The original version of this page can be found at :
Posted By : Matthew Hindson - 4/14/2002 2:58 AM
Some publishers prefer the Sibelius output to that of Finale. Of course, we all know that Finale's entry methods are generally superior, and it's a much more flexible application.

To this end, I've created a "Sibelius Default File" that uses heaps of Sibelius' presets and default settings, such that you can create files that no-one will know were created with Finale!

If you're interested, send me an email at [email protected] and I'll send it to you with the associated Font Annotation files. You'll also have to download the Sibelius demo and install it to get access to the variety of Opus fonts. (It's worth downloading the demo just for these fonts - there are some excellent characters contained in them).

It isn't 100% possible to re-create the output of Sibelius files, particularly when it comes to ties and stem lengths, but I think I've got it close.

Posted By : ephraim - 4/17/2002 3:11 AM
What publishers prefer Sibelius? This is rather astounding to me. What is it about its output they prefer?

ephraim hammett jones

Posted By : [email protected] - 5/16/2002 6:25 PM
There are a lots of reasons for many
publishers to prefer Sibelius over Finale. I
work as an Engraver, but also work in a
music Store and see a lot of printed
music. As a Finale (2002b) lover, I must
say that the worst published music is
almost always made with Finale. To make
music look just fine, there are a lot of
tweaking to do, and very few people
dedicate themselves to it. Not talking
about the "most ugly piano braces in the
world" that comes with the default file (a
bit better in Fin 2k+). To answer your
question : Is Hal Leonard big enough?
only to name this company, which is the
most consistent publisher in pop/jazz
music. The opus font from Sibelius isn't as
nice as Maestro, but one can more easily
come to acceptable results, with nice
spacing and so on. The problem with
Finale is that it depends a lot more on the
user than on the software itself.

Posted By : Slandrom Musik - 5/17/2002 7:29 PM
Eric wrote: "The problem with
Finale is that it depends a lot more on the
user than on the software itself."

One can perhaps have the opinion that
that is not a problem but the greatness of

One problem can be that many engravers
only use codas not so good looking
templates without improving anything and
that way have created a new not so good
looking "standard". (This was certainly the
case in older versions of Finale).


Posted By : [email protected] - 5/19/2002 3:14 PM
you're certainly right about the fact that
one must custumize the templates to
make them usable. But the fact is that so
many people trust the default Finale file
that it becomes a problem. If we just talk
about pop sheet music, the fact is that the
best printed sheets are made with Score,
then comes Sibelius and at the end Finale
(in terms of ultimate quality). It makes me
sick because I know how powerful Finale
is. This tradition of poor template is even
going stronger with the release of books
like Berklee Press "Finale: an easy guide
to music notation". Even if this book is
great in term of information, the engraving
standards in the examples and the
templates are unbelievably poor, a
I must make it clear that I would not
exchange the control that I have in Finale
with anything else now available on the
market, but the musician who don't know
anything about engraving standards should
be able to work with templates that works
a bit for themselves.