 | Sep 25 2009 |
HENRY OZ Finale 2010 DVD installer must install Rosetta if it isn't installed - even though Finale 2010 doesn't need it. Quitting the install just after the Must Install Rosetta warning leaves an incomplete install - even though it appears Ok at first. A second install from the DVD after installing Rosetta works fine - even though an updated version of the Garritan Aria Player is necessary to download and install before launching Finale. MacBook Pro/SL 10.6.1 Finale 2010 FTW - even though the installer is currently POS.
(Version 2010) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Aug 18 2009 |
PIOTRGM Finale has a very, very steep learning curve; it has irritating bugs that have been there for a long time and are not yet fixed; it relies too much on the user's own inventiveness in creating workarounds; some of its modules are clumsy; its help section is immense in its size - and very confusing. It is all true. But what is also true is this. I have been using it heavily since 1994 to create a variety of scores - including graphics driven experimental ones - and during that time it crashed twice (yes, twice). Not bad, right? It makes it one crash per seven and a half years. I would like to see another Mac programme which is so sturdy. Finale offers unmatched flexibility in terms of advanced notations, MIDI manipulation and the like. It is very highly customisable - you can focus on some modules only, those which you know you will use. The other modules are always out of your way unless you need them. Once you've mastered it, Finale is a delight, many of its plug-ins saving the conscious user dozens of hours of potentially crippling, time-consuming work. Finale is not perfect and never will be, but it is nonetheless way ahead of its competitors in terms of the sheer number of options it gives the user.
(Version 2010) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jan 1 2009 |
DGATWOOD Finale 2009 is a pretty significant regression from 2007 in that it won't even install if you use a case-sensitive HFS+ volume as your boot volume. The installer just sits there and does nothing when you click install. I've posted a detailed list of Finale bugs (including some specific to case-sensitive HFS+) with workarounds over on VersionTracker, along with many other bugs for which no workaround is possible. Here's an abbreviated list: 0. Installer fails to work. Workaround: In Terminal, type: cd /System/Library/CoreServices/Installer.app ln -s Installer installer 1. Finale repeatedly asks if you want to check for updates. Workaround: In Terminal, type: sudo chmod g+w /Library/Preferences Next, run Finale and tell it whether to check for updates. Finally, in Terminal, type: chmod g-w /Library/Preferences 2. Finale (since at least 2007) spews a bunch of warnings from the shell when it loads plug-ins. sh: -c: line 0: unexpected EOF while looking for matching `'' sh: -c: line 1: syntax error: unexpected end of file No known workaround, possibly harmless? 3. Finale installs 326 files with the execute bits set to true. Of these, probably only one (the main Finale binary) should be executable. 4. Finale help index won't open. Workaround: In Terminal, type: ln -s Finale_CSH.htm Finale_csh.htm 5. Very high CPU overhead and poor battery life. Basically, they keep their Core Audio worker thread running and providing audio data continuously even when no documents are open (much less playing). The result is 8-9% of the CPU wasted while the application is idle. This translates to a significant reduction in battery life on portables. Workaround: Always quit Finale when not in use and carry a spare battery.
(Version 2009b) | |
| [ 5 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
 | Feb 24 2009 |
MMD, LTD A single workaround takes care of all this: competitive crossgrade to Sibelius ASAP. Why is anyone still futzin' around with this crapware?
(Version 2009b) | |
| Aug 18 2009 |
PIOTRGM To call this excellent programme a "crapware" is truly rude and very inconsiderate. How much time have you spent learning it? How comfortable are you using it? What are you using it for? Show me examples of your work so that I can see you're so versatile in using Finale you have a right to make derogatory, nasty comments. I suspect you are not a pro because professionals do not use such language.
(Version 2010) | |
| Aug 19 2009 |
MADMEGDIGITALLTD I used Finale c. 1995-2003
through two composition degrees. I used it because my teachers used it and I didn't know there was something better. I even engraved my doctoral dissertation with it
a 35-minute flute concerto. Preparing parts was an agonizing process. This program's all about clicking submenus and making the mouse travel to the palette. Then somebody suggested I try Sibelius. I've since been kicking myself for using Finale all those years, paying for "upgrade" after "upgrade." Getting useless new features when the fundamental underlying problems of the interface remained and the size of the program became more bloated. I do make my living from engraving, arranging and original work, which makes that my profession. Nonetheless, I will stick with my original assessment of this "programme" (as you call it) as crapware. I'm not sure what being a professional has to do with it one way or another. I call 'em like I see 'em. I even tried 2009 thinking that after 10 years, surely they would have improved the interface. But no. It's still clunky as ever.
(Version 2010) | |
| Aug 19 2009 |
PIOTRGM Thank you for the explanation. Let us agree to disagree, then. Call those programmes what you will. I am not eager to use harsh words because two of my friends are programmers (one Mac, one Windows) and I simply know how much work goes into those things (regardless of how successful or unsuccessful software might turn out be). I still think Finale is very good and yes, I have created a number of pretty complex scores using it, including pieces for orchestra such as a series of concerti (all performed) for violin and viola (double concerto), saxophone, and organ. For a time, I supported myself as a copyist (or engraver, if you will) and used Finale for it. Finale is extremely flexible - and this is what I like. I tried Sibelius and was not too impressed. However, some people tell me it is easier to learn than Finale and hence its popularity with those who are not interested in extended notation.
(Version 2010) | |
| Aug 19 2009 |
DGATWOOD For whatever it's worth, recent Finale versions are a lot better with regards to part extractions, in that they finally caught up with what Igor Engraver did a decade ago, keeping the part formatting as an integral part of the score. I think in terms of functionality, Finale and Sibelius are probably about on par with one another. I think that Sibelius does a better job of automatically getting the formatting right, however, while Finale gives more control for when it gets positioning wrong (which is crucial because it almost inevitably gets it wrong). Finale seems pretty buggy to me, from a programmer perspective, and has really poor CPU performance, causing it to run down a normally six hour laptop battery in a little over two hours. IMHO, most of Finale's performance problems came when they moved to Mac OS X. It seemed like they did the port and then never bothered to go back and optimize it afterwards. I haven't done the same level of experimentation with Sibelius, but I would expect it to be better in both regards, if only because it is a much more recent code base with less legacy cruft lying around. Finally, for what it's worth, Apple has a technical note, TN2096, that describes how to track down most case sensitivity issues. If MakeMusic hasn't read it, they should.
(Version 2010) | |
| Feb 24 2008 |
JMSUIJKERBUIJK One simply cannot stick to a version that one is satisfied with, because there is not a single bug-free version in the history of Finale. Sure, they fix some of the bugs with the 'a' and 'b' updates, but the rest will not be fixed until the next upgrade, which in turn introduces new ones, etcetera, etcetera. E.g., 2007 could not be quit with the cmd-Q key combination (probably THE oldest key command in the history of the Mac OS). This bug was never fixed in the updates on 2007. It wasn't even fixed in the payed for upgrade 2008, but only in 2008a. And there are bugs like this, I'm a user since 3.0 and have paid the app SIX times over since, for 'upgrades' only. I am still satisfied with what I can do with the app and that's why I use it, but I strongly protest against the way MakeMusic declares us all morons and sucks us all dry with their abjectable policy that defies any etiquette of software development. They know their app is the best in the market, and they'll make sure we'll know it as well ... through our wallet.
(Version 2008b) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Feb 24 2008 |
JMSUIJKERBUIJK JMSUIJKERBUIJK One simply cannot stick to a version that one is satisfied with, because there is not a single bug-free version in the history of Finale. Sure, they fix some of the bugs with the 'a' and 'b' updates, but the rest will not be fixed until the next upgrade, which in turn introduces new ones, etcetera, etcetera. E.g., 2007 could not be quit with the cmd-Q key combination (probably THE oldest key command in the history of the Mac OS). This bug was never fixed in the updates on 2007. It wasn't even fixed in the payed for upgrade 2008, but only in 2008a. And there are bugs like this, in more or less serious degree, in each and every version that I have used todate, and that is ever version since 3.0. I'm a longtime user as well and have paid the app SIX times over since, for 'upgrades' only. I am still satisfied with what I can do with the app and that's why I use it, but I strongly protest against the way MakeMusic declares us all morons and sucks us all dry with their abjectable policy that defies any etiquette of software development. They know their app is the best in the market, and they'll make sure we'll know it as well ... through our wallet. [duplicate because of missing text]
(Version 2008b) | |
| Jul 25 2005 |
DEBOLT As a long time Finale user I've learned over the years that it's not necessary to upgrade to every single yearly version. If you're happy with your current version then don't bother to upgrade. This pretty much goes for any software in general. However, for people to constantly put Finale down because they charge for their commitment to the product, in making it the absolute best notation program on the market, is simply outrageous. Sibelius is great if you're a student or beginner, but nothing holds a candle to Finale for precise music notation. Sibelius simply produces sloppy scores. If you're a serious composer Finale is the ultimate tool.
(Version 2006) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jul 25 2005 |
ANONYMOUS I've seen very sloppy Finale scores. It makes no difference which program you're using. Sloppy composers create sloppy scores. All I know is it takes me about 1/10th of the time to prep my orchestral scores for publication with Sibelius than it did when I used Finale.
(Version 2006) | |
| Nov 14 2004 |
ANONYMOUS Nice to hear that Sibelius is working on a "higher" level. Been using Finale for years, but am tired of the company reaching into my pocket for these so-called "upgrades." Will switch!
(Version 2005a) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Nov 12 2004 |
PIPPO CANNISTRA' Isn't an update from 2004 to 2005 supposed to be a "major update" ? I mean, the two versions of the program look preatty much the same, except for a couple of functions that you don't even notice....Very disappointing. The last version of Sibelius is absolutely on a way higher level, from any point of view.
(Version 2005a) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Feb 13 2004 |
XAMBIENT408 I want Finale NotePad 2004. I don't want to spend six hundred dollars for music notation software.
(Version 2004) | |
| [ 6 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Feb 13 2004 |
SPAMGUY I have never been very satisfied with any music notation program, cost being the most significant decider. I'm a student; I don't plan to pay off the cost through humungous sales of a magnum opus I've got up my sleeve. What gives? My favourite so far is Lilypond (http://www.lilypond.org). It's free, and the support base is immense. The big downside: you have to script your music in plaintext.
(Version 2004) | |
| Apr 26 2004 |
JOEL NELSON Finale NotePad 2004 has been released. Go to www.codamusic.com to download it. It runs in native mode on OS X and works fine in 10.3.3.
(Version 2004) | |
| Feb 14 2005 |
BORBORYGMUS Finale 2005b did fix a couple of annoying glitches barely mentioned: The tuplet tool was cranky in the "a" version and the lyric tool was troublesome. Both problems went awaty with the "b" version. That being said, why shell out some US$90 or so every year just t0 pay for minor changes? Leave that sort of nonsense to Microsoft. I would love to go to Sibelius, but I have musical needs that Finale does cover, even if only by kludging the files around, but Sibelius can't deal with at all. I deal with Arabic (Cairo Convention), Persian and Turkish music. They use microtonality and although I can clumsily appproximate them on Finale (in a bass-ackward sort of way...) I can't even get in the neighborhoood with Sibelius. Add to that, compound time signatures, limping irregular rhythms, etc. and microtones (comma system, 9 intervals inside of a whole note), I can't even get to first base in Sibelius. Finale does the job... badly, but it is possible. The first engraver application publisher to figure it out will get a lock onto what is a really big potential market. Western pop isn't all there is! The other 95% of the world's music is waiting for you to wake up. Don't you guys want to make some money?
(Version 2005b) | |
| Feb 25 2005 |
ELMER Borborygmus, can you explain what you mean by "limping irregular rhythms", and what is it about Finale that gets you to first base on them vs. Sibelius?
(Version 2005b) | |
| Aug 21 2006 |
THATPIANOPLAYER88 Sibelius vs. Finale? Just depends. Each software does something the other one cannot do until the other one finds out and adds it as well. I have beta tested for one of these softwares and I will tell that each one is watching the other quite closely. Stay tuned, folks!
(Version 2007) | |
| Oct 28 2008 |
GUNTIS Go to http://www.finalemusic.com/NotePad/ and downloaf NotePad. No problems.
(Version 2009a) | |
|
Main
