade every year anyway: they will wait another year or two until the latest version really seems to represent a substantial improvement on the one they're using. Yes, you're right. For occasional upgraders like me, with a higher price for the non-annual upgrade, they'd be getting more revenue from me. But I wouldn't necessarily regret that *if* the longer development time allowed them to make bigger changes to Finale. I'd pay more money for a couple of areas being completely redesigned/re-engineered to get rid of long-term problems plus a lot of small incremental improvements, vs. the current situation where I wait several years until the number of small incremental improvements accumulates to a point where it seems worth the upgrade price. If the longer development time allowed them to be more ambitious in the evolution of Finale, I'd be glad to pay more. How much more, well, that's a different story. Currently I've been paying $150 or so. Raising that to $200 is probably not going to be an issue. Anything more than that starts approaching the price I paid for the full educational discount back in 1991 ($250). I don't know what the current educational discount price for the full version is, but that's going to be an upper limit on the price for the non-annual upgrade. They may have backed themselves into a corner by overpricing the yearly upgrades, so that they have no way to actually maintain revenues on a non-annual upgrade cycle. Secondly, all you folks who've always advocated paying the yearly upgrade price have trained MakeMusic to stay on a yearly upgrade cycle, which it is pretty clear doesn't allow them the time to implement major improvements. If fewer people purchased the yearly upgrades out of the sense of duty that so many of you claim, then they would have less motivation to continue yearly upgrades. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associateshttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Jari Williamsson wrote: dhbailey wrote: They've already reduced their development department for Finale so they could put more developers to work on MakeMusic. Can you please include some proof to this statement? I can't recall the exact message from a few years ago in which it was stated by a MakeMusic employee who was resident on this list until he no longer worked for them. I can't provide proof, so if it pleases you I will withdraw the statement as so much blowing into the wind on my part. -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
I thought it was a great joke!! :-) Rick Neal Christopher Smith wrote: On Jul 10, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: What? You mean another one? Johannes [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb: Does anyone have an address for a Finale mailing list? I have some questions I'd like to ask, Sheesh, everyone! It was a JOKE! Maybe it was a dry British-type joke that only they and Canadians get, but it WAS a joke. Christopher ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale -- Rick Neal Teacher, Composer, Bassist, Guitarist [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
After quoting a bit of my comments, including It occurs to me, too, that there is an aspect to some of these things that may affect certain items. I have not explored in any detail, the Sibelius software patents, and if there are any that relate to items like dynamic parts linking, or house styles, it may be that MakeMusic! may choose to ignore these items for the duration of the patent, rather than risk an expensive lawsuit in which they are charged with infringement. David Fenon wrote Er, is the Dynamic Parts featured patented, not just trademarked as a term? If so, it seems that it's a bad patent, given that there was prior art long before Sibeilus even existed. Where do you get the patent idea related to dynamic parts? I wrote my comments about software patents because I thought I rememberd a list of patents in Finale related materials. I cannot find it in the places I would expect to find it now, though, so perhaps the malaise I've been feeling stems from my sorely mistaken again. So, I'll concede that maybe there are not held either by Finale or Sibelius, and that this is a non issue for that reason. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes Gebauer wrote: Can someone remind me why I _shouldn't_ switch to Sibelius? Seems like it much more fulfills the promises of CAE (computer aided engraving...). My quick 2c: - No scroll view in Sibelius. Having the last bars on the page jump around I find intensely irritating. Also as one of the Davids here said, it makes it more difficult to select different things. - Very few metatools for things like time signatures, which are a big time-saver in Finale. Mind you if you're dealing mostly with baroque music you may not need such things... Also the option-click to copy function in Sibelius is great. - The time signature function in Sibelius is actually pretty clunky from what I can see if you need them to change a lot. - No Sibelius Notepad. - No Speedy Entry in Sibelius. - You can't undo plugins (this is truly bizarre IMHO - what application doesn't have an Undo for some of its functions?). - No TGTools Staff List Manager or TGTools Cue Notes function in Sibelius. - No graphic expression editor in Sibelius like in Finale. - You might not have time to learn another application to the standard to which you currently know Finale. - There is no rhyming dictionary in Sibelius ;-) (Funnily enough I needed to use this the other day). I think that it would still depend on your notational needs though. I wonder if you could make something as beautiful as your quasi-Henle scores using Sibelius? That would be the real test? It's interesting though, if I had to make a prediction about which application will still be around in 5-10 years, I think it would be Sibelius. It's caught up in most areas to Finale and in some areas, such as House Styles, its Setup Wizard and the new Dynamic Parts, has well and truly surpassed it. Matthew -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/44 - Release Date: 8/07/2005 ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Can someone remind me why I _shouldn't_ switch to Sibelius? Seems like it much more fulfills the promises of CAE (computer aided engraving...). My music school gave me Sibelius 3, including a five lesson course in how to use it. I was excited and prepared really well for the first lesson: scanned a piece and edited it, imported a file from Finale and edited it and finally I input a piece from scratch. I included lute tablature, something I am particularly interested in, and classical guitar music (many voices on one staff). Working with Sibelius was all rather straightforward, no big problems, but I didn't have that much influence on the final appearance of the piece as I have with Finale. I encountered some things I couldn't do and a number of things that didn't look right on the page, so I had a list of questions for the first lesson. The guy who was teaching answered me on every question: what you want cannot be done in Sibelius. All of my problems can easily be solved with Finale, however. My impression was that Sibelius is fine as long as you're happy with the choices Sibelius makes for you, but if you want something different from standard you'd better give it up. Not much room for workarounds. So, back to Finale. But at least I tried, and I did like the 'feel' of the program. I think I will use it for some simple music-for-pupils jobs. David * David van Ooijen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Http://home.planet.nl/~d.v.ooijen/ * ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Isn't the fundamental problem here that the pie is not getting bigger? Sibelius had the luxury of learning from Finale's mistakes. Its original features list was a litany of Finale's (then) shortcomings. Apparently its entire reason for existing and strategy for growth was to be the answer to Finale's problems. I can't tell you how many Sib users who have told me flat-out this was their reason for using Sibelius: notably Sib's posterchild, John Rutter. So Sibelius has growth potential as long as there is a large number of Finale users. (I almost said dissatisfied Finale users, but that seems to go without saying.) :-) Meanwhile, I suspect Finale has a poor track record of stealing users from Sibelius. I do not say this because I think Sib is better or worse. I'm just reporting my personal impressions of fact. If it is true, then Finale's only potential for growth is to grow their market, and that growth will not happen in the pure notation arena. I believe Finale's fundamental dilemma is manifest in their upgrades of late. They are diversifying Finale and integrating it with a suite of products, notably Smart Music. (Smart Music is an amazing educational tool and is potentially if not actually the crown jewel in MM's portfolio.) I would not be surprised to see them develop or buy an audio/midi program (or integrate closely with a 3rd party) and move into that domain. If MM's strategy works, then Finale will be around a long, long time. However, it may no longer be the program of choice for high-end engravers. (Although that remains to be seen as well.) In any case, much as I personally wish MM would stick to notation needs for Finale, I believe MM has chosen the best (perhaps only) strategy with which they can grow and prosper. Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote: ...if I had to make a prediction about which application will still be around in 5-10 years, I think it would be Sibelius. It's caught up in most areas to Finale and in some areas, such as House Styles, its Setup Wizard and the new Dynamic Parts, has well and truly surpassed it. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 9:28 AM -0500 7/9/05, Robert Patterson wrote: Isn't the fundamental problem here that the pie is not getting bigger? Sibelius had the luxury of learning from Finale's mistakes. Its original features list was a litany of Finale's (then) shortcomings. Apparently its entire reason for existing and strategy for growth was to be the answer to Finale's problems. I can't tell you how many Sib users who have told me flat-out this was their reason for using Sibelius: notably Sib's posterchild, John Rutter. I ask this quite honestly because I don't know the answer. Was there actually a situation of competition with Finale in the UK when Sibelius was being developed? Or was it simply a case of parallel development? As I recall, Sibelius was originally developed for a computer platform only used in the UK--Acorn?--and thus had no possible market in the U.S., while Finale had no version that could compete on that platform. You may be completely correct if you're talking about what they did when they were preparing their Windoze and Mac versions, bringing them directly into competition with Finale, but it doesn't seem that the original impetus to develop the program was direct competition. John -- John Susie Howell Virginia Tech Department of Music Blacksburg, Virginia, U.S.A 24061-0240 Vox (540) 231-8411 Fax (540) 231-5034 (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.music.vt.edu/faculty/howell/howell.html ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Matthew, this is a pretty good list. I wish I knew a bit more (learning) about some of the features in Finale that you mention as I think some things are there in different form. A few comments. At 06:48 AM 7/9/2005, you wrote: My quick 2c: - No scroll view in Sibelius. Having the last bars on the page jump around I find intensely irritating. Also as one of the Davids here said, it makes it more difficult to select different things. The jumping around thing, which i agree is a kludge, has workarounds. Basically i just set the page justification to off, or a very high value, when working on anything with touchy formatting. I'm not sure yet how useful I'd find scroll view because when entering music I'm almost always thinking about page layout - how the final product will look. - Very few metatools for things like time signatures, which are a big time-saver in Finale. Mind you if you're dealing mostly with baroque music you may not need such things... Also the option-click to copy function in Sibelius is great. - The time signature function in Sibelius is actually pretty clunky from what I can see if you need them to change a lot. One of my most-often requested changes. It IS clunky, and I use changing sigs frequently. A user-definable list of other time sigs would seem to me to solve the problem. - No Sibelius Notepad. - No Speedy Entry in Sibelius. Not sure I understand this. Sib's whole basis seems to me to be basically similar to Speedy Entry, using a MIDI keyboard and the keypad. And I certainly find it speedy! I realize there are differences, but not huge. - You can't undo plugins (this is truly bizarre IMHO - what application doesn't have an Undo for some of its functions?). No and I don't know enough about how plug-ins alter the file structure to have an inkling of why this is so. Some, quite a few, of them create the operation in a new file. But it's easy enough to work around with file versions, save as, and Save changes? responses. - No TGTools Staff List Manager or TGTools Cue Notes function in Sibelius. - No graphic expression editor in Sibelius like in Finale. - You might not have time to learn another application to the standard to which you currently know Finale. Right. I'm experiencing the reverse. But it's my summer project - to get a little further that is. - There is no rhyming dictionary in Sibelius ;-) (Funnily enough I needed to use this the other day). I think that it would still depend on your notational needs though. I wonder if you could make something as beautiful as your quasi-Henle scores using Sibelius? That would be the real test? I know quite a few major publishers are using Sibelius, as they also do Finale and Score. It would be interesting to have a list of what editions were done with which. Ken ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Robert Patterson schrieb: If MM's strategy works, then Finale will be around a long, long time. However, it may no longer be the program of choice for high-end engravers. (Although that remains to be seen as well.) In any case, much as I personally wish MM would stick to notation needs for Finale, I believe MM has chosen the best (perhaps only) strategy with which they can grow and prosper. I personally doubt that very much. What I see will happen is this: The main package will be SmartMusic, which includes Finale or parts of Finale as a notation editor. This will secure MakeMusic the educational market, but not in the notation field, where Sibelius has already taken over (perhaps not in numbers but with the V4 update certainly in fame). With MM's current strategies I see no future for Finale as an engraving tool. Currently Sibelius may still have shortcomings in certain areas where Finale works well. But the Sibelius people will do anything to correct them for the next big update, and that's going to be when the market is going to decide who is going to win the run. Chances are it won't be Finale. I am also worried from another perspective: I fear that Sibelius is already taking so much of the market away from Finale that MM will stop the Mac development. Perhaps not in the next two years, but I somewhat doubt that by that time there is enough of a Finale Mac market to justify the move to Intel. So, whether I like it or not, I have to look around and actually hope that Sibelius improves even more, so that by that time it will be a good alternative for me. You are correct that Sibelius's claim to have won however many Finale users doesn't really say much. There used to be a market dominated by Finale (by almost 100%). Then Sibelius cut in and took away some percentage. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Finale came out in (I believe) 1988, and it should immediately or very quickly have been available in the UK. It had regular upgrades until about 1991, then it vanished until about 1994. I first began hearing about Sibelius (running on Acorn) in the early nineties. The first set of features for Sib I ever saw was a litany of c. 1994 Finale shortcomings. (My impression from talking to Rutter was that he switched from Finale to Sib in mid-90s, but I may have been mistaken.) BTW: this was true of *every* Finale competitor, not just Sib. Igor and Graphire feature lists also read as litanies of Finale shortcomings. The only exception I can think of is SCORE, which was a completely different beast and certainly predated Finale anyway. There was that ultra-expensive Synclavier system that some were working on in Dartmouth in the early eighties. This certainly predated Finale, and it may have been a precursor to Sib. But I don't think it bore much resemblance to the Mac/Win program that came out in the 90s. I have never spoken with the brothers Finn, so my comments derive mostly from observations of their marketing materials and spokespersons during the time since they in fact came into competition with Finale. BTW: In all fairness, Finale v1.0's feature list read as a litany of shortcomings of Professional Composer. It's a short road that never turns. MOTU took a stab at keeping up with Mosaic, but ultimately that technology ended up as an ancillary in DP, where it lives on to this day. (I can still open my old ProCo files in DP, well enough to play them and to export them as MIDI files.) MM may be headed down a similar path as MOTU. A great path for the company but perhaps not so great for Finale. OTOH, Finale is top-quality program, so history may not take the same turns. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
The Synclavier system was the basis for Graphire, IIRC. Is Graphire being produced/supported?? - Original Message - From: Robert Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: finale@shsu.edu Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 10:30 AM Subject: Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question... about 1991, then it vanished until about 1994. I first began hearing about Sibelius (running on Acorn) in the early nineties. The first set of features for Sib I ever saw was a litany of c. 1994 Finale shortcomings. (My impression from talking to Rutter was that he switched from Finale to Sib in mid-90s, but I may have been mistaken.) BTW: this was true of *every* Finale competitor, not just Sib. Igor and Graphire feature lists also read as litanies of Finale shortcomings. There was that ultra-expensive Synclavier system that some were working on in Dartmouth in the early eighties. This certainly predated Finale, and it may have been a precursor to Sib. But I don't think it bore much resemblance to the Mac/Win program that came out in the 90s. I have never spoken with the brothers Finn, so my comments derive mostly from observations of their marketing materials and spokespersons during the time since they in fact came into competition with Finale. BTW: In all fairness, Finale v1.0's feature list read as a litany of shortcomings of Professional Composer. It's a short road that never turns. MOTU took a stab at keeping up with Mosaic, but ultimately that technology ended up as an ancillary in DP, where it lives on to this day. (I can still open my old ProCo files in DP, well enough to play them and to export them as MIDI files.) MM may be headed down a similar path as MOTU. A great path for the company but perhaps not so great for Finale. OTOH, Finale is top-quality program, so history may not take the same turns. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ 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] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes Gebauer wrote: This will secure MakeMusic the educational market, but not in the notation field, where Sibelius has already taken over (perhaps not in numbers but with the V4 update certainly in fame). This seems overly pessimistic to me. Sib is a strong competitor. It looks like it is winning because its only option is to leech off Finale users. When it succeeds, it looks like it is doing better. But there are still many Finale users. With MM's current strategies I see no future for Finale as an engraving tool. But it has such a glorious present as one that I don't foresee a mass abandonment any time soon. Mosaic had linked scores and parts, but that didn't keep Finale from trouncing it. I'm not saying linked scores and parts are not important, but I just don't think they are the be-all and end-all. For much of the work I do, I doubt I could use them in Sib. Meanwhile, Sibelius still (apparently) limits your ability to make the score look the way you want it to. This has been my biggest concern with adopting it, and I would think it would be yours as well. Furthermore, the attitude I've seen in the past from Sib insiders has been very arrogant that they know the right way and alternate opinions are wrong. If that attitude persists, can they possibly win over serious notators and engravers? I don't agree about a big showdown. Both programs will more likely stumble and muddle along in their respective directions. Honestly, I can't believe so many grown adults are so worked up over software marketing hype (which sfaict is the only thing anyone has seen about these linked parts). I am also worried from another perspective: I fear that Sibelius is already taking so much of the market away from Finale that MM will stop the Mac development. I almost hope that happens. Then I could abandon Steve Jobs and his cut-the-feet-out-from-under-me arrogance without a backwards glance. Honestly the main reason I remain on Mac is that FinWin still has an MDI container window, which means that multi-monitor use is quite awkward and constrained. -- Robert Patterson http://RobertGPatterson.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 09 Jul 2005, at 12:10 PM, Robert Patterson wrote: Honestly, I can't believe so many grown adults are so worked up over software marketing hype (which sfaict is the only thing anyone has seen about these linked parts). Robert -- the Sibelius 4 demo is available NOW. It was immediately available on the day Sib 4 was announced. Some of us grown adults have been testing Dynamic Parts and other Sib 4 features for days now. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
--- Robert Patterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Isn't the fundamental problem here that the pie is not getting bigger? To some extent this is true. The number of people interested in a professional notation product increases somewhat slowly. The biggest source might be in the form of incoming and graduating college students. At the same time, MakeMusic has had success in getting their child products in the hands of an increasingly large crowd. PrintMusic has been amazingly popular, and I think it's the only MakeMusic product I've ever seen in the major retail chains like Comp USA. And I agree with you about SmartMusic. The program is experiencing a very respectable growth (something like a 70% increase over the last year I believe). And I think we're going to see that explode in the future. I believe SmartMusic will be used by millions in the not-too-distant future. Tyler __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 08/07/05, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Download the demo, read the manual, try inputting a page of music. I tried out the Sib4 demo, and while the dynamic parts is really cool (based on tests that were fairly superficial) I still felt stymied in my attempts at numeric control over positioning. It seems that Sibelius requires you to manipulate almost all of your positioning by eye, where Finale has setting upon setting to allow you to specify exact measurements for distances. In particular, I find Sibelius's system for implementing staff names completely inadequate, especially when including a 1/2 (vertically, no slash) for multi-part staves. In Finale I can specify exactly how far from the staff to place these numbers, whether to align them on the left or the right, etc. While Sibelius seems attractive on the surface, I could never deal with the intense we know better than you do; and we won't even tell you how we're doing it approach inherent in its placement of musical and textual elements. -- Brad Beyenhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] my blog: http://augmentedfourth.blogspot.com Life would be so much easier if only (3/2)^12=(2/1)^7. ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 10:36 AM 7/9/05 -0500, Jim wrote: The Synclavier system was the basis for Graphire, IIRC. Is Graphire being produced/supported?? No. It has a support group, but no active development. Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
At 10:30 AM 7/9/05 -0500, Robert Patterson wrote: There was that ultra-expensive Synclavier system that some were working on in Dartmouth in the early eighties. That was what was renamed Graphire when the programmer took it independent. It predated Finale, and was never to my knowledge marketed as a competitor until its waning days. Dennis ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Robert Patterson wrote: Meanwhile, I suspect Finale has a poor track record of stealing users from Sibelius. I do not say this because I think Sib is better or worse. I'm just reporting my personal impressions of fact. I would submit that there are two additional reasons Sibelius did a better job of stealing customers form Coda / Net4Music / MakeMusic! than C/N/M did in stealing customers from Sibelius, besides the reasons Robert mentioned. First, while Sibelius offered a competitive discount to Finale owners, to my knowledge, C/N/M has never offered Sibelius users a competitive discount. Second, because of the openness of the ~.ETF format, it was trivial for Finale users to switch to Sibelius: save your Finale work as ~.ETF, and open it in Sibelius. However, sinc Sibelius has a closed data file format, and does not write the ~.ETF format, there was no good way to go backwards. And under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, it is a crime in the U.S. to reverse engineer the data file format which is copyright and proprietary. There is also the issue of just how accurate Sibelius' claim of 1 users switching from Finale to Sibelius really is. I would expect that it is true that 1 users took advantage of the competitive upgrade; however, this was painless, as C/N/M keeps track of their own user base and ships out upgrades based upon its own records, there is no penalty to sending in the distribution CD (especially if you send in an older redundant version, or first burn a back-up copy). So there is no way to know how many of the claimed 10,000 users who Sibelius claims switched, actually use the program, and how many purchased the competitive upgrade, and still are using Finale instead, even newer versions. I would also note that in the various forums in which I participate, since the first of the year, I have seen by actual count, a dozen different users who wrote to the lists, saying that they had originally used Finale, had switched to Sibelius, been disenchanted, and had switched back to using Finale because of Sibelius' shortcomings. I believe Finale's fundamental dilemma is manifest in their upgrades of late. They are diversifying Finale and integrating it with a suite of products, notably Smart Music. I don't think one can overllook the impact of Smartmusic. As I understand it, Smartmusic files are MIDI files with proprietary extensions, and these extensions have not been published, which means that no one (e.g., Sibelius) can produce a smartmusic file without licensing the technology from MakeMusic!, and that they cannot reverse engineer the SmartMusic data format without themselves being in violation of the DMCA. Furthermore, I would expect that aspects of the SmartMusic extensions are also patented, and probably in such a way that Sibelius cannot develop a competing product for at least another decade, or decade and a half, without running the risk, of a patent infringement suit. It occurs to me, too, that there is an aspect to some of these things that may affect certain items. I have not explored in any detail, the Sibelius software patents, and if there are any that relate to items like dynamic parts linking, or house styles, it may be that MakeMusic! may choose to ignore these items for the duration of the patent, rather than risk an expensive lawsuit in which they are charged with infringement. ns ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Hi Johannes, Not saying you *shouldn't* investigate Sib 4 -- they have a very nice competitive upgrade price for Finale uses, and it's a good idea to try to stay on top of the competition. But I have a hunch that you will feel that the slurs are unacceptable by your standards. Have you tried inputting music into the demo yet? - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 08 Jul 2005, at 2:12 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Can someone remind me why I _shouldn't_ switch to Sibelius? Seems like it much more fulfills the promises of CAE (computer aided engraving...). Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Darcy James Argue schrieb: Hi Johannes, Not saying you *shouldn't* investigate Sib 4 -- they have a very nice competitive upgrade price for Finale uses, and it's a good idea to try to stay on top of the competition. But I have a hunch that you will feel that the slurs are unacceptable by your standards. Have you tried inputting music into the demo yet? I haven't even got the demo yet. Not sure whether I will, but I would like to know all the things I would be missing should I decide to switch. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes, Trust me, you really are better off downloading the demo and experimenting for yourself. You are the only one who knows which Finale features are essential to you, and which you can do without, and nothing can take the place of hands-on experimentation. Download the demo, read the manual, try inputting a page of music. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 08 Jul 2005, at 3:10 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Darcy James Argue schrieb: Hi Johannes, Not saying you *shouldn't* investigate Sib 4 -- they have a very nice competitive upgrade price for Finale uses, and it's a good idea to try to stay on top of the competition. But I have a hunch that you will feel that the slurs are unacceptable by your standards. Have you tried inputting music into the demo yet? I haven't even got the demo yet. Not sure whether I will, but I would like to know all the things I would be missing should I decide to switch. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Darcy, I wasn't 100% serious anyway. I have no time nor intention to do a quick switch to Sibelius, but I do want to put some pressure on MakeMusic to move into the right direction. Johannes Darcy James Argue schrieb: Johannes, Trust me, you really are better off downloading the demo and experimenting for yourself. You are the only one who knows which Finale features are essential to you, and which you can do without, and nothing can take the place of hands-on experimentation. Download the demo, read the manual, try inputting a page of music. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 08 Jul 2005, at 3:10 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Darcy James Argue schrieb: Hi Johannes, Not saying you *shouldn't* investigate Sib 4 -- they have a very nice competitive upgrade price for Finale uses, and it's a good idea to try to stay on top of the competition. But I have a hunch that you will feel that the slurs are unacceptable by your standards. Have you tried inputting music into the demo yet? I haven't even got the demo yet. Not sure whether I will, but I would like to know all the things I would be missing should I decide to switch. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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 -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes: I agree with Darcy though, you should download the demo and check it out. It's pretty amazing. I've owned Finale since 1989, Mosaic since 1990, and Sibelius since 2000, but I've primarily used Sibelius since 2002 for music prep and engraving, and this new version seems really slick. == Doug LeBow LeBow Music Multimedia, Inc. Santa Clarita, CA 91390-5233 (661) 297-1001 Studio (661) 244-4400 Fax (661) 313-6044 Cell http://www.lebowmusic.com On Jul 8, 2005, at 12:29 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Darcy, I wasn't 100% serious anyway. I have no time nor intention to do a quick switch to Sibelius, but I do want to put some pressure on MakeMusic to move into the right direction. Johannes Darcy James Argue schrieb: Johannes, Trust me, you really are better off downloading the demo and experimenting for yourself. You are the only one who knows which Finale features are essential to you, and which you can do without, and nothing can take the place of hands-on experimentation. Download the demo, read the manual, try inputting a page of music. - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY On 08 Jul 2005, at 3:10 PM, Johannes Gebauer wrote: Darcy James Argue schrieb: Hi Johannes, Not saying you *shouldn't* investigate Sib 4 -- they have a very nice competitive upgrade price for Finale uses, and it's a good idea to try to stay on top of the competition. But I have a hunch that you will feel that the slurs are unacceptable by your standards. Have you tried inputting music into the demo yet? I haven't even got the demo yet. Not sure whether I will, but I would like to know all the things I would be missing should I decide to switch. Johannes -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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 -- http://www.musikmanufaktur.com http://www.camerata-berolinensis.de ___ 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] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Johannes Gebauer wrote: Can someone remind me why I _shouldn't_ switch to Sibelius? Seems like it much more fulfills the promises of CAE (computer aided engraving...). Johannes These days the older complaints of Sibelius being too rigid in the placement of items and not allowing engraver control over things seems to be fading away. There may not be much reason no to switch anymore. Try the demo for a while more (the American release of Sibelius4 won't ship until August so you've got some more time to fool around with it.) -- David H. Bailey [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Indeed. We should start a petition or something. Light a fire under MakeMusic's ass. Or something. Johannes Gebauer wrote: Darcy, I wasn't 100% serious anyway. I have no time nor intention to do a quick switch to Sibelius, but I do want to put some pressure on MakeMusic to move into the right direction. Johannes ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 08 Jul 2005, at 6:53 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: Indeed. We should start a petition or something. Light a fire under MakeMusic's ass. Or something. By all means, if you want this feature implemented in future versions of Finale, tell Coda. If you have any detailed suggestions about exactly *how* to implement Dynamic Parts in Finale, I might suggest holding off until Fin2k6 is out the door -- but if it's just We demand Dynamic Parts, you know where to go: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
The HOW part is up to them. Playing with the Demo of Sibelius 4, I think what they did is very good. So, they could just COPY them Darcy James Argue wrote: By all means, if you want this feature implemented in future versions of Finale, tell Coda. If you have any detailed suggestions about exactly *how* to implement Dynamic Parts in Finale, I might suggest holding off until Fin2k6 is out the door -- but if it's just We demand Dynamic Parts, you know where to go: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
On 08 Jul 2005, at 7:11 PM, Eric Dannewitz wrote: The HOW part is up to them. I meant how do you want this feature to work, not how do we implement this feature. Playing with the Demo of Sibelius 4, I think what they did is very good. So, they could just COPY them If that's really what you want, tell them. If there are things that Sib doesn't do so well and you can think of a way to do it better, tell them that, too. (Again, for best results, AFTER Fin2k6 starts shipping.) - Darcy - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Brooklyn, NY ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Re: [Finale] The ultimate Sibelius question...
Can someone remind me why I _shouldn't_ switch to Sibelius? Seems like it much more fulfills the promises of CAE (computer aided engraving...). I thought that and tried it and discovered that it just couldn't do the job. The performance claims were over exaggerated and if you didn't want to do things the way Sibelius wanted to do them then there were precious little ability for work arounds. When they talk about Finale workarounds as a bad thing (implying that Finale can't do something properly and Sibelius can), they're really saying that Sibelius is over-rigid and Finale is very _very_ flexible. I sold Sibelius 3 on ebay a while back. Having said that you really ought to try it, maybe it'll work for you, I thought it was a textbook case of over marketing though. Ever since I watched Dead Ringers (David Cronenberg) I find twins really spooky, maybe that has something to do with it too. Simon Troup Digital Music Art ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
