On 22 Jun 2002, at 5:42, Michael Edwards wrote:
> I've heard comments from various people
> which seem to indicate that Finale is not easy to use; and certainly, when I was
> experimenting with the demo version, I found it far more difficult to figure out
> than the Sibelius demo version I was tr
On 21.06.2002 21:42 Uhr, Michael Edwards wrote
> The ease of using Finale, though, has been of concern to me, especially
> since I have a strong preference for using the keyboard (computer keyboard,
> that
> is) as much as possible for doing things, especially tasks which are going to
> be
> repe
At 12:20 am -0400 22.06.2002, Steven Powell wrote:
>It is undeniable that Finale has a longer learning curve than
>Sibelius, but once you learn it, I find it is usually faster to work in.
Seconded.
Regards
John
___
Finale mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Robert makes a really good point below. I'd add (in reference to an earlier
post from a member who received a file with expressions added as text
blocks) that when I compared Finale and Sibelius for my book, I sent a
preprint to both Coda and Sibelius. A Sibelius representative (actually the
owner
At 5:42 AM +1000 6/22/02, Michael Edwards wrote:
[big clip'
> However, I understand Finale is the most powerful program of
>all, which is
>why I am considering getting it. (A couple of people mentioned simpler or
>cut-down versions of Finale. But the full version is the only one I will
>c
On Sat, 22 June 2002, "Michael Edwards" wrote
> I've heard comments from various people
> which seem to indicate that Finale is not easy to use;
We should draw a distinction here between easy to use and easy to learn. I am
not qualified to comment on either Igor or Sibelius, but I will say that u
[Johannes Gebauer:]
>I am surprised you consider Igor more a possibility than Sibelius. I am
>pretty sure Sibelius is much better than Igor, in almost any respect.
My opinion is admittedly second-hand, so I can't vouch for it. I've been
on the Igor list for a couple of years, so my opinion
