~

~

No offense, but I've tried Overture, and I didn't like it at all. The interface was very confusing.

~

You can get a pro notation package that can do more than Finale or Sibelius for half the price.

This is a big claim. I really doubt Overture can actually do more than Finale when its team is smaller.

But it really is easier to most people imo.

You can't have an opinion about whether it's easier for most people - that's dependent on their opinions. Also, what you say about picking up Overture without reading the manual is true of Finale as well - I used Finale before I read any of its manual. In fact, using Finale as adeptly as I now do, I've still read very, very little of the manual.

Basically you can just click on a note value and drop it right on the staff, drag it up and down, or play right into the score with a keyboard.

Yes, you can do these things and more with Finale. Does Overture have lots of time-saving keyboard shortcuts? Human Playback-like performance interpretation? Ability to export a notation file as an audio file? I'm looking at the features of Overture, and it just seems amazingly basic.

I understand you work for this company, and I'm sure you want very much for it to succeed. Best wishes to you. Please don't make grand assumptions in your advertisement, though, it will only turn people off to your product. How far did you really go in learning Finale? It seems like you don't realize how advanced it really is.

Also, I checked the price of Overture 4. It's the same as the price of Finale for students. I bought Finale for $350, and that's how much GenieSoft is charging for its product.

Hmmm...and you're basing this on...what? The ten minutes you spent trying to learn all the features of Finale? It seems like you didn't give either program enough time to realize that they both can do and exceed all of the features that you say can only be done with Overture 4. The world already has enough notation softwares. We don't need another that can't even do half of the features other progams can.

~

Any offers for those of us who do not use Windows or Mac operating systems?

~

Not necessarily Linux - there are various alternatives. I have used BSD and Solaris, for example, in addition to Linux.

Linux isn't the be all and end all of 'non standard' operating systems!

Anyway! I am well aware of the posix alternatives - I am actually interested in software packages (proprietary or not) that don't require windows or Mac OS.

You can get a pro notation package that can do more than Finale or Sibelius for half the price.

I'm sorry, but this just isn't a fair statement. First of all, the academic price for both Finale and Sibelius can be easily found for less than $250. Academic Superstore, which advertises on this website, sells them for less than that.

Secondly, stating that Overture can do more than Finale or Sibelius is just incorrect. Overture has some strengths, particularly in its MIDI editing features. In terms of notation, both for speed and quality, Sibelius and Finale are both very far ahead of Overture. You simply can not produce the same quality output in Overture in anything close to the same time that you can in either of these other programs. If you want to get decent looking output in Overture, you're going to spend a lot more time. And even for simply entering the notes and other elements, Overture lacks many of the tools that make this quick in Finale and Sibelius.

Regarding playback, you can make a case that Overture is in front, but even here it's not a clear choice. Overture has a much better UI for editing MIDI data than either Finale or Sibelius. While the same edits that are possible in Overture are also possible in Finale, it's generally quicker to do them in Overture because of the graphical editing.

Finale does however have several advantages in terms of playback. The first is that it comes with a substantial number of sounds, including 100 sounds from GPO, its own soundfont, and various percussion soundfonts. Sibelius includes Kontakt Silver. Overture doesn't include any sounds (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Finale also has the best default playback, reading more elements than any other program and also adding more musicality through HP than what's simply written on the page.

A) There's a keyboard shortcut for everything. But don't expect them to be the same key combos as Finale. [/b]

Unless I've really overlooked something major, Overture doesn't have nearly the number of shortcuts as Finale or Sibelius. Finale and Sibelius can be used to a great extent without a mouse. Overture seems to be very mouse oriented, requiring the user to click most non-note objects on a palette and then click on the score to place them. Both of these programs allow the user to redefine virtually all shortcuts and to create new shortcuts for new items.

B) It has humanization, but it leaves the specific details up to the composer It gives the composer more control than just choosing "salsa" and leaving it at that. You can use the filter to change the beat emphasis and also run the humanize filter which allows you to control the amount of humanization. (Velocity, duration, attack time, etc.) [/b]

Humanization in Overture is not the same type of thing as it is in Finale. In Overture it's a randomizing feature for adjusting start/end times, velocity, and tempo. Finale had that type of randomization feature long before it gained the Human Playback feature. Human Playback in Finale is designed to look at the musical context and adjust the music in a way that makes sense. Also, Finale's Human Playback offers a lot more in terms of customization than just selecting a style. And as is possible in Overture, you can override the Human Playback in any specific location. So you get the smarter default playback along with the ability to tweak it to your liking (and as I said before, Overture's graphical editing for this is generally faster and much nicer than Finale's MIDI Tool).

I realize Finale is very advanced, and have tried using each new version over the years to see if I felt more comfortable using it, or if there were new options that Overture didn't have. There are a few, but overall, Overture can do more helpful things for composers who wish to have professional demos based on their sheet music. Where I find Finale lags behind Overture is in the ability for the composer to control every aspect of playback, and its ability to wed beautifully with any sample library out there.[/b]

Just to be clear, you can control every aspect of playback in Finale as well. It's a question of UI, not capability.

- Let's compare for a moment the playback options for articulations. If you add a staccato accent in Finale, the composer has the following playback choices. "Change Attack" "Change Duration" "Change Velocity" (values are percentages). Overture can do that as well...But what if you wanted more realism? What if you had a large and realistic sample library with a staccato (even a staccatissimo) sample. Overture gives the composer control over more playback effects in order to take the most advantage of the most detailed samples. In contrast to Finale's short list of playback options for articulation symbols, Overture's reads as follows:

http://www.composerarts.com/artics.bmp[/b]

This isn't a good comparison on a number of levels. First of all, we don't know exactly how this actually does work in the latest Finale, since we don't have it yet. It does sound as if Human Playback has been updated to include some options that apply here. But more importantly, Finale's expressions have these types of options for playback, and because of advanced positioning options for expressions not found in Overture, along with a convenient shortcut system for entering these expressions, expressions are a very legitimate way to quickly enter this playback data.

Note also that Overture suffers from a similar shortcoming in that its dynamics (which aren't expressions, as in Finale) can't be assigned to send key switches, while in Finale they can.

- Overture integrates itself to any sample library out there (not just GPO, and not only by way of loading VST). With Overture, there are instrument definitions for every sample library, and the symbols actually trigger the different unique functions of those libraries. For instance, regardless of whether you use EastWest Symphonic orchestra or Vienna Symphonic library, or the library of the future, we're always adding new definitions to the list. Overture's menus will list the keyswitches of that particular library and the symbols will actually switch them. It will also use the same methods for playback of dynamics that your synth does just by choosing the proper synth on the staff.

I'm sure since you've heard that Finale 2007 has linked parts that you've also heard Human Playback has been updated to be customizeable for other libraries and devices (not just VST). Overture does score a big point in that it can work with any VST software, while Finale is restricted to VST software made by Native Instruments. Fortunately Kontakt 2 (which works in Finale) opens many of the most popular sound labraries available, but this is clearly still a point in Overture's favor.

One question about Overture I have is whether it has any intelligence regarding dynamics, articulations, expressions, etc. according to which staff these elements exist on. I see that I can edit the definition for each of these separately, or for an entire staff. So clearly I can set a pizzicato marking on a violin staff to send a different patch change than a pizzicato marking for the viola. But can it do this by default, just by recognizing the type of instrument? Finale with Human Playback does do this.

Overture also has a full sequencer, meaning piano roll view with the ability to alter any midi data. You can draw midi values for any parameter into the graphical menu, just like today's most hi-tech sequencers. It also allows you to use another unique view that overlays the midi data over the score so you can use the sequencer and notation window at the same time.[/b]

This is very cool. It's convenient to be able to hit Tab to get this and then draw the data in. Finale still makes us edit this numerically.

Also, I checked the price of Overture 4. It's the same as the price of Finale for students. I bought Finale for $350, and that's how much GenieSoft is charging for its product.

Are there places Finale is better? Sure! But those features are not necessary to create professional sheet music AND have a professional sequencer in one.

I'm sorry, I don't agree with that statement at all. Many of the notation features in Finale that Overture lacks make it MUCH simpler and faster to get a good looking score. Finale has much better default positioning for many objects (slurs, expressions, etc.). Finale has superior tools for filtering individual items and copying them. Extensive and customizeable shortcuts make a big difference. Finale has a rich plug-in language that has allowed for hundreds of very useful plug-ins to be created (many of these I can't live without). The list goes on.

And imo, it is faster to use when entering notes, especially when using the mouse or step entry.

I can actually show conclusively that the reverse is true. Finale will take fewer keystrokes than Overture for entering the same music, and the keystrokes will fit under the hands better. Start looking at tablature notation and the difference gets even bigger.

Overture is a fine program - extremely impressive considering that there's really one man behind it. It certainly appeals to many people, and trying out the demo is a great idea. I really enjoy studying various notation programs, and Overture has some really great ideas in it (one click adding of a dynamic to all staves which contain notes is a great idea and to my knowledge unique). I don't mean to attack Overture - I just want to clarify that there are many extremely useful features in Finale and Sibelius that are not found in Overture that have helped them get where they are.

~

I'm not sure if you've tried entering using the step entry feature and a keyboard, but it is as fast a method as they come. Perhaps you were using the mouse entry. To enter a musical line you just hit 4 for a quarter note and then press the note you want, 2 for a half note and press the note you want, etc. This is no slower than any other notation program in that regard. [/b]

Yes, I had experimented with step-time entry with both MIDI and qwerty. Finale works better for both of these. To give you some examples:

Durations:

1. Overture doesn't have a hot key for 64th notes. These are common enough to warrant a keystroke.

2. Overture doesn't allow the user to fix a duration mistake via a shortcut. Entering the wrong rhythm in Finale can be corrected via a single keystroke. Overture requires the user to backtrack and correct the mistake.

3. Tuplets of mixed duration take much more time in Overture than Finale. To my knowledge there is no way to set up a triplet definition in Step-Time for eighth note triplets consisting of a quarter note and an eighth note.

4. Tuplets are always sticky, meaning that they must be disabled (an extra keystroke). It's common in music to have a single triplet. In Finale the user has the option for both sticky and non-sticky tuplets.

5. Finale's Speedy Entry allows for much faster entry of tuplets of changing sizes.

6. From what I can tell, Overture can't enter grace notes in step-time entry via keyboard shortcut.

7. Augmentation dots must be selected before entering the note in Overture. In Finale they can be selected before or after the note is entered, meaning the user is not penalized for forgetting to turn it on (or turn it off).

8. I see no way to enter double-dotted notes via step-time in Overture. This is easily done in Finale.

Pitches:

1. After notes have been entered a single keystroke can change their pitch. In Overture the user must back up.

2. QWERTY input is much faster with Finale. In Overture the pitch must be selected and the QWERTY enter key hit for every note. In Finale, pressing a letter enters the note directly. Adding an extra note to make a chord takes one key with Finale and at least 2 with Overture. Octave switching is more intelligent in Finale where the program automatically switches to whichever octave is closest (and correcting an octave mistake is 1 key in Finale but involves backing up in Overture).

3. Accidentals can be applied to a note in Finale before or after the note is entered via a single key - no backing up involved. The user is not penalized for forgetting initially.

Other:

1. Beams can be broken on the fly in Finale.

2. Stems can be flipped on the fly in Finale.

3. Stems in step-time entry don't seem to flip the correct direction automatically when using multiple voices in Overture. This must be set up manually in the step-time window.

4. Finale's step-time entry allows the entry of virtually any articulation, expression, key signature, time signature or clef with two keystrokes.

5. Ties in entry can be added to individual notes in Finale. In Overture's step-time it appears they must be applied to an entire chord (which is also possible in Finale, but not always desirable).

I also found that when you want to add articulations afterward, it is very quick. You can drag over a whole group of notes at a time and it will add the articulation to all of them for instance. Overture is only mouse oriented if you want it to be. You can do most things with shortcuts. Here is the shortcut list.

Finale's implementation of this is still preferable. First, you can hold a shortcut key and click on a note to enter that particular object - no need to go click a tool on a palette. Secondly, you can also drag select a region while holding this shortcut key to apply it to all of those notes, or you can drag select a region without holding a key to bring up a dialog that lets you specify which durations you want the articulation to apply to. This is particularly handy if you want to for example put staccatos on all of the eighth notes in a section but not the half or quarter notes.

On the main page of geniesoft you can see the package that includes Overture 4 SE and GPO. But Overture's VST integration is for people who want to use the available sound libraries like VSL, EastWest, Kontakt, etc. [/b]

Comparing Finale to Overture SE isn't exactly an equal comparison! I just brought up the included sample libraries for Finale and Sibelius since it is part of the playback package when comparing the products.

I think you'll see that we've made nearly every symbol, including jazz symbols playback. All dynamics, hairpins, articulations, repeats, etc. are not only playable, but user customizable with more options for playback than Finale, as illustrated in an above post using staccato as an example. You wouldn't really want to use an expression (Finale's workaround that you suggested) for something that only effects the score for one note. Overture not only allows you more playback options per symbol, but even keyswitches are auto, happening just for the note that have the articulation.[/b]

There are still some symbols which apparently don't play back (turns for example). Also, the playback of others, such as trills, is less intelligent than with Finale.

I don't think you've fully explored Finale's playback functionality. Repeats are definitely not as customizeable in Overture as they are in Finale. Hairpins aren't customized in Finale by editing the hairpin but rather by using the MIDI Tool to edit the data directly. For articulations it remains to be seen what's possible now that 2007 is coming out. Already they affected more than what you've seen via Human Playback, and since Human Playback in 2007 includes the ability to open it up for any other sample library, I think we should wait to see how this is implemented before saying that their playback is limited. Also, having using expressions in the manner I suggested, I can say quite confidently that they work well for the purpose (remember that expressions in Finale can be either note attached or measure attached).

Each voice of each staff has its own playback settings based on the instrument you're using. If you're a sample programmer, you can even set up your own profile to use with your instrument. Overture uses the settings for dynamics, artics, expressions that are appropriate to the instrument assigned to the voice of that staff.[/b]

I'm trying to understand this better. Can you tell me how inside Overture I would go about setting up the definition for the playback of a pizzicato on a violin staff and then separately setting it up for a viola staff?

Does finale do that for all VST synths out there though? Overture recognizes all of these and is included in that synth's xml profile. [/b]

From what I understand about Finale 2007, yes. Finale now allows users to create custom Human Playback sets for this and trade them with each other. I don't know which ones will be included with the program.

I can't help thinking that this Overture stuff is good in that it presents competition to the hugely overpriced finale and sibelius. They have a stranglehold on the market.

I downloaded a demo of sibelius but it didn't allow me to save so I couldn't progressively experiment. I'd have to practice then do one long stint to ensure it did all I wanted (including exporting midi versions and how easily they could be edited in sibelius). I also found sibelius a bit like its namesake, Sibelius - slow, he took years to finish a symphony. I can overtake it easily to get a reasonably neat finished score by hand.

As for finale, from this very site I've come to see a product sold knowingly bug-ridden and relying on users to test it (and get screwed up with their compositions waiting for things to be resolved at one level or another). It's not backward compatible and you need upgrades and fixes all over the place at $99 a throw. It looks like it could write most music most of the time but I'm loathe to go through a long learning curve so I have everything at my disposal. And I don't want error messages that say "A-hah! You can't have more than 20 accidentals with this version. For another $99, however....."

And, like Sibelius, it still can't do everything.

Next, the limitations of computers and their displays. When scoring on, say, 32 staves, I want to be able to see and work on them all at the same time. My screen will show about 8 staves so I'd have to keep scrolling up and down. Then printing and unless I invest in a good A3 printer, 32 staves on a piece of A4 is far too small.

Weighed against this is: if you can input the music, these products can rip the parts; and they will save a lot in the publishing cycle.

So I can see the benefits of copying a completed composition into finale/sibelius if possible, but is too limiting and far too slow for composing especially for those who have evolved some kind of shorthand in the preliminary stages.

I get the feeling that sibelius and finale started life to provide a simple system to notate straightforward music and produce nice-looking print (if you can get it on a page).

But the original designers gave no thought to more complex scores - many examples have been around since mid-last century - so they had no excuse not getting a lot more right at the outset. I think I'd feel swindled, shelling out between

I can't help thinking that this Overture stuff is good in that it presents competition to the hugely overpriced finale and sibelius. They have a stranglehold on the market.

We discussed this. At the eductional price, Finale and Sibelius can both be had for less than the Overture price quoted here. Non-educational price is somewhat higher, but not dramatically if you shop around.

I downloaded a demo of sibelius but it didn't allow me to save so I couldn't progressively experiment. I'd have to practice then do one long stint to ensure it did all I wanted (including exporting midi versions and how easily they could be edited in sibelius). I also found sibelius a bit like its namesake, Sibelius - slow, he took years to finish a symphony. I can overtake it easily to get a reasonably neat finished score by hand.

This just means you don't know how to use the program very well yet! Sibelius is anything but slow.

As for finale, from this very site I've come to see a product sold knowingly bug-ridden and relying on users to test it (and get screwed up with their compositions waiting for things to be resolved at one level or another).

Saying Finale has bugs is one thing (all software does, so this is hardly surprising), but calling it bug-ridden is quite another. Keep in mind that a number of the things you hear reported here aren't bugs at all but just people not understanding how to do something. Generally Finale is a very stable program, and its bugs don't prevent people from getting their work done. The same is true for Sibelius and Overture.

It's not backward compatible and you need upgrades and fixes all over the place at $99 a throw.

First, Finale does allow users to transfer files back to earlier versions via the included Music XML export/import. It works quite well, though you will usually have to edit page formatting. Also, maintenance updates are not $99, they're free.

It looks like it could write most music most of the time but I'm loathe to go through a long learning curve so I have everything at my disposal.

The learning curve can be either long or short. It's up to you. If you skip the tutorials and don't make any effort to actually really learn the program, you can spend 10 years with the program and never really get it down. Or you can spend a couple of weeks going through the tutorials and studying the manual to see the various capabilities and you can be on your way to being a Finale expert.

And I don't want error messages that say "A-hah! You can't have more than 20 accidentals with this version. For another $99, however....."

That's silly. Even with 10 year old versions of Finale it's generally possible to notate just about any type of music. Some are simpler to do than others, and many of the new features added in each version are improvements to the methods of completing these tasks. But the overall ability has been there for a very long time. That's why Finale has been widely used by publishers for over a decade.

And, like Sibelius, it still can't do everything.

Like what? What can it absolutely not do?

Next, the limitations of computers and their displays. When scoring on, say, 32 staves, I want to be able to see and work on them all at the same time. My screen will show about 8 staves so I'd have to keep scrolling up and down.

Screen displays have advantages as well - not fumbling around with paper for one. If you can't see enough on your screen, you can always go with a larger monitor or even multiple displays.

So I can see the benefits of copying a completed composition into finale/sibelius if possible, but is too limiting and far too slow for composing especially for those who have evolved some kind of shorthand in the preliminary stages.

Sorry, but no way. Unless you're notating something that's more like a picture than it is notes and music, there's no way that anyone writing by hand can keep up with an experienced notation program user. When you think about the fact that a single keypress can enter a note or even an entire chord and then couple that with features like copying and pasting, filtering, inserting, etc. - you realize that notating by hand can't possibly be as fast. Notating by hand simply involves more actions and requires more precision.

I get the feeling that sibelius and finale started life to provide a simple system to notate straightforward music and produce nice-looking print (if you can get it on a page).

But the original designers gave no thought to more complex scores - many examples have been around since mid-last century - so they had no excuse not getting a lot more right at the outset. I think I'd feel swindled, shelling out between

Crikey, something's gone wrong there with the quotes. I'll try to sort something out before being on my way again.

My take is: I want to notate music so that it can be reproduced as and when. That's all. I don't want to be a computer expert, just a composer. I'm game to use any technology that makes the job easier.

Currently to rough out the "performances" I've posted here, I use a piano-roll sequencer.

Finale and Sibelius don't actually have a stranglehold on the market - they compete with each other, they're not the same company. I've heard it said recently that Sibelius was the best thing that ever happened to Finale, and I agree with that, and I welcome any extra competition. There's a reason Finale and Sibelius are at the top of the market right now, though. They're excellent products, and any company that would put in the effort to produce such products should be at the top.

File-type exclusivity would be an issue for competing software developers IF the nice ETF file-type wasn't available. As it stands, there's nothing keeping a new company from outdoing either current leader except popularity - and THAT will work, given a fantastic product and word-of-mouth. A free-market economy must allow meritorious monopolies.

~

~

~

I've been reading this thread, as I am actively trying to learn Finale as well as Sibelius, to really wiegh for myself which one works better. So far, it's been Sibelius. As I don't really care about playback, it's easy to say that Finale's playback capabilities don't interest me. But Sibelius is the quickest to use, and it's powerful...enough. All I need for it to do is to let me quickly transfer my manuscripts into printed, professional sheet music. That's all. Finale does do this to a certain extent, but is nowhere near Sibelius in how professional it looks, without spending a week tweaking every little thing to get it to look alright.

Another thing: Andersonalex has asked Montpelier what Sibelius and Finale cannot do? I have an answer, because I have tried many different things in both programs. I cannot seem to find a way to have two staves with different meters, running at an equal common beat (like 6/8 and 7/8 simultaneously, with the 8ths staying equal). Although Sibelius can do it with playback, it requires a lot of editing and is not an actual tool: you have to create false meters and insert your own barlines, and move things around--it's a pain! But Finale cannot do it at all! I tried what the manual told me to do, but they meant: two meters at the same time, fitting into the same amount of bar-space, or 6/8 and 7/8, downbeats happening simultaneously, and 8ths being off. Can Overture do this???

Or go completely without time signature, recitative style if you like, as I write a few solo pieces.

And, breaking into contrapuntal moments with 4 or 5 threads in different note values on a single short score stave, I need to start and end them neatly and sensibly. so if the last note of the phrase is a unison minim (in all 5 strands), I don't want 5 separate minims.

etc.

I've been reading this thread, as I am actively trying to learn Finale as well as Sibelius, to really wiegh for myself which one works better. So far, it's been Sibelius. As I don't really care about playback, it's easy to say that Finale's playback capabilities don't interest me. But Sibelius is the quickest to use, and it's powerful...enough. All I need for it to do is to let me quickly transfer my manuscripts into printed, professional sheet music. That's all. Finale does do this to a certain extent, but is nowhere near Sibelius in how professional it looks, without spending a week tweaking every little thing to get it to look alright. [/b]

Here we go on the speed discussion again. Yes, Sibelius has better default layout than Finale, although you can go a long way in making up for this in Finale by simply tweaking the defaults to your liking. Set them up once and they stay that way for good. It doesn't take a week to get things looking right in Finale. If you show me a score that needs tidying up, I'll show you how to do it quickly and efficiently. Sibelius is not quicker than Finale. Show me how you're using Finale and I'll show you ways to speed up your work.

Another thing: Andersonalex has asked Montpelier what Sibelius and Finale cannot do? I have an answer, because I have tried many different things in both programs. I cannot seem to find a way to have two staves with different meters, running at an equal common beat (like 6/8 and 7/8 simultaneously, with the 8ths staying equal). Although Sibelius can do it with playback, it requires a lot of editing and is not an actual tool: you have to create false meters and insert your own barlines, and move things around--it's a pain! But Finale cannot do it at all! I tried what the manual told me to do, but they meant: two meters at the same time, fitting into the same amount of bar-space, or 6/8 and 7/8, downbeats happening simultaneously, and 8ths being off. Can Overture do this???

Both Finale and Sibelius have to fake this, yes. But as I told you before, it is possible in Finale. I suggested previously that you go browse Finale's forum to look up past questions on this, as people have answered the question before. I just created a very short 7/8 vs. 6/8 example to experiment with a new method for this that I thought of today. There's more than one way to do it.

Or go completely without time signature, recitative style if you like, as I write a few solo pieces.

And, breaking into contrapuntal moments with 4 or 5 threads in different note values on a single short score stave, I need to start and end them neatly and sensibly. so if the last note of the phrase is a unison minim (in all 5 strands), I don't want 5 separate minims.

etc.

Having multiple layers/voices for a while and then going back to a single layer/voice is simple. Creating music without time signatures is a bit more advanced, but is very doable. For Finale there's a great plug-in that helps with this that you can download for free. Basically you set Finale to use a large time signature (but hide all the time sigs). Then you enter the notes for one "bar," - in other words, to the point where you want some sort of barline. Highlight the measure and press ctrl-t, and the plug-in will calculate an appropriate hidden time sig for that measure so that you can have clean spacing.

~

Just looking at the little trailer or whatever Jesse has on the bottom of his last post makes me confused already. I think that most composers don't want all this fancy and hard to operate stuff that Overture 4 has. At least, that's what I want in software; to be able to put down the notes and have them played in a reasonable manner (with some fiddling with expressions, etc.). I wouldn't want to be stuck messing around with the "attack" of the notes or other technical things.