What am I missing about this program?

[sethd2005]

I started writing a long post, then realized it was really just a rant of how frustrated I am with Finale, so I'm starting over because you don't want to waste your time with that.

Compared to MuseScore (a free program), I don't see why anyone would use Finale. What am I missing that is so great about this program?

[motet]

Finale is definitely hard to learn, so I understand your frustration. I'm not familiar with MuseScore, but I suspect Finale has more features and is up to more complicated tasks. If MuseScore is adequate for your application, though, I would definitely stick with that.

[Djard]

What is it about Finale that you do not like?

[miker]

My experience with MuseScore is that it is adequate, but just. I kept looking for things that I would do in Finale, but they were either not there, or too well hidden for me to find.

Still, if MS does what you need, no reason not to use it.

If you would like a few lessons in getting started with Finale, I’m happy to help. I have quite a bit of experience in teaching Finale 101!

[ebiggs1]

miker said

My experience with MuseScore is that it is adequate, but just.

I agree with that statement.

motet said

Finale is definitely hard to learn, ...

I disagree with that statement.

I have Musescore 4 and have done a few things using it but I find it does things the way Musescore wants them done. Not the way I want them done. Big problem for me. I do love a few things in Musescore 4 and if no Finale it would probably be my next choice.

Yes Finale can be difficult to use but for simple to moderate stuff it is actually pretty simple. I have middle schoolers using it. Certainly no more difficult than Musescore 4 to learn which in my opinion is quite ambiguous and arbitrary at best. The difficult part using Finale comes from difficult music compositions.

I totally agree with MikeR again, if Musescore 4 does what you need go for it. And if not, do take him up on some tutoring and ask specific questions here on the forum.

[miker]

it does things the way Musescore wants them done.

Wasn’t this always the complaint about Sibelius? It’s interesting that since Dorico arrived, we see a lot fewer “but Sibelius does it this way…” posts.

[ebiggs1]

Yes again I agree. As I stated but further, If there was no Finale tomorrow I would skip Sibelius and Dorico for Musescore 4.

Consider, the very simple and basic task of moving a measure in Musescore 4 is convoluted at best even if it is possible. In Finale it is the up or down arrow key!

BTW, Sibelius damn expensive and Musescore is free.

[bj nick]

Years ago when I was just writing/transcribing horn section parts, I used a primitive version of Finale my brother gave me, and it was ideal: very simple, intuitive, no issues. If I was starting all that today, I'd probably use something like Muse or another free program. When I decided to start composing much more ambitious music, I bought a new, full version (v.22? v.23? v.25?). Like any highly capable program (Word, Excel, Photoshop, etc.) once you get into the more complex aspects, it can be challenging to learn....and sometimes very frustrating. I feel it's well worth it. I agree w/others: if Muse does the job for you, stick with that. But don't dismiss Finale so easily- by all means consider Mike R., who is a very patient, knowledgeable guy, so that's a good option. Plus there are many resources out there, such as Jason Loffredo's series "Conquering Finale," and others. And of course, there are many experienced users on this forum who are cheerfully willing to help. Good luck!

[motet]

The O.P. here apparently posted his displeasure and hasn't returned.

[ebiggs1]

Barry there is no way Musescore 4 would do the complex scores you are making.

[bj nick]

ebiggs: UNDERSTOOD! When I said, "if I was starting out" I meant "When I was just doing horn parts," etc, etc. At that time, for such simple stuff, an inexpensive (free?) program would have been fine; Finale was capable of orders of magnitude more than that. Now, today, no way would I "skimp"- I'd use an industry-standard program like Finale or Sibelius (don't know anything about the others.)

[miker]

If Finale still offered the entry level NotePad, and low-cost PrintMusic, they might not have so much trouble attracting new users. I followed that route, and I'm sure many others did, as well.

Make no mistake, the full version is needed to take advantage of plug-ins, which enrich the app way beyond what current management is capable of doing. But imagine PrintMusic with plugins!

[ebiggs1]

Or Musescore with plug-ins. There are a lot of things in Musescore 4 to like. Its just not ready for prime time........yet. Perhaps this is a testament to how difficult itis to make an everything notation program.

[miker]

Does Dorico use any plugins? Or are they trying to make the program so good, that plugins from “outsiders” won’t be needed?

Perfection is the enemy of good enough.

[oldmkvi]

I learned way more from actual users, including here!
Reading the manual didn't help me much 20 years ago when I was getting started,
and I had no previous Computer experience.
Didn't know the vocabulary, and randomly trying different things was not working for me.
Now that I'm familiar with what I need from Finale, I can sometimes experiment a bit and find a solution.
But I had any number of Aha Moments when someone explained some basic feature and I got it to work!
Sibelius was supposed to be intuitive.
Clearly I'm not...
I'm happy with Finale, including playback.
It never crashes, and printing parts at home is awesome!

[ebiggs1]

Be careful there. This forum doesn't like it when Finale works for you especially if it works well.

[bj nick]

Be careful there. This forum doesn't like it when Finale works for you especially if it works well.

Haha.....yep...."pride goeth...", etc. etc....but it's great to hear! I love Finale too, in spite of occasional tear-your-hair-out periods.

[miker]

Me too. Especially with the JW and RGP Lua scripts, once I got over my fear of using them!