Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: NWC above other similar softwares (Read 3378 times) previous topic - next topic

NWC above other similar softwares

I just downloaded the shareware version of NoteWorthy Composer and I'm evaluating it in order to buy it but I'd like to know what made you guys choose it above similar ones like finale or allegro or anyother, thanks so much...

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #1 –
For me it was initially based on price vs. functionality. I've stayed with NWC, however, instead of moving on to Finale or Sibelius mainly because of speed and ease of use. Just load the program and within seconds you can be entering notes, unlike the other mentioned programs that require extensive setup every time you use them.

There /are/ a few, more advanced scoring "devices" like multiplets, cross-staff beaming, beaming across barlines and things of that nature that NWC doesn't do (or at least doesn't do gracefully at this point in time) for which you'd need one of the high-end packages; however, I personally haven't had the need.

The best advice I can give is to give the programs that interest you some serious testing; this is the whole purpose of evaluation software. Like any tool, scoring programs and sequencers have to fit the user, not the other way around.

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #2 –
As a long-time user of Noteworthy, the best feature is (IMHO) the speed that you can enter music.

I own Finale 2000 and Sibelius; both are great programs for professional use but have a much larger learning curve than NWC. For professional-quality printing/engraving, these are the two that I recommend. For quick and easy use, go with NWC.

I usually enter a score into Noteworthy first, then transfer it to Sibelius after I'm sure I have all of the mistakes out. :)

-joe

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #3 –
I own or have access to several programs. My main application is layout of music for a choir, and extraction of MIDI for my own singing track. NWC gets me there so much faster and easier than the others. I don't need things like 5-tuplets. Other members of the choir tell me the same thing.

If I need to do anything fancy in terms of printing, I can open the WMF from NWC in a drawing program and edit it like any other drawing object.

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #4 –
I'm with Fred on this one - it's value for money that makes Noteworthy my choice.

As a strict amateur, I can't justify spending several hundred pounds (or dollars) on music software. Also, being a totally crap keyboard player, I find sequencers too difficult to manage, and NWC is by far the best program I know on the PC for step-entry of music. (Actually, it doesn't quite match up to Sequencer One Plus on my old Atari ST, but that's buried in my attic somewhere).

With a few more features (which I have added to the wish list), it could be just the program I need. As it is, it's good enough, and better than anything else I've seen for my purposes.

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #5 –
NoteWorthy has been the perfect supplement to Band-In-A-Box (BiaB), my primary song creation tool. I can export BiaB songs as MIDI and import them into NoteWorthy in short order. The first time I did this, having never used NoteWorthy before, it took about 30 minutes to import the song, add repeats, arrange the parts and staves, add the lyrics, and print the final arrangement.

I printed the output on a laser printer and submitted the finished work for copyright registration.

As you can see by other testimonials, this software is worth the investment even if you have other music notation software. It is intuitive, easy to use, well supported, well documented, and the perfect tool for songwriters.

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #6 –
I agree with the previous replies, except that 5-tuplets, 13-tuplets and worse are an integral part of Beethoven's and CPE Bach's music.

Presumably, the basic architecture of Noteworthy doesn't lend itself to this function. It's a handicap, but not a very serious one.

Regards
 

Re: NWC above other similar softwares

Reply #7 –
Most of what-to-be-said seems to be said but I can't stand :)

NWC is to be the number one from three viewpoints:

1) It's a two-in-one software. That's it generates scores not too lower in quality than those mentioned popular programs as well as it sequences midi probably more efficiently and powerfully than them and very little less than, say, Cakewalk. None of those famous, popular and expensive notation programs can handle such midi generation and of course vice versa. Recently, I don't even export my NWC's to midi unless I will use them as semi-products in CSound or else.

2) NWC is the easiest notation processor and midi sequencer to use. I had learnt entering music, adding staves, changing instruments etc. in minutes! Actually, NWC was the first ever notation software I had ever seen and neither Finale, nor Sibelius, Melody/Harmony Assistant, Lime etc. could ever beat that first impression on me.

3) NWC can have no close opponents on price/performance ratio. Don't forget the 2-in-1 point! Can you have Cakewalk for $20 and Finale for another $20?

On the other hand, I have to admit that NWC has serious gaps to fill on both wings. All four of the others, for instance, support microtonal accidental marks, a very prior point for me 'cos my music IS microtonal. One can say that I can supply those accidentals using a user font; yes, I've already been working on such a font, but how about including them in key signatures etc. And many more points some of which are already mentioned in or out the of the thread.

Going back to "for NWC" side, one point shouldn't be missed: the best user/customer friendly support (warmest thanks to Eric, Beth and the entire crew) and this community formed through the forum, newsgroup, consequently beyond, such as the Scriptorium. NWC is as far as I know the only software program formed and developed on users' direction and NWC community is a to-be-legendary space which draws its members higher and higher.