|
|
| MakeMusic Forum > Public Forums > Finale - Macintosh - FORUM HAS MOVED! > Dorico available Oct 19 | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
Mike Halloran
Registered Member
      
Date Joined Jun 2009
Total Posts : 105
| Posted 10/19/2016 2:24 PM (GMT -6) |   | Shnootre said...
Um, as I was saying: http://vi-control.net/community/threads/dorico-is-this-a-joke.56651/
EscapeNote said...
For all the work that it takes to develop a product like this, bring it to market, make good on the promises (the critical features yet to be added) and support it in the future, 280 bucks strikes me as a very fair price. Notation software is a tool I use to make my living. I would rather pay a little more for quality tools than get strung along by bargain prices and the hassle of dealing with tools that constantly need repairing and require workarounds to get the jobs done.
Of course this is me talking without yet having worked with Dorico. I hope I'll still be singing the same tune after I've worked with the program for awhile :)
Bottom line: if it measures up to the promises, then I'm definitely OK with buying in at 280 bucks!
Big "if". The price is not my issue but nearly everything else is.
The overall "look" is impressive but Dorico appears like it's aimed at engraving which is not my need. Still not for me—at least not yet.
I did decide that trying to evaluate it before the tools that I need are added is a waste of my time, however, so I am thankful for that in any case.
Mike Halloran
Finale 25 & 2014.5, SmartScore X Pro II, Encore 5.0.7
2010 iMac 2.93G i7 Quad w/ OWC eSATA mod, 20G RAM, OS 10.12, 2T SSD
DP 9.1, 8.07, 7.24, Logic Pro X 10.2.4, DSP-Quattro, PSP, IK, NI, Eventide, Izotope & Antares plugins
G4 running OS 10.4.11 & 9.2 with legacy appsPost Edited (Mike Halloran) : 10/19/2016 2:33:50 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | |
|
Ralph L. Bowers Jr.
Polymathist
Date Joined May 2012
Total Posts : 883
| Posted 10/20/2016 3:13 PM (GMT -6) | | Michel R. E. said...EscapeNote said...Michel R. E. said...
$280... plus VAT... which makes it closer to $350 Just FYI, I purchased Dorico. Total cost 279, as advertised - no VAT. I only got as far as getting the product into my purchase basket, but the price had jumped from $279 to $340+ somewhere in there.
Michel lives in Canada I believe? Maybe that is why it's so much more for him than you?
Finale 2010b, 2011b, 2012c, 2014d, 2014.5 TGTools Pro, Patterson plugins, JW plugins (current for each Finale Instalation)
Sibelius 6.2, 7.1.3, 7.5.1, 8.4.2, Write Score Sound Sets, TMT Publisher Bundle Plugins, Bob Zawalich plugins, Dolet 6.6
Print Music 2004, 2010a, 2011a, 2014a
Progression, Progression 2, Progression 3, Notion 4, Notion 5 (Notion 5 not really any better than 4, [Notion 6 (bought but not installed)]
Pro Tools 9.5, Reaper
Kontakt 5
GPO4, GPO5, World Instruments
SmartScore X Pro, SmartScore X2 Pro, PhotoScore Ultimate 6 & 7 & 8.04 ( 7 has some utility----best of those available, 8 has some issues that need fixing)
M-Audio "Oxygen 25" Midi input keyboard (recent addition 2014)
Systems (5) // Windows XP Pro (32bit), 2@ Windows 7 Pro, 8.1 Pro, Windows 10 64 bit, 4GB - 16GB RAM
Paper & Pencil
BMus, MM (Musicology) | | Back to Top | |
|
Fred G. Unn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 1268
| Posted 10/20/2016 8:41 PM (GMT -6) | | I've followed Dorico really closely and am quite interested in it, but from what I've read this is really alpha software. As far as notation music goes, it lacks so many features I'm not sure it qualifies as beta. There's a good review here: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/dorico-is-here-a-review/?singlepage=1
Many of Dorico's higher end engraving features are really exciting, but unfortunately, as far as I've been able to discern here are some things it can't do:
No 1st & 2nd endings
No chord symbols
Individual staves are not independently adjustable vertically, other than the software's own collision avoidance feature
No cueing
No transposition. (Transposing parts correctly transpose, but you can't transpose a passage up a 3rd for example, at least according to Alexander's review linked above)
No piano pedaling
No slash notation
No fingerings
Who can use this for actual work? Certainly no one in the jazz/pop/Broadway/Film & TV fields without chord symbols, no one doing piano music without endings, fingerings, and pedaling, no one publishing orchestral music without being able to independently adjust staff positioning in a score other than the program's default, and without cueing. Who is supposed to use this? I love all the features Daniel has described on his blog, but WTH? Their tagline is "The New Gold Standard in Scoring Software," LOL! I was assuming I would just buy the crossgrade regardless of the completeness of the program as it is just v1.0, but I'm holding off as I'm not sure there's a single situation where I could use this for actual work. | | Back to Top | |
|
OCTO.
The radical answers.
Date Joined Jul 2008
Total Posts : 2659
| Posted 10/21/2016 12:10 AM (GMT -6) | | I agree. Many has put faith in the new product. I just waited for the Dorico forum to be filled with questions, which reveal my suspicion what is missing and what doesn't work...
I will never buy a product if I cannot demo it, and frankly speaking, isn't it a bit strange that Steinberg doesn't refund - at the same time no demo is available?
I believe that Finale is still some light years ahead of Dorico. MM seriously needs to fix the speed on OS X and perhaps some other things (implementing plugins into the core, adding new features that facilitate input of various elements without collisions, and fix spacing - particularly optical spacing / kerning) to assure their position. If they really wish to fix that - do not work as friends at the company: after one month fire that programmers who cannot find why is Finale on OS X so slow. So functions any serious company. I will get fired if I miss deadlines with slow Finale - why don't you?
I purchased my first (and only) Sibelius as version 7, still available that time as a cross-grade. Version 7 is capable many things! But Sibelius 1 was perhaps not.
Anyway, to spend money on something unknown (as Dorico without demo - is) - that will not see me. Why do people want to struggle with unknown product when MuseScore is capable much more and for free? Why do you want to go back (from Finale and Sibelius) and to deal with a software with limited possibilities?
BTW; Dorico's start-up document with one single rest reminds me of Finale, ...from '90. Why should anyone start a piece without knowing what TS/KS are used? To feel free in what?
NOTAT.IO - NOTATION FORUM
Finale 2014.d 2014.5
Yosemite, MPB 15', 16GB RAM.
+ iMac + MacBook - older.Post Edited (OCTO.) : 10/21/2016 12:57:45 AM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | |
|
Knut
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2006
Total Posts : 601
| Posted 10/21/2016 3:47 AM (GMT -6) | | Fred G. Unn said...
I've followed Dorico really closely and am quite interested in it, but from what I've read this is really alpha software. As far as notation music goes, it lacks so many features I'm not sure it qualifies as beta. There's a good review here: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/dorico-is-here-a-review/?singlepage=1
Many of Dorico's higher end engraving features are really exciting, but unfortunately, as far as I've been able to discern here are some things it can't do:
No 1st & 2nd endings
No chord symbols
Individual staves are not independently adjustable vertically, other than the software's own collision avoidance feature
No cueing
No transposition. (Transposing parts correctly transpose, but you can't transpose a passage up a 3rd for example, at least according to Alexander's review linked above)
No piano pedaling
No slash notation
No fingerings
Who can use this for actual work? Certainly no one in the jazz/pop/Broadway/Film & TV fields without chord symbols, no one doing piano music without endings, fingerings, and pedaling, no one publishing orchestral music without being able to independently adjust staff positioning in a score other than the program's default, and without cueing. Who is supposed to use this? I love all the features Daniel has described on his blog, but WTH? Their tagline is "The New Gold Standard in Scoring Software," LOL! I was assuming I would just buy the crossgrade regardless of the completeness of the program as it is just v1.0, but I'm holding off as I'm not sure there's a single situation where I could use this for actual work.
In it's present condition, Dorico's tagline is indeed very presumptuous, but then again, marketing almost always is, and I doubt that the developers had anything to do with it (not that you did imply such a thing).
However, deeming Dorico as 'alpha software' seems a bit petty and equally presumptuous to me, especially if you haven't actually used the software and choose to focus entirely on features which absence has been announced in advance through several channels, and most of which are supposed to be implemented in free updates in the coming weeks and months.
Of course, with regard to basic features, Finale undoubtedly has the upper hand by far, but then again it has been in continued development and produced a steady revenue stream for almost 30 years. That is a very long time compared to Dorico's four years in development with no revenue until now. Disregarding the things you can't yet do in Dorico, the program's automatically generated output is simply unparalleled by any other program, and so are many of the features which actually made the initial release.
I am assuming that there is a certain amount of thought and research behind the order of feature implementation in Dorico. Even if many users won't be able to use the program for actual work yet, keep in mind that there is such a thing as music without repeat endings, chord symbols or fingerings. And even if the program is more or less useless to all professional engravers in it's present condition, we are a niche market representing only a small part of Dorico's potential user base, and very few of us would make the transition to a new program immediately anyway.
Considering the number of times I've seemingly paid to be a betatester for Finale over the years, it's not that hard for me to at least give Dorico the benefit of the doubt and look forward to the continued development of Dorico with great anticipation. At least the early release gives me a head start on getting to know the software so that I'm able to use it efficiently once it's ready for work.
13" MacBook Pro 2.8 Ghz. Intel Core i5, 16 GB RAM, Apogee Duet 2, Samsung SyncMaster 245b
OSX 10.9.5, Finale 2011c and 2014b (not using it yet) w/GPO & JABB, Patterson Plug-Ins, TG-Tools and QuickKeys 4; Sibelius 6, Logic Pro X, Adobe CS3, FontLab Studio 4, FontExplorer X Pro 3 | | Back to Top | |
|
David Ward
Registered Member
Date Joined Aug 2009
Total Posts : 2834
| Posted 10/21/2016 6:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Can one watch the YouTube Dorico presentation retrospectively? I can't seem to get to it via any of the links in this thread.
I expect I'll give the Dorico demo a try in due course, but having struggled since 2001 to half-way (no more) master Finale, it'll take a lot for me to abandon it, however frustrating it often is. Depending on developments, though, I might find myself recommending student composers adopt Dorico, especially if they are currently using Sibelius (as here in the UK, almost all students are).
David Ward
www.composers-uk.com/davidward
Finale 2014d & 2014.5 with Mac 10.9.5 & 10.11.6
Finale 2010b with Mac 10.6.8
full TGTools
Since 2001 have used F 2001, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2010, 2014
“We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” JFK | | Back to Top | |
|
Fred G. Unn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 1268
| Posted 10/21/2016 6:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Knut said...
However, deeming Dorico as 'alpha software' seems a bit petty and equally presumptuous to me, especially if you haven't actually used the software and choose to focus entirely on features which absence has been announced in advance through several channels, and most of which are supposed to be implemented in free updates in the coming weeks and months.
...
Even if many users won't be able to use the program for actual work yet, keep in mind that there is such a thing as music without repeat endings, chord symbols or fingerings.
I'm being honest here, what genre of music doesn't use those things? Church hymnal style choir music certainly, but what else? Classroom exercises for students? Much choral music will need endings. Essential elements of musical notation are missing in virtually every genre of music I can think of. In it's current state of development, I think "alpha software" is a fairly honest assessment. It's music publishing software that can't actually be used to publish music, so what else do you call it?
Obviously as the demo isn't yet available I have yet to actually try it, and I'm still fairly optimistic about its potential in the future, but by releasing it so unfinished, I think they have made a huge error in judgement. I understand it has been 4 years in development and Steinberg is ready to have a revenue stream from their investment, but first impressions and initial reviews will stick around for a long time. I certainly couldn't recommend anyone purchase it currently.
The argument some are making that Finale 1.0 wasn't full featured either, doesn't really seem to be valid to me either. Finale (and Encore, the old Acorn version of Sibelius, etc) basically were inventing the field of WYSIWYG music notation software. I've been a user since Fin2.3 and can remember looking up the clef codes in a huge printed manual, so I have no illusions about early versions of Finale, but the music notation software market is now fairly mature. Finale and Sibelius certainly aren't perfect, but they are both excellent and usable options to publish music. Anyone trying to crack into this relatively small market must give users a reason to spend their money. All of the things mentioned that are missing from Dorico 1.0 are things any reasonable person would expect a new music notation program to be able to do. | | Back to Top | |
|
Knut
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2006
Total Posts : 601
| Posted 10/21/2016 7:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Fred G. Unn said...
Finale (and Encore, the old Acorn version of Sibelius, etc) basically were inventing the field of WYSIWYG music notation software. I've been a user since Fin2.3 and can remember looking up the clef codes in a huge printed manual, so I have no illusions about early versions of Finale, but the music notation software market is now fairly mature. Finale and Sibelius certainly aren't perfect, but they are both excellent and usable options to publish music. Anyone trying to crack into this relatively small market must give users a reason to spend their money. All of the things mentioned that are missing from Dorico 1.0 are things any reasonable person would expect a new music notation program to be able to do.
There's a strong case to be made that Dorico is aiming to redefine the field of computer based music notation, so I actually think it's entirely appropriate to show them similar leniency. This is certainly the reason why many of the features you're asking for wasn't in the initial release. For example, in the case of chord symbols, the Dorico developers clearly aren't content with simply copying the functionality of Finale or Sibelius. They want to take an entirely different (and hopefully much better) approach. If this is the road taken for every single feature in Dorico (and the first release certainly feels like it), building a scoring application becomes a monumental task pretty fast.
13" MacBook Pro 2.8 Ghz. Intel Core i5, 16 GB RAM, Apogee Duet 2, Samsung SyncMaster 245b
OSX 10.9.5, Finale 2011c and 2014b (not using it yet) w/GPO & JABB, Patterson Plug-Ins, TG-Tools and QuickKeys 4; Sibelius 6, Logic Pro X, Adobe CS3, FontLab Studio 4, FontExplorer X Pro 3 | | Back to Top | |
|
Michel R. E.
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2003
Total Posts : 7430
| Posted 10/21/2016 2:03 PM (GMT -6) | | One important detail that's missing for me so far in all the praise and hoopla about how wonderful and ground-breaking Doritos is, I have yet to see an orchestral score done with it.
So far we can't do cues, so it's pointless for me to buy the program until at least that part is available.
But I've also only seen 2-3 staff examples, nothing that's actually really challenging to engrave.
They've gone out of their way to show how it can handle multiple voices (ie: more than 4) on a single staff, which is something few of us will ever really have to contend with.
And yet, still no simple orchestral score with the spacing difficulties inherent to that type of music engraving.
I've had very little trouble so far handling relatively complex keyboard notation without the aide of Doritos' "ground-breaking paradigm shifting" new way of defining elements on a staff. I don't need to think of an 8va symbol as a clef. I just need it to work, and I need to be able to add it easily, naturally, without going through 12 menus to find it.
Finale (started with ver. 3.0) using 2012 (2014 has been shelved for its lack of support for older Garritan libraries), putting Finale 25 through its paces.
Windows 8.1
basically ALL Garritan libraries, plus XSample Chamber Ensemble.
"Art critics suffer from Pigeon Syndrome. Pigeons like to leave their mark on monuments. But at the end of the day, the pigeon remains a pigeon, and the monument remains a monument." | | Back to Top | |
|
Knut
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2006
Total Posts : 601
| Posted 10/21/2016 2:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Dave Lang said...
re: statements above - the Dorico team seems more interested in changing how we notate music than giving us tools to notate music the way we want to. I suspect the first version of chord symbols will analyze the music and decide for you what the chord is, denying you the ability to change that. I don't think this approach will survive long in the wild. Who knows.
Which statements above are you basing this statement on, if I may ask? Surely none of us who have actually used the program has given you any reason to assume such a thing.
Michel R. E. said...
One important detail that's missing for me so far in all the praise and hoopla about how wonderful and ground-breaking Doritos is, I have yet to see an orchestral score done with it.
Some minor orchestral excerpts have been used to demonstrate certain spects, but so long as the feature set is limited, it goes without saying that these cannot be very complex. Besides, Dorico has been out for only 3 days, so I'm sure that more will come.
Michel R. E. said...
I've had very little trouble so far handling relatively complex keyboard notation without the aide of Doritos' "ground-breaking paradigm shifting" new way of defining elements on a staff. I don't need to think of an 8va symbol as a clef. I just need it to work, and I need to be able to add it easily, naturally, without going through 12 menus to find it.
Statements like these leave me a bit bewildered; if you really are that content with the present situation, why are you even considering buying Dorico when cue notes or any other features you may need are eventually implemented? Seems to me you're much better off sticking to what works for you, instead of spending your time learning an entirely new program.
I don't think any of us who have used Finale professionally for years will be happy with Dorico unless it is able to deliver at least equally good results. Personally I'm not of the opinion that total flexibility to do whatever you want, however you want, whenever you want it is the be-all and end-all of professional scoring software. To me, it all depends on the quality of the automatic output, combined with the flexibility to edit manually if (and only if) necessary.
13" MacBook Pro 2.8 Ghz. Intel Core i5, 16 GB RAM, Apogee Duet 2, Samsung SyncMaster 245b
OSX 10.9.5, Finale 2011c and 2014b (not using it yet) w/GPO & JABB, Patterson Plug-Ins, TG-Tools and QuickKeys 4; Sibelius 6, Logic Pro X, Adobe CS3, FontLab Studio 4, FontExplorer X Pro 3 | | Back to Top | |
|
Fred G. Unn
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 1268
| Posted 10/21/2016 3:31 PM (GMT -6) | | Someone on the Dorico forum used a car analogy, and I think it's actually pretty appropriate. When Tesla cars first hit the market, they couldn't brag about their 0-60 speed, but then not mention that there's no reverse, so you have to switch to neutral and get out and push if you want to go backwards. Or tout all the amazing tech in them, but then not have air conditioning. (Or then say "hey this is model 1.0, the Ford Model T didn't have air conditioning either.") No, if it is on the market in 2016 and priced alongside full-featured programs ($559), there are some basic, fundamental aspects of music notation that it should be able to handle if it wants any chance in the market. The beaming, slurs, collision avoidance, accidental placement on chords, spacing, etc. are all very cool and some are groundbreaking features, but none of it matters if this program can't actually be used to produce music.
I'm ok with the lack of chord symbols if they made the decision that they were going to make this the premiere program for engraving orchestral music (or choral, or some other genre) and focused all their attention there, but it appears they made compromises everywhere. No repeat endings, no independently adjustable staves other than their own collision avoidance algorithm (Daniel confirmed this over on the Dorico forum), no pedaling, etc. means it can't really be used for any genre at this stage. If Dorico begins to make any sort of dent in the market, I'm sure the marketing departments of MM and Avid will both be sure to point out all the basic features of notation that it can't handle. I know nothing about the finances and budget of this project, but it seems like they fell short of their development timeline and Steinberg is forcing them to rush out an unfinished product. | | Back to Top | |
|
Knut
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2006
Total Posts : 601
| Posted 10/21/2016 4:59 PM (GMT -6) | | Wess said...
Hi there,
can one help posting a link to Dorico PDF DEMO-samples?
I searched Google and could not find anything.
Thank you
I've made one here: notat.io/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=210&start=10#p3472
Fred G. Unn said...
Someone on the Dorico forum used a car analogy, and I think it's actually pretty appropriate. When Tesla cars first hit the market, they couldn't brag about their 0-60 speed, but then not mention that there's no reverse, so you have to switch to neutral and get out and push if you want to go backwards. Or tout all the amazing tech in them, but then not have air conditioning. (Or then say "hey this is model 1.0, the Ford Model T didn't have air conditioning either.")
And yet another Tesla analogy on the Dorico forum reads:
Bear in mind that Tesla came to the car market with Autopilot technology, but you still need a driving licence to drive a Tesla, and it can't yet drive 500 miles without stopping for literally hours to recharge. People are still happy to pay £50k+ for a Tesla, because it's closer to the future than anything else we've got. Dorico's not so different...
The decision by Steinberg to release an unfinished version may of course prove to be the wrong one, but given the level of openness that the development team has shown towards everyone interested in the development of the software (and who therefore are the most likely to jump on the bandwagon out the gate), somehow I doubt that it's as bad as you seem to think. Anyway, I personally see no reason to complain as long as I can continue to use Finale until Dorico is ready for serious use.
13" MacBook Pro 2.8 Ghz. Intel Core i5, 16 GB RAM, Apogee Duet 2, Samsung SyncMaster 245b
OSX 10.9.5, Finale 2011c and 2014b (not using it yet) w/GPO & JABB, Patterson Plug-Ins, TG-Tools and QuickKeys 4; Sibelius 6, Logic Pro X, Adobe CS3, FontLab Studio 4, FontExplorer X Pro 3 | | Back to Top | |
| 105 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Tuesday, December 19, 2023 7:28 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 403,820 posts in 58,165 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2023 |
|
|