MAC Applications - Re: Finale Question

Author

Re: Finale Question

John Rethorst

2004-05-21, 11:30 pm

In article <qkorc.9265$cz5.1360841@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
"Richard F. Sayage" <rsayage1@ZEROSPAMoptonline.net> wrote:

> There are a
> number of top-notch packages, all with varying amounts of strengths and
> weaknesses. Finale, Encore, Sibelius, and Overture (by the original creator
> of Encore) are all top notch.

True, although the interfaces are quite different. Interface is by
definition a two-way street, and users' preferences will vary.
Otherwise, a historical perspective can help clarify the arguments about
notation programs.

Finale was born into the world of Professional Composer (nice output
with the third-party Sonata font, difficult to use, severe limitations
on capability) and DMCS/Deluxe Music Construction Set (nice output with
Sonata, easy to use, even more severe limitations). Finale was the first
program that supported the most advanced/arcane notation anyone would
want, although output wasn't that nice and it was insane to use.
Successive versions have become easier, although I think a good
interface is still a long way off.

Encore would never do _everything_ as Finale would, but meets all but
the most arcane requirements, has an excellent interface designed by
someone gifted in that regard, and developed a smallish but loyal
following among amateurs and professionals who generate a lot of music.
Output really isn't very good. Encore's designer later went on to write
Overture, with an even better interface and excellent output. It runs on
Windows, Mac and native Mac OS X. It was buggy when owned by Opcode and
then Cakewalk but, since the developer bought the rights and gave it the
support the two other companies did not, this is no longer the case.

The problem anyone has faced trying to decide between these and the
astonishing number of other notation programs, given the size of the
market - Igor, Lime, Opus/Vivaldi, Nightingale, Personal Composer,
Mosaic, Noteworthy, Mozart, etc. - has been in trying to answer the
questions 1) will it do what I need it to do, next year as well as now?
2) do the people I want to work with use it too? 3) will it continue to
be supported? For the last decade Finale has answered these questions
best, even if users find that they can stop paying for haircuts.

Sibelius' entry into the Mac and Windows marketplace was interesting.
For years, Finale users and others heard a grass is greener sort of
story about the program written for a workstation (Acorn) with a tiny
market base and proprietary OS. It would do as much as Finale, the
rumors went, and was far easier to use. So when Sibelius was released
for the two major platforms, it achieved critical mass in market share
in short order.

Just as it only slowly dawns on us that the emperor has no clothes,
users were hesitant to realize that Sibelius would not do as much as
Finale and S's interface, while a breath of fresh air from F, was not as
good as Encore's or Overture's.

The whole picture is about to change with the advent of MusicXML, an
interchange format that works (unlike NIFF), so we'll all be able to
trade files. For the remaining questions, the best advice I've heard is
to download demos - most of the programs offer them - and spend enough
time to be comfortable with your choice.

--
John Rethorst
jrethorst at post dot com

--
John Rethorst
jrethorst at post dot com

Joe Roberts

2004-05-22, 12:33 pm

Excellent post, John, giving a fine historical perspective on those
softwares' developments and especially considering the interfaces.

Another perhaps worthy of note is Turandot. Also if one hasn't looked at
Noteworthy Composer recently it is well worth examining. I've tried
half-a-dozen of the others (no names) and found NWC the most intuitive and
smoothest in terms of note entry.

Obviously, what's already the most familiar seems like the easiest. Mileage
may vary, but I looked as critically and fairly as possible while working
with the others before staying with Noteworthy.

Joe

Reginald Dwight

2004-05-22, 2:36 pm

In article <SbKrc.22790$zw.11595@attbi_s01>,
"Joe Roberts" <cdex3@comcast.net> wrote:

> Another perhaps worthy of note is Turandot. Also if one hasn't looked at
> Noteworthy Composer recently it is well worth examining. I've tried
> half-a-dozen of the others (no names) and found NWC the most intuitive and
> smoothest in terms of note entry.

One of my music student's used NC and ran into a number of roadblocks in
just getting decent standard output. This program is not in the same
league as the the ones mentioned in the previous post.

sophrosune

2004-05-23, 6:34 am

Last time I looked at Encore, it wouldn't do basic things like allow
cross-stave beaming or percussion notation or embedded n-tuplets.
These are basic requirements for serious modern music. Has this been
fixed in the latest version of Encore?
Finale certainly isn't easy to use but does let you do these sorts of
things. Finale seems to be the worst possible music notation
program...except for all the others.
---------
--mclaren

Dr.Matt

2004-05-23, 1:36 pm

In article <fff23320.0405230109.220c65a8@posting.google.com>,
sophrosune <xed@exchangenet.net> wrote:
>Finale seems to be the worst possible music notation
>program...except for all the others.

Now, THAT's worth quoting!

--
Matthew H. Fields http://personal.www.umich.edu/~fields
Music: Splendor in Sound
"Hey, don't knock Placebo, its the only thing effective for my hypochondria."
Brights have a naturalistic world-view. http://www.the-brights.net/

Sponsored Links