I can suggest the following (try 1. first since it is free):
It worked! Method 1 was practically flawless. Method 2 not so much but with some tweaking it would likely do the job. But option 1 fits my needs. Thank you!
You could also use the free dolet plug-in in Sibelius to export XML, which give different results (and often way better).
That depends what industry you are in.
If you are working on something safety-critical, you donāt take a guess at what something ānot to specā is supposed to mean and carry on. You send it straight back to where it came from, with the message āDo it right next timeā attached to it.
Of course there are not many recorded instances of bad music killing people 
What about Mars Attacks!!! ?
I endured a playlist of Pachalbelās Canon, Air on a G string, Clair de Lune and the slow movement of the Moonlight Sonata in an MRI machine recently. It didnāt kill me, and I guess itās not even objectively bad music, but it did feel like a sneak preview of purgatoryā¦
I would prefer the noise of the gradient coils to that! As you say, itās not bad music, but itās trite and often performed with no panache. Iām surprised they didnāt add the Four Seasons to that playlist, perhaps looped like some recent hold music I had to endure where you didnāt even get to the end of the opening exposition before it arbitrarily looped back to the beginning - over, and over again.
Sadly, I seem to be rather too well acquainted with MRI machines. I guess it comes with having a chronic neuromuscular condition. At least the brain tumour scare earlier this year proved groundless.
Aaaaaargh!
I do wonder if someone thought through that playlist, though - Clair de Lune is kind of in Db, the Beethovenās in C#m, and much of the hammering noises of the machine were kind of Db-ish. Iām probably overthinking this.
you guys are listing all the music I want played at my funeral
hey donāt knock Slim Whitman!
Ok, like the OP this is going to be a bit stream of consciousness too. Iām a very experienced Finale user who after 25 years took the plunge, bought Dorico 2.2, and have been more or less using it exclusively since March or so. Iām still learning things everyday from more experienced users on this forum like leo and Dan, but after 6 months I feel like I now have a pretty good grasp on Doricoās strengths and weaknesses. In the late 90s I did a lot of work with SCORE too (I mostly did input and proofing, the woman I worked for mostly did layout), and Iāve done plenty of paid jobs in Sibelius as well. I currently have to have Finale, Sib, and Dorico all installed for compatibility with co-workers.
Yes, Iāve had a lot, and Iāve found there are quite a few obstacles to getting folks to switch over. Cost is certainly a big one. Musicians generally as a group donāt have a lot of extra $ to spend, especially if they are happy with their current software. Both Finale and Sib are mature products that can handle just about anything, and many of Doricoās best features IMO are features that are very appealing to professional copyists and engravers, but arenāt that important to users who use notation software more casually. This makes it a bit of a tough sell to those that are invested in another program already.
First impressions are also important. How many here remember the early Sib sales strategy that focused on it being easier to use than Finale? That strategy certainly paid off as many people still think that today, and thatās the first thing they say when asked to compare the two programs. At least in the jazz community, the initial impression of Dorico was that it was a $600 piece of software that couldnāt do a lead sheet. It was sort of a joke among those that were even paying attention to its initial release. Obviously chord symbols have been available for a while now, and the implementation of them is even better in Dorico 3, but any Finale or Sib users that dismissed Dorico 1 as unusable will need extra convincing to overturn their first impression of it.
Iām on the jazz faculty at a fairly large university in the northeast US that has a Masters program in jazz. None of my students have even heard of Dorico before I mention it. My Masters students are generally split evenly between Finale and Sib, with a handful using MuseScore. Masters students obviously are pursuing music as a career, so are a little more likely to invest in a quality notation program. Almost all of my undergrad students are using MuseScore or other freeware notation programs, some of which I have never heard of before they mention them (and canāt recall now). The current generation of undergrads has grown up in the iOS app era, where even a $15 app is considered expensive. Spending $339 for the educational version of Dorico (or any other software) just seems absurd to them, especially when there are free notation programs available. I think Finale, Sib, and Dorico all have a lot of work to do to reach the current generation of undergrads. Iām not sure what the answer is, but any software that costs $300 isnāt even going to be considered by many of them.
For all the time saving features Dorico has, there are two big areas where I feel it is considerably slower than Finale.
With duration first input in Dorico, as soon as I touch the MIDI keyboard with the input caret active it will input notes (obviously). To go back and forth between composing and inputting, I have to constantly be leaving the input caret to compose and then re-starting input to enter notes. In the course of writing a piece I may have to do these additional steps thousands of times in Dorico vs Finale, and thatās not to mention the times I forget to leave the caret only to look up and realize Iāve input a dozen bars of nonsense. To facilitate Dorico input I have keymapped the numpad Enter to stop input and Ctrl-numpad Enter to restart it, but this still is thousands of extra keystrokes and time. Finale of course has the option of duration first input too, itās just Speedy Entry with the CapsLock on. In my 25 years of using Finale I would guess Iāve only used it duration first less than 0.1% of the time. Pitch first is just faster for composing directly into software IMO.
TGTools/Modify/Transfer/Layout/Locked Measure Groups is a wonderful tool in Finale that allows me to simply transfer system breaks from one part to another without transferring frame breaks. In Dorico the only option (AFAIK) is to use Propagate Part Formatting which also includes frame breaks. Often I will get a general layout I want to transfer, but as each part will almost certainly have different page turns, I usually do not want to transfer frame breaks. Clicking the signposts to delete these is an unnecessary waste of time. I would love to just be able to transfer system breaks like I can in Finale.
Just my $0.02.
Any note or item on the downbeat will do as well, and is likely a bigger target and easier to hit.
In Dorico the only option (AFAIK) is to use Propagate Part Formatting which also includes frame breaks. Often I will get a general layout I want to transfer, but as each part will almost certainly have different page turns, I usually do not want to transfer frame breaks. Clicking the signposts to delete these is an unnecessary waste of time. I would love to just be able to transfer system breaks like I can in Finale.
Select all system breaks in Write Mode by selecting one and invoking Select more. Then you can copy and paste them to other parts. Just make sure to paste the first one at its correct position and all the others will follow.
Good tips, thanks!!!
I think pitch-before-duration vs duration-before-pitch comes down to what youāve trained your brain to do. There are pros and cons to both.
Re Layout stuff, System Breaks/Frame Breaks do NOT have to be attached to barlines. Select any note on the downbeat of the next bar, if thatās an easier target. Also, once youāve got one break, you can Alt+click them anywhere you want, in Write mode.
Further to that, copying System Breaks from one part to another should be a case of selecting the first System Break, use the Select More shortcut, filter just System Breaks (Select More will select both kinds of breaks by default), Copy, switch to the other part, paste in the correct spot. Note that if the first break falls in the middle of a multirest (in the second part layout), you can invoke the caret at the start of the multirest then use Ctrl/Cmd+Right to advance the caret by a whole measure, then paste directly from the caret. This will only do one flow at a time - the other way of just transferring system breaks would be to use Propagate Part Formatting, then Select All, Filter Frame Breaks, delete - again, this will only do one flow at a time.
edit: Florian was faster.
Iām glad you mentioned that. I found page layout to be a nightmare in Dorico and one of the main reasons I was happy to get back to Finale.
Something to tell my grandchildren: One time I was faster than pianoleo himself on the Dorico forum. 
(I think I wonāt mention that it was because I skipped all the crucial little details in my answerā¦)
I know this is a long thread and maybe someone brought this up, when folks are talking about publishing houses Iām pretty sure some of the major publishers have agreements and deals with MakeMusic for instance. Anyone else hear of this?
Aside from pitch-before-duration, the main feature that continues to tether me to Finale is that Dorico is still playing catch-up on audio output. Even though I own NotePerformer (kudos to Arne) and often XML my finale score to Dorico for printing, I still find Finaleās Human Playback and Garritan sounds easier to manage than the evolving Dorico playback.
As Dorico continues to improve and forms Expression Map links with Iconica (and more complete maps for Garritan), I may very well depend less and less on Finale for initial input and sound production.
Thank heaven Finaleās XML export works as well as it does.
That reminds me of another feature where I think Finale has an advantage for composers. When Iām composing with a MIDI controller (no speakers, no built in sounds) directly into notation software, any time I touch the keyboard I want to hear a piano sound, but when I play the file back of course I want to hear all the correct instrument sounds. This is easy in Finale simply by setting MIDI Thru to whatever channel Iāve loaded a piano sound. This even works whenever Iām still in the input frame. In Dorico even when I leave the input caret Iām stuck hearing the last instrument I was inputting which is never what I want while composing. Sure there are workarounds with loading an external playback engine, then muting/unmuting Dorico playback sounds, or adding a piano staff to click into any time I want to write, but these all add additional time. It would be nice if Dorico could find a way to approximate the traditional ācomposing at the pianoā approach like Finale can.
It may seem like a trivial thing, but if Dorico is trying to convert Finale composers who work that way, itās a pretty big change in time and composition workflow. At my studio I have a keyboard with sounds (but no speakers) so I use a Mackie passive monitor controller to just switch between computer audio and my keyboard audio with one button as they both are using the same Adam studio monitors. On the road with a MIDI controller, I find Finaleās way much preferable.
Thatās a good idea! Scoring Notes and Robert Puffās Of Note have both done similar things with comparing functions in Finale and Sibelius in the past. The Dorico Making Notes blog seems more or less inactive now except for product announcements and the archives of Anthony Hughes 1 minute long videos. Perhaps Steinberg should actively create content to encourage users to switch. Maybe more brief 1 minute videos or blog posts, but aimed directly at Finale (or Sib) users showing if this is how you did something in Finale, hereās how you do it in Dorico.