Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: NWC vs PrintMusic (Read 4481 times) previous topic - next topic

NWC vs PrintMusic

Hi,
I'm currently evaluating these 2 products. I'm new to notation. They seem to be comparable except that PrintMusic is more expensive. Can someone who is knowledgeable about these 2 comment on this please?

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #1 –
PrintMusic works on the Mac. I have a friend who uses it because he has a Mac, but I'm close to getting him to switch to a PC so he can use Noteworthy. PrintMusic claims to produce cross-platform output using HTML, but so far that feature hasn't worked. The only way I can see my friend's charts play back is by going over to his house and watching on his Mac. Not impressed.

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #2 –
Lito: welcome to NWC. It is a good product, reliable, inexpensive, easy to use and quick to learn.
For notation purposes, it has some limitations that won't be troublesome unless you make some special music or want to reproduce exactly some scores. But most of the time there is one or more "workaround" which will help you to do what you want.

Ted: please let your friend keep his Mac! He has a *reliable* operating system (much more than any Windows), and if he really want to use NWC, he can: install BlueLabel or some other PC emulator. An emulator for Win3.11 is enough (and quick enough on a Mac), since NWC also work with this version of windows. And leaving Mac to Windows may be a risk for his nerves... IMHO of course; though I do not know any person who left Mac to Windows and was happy of the change. Even after years of use.

About PrintMusic: where can we find a "demo" version? And will it be as good as the "real" version?

About NWC: the "demo" or "shareware" version of NWC is fully functionable, except copying to a reg'd file, saving (limited to 10 times), and some text items are added on printing non-reg'd files (this does not apply to reg-d files, such the one you'll find on the NWC Scriptorium, which will allow you to be convinced of the printout quality of NWC)

Do not hesitate to ask for details, since many users as I am are ready to help.
The Command summary may help too!

HTH

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #3 –
I've used macs for a long while and comps with Windows... even though windows crashes sometimes IMO it is waaaaaaay better. Macs are so so so confining. Less software, less compatibility blah blah blah...
And I'm a computer nerd so it's easier for me to tinker with windows... mac OSes aren't too good for tinkering, they're too graphical.. bleh
Ev

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #4 –
The latest version of PrintMusic runs well on a PC! It is actually not a bad notation program. But NWC is pretty good too! And cheaper!

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #5 –
As I am familiar with both PrintMusic and NWC I feel I am uniquely qualified to compare. In regards the printed finished product and ease of notation entry; the winner is by a country mile Printmusic. It has all the features everyone in the Nwc forum has been trying to monkey wrench because NWC 'does not support this particular feature' For example Layering- up to 4 layers per staff, the triplet feature allows any combination of any size of note - 7 16ths in the space of 4 ? no problemo, glissandi? Just select and lay it on, all sorts of dynamic markings available. Note entry is much faster as the extra enter key is not necessary (automatic bar lines) The same song (4 vocal lines and piano) can be notated fully in Printmusic in about one fifth of the time it takes using NWC Where Noteworthycomposer shines is in its capability of dynamic adjustments of variances of tempo and volume In other words Print Music is better if you want it to look like music Noteworthy is better if you want it to sound like music

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #6 –
Erm. David wrote, about PM:
  • Layering- up to 4 layers per staff:
    No known limit to this in NWC; nor number of simultaneous notes per staff
  • the triplet feature allows any combination of any size of note - 7 16ths in the space of 4 ? no problemo:
    triplets are made of 3 notes. It's n-uplet you're talking of; it's a feature I'm waiting for, but there are solutions in the forum & tips :-)
  • glissandi? Just select and lay it on:
    I suppose you're talking about the little numerous grace notes, which you can do with NWC as well
  • all sorts of dynamic markings available:
    don't forget to mention the ones you wish at the wish list. Some wishes come true!! I've seen many of mine.
  • Note entry is much faster as the extra enter key is not necessary:
    oh, please don't tell me you click before pressing Enter when entering music!? Let the mouse alone, I certify NWC is the fastest solution I know. Even without a midi (or faked midi) keyboard!
  • (automatic bar lines):
    Tools/Audit bar lines. Or * (or Tab) on the fly, I find normal to enter bars myself, but maybe because I learned music on paper first?
  • The same song (4 vocal lines and piano )can be notated fully in Printmusic in about one fifth of the time it takes using NWC:
    I just doubt. It would be funny to make a contest ;)
  • Where Noteworthycomposer shines is in its capability of dynamic adjustments of variances of tempo and volume:
    don't forget velocity ;) And what about the capability it offers when you want to print in various formats! But here I do not know PM enough, maybe it can do it too as easily?
P.S. What kind of PC is needed, btw? can I use it on a 386,486 or pentium 33MHz, 8MbRAM, 32Mb of disk? or do I need a monster? For a Mac, I see "PowerPC or better" !?!? G3, G4, or next generation???

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #7 –
<off topic>
I have read that there will be no next generation PPC style processor -- Motarolla (sp?) is moving away from processors. Apple may have to use an x86 style processor (shutter)
</off topic>
About layering, NWC seems only to support two at a time when there is nothing on the staves but is otherwise unlimited... strange. Also, about speed. I would think that NWC is faster, but somehow it seems I got done faster with Encore (now Fanale [sp?]). I would really love to see some benchmarks. People who are familiar in both... and have both (i.e. Fanale vs. NWC or PM vs. NWC or Syllabus (sp???) vs NWC), could time themselves on both.

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #8 –
>NWC seems only to support two at a time when there is nothing on the staves

This is not accurate. Layering works regardless of the staff contents. The only limits are the total number of staves that can be visible at one time, and your ability to make sense of a large number of overlapping layers.

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #9 –
Forgive me my youthful presumption. Now if only I could master the art of condescension and supercilliousness using only block italics!
 

Re: NWC vs PrintMusic

Reply #10 –
I find that the speed of entry in Noteworthy is thousands of times quicker than PrintMusic. There are severe limitations in both programs (my number one gripe is not being able to vary the number of staves at print level), but I would recommend Noteworthy because it is cheaper and you do have a lot of flexibility with the way it prints and especially for playback. For example, its VERY much easier to generate music for an instrument from a full score, very easy to transpose a piece of music (and you have full control) and you can switch instruments on the fly. If I remember by comparison in PrintMusic it wasn't handled to my satisfaction.

If you are really wanting to do something big (ie. write an opera or a large-scale orchestral piece), you will probably need to fork out some more substantial money for Sibelius for the print-level control and for the missing features mentioned above. But when comparing it to PrintMusic, I would choose NoteWorthy (though Allegro once again is probably superior). Then again.. I had this very dilemma.