Nice to ask to someone who own both.
Best free notation editor/printer
-
- KVRist
- 410 posts since 8 Jan, 2004 from Switzerland
Thanks koolkeys
Nice to ask to someone who own both.
Nice to ask to someone who own both.
-
- KVRer
- 10 posts since 26 Jan, 2005
Right, Finale is the standard in the business, and obviously one of the default choices for the professional musician/engraver (at least considering the number of font designed to fit its character map), even if I dare say that Sibelius is a fierce competitor, and testing the demos of other notation packages I personally would add Opus as an excellent third choice. Given this Finale happens to be priced 590,00 Euros - not cheap at all, and one must be prepared to purchase upgrades on a yearly base.s! Over here we would call it a mortgage!
Myriad is a small software house, actually toe brothers, and the price you pay Harmony Assistant is 70,00 Euros (or 70 US dollars, much cheaper if you live in the States!), and you get a lifetime registration.
Considering the difference in price, a comparison between Finale and Harmony Assistant could seem unfair, yet while I might agree that Finale is somewhere better (I am not using it, but given its price!), I'm not sure what it offers is so far above what Harmony offers. In the end with the latter you obtain a number of features that are usually associated with top notation packages, like the support for third party fonts or a script language to write your own plug-ins, as well as a lot of gadgets (just if you like to "play with" the music, rather than "plying it", from time to time...).
No doubt Finale probably has features no other programs offer, yet this is true for almost any other good software I could think of, and definitely the Myriad software offer a few things that you can't get with Finale, For instance I registered Melody Assistant in the mid-nineties because of my interest in folk music, since it can import transcriptions in abc notation (both Harmony and Melody Assistant support in input and/or in output an amazing number of formats), and this mean I can handle some twenty thousand tunes. I switched to Harmony Assistant a couple of years ago because I can use to generate the exoteric tablatures formats devised for the instruments I play (melodeons/button accordions).
Then, with 20,00 extra Euros (or 20 US dollars) you can get OMeR, the Myriad Melody/Harmony Assistant dedicated music OCR. I'm not using it, and I don't think it can be compared with the top versions of Photoscore or Smartscore (yet), but I tested the demo a while ago and I would say it's not too far from their light versions (and as for any Myriad program one gets the future updates for free).
Also, behind the program in itself, you should consider that Harmony Assistant can resort to its own sound samples for playback (or to burn the music on a CD, another included facility). The sound base you download with the demo sounds pretty ugly, and the largest one you can get for free is just a bit better than the Wavetable synch of a cheap sound card, but for another 30,00 extra Euros (or 30 US dollars) you can be posted the Gold Sound Base, that is in fact a CD with some 400 MB of samples. Yes, I've bought it and here there is no match, we are light years ahead the tiny soundfont bank shipped with Finale (although I fear still far from the Kontakt based player offered with Sibelius!).
To sum up: Harmony Assistant + OMeR + the Gold Sound Base is 120,00 Euros. This means that with a bare 20% of what you would pay for Finale you still get (at least!) a good 70/80% of the features it implements. If you are interested to put in print some excellent scores and you think in terms of quality/price ratio, buy Harmony, and you'll save enough money for a full featured professional sequencer for your midis. If you are on a budget register Melody, or try some typesetting package (MusiXTex is very good and free, Lilypond is free as well though I've never been able to make it work under Windows, and MUP costs just 29 US dollars and is excellent).
Regards
Gianni
Myriad is a small software house, actually toe brothers, and the price you pay Harmony Assistant is 70,00 Euros (or 70 US dollars, much cheaper if you live in the States!), and you get a lifetime registration.
Considering the difference in price, a comparison between Finale and Harmony Assistant could seem unfair, yet while I might agree that Finale is somewhere better (I am not using it, but given its price!), I'm not sure what it offers is so far above what Harmony offers. In the end with the latter you obtain a number of features that are usually associated with top notation packages, like the support for third party fonts or a script language to write your own plug-ins, as well as a lot of gadgets (just if you like to "play with" the music, rather than "plying it", from time to time...).
No doubt Finale probably has features no other programs offer, yet this is true for almost any other good software I could think of, and definitely the Myriad software offer a few things that you can't get with Finale, For instance I registered Melody Assistant in the mid-nineties because of my interest in folk music, since it can import transcriptions in abc notation (both Harmony and Melody Assistant support in input and/or in output an amazing number of formats), and this mean I can handle some twenty thousand tunes. I switched to Harmony Assistant a couple of years ago because I can use to generate the exoteric tablatures formats devised for the instruments I play (melodeons/button accordions).
Then, with 20,00 extra Euros (or 20 US dollars) you can get OMeR, the Myriad Melody/Harmony Assistant dedicated music OCR. I'm not using it, and I don't think it can be compared with the top versions of Photoscore or Smartscore (yet), but I tested the demo a while ago and I would say it's not too far from their light versions (and as for any Myriad program one gets the future updates for free).
Also, behind the program in itself, you should consider that Harmony Assistant can resort to its own sound samples for playback (or to burn the music on a CD, another included facility). The sound base you download with the demo sounds pretty ugly, and the largest one you can get for free is just a bit better than the Wavetable synch of a cheap sound card, but for another 30,00 extra Euros (or 30 US dollars) you can be posted the Gold Sound Base, that is in fact a CD with some 400 MB of samples. Yes, I've bought it and here there is no match, we are light years ahead the tiny soundfont bank shipped with Finale (although I fear still far from the Kontakt based player offered with Sibelius!).
To sum up: Harmony Assistant + OMeR + the Gold Sound Base is 120,00 Euros. This means that with a bare 20% of what you would pay for Finale you still get (at least!) a good 70/80% of the features it implements. If you are interested to put in print some excellent scores and you think in terms of quality/price ratio, buy Harmony, and you'll save enough money for a full featured professional sequencer for your midis. If you are on a budget register Melody, or try some typesetting package (MusiXTex is very good and free, Lilypond is free as well though I've never been able to make it work under Windows, and MUP costs just 29 US dollars and is excellent).
Regards
Gianni
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Thanks Gianni for the input. I agree that Finale can be expensive. And for non-professionals, it may not be what you want. However, you can get it for educational pricing, which is still more than MA or HA, but a bit cheaper. And you're right, if you get it, you'll want to upgrade every year for about $80 per upgrade. I do this, and can tell you I have alot invested in it! That may be why I'm so loyal. And Finale is truly a professional standard because of it's versatility, and it is truly (IMO) the most powerful notation editor package around.
On the other hand, I completely agree that MA and HA offer some things that FInale doesn't. I have MA as well as Finale, for it's own specific reasons. The first time I saw MA I couldn't believe the value. It's wonderful. And though I won't be putting Finale down, I will be supporting MA for as long as I can see! Any time a developer offers a great value, I have no problem recommending it to those on a budget.
It's all about what does what you want, and no tool is for everyone. As long as the job gets done!
Koolkeys
On the other hand, I completely agree that MA and HA offer some things that FInale doesn't. I have MA as well as Finale, for it's own specific reasons. The first time I saw MA I couldn't believe the value. It's wonderful. And though I won't be putting Finale down, I will be supporting MA for as long as I can see! Any time a developer offers a great value, I have no problem recommending it to those on a budget.
It's all about what does what you want, and no tool is for everyone. As long as the job gets done!
Koolkeys
-
- KVRer
- 10 posts since 26 Jan, 2005
Yes Keylogger, I whole heartily agree - It's all about what does what you want. If Finale meets your requirements and you are satisfied with it, that’s fine for me.
Also I am aware that Finale is a standard (that was the first statement in my previous posting). If I was a professional engraver or composer, always working under pressure, or an arranger, frequently asked to modify a large score almost on the fly, I would probably choose Finale, since it is no doubt a flexible and reliable professional tool.
(Un)fortunately I am not a professional, so I am free to tell that I couldn’t care less of the industry standards, or to say better of the productivity issue that lays behind them. I put scores in print for my own enjoinment, and I am concerned with their quality rather than their quantity.
Sorry, I personally believe that the remarks made by the Lilypond developers about the major notation software, that btw are illustrated with a standard Finale score on their web site, are undeniable. Even if Finale has improved a lot in the past two years (I think replacing the Petrucci font with the Maestro was a good move), still the raw output needs a lot of work to be fine tuned for printing. I’m not telling you can’t produce the finest of scores with Finale, yet you surely need all its flexibility and customization possibilities (and a lot of hard work) if you really wish to stay above the average fairly poor quality of the scores nowadays the music printers flood the sheet music shops with. In my opinion, if we think in terms of results, the difference in price between Finale and Harmony Assistant simply isn’t justified.
Given this, I do not intend to start an argument. Those who wish to investigate the Lilypond developers point can jump to the url below and make their own mind about it:
http://www.lilypond.org/web/about/autom ... tware.html
Also, I would warmly suggest to those who are interested in a comparison between Finale and Harmony Assistant to download the demos, and try them to see which can better serve their purpose. The Harmony demo, if I am not wrong, is fully functional except for the printing functions (that, again if I am not wrong, can be tested using the Melody Assistant demo, that shares the same engine). I would say that the functional limitations of the Finale demo are, so to say, debatable, but still it offers a fair chance to test most of what the program offers.
Regards
Gianni
Also I am aware that Finale is a standard (that was the first statement in my previous posting). If I was a professional engraver or composer, always working under pressure, or an arranger, frequently asked to modify a large score almost on the fly, I would probably choose Finale, since it is no doubt a flexible and reliable professional tool.
(Un)fortunately I am not a professional, so I am free to tell that I couldn’t care less of the industry standards, or to say better of the productivity issue that lays behind them. I put scores in print for my own enjoinment, and I am concerned with their quality rather than their quantity.
Sorry, I personally believe that the remarks made by the Lilypond developers about the major notation software, that btw are illustrated with a standard Finale score on their web site, are undeniable. Even if Finale has improved a lot in the past two years (I think replacing the Petrucci font with the Maestro was a good move), still the raw output needs a lot of work to be fine tuned for printing. I’m not telling you can’t produce the finest of scores with Finale, yet you surely need all its flexibility and customization possibilities (and a lot of hard work) if you really wish to stay above the average fairly poor quality of the scores nowadays the music printers flood the sheet music shops with. In my opinion, if we think in terms of results, the difference in price between Finale and Harmony Assistant simply isn’t justified.
Given this, I do not intend to start an argument. Those who wish to investigate the Lilypond developers point can jump to the url below and make their own mind about it:
http://www.lilypond.org/web/about/autom ... tware.html
Also, I would warmly suggest to those who are interested in a comparison between Finale and Harmony Assistant to download the demos, and try them to see which can better serve their purpose. The Harmony demo, if I am not wrong, is fully functional except for the printing functions (that, again if I am not wrong, can be tested using the Melody Assistant demo, that shares the same engine). I would say that the functional limitations of the Finale demo are, so to say, debatable, but still it offers a fair chance to test most of what the program offers.
Regards
Gianni
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1256 posts since 22 Aug, 2003
Interesting discussion.
Anyway, problem: Melody Assisstant is NOT a full-featured shareware version
. It won't even let me change key signature. Oh well 
So far no solution besides laboriously trying to work my way around demo limitations on a variety of different apps.
Anyway, problem: Melody Assisstant is NOT a full-featured shareware version
. It won't even let me change key signature. Oh well So far no solution besides laboriously trying to work my way around demo limitations on a variety of different apps.
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Why can't you change the key sig? I'm able to do so. Are you going under the "Score" menu? Try the "Fast Transpose" option, and it should let you. For some reason, the Tempo and Key Signature option doesn't work the way it's supposed to. If you click the question mark it will give you the option of updating your plug-in for Melody. Not sure what it did then.
Also, there is a way to do transposing instruments also, under the Staff menu.
Still, it's free, and not too expensive to register, so what do you expect? It's still super powerful.
Koolkeys
Also, there is a way to do transposing instruments also, under the Staff menu.
Still, it's free, and not too expensive to register, so what do you expect? It's still super powerful.
Koolkeys
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Sorry, I guess it is one of the very few limitations. But you can at least transpose the whole piece with the Quick transpose.
Again, it's still cheap if you want this feature.
Koolkeys
Again, it's still cheap if you want this feature.
Koolkeys
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1256 posts since 22 Aug, 2003
Yeah, that's true - I don't "expect" anything, but I'm still very surprised that I haven't found a truly full-featured free alternative.
I guess I *could* just transpose it into a different key - namely C. I'd prefer not to have to have all my pieces be in C though
I guess this cuts my work out for me for my tech-lab project next year: free, intuitive score editor and printer. Difficult? Probably too difficult. I can still try.
I could just pay the $20.00 or whatever it takes to get a registration - because that's the kind of money I do have, as opposed to the kind of costs of the sample libraries I want/need (somewhere in between). Thing is, I would need to spend a lot more time with the app to get to know it before I make an expenditure on it - seems very clunky so far, unfortunately. What with the separate tools to write and erase and the tiny toolbars - at least it has marks for all the different symbols necessary, which is very good. But at this rate, writing it all out by hand would be faster
I do appreciate your suggestions, by the way, in case I'm unclear. I guess MIDI notation is the one area where you just can't get by with free software... now that's something I'm not used to. In this day and age - something you need MONEY to be able to do, even rudimentarily?
I guess I *could* just transpose it into a different key - namely C. I'd prefer not to have to have all my pieces be in C though
I guess this cuts my work out for me for my tech-lab project next year: free, intuitive score editor and printer. Difficult? Probably too difficult. I can still try
.I could just pay the $20.00 or whatever it takes to get a registration - because that's the kind of money I do have, as opposed to the kind of costs of the sample libraries I want/need (somewhere in between). Thing is, I would need to spend a lot more time with the app to get to know it before I make an expenditure on it - seems very clunky so far, unfortunately. What with the separate tools to write and erase and the tiny toolbars - at least it has marks for all the different symbols necessary, which is very good. But at this rate, writing it all out by hand would be faster
I do appreciate your suggestions, by the way, in case I'm unclear. I guess MIDI notation is the one area where you just can't get by with free software... now that's something I'm not used to. In this day and age - something you need MONEY to be able to do, even rudimentarily?
-
- KVRAF
- 4707 posts since 16 Mar, 2004 from Columbia, MD
Wait, Finale is the industry standard? I was under the impression Sibelius was.. and Digital Performer for high end stuff.
-
- KVRAF
- 16154 posts since 2 Dec, 2003 from Nashville, TN
Finale is the industry standard, despite Sibelius' recent progressions. The thing is, that Finale has been around for so much longer. I'm not saying Sibelius isn't good, but it's just a fact that more professionals use Finale at this time. Here's why I think this is so.
It's kind of like Pro-Tools. PT is by far the industry standard. Some will dispute this, but I live in Nashville, and I can take you to some studios. They run PT. I asked several of my instructors what they see in all the studios they are in through the week. It's 95% of the time PT. When it's not, it's Nuendo usually. But the reason is that PT was one of those apps that everyone bought early on and stuck with it. They won't change because they have their hardware setup that uses it. So they keep up with it. And why not, it is truly more powerful than most deep down.
With Finale, it's the same way kind of. Finale has been around for so long, and it's user base is far greater than any competition. Sibelius makes a great product, but it's user base is not yet what Finale has. Plus, Finale is still getting greater every year. It is still gaining users, and most likely isn't losing too much ground.
Many pros do use Sibelius, but Finale is just too big at the moment for any other product to become the new "Industry Standard".
Oh, and with Digital Performer, I've not heard of one studio here in Nashville that has it, and the instructors I've talked too say the same, with maybe one or two studios using it. And I'd say Nashville has a pretty big share in what is the music industry.
And I'm talking about for ALL genres. It's really not all country here, by far.
Sorry to make this so winded. I'm waiting for something to upload to my site, and needed to kill some time. Cheers!
Koolkeys
It's kind of like Pro-Tools. PT is by far the industry standard. Some will dispute this, but I live in Nashville, and I can take you to some studios. They run PT. I asked several of my instructors what they see in all the studios they are in through the week. It's 95% of the time PT. When it's not, it's Nuendo usually. But the reason is that PT was one of those apps that everyone bought early on and stuck with it. They won't change because they have their hardware setup that uses it. So they keep up with it. And why not, it is truly more powerful than most deep down.
With Finale, it's the same way kind of. Finale has been around for so long, and it's user base is far greater than any competition. Sibelius makes a great product, but it's user base is not yet what Finale has. Plus, Finale is still getting greater every year. It is still gaining users, and most likely isn't losing too much ground.
Many pros do use Sibelius, but Finale is just too big at the moment for any other product to become the new "Industry Standard".
Oh, and with Digital Performer, I've not heard of one studio here in Nashville that has it, and the instructors I've talked too say the same, with maybe one or two studios using it. And I'd say Nashville has a pretty big share in what is the music industry.
And I'm talking about for ALL genres. It's really not all country here, by far.Sorry to make this so winded. I'm waiting for something to upload to my site, and needed to kill some time. Cheers!
Koolkeys
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1256 posts since 22 Aug, 2003
Don't forget that along with the "Music Industry" people, there are huge amounts of well-known modern composers all around the US at different universities. These are the ones who use DP alot - and from what I've heard, Sibelius is sort-of- catching up, but Finale has the most fine-tuned control over the score (which is very important for people working with modern music, since it has so many non-standard elemenents - like physical digital-wand waving and sample-triggering, and pulling strings on pianos to make wierd harmonics, etc.
-
- KVRAF
- 3266 posts since 22 Sep, 2003 from under the sun
Sibelius is by far the best one
not free, unfortunately
not free, unfortunately
-
- KVRAF
- 3266 posts since 22 Sep, 2003 from under the sun
it's true for me and for some real composers...koolkeys wrote:Completely your opinion. Not at all true in a general sense.Wopelka wrote:Sibelius is by far the best one
not free, unfortunately
Koolkeys
what the "industry" (what an ugly word BTW) uses as a standard is another sort of truth, which i don't care much about.
