On 25 Aug 2004 at 1:18, Darcy James Argue wrote: > But Sibelius has gotten dramatically better with the last two major > upgrades. They have closed the gap in many areas, and frankly, have > pulled drmatically ahead in areas where they used to lag, especially > when it comes to performance.
In our last discussion of Finale vs. Sibelius I downloaded the Sibelius demo and tried it out. I wasn't really able to decide whether I could use Sibelius or not because: 1. I couldn't save a file, so I really couldn't get to the point of doing anything at any particular level of complexity. 2. I didn't have enough documentation to figure out how to do some things that are surely very basic (such as changing the system size after the music is input, and also how to input articulations and the like without being tied to the tiny little tool pallette with way too few selections on it at one time, which required tons of pallette switching). I can't imagine that things are not easier than what I was able to figure out, but it was pretty darned slow to get things done (far slower than Finale). I'm only assuming that this was because the demo didn't give me the chance to figure it out. I certainly wouldn't spend money on Sibelius based on the demo. But it did show me that I would probably be satisfied with the output of Sibelius for my own work, if I were able to get the data in quickly. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
