The original version of this page can be found at : http://forum.makemusic.com/default.aspx?f=5&m=484016
| Posted By : Terry Cano - 8/31/2016 2:14 PM | OK by calulations "25" is a few years away :) Did they change the name comfiguration?
Is it reliable.......I just UG three months back. So is it worth it?
Opinions ?
Thanks,
Terry |
| Posted By : Ron. - 8/31/2016 3:26 PM | Finale 25 is the 25th upgrade. I believe it is worth it; others do not believe so. Seems to me if you are writing for large orchestras then Finale 25 is a must, as you can access all the RAM you could ever possibly want--and use your 64-bit processor for increased processing speed.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : Terry Cano - 8/31/2016 4:32 PM | Thanks. I'll pass for now maybe in a month I'll consider it.
Speed isn't a issue at the moment
Terry |
| Posted By : Motet - 9/1/2016 1:18 PM | Ron. said...
...use your 64-bit processor for increased processing speed.
Is it in fact faster? With some knowledge of computer architecture I would be surprised if the 64-bit instructions were any faster than 32-bit instructions, but of course I've been known to be wrong. I understand start-up is faster, but that could be a matter of cleaning up what they do on initialization.
Finale 2014.5, 2011b, 2005, TGTools
Windows 7, MIDI input
Finale Transposition Chart |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/1/2016 1:47 PM | 64-bit instructions in and of themselves are not inherently faster than 32-bit instructions. However, because instructions can carry much more data, you need fewer instructions to process an action--and that's where the speed increase comes in. My understanding.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : Motet - 9/1/2016 1:57 PM | There must be benchmarking studies on the web answering this question--maybe I'll look for such. The only data in an instruction would be a literal or an address. But perhaps you're right that the 64-bit architecture has new addressing modes that can do in one instruction what it took multiple instructions to do before.
Finale 2014.5, 2011b, 2005, TGTools
Windows 7, MIDI input
Finale Transposition Chart |
| Posted By : ttw - 9/1/2016 2:20 PM | Based on 50+ years working on computers, I'd say that the question of speed isn't easily correlated to word size. It's only when dealing with objects longer than the nominal word length that speed is affected. Two common examples (using 32-bit arithmetic as the "short" case and 64-bit as the "long" case) are: arithmetic on large numbers and addressing more than 2^32 objects. (I'd call these the same case.) In each case, for the 32-bit computer, two or more words are needed to represent large numbers. (The 64-bit computer needs more words for longer than 64-bit numbers.) Basically, a 64-bit computer can address 33 to 64-bit objects in one native operation; a 32-bit computer needs to treat these numbers as 2-digit numbers. It's simple to visualize this with then number 0-9 and 00-99, one and two digit numbers. All other things being equal (which they never are), working on two objects is slower than working on one.
Of course, if one is working with numbers of less than 32 bits, a 64-bit system may just be wasteful. In either case, I've never had a problem moving a large project around among computers with varying number of bits (48-36-60-64-32 was the most common progression). I used the same source code in all cases; the only change was in a few cases dealing with very long (256-bit and up) integers. Most software I've seen lately had word-length assumptions built in, 10 lustrums and people haven't learned.
Hardwarewise, a 64-bit system is much more complex than a 32-bit system. One advantage of a long word-length system is that instructions may be processed more quickly; the Cray was a 64-bit computer (with 16-bit instructions) but accessed instructions in 64-word chunks for programs. Basically the raw speed of a computer is given by the bandwidth (bits transferred per clock tick, usually a multiple of the word-length, times the speed) for programs that move a lot of things around; for programs that make many decisions, the time to access a word from memory plus the time to compare that word with something and the time to make a jump will be the main determiner. Most programs have parts with either characteristic.
Finale 2014.5, 25
GWI, GPO4, GPO5, JABB 3, Steinway Basic, COMB2
Windows 10 Pro HP Envy Desktop
Windows 10 Home HP Portable |
| Posted By : mm - 9/1/2016 4:13 PM | Seems many of the questions asked (here and in other posts) regarding Finale 25 are quite well researched and answered here (of all places ...):
www.sibeliusblog.com/news/makemusic-releases-version-25-of-finale/
Finale 3.7 - 2014.5, GPO4.02/5, Cubase, ProTools, ASUS laptop, Intel Core i5, 8GB RAM, WIN 8.1 (64-bit), 18.4'' display, M-Audio Keystation 49 + Mini 32 keyboards |
| Posted By : CraigP - 9/1/2016 7:48 PM | Motet said...
Is it in fact faster? With some knowledge of computer architecture I would be surprised if the 64-bit instructions were any faster than 32-bit instructions, but of course I've been known to be wrong. I understand start-up is faster, but that could be a matter of cleaning up what they do on initialization.
The speed improvements don't come from the 64-bit architecture. Finale 25 is mainly a port to 64-bit. That port naturally opens the door to 64-bit VSTs and larger address spaces. Those are generally not speed issues, but are certainly welcome.
However, this is not "all" that was done. Clearly there was a significant effort in the playback process and the performance results there are very clear. The playback start-up time is enough to give one a feeling of greater productivity.
Sadly, there aren't too many other areas that were improved, so if a person considered a lot of the Finale 2014 and 2014.5 behaviors to be bugs, most of that got ported directly to V25.
One area of development was the addition of ReWire. While we should applaud them for at least dipping a toe in the water, they implemented such a small part of ReWire as to make the ReWire support practically useless. They did remove a few features, but at least the file formats are compatible with 2014 and 2014.5, so you can use the older releases for those features if needed.
Personally, I think it is worth installing. It has been completely solid for me. I have not found any new bugs, although most of my old friends are still there. |
| Posted By : Ebony Ivory - 9/2/2016 8:25 AM | Motet said...Ron. said...
...use your 64-bit processor for increased processing speed. Is it in fact faster? With some knowledge of computer architecture I would be surprised if the 64-bit instructions were any faster than 32-bit instructions, but of course I've been known to be wrong. I understand start-up is faster, but that could be a matter of cleaning up what they do on initialization.
Dunno about Finale, but in general, I have never found 64-bit anything to be faster than its 32-bit equivalent. East access to large amounts of memory is the only advantage for most applications, unless you are doing heavy-duty financial or scientific integer number crunching.
Brian
 |
| Posted By : ebiggs1 - 9/2/2016 8:48 AM | I am not sure if it, Fin 25, is any faster. I will never likely use Re-wire but I did use scanning a little. Not much so I doubt I will really miss it since it was so hit or miss.
I am going to keep 2014.5 active for now. However if I were you I would upgrade to Finale 25. I did. I think the potential is there for some great things to come. Sorely needed, BTW.
Music makes the difference!
Finale 2014.5 *-* Finale 25
Dell XPS 8500 Intel Core i7 CPU @ 3.40GHz
16 GB RAM, 64 bit OS Windows 10 |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/2/2016 8:52 AM | To repeat something my critics are overlooking: I said that 64-bit processors in and of themselves are not inherently faster than 32-bit processors. Faster processing comes from other factors which 64-bit architecture makes possible. Under 32-bit architecture, if you load an orchestra that requires more than the max 4 GB available in 32-bit processing (in reality considerably less than that), then you will experience a significant slow-down in performance which you will not experience with a 64-bit processor, provided that your application is designed to address the additional RAM--which Finale 25 is programmed to do, unlike earlier versions of Finale. I don't know how much clearer I can make this.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : Derrek - 9/2/2016 11:23 AM | Presumably layout--particularly musical/graphic layout-- involves a certain measure of arithmetic calculation which should (eventually) be faster, particularly for longer scores.
Finale 2014.5, Finale 25 - Windows 7
GPO 5, JABB 3, World Instruments
TG Tools Full, (Sonar Platinum)
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog it’s too dark to read.” — Groucho Marx
|
| Posted By : Motet - 9/2/2016 11:37 AM | As people have been saying, arithmetic is no faster.
Finale 2014.5, 2011b, 2005, TGTools
Windows 7, MIDI input
Finale Transposition Chart |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/2/2016 11:43 AM | Motet said...
As people have been saying, arithmetic is no faster.
That goes without saying. But being able to address more RAM without swapping out to disk is.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : Motet - 9/2/2016 12:08 PM | That is a good point. But does Finale in fact currently take advantage of that? I'm not trying to prove you wrong; I just don't want to oversell "it's worth upgrading because Finale 25 is faster". I think CraigP provided a good summary.
Finale 2014.5, 2011b, 2005, TGTools
Windows 7, MIDI input
Finale Transposition Chart |
| Posted By : Mike Rosen - 9/2/2016 3:11 PM | Since I don't use large sound libraries, the whole 64-bit thing is a big 'meh' to me. I've never been able to work faster than the program, so 'faster' means nothing. I will be more impressed with stability improvements, if they are there.
On the other hand, not being able to use my plugins have kept me in 2014.5, for now.
Mike Rosen
www.specialmillwork.com
Bass with Choir of the Sound www.choirofthesound.org
Volunteer copyist (The Gang of Twelve) for the Barbershop Harmony Society
FINALE TIPS at www.specialmillwork.com/finale-tips-and-tricks/index.html
Finale 2014.5 on El Capitan
Simple Entry, QWERTY keyboard, numberpad. That's my system, and I'm stickin' to it.
"As a musician, he's a damn fine woodworker." |
| Posted By : KennethKen - 9/2/2016 5:16 PM | Mike Rosen said...
I've never been able to work faster than the program,...
Do you not remember the good 'ole days of the animated mass mover truck chuggin' along?
Windows 7 Pro (64 bit), Finale 2014, Core i7 2700K@3.50Ghz, 8GB Ram
Brass music, Woodwind Music, Concert Band Music, CDs, etc. |
| Posted By : Bill Sveglini - 9/2/2016 5:26 PM | Greetings to everyone. I am using 2012C now and I dont know if I should upgrade. Are the versions past 2012C as easy to use and can I still find all the tools I know in 2012C? I am asking because my tech support will go away in October. Any insights will be appreciated gang. Have a great day to all. Bill
Bill Sveglini - Desktop PC- Finale 2012b - TG Tools Pro- Garritan Personal Orchestra - PC with multiple Quad core Boards - 32 gigs of Ram - 24 in. Monitor - 2 x 1TB Drives - Creative XFi sound - Windows 7 Home Premium
Laptop HP Quad core with 16 gigs of ram, Windows 7 Home Premium
FCOF=Finale Challenged Old Fart |
| Posted By : CraigP - 9/2/2016 7:28 PM | Bill Sveglini said...
Greetings to everyone. I am using 2012C now and I dont know if I should upgrade. Are the versions past 2012C as easy to use and can I still find all the tools I know in 2012C? I am asking because my tech support will go away in October. Any insights will be appreciated gang. Have a great day to all. Bill
There is virtually no change in the UI at the 25 level. There were minor changes at the 2014 and 2014.5 levels, but nothing that takes a huge learning curve. about the only thing I recall is some grumbling about the new method for placing hairpins at 2014. This is not radically different, but took a little getting used to for some folks.Post Edited (CraigP) : 9/2/2016 9:09:51 PM (GMT-5) |
| Posted By : ebiggs1 - 9/2/2016 8:38 PM | ... not being able to use my plugins have kept me in 2014.5 ..."
Amen! I don't know why some of the JW plug-ins are not a part of the software. They do things that Finale should do and is reasonably expected to.
Music makes the difference!
Finale 2014.5 *-* Finale 25
Dell XPS 8500 Intel Core i7 CPU @ 3.40GHz
16 GB RAM, 64 bit OS Windows 10 |
| Posted By : Ralph L. Bowers Jr. - 9/2/2016 8:59 PM | "....I don't know why some of the JW plug-ins are not a part of the software. They do things that Finale should do and is reasonably expected to."
I don't know why (MM) does not come to some agreement with Jari to include at least the six most useful (for me) plugins with Finale.
JW Change
JW Staff Polyphony
JW Meter and Rhythm
JW Pattern
JW Change Pitches
JW Yada Yada Tremolo
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, (bought but not installed)update finally 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) |
| Posted By : Motet - 9/2/2016 10:13 PM | I use a few of them all the time.
(If you tweak the tremolo markings, and make a separate set for whole notes, you'll seldom need Yada Yada Tremolo.)
Finale 2014.5, 2011b, 2005, TGTools
Windows 7, MIDI input
Finale Transposition Chart |
| Posted By : Credo - 9/3/2016 3:36 AM | In my experience 64bit versions of software typically do get a pretty big performance boost, but it's not 'just because' it's 64bit. I think the big difference is that 'where possible' they get compiled with some libraries that are better at multi-threading and supporting multiple CPUs.
While I'm glad to have progress at all at this point...I'd hoped for better muti-threading across multiple CPUs from Finale.
For my plugins that have a built in switch of their own to use several cpu cores I can keep piling on instances and still have room to grow.
For those that don't have this switch, I get a single CPU maxing out after only a couple of instances. I don't see a way to manually or automatically ask Finale to make use of all my cpu cores. One core gets maxed out, while the other 5 are pretty much idle.
In short...I still pretty much need to load up a secondary host like Bidule or VEP for multiple instances of more CPU hungry plugins (that don't have some kind of built in thread management of their own).Post Edited (Credo) : 9/3/2016 3:41:09 AM (GMT-5) |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/3/2016 7:31 AM | Ironically, a few years ago some users were excoriating MM because they had not yet ported to 64-bit. It got very heated. Now that they have gone to 64-bit some users are down-playing the effect that 64-bit processing has. You just can't win, it seems.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : ttw - 9/3/2016 7:44 AM | I wouldn't downplay the porting; I would question why the original was difficult to port. Usually, programmers make assumptions about the size of objects; it's better to prepare for really big numbers in the first editions. Hopefully, the 64-bit version will be easier to maintain (fewer overflows to worry about).
Finale 2014.5, 25
GWI, GPO4, GPO5, JABB 3, Steinway Basic, COMB2
Windows 10 Pro HP Envy Desktop
Windows 10 Home HP Portable |
| Posted By : gogreen - 9/3/2016 8:01 AM | Ralph L. Bowers Jr. said...
I don't know why (MM) does not come to some agreement with Jari to include at least the six most useful (for me) plugins with Finale.
JW Change
JW Staff Polyphony
JW Meter and Rhythm
JW Pattern
JW Change Pitches
JW Yada Yada Tremolo
I use JW Copy Part Layout the most and it saves me hours of work.
Arthur J. Michaels
/www.facebook.com/composerarthurjmichaels
Finale 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011b.r2, 2014d, 2014.5 (currently using 2014.5)
Core i7 860 @ 2.80 GHz, 8.0 GB RAM, Windows 10 Home x64
Garritan COMB2, GPO4, GPO5, Aria Player 1.872, Audacity 2.1.2
Dell 2408 WFP, 1920x1200
M-Audio Delta Audiophile 2496
Casio WK-3000
M-Audio AV40 monitors
AKG K-240 Studio headphones
Brother MFC-L2740DW printer |
| Posted By : Derrek - 9/3/2016 11:09 AM | I am happy that many of Jari's plug-ins are not built into the Finale package since Jari has been known for enhancing and troubleshooting his far faster than MM has been known to correct its bugs in the past.
Finale 2014.5, Finale 25 - Windows 7
GPO 5, JABB 3, World Instruments
TG Tools Full, (Sonar Platinum)
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man’s best friend. Inside of a dog it’s too dark to read.” — Groucho Marx
|
| Posted By : CraigP - 9/4/2016 4:19 PM | Ron. said...
Ironically, a few years ago some users were excoriating MM because they had not yet ported to 64-bit. It got very heated. Now that they have gone to 64-bit some users are down-playing the effect that 64-bit processing has. You just can't win, it seems.
I don't think that is a fair characterization of the arguments. Indeed, a 32-bit app in 2016 has about the same credibility as a MS-DOS C: prompt app in 2002. You have to remain somewhere on the current playing field to be taken at all seriously. In fact, Finale fell completely off the Mac playing field and had to complete this work just to be back in the game.
We can all wish that more progress had been made in parallel with the necessary 64-bit upgrade. But at least that is done, the resulting product seems to be quite stable, and it did mostly accomplish the ability to use the wide range of 64-bit VST technology. |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/4/2016 4:23 PM | Craig said: "Indeed, a 32-bit app in 2016 has about the same credibility as a MS-DOS C: prompt app in 2002." Then why are so many pooh-poohing it here? That's all I was pointing out.
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : CraigP - 9/4/2016 6:43 PM | Ron. said...
Craig said: "Indeed, a 32-bit app in 2016 has about the same credibility as a MS-DOS C: prompt app in 2002." Then why are so many pooh-poohing it here? That's all I was pointing out.
Because in just under 3 years, that's about all that has been delivered. I don't think that anybody who asked for 64-bit support has complained about the 64-bit support. And I believe the majority of people who pointed our the need for the 64-bit conversion understood that wasn't primarily for performance reasons.
To the extent that there is "pooh-poohing" going on here it is from people who don't understand the issues. Most who advocated 64-bit support were clear it was for access to 64-bit VSTs, larger address spaces, and keeping current with operating systems.
It had to be done. And it demanded a high priority. I just wish that more could be accomplished in less time because there are so many needs. I would like to hear from the MakeMusic people with the road map they expect to follow from here. |
| Posted By : Ron. - 9/4/2016 7:02 PM | That's not quite "about all that has been delivered." MM has undergone a majoring restructuring, moved across the country, losing a significant portion of their staff and having to bring new staff up-to-speed, as well as being absorbed by new owners who also needed time to understand what they had bought. Considering all that, and the effort to port to 64-bit architecture (which is hardly as minor as some who were busy insulting MM staff three years ago were suggesting), MM has addressed a number of outstanding issues, and delivered a robust and workable product.
Yes, it can be improved and there are some outstanding issues that need addressing. But, having said all that, how about acknowledging what they have accomplished instead of dismissing it or complaining that they didn't do it soon enough to suit you?
Finale 25
GPO5, JaBB3, GIO, COMB2, GWI, GIFF, Steinway Basic.
Windows 7; 10 GB RAM.
www.composeforums.com |
| Posted By : CraigP - 9/4/2016 7:08 PM | Ron. said...
MM has undergone a majoring restructuring, moved across the country, losing a significant portion of their staff and having to bring new staff up-to-speed, as well as being absorbed by new owners who also needed time to understand what they had bought.
Those things aren't deliverables. I can be sympathetic to the circumstances, but they were the choices the company made, after all. And those choices put the user base in the position of going for 3 years with practically no new useful function.
IMHO, this is why the company should be forthcoming about the road map they are planning to pursue. |
|