On 05 Jul 2005, at 6:56 PM, dhbailey wrote:
Sibelius 4 has been announced, and one aspect which we have clamored
for on this list for years is in their list of added features:
Dynamic linking of parts to the score. Apparently you only have to
change things in the score, and the changes are reflected in the
parts. I know no more about it, but thought I would let you folks
know about it and give you this link. But it does allow the user to
tweak certain things in the parts which don't show up in the score, so
nudging of items for better legibility won't affect the score but can
make the parts more legible. It sounds like a glorified Special Parts
Extraction, where each part is maintained in its own layout, unlike
Finale, where whatever layout changes are made in special parts
extraction affect the score as well. There is a flash movie which
supposedly shows how it all works:
http://www.sibelius.com/products/sibelius/4/dynamicparts.html
If the above flash movie is to be believed, it's a *lot* more than just
glorified Special Part Extraction. Assuming everything works as
advertised -- e.g., copy layout from one part to another, auto page
turns *when laying out the part* (not as a flaky, unreliable plugin),
split-screen score/parts, etc. -- it's exactly what many of us have
been asking for from Finale for years. Dynamic Parts looks like a
dream come true -- in fact, it looks very much like my own vision of
how this feature ought to work -- and I agree that Coda needs to
implement their version of this ASAP.
That said:
If Finale doesn't start listening to its core users and stop dicking
around with fancy playback issues, it's going to lose the entire
educational and professional market, plain and simple.
David, this is a baseless assertion. First, hardcore engravers don't
drive sales of Finale. Second, what on earth makes you think the
educational market isn't interested in playback? Third, Finale is only
just now catching up to (and, in some was, surpassing) Sibelius in
terms of playback capabilities. Sib has had it together on playback
for a while now, which is why they were able to be innovative in other
areas, like the new Dynamic Parts.
Let's hope that Finale2006 has this feature, too! Wait, I just
checked, and it's nowhere to be seen. But they're making it easy to
use GPO -- wow! Incredible, just what every engraver needs! And wait
a minute more, there's a new MIXER panel, something I've seen every
engraver clamor for time and again.
Actually, I believe the addition of a mixer has been the most-requested
new Finale feature request for many years now. It's ridiculous for you
to claim there isn't a demand for it just because you don't need it.
Also, you'll notice that one of the most accomplished engravers on this
list, Johannes Gebauer, now uses GPO -- and in fact was recently
complaining that GPO-Finale integration in 2k5 leaves a lot to be
desired, and requires far too much hand-tweaking. I happen to agree --
hell, I'm sure anyone who uses GPO and Finale agrees -- and I'm very
much looking forward to the improvements Fin2006 promises in this area.
I am beginning to fear for Finale's continued well-being -- those of
us on this list who care about GPO probably already have it! And
those of us who don't have it probably don't really care about it.
That's demonstrably not true. Lots of people on this list have
expressed an interest in GPO, but are still sitting on the fence, or
waiting to see what Fin2006 brings, or waiting until they upgrade their
machines, or waiting to see what the sample GPO instruments included in
Fin2k6 sound like, etc. More to the point, there's been a tremendous
interest on the GPO forums about Finale integration, with lots of GPO
users considering switching to Finale because of the tighter
integration in Fin2k6.
So why integrate it with Finale (and add the cost to the product when
many don't want/need it) when something which would truly make getting
the music onto paper (oh, let's not forget, TEXTURED paper on-screen!
Will it print like that, I wonder?) like linked score/parts isn't
included.
Okay, first off, the textured paper is a feature borrowed from
Siblelius. It was, I assume, a trivial feature to add, and matching
Sibelius feature-for-feature is obviously important to Coda. I can see
textured paper being impressive to newbies forming their first
impressions of the programs. Sibelius almost always makes a better
first impression, because it's generally more polished-looking and the
UI is more intuitive. (Obviously the textures don't print in either
application.)
Next, believe me, nobody wants linked scores and parts more than I do.
But that's a really big feature to add. Fin2k6 looks like it was
focused on solving performance and redraw issues and improving
playback. These were both high-priority areas for a *lot* of Finale
users, and Finale's punishing yearly upgrade schedule only allows them
to focus on so much every year.
Anecdotally, I have been told that many Coda programmers are unhappy
with the yearly update grind, and would prefer to do what Sibelius does
-- release more impressive, thorough upgrades less frequently. I have
also been told that this is financially impossible.
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
