Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[David H. Bailey]

On 4/20/2018 7:13 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
> I take your point that they "could" do some of the abstraction that is
> inherent in the newer programs.  I am not seeing anything that suggests
> to me they are at all interested in matching up to Dorico.  Indeed, the
> only recent statements I could find were very much oriented to
> SmartMusic and not Finale.  If they actually are making a significant
> investment in the program (which I question), I suggest it would be wise
> for them to take note of the major advances in the past 2 years in both
> Dorico and Sibelius, and communicate much more openly with the Finale
> user base.
> 
[snip]

Back when Coda was the owner and Finale was the major product, they knew 
they had to keep communicating with users and work hard to keep the 
program growing in order to satisfy their user base and attract new 
users.  But with virtually no competition in the Windows area at that 
time they were the program that any newcomer had to beat.

With the various owners the product has had along the way, coupled with 
the development of a new cash-cow (smartmusic) Finale has been pushed 
aside somewhat, seemingly more with each new owner, and improved mainly 
so that it could create more and better smartmusic accompaniments in 
addition to producing publication-ready engraved music.  To that end, 
whoever owned the program worked to improve the program in obvious ways 
again to keep the user base somewhat satisfied and also in an attempt to 
attract new users but mainly to benefit the SmartMusic marketplace.

But the current owners are not musicians, they were not involved in the 
music field at all before the acquisition of Finale and SmartMusic. 
Their athletic-training background sees a good fit for SmartMusic since 
it's a training software, just for musicians instead of athletes.  And 
so Finale tags along because without it there can't be any new 
SmartMusic accompaniments created.  But Finale upgrades generate an 
unpredictable amount of income and then only when the new version comes 
out -- once it's out and those who will upgrade have done so, there's 
very little cash-flow in the product.  Especially with the 
less-expensive (free) but very capable MuseScore attracting ever larger 
numbers of people who formerly would have had to purchase either Finale 
or Sibelius (i.e. music students and recent graduates of music 
schools/colleges), Finale's market share among notation software users 
is constantly shrinking.  And with the entry of Dorico at the truly 
professional music engraving level the potential user base is diluted 
even further and the recent entry of Forte and Notion is attracting 
those potential users who don't want to spend a lot of money and who 
formerly would have purchased the cheaper versions of Finale.

But SmartMusic remains the only product of its kind and it has major 
educational market music publishers sewn up. With the annual 
subscription the only business model and schools willing to budget for 
it so that teachers have clearly objective ways of measuring student 
ability (there's no disputing when SmartMusic records a student's 
performance and gives a concrete number of mistakes), it is a golden 
cash-cow.

We have to remember that in the early days of Finale when Coda was run 
by musicians who cared about making a product that could serve them as 
well as the user base the thrust of the company was to make a product 
that filled a need.

These days when the company is no longer run by musicians but instead by 
accountants and entrepreneurs for whom the bottom line is the most 
important attribute of a product, the product isn't being made to 
fulfill their dream of usefulness, only to fulfill their dream of larger 
profits.  So as long as SmartMusic remains profitable and as long as 
Finale is the only way to create SmartMusic accompaniments, Finale will 
remain viable to the company but not a great income generator in and of 
itself.  If it were a larger income generator it wouldn't be getting 
sold every few years.


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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Chuck Israels]

The nice comment from David prompts me to weigh in for a moment.

Much of my output in Finale is good — and close to serious engraving standards. 
That’s partly because I have the luxury of being able to work slowly, and 
partly because I work mostly in a idiom with which I am familiar. I have 
learned the tricks that make written idiomatic jazz music look good and be easy 
to read. When I do choral arrangements, the results are OK, but not quite as 
elegant. None of this would be practical (probably possible, but not practical) 
without a couple of Tobias’s plugins and several of Jari’s.

I am in agreement about shortcomings that I had hoped would have been addressed 
by now. Cautionary accidentals is hopelessly broken, so I do that by hand. 
Adjusting space between systems in scores when there are vertical clashes is 
still a time consuming process best done by hand, and when I get picky about 
accidentals on notes with ledger lines, adjusting them horizontally so they 
don’t touch the lines is painful. Those are the things that come quickly to 
mind.

Greg Hamilton produces beautiful work in Finale (and prefers it to Sibelius in 
which he also does excellent work), and I’m sure there are others whose work I 
have had no reason to see. 

I have used Finale from almost day one (certainly version 1.0) and while I have 
found learning how to make it submit to my will, acquiring an instinct for 
controlling computer programs, and eventually being able to edit older works, 
fairly easy (I'm an inveterate tinkerer with my now work — rarely entirely 
finished), every time I use another program I find the learning curve steep 
(even in Pages there are things I think should be easy that are obscure to me). 
So I stick with Finale and will be likely to continue using it until something 
remarkably better arrives that makes learning a new program at my age seem 
worth the trouble.

I really on information about other programs coming from this list to help with 
such a decision.

Chuck

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

8831 SE 12th Ave.
Portland OR 97202






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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[David H. Bailey]

There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If you 
want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos 
addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is indeed 
capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.

Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the 
finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are 
others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are continuing 
to work in our notation software of choice while learning the 
intricacies of Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply makes 
things easier for that person because of a workflow developed over many 
years of using Finale, while he is learning the more intricate details 
of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.

I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music engraving 
tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac marketplace. 
Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using it at that time 
instead of Finale, while some other publishers added Sibelius to their 
toolbox and used both.

A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's certainly 
much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two other recent 
entries into the notation software marketplace, and despite major 
advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing much more 
elegant printed output.  And it's capable of producing output as elegant 
as Finale's output.  I don't work in avant-garde notation so I can't 
speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale regarding the ability to 
accomplish such projects.

I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more accurate, 
but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale from 
Finale2014.5 to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly become 
superb and very efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked score/parts 
to be much more efficient and easier to use.

But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing great 
output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some major 
improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and deserve 
this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale used to lead, 
then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale was playing 
catch-up with Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up with Dorico as 
well as Sibelius now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with the next version 
and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?

Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- I 
have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to upgrade 
from 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been worried 
about future development of Sibelius.

And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the 
tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of 
effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative 
side of things.



On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
>  > And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music 
> engraving level
> 
> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that 
> it has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the 
> Dorico users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the 
> finished product. (Which surprised me.)
> 
> Everything I've heard about the most recent owners of Finale is that 
> they are quite interested in it. But I haven't heard much about it in 
> recent months. I hope Michael Johnson's departure was for personal 
> reasons rather than due to a direction the owners are taking. Meanwhile 
> the rest of the team (as far as I can tell) seems really engaged and 
> forward looking.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:12 AM, David H. Bailey  > wrote:
> 
> On 4/20/2018 7:13 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
> 
> I take your point that they "could" do some of the abstraction
> that is
> inherent in the newer programs.  I am not seeing anything that
> suggests
> to me they are at all interested in matching up to Dorico. 
> Indeed, the
> only recent statements I could find were very much oriented to
> SmartMusic and not Finale.  If they actually are making a
> significant
> investment in the program (which I question), I suggest it would
> be wise
> for them to take note of the major advances in the past 2 years
> in both
> Dorico and Sibelius, and communicate much more openly with the
> Finale
> user base.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> Back when Coda was the owner and Finale was the major product, they
> knew they had to keep communicating with users and work hard to keep
> the program growing in order to satisfy their user base and attract
> new users.  But with virtually no competition in the 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Robert Patterson]

> And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music engraving
level

Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that it
has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the Dorico
users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the finished
product. (Which surprised me.)

Everything I've heard about the most recent owners of Finale is that they
are quite interested in it. But I haven't heard much about it in recent
months. I hope Michael Johnson's departure was for personal reasons rather
than due to a direction the owners are taking. Meanwhile the rest of the
team (as far as I can tell) seems really engaged and forward looking.




On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:12 AM, David H. Bailey 
wrote:

> On 4/20/2018 7:13 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
>
>> I take your point that they "could" do some of the abstraction that is
>> inherent in the newer programs.  I am not seeing anything that suggests
>> to me they are at all interested in matching up to Dorico.  Indeed, the
>> only recent statements I could find were very much oriented to
>> SmartMusic and not Finale.  If they actually are making a significant
>> investment in the program (which I question), I suggest it would be wise
>> for them to take note of the major advances in the past 2 years in both
>> Dorico and Sibelius, and communicate much more openly with the Finale
>> user base.
>>
>> [snip]
>
> Back when Coda was the owner and Finale was the major product, they knew
> they had to keep communicating with users and work hard to keep the program
> growing in order to satisfy their user base and attract new users.  But
> with virtually no competition in the Windows area at that time they were
> the program that any newcomer had to beat.
>
> With the various owners the product has had along the way, coupled with
> the development of a new cash-cow (smartmusic) Finale has been pushed aside
> somewhat, seemingly more with each new owner, and improved mainly so that
> it could create more and better smartmusic accompaniments in addition to
> producing publication-ready engraved music.  To that end, whoever owned the
> program worked to improve the program in obvious ways again to keep the
> user base somewhat satisfied and also in an attempt to attract new users
> but mainly to benefit the SmartMusic marketplace.
>
> But the current owners are not musicians, they were not involved in the
> music field at all before the acquisition of Finale and SmartMusic. Their
> athletic-training background sees a good fit for SmartMusic since it's a
> training software, just for musicians instead of athletes.  And so Finale
> tags along because without it there can't be any new SmartMusic
> accompaniments created.  But Finale upgrades generate an unpredictable
> amount of income and then only when the new version comes out -- once it's
> out and those who will upgrade have done so, there's very little cash-flow
> in the product.  Especially with the less-expensive (free) but very capable
> MuseScore attracting ever larger numbers of people who formerly would have
> had to purchase either Finale or Sibelius (i.e. music students and recent
> graduates of music schools/colleges), Finale's market share among notation
> software users is constantly shrinking.  And with the entry of Dorico at
> the truly professional music engraving level the potential user base is
> diluted even further and the recent entry of Forte and Notion is attracting
> those potential users who don't want to spend a lot of money and who
> formerly would have purchased the cheaper versions of Finale.
>
> But SmartMusic remains the only product of its kind and it has major
> educational market music publishers sewn up. With the annual subscription
> the only business model and schools willing to budget for it so that
> teachers have clearly objective ways of measuring student ability (there's
> no disputing when SmartMusic records a student's performance and gives a
> concrete number of mistakes), it is a golden cash-cow.
>
> We have to remember that in the early days of Finale when Coda was run by
> musicians who cared about making a product that could serve them as well as
> the user base the thrust of the company was to make a product that filled a
> need.
>
> These days when the company is no longer run by musicians but instead by
> accountants and entrepreneurs for whom the bottom line is the most
> important attribute of a product, the product isn't being made to fulfill
> their dream of usefulness, only to fulfill their dream of larger profits.
> So as long as SmartMusic remains profitable and as long as Finale is the
> only way to create SmartMusic accompaniments, Finale will remain viable to
> the company but not a great income generator in and of itself.  If it were
> a larger income generator it wouldn't be getting sold every few years.
>
>
> --
> *
>
> David H. Bailey
> dhbaile...@comcast.net
> 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Robert Patterson]

Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a plugin.

On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:

> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If you
> want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos addressing
> various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is indeed capable of
> very elegant professional, publishable output.
>
> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are continuing to
> work in our notation software of choice while learning the intricacies of
> Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply makes things easier for
> that person because of a workflow developed over many years of using
> Finale, while he is learning the more intricate details of the workflow in
> Dorico to get the same output.
>
> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music engraving
> tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac marketplace. Several
> publishers, if I remember correctly, began using it at that time instead of
> Finale, while some other publishers added Sibelius to their toolbox and
> used both.
>
> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's certainly
> much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two other recent
> entries into the notation software marketplace, and despite major advances
> with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing much more elegant printed
> output.  And it's capable of producing output as elegant as Finale's
> output.  I don't work in avant-garde notation so I can't speak to either
> Dorico or Sibelius or Finale regarding the ability to accomplish such
> projects.
>
> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more accurate,
> but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale from Finale2014.5
> to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly become superb and very
> efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked score/parts to be much more
> efficient and easier to use.
>
> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing great
> output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some major
> improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and deserve this
> sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale used to lead, then
> Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale was playing catch-up with
> Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up with Dorico as well as Sibelius
> now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with the next version and force Sibelius
> and Dorico to catch up to it?
>
> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- I
> have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to upgrade from
> 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been worried about future
> development of Sibelius.
>
> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the tools
> which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of effort for us
> so that most of our effort can be put into the creative side of things.
>
>
>
> On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
>
>>  > And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music engraving
>> level
>>
>> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that
>> it has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the Dorico
>> users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the finished
>> product. (Which surprised me.)
>>
>> Everything I've heard about the most recent owners of Finale is that they
>> are quite interested in it. But I haven't heard much about it in recent
>> months. I hope Michael Johnson's departure was for personal reasons rather
>> than due to a direction the owners are taking. Meanwhile the rest of the
>> team (as far as I can tell) seems really engaged and forward looking.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:12 AM, David H. Bailey > > wrote:
>>
>> On 4/20/2018 7:13 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
>>
>> I take your point that they "could" do some of the abstraction
>> that is
>> inherent in the newer programs.  I am not seeing anything that
>> suggests
>> to me they are at all interested in matching up to Dorico.
>>  Indeed, the
>> only recent statements I could find were very much oriented to
>> SmartMusic and not Finale.  If they actually are making a
>> significant
>> investment in the program (which I question), I suggest it would
>> be wise
>> for them to take note of the major advances in the past 2 years
>> in both
>> Dorico and Sibelius, and communicate much more openly with the
>> Finale
>> 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[George Brooke]

Following this discussion with interest.  As a church musician, a great deal of 
my work involves lyrics. I’d appreciate observations about using lyrics in 
Dorico (especially as compared to Finale).

Thanks

George Brooke

Sent from my iPad

> On Apr 20, 2018, at 1:07 PM, David H. Bailey  wrote:
> 
>> On 4/20/2018 11:33 AM, Lynn David Newton wrote:
>> Forgive me for elbowing in on this discussion. I'll ask my question
>> up front:
>> 
>> I notice (checking sweetwater.com) that there is a "trade-up" path,
>> a way to acquire Dorico for considerably less than the standard
>> price if I am a user of a competing product.
>> 
>> Does that mean I have to somehow *give up* on using the competing
>> product? Which doesn't make sense. Or only present proof of
>> being a user of that product? What's the catch, because the price
>> difference is significant.
>> 
> [snip]
> 
> When we purchase a cross-grade for a piece of software, proving that we 
> are legitimate owners of the competing product the requirement.
> 
> We are not forced into stopping using the competing requirement.
> 
> For example, I used Finale for quite a few years before buying a 
> cross-grade, vastly reduced price, version of Sibelius.  I have been 
> upgrading each practically every upgrade since then, and both programs 
> have worked side by side.
> 
> Then I took advantage of the introductory cross-grade offer of Dorico 
> and now all three of those products work side by side by side on my 
> computer.
> 
> So you can invest in the competition if you wish.
> 
> However, if you are satisfied with Finale and it is able to fulfill all 
> your music engraving needs, then there's no need to start all over again 
> with a different product.
> 
> Competing products such as Sibelius and Dorico are for people who aren't 
> happy with some major aspect of Finale (or other current notation 
> software) and who find that the new product will do something better, 
> easier, faster, smoother, more elegantly, or just plain do something 
> which the current notation software being used can't do.

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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Craig Parmerlee]

Anybody who can do ANYTHING with percussion parts with ANY of these 
products has my boundless admiration.  I find all the products 
unbelievably tedious when it comes to percussion parts.  There must be a 
better way.

Regarding Dorico being ready for professional use, I agree with David 
that it depends on how you define "professional".  I am convinced that I 
could produce a publication-quality big band chart with it given where 
the program is today.  And if I knew Dorico as well as I know Finale, I 
think I would save about 20% of the time on such a project, mostly 
because of less fiddling with layouts.

If I were doing a orchestra score with 4-part choir, vocal soloist, 
Theremin, piano and harpsichord, I have no idea which product would be 
faster to use.

And one thing I have not tried to do yet, is get my 3-page transcription 
down to 2-pages while keeping the music font reasonably large.  This is 
where I get into a world of hurt with Finale.  If you are willing to let 
Finale print with its default spacing, sometimes the layout isn't too 
laborious.  But in most cases, I want big band parts to be 2 pages on an 
8-1/2x11 sheet (and if using more than 2 pages, I must lay out very easy 
page turns.)  That quickly becomes a dreadful experience with Finale. 
Tomorrow evening I will have some time to go through that process with 
my Dorico demonstration project.  That will show very clearly whether or 
not Dorico has made a major advance in layout.


On 4/21/2018 10:21 AM, Ryszard Pusz wrote:
> I have followed this thread with interest. I continue to use Finale because I 
> am too lazy to learn any other, but I use it quite detachedly. As a 
> percussionist I would like to be able to notate a much greater range of 
> nuances than the program allows, and then to have the sounds played back.
>
> I don't know why the untuned percussion sounds are locked into such a rigid 
> system. Surely it would be possible to have each untuned instrument notated 
> anywhere on the staff, say in a "two-octave" range and have those sounds tied 
> to the neutral clef. Secondly, the strokes used to play them could also be 
> more flexibly notated and played back
>
> But probably NIML (not in my lifetime)…
>
> Ryszard
>
>
> On 21/04/2018, at 11:32 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:
>
>> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the
>> tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of
>> effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative
>> side of things.
> ___
> Finale mailing list
> Finale@shsu.edu
> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
>
> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to:
> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
>


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

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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Skjalg Bjørstad]

Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced 
linked parts are
-Not access to special tools
-No enharmonic flips

Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script  not accessible. (Scripts 
are accessible with a workaround, but...)

Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.

> 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson :
> 
> Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a plugin.
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
> dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> 
>> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If you
>> want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos addressing
>> various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is indeed capable of
>> very elegant professional, publishable output.
>> 
>> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
>> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
>> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are continuing to
>> work in our notation software of choice while learning the intricacies of
>> Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply makes things easier for
>> that person because of a workflow developed over many years of using
>> Finale, while he is learning the more intricate details of the workflow in
>> Dorico to get the same output.
>> 
>> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music engraving
>> tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac marketplace. Several
>> publishers, if I remember correctly, began using it at that time instead of
>> Finale, while some other publishers added Sibelius to their toolbox and
>> used both.
>> 
>> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's certainly
>> much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two other recent
>> entries into the notation software marketplace, and despite major advances
>> with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing much more elegant printed
>> output.  And it's capable of producing output as elegant as Finale's
>> output.  I don't work in avant-garde notation so I can't speak to either
>> Dorico or Sibelius or Finale regarding the ability to accomplish such
>> projects.
>> 
>> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more accurate,
>> but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale from Finale2014.5
>> to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly become superb and very
>> efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked score/parts to be much more
>> efficient and easier to use.
>> 
>> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing great
>> output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some major
>> improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and deserve this
>> sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale used to lead, then
>> Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale was playing catch-up with
>> Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up with Dorico as well as Sibelius
>> now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with the next version and force Sibelius
>> and Dorico to catch up to it?
>> 
>> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- I
>> have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to upgrade from
>> 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been worried about future
>> development of Sibelius.
>> 
>> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the tools
>> which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of effort for us
>> so that most of our effort can be put into the creative side of things.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
>> 
 And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music engraving
>>> level
>>> 
>>> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that
>>> it has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the Dorico
>>> users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the finished
>>> product. (Which surprised me.)
>>> 
>>> Everything I've heard about the most recent owners of Finale is that they
>>> are quite interested in it. But I haven't heard much about it in recent
>>> months. I hope Michael Johnson's departure was for personal reasons rather
>>> than due to a direction the owners are taking. Meanwhile the rest of the
>>> team (as far as I can tell) seems really engaged and forward looking.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:12 AM, David H. Bailey >> > wrote:
>>> 
>>>On 4/20/2018 7:13 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote:
>>> 
>>>I take your point that they "could" do some of the abstraction
>>>that is
>>>inherent in the newer programs.  I am not seeing anything that
>>>suggests
>>>to me they are at all 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Dreamhost]

I disagree. I think this is a valuable discussion. Finale is a big part of our 
lives and livelyhood. I think a discussion of concerns about their direction is 
valid.

Since I left MakeMusic, I’ve been kind of disheartened at the direction they’re 
going. I unfortunately don’t know many people over there since the purge of 
people so I really have no insight. The loss of Michael Johnson, if that is 
true, is a big loss. Gigantic, in fact. Michael was my boss in QA, and is a 
close friend and mentor. He really was/is really passionate about Finale, as am 
I (I spent over 10 years in support/QA/Development).

Allen

Allen Fisher
allen.fis...@gmail.com


On Apr 21, 2018, 11:04 AM -0500, wit...@nctv.com, wrote:
> I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a new subject.
> Please
>
> -Original Message-
> From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu  On Behalf Of Skjalg 
> Bjørstad
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 11:59 AM
> To: finale@shsu.edu
> Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?
>
> Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced 
> linked parts are -Not access to special tools -No enharmonic flips
>
> Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script not accessible. (Scripts 
> are accessible with a workaround, but...)
>
> Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.
>
> > 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson 
> > :
> >
> > Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> > Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a plugin.
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
> > dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> >
> > > There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If
> > > you want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos
> > > addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is
> > > indeed capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.
> > >
> > > Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
> > > finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
> > > others who do that. I do know there are lots like me who are
> > > continuing to work in our notation software of choice while learning
> > > the intricacies of Dorico. I wonder if exporting to Finale simply
> > > makes things easier for that person because of a workflow developed
> > > over many years of using Finale, while he is learning the more
> > > intricate details of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.
> > >
> > > I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music
> > > engraving tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac
> > > marketplace. Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using
> > > it at that time instead of Finale, while some other publishers added
> > > Sibelius to their toolbox and used both.
> > >
> > > A lot depends on how one defines "truly professional" -- it's
> > > certainly much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two
> > > other recent entries into the notation software marketplace, and
> > > despite major advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing
> > > much more elegant printed output. And it's capable of producing
> > > output as elegant as Finale's output. I don't work in avant-garde
> > > notation so I can't speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale
> > > regarding the ability to accomplish such projects.
> > >
> > > I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more
> > > accurate, but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale
> > > from Finale2014.5 to Finale25. Linked score/parts didn't suddenly
> > > become superb and very efficient. I still find Sibelius's linked
> > > score/parts to be much more efficient and easier to use.
> > >
> > > But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing
> > > great output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some
> > > major improvements coming soon. Not only do Finale users need and
> > > deserve this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also. Finale
> > > used to lead, then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale
> > > was playing catch-up with Sibelius. Will it need to play catch-up
> > > with Dorico as well as Sibelius now? Or will Finale leap ahead with
> > > the next version and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?
> > >
> > > Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius --
> > > I have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to
> > > upgrade from 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been
> > > worried about future development of Sibelius.
> > >
> > > And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the
> > > tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of
> > > effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative 
> > > side of things.
> > >
> 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Robert Patterson]

Voiced linked parts are indeed fatally flawed for having no access to
special tools. The irony is that there is no longer any need for this
restriction and they could essentially just turn it off. I have complained
about it in all the appropriate fora.

Plugins are quite available in linked parts. Just not the ones originally
developed by Makemusic. But since the most useful plugins are 3rd party I
don't see this as a huge loss. (I do find the non-availability of Move
Rests to be annoying though.)


On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Skjalg Bjørstad <
trekkspillman...@icloud.com> wrote:

> Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced
> linked parts are
> -Not access to special tools
> -No enharmonic flips
>
> Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script  not accessible.
> (Scripts are accessible with a workaround, but...)
>
> Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.
>
> > 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson <
> rob...@robertgpatterson.com>:
> >
> > Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> > Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a
> plugin.
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
> > dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> >
> >> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If you
> >> want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos
> addressing
> >> various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is indeed capable of
> >> very elegant professional, publishable output.
> >>
> >> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
> >> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
> >> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are
> continuing to
> >> work in our notation software of choice while learning the intricacies
> of
> >> Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply makes things easier for
> >> that person because of a workflow developed over many years of using
> >> Finale, while he is learning the more intricate details of the workflow
> in
> >> Dorico to get the same output.
> >>
> >> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music engraving
> >> tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac marketplace.
> Several
> >> publishers, if I remember correctly, began using it at that time
> instead of
> >> Finale, while some other publishers added Sibelius to their toolbox and
> >> used both.
> >>
> >> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's certainly
> >> much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two other recent
> >> entries into the notation software marketplace, and despite major
> advances
> >> with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing much more elegant printed
> >> output.  And it's capable of producing output as elegant as Finale's
> >> output.  I don't work in avant-garde notation so I can't speak to either
> >> Dorico or Sibelius or Finale regarding the ability to accomplish such
> >> projects.
> >>
> >> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more accurate,
> >> but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale from
> Finale2014.5
> >> to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly become superb and very
> >> efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked score/parts to be much more
> >> efficient and easier to use.
> >>
> >> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing great
> >> output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some major
> >> improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and deserve
> this
> >> sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale used to lead, then
> >> Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale was playing catch-up
> with
> >> Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up with Dorico as well as Sibelius
> >> now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with the next version and force Sibelius
> >> and Dorico to catch up to it?
> >>
> >> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- I
> >> have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to upgrade
> from
> >> 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been worried about
> future
> >> development of Sibelius.
> >>
> >> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the
> tools
> >> which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of effort for
> us
> >> so that most of our effort can be put into the creative side of things.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
> >>
>  And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music engraving
> >>> level
> >>>
> >>> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that
> >>> it has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the
> Dorico
> >>> users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the finished
> >>> product. (Which surprised me.)
> >>>
> >>> Everything I've heard about 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Ryszard Pusz]

I have followed this thread with interest. I continue to use Finale because I 
am too lazy to learn any other, but I use it quite detachedly. As a 
percussionist I would like to be able to notate a much greater range of nuances 
than the program allows, and then to have the sounds played back.

I don't know why the untuned percussion sounds are locked into such a rigid 
system. Surely it would be possible to have each untuned instrument notated 
anywhere on the staff, say in a "two-octave" range and have those sounds tied 
to the neutral clef. Secondly, the strokes used to play them could also be more 
flexibly notated and played back

But probably NIML (not in my lifetime)…

Ryszard


On 21/04/2018, at 11:32 PM, David H. Bailey wrote:

> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the 
> tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of 
> effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative 
> side of things.

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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Robert Patterson]

So I watched this video  about
laying out a piano/vocal score for a large orchestral work in Dorico. I
would do (have done) this with linked parts in Finale. Finale's user
interface is quite clunky compared to Dorico. To eliminate the piano
reduction from score view, for example, you have to Force Hide it with a
staff style. But in terms of steps, it is basically equally easy to
implement once you know the steps in Finale.

What I am seeing here is an opportunity for plugin to eliminate a lot of
the pain points with linked parts. I am curious to know what this list
thinks they are.



On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 11:04 AM,  wrote:

> I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a new
> subject.
> Please
>
> -Original Message-
> From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu  On Behalf Of
> Skjalg Bjørstad
> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 11:59 AM
> To: finale@shsu.edu
> Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?
>
> Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced
> linked parts are -Not access to special tools -No enharmonic flips
>
> Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script  not accessible.
> (Scripts are accessible with a workaround, but...)
>
> Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.
>
> > 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson <
> rob...@robertgpatterson.com>:
> >
> > Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> > Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a
> plugin.
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
> > dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> >
> >> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If
> >> you want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos
> >> addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is
> >> indeed capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.
> >>
> >> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
> >> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
> >> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are
> >> continuing to work in our notation software of choice while learning
> >> the intricacies of Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply
> >> makes things easier for that person because of a workflow developed
> >> over many years of using Finale, while he is learning the more
> >> intricate details of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.
> >>
> >> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music
> >> engraving tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac
> >> marketplace. Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using
> >> it at that time instead of Finale, while some other publishers added
> >> Sibelius to their toolbox and used both.
> >>
> >> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's
> >> certainly much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two
> >> other recent entries into the notation software marketplace, and
> >> despite major advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing
> >> much more elegant printed output.  And it's capable of producing
> >> output as elegant as Finale's output.  I don't work in avant-garde
> >> notation so I can't speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale
> >> regarding the ability to accomplish such projects.
> >>
> >> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more
> >> accurate, but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale
> >> from Finale2014.5 to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly
> >> become superb and very efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked
> >> score/parts to be much more efficient and easier to use.
> >>
> >> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing
> >> great output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some
> >> major improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and
> >> deserve this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale
> >> used to lead, then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale
> >> was playing catch-up with Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up
> >> with Dorico as well as Sibelius now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with
> >> the next version and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?
> >>
> >> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius --
> >> I have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to
> >> upgrade from 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been
> >> worried about future development of Sibelius.
> >>
> >> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the
> >> tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of
> >> effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative
> side of things.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
> >>
> 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Craig Parmerlee]

It seems that must of the function that Finale users have with Staff 
Styles is lacking in Dorico at the moment.  I don't think there is any 
support for slash notation or rhythmic notation, for example.  That 
rules it out for me for the time being.

I cannot find any reference to one-bar and two-bar repeats in Dorico.  
If it is there, I cannot find it.

I think this reflects a very strong bias toward classical engraving.  
But they certainly are working to incorporate the things that are needed 
for contemporary music.  The most recent release added chord support.  
The chord support is very nice. They are thinking through these things 
very well, but I would have to agree with you that the product is not up 
to professional use yet, at least for contemporary music.  I cannot 
conceive of very many projects I would do that does not require at least 
some slash bars, rhythmic notation, or bar repeats.

On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
>
> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that it
> has the potential to be but isn't there yet.



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

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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[witmer]

I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a new subject. 
Please

-Original Message-
From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu  On Behalf Of Skjalg 
Bjørstad
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 11:59 AM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced 
linked parts are -Not access to special tools -No enharmonic flips

Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script  not accessible. (Scripts 
are accessible with a workaround, but...)

Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.

> 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson :
> 
> Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a plugin.
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey < 
> dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> 
>> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If 
>> you want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos 
>> addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is 
>> indeed capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.
>> 
>> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the 
>> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are 
>> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are 
>> continuing to work in our notation software of choice while learning 
>> the intricacies of Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply 
>> makes things easier for that person because of a workflow developed 
>> over many years of using Finale, while he is learning the more 
>> intricate details of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.
>> 
>> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music 
>> engraving tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac 
>> marketplace. Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using 
>> it at that time instead of Finale, while some other publishers added 
>> Sibelius to their toolbox and used both.
>> 
>> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's 
>> certainly much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two 
>> other recent entries into the notation software marketplace, and 
>> despite major advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing 
>> much more elegant printed output.  And it's capable of producing 
>> output as elegant as Finale's output.  I don't work in avant-garde 
>> notation so I can't speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale 
>> regarding the ability to accomplish such projects.
>> 
>> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more 
>> accurate, but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale 
>> from Finale2014.5 to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly 
>> become superb and very efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked 
>> score/parts to be much more efficient and easier to use.
>> 
>> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing 
>> great output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some 
>> major improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and 
>> deserve this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale 
>> used to lead, then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale 
>> was playing catch-up with Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up 
>> with Dorico as well as Sibelius now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with 
>> the next version and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?
>> 
>> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- 
>> I have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to 
>> upgrade from 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been 
>> worried about future development of Sibelius.
>> 
>> And ultimately it all boils down to each of us finding and using the 
>> tools which allow us to get the desired result with the minimum of 
>> effort for us so that most of our effort can be put into the creative side 
>> of things.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/21/2018 8:33 AM, Robert Patterson wrote:
>> 
 And with the entry of Dorico at the truly professional music 
 engraving
>>> level
>>> 
>>> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is 
>>> that it has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of 
>>> the Dorico users in this thread even said they export to Finale for 
>>> the finished product. (Which surprised me.)
>>> 
>>> Everything I've heard about the most recent owners of Finale is that 
>>> they are quite interested in it. But I haven't heard much about it 
>>> in recent months. I hope Michael Johnson's departure was for 
>>> personal reasons rather than due to a direction the owners are 
>>> taking. Meanwhile the rest of the team (as far as I can tell) seems really 
>>> engaged and forward looking.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Craig Parmerlee]

Steve, I am a little confused.  As I understand it, all the licenses 
have the same functionality.  If you qualified for the educational 
license, doesn't that give you full use of Dorico?  I don't understand 
why you would duplicate the work in Finale.

This is relevant to me because most of my use of notation programs is 
for an educational charity.  Steinberg recognized that organization to 
qualify for the educational pricing with Cubase and I assume I could do 
the same with Dorico.  I just want to make sure there aren't any 
restrictions I am not expecting.


On 4/21/2018 5:25 PM, Steve Parker wrote:
> The only reason I’m still re-doing in Finale is that I bought an 
> educational licence for Dorico (I’m a postgrad…).
> When the next paid upgrade comes, I will move to a full licence.
>


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

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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[David H. Bailey]

On 4/21/2018 12:04 PM, wit...@nctv.com wrote:
> I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a new subject.
> Please
> 
[snip]

If you want a new discussion then you have to start it.  Ask a question, 
air a complaint, whatever.

Nobody leads this group, the conversation goes where it will among the 
people who participate in it.

It sounds as if you think there is a "group leader" who initiates 
discussions -- we're all that person and if you want something 
discussed, change the subject line and post your message.  Just telling 
us all to "get on with it" -- well, we are getting on with it.  We're 
continuing the discussion because it is of value to those who are 
participating.

So what would like us to discuss?


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

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

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[craig]

Allen,

Thank you for all those years of effort.  A very large number of us  
benefited greatly from everything you and MakeMusic did.  And even if  
the program is now in "cash cow" or "maintenance" mode, it still is  
useful for many.  That's much more of a run than most software titles  
achieve.




Quoting Dreamhost :

> I disagree. I think this is a valuable discussion. Finale is a big  
> part of our lives and livelyhood. I think a discussion of concerns  
> about their direction is valid.
>
> Since I left MakeMusic, I’ve been kind of disheartened at the  
> direction they’re going. I unfortunately don’t know many people over  
> there since the purge of people so I really have no insight. The  
> loss of Michael Johnson, if that is true, is a big loss. Gigantic,  
> in fact. Michael was my boss in QA, and is a close friend and  
> mentor. He really was/is really passionate about Finale, as am I (I  
> spent over 10 years in support/QA/Development).
>
> Allen
>
> Allen Fisher
> allen.fis...@gmail.com
>
>
> On Apr 21, 2018, 11:04 AM -0500, wit...@nctv.com, wrote:
>> I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a  
>> new subject.
>> Please
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu  On Behalf  
>> Of Skjalg Bjørstad
>> Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 11:59 AM
>> To: finale@shsu.edu
>> Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?
>>
>> Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s  
>> voiced linked parts are -Not access to special tools -No enharmonic  
>> flips
>>
>> Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script not accessible.  
>> (Scripts are accessible with a workaround, but...)
>>
>> Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.
>>
>> > 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson  
>> :
>> >
>> > Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
>> > Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable  
>> with a plugin.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey <
>> > dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If
>> > > you want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos
>> > > addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is
>> > > indeed capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.
>> > >
>> > > Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the
>> > > finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are
>> > > others who do that. I do know there are lots like me who are
>> > > continuing to work in our notation software of choice while learning
>> > > the intricacies of Dorico. I wonder if exporting to Finale simply
>> > > makes things easier for that person because of a workflow developed
>> > > over many years of using Finale, while he is learning the more
>> > > intricate details of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.
>> > >
>> > > I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music
>> > > engraving tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac
>> > > marketplace. Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using
>> > > it at that time instead of Finale, while some other publishers added
>> > > Sibelius to their toolbox and used both.
>> > >
>> > > A lot depends on how one defines "truly professional" -- it's
>> > > certainly much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two
>> > > other recent entries into the notation software marketplace, and
>> > > despite major advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing
>> > > much more elegant printed output. And it's capable of producing
>> > > output as elegant as Finale's output. I don't work in avant-garde
>> > > notation so I can't speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale
>> > > regarding the ability to accomplish such projects.
>> > >
>> > > I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more
>> > > accurate, but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale
>> > > from Finale2014.5 to Finale25. Linked score/parts didn't suddenly
>> > > become superb and very efficient. I still find Sibelius's linked
>> > > score/parts to be much more efficient and easier to use.
>> > >
>> > > But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing
>> > > great output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some
>> > > major improvements coming soon. Not only do Finale users need and
>> > > deserve this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also. Finale
>> > > used to lead, then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale
>> > > was playing catch-up with Sibelius. Will it need to play catch-up
>> > > with Dorico as well as Sibelius now? Or will Finale leap ahead with
>> > > the next version and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?
>> > >
>> > > Of course what I'm saying about Finale is 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Steve Parker]

> On 21 Apr 2018, at 13:33, Robert Patterson  > wrote:
> 
> Wait. Is Dorico at the truly professional level? All I've heard is that it
> has the potential to be but isn't there yet. I mean, one of the Dorico
> users in this thread even said they export to Finale for the finished
> product. (Which surprised me.)

This may have been me?

I don’t export to Finale. I do everything in Dorico, then start again in Finale.

This is a method of learning Dorico. At this point (after maybe 3 months proper 
use), I’m way quicker in Dorico than after decades of Finale.
The only reason I’m still re-doing in Finale is that I bought an educational 
licence for Dorico (I’m a postgrad…).
When the next paid upgrade comes, I will move to a full licence.

I don’t want to be on the Finale forum as a fan-boy for Dorico, but it is at a 
professional level. Some things need workarounds at the moment—temporarily I’m 
sure. But I use workarounds in Finale every day. Even mixed metres with aligned 
bars can be achieved. For contemporary music, using music frames which can have 
any music assigned to them, allows things to be achieved within Dorico that 
would require cutting up in a graphics program. Pedalling, cues, lyrics, 
instrument changes—all take significant fiddling in Finale, but none in Dorico.

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

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

[Finale] Was: What is the Finale strategy; now: get on with it?

[Mariposa Symphony Orchestra]

I really don’t want to pile on, but I disagree profoundly.   

This is a fascinating discussion and an intriguing one regarding Dorico’s 
capabilities compared to those of Finale (and Sibelius.)   As a longtime Finale 
user going back well over 20 years, and a Sibelius one for slightly less, I’m 
also enjoying others’ shares regarding mutually common functionality 
complaints, workarounds, alternatives – it’s all good stuff.  

Let the thread continue!

Les Marsden
(209) 966-6988 (H)
(559) 708-6027 (Limited-reception cell)
7145 Snyder Creek Road
Mariposa, CA 95338-9641

President, Yosemite Gateway Partners, Inc.
National Park Service Centennial Ambassador
Board Director, Mariposa County Arts Council, Inc.
Board Director, Economic Development Corporation of Mariposa County
Founding Music Director and Conductor, The Mariposa Symphony Orchestra

Marsden Marx Pages (former career ended by disability): 
http://tinyurl.com/ygpj7og  
Mariposa Symphony Orchestra: http://tinyurl.com/MariposaSO 



From: wit...@nctv.com 
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 9:04 AM
To: finale@shsu.edu 
Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

I'm so tired of this thread. Finale users: get on with it. Find a new subject. 
Please

-Original Message-
From: finale-boun...@shsu.edu  On Behalf Of Skjalg 
Bjørstad
Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2018 11:59 AM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

Don’t know about the others, but the major shortcomings in Finale’s voiced 
linked parts are -Not access to special tools -No enharmonic flips

Another limitation for linked part: Plug-ins/Script  not accessible. (Scripts 
are accessible with a workaround, but...)

Skjalg - for anledningen på nett med iPhone.

> 21. apr. 2018 kl. 16:15 skrev Robert Patterson :
> 
> Could you elaborate on what you find lacking in Finale's linked parts vs.
> Sib. (or even Dorico)? Some of that lack might be addressable with a plugin.
> 
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 9:02 AM, David H. Bailey < 
> dhbai...@davidbaileymusicstudio.com> wrote:
> 
>> There are professional engraving projects being done with Dorico. If 
>> you want to see what it is capable of there are many youtube videos 
>> addressing various aspects of Dorico, and I would say that it is 
>> indeed capable of very elegant professional, publishable output.
>> 
>> Yes, you read that one of the Dorico users exports to Finale for the 
>> finished product -- I haven't read on the Dorico forum that there are 
>> others who do that.  I do know there are lots like me who are 
>> continuing to work in our notation software of choice while learning 
>> the intricacies of Dorico.  I wonder if exporting to Finale simply 
>> makes things easier for that person because of a workflow developed 
>> over many years of using Finale, while he is learning the more 
>> intricate details of the workflow in Dorico to get the same output.
>> 
>> I would say that Dorico is as much a truly professional music 
>> engraving tool as Sibelius was when it entered the Windows/Mac 
>> marketplace. Several publishers, if I remember correctly, began using 
>> it at that time instead of Finale, while some other publishers added 
>> Sibelius to their toolbox and used both.
>> 
>> A lot depends on how one defines  "truly professional" -- it's 
>> certainly much more professional than either Notion or Forte, two 
>> other recent entries into the notation software marketplace, and 
>> despite major advances with MuseScore, Dorico is capable of producing 
>> much more elegant printed output.  And it's capable of producing 
>> output as elegant as Finale's output.  I don't work in avant-garde 
>> notation so I can't speak to either Dorico or Sibelius or Finale 
>> regarding the ability to accomplish such projects.
>> 
>> I hope I'm wrong about Finale and that your thoughts are more 
>> accurate, but to be honest I don't see much advancement in Finale 
>> from Finale2014.5 to Finale25.  Linked score/parts didn't suddenly 
>> become superb and very efficient.  I still find Sibelius's linked 
>> score/parts to be much more efficient and easier to use.
>> 
>> But I know that you and Chuck Israel and many others are producing 
>> great output with Finale, and I hope development continues, with some 
>> major improvements coming soon.  Not only do Finale users need and 
>> deserve this sort of thing, but the marketplace does also.  Finale 
>> used to lead, then Sibelius hit the marketplace and suddenly Finale 
>> was playing catch-up with Sibelius.  Will it need to play catch-up 
>> with Dorico as well as Sibelius now?  Or will Finale leap ahead with 
>> the next version and force Sibelius and Dorico to catch up to it?
>> 
>> Of course what I'm saying about Finale is also true about Sibelius -- 
>> I have heard nothing about Sibelius 8 or 8.5 to make me want to 
>> upgrade from 7.1.3, and ever since the takeover by Avid I have been 
>> worried about future 

Re: [Finale] What is the Finale strategy?

[Barbara Touburg]

I have just watched the youtube videos and it occured to me that they 
have borrowed a lot from InDesign, which I know farely well.
I might like it. Who knows?
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

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