why do they use a Finale example that hasn't had music spacing or update layout applied?
Mark --- On Thu, 7/2/09, Daniel Wolf <djw...@snafu.de> wrote: > From: Daniel Wolf <djw...@snafu.de> > Subject: [Finale] Re: Comparing notation systems > To: "finale@shsu.edu" <finale@shsu.edu> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 3:42 AM > David Fenton wrote: > > "I'm particularly unimpressed with the stiff look of > Lilypond output, > which reminds me of Finale from the days of Petrucci." > > This is an interesting critique, considering that the main > idea of Lilypond is emulating traditional handmade > engraving. Have you read either the essay at the main > Lilypond site (here: http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/ (the > Lilypond examples are very good, but unfortunately uses > out-of-the-box Finale output as a strawman) or Andrew > Hawryluk's essay, to which I previously linked? > > "I also think it's quite interesting that most of the > activity > creating new notation apps is coming from parts of the > world where > Finale and Sibelius are very expensive. The conclusion > seems quite > obvious to me." > > What activity do you mean specifically? The > alternative products in France, Sweden, and Hungary have > been sent to open source, abandoned,or stalled > (respectively). Of the latest applications > MuseScore is arguably more a response to Lilypond. But > you may well have a point with regard to the pricing of > Finale and Sibelius in Germany, as Forte and PriMus (like > MuseScore) originated in Germany and the local prices are > high. > > Daniel Wolf > > > _______________________________________________ > Finale mailing list > Finale@shsu.edu > http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale > _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
