Finale Dorico appearance comparison

[Ian Stewart]

Following the current Dead Horse thread I was interesed in a direct comparison between the appearance of Finale and Dorico. With this in mind, I input a new piano work into Finale, exported it to Dorico (via XML) for extensive editing, and then re-imported the new XML file from Dorico, back into Finale for comparison. A few things were not picked up, the title etc. and pedal markings but it would only take minutes to add these in Finale. However I left the new import exactly as it is, it is useful to see what is lost in the XML export/import from Dorico. Here are the links:

https://www.ianstewart.xyz/pdf/fluorescent_dorico.pdf

https://www.ianstewart.xyz/pdf/fluorescent_finale.pdf

I would be interested in any views on the differences.

[RimasG]

I didn’t really understand what you wanted to say or prove by that comparison. XML import / export from the program to the program practically always takes place with little graphical loss. Whether it's Finale, Sibelius, Dorico, etc. This requires additional editing, but it's still more convenient than reassembling notes in another program. Maybe someday someone will discover the ideal converter as well

[Ian Stewart]

I wanted to see if anyone had any preference over the appearence of the Finale or Dorico versions. I went over to Dorico because I think it is slightly easier to get the score to look good without any effort, now I am not so sure. Does anyone think one is better than the other or are both much of a muchness?

The XML import was just to show that apart from pedal markings and titles etc. the transfer was accurate.

[RimasG]

Only cheese in the mice trap is free

[Michel R E]

MusicXML transfer isn't really the answer for now.

I've now twice tried to transfer works from Finale to Dorico using XML files.
One a symphony that I sent to someone else for them to send me back a PDF of Dorico's output, so I cold compare.
The other my Violin concerto, which I transferred myself from Finale to Dorico using XML.

The Symphony was a complete mess. The XML conversion didn't work at all.

As for the Concerto, half of it came out fine in Dorico, but about mid-way through the 2nd movement (of 3) all of the noteheads, and most stems disappeared, leaving nothing but patches of beams and stems and pages of dynamics and hairpins with text expressions.

Once I've finished a page of the orchestra score to the concerto (I've mostly been inputting the solo part to learn Dorico's ins and outs) I'll post the 1st page of the same work in both Finale and Dorico. The former required large amounts of tweaking, while the latter I will let it's own automatic spacing and placement speak for itself.

Forum members will be able to judge for themselves their preferences.

[John Ruggero]

For me the Dorico version is clearly superior, except that:

1. With Finale everything hinges on the settings. I suspect that if I were using mine, the initial result would be better.

2. Dorico's piano braces are unacceptable to me, and while they can be replaced with a glyph from another font, their shape can't be modified the way one can in Finale. So, as good as the Dorico file is at the outset, I would never be able to get it to look the way I wanted. So the fact that it may be easier to achieve an initial good result in Dorico doesn't really matter.

OT I've never understood why composers clutter up their scores with those long Pedal lines, when Ped. * is so clear, clean and easy for the kind of pedaling used in this piece.

[Ian Stewart]

OT I've never understood why composers clutter up their scores with those long Pedal lines, when Ped. * is so clear, clean and easy for the kind of pedaling used in this piece.

Many thanks for your feedback John. Regarding pedal markings I cannot make up my mind which is better. The same as crescendos or diminuendos, whether to use hairpins or "cresc." or "dim.". I think regarding pedal markings the asterisk is quite an ugly shape and usually too big. I will go through my score and change the pedal markings in a second version, then compare them.

I really appreciate comments on the engraving as it is something I'm interested in but often can't decide which of several possibilities is better..

[John Ruggero]

You are very welcome, Ian. I confess that I have a "thing" about the style of pedal indications that combine the ped. with the bracket, feeling that it combines the worst of both styles. I use bracket-only pedal indications in educational editions for intricate pedaling that has many quick changes and the Ped. * system otherwise.

To mention just one advantage of the traditional system: in a situation like the following, one may place the asterisk closer to the staff than the Ped. or vice versa for greater visual communication. and a much better look.

Imagine the long horizontal bracket ending far from the staff. And worse if it is angled. To me, THAT is ugly. (And if it is angled that removes the possibility of using slanted pedal lines to show gradual lifting of the pedal.) If one doesn't like the particular size or font of a pedal release symbol one can change it. But please remember the pianists have grown up with the traditional pedal markings and are most accustomed to them.

[motet]

With cresc. and dim., there's always the question of where they end. Next dynamic? Do you need a dashed line for long ones? Or cre . . . scen . . . do?

[Michel R E]

how would one go about attaching a PDF file here?

[motet]

The ones above are hyperlinks to an off-site URL. You can zip them and attach them here, but you run the risk that people won't want to bother unzipping them.

[Michel R E]

ok, thank-you.

I guess I'll just zip them, and those really interested in seeing a simple example of the differences in look between Dorico and Finale will be able to look at them.

[Michel R E]

So here's the first page of my violin concerto. There are probably a few errors in the Dorico version as I keep having to look from one screen to the other to look at the Finale-generated PDF so I can enter the notes in Dorico. (no, I don't want to use MusicXML, I am trying to get a handle on Dorico's features and functionality, and learning how to input music)

The measure layout is probably not the same, and I'm not used to working with Dorico's text features, so titles and whatnot are not ideally placed, like in the Finale version.

But this is basically Dorico's default output. I entered notes and that was it. I didn't move anything around. The Finale version required a lot of adjusting, some minor, some quite major.

The one major difference is the way Finale lets me set up my pair of orchestral violin staves and their staff names. Dorico, for now, will not allow this.

[Ian Stewart]

Thank you for giving the examples Michel. I like both and to me it looks like the output from two different publishing houses. I like that Dorico has four bars in the first system as opposed to the five in the Finale version. I also wonder how much of the difference has to do with fonts.
My immediate response was that the Dorico font is too heavy, the Finale too light.
The first bar in the Dorico I think is better because the notes are equally spaced, whereas in Finale the spacing changes depending on whether the solo violin interval is preceded by grace notes or not.
The slurs under the staccato notes are so much better in the Finale version, in the Dorico version they look like smiley emojis.

I have received the Perfect Layout demo of my work and will study that now as well.

[John Ruggero]

I think that differences may also have to do with various settings in both. Finale's slurs, once the tip thickness is increased, look much better than Dorico's. But Dorico's slurs can be made to look almost as good with various setting changes. Finale's line thickness settings are too thin for many people. And to me, Maestro is a nicer-looking font than Bravura. And then there is Perfect Layout. And so it goes...

For me, it comes down to what I can or can't do. And Finale wins that one.

[Michel R E]

I've finished entering the cadenza of the 1st movement of the concerto, and here I have to say that Dorico wins, hands down.
I was able to enter it as one continuous measure, the way it was originally planned out. With Finale I'd have had to cludge my way through with hidden barlines and counting beats. In Dorico I just chose a measureless time signature and entered all the notes of the cadenza. It divied them up to split it into systems. Once I've finished entering the orchestra part I will look at making adjustments to that cadenza, see if I can move notes from one system to the next.

[Peter Thomsen]

One of the differences between the two examples is that the staff height is not the same (slightly bigger in the Dorico example, slightly smaller in the Finale example).

Also, the staff spacing is different: un-even in the Dorico example, even in the Finale example.

Such differences make a comparison more difficult.

To get a true comparison, make the same layout in both programs:
- same staff height,
- same staff spacing,
- same number of measures in each system,
&c.