Encore vs Finale vs Score vs Sibelius 7 ???
Van Der Merwe, PJ
above notation programs and who can give a bit of information/comparison of
each platform's good/bad features?
I already know Finale 3.0 (Windows) quite well, and have the opportunity to
learn any of the others, but not enough time to learn them all. Your advice
might make the choice easier (or not!)
Thanks for any contributions.
(If this is covered in a FAQ somewhere, my sincere apologies, and please
guide me gently in the right direction :-)
# Jaco van der Merwe Department of Music #
# <mailto:mot...@ilink.nis.za> Potchefstroom University for #
# <mailto:musp...@puknet.puk.ac.za> Christian Higher Education #
# <http://www.puk.ac.za> Potchefstroom, South Africa #
# "I'm writing a book. I've got the page numbers done, so now I #
# just have to fill in the rest." - Steven Wright - #
Matthew H. Fields
version of Score back when it only ran on a mainframe.
Score produces correct music notation. Finale produces
OK music notation and appears to be a bit easier to use, and also
devotes about 60% of its code (maybe more) to MIDI proessing.
The manual that I skimmed made it look like Encore wasn't comparable.
Sibelius 7 was written in archemedes assembler for the Acorn platform,
and will not be ported anywhere else anytime soon, so I haven't used it,
but I've quizzed folks about it in e-mail, and it sounds like Acorn
fanatics and Acorn corp. are pushing it, and the authors are far more
confident than knowledgeable .
At this time, the only product that actually does what it sets out to do
well is probably only Score.
I own Finale.
Matthew H. Fields
but I should add that Lime and Mosaic appear to both be making
strides that will heat up the arena, and folks occasionally mention
Nightingale. There is a periodic FAQ document on notiation
programs, too, so wait around and it will pop up.
Daniel Dorff
>Are there any subscribers to this group who have used more than two of the
>above notation programs and who can give a bit of information/comparison of
>each platform's good/bad features?
Sibelius 7 is only available on the Acorn platform and it would be
unthinkable to make it work on Mac or Windows as we know them know.
It is very elegant in many ways and the folks who run it really want
you to like the program; they seem very responsive to user feedback.
It is very flexible for complicated music; I have only seen it
demonstrated so I don't know what pitfalls lurk.
Score is considered the best by high-end users in the US and Europe.
It is the program of choice for such publishers as CF Peters,
G.Schirmer, Theodore Presser, ECSchirmer, Peer-Southern,
Boosey&Hawkes, and many European companies of similar repute. I use
this program and adore it. You can adjust your slur positions to the
most minute increments and change anything you want however you want.
Daniel Dorff
Daniel Dorff
DDo...@presser.com
Donna Mettler
> Are there any subscribers to this group who have used more than two of the
> above notation programs and who can give a bit of information/comparison of
> each platform's good/bad features?
>
> learn any of the others, but not enough time to learn them all. Your advice
> might make the choice easier (or not!)
>
> Thanks for any contributions.
>
> (If this is covered in a FAQ somewhere, my sincere apologies, and please
> guide me gently in the right direction :-)
>
If you can access a Cica mirror site, you can dowload demos of Finale, score,
encore and other programs. (There is one on the web-but I don't have
an address-sorry!)
D2M
Donna Mettler
Aidan Goldstraw
>Are there any subscribers to this group who have used more than two of the
>above notation programs and who can give a bit of information/comparison of
>each platform's good/bad features?
>I already know Finale 3.0 (Windows) quite well, and have the opportunity to
>learn any of the others, but not enough time to learn them all. Your advice
>might make the choice easier (or not!)
On a slightly different bent, is there a demo version of Finale
knocking about anywhere that I could FTP?
--
ai...@gustav1.demon.co.uk
"I had that Shirley Bassey round for Sunday lunch. Never again.
She walked right in the joint - made a right mess of it."
David Andrews
arrived.
I've been following opinions about SCORE etc with much interest. I started by
using SCORE with DOS 4.1, which wasn't the best way to begin! That version
of DOS was very big and SCORE needed everything pruning to the hilt.
Versions 3 and 5 were easier.
Compared with Sibelius 7 (which I use now) SCORE is rather ponderous. The
result is good, but needs much labour. Sibelius is gaining ground rapidly.
The great point is its favour is the immediate screen refresh showing
exactly what has been entered. No command line input, no compiling, all
graphics and pretty well instantaneous repagination, part extraction,
transposition etc.. Input is fast, via qwerty+mouse or midi keyboard (step
time only, though real time promised).
There are preset features which I would like more flexible - use of text,
position of augmentation dots etc., but the Finn brothers (authors) do
respond quickly if there is a need. One publisher I was setting for needed a
particular symbol and it was added to Sibelius 7 over a weekend. I believe
Faber, Kevin Mayhew and Oxford University Press are publishing using
Sibelius 7.
One excellent system, rarely mentioned, is PMS (Philip's Music Scribe) by
Philip Hazel of 33 Metcalfe Road, Cambridge CB4 2DB, UK. This is solely for
the Acorn platform and is a superb piece of work. Text input is used in
ascii editor on any platform. The program then acts as a compiler and
translates the text file into music graphics. Every facet of the music's
appearance is variable, consistent and (dare I say) absolutely dependable. I
have never had anything illogical happen. The down side is that the learning
curve is steeper than the more intuitive Sibelius 7. Input is slower - much
slower on 'irregular' or dense scores. Baroque/classical music is a dream to
set. I don't pretend to have cracked PMS yet, but I really can't fault it.
The price was about £500 (including commercial licence and postscript
output) or £170 (non-profit-making and no PS). The beauty of the system is
that you can as many people as have ascii editors entering data separately
and simultaneously.
The cost of music typesetting has fallen dramatically since computers
entered the scene, and particularly with the speed of Sibelius 7. I use a
Calligraph (Sharp engined) A4 laser printer producing enhanced 1200x600 dpi
output on up to 115gm Mellotex, without problems. No publisher has asked for
bromides for some time now.
Incidentally, I have a redundant version of SCORE for sale if anyone is
interested, but I'm not selling either of the Acorn packages!
--
David Andrews # musician typesetter violin repairer
#
# da...@concerto.demon.co.uk
michael leese
you have a good computer, configured well, there is no problem with
refresh, or any other computational procedures. (For instance, if your
library files reside on a RAM disk, and you have a good, fast graphics
card, the refreah is instantaneous.)
Likewise a good 1200 dpi plain paper laser printer will do well for you.
My clients are very happy with my product. I have had calls informing me
that a FINALE score was rejected by a major orchestra's librarian,
begging me to use SCORE to try and resolve the problem. But I'm usually
booked in these situations and can't take on an emergency project.
I think that each person should use the program which is easiest for them
to use. All of the programs worth their price will be adequate for the
production of decent performance materials, in the right hands.
JMHO
Michael Leese
composer/flutist/copyist