Why I changed from S... to Dorico :-)

https://youtu.be/dKx1wnXClcI?list=PLm9VVia9DFSUVK24lR9mS5zT0sasxctad

Fun video to watch at 4.24 am :blush:

What a great video! Thank you. :slight_smile: :slight_smile: :slight_smile:

After watching this video I can’t stop laughing! Great! So true!

Oh my! But wait, didn’t the team that designed Sibelius design Dorico?
But yes, this is why I switched. All that wonkiness. And he didn’t even touch on trying to get staves aligned on a page.

As painful as it might have been for the dev team to get sacked by Avid, perhaps it’s the only situation in which they could be funded to redesign the app from the ground up.

I’d love to see his take on Finale…

Schadenfreude !!
:=)
SW

I would too, but it couldn’t quite be as poignant. The genius of this video comes from the whole Stockholm Syndrome thing, and he’s not a Finale user.

Some of that was hilarious, but, halfway through, I found myself also disagreeing. Half the battle is knowing how to work alongside the program, and that entails (in my opinion) knowing its object classes. Is there anything else more jarring than seeing a dynamic written in plain text, which used to be par for the course? It’s far more useful to guide the users to the proper way to do a task (and Dorico does this far better, I think). I have no idea anymore how a new user might approach the software, but the large majority of new users might not also be new musicians, which seems to be a condition for some of his gripes.

A very entertaining video!

Here’s my take on the whole Sibelius thing. Sibelius was a wonderful gem when it was at 2.0 or even 4.0. Then as it worked on extending its feature list, I’m sure the simplicity and sheer character of its roots were becoming muddled with the implementation factor. I somehow think that Dorico will be able to grow without a lot of bloat because of some core decisions made during those 3-4 years of planning and strategizing that went on. Daniel’s numerous interviews allow for a peek into the process and journey that preceded where we are now. At present, Dorico achieves so much on an automatic level, with access to micro-level adjustments when needed. They’ve managed to keep a clean interface throughout this, and I’m sure that’s high on their priority list as they journey forth.

Absolutely, which is why I accept that the answer to feature requests is sometimes “no,” even when some of those requests have been mine. I feel that there’s a healthy balance here between listening to users but not acquiescing to their every whim. The result is a clean and cohesive UI, and features that are carefully planned before they’re added, rather than needing multiple corrective design iterations.

I totally agree.

I lost it at https://youtu.be/dKx1wnXClcI?t=1080

I watched this the other day and laughed my butt off. I felt a little guilty that there were undoubtedly a few things the team would disagree with, but on the whole, I think they must have known many of these things deep down which is why Dorico is so different from Sibelius.

Wow, that was a labor of love - or not love…

I don’t think the Olsen twins and Morten Feldman have been in the same video, paragraph, or document until now. Worth watching just for that!