Finale's finale (software being phased out)

[Brian]

https://www.finalemusic.com/blog/end-of-finale-new-journey-dorico-letter-from-president/

I saw this posted by a friend who runs a local chorale and frequently arranges works for his forces. He much prefers Dorico, which Finale has made an arrangement with for users to make an affordable switch.

[lunar22]

in the weeks that have passed, the Dorico forums have been clogged with Finale refugees trying to get to grips with a very different sort of programme. Quite a few have complained about the "lack of intuitiveness" of Dorico which in a sense I would agree with but on the other hand, you have to expect to invest some time with a piece of software that complex and try to understand the mindset which created it. Others are pleasantly surprised by how much more efficiently they can work than before. But if there are any Finale users here who remain somewhat confused, there are at least a multitude of transition videos out now and most queries and difficulties are quickly sorted by the very active forum (I can no longer keep up with the posts -- there are so many these days) 

[(poco) Sforzando]

I started a thread on this topic close to a month ago:

https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,33429.0.html

As someone who uses notation software only sporadically, I found many problems with Finale and the latest release 27 just appeared to compound some of the bugs. But I had been using Finale for close to 30 years, and it was something like an old but at times very annoying friend.

Right now I am going through various Dorico tutorials and exercises as I have time, and it's plain that this is a very sophisticated and serious piece of software. But while certain aspects of the software are very logical and intuitive, it can also be very difficult to get the results you want. As a test case, I am starting by inputting Schoenberg's Six Little Piano Pieces, op. 19. Number 2 in the set went through very easily; however, with number 1 it has sometimes taken me fifteen minutes or more just to input a single measure, and I still can't always get all of them correct. But there's no going back. Finale is on its deathbed and the best thing is to make funeral arrangements.

[Karl Henning]

Quite a few have complained about the "lack of intuitiveness" of Dorico

I haven't tried Dorico, so perhaps the Finale users are right. The non-consolatory irony being that long-time users of Finale who have taken the program's design for granted for so long have therefore forgotten how user-unfriendly Finale was. As to Dorico, I sympathize, because any steepness to the learning curve is bothersome on the raw merits, but especially obnoxious if you're a composer trying to chop a score out.

[(poco) Sforzando]

I haven't tried Dorico, so perhaps the Finale users are right. The non-consolatory irony being that long-time users of Finale who have taken the program's design for granted for so long have therefore forgotten how user-unfriendly Finale was. As to Dorico, I sympathize, because any steepness to the learning curve is bothersome on the raw merits, but especially obnoxious if you're a composer trying to chop a score out.

People still have a full year before Finale shuts down, and even afterwards the software will be usable so long as you have an operating system that supports it. Mac Sequoia users are out of luck already, however, as Finale is not compatible and MakeMusic will not be making upgrades for it.

[krummholz]

I can't speak to the Finale -> Dorico transition, but I'm still in the process of learning Dorico as I transition away from Sibelius. I can vouch for the steepness of the learning curve, but will also say that the process has been rewarding and I've been made aware of Sibelius bugs that I never really noticed before - e.g., a particular rallentando in my symphony never reached the slow tempo I ask for at the end when played back under Sibelius. Dorico plays that passage back so perfectly that I had forgotten that I had always just been "accepting" the way Sibelius was playing it.

Then again, there are mysteries in Dorico that I haven't begun to crack. For example, why does editing a dynamic level (like mp) sometimes result in the new dynamic being placed under the old one, instead of just replacing it? Inquiring minds and all...

[(poco) Sforzando]

I am starting a new thread specifically on Dorico, as the title is Brian's here.

[lunar22]

sometimes result in the new dynamic being placed under the old one, instead of just replacing it? Inquiring minds and all...

just spotted this -- it's all to do with how Dorico groups and links dynamics which is well nigh incomprehensible even to those of us who have more or less got to grips with the software. Needless to say, this exact same point comes up frequently in the forums and is one of my own pet peeves. However, as I've said before the combination of superior DAW-style playback facilities and what in general is a good automatic engraving engine still makes the software trounce any others for my purposes despite its (many) oddities.

[Karl Henning]

just spotted this -- it's all to do with how Dorico groups and links dynamics which is well nigh incomprehensible even to those of us who have more or less got to grips with the software. Needless to say, this exact same point comes up frequently in the forums and is one of my own pet peeves. However, as I've said before the combination of superior DAW-style playback facilities and what in general is a good automatic engraving engine still makes the software trounce any others for my purposes despite its (many) oddities.

Interesting!

[krummholz]

just spotted this -- it's all to do with how Dorico groups and links dynamics which is well nigh incomprehensible even to those of us who have more or less got to grips with the software. Needless to say, this exact same point comes up frequently in the forums and is one of my own pet peeves. However, as I've said before the combination of superior DAW-style playback facilities and what in general is a good automatic engraving engine still makes the software trounce any others for my purposes despite its (many) oddities.

Thanks for the info. It's not the only engraving problem with Dorico though - another issue that has bitten me is that sometimes hiding empty staves results in collisions between the remaining staves and systems. I had similar problems with Sibelius as well, but my impression is that Dorico is much worse about this. I remember that someone (either here or on the other forum, not sure where) complained about my Sinfonia Solenne's score being unreadable due to the size of the systems and the need to zoom in to read anything, which was mostly for this reason - all instruments are shown on the page at all times, even when only a few are playing.

I'm still hoping to get back into composing this summer and will try to do everything from the start in Dorico so that next year I can cancel my Sibelius Ultimate subscription. (First though, I have to find another place to live... )

[lunar22]

Nice to hear from you, Liz -- it's shame you don't have more time for composing. I'm not sure what exactly your layout issues are but it might be worth putting them on the forum. It's possible that benwiggy's general tips for layout here https://forums.steinberg.net/t/staff-spacing-gone-berserk/985255 might help.

Ironically, I just installed Sibelius on my new PC for the first time as I thought it had a score I had not yet converted but in the end, couldn't find it anyway so that was probably a waste of time unless I need to make some specific comparison for research purposes.