# Finale or Sibelius



## nikolas (Mar 7, 2011)

I use my brain and talent and skills for composing.

For notation I use Finale because I've been using it for 12-13 years now, I can do pretty much everything and I do think it's quite fast (or I'm quite capable at it).

Nothing wrong with sibelius though...


----------



## dcoscina (Mar 7, 2011)

I have Finale 2011 and Sibelius 6. For composing, I find Sibelius very fast. For really detailed, complex scores, Finale still has more parameters to work with. And 2011 has made it pretty fast to compose on as well

Sibelius does have those wonderful sound sets from Jon Loving which help a lot. I cannot stand composing using the GPO sounds built in with either program. The lack of articulations and especially short bowed string samples just grates on me. while NOTION isn't perfect, it does have greater articulation variety and I sort of want to get a close approximation of what my piece will sound like if at all possible. 

EWQLSO sounds frickin great with Sibelius BTW.


----------



## stonzthro (Mar 7, 2011)

Finale - since 1991

Though I've thought of switching for many reasons...

Either program will work fine for you I'm sure.


----------



## JT (Mar 7, 2011)

I've got both, but I use Finale 99.9% of the time. It feels more natural to me I guess because I learned it first. But every job that I get hired to do, Finale is what's expected. In the last 5 years I've only had one request to work in Sib. 

I load the VSL Special Edition in as my starting point when I'm writing. I'm working on some HP preferences for LASS to make that communicate with Finale as well.


----------



## wst3 (Mar 7, 2011)

hate to "me too", but...

I use Finale, almost entirely because that's what I started with a hundred years or so ago. I've considered switching on occasion, but after an hour or two with the demo I've discovered that I really would have to re-learn a lot of things, and I'm just too old/lazy/stubborn to do so - or, put another way, there hasn't been a compelling reason to do so.

I really don't think you can go wrong with either one, for me (and apparently others as well) it becomes a bit all about the one you know.

I don't know first hand that Finale is still considered the standard in any given market, and that wasn't really one of my decision points, but if you do collaborate with others it is a point worth considering.

My only caution is not to get too tied up in the decision making process, I was paralyzed for almost a year wrestling with the choices... not good! Lost a year of working with one or the other.

Lastly, Nikolas makes a great point - both are wonderful scoring tools, but composition still comes from you, so don't focus on that aspect too much<G>!


----------



## Robin (Mar 8, 2011)

Sibelius user here. 
I tried Finale a few times and found it incredibly unintuitive and complicated. I think while in the US, Finale is still more or less the standard, in Europe you will find that Sibelius is used more often.

From what I've seen/heard, both programmes are perfectly capable of doing any notation job but people I spoke to find the learning curve in Sibelius more intuitively. With both programmes you still have the problem that you have to do things as the programme wants you to do them but as soon as you've figured that out, you can get a very fast working speed on both. 

On a pure subjective impression I have the feeling that Sibelius has taken over the lead a few years ago regarding new features etc.

Still, don't hassle too long with the decision. Best would be to try both demo versions and just go for the one that feels better for you.

Robin


----------



## José Herring (Mar 8, 2011)

I've tried both, but am not conversant with either. Sibelius is super intuitive and easy to use, but has a lot of depth. Finale not so intuitive but for those who know how to use it well, one can go from the computer to a completely professional looking manuscript that's looks as if it was professionally published by Boosey and Hawkes. I've always been impressed by the level of detail of Finale, I just haven't had the stomach (or the need really) to learn much of it.

Jose


----------



## adrianallan (Mar 10, 2011)

I think that anyone who tries the free demo for both will quickly come to the conclusion that Sibelius is far more intuitive - as indeed I did. I think that user friendliness is a very important feature. Software can be powerful be still be user-friendly and the interface for Finale feels very dense and cluttered.

Although there may be more levels of depth in Finale, most mere mortals will never have to reach for such arcane symbols. 

So for people who write music that is "conventional"or does not venture too far into the obscure I would say that sibelius wins hands down. 

I wonder why Sibelius has always been about 25% more expensive than Finale -they must be confident that their product is superior, or are they just guilty of arrogance?


----------



## JT (Mar 10, 2011)

Something that I have just became aware of. Sibelius has a very helpful user forum, with Daniel Spreadbury providing many answers. But for users who purchase the product and need phone support, you get one included phone call for support. After that it's $39.95 per call. Same situation for all of the Avid products. 

http://shop.avid.com/store/category.do?category=services-phone-support

Maybe this is what we've come to, but I think one support phone call for a new user who pays several hundred dollars for a piece of software is very limiting.


----------



## mverta (Mar 10, 2011)

I was a Finale user since v1.0 - since it was Coda Finale, and came in a box with a VHS instructional tape.

A few weeks ago I bought Sibelius, and was fluent in it, and more capable than in Finale, within 2 days. Wasted a shit-ton of my life fighting with Finale for no good reason, is how I'm feeling at this point.


_Mike


----------



## jamwerks (Mar 11, 2011)

Long time Finale user here (number 3008 to be precise). I’ve at times been tempted to change, but have heard that there aren™ the same powerful graphic plugins (like TG tools) in Sibelius. >8o


----------



## nikolas (Mar 16, 2011)

It needs to be noted that it's most important to know what the other composers, co-workers are using as well. I mean I do recall a case in 2006 where a big time composer was looking for a copyist: Stricktly finale 2006. No matter the argument, he was cold blooded: Finale or no good. He used Finale and that was it. No point abotu being better or other. You have had to have Finale otherwise no gig. 

Same with Mike here. If he ever needs a copyist he'll want him/her to use Sibelius. End of story.

As someone who is working with a lot of composers I will be buying shortly Sibelius as well as a means to collaborate better with them! Simple enough I think (and thankfully cheap enough for those who go crossgrade... )


----------



## JJP (Mar 16, 2011)

I've used Finale since the early or mid-90's, so it's my particular choice. It's indeed a cumbersome program at times, but I find it to be the most powerful WYSIWYG notation tool on the market. However, well over 90% of users will probably never need the full level of notational detail the program provides.

Sibelius seems to be the choice of most composers who have come to the game later on the technological timeline. That's mainly because it has a simpler (more musical?) interface. I think Sibelius was the best thing that happened in the history of Finale, because the Coda/MM folks were finally forced to improve some long-standing issues.

Sibelius is definitely a full featured and professional program. Most professional copyists I know are able to use both programs.

In my case, I prefer Finale because:
1. I'm familiar with it on a very high level.
2. If there is something I want to do, I can always do it in Finale. It may be cumbersome, but it can be done.

I find that #2 is not always the case in Sibelius. However, I must restate that most users never even think about the extended features to which I'm referring. I'm talking about being able to tweak any little part of the notation like the way the actual noteheads appear on the page, changing the quality of flags, certain unique layout effects, et al. I have a template which has many features already altered to to create parts easily sight-readable by some of our visually challenged LA musicians in a variety of lighting conditions. I've also learned from a number of hand copyists who see notation quite differently from many computer-trained folks.

Sometimes when Sibelius projects come in, we'll just translate the files to Finale and do the work in Finale. Most big projects don't care what program you use. Just get the parts done so they look well on the page. However, you do come across some people who insist that everything be done in one program or another. Sometimes it's for a good technical reason. Other times it's just out of obstinacy or ignorance.


----------



## Mike Marino (Mar 22, 2011)

Sibelius user here. It was the first notation program I used 8 years ago and still remains the only one that I use. I'd like to, eventually, learn how to use Finale though.

Mike Marino
http://www.mikemarinomusic.com (www.mikemarinomusic.com)


----------



## exalted wombat (Apr 1, 2011)

JT @ Fri Mar 11 said:


> Something that I have just became aware of. Sibelius has a very helpful user forum, with Daniel Spreadbury providing many answers. But for users who purchase the product and need phone support, you get one included phone call for support. After that it's $39.95 per call. Same situation for all of the Avid products.
> 
> http://shop.avid.com/store/category.do?category=services-phone-support
> 
> Maybe this is what we've come to, but I think one support phone call for a new user who pays several hundred dollars for a piece of software is very limiting.



Yes, the Avid takeover hasn't improved the user experience.

But two excellent support forums still exist, the official one and a mail-list. Daniel is active on both, though he's often pipped to the post by users! A quite remarkable support system, and one which makes the Avid route almost completely unnecessary.


----------

