At 12:28 PM 7/25/2005, you wrote:
I never realized Sibelius was in Walnut Creek, a town I've spent
quite a bit of time i
Interesting. Did you live there at one time?
If you're near there, I suggest you might want to try out some of the
concerts of the California Music Festival. The
At 08:00 PM 7/27/05 -0700, Ken Durling wrote:
http://californiamusicfestival.org/home.html
Wow, that really is an awful site!.
Maybe, but I can't even get it because on Firefox I have Flashblock
installed, and IBM Homepage Reader is a speech reader. With no regular
alternative, it's officially
On 27 Jul 2005 at 23:14, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
At 08:00 PM 7/27/05 -0700, Ken Durling wrote:
http://californiamusicfestival.org/home.html
Wow, that really is an awful site!.
Maybe, but I can't even get it because on Firefox I have Flashblock
installed, and IBM Homepage Reader is a
At 08:44 PM 7/27/2005, you wrote:
Here's what I had designed for their website:
http://www.dfenton.com/CMF/
I was going to do it all for free, but the significant other of one
of the Festival board members is a web designer, so he did it (it
was complete nepotism). I was never even told that
On Jul 23, 2005, at 8:40 PM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Case law, or speculation? All that you describe is several direct
copies of a computer output.
causing me to note that a better way to have said this is my
informed, lay (that is to say, I am not an attourney) interpretation
of case
Richard Yates wrote:
I experienced the same from Daniel Spreadbury when I was trying out the
Sibelius demo. What was most impressive, in addition to the time he spent,
was his acknowledgment that Finale's adjustable and programmed placement of
articulations was superior to Sibelius'.
This is
Tyler Turner wrote:
[snip]
Where
are Finale products at the www.jwpepper.com site?
Not on the home page,
where the visitor first looks around -- on that page
is a link to
download Sibelius' Scorch plug-in. Not either of
the first two products
on the Music Technology page, either. Finale
Colin Broom wrote:
Richard Yates wrote:
I experienced the same from Daniel Spreadbury when I was trying out the
Sibelius demo. What was most impressive, in addition to the time he
spent,
was his acknowledgment that Finale's adjustable and programmed
placement of
articulations was superior
Mark D Lew wrote:
Regarding copyrights on fonts, the current guiding case is Adobe vs
SSI (1998), which you can read online at
http://directory.serifmagazine.com/Ethics_and_Law/Copyright/
judgement.php4.
The law is pretty straightforward, neither illogical nor
complicated. When you
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I'm not saying the product is superior, just saying
that MakeMusic
hasn't done what it needs to do to get its product
listed! How can a
prospective buyer, going to JWPepper, even know that
PrintMusic exists?
I don't know the current situation, but
In rebuttal to Dave's comment that
Daniel [Speadbury]'s involvement [in a Sibelius list], by the way,
isn't unofficial -- he's very upfront about being an employee and is
constantly providing links to personnel inside the company if he can't
provide the answer. He's very much an official
In partial reply to Tyler, David Bailey wrote, in part:
I know that for a book to become a best-seller it has to be sold
to which I would note the following anecdote. Part of my income is
derived from small package delivery, and earlier this year, one of the
small packages I was called
At 01:33 AM 7/25/2005, you wrote:
Obviously it's entirely feasible that the whole Sibelius technical support
team is like that, and if so, I would be the first to take my hat off to
them, but is it not also possible that this is just one really nice
guy? Would the kind of unofficial
On 25 Jul 2005 at 9:33, Colin Broom wrote:
Richard Yates wrote:
I experienced the same from Daniel Spreadbury when I was trying out
the Sibelius demo. What was most impressive, in addition to the time
he spent, was his acknowledgment that Finale's adjustable and
programmed placement of
On 25 Jul 2005 at 7:02, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Mark D Lew wrote:
Regarding copyrights on fonts, the current guiding case is Adobe vs
SSI (1998), which you can read online at
http://directory.serifmagazine.com/Ethics_and_Law/Copyright/
judgement.php4.
The law is pretty
On 25 Jul 2005 at 7:20, Ken Durling wrote:
Daniel is unique, but I've had a few occasions to call the official
tech support line (listed in the documentation that comes with Sib) in
Walnut Creek, which is near me.
I never realized Sibelius was in Walnut Creek, a town I've spent
quite a bit
On 25/07/05, David W. Fenton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 25 Jul 2005 at 7:02, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Mark D Lew wrote:
Regarding copyrights on fonts, the current guiding case is Adobe vs
SSI (1998), which you can read online at
On Jul 25, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
and indeed, I am familiar with Adobe v. SSI; I would assert that the
U.S. Supreme Court decision is illogical and complicated for this
reason. The court held that SSI infringed software copyrights because
the files manipulated by SSI were
David W. Fenton wrote:
I've only had one correspondence with MakeMusic (I've sent in feature
requests, etc., which didn't require a response beyond an acknowledgment),
and it took several messages before the support person even got to the
point of comprehending what I was talking about,
Tyler Turner wrote:
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Compare this to MakeMusic, which has several
employees who monitor this
list on their own time (we do appreciate that), but
since there is no
official monitoring of this list we have to follow
official procedures
to submit feature
At 07:31 AM 7/24/05 -0400, dhbailey wrote:
My point about Sibelius as a company working hard to create a presence
for itself while MakeMusic is just trudging along in the same old rut
still stands, regardless of the low-brow quality of the comparison in
question.
David is right. Sibelius came
Mark D Lew wrote:
On Jul 23, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Tyler Turner wrote:
This is wrong. When I worked in customer support, I
computed the number of customer e-mails finished in
one response vs. those that took multiple e-mails to
resolve. I personally was resolving over 90% of the
issues to the
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sibelius also maintains an in-house forum populated
by their
tech-support personnel, same as MakeMusic does.
They go the extra-mile and also officially
participate in the
out-of-house group. MakeMusic does not.
If you address my statements on
On 24 Jul 2005 at 12:46, Tyler Turner wrote:
And even though I'm not a
MakeMusic employee any longer, for the past 4 years I
have been out on the net correcting misinformation and
participating on various forums, always in my spare
time. I haven't seen anyone from Sibelius logging as
much
Someone forwarded my posts to this forum about trying out the
Sibelius demo to Daniel Spreadbury and he answered me in great detail
and at great length, and then engaged in a lengthy and quite
interesting discussion of the points I'd raised. He spent *hours*
responding to my emails.
And all
On 24 Jul 2005 at 14:40, Richard Yates wrote:
Someone forwarded my posts to this forum about trying out the
Sibelius demo to Daniel Spreadbury and he answered me in great
detail and at great length, and then engaged in a lengthy and quite
interesting discussion of the points I'd raised.
On Jul 21, 2005, at 4:54 AM, Richard Yates wrote:
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the
exemplar
is not complicated.
http://home.earthlink.net/~jfalbano/
Six%20Music%20Notation%20Programs.pdf
I'm coming into this discussion late. (This list is too busy, and I
Owain Sutton wrote:
Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Adobe succeeded in persuading the court that a digital font is output
of a computer program
Case law suggests, that in the U.S., if you printed out all of the
characters of the revere font enlarged them with an analog pantagraph,
and scanned
The fact that Mr Spreadbury submitted the Sibelius entry, whereas the
Finale entry fell by default to the only person who volunteered, tells
me something about the difference between MakeMusic and Sibelius. The
latter saw an opportunity to show off their product and made sure that
Mark D Lew wrote:
On Jul 21, 2005, at 4:54 AM, Richard Yates wrote:
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the
exemplar
is not complicated.
http://home.earthlink.net/~jfalbano/
Six%20Music%20Notation%20Programs.pdf
I'm coming into this discussion late. (This
Simon Troup wrote:
The fact that Mr Spreadbury submitted the Sibelius entry, whereas the
Finale entry fell by default to the only person who volunteered, tells
me something about the difference between MakeMusic and Sibelius. The
latter saw an opportunity to show off their product and
On Jul 23, 2005, at 4:04 AM, dhbailey wrote:
As I recall reading (no I can't remember nor cite where I read these
things) what Adobe did was to convince the courts that the electronic
files which describe the fonts is copyrightable, not the fonts that
were generated by the electronic files.
The fact that Mr Spreadbury submitted the Sibelius entry, whereas the
Finale entry fell by default to the only person who volunteered, tells
me something about the difference between MakeMusic and Sibelius. The
latter saw an opportunity to show off their product and made sure that
they
The quality of the engraving isn't in question here - the fact that the
company participated is. Look at the MakeMusic submission -- it's far
inferior to the Sibelius submission. I can't even see the notes or the
staves for the MakeMusic submission!
You are all reading far more into this
The fact that Mr Spreadbury submitted the Sibelius entry, whereas
the Finale entry fell by default to the only person who
volunteered, tells me something about the difference between
MakeMusic and Sibelius. The latter saw an opportunity to show off
their product and made sure that they got
At 06:37 AM 7/23/2005, you wrote:
It's not a MakeMusic submission. Presonally I think they should stay out
of things as badly organised as this. There are far better way of
promoting their product than getting involved in badly thought out
competitions. This nothing but a mildly interesting
Ken Durling schrieb:
Something I'd like to see is at least a partial list of what editions by
what publishers are done in which program, especially major publishers.
Here is one of one company which uses Sibelius.
http://www.notation.de/german/referenzen.html
Johannes
--
On 7/23/05, Richard Yates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The quality of the engraving isn't in question here - the fact that the
company participated is. Look at the MakeMusic submission -- it's far
inferior to the Sibelius submission. I can't even see the notes or the
staves for the MakeMusic
On Jul 23, 2005, at 5:47 AM, Richard Yates wrote:
This is all pure fantasy. Do you actually read the posts in these
threads?
Well, I try, but it seems like there's about 70 posts a day lately, so
it's hard for me to keep up as well as I'd like.
Evidently, I didn't study hard enough and got
--- dhbailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Compare this to MakeMusic, which has several
employees who monitor this
list on their own time (we do appreciate that), but
since there is no
official monitoring of this list we have to follow
official procedures
to submit feature requests or
On 23 Jul 2005 at 16:06, Tyler Turner wrote:
When I worked in customer support, I
computed the number of customer e-mails finished in
one response vs. those that took multiple e-mails to
resolve. I personally was resolving over 90% of the
issues to the satisfaction of the customer in the
To my comments
Adobe succeeded in persuading the court that a digital font is output
of a computer program
and
Case law suggests, that in the U.S., if you printed out all of the
characters of the revere font enlarged them with an analog pantagraph,
and scanned and digitized the enlarged
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
The Graphire font (Revere) is not even the same character order, and it has
some sort of zero-width parameter, so it can't be used as text in other
documents -- characters appear one on top of the other. I'd experimented
unsuccessfully with using it in Finale ...
On 21 Jul 2005, at 5:46 PM, Carl Dershem wrote:
I'd think one page of that, one page of a relatively complex jazz
piece (perhaps something from Mantooth or Levy or Fedchock) and one
other piece in a third style. After all, you want to show the
flexibility of the program, rather than just one
Owain Sutton schrieb:
I'd love for a third further requirement, of a critical edition of
(perhaps) one small segment. This would entail all of the above, plus
the important questions of target audience, multiple function, etc.
I don't see in which way a critical edition shows anything about
All fine with me, but count me out of it. I doubt there are many
engravers who have extensive experience in both genres, I certainly haven't.
I think a _much_ better idea would be to do this separately. What I am
after is things like beam placement, and as I understand it that doesn't
matter
On 22 Jul 2005, at 3:00 AM, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
All fine with me, but count me out of it. I doubt there are many
engravers who have extensive experience in both genres, I certainly
haven't.
I think a _much_ better idea would be to do this separately.
I agree. I'd certainly volunteer
If anyone is interested in organising this sort of competition, it's
important to work out what the purpose is. Do we want to test:
- the capacity of the software for producing complex notation?
- the capacity of the software for producing clear, readable notation?
- the capacity of the
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
The Graphire font (Revere) is not even the same character order, and
it has
some sort of zero-width parameter, so it can't be used as text in other
documents -- characters appear one on top of the other. I'd experimented
At 04:10 PM 7/22/05 +1000, Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote:
Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
The Graphire font (Revere) is not even the same character order, and it has
some sort of zero-width parameter, so it can't be used as text in other
documents -- characters appear one on top of the
, 2005 5:00 PM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] notation program comparison
The comparison does make me wonder though: Wouldn't a real comparison
where experts with each software work by strictly copying one or more
sources of real published music be long overdue?
Some time ago (years I
) 272-3181
http://www.RonaldJBrown.com
-Original Message-
From: Johannes Gebauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: July 21, 2005 5:00 PM
To: finale@shsu.edu
Subject: Re: [Finale] notation program comparison
The comparison does make me wonder though: Wouldn't a real comparison
where
ronan wrote:
I don't know about staging, but didn't Daniel Spreadbury work for Sibelius
at one time? To add insult to injury, Lora Creighton is using an ancient
version of Finale--which leads me to wonder what kind of engraving
experience she has. Or any of them, for that matter. The whole
There is no possible way any such comparison is ever going to be totally
objective. Noone is going to enter if it involves doing endless pages of
complex notation. If I am going to enter the comparison I want it
limited, and I am not going to time it (that's not the way I work, I am
too
There is no possible way any such comparison is ever going to be
totally objective. Noone is going to enter if it involves doing
endless pages of complex notation.
I think Jari's idea of a more selective gallery of well engraved Finale work
deserves more attention. I never liked the Hall Of
this is a crucial element of any useful comparison
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
But I would write a report on how I did
what and which things took time/were complicated/had me consult the manual.
--
Robert Patterson
http://RobertGPatterson.com
___
At 05:59 PM 7/22/05 +0200, Johannes Gebauer wrote:
There is no possible way any such comparison is ever going to be totally
objective. Noone is going to enter if it involves doing endless pages of
complex notation. If I am going to enter the comparison I want it
limited, and I am not going to
At 7/22/2005 12:37 PM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
A proper comparison, it seems to me, would include (as do performance
auditions) music from numerous genres. For me that might include a
comparison of settings of...
...a page of plainchant in appropriate fonts
...a page of Couperin complete
Oh, I don't mind complex, just not pages and pages of it to try out
every possible situation. Not practical, won't happen.
However, the list you give I am not going to do in full, it's just too
time consuming. But perhaps one doesn't have to do it all, and various
people can try their luck on
On 22 Jul 2005 at 12:37, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
It seems to me that the power of a program resides not in its defaults, but
in its flexibility in solving frequent notational challenges
Well, I think that if what you're trying to test is flexibility,
that's correct.
But if you're trying
At 03:54 PM 7/22/05 -0400, David W. Fenton wrote:
But if you're trying to test ease of use and good results with very
little work, then I think the defaults ought to be used.
And I think Finale falls down on the defaults, and that's what the
vast majority of users will end up with.
You're
Actually, I think two versions have had much better templates than
before. Not ideal in every respect, but still much better.
However, what really needs to be improved is Finale's template handling.
There is absolutely no reason that the wizard can only have two
templates. If MM shipped
Matthew Hindson Fastmail Account wrote:
With respect to reverse engineering the Revere font of Graphier as
Matthew suggested, and about which he further wrote, in part:
It would of course be illegal to do this most likely - what is the
status of 'abandonware' these days?
It would probably
Noel Stoutenburg wrote:
Adobe succeeded in
persuading the court that a digital font is output of a computer
program
Case law suggests, that in
the U.S., if you printed out all of the characters of the revere font
enlarged them with an analog pantagraph, and scanned and digitized the
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the exemplar
is not complicated.
http://home.earthlink.net/~jfalbano/Six%20Music%20Notation%20Programs.pdf
Richard Yates
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the
exemplar is not complicated.
It might help if the person who did the Finale version made an effort.
Simon Troup
igital Music Art
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
At 04:56 PM 7/21/05 +0100, Simon Troup wrote:
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the
exemplar is not complicated.
It might help if the person who did the Finale version made an effort.
Ain't that the truth. Same with the Graphire example. These are like
first-day
It might help if the person who did the Finale version made an effort.
Ain't that the truth. Same with the Graphire example. These are like
first-day user examples.
It is interesting to see but taken with a pinch of salt. Half the time all the
programs you see demonstrated are capable or
Just a cursory glance:
- I see that the Finale and Sibelius people both forgot the cautionary
A natural in measure 3. The Finale person also forgot the cautionary C
natural just after it in the middle voice and nobody thought of putting
a cautionary A natural in measure 26.
- The Finale
Does anyone know the ground rules set for this comparison? Was the amount of
tweaking limited or restricted? The number and type of collisions in these
examples are inexcusable.
Rick Neal
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 11:55 AM, Dennis Bathory-Kitsz wrote:
At 04:56 PM 7/21/05 +0100, Simon Troup
At 07:29 PM 7/21/05 +0200, Michael Cook wrote:
The
Graphire Music Press font does look good, though - shame it's not
available for Finale.
The Graphire font (Revere) is not even the same character order, and it has
some sort of zero-width parameter, so it can't be used as text in other
At 6:28 PM +0100 7/21/05, Simon Troup wrote:
It might help if the person who did the Finale version made an effort.
Ain't that the truth. Same with the Graphire example. These are like
first-day user examples.
It is interesting to see but taken with a pinch of salt. Half the
time all
On 7/21/05, Rick Neal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know the ground rules set for this comparison? Was the amount of
tweaking limited or restricted? The number and type of collisions in these
examples are inexcusable.
This was not anything very formal, and as far as I know none of
The first post in this thread never showed up for me. Could someone repost
the link? Thanks
Ken
At 08:56 AM 7/21/2005, you wrote:
This may be of interest, although the score that as chosen as the
exemplar is not complicated.
It might help if the person who did the Finale version made
http://home.earthlink.net/~jfalbano/Six%20Music%20Notation%20Programs.pdf
On 21/07/05, Ken Durling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first post in this thread never showed up for me. Could someone repost
the link? Thanks
Ken
At 08:56 AM 7/21/2005, you wrote:
This may be of
The comparison does make me wonder though: Wouldn't a real comparison
where experts with each software work by strictly copying one or more
sources of real published music be long overdue?
Some time ago (years I guess) we had this kind of thread as well, where
I believe Sibelius staged a kind
Lora,
what I'd like to know: why is the Finale example a scanned image, and
not a direct PDF from the source file?
Johannes
Lora Crighton schrieb:
On 7/21/05, Rick Neal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know the ground rules set for this comparison? Was the
amount of tweaking limited
On 7/21/05, Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lora,
what I'd like to know: why is the Finale example a scanned image, and
not a direct PDF from the source file?
Johannes
I don't have the Adobe program that I would need to create a PDF file.
I'm using Finale 2002 on a laptop
On 7/21/05, Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The comparison does make me wonder though: Wouldn't a real comparison
where experts with each software work by strictly copying one or more
sources of real published music be long overdue?
I would love to see that, maybe doing a page each
Next time it may be worth noting, that Finale can export a TIFF file of
a page. If you save at 1200dpi the quality is very good.
It does show, however, that this is not a valid comparison, after all
you were using a 4 year old version of the software, with currently 3,
in a few days four
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
My suggestion for a good piece of music would be a page from a Sonata or
Partita for violin solo by Bach. This usually really tests notation
software. First movement of the A minor Sonata comes to mind. There
should be loads of out of copyright editions of this,
Another factor in this is how quickly it is done. I would propose that any
comparison include the length of time it took to produce the results.
___
Finale mailing list
Finale@shsu.edu
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
Some time ago (years I guess) we had this kind of thread as well, where
I believe Sibelius staged a kind of competition, but ended up with a
rather poor result for their own software and quickly withdrew the
results.
Hi Johannes
I think I remember the event, but ti wasn't Sibelius, it was
Yeah, but...
Is there any way to measure this accurately? Every Engraver who will
enter this as a competion will try to make himself look really quick. To
be honest I don't think we'd get any real life times. Since it also
depends on the skill, but also on the accuratesse of the person I
Yes, you are right, I take this back. I didn't intend to damage
Sibelius, in case anyone wondered.
In the current comparison I actually found the Score example quite
appealing in some respects.
Johannes
Simon Troup schrieb:
Some time ago (years I guess) we had this kind of thread as well,
Johannes Gebauer wrote:
Next time it may be worth noting, that Finale can export a TIFF file of
a page. If you save at 1200dpi the quality is very good.
It does show, however, that this is not a valid comparison, after all
you were using a 4 year old version of the software, with currently
On 21 Jul 2005 at 17:16, Lora Crighton wrote:
On 7/21/05, Johannes Gebauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
what I'd like to know: why is the Finale example a scanned image, and
not a direct PDF from the source file?
I don't have the Adobe program that I would need to create a PDF file.
I'm
The comparison does make me wonder though: Wouldn't a real comparison
where experts with each software work by strictly copying one or more
sources of real published music be long overdue?
Some time ago (years I guess) we had this kind of thread as well, where
I believe Sibelius staged a
88 matches
Mail list logo
