Re: [Finale] Sale: Dorico Pro 2 and Dorico Elements 2
I’m now using Dorico for all new projects. Dorico’s ability to have distinct pieces in one file (‘flows’) that can be reordered saves so much time. For each layout, these can be set to continue on the same page or to start a new page, both with header information. Dorico handles cue superbly. The lengths of these can be dragged to extend or reduce, all correctly labelled. Dorico handles doubling players well, with automatic labelling. Dorico is also strong for percussion writing. You can easily switch from a combined set to individual instruments, because the underlying music representation is distinct from the form of it on the page. Dorico has some annoyances. IMO more engraving decisions should auto-propagate to parts. This is easily dealt with, but can catch you out. Sometimes cutting ties is the quickest method to enter dynamics etc. This ‘reversing’ always feels uncomfortable. Undo/redo includes every selection and click that you make. I hate this, but it does make me careful to think things through rather than to do and undo. Dorico jumps around more than I understand to focus the screen on something I don’t want to see (or worse I don’t immediately know where I am). Conversely, I can’t reliably find a way to link focus between score and parts. My biggest hassle in Dorico is its inability to set bars-per-system over a specified range of bars. You can do this one system at a time, but it’s annoying that something so simple in Finale takes longer in Dorico. However, Dorico’s first guess at system layout is far better than Finale’s. On the whole, Dorico’s downsides lose me minutes, but its upsides gain me days. Steve Parker ___ 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] Sale: Dorico Pro 2 and Dorico Elements 2
Steve, Thanks for the info. Are you saying that Dorico handles two instruments per score staff, but with individual parts separated, including cues and solos, very well? (I find this is a weakness in Finale). Christopher > On Jan 28, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Steve Parker wrote: > > I’m now using Dorico for all new projects. Dorico’s ability to have distinct > pieces in one file (‘flows’) that can be reordered saves so much time. For > each layout, these can be set to continue on the same page or to start a new > page, both with header information. Dorico handles cue superbly. The lengths > of these can be dragged to extend or reduce, all correctly labelled. Dorico > handles doubling players well, with automatic labelling. Dorico is also > strong for percussion writing. You can easily switch from a combined set to > individual instruments, because the underlying music representation is > distinct from the form of it on the page. > > Dorico has some annoyances. IMO more engraving decisions should > auto-propagate to parts. This is easily dealt with, but can catch you out. > Sometimes cutting ties is the quickest method to enter dynamics etc. This > ‘reversing’ always feels uncomfortable. Undo/redo includes every selection > and click that you make. I hate this, but it does make me careful to think > things through rather than to do and undo. Dorico jumps around more than I > understand to focus the screen on something I don’t want to see (or worse I > don’t immediately know where I am). Conversely, I can’t reliably find a way > to link focus between score and parts. > > My biggest hassle in Dorico is its inability to set bars-per-system over a > specified range of bars. You can do this one system at a time, but it’s > annoying that something so simple in Finale takes longer in Dorico. However, > Dorico’s first guess at system layout is far better than Finale’s. > > On the whole, Dorico’s downsides lose me minutes, but its upsides gain me > days. > > Steve Parker > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
Re: [Finale] Sale: Dorico Pro 2 and Dorico Elements 2
Craig, would you consider posting PDFs of a score and a part page and show us what Dorico produces without having tweaked much? Personally I’m more interested to see an orchestra piece. Thanks, Thomas Schaller > On Jan 27, 2019, at 8:08 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote: > > Yes, it is a big learning curve. I never really learned Sibelius, and I > haven't learned MuseScore, so I can't really compare the size of the learning > curve. My guess is the Dorico learning curve is more difficult for advanced > Finale users of long standing: > > 1) Because Dorico is considerably more sophisticated than either Sibelius or > MuseScore. > 2) Because Dorico uses a fundamentally different architecture (notes are > abstracted away from the music "canvas" and many operations are driven by a > very large set of rules. > 3) Because of Dorico's rapid development, the documentation simply has not > kept pace. > > I have found it necessary to compile my own personal user guide so that I can > quickly find my way back to the pertinent options, settings and procedures I > rely on. I do this for most software products just to help me learn them. > But in the case of Dorico, I still find myself referring to this document > every single session, and I usually add something to the document every day I > use the program. It is now 30 pages long, and that is mostly my own > shorthand. My table of contents has about 50 topics. > > My point is that this really is a major learning commitment, and many Finale > users will find they are happier staying with what they know and what is > working for them. Nothing at all wrong with that. > > > On 1/26/2019 6:56 PM, David H. Bailey wrote: >> Craig, >> >> Thank you for sharing these thoughts. You have made much more progress with >> Dorico than I have made, so I didn't feel qualified to respond. But I'm glad >> you were able to make the comparisons. >> >> I know that becoming better acquainted with Dorico is in my imminent future, >> but most of the projects I've been working on lately have had short >> timetables so learning a new software hasn't been possible. >> >> soon . . . >> >> Thanks, >> David >> >> >> On 1/26/2019 5:01 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote: >>> Here are some observations about each of the plug-in examples. Let me >>> stipulate that the Finale plug-ins might provide some unusual visual >>> results that aren't directly matched by Dorico, so I am not claiming >>> equivalence on any of these. >>> >>> 1. Copy arbitrary material regardless of barlines, etc. This is inherent >>> in Dorico, and I think you would find this far more productive in Dorico. >>> Dorico does not provide any drag-and-drop, but the cut and paste model is >>> extremely powerful. It even allows 1-to-many pasting, and pasting to >>> discontinuous staffs and so on. Also there is a very powerful capability >>> where you can select any material, press "R" and it automatically >>> duplicates the material placing it immediately to the right of the >>> selection, which still expressing everything correctly with no touch-up >>> required. >>> >>> 2. Mass relink. This is inherent in Dorico. Moreover, Dorico seems to >>> make better assumptions about when to automatically reflect score changes >>> in parts and vice versa. >>> >>> 3. Autocreate MM rests. This is always automatic. You never "create" any >>> MM rests. It is inherent. There are some options for visual appearance. >>> >>> 4. Multiple sets of not spacings. I am not aware of anything line this in >>> Dorico. Of course you can edit the parts directly to apply any spacing you >>> need. >>> >>> 5. Designate certain text as titles. There is only "text" and "system text" >>> in Dorico. There is no hierarchy of text objects, such as an outline mode >>> in a word processor. However, you have a great deal of control over the >>> formatting of any text object and you can freely copy and reuse any of your >>> text items. So if you have a text object formatted as a "title", you can >>> copy that anywhere else you need a similar title to appear. Moreover, >>> Dorico has a higher level of abstraction for these situations. Your file >>> can consist of multiple "flows", which are like movements. And each flow >>> can have a title, with options how and when to display those titles. >>> >>> 6. Mass align hairpins. There is no mass alignment, but if you have a >>> 4-bar passage, you can enter the dynamic as "F" and Dorico will >>> enter that dynamic as a group that is all aligned. And if you copy that >>> group to other staves, they will be aligned (taking in to account the >>> collisions). So if you enter it properly, you never need to go back and >>> fix it. Dorico moves the groups around (maintaining the alignment) as >>> needed even if the music changes to create a new collision. >>> >>> 7. Various fixes. Most of these situations just don't happen in Dorico. >>> And you have
Re: [Finale] Sale: Dorico Pro 2 and Dorico Elements 2
Hi Christoper, This is something that is promised. You can easily set divisi passages with extra staves. As far as cuing goes, you select something in the part and choose from a list of which instrument(s) you want cued. As it stands now, I still find combining instruments into a staff to be easier than in Finale, because it is so easy to have three staves (combined, I and II) and allocate these to different layouts. Steve P. > On 28 Jan 2019, at 13:45, Christopher Smith > wrote: > > Steve, > > Thanks for the info. Are you saying that Dorico handles two instruments per > score staff, but with individual parts separated, including cues and solos, > very well? (I find this is a weakness in Finale). > > Christopher > > >> On Jan 28, 2019, at 8:31 AM, Steve Parker wrote: >> >> I’m now using Dorico for all new projects. Dorico’s ability to have distinct >> pieces in one file (‘flows’) that can be reordered saves so much time. For >> each layout, these can be set to continue on the same page or to start a new >> page, both with header information. Dorico handles cue superbly. The lengths >> of these can be dragged to extend or reduce, all correctly labelled. Dorico >> handles doubling players well, with automatic labelling. Dorico is also >> strong for percussion writing. You can easily switch from a combined set to >> individual instruments, because the underlying music representation is >> distinct from the form of it on the page. >> >> Dorico has some annoyances. IMO more engraving decisions should >> auto-propagate to parts. This is easily dealt with, but can catch you out. >> Sometimes cutting ties is the quickest method to enter dynamics etc. This >> ‘reversing’ always feels uncomfortable. Undo/redo includes every selection >> and click that you make. I hate this, but it does make me careful to think >> things through rather than to do and undo. Dorico jumps around more than I >> understand to focus the screen on something I don’t want to see (or worse I >> don’t immediately know where I am). Conversely, I can’t reliably find a way >> to link focus between score and parts. >> >> My biggest hassle in Dorico is its inability to set bars-per-system over a >> specified range of bars. You can do this one system at a time, but it’s >> annoying that something so simple in Finale takes longer in Dorico. However, >> Dorico’s first guess at system layout is far better than Finale’s. >> >> On the whole, Dorico’s downsides lose me minutes, but its upsides gain me >> days. >> >> Steve Parker >> ___ >> Finale mailing list >> Finale@shsu.edu >> https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale >> >> To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: >> finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu > > > ___ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > > To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: > finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
[Finale] music softwares and 'politics'
Hi, A 'political' (maybe) consideration about music softwares other than /Finale /- that allow me not to mention them explicitly. I see that many people (and increasingly so) likes to allow software (or maybe, other people) to do things ready for them. That's an interesting phenomenon, not at all restricted to 'music softwares'; it's simpler, easier, quicker etc.; you have not even to think with your head. Maybe it come close to something Italy (and other countries as well) has suffered some decades ago (I mean, a single person that think, do, etc. for a whole nation). I continue to prefer that the software do what I want, even if I had to find myself alone. Paolo A. Rismondo --- Questa email è stata esaminata alla ricerca di virus da AVG. http://www.avg.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] Sale: Dorico Pro 2 and Dorico Elements 2
Everything I have has been edited at least a little. Maybe a good demonstration would be for somebody to send me a MusicXML file. I'll import it into Dorico and post the score and parts with no editing. On 1/28/2019 10:13 AM, Thomas Schaller wrote: Craig, would you consider posting PDFs of a score and a part page and show us what Dorico produces without having tweaked much? Personally I’m more interested to see an orchestra piece. Thanks, Thomas Schaller On Jan 27, 2019, at 8:08 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote: Yes, it is a big learning curve. I never really learned Sibelius, and I haven't learned MuseScore, so I can't really compare the size of the learning curve. My guess is the Dorico learning curve is more difficult for advanced Finale users of long standing: 1) Because Dorico is considerably more sophisticated than either Sibelius or MuseScore. 2) Because Dorico uses a fundamentally different architecture (notes are abstracted away from the music "canvas" and many operations are driven by a very large set of rules. 3) Because of Dorico's rapid development, the documentation simply has not kept pace. I have found it necessary to compile my own personal user guide so that I can quickly find my way back to the pertinent options, settings and procedures I rely on. I do this for most software products just to help me learn them. But in the case of Dorico, I still find myself referring to this document every single session, and I usually add something to the document every day I use the program. It is now 30 pages long, and that is mostly my own shorthand. My table of contents has about 50 topics. My point is that this really is a major learning commitment, and many Finale users will find they are happier staying with what they know and what is working for them. Nothing at all wrong with that. On 1/26/2019 6:56 PM, David H. Bailey wrote: Craig, Thank you for sharing these thoughts. You have made much more progress with Dorico than I have made, so I didn't feel qualified to respond. But I'm glad you were able to make the comparisons. I know that becoming better acquainted with Dorico is in my imminent future, but most of the projects I've been working on lately have had short timetables so learning a new software hasn't been possible. soon . . . Thanks, David On 1/26/2019 5:01 PM, Craig Parmerlee wrote: Here are some observations about each of the plug-in examples. Let me stipulate that the Finale plug-ins might provide some unusual visual results that aren't directly matched by Dorico, so I am not claiming equivalence on any of these. 1. Copy arbitrary material regardless of barlines, etc. This is inherent in Dorico, and I think you would find this far more productive in Dorico. Dorico does not provide any drag-and-drop, but the cut and paste model is extremely powerful. It even allows 1-to-many pasting, and pasting to discontinuous staffs and so on. Also there is a very powerful capability where you can select any material, press "R" and it automatically duplicates the material placing it immediately to the right of the selection, which still expressing everything correctly with no touch-up required. 2. Mass relink. This is inherent in Dorico. Moreover, Dorico seems to make better assumptions about when to automatically reflect score changes in parts and vice versa. 3. Autocreate MM rests. This is always automatic. You never "create" any MM rests. It is inherent. There are some options for visual appearance. 4. Multiple sets of not spacings. I am not aware of anything line this in Dorico. Of course you can edit the parts directly to apply any spacing you need. 5. Designate certain text as titles. There is only "text" and "system text" in Dorico. There is no hierarchy of text objects, such as an outline mode in a word processor. However, you have a great deal of control over the formatting of any text object and you can freely copy and reuse any of your text items. So if you have a text object formatted as a "title", you can copy that anywhere else you need a similar title to appear. Moreover, Dorico has a higher level of abstraction for these situations. Your file can consist of multiple "flows", which are like movements. And each flow can have a title, with options how and when to display those titles. 6. Mass align hairpins. There is no mass alignment, but if you have a 4-bar passage, you can enter the dynamic as "F" and Dorico will enter that dynamic as a group that is all aligned. And if you copy that group to other staves, they will be aligned (taking in to account the collisions). So if you enter it properly, you never need to go back and fix it. Dorico moves the groups around (maintaining the alignment) as needed even if the music changes to create a new collision. 7. Various fixes. Most of these situations just don't happen in Dorico. And you have complete control over the rhythmic position
Re: [Finale] music softwares and 'politics'
Hi Paolo, You make good points. In an ideal world, the software would create beautiful engraved scores and parts with very little effort, but for those who want more control it would also allow them to do what they want. After all, the whole purpose of computers in the first place was to do quickly and easily what would take a human many more hours to do and not so easily. Imagine getting to the end of a 30-part score, all written beautifully by hand, only to find that 30 notes needed to be changed in every part, necessitating the complete rewriting of many pages of the score. Computers were designed to remove that sort of labor. Using notation software, which in actuality is a very tiny niche of a niche market and nowhere near to affecting the entire population is quite different from the political manifestations you mention when a country's leader tries to think for the entire population. One of the great things about good notation software such as Finale, Sibelius, Dorico, increasingly MuseScore, Notion, Forte, is the amount of control that each software allows the user to exercise. None of the programs forces anybody to accept the result "out of the box" with no changes possible. The more expensive programs Finale, Sibelius and Dorico allow more control over more items so the users indeed have the ability to think and sweat all they want over all the little details that only a music engraver would care about but which would not be noticed by most performing musicians. And the best thing in my opinion about the notation software marketplace is that nobody is forced to use any particular software unless they have a demanding client who insists on one over the others. So the "political" comparison doesn't Really hold up, again in my opinion. Thanks for raising the issue, David H. Bailey On 1/28/2019 9:49 AM, Paolo Alberto Rismondo wrote: Hi, A 'political' (maybe) consideration about music softwares other than /Finale /- that allow me not to mention them explicitly. I see that many people (and increasingly so) likes to allow software (or maybe, other people) to do things ready for them. That's an interesting phenomenon, not at all restricted to 'music softwares'; it's simpler, easier, quicker etc.; you have not even to think with your head. Maybe it come close to something Italy (and other countries as well) has suffered some decades ago (I mean, a single person that think, do, etc. for a whole nation). I continue to prefer that the software do what I want, even if I had to find myself alone. Paolo A. Rismondo --- Questa email è stata esaminata alla ricerca di virus da AVG. http://www.avg.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 -- * David H. Bailey dhbaile...@comcast.net http://www.davidbaileymusicstudio.com ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
[Finale] Dorico test importing Finale XML
OK, here are the results Score: https://app.box.com/s/n7pi05swx2hve4wk71znvg409geju45b Parts: https://app.box.com/s/slp2py2olo3404gcpnlq9i30w3m4h0g9 I emphasize I did ZERO EDITING. All I did was: 1) Open Dorico 2) Import your XML file 3) Print score 4) Print parts That all took about i minute. I chose to use Dorico's internal PDF creator which is really very nice and extremely fast. But one shortcoming is that it creates a separate PDF for each part, so I also did 5) Opened PdfSAM Visual to merge all the parts into one file. That took about 3 minutes -- longer than it took to create the parts in Dorico. The layouts aren't perfect. I'd certainly edit them a little. But a key point is that in almost every case, the parts are usable without any editing if you are in a big rush to get something out for rehearsal. On 1/28/2019 4:21 PM, Thomas Schaller wrote: Hi Craig, thanks for volunteering to do a little test. Here is an orchestra job that has a bit of everything, yet not long. Not sure what will translate, maybe there is too much information in this XML file. Let me know if I should prepare it differently to get a better result (for test purposes). But I’m really anxious to see how little one needs to touch to get a good result. Thanks again, Thomas PS - I took out title and credits and copyright to be on the safe side. --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus ___ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu https://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale To unsubscribe from finale send a message to: finale-unsubscr...@shsu.edu
