Sibelius or Finale ?
Moderators: Frodo, FMiguelez, MIDI Life Crisis
Forum rules
Discussions about composing, arranging, orchestration, songwriting, theory and the art of creating music in all forms from orchestral film scores to pop/rock.
Discussions about composing, arranging, orchestration, songwriting, theory and the art of creating music in all forms from orchestral film scores to pop/rock.
-
- Posts: 613
- Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: New York
Re: Sibelius or Finale ?
I had some of the same thoughts too. The fact that language is linear not graphic (the words and letters are still recognized as the same regardless of font style or size for instance). And yes music notation is a graphic language. But aren't Chinese, Japanese and Arabic to some extent? And aren't computers supposed to handle graphics well? Frankly I still can't rationalize why music notation is so convoluted. I live for the day when I can write on a tablet by hand, with a whole score in front of me and it all prints out and transposes and extracts just perfectly. I don't really care about the playback.
DP 10.11 MacPro 16-core 3.2 GHZ, 48 Gb Ram, 10.15.2, numerous VIs, etc.
- MIDI Life Crisis
- Posts: 26277
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Contact:
Re: Sibelius or Finale ?
Maybe think of it like this:
Word processors aren't really good at notating "conversations." Music is more like a conversation. A single musical line is easy enough, but when you add inner voices, multiple parts and instrumentation the vertical stack becomes problematic for a computer to deal with.
How would you really write a conversation that way? Court reporters do it, but they only write one persons words at once, even when interrupted, they only get one voice. BTW, a court reporters device is based on the 44 or so sounds that the english language has. It is not a QWERTY keyboard but it works great for documenting fast paced talking. Fancy pageant walking? Not so much...
Word processors aren't really good at notating "conversations." Music is more like a conversation. A single musical line is easy enough, but when you add inner voices, multiple parts and instrumentation the vertical stack becomes problematic for a computer to deal with.
How would you really write a conversation that way? Court reporters do it, but they only write one persons words at once, even when interrupted, they only get one voice. BTW, a court reporters device is based on the 44 or so sounds that the english language has. It is not a QWERTY keyboard but it works great for documenting fast paced talking. Fancy pageant walking? Not so much...

2013 Mac Pro 2TB/32GB RAM
OSX 10.14.6; Track 16; DP 12; Finale 28
LinkTree (events & peformances)
Instagram
Facebook
MIDI LIFE CRISIS
OSX 10.14.6; Track 16; DP 12; Finale 28
LinkTree (events & peformances)
MIDI LIFE CRISIS
- mhschmieder
- Posts: 11384
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:01 pm
- Primary DAW OS: MacOS
- Location: Annandale VA
Re: Sibelius or Finale ?
If you want to see a REALLY good ergonomic design, look at the Yamaha QY700 sequencer. You should be able to find large images on-line somewhere, that are big enough to see the details. Or go to the yamahasynth.com website, traverse to the link for manuals, and download it.
I owned one of these for a year. Ultimately I sold it because it didn't play nice with DP (or vice-versa). But it salvaged over 50 MIDI files that had been corrupted and that crashed QuickTime, Digital Performer, and anything else I threw them at.
Easily the most robust MIDI sequencer I've ever used, and the most complete in its ability to handle any incoming data and allow for data save and recovery even in cases where some bogus SysEx might prevent a direct save.
The point, though, is the physical interface, which made for extremely quick and intuitive entry of scoring data. Take a look.
We may never see a USB controller for notation programs, that has a control surface dedicated for quick notation work.
So it may be that our best long-term choice is one of those dedicated tablet or touch screen devices that effectively turn the old pencil-and-paper technique into an immediately digitsed format for further editing and backup.
It is indeed frustrating that most of the solutions on offer today, are at best the same speed as paper-and-pencil, and often slower. I only use them because I don't have a scanner and it allows for easier editing/modifications and also backup.
After all, I've lost scores before during petty theft. This is less likely to be a problem if the score is entered into a notation program and backed up on a hard disc -- although one should xerox one's paper scores as well (note to self!).
I owned one of these for a year. Ultimately I sold it because it didn't play nice with DP (or vice-versa). But it salvaged over 50 MIDI files that had been corrupted and that crashed QuickTime, Digital Performer, and anything else I threw them at.
Easily the most robust MIDI sequencer I've ever used, and the most complete in its ability to handle any incoming data and allow for data save and recovery even in cases where some bogus SysEx might prevent a direct save.
The point, though, is the physical interface, which made for extremely quick and intuitive entry of scoring data. Take a look.
We may never see a USB controller for notation programs, that has a control surface dedicated for quick notation work.
So it may be that our best long-term choice is one of those dedicated tablet or touch screen devices that effectively turn the old pencil-and-paper technique into an immediately digitsed format for further editing and backup.
It is indeed frustrating that most of the solutions on offer today, are at best the same speed as paper-and-pencil, and often slower. I only use them because I don't have a scanner and it allows for easier editing/modifications and also backup.
After all, I've lost scores before during petty theft. This is less likely to be a problem if the score is entered into a notation program and backed up on a hard disc -- although one should xerox one's paper scores as well (note to self!).
iMac 27" 2017 Quad-Core Intel i5 (3.8 GHz, 64 GB), OSX 13.7.1, MOTU DP 11.34, SpectraLayers 11
RME Babyface Pro FS, Radial JDV Mk5, Hammond XK-4, Moog Voyager
Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35
Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, Johnny Marr Jaguar, 57 LP, Danelectro 12
Eastman T486RB, T64/V, Ibanez PM2, D'angelico Deluxe SS Bari, EXL1
Guild Bari, 1512 12-string, M20, Martin OM28VTS, Larivee 0040MH
RME Babyface Pro FS, Radial JDV Mk5, Hammond XK-4, Moog Voyager
Eugenio Upright, 60th Anniversary P-Bass, USA Geddy Lee J-Bass, Yamaha BBP35
Select Strat, 70th Anniversary Esquire, Johnny Marr Jaguar, 57 LP, Danelectro 12
Eastman T486RB, T64/V, Ibanez PM2, D'angelico Deluxe SS Bari, EXL1
Guild Bari, 1512 12-string, M20, Martin OM28VTS, Larivee 0040MH