On 08.06.2007 Jonathan Smith wrote:
Also, you need to take a close look at the features you receive for the price.
They only attempt to bring Sib. in line with today's Finale. They have again
taken many of the best features in Finale and are trying to incorporate them
into their program. It's
Existing Finale users can cross-grade to Sibelius 5 for $199 US.
Cheers,
- Darcy
And it works the same the other way, Sibelius users can cross-grade
to Finale for $199 US.
I have to use both programs, and I find the Sibelius upgrade price
way too expensive for the features it offers
On 08.06.2007 Jonathan Smith wrote:
Also, you need to take a close look at the features you receive
for the price. They only attempt to bring Sib. in line with
today's Finale. They have again taken many of the best features in
Finale and are trying to incorporate them into their program.
Jonathan Smith wrote:
Existing Finale users can cross-grade to Sibelius 5 for $199 US.
Cheers,
- Darcy
And it works the same the other way, Sibelius users can cross-grade to
Finale for $199 US.
I have to use both programs, and I find the Sibelius upgrade price way
too expensive for the
Remember this?
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:29:04 +0100
From: Jonathan Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: finale@shsu.edu
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
O.K. for David, Mark Joel (+ any lurkers) here goes.
Remember this his a list from a little way back (actually, I did post it
on the
Remember this?
Hey, I remember that!
I called them two days ago to register Sib3 on a mac intel laptop as
the Sib. software blocked me from registering via the internet. I was
told by their rep. that it would run really slowly on a Macintel
chip. So, I guess the backwards compatibility
Existing Finale users can cross-grade to Sibelius 5 for $199 US.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
On 08 Jun 2007, at 5:13 PM, Jonathan Smith wrote:
Remember this?
Hey, I remember that!
I called them two days ago to register Sib3 on a mac intel laptop
as the Sib.
Randall Stokes schrieb:
I have spent much of that time deep within the bowels of Finale. So you
don't always see much of my work on the surface, but Finale is faster
and more stable as a result of it. Much of this will provide a
foundation for future growth. Things coming down the pike like
On Jul 15, 2005, at 9:32 PM, Ken Durling wrote:
Andrew -
That's easy too - just use the key below the one mentioned earlier -
the key for the number 8.
I give up. I know there was a legitimate problem, because I spent a
long time futzing with it, manual in hand, and ended up calling
And again, I say, Amen!!
Dean
On Jul 16, 2005, at 9:19 AM, Technoid wrote:
On 7/15/05, Darcy James Argue [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:21 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
I'm really having a great deal of trouble trying to figure out what
you
saw in the above that you felt
On 15 Jul 2005 at 1:46, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005, at 1:35 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005 at 1:17, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Any ATI or nVidia graphics card with 32MB or more supports OpenGL
(and, on Windows, Direct3D -- the Windows version of Sib may use
Tyler Turner wrote:
Thanks. Yes, I've looked into this some in the past,
but it's a bit of a hassle to do it with my free Yahoo
account, and the free software that's available for
doing it is from what I understand pretty buggy.
Although I have a Yahoo I.D., due to membership in yahoo lists,
David W. Fenton wrote:
I would think that MakeMusic would want someone's job description to
include monitoring this list, in any case. There are too many heavy
hitters here to ignore, in my opinion.
But it's their business, and if they want to miss such an
opportunity, then that's their
At 7/15/2005 01:35 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Is nVidia the chipset that ATI uses? Mine is ATI and I know it's an
nVidia chipset. I can't seem to find any way to poke the thing to
find out how much RAM it has.
Right click the desktop. Choose Properties.
Choose Settings. Click the Advanced
At 10:17 PM 7/14/2005, you wrote:
The Intel graphics controller is not a proper graphics controller at all
-- it means there is no separate graphics card, and the CPU has to handle
drawing in addition to everything else. Whether it supports OpenGL or
Direct3D is anyone's guess -- if it did,
At 7/15/2005 10:45 AM, Ken Durling wrote:
At 10:17 PM 7/14/2005, you wrote:
The Intel graphics controller is not a proper graphics controller at all
-- it means there is no separate graphics card, and the CPU has to handle
drawing in addition to everything else. Whether it supports OpenGL or
On Jul 14, 2005, at 11:42 AM, Ken Durling wrote:
At 07:36 AM 7/14/2005, you wrote:
Another Sibelius flaw, unmentioned in the long list quoted in this
thread, is its inability (as of Sib. 3) to break secondary beams. To
me this is a deal breaker all by itself, though I do keep a copy of
the
On Jul 14, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Darcy James Argue wrote:
the selection tool has been so slow as to be completely useless on
MacFin since 2k4. It's faster to just drag whatever's in front out of
the way and reposition it later.
Isn't that a little extreme? I often get files sent to me that
At 09:19 AM 7/15/2005, you wrote:
In 4/4 time, enter two 16ths followed by a 16h-note triplet. You will see
two beams linking all five notes. The proper notation would be for the
inner beam to be broken between the duplet and the triplet, but Sibelius 3
cannot do this. I was told as much, in
At 12:03 PM 7/15/2005, you wrote:
Wow. That's an easy one. I can't believe tech support said it wasn't
possible. Enter the notes as you've described above,
Oops, I neglected to say - select the first 16th in the triplet, THEN
go to the 3rd keypad (F10), and hit / - or mouse the top
On 15 Jul 2005 at 7:23, Phil Daley wrote:
At 7/15/2005 01:35 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Is nVidia the chipset that ATI uses? Mine is ATI and I know it's an
nVidia chipset. I can't seem to find any way to poke the thing to
find out how much RAM it has.
Right click the desktop. Choose
On 15 Jul 2005, at 3:40 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Phil, I do this kind of thing for a living, so I don't really need
instructions from you for how to look up this information, especially
when you don't seem to be aware of the aspects of your advice that
are OS- and driver-specific. If I gave
On 15 Jul 2005 at 15:48, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005, at 3:40 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Phil, I do this kind of thing for a living, so I don't really need
instructions from you for how to look up this information,
especially when you don't seem to be aware of the aspects of
On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:21 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
You should be glad I hold my tongue in response to Phil. Practically
every post he makes betrays attitudes that I find (let's find a
euphemism) annoying. I don't respond, since most times he's not
replying to me.
Be glad you only see it
David W. Fenton wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give technical explanations
for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him around really
increased my confidence in Finale.
And it seems that back in the days
On 15 Jul 2005 at 17:56, Randall Stokes wrote:
David W. Fenton wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give technical
explanations for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him
around really increased my
In 4/4 time, enter two 16ths followed by a 16h-note triplet. You will
see two beams linking all five notes. The proper notation would be
for the inner beam to be broken between the duplet and the triplet,
but Sibelius 3 cannot do this. I was told as much, in so many words,
by Sibelius tech
Andrew -
That's easy too - just use the key below the one mentioned earlier - the
key for the number 8.
Ken
At 06:25 PM 7/15/2005, you wrote:
In 4/4 time, enter two 16ths followed by a 16h-note triplet. You will
see two beams linking all five notes. The proper notation would be for
the
At 06:32 PM 7/15/2005, you wrote:
Andrew -
That's easy too - just use the key below the one mentioned earlier - the
key for the number 8.
Ken
And lest ye Finale-niks should think this is too obscure - the number 8
key - on the third (F10) keypad it does have a continuous 16th beam icon
Ken, thanks.
The last version of Sib I did serious work in was 1.4, so I'm all-too
familiar with many of those frustrations. Some of the fixes I knew
about, and some I didn't, but the nicest thing about Mr. Spreadbury's
comments is that they seem to reflect a genuine change in attitude from
Christopher,
I for one, not speaking for anyone else of course but suspecting I'm
not alone, appreciate you once again for your voice of reason.
Even when I don't agree with what is posted on this list, I
nonetheless appreciate the merit in such...there is usually something
to be gained.
Darcy James Argue wrote:
It was grabbing the tie ends that was hard (especially when items
overlapped). Apparently there's now a shortcut to cycle through
overlapping items, which is nice (and which would be nice for Finale).
Can't you cycle through overlapping items with the selection
Christopher Smith wrote:
Ken,
Great work! Thanks for this; it is indeed point by point and extremely
detailed.
Of course, given the source, some points will bear confirmation, but it
was good to see someone who knows the present version of the program as
well as the older version give a
At 7/13/2005 09:03 PM, Ken Durling wrote:
Sorry, Phil. I overreacted because it was so old as to defy relevance in
my eyes. But of course I know the program. I'm sure it's interesting and
relevant to someone who hasn't been tracking its progress.. See the
response on this list from Daniel
At 06:12 AM 07/14/2005, dhbailey wrote:
Compare that with MakeMusic's official disregard for this list and how
we have to look out for each other.
On the other hand, Coda does provide forums (as does Sibelius) which
are officially monnitored. It would be nice if there were an
official presence
68: It is impossible to have two brackets of the same type in
different
horizontal positions, as for example when a divided string section
uses
extra staves.
This is still fiddly to do, and we should have better automatic
support for it.
Fiddly is a bit euphemistic. At least as of Sib.
On 14 Jul 2005 at 1:23, Darcy James Argue wrote:
If you don't have an OpenGL-compatible graphics card with at least 32
MB of video RAM, Sibelius redraws will be painfully slow. Could that
be the problem?
I corresponded at length with the same very nice Sibelius employee
who annotated the
On 14 Jul 2005, at 1:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Nonetheless, the competitor program, Finale, exhibits no such
problems.
That's because Finale doesn't use OpenGL-enhanced drawing.
If you have an OpenGL-compatible video card, drawing in Sib 3 is
virtually instantaneous, and drawing in Sib
On 14 Jul 2005 at 6:12, dhbailey wrote:
Christopher Smith wrote:
Great work! Thanks for this; it is indeed point by point and
extremely detailed.
Of course, given the source, some points will bear confirmation, but
it was good to see someone who knows the present version of the
On 14 Jul 2005 at 7:36, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 06:12 AM 07/14/2005, dhbailey wrote:
Compare that with MakeMusic's official disregard for this list and
how we have to look out for each other.
On the other hand, Coda does provide forums (as does Sibelius) which
are officially monnitored.
David W. Fenton / 2005/07/14 / 01:52 PM wrote:
Nonetheless, the competitor program, Finale, exhibits no such
problems.
It used to. I remember painful redraw slowness prior to FinMac3, and
there was an option to turn off redraw until you ask for it. ProComp
had much faster redraw back then, but
On 14 Jul 2005 at 10:36, Andrew Stiller wrote:
Another Sibelius flaw, unmentioned in the long list quoted in this
thread, is its inability (as of Sib. 3) to break secondary beams. To
me this is a deal breaker all by itself, though I do keep a copy of
the program to edit the occasional
On 14 Jul 2005 at 14:00, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005, at 1:52 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
Nonetheless, the competitor program, Finale, exhibits no such
problems.
That's because Finale doesn't use OpenGL-enhanced drawing.
If you have an OpenGL-compatible video card, drawing
On 14 Jul 2005 at 14:13, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
David W. Fenton / 2005/07/14 / 01:52 PM wrote:
Nonetheless, the competitor program, Finale, exhibits no such
problems.
It used to. I remember painful redraw slowness prior to FinMac3, and
there was an option to turn off redraw until you ask
On 14 Jul 2005, at 2:13 PM, A-NO-NE Music wrote:
Darcy James Argue / 2005/07/14 / 02:00 PM wrote:
If you have an OpenGL-compatible video card, drawing in Sib 3 is
virtually instantaneous, and drawing in Sib 4 is still very good.
(There are some slowdowns when you have to actually adjust
At 02:06 PM 07/14/2005, David W. Fenton wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give technical explanations
for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him around really
increased my confidence in Finale.
And it seems
On 14 Jul 2005, at 2:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
That's because Finale doesn't use OpenGL-enhanced drawing.
If you have an OpenGL-compatible video card, drawing in Sib 3 is
virtually instantaneous, and drawing in Sib 4 is still very good.
(There are some slowdowns when you have to actually
David W. Fenton schrieb:
Secondly, the implementation of default beaming rules is exactly what
I've always requested for Finale. Finale works a lot better since the
implementation of classic 8ths into the basic beaming algorithm,
but it still doesn't properly beam smaller subdivisions (at
Darcy James Argue / 2005/07/14 / 02:33 PM wrote:
Hiro,
I don't think you understood what I meant.
Ha-ha. I did it again. I reread it and you are right I got it
backward. Sorry about that. By the way, in general, the difference
between OGL app and non-OGL app is CPU hit rather than GUI
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like
that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give
technical explanations
for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him
around really
increased my confidence in Finale.
Nope. Randy's still here. He just does more lurking (:-P) these days.
A
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Aaron Sherber
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 1:36 PM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] comparing finale/sibelius
At 02:06 PM
] comparing finale/sibelius
Darcy James Argue wrote:
It was grabbing the tie ends that was hard (especially when items
overlapped). Apparently there's now a shortcut to cycle through
overlapping items, which is nice (and which would be nice for Finale).
Can't you cycle through overlapping
On 14 Jul 2005, at 3:18 PM, Fisher, Allen wrote:
Ah, but you can cycle through overlapping elements with the +/- keys in
the selection tool...
Yes, but Allen, as you know, the selection tool has been so slow as to
be completely useless on MacFin since 2k4. It's faster to just drag
Account
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2005 3:20 AM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] comparing finale/sibelius
Darcy James Argue wrote:
It was grabbing the tie ends that was hard
(especially when items
overlapped). Apparently there's now a shortcut to
cycle through
overlapping
Hello Tyler,
Am 14.07.2005 um 21:15 schrieb Tyler Turner:
Part of the nice thing about the forum is that the
organization into threads makes it much easier to
browse through and quickly see where your input is
beneficial and skip over the stuff where you aren't needed.
You can get the
Hello Darcy,
Am 14.07.2005 um 08:04 schrieb Darcy James Argue:
14 Clunky text selection for expressions etc.
I assume this is a complaint about our word menu system (where you
right-click during text input for a useful menu of terms to input
into the score). This is actually pretty
--- Gerhard Torges, geb. Hölscher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hello Tyler,
Am 14.07.2005 um 21:15 schrieb Tyler Turner:
Part of the nice thing about the forum is that the
organization into threads makes it much easier to
browse through and quickly see where your input is
beneficial
On 14 Jul 2005 at 14:36, Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 02:06 PM 07/14/2005, David W. Fenton wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give technical
explanations for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him
around
On 14 Jul 2005 at 14:37, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005, at 2:18 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
That's because Finale doesn't use OpenGL-enhanced drawing.
If you have an OpenGL-compatible video card, drawing in Sib 3 is
virtually instantaneous, and drawing in Sib 4 is still very
On 14 Jul 2005 at 14:37, Darcy James Argue wrote:
When Sib3 first came out, there was a discussion on this list of the
effectively instantaneous graphics-card assisted redraw. Several PC
users downloaded the demo and reported the same results.
Um, the Sibelius 3 demo is FINE on my PC --
On 14 Jul 2005 at 12:15, Tyler Turner wrote:
I'll be honest. When I was working as an employee of
MakeMusic, I tried to keep up with this list so I
could comment when needed. But boy, there are so many
e-mails going through here every day that keeping up
here meant not being able to keep up
On 15 Jul 2005, at 02:11, David W. Fenton wrote:I would think that MakeMusic would want someone's job description to include monitoring this list, in any case. There are too many heavy hitters here to ignore, in my opinion. SecondedJohn___
Finale
On 15 Jul 2005 at 1:25, Gerhard Torges, geb. Hölscher wrote:
Am 14.07.2005 um 08:04 schrieb Darcy James Argue:
14 Clunky text selection for expressions etc.
I assume this is a complaint about our word menu system (where you
right-click during text input for a useful menu of terms to
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I don't find this at all difficult in the
Sibelius 4 demo. I can
select and entire measure and apply an articulation
to all notes. Of
I can click a note and then shift-click any
additional notes, then
apply an articulation.
This
On 14 Jul 2005 at 18:31, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I don't find this at all difficult in the
Sibelius 4 demo. I can
select and entire measure and apply an articulation
to all notes. Of
I can click a note and then shift-click any
Aaron Sherber wrote:
At 02:06 PM 07/14/2005, David W. Fenton wrote:
Back in the Randy Stokes days, we had somebody like that, but who
also was one of the programmers and could give technical explanations
for problems. Boy, but I do miss Randy. Having him around really
increased my
David,
You don't have to use partial measure selection, *or* the apply
articulation dialog.
In the articulation tool, hold down the metatool for the articulation
you want, and then just drag enclose the notes you want.
I only wish note expressions worked like this too.
- Darcy
-
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, that's a feature I'd never seen before, but it
seems to me that
it hardly relates at all to the scenario I outlined.
First off, it only works for copying from existing
music to music
that is similar. Useful as that is, it is
On 14 Jul 2005 at 22:15, Darcy James Argue wrote:
You don't have to use partial measure selection, *or* the apply
articulation dialog.
In the articulation tool, hold down the metatool for the articulation
you want, and then just drag enclose the notes you want.
I only wish note
On 14 Jul 2005 at 19:25, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, that's a feature I'd never seen before, but it
seems to me that
it hardly relates at all to the scenario I outlined.
First off, it only works for copying from existing
music to music
On 14 Jul 2005, at 11:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 at 22:15, Darcy James Argue wrote:
You don't have to use partial measure selection, *or* the apply
articulation dialog.
In the articulation tool, hold down the metatool for the articulation
you want, and then just drag
On 14 Jul 2005 at 23:37, Christopher Smith wrote:
On Jul 14, 2005, at 11:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 at 22:15, Darcy James Argue wrote:
You don't have to use partial measure selection, *or* the apply
articulation dialog.
In the articulation tool, hold down the
On 14 Jul 2005, at 11:23 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
My point is that Finale only allows a range of notes. If you start on
beat 1 and end on beat 3, beat 2 is included. Sibelius allows you to
select beat 1 and beat 3 without selecting beat 2. This is a useful
feature.
But David, the point
On 15 Jul 2005 at 0:02, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005, at 11:23 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
My point is that Finale only allows a range of notes. If you start
on beat 1 and end on beat 3, beat 2 is included. Sibelius allows you
to select beat 1 and beat 3 without selecting beat
On 14 Jul 2005 at 23:57, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005, at 11:15 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 14 Jul 2005 at 22:15, Darcy James Argue wrote:
You don't have to use partial measure selection, *or* the apply
articulation dialog.
In the articulation tool, hold down the
But it does *not* offer the same functionality. It
only offers the
ability to copy from one source to another.
Well, unless I completely do *not* understand how it
works -- the
online documentation says it's for COPYING. That's
great if you've
got a model to copy from, but it still
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finale requires the same number of mouse clicks if
you metatool
applied to each individual note. But the result is
as many UNDO
buffer events as there were mouse clicks. In
Sibelius, you have the
same number of ctrl-clicks as Finale has
On 15 Jul 2005, at 12:22 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
In Finale you cannot select the 1st and 3rd of 3 notes in one
operation.
But you don't NEED to do this, is my point. In Finale, you can select
*and* apply the articulation with a single click (or drag-enclose
operation). So being able to
On 14 Jul 2005 at 21:29, Tyler Turner wrote:
But it does *not* offer the same functionality. It
only offers the
ability to copy from one source to another.
Well, unless I completely do *not* understand how it
works -- the
online documentation says it's for COPYING. That's
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With only two notes involved, the comparison is
pretty equal, but if
there's more, Sibelius is clearly quicker.
Only if you intend to do something more with the notes
after the fact, right?
Sibelius:
Hold Ctrl and click 20 non-contiguous notes
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't get why there's any benefit to it beyond
regular mass copy
used selectively. That *also* copies between the
same rhythmic
values, but also has the advantage in some cases of
copying to
*different* rhythmic values.
That's the
On 14 Jul 2005 at 21:37, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Finale requires the same number of mouse clicks if
you metatool
applied to each individual note. But the result is
as many UNDO
buffer events as there were mouse clicks. In
Sibelius, you
On 15 Jul 2005 at 0:37, Darcy James Argue wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005, at 12:22 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
In Finale you cannot select the 1st and 3rd of 3 notes in one
operation.
But you don't NEED to do this, is my point. In Finale, you can select
*and* apply the articulation with a
On 14 Jul 2005 at 21:58, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, if articulations always had handles like
expressions do, then
the Sibelius functionality would be blown away.
Articulations always showing handles in Finale? Which
version are you using?
It does have 32mb of video RAM, but I don't think it has OpenGL. To be
honest I'm not really even sure how or where that would be indicated. I
have an Intel 82810 graphics controller.w/32MB on the slower machine, and
an NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5700 w/64MB video RAM on the fast one. That tell
Hi Ken,
Any ATI or nVidia graphics card with 32MB or more supports OpenGL (and,
on Windows, Direct3D -- the Windows version of Sib may use Direct3D, I
don't know).
The Intel graphics controller is not a proper graphics controller at
all -- it means there is no separate graphics card, and
On 15 Jul 2005 at 1:17, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Any ATI or nVidia graphics card with 32MB or more supports OpenGL
(and, on Windows, Direct3D -- the Windows version of Sib may use
Direct3D, I don't know).
Is nVidia the chipset that ATI uses? Mine is ATI and I know it's an
nVidia chipset. I
One thing I am forgetting in Sibelius... what's the
workaround for copying articulations without notes?
You can't separately filter the property elements of
notes, which includes the articulations.
Tyler
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo!
On 15 Jul 2005, at 1:35 AM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005 at 1:17, Darcy James Argue wrote:
Any ATI or nVidia graphics card with 32MB or more supports OpenGL
(and, on Windows, Direct3D -- the Windows version of Sib may use
Direct3D, I don't know).
Is nVidia the chipset that ATI
On 14 Jul 2005 at 22:30, Tyler Turner wrote:
--- David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to see a better, more consistent
implementation of
partial measure selection in Finale, as well as the
ability to do non-
contiguous selections. Having that capability in
partial
Missing from this list is:
70. Note spacing cannot be set to avoid collisions with expressions. This,
combined with the inability to move articulations horizontally, was the key
deficiency in my deciding not to buy Sibelius.
Richard Yates
I was looking through my archives.
I guess Sib must
I don't have time to go over this point by point, but this list looks like
it was from version 1.4. I'm really not sure what relevance it has at this
point. But at a glance I see things that have been fixed, things that
haven't and things that display an ignorance of how Sibelius works. Did
At 7/13/2005 09:49 AM, Ken Durling wrote:
I don't have time to go over this point by point, but this list looks like
it was from version 1.4. I'm really not sure what relevance it has at this
point. But at a glance I see things that have been fixed, things that
haven't and things that display
I did this list years back, at v1.4 and then again after v2. Many of the points as you mention are fixed, some still there, and there are always new ones to moan about.But I don't think these things are a bash at anything. There are 2 good notation applications out there, Finale and Sibelius. They
On Jul 13, 2005, at 9:49 AM, Ken Durling wrote:
I don't have time to go over this point by point, but this list looks
like it was from version 1.4. I'm really not sure what relevance it
has at this point. But at a glance I see things that have been fixed,
things that haven't and things
On 13 Jul 2005 at 6:49, Ken Durling wrote:
I don't have time to go over this point by point, but this list looks
like it was from version 1.4. I'm really not sure what relevance it
has at this point. But at a glance I see things that have been fixed,
things that haven't and things that
Well, I, for one, would like to see a point-by-point response to each
of the items. Maybe somebody could do something like:
David -
I forwarded the list to someone at Sibelius as I had to work all day
today. here's a point-by-point response from the source:
Hi Ken,
Thanks for
Ken,
Great work! Thanks for this; it is indeed point by point and extremely
detailed.
Of course, given the source, some points will bear confirmation, but it
was good to see someone who knows the present version of the program as
well as the older version give a reaction to the criticisms
Sorry, Phil. I overreacted because it was so old as to defy relevance in
my eyes. But of course I know the program. I'm sure it's interesting and
relevant to someone who hasn't been tracking its progress.. See the
response on this list from Daniel at Sibelius, to whom I forwarded your
Thanks, Ken, for posting this -- I definitely appreciate it.
On 13 Jul 2005 at 17:33, Ken Durling wrote (quoting two other people):
34. Speed users will find that you are constantly grabbing the wrong
items as the application is so slow to react.
The responsiveness of the program is, in
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
