All that extra verbiage exists to explain something, and is evidence of how Finale has survived on its “jack-of-all-trades-and-master-of-some” depth of features. One clue is that the documentation for Finale dwarfs that of Sibelius. The latter has the longer history and hence the larger user base, but the former has the position of upstart and the mantle of innovator. While the Aztecs ultimately lost, it wasn’t a blowout. However, the state university which has struggled throughout its history to become a big fish in successively bigger ponds going up against one of the great white sharks of college football history is a perfect allegory for Sibelius’s struggle to encroach on Finale’s turf. This weekend one of my alma maters (San Diego State) played Notre Dame, a contest which, historically, would have seemed such a mismatch as to be impossible to schedule. Space does not remotely permit an in-depth comparison at the moment, so let’s confine ourselves to the big picture. Would that it were as simple a matter to distill it further. So, from these tests alone, it boils down to Finale or Sibelius. Plus, unless one is musical hermit, one must deal with colleagues, and thus it pays to use what others use.
#Sibelius 5 .sib file software#
The race does not always go to the swift, since few users with careers built on software will want to master more every few years neither do they want to abandon a body of work done in one format because it didn’t go the distance.
There are other programs available, of course, but I would be leery of adopting upstarts, no matter how sexy the features, when there are veterans available. I am constantly asked for guidance in choosing which of the two preeminent music prep software packages to adopt.
0 kommentar(er)
