Music Notation Software

[Dylan King]

Back when I used to run Digital Performer as my primary sequencing software, I bought Sibelius, having heard that it was the easiest to learn and had the power to do what I needed. DP has a terrible notation program.

Sibelius did turn out to be easy to use, but there are many things about it that I was unhappy with. There are serious formatting problems, especially when writing ledger lines. There are also many tasks that one might think you could do to the entire project, but as it turns out, I had to go through and do them one task at a time. This took too long for me, although I did come up with some nice looking scores.

Upon moving to Logic about a year ago, I found that Logic's notation editor is just as pretty and powerful as Sibelius, but even easier to use, without the formatting problems. If you are only running a PC, I would think harder about getting Finale.

[hurricane_harry]

i use finale to do stuff like transposition and for composing/arranging. i like it the best if you have the means to get it, but if your more limited in your spending, dollar for dollar notworthy composer is probobly the best.

[ThomasDodd]

For a more professional layout, Igor Engraver is the best I know.
but it is a litle more difficult to use in my point of view.

Igor Engraver will do a superb printig job. (not so fast)

none of these can easily make a modern looking score.

What do you mean, "modern looking" above?

You seam to say that Igor Engraver is good for printing, but then say it doesn't easily make a "modern looking" score.

FWIW, I don't want a modern looking score. They look bad, and are hard to read. I want the hand engraved look of 100 years ago. As discussed here.

Has anyone here worked with Denemo much yet? Looking for opinions on it as a GUI entry app.

[Anterux]

What do you mean, "modern looking" above?

We can do almost anything with these notations softwares.

but all three I mention above and I may add to the list, Encore, Music Time, Noteworthy, Ouverture, have one big problem:
they are based in measures.
sure we can write music without measures with them, but we have to think in measures always.
that is a big andycap because sometimes (many times in my composition) it is more natural to write without measures. (not only without DISPALYING measure bars.)
I dont look for a "modern look". I use the look that can better represent on paper what I want to hear. Or so I try it.

Anterux "who thinks music is not on paper. but in our hearts. paper is just a guide. a map. with many gaps sometimes..." Ã

[MaryAnn]

I'm a long term Finale user, but the comment about measures did ring a bell. If you want to write a piece that has frequent time signature changes, or one that is "free flow" without measures at all (I wrote one back in college that was "spacial" to read....everyone had a score and came in when it "looked" right) .... finale might not be right, or even Sibelius. I"ll be curious to see the new Overture.

Since I compose without a keyboard, just on the computer itself by inputting notes on the staff, playback is important for me. I don't need fabulous true-to-life instrument sounds (which is good, because I don't have them) but I'd be up a creek without playback. It continues to amaze and astound me how Brahms, Tchaikowski, Beethoven, etc...wrote symphonies with too many parts to play on a keyboard, and they got them right. I couldn't do counterpoint or multiphonics without playback. I mean, how do you hear Rite of Spring in your head?

MA

[MaryAnn]

Shall I assume that is not a slam?

I find that when the counterpoint or melodic interplay becomes complex, that playback is extremely helpful, and that the parts are much easier to write on the fly. If that makes me not a "real" composer, well, I guess you are entitled to your opinion.

MA, who still greatly admires the "real" composers

[TMurphy]

It all depends on what you are more used to using. If you have used Finale more in the past, then it will feel easiest, and make the most sense. People who say Sibelius is easier to use than Finale do so because it's what they're familiar with; Finale seems foreign and complex. For me, I became acquainted with Finale first, so when I try to use Sibelius, I get easily frustrated. I would say Finale is easier to use, but again, that's because it's what I know.

Both programs are very capable, and can do really anthing you need to do. As for Noteworthy Composer, Lilypad, Overture, et. al., I am not really familiar with those, so I'm afraid I'm useless to you there. All I can tell you is, whichever program you choose, if it can support a MIDI keyboard input (which I imagine they all can), you would do yourself a huge favor to set one up. You will find the amount of time it takes you to write a score decreases by about half.

Tim Murphy, who wishes there was a quick and easy way to enter all dynamics, articulations, and other markings into the score, too.

[Anterux]

"Internal audition" is good. I use it until a point. but with certain complexities it helps to hear "externaly". all thru the ages there was exelent composers who had it all in the head before witing. others didnt and experimented on the piano, the organ, guitar, or what ever came to hand. And they were also exelent composers. Creativity, musicality, are more (most) important to us. today we also use computers. great. they help alot. but they dont garantee anything. (I also use the tuba... to compose music for piccolo )