OT: There is no going back now

Yup, there is no bloody way in hell that I’m going back to Finale at this point.

I just finished writing the middle movement of my 4th symphony (the last movement that had to be written as the outer two movements were already done.)

I did it entirely from within Dorico. And it was a breeze.

So thank-you Daniel, and the whole team.

34 Likes

That’s great to hear, Michel. I’m happy that you are finding Dorico to be a useful partner in your creative work.

6 Likes

I second that! I’m orry Dorico 5 wasn’t available for the 20+ years I spent with Finale (I’m reworking my Finale comps in Dorico). As I write mostly for publication (school and church music-and original compositions, too:wink), I’m especially gob-smacked by Dorico’s ability to so easily allow 1st X, 2ndX playback (tempo changes too!!). It’s SO nice not to have to copy/insert/delete music in scores to get them to play back as written, and also to so easily incorporate vst libraries for more realistic playback. It’s a game changer for potential customers to be able to actually hear a realistic sound, and playback that actually follows the score they’re looking at (and hopefully, buy) You all have provided us with an amazing program that allows us to create our music without being bogged down with klunky manipulations. Kudos to all!

5 Likes

I agree with all of the above, except that I don’t think this is off-topic! :slight_smile:

6 Likes

OH!
and I’m getting a grasp on how to change a time signature in one measure in the middle of a passage, finally.
I still do wish it was a tiny bit easier, but at least it works.

Same here. I was with Finale from the beginning. Switching to Dorico and moving most recent work from Finale to Dorico was fantastic. I am here to stay.

2 Likes

Same times 100. My only regret is not switching sooner. I spent nearly 25 laborious years in Finale world. What a waste!

2 Likes

Well I switched from Finale to Sibelius early on, back around Sib version 1.4 or so (as I recall). but when the Sib team got replaced and moved over to invent Dorico, I made the second switch and have never regretted it.

9 Likes

I’m the same - Finale, then Sibelius, then Dorico. I think we are all very lucky that the Dorico team has been able to leverage their knowledge and experience with Sibelius to make a completely new program. This seems rare in my experience.

9 Likes

I come from Sibelius, and a few months ago, I was on the fence, having to decide which license to buy or renew (after a long pause writing music, which is only a hobby), having stopped upgrading since Sibelius 6. I discovered Dorico earlier this year and wasn’t sure at first try. Took me a while to become familiar with the concepts and break some old Sibelius habits (I’m still learning). I must say, the one final kick that made me finally take the leap is when I heard the story about Steinberg bringing most of the original Sibelius dev team (Daniel and team) to build Dorico. I don’t regret that decision!

1 Like

I’d been using Finale since version 3.1. I had previously used a truly basic program called Musicator, and I even forget the name of my very first music program (it was on DOS, the monitor on my XT or AT? computer was a nice green, it was VERY primitive, but OH so advanced at that time.)

I kept waiting for Make Music to improve spacing.

Then when I finally realized that they were relying on 3rd party plug-ins to do the heavy lifting I really knew that Finale was on its last legs as far as I was concerned.

Playback in Finale, directly from the score, was actually pretty good… but now in Dorico I’m getting as good - if not better - playback by tinkering with minor details in the Play window, or using the Key Editor.

This doesn’t mean I don’t still have a minor wish list of improvements to bring to Dorico. But I have absolute faith in Daniel and the team.

And come on, who doesn’t love finishing an orchestral score and realizing that all the instrumental parts are almost completely done at the same time, under the hood.

All I have to do is add cues, then place a few judicious page turns in the parts, and it can all go to the publisher.

1 Like

Interesting coincidence - I also used Musicator, but I think I used it a bit longer than you, through the 90’s and early 2000’s, until I switched to Finale around 2005 or so as a crossgrade from Musicator.

actually I’m not sure if the question of page turns in parts has been brought up before. I recently had to do a fair amount of work in inserting them in appropriate places in a couple of chamber works. My initial reaction was that Dorico indeed had got a lot of them right but that more could possibly be done in this area. Are there particular algorithms which determine where the page turns in parts take place? Are there perhaps even some layout settings which might help I could be unaware of? Obviously the ideal is when there is at least one bar rest but all this has to be balanced against decent layout in the first place.

As regards moving to Dorico – no there is indeed no going back. I’m converted around 50 Sibelius scores and now rarely need to bring it out again. I’ve not updated Sib since Daniel and the team left it.

Responding to both @Michel_Edward and @dko22 :
We generate the complete conductor score of a work, including adding the cues for the instrument parts from within the conductor score, in Galley View.
As Michel said, when our conductor score is ready (including all Engraving work), the instrument parts are almost finished as well.
We do indeed the manual tweaking of the page breaks in all instrument parts, we even insert blank pages in the middle of an instrument part, for example when the second movement is only two pages, and it starts on the right page, we insert a blank page, so that the movement comes on two facing pages, avoiding a page turn in the middle of the movement. And obviously we put page breaks when the musician has at least one hand free. For keyboard parts it is not always easy, and sometimes even not possible, alas.
Any clever algorithms from the Dorico software will be appreciated in this matter :).

Same story here, more then 20 years with Finale, happy at the start but slowly observing how a high potential application slowed down with bug repairs and implementing new features. Followed the Dorico development process and moved over at version 3.1. Had two frustrating weekends of experimenting and familiarising, then saw the light. And yes, I regularly need the popovers list and manual PDF, while memorising the shortcuts (after trying the Jump bar first).

I wrote Finale scripts for exporting all projects and scores in each folder / subfolder as MIDI, MusicXML, and PDF file, then closed that book for good. Only thing I find missing so far in Dorico is the equivalent of expression (category) definitions. Cannot thank the Dorico team enough for an essential high quality product, and this forum is another treasure.

6 Likes

In fairness to Finale, it was the best there was, certainly in Windowsland, until Sibelius came along. And it isn’t as though Sibelius achieved competitive status immediately.

For me, the issue with Finale was playback using VSTs other than Garritan; in particular, using them simultaneously.

I’m also a long-time Finale user (I used MusicTime before Finale) and will be making my switch. There are so many things I like about the Dorico work flow that save a lot of editing time. I began purchasing and using the SE version, but found that I needed engraving tools only found in the pro version.

Page formatting is more difficult for me to understand than in Finale, but I’m starting to get the hang of it. I would like to see the ability to add and save my own custom text expressions that I use (If there is a way, I probably haven’t found it yet). As an organist, I need to be able to signify manual changes (Swell, Great, Choir, and all foreign equivalents). So far, I’m very happy with Dorico, and even as I retire from full-time church work, I’ll be doing half-time work.

Thanks for a great product!

In Engrave Mode (in the Pro version), click the Plus sign in the Playing Techniques panel on the right to bring up an Edit screen where you can add a Playing Technique.

Playing Techniques can be associated with Playback techniques to have your custom techniques affect playback.

1 Like

also, don’t forget to click on the little star on the bottom left hand side so that your new playing technique can be used in other documents.

and you’ll notice in the "playback technique"drop down, it’s written “do nothing”. Someone on the forum showed how to do this. It basically allows you to create a “non-playback technique” playback technique. In other words, one that won’t affect the actual playback.

I noticed that the default was “natural”, which will cancel out any other playing techniques going on at that point (for example muted strings, or pizzicato.)
This “do nothing” playback technique basically allows Dorico to simply not do anything.

I forget, unfortunately, how to recreate this. Someone here, I’m sure, will be able to give instructions on how to get this.

2 Likes

I just used the Plus Icon (on the Left) in Playback Techniques (Library Menu) to create a new PB Technique that does nothing. I find it very useful.

4 Likes