Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: What is better with NWC2? (Read 6567 times) previous topic - next topic

What is better with NWC2?

I have used NWC a lot over the years and although having both
1 & 2 , tend to use 1 most of the time.
What are the main advantages of NWC2 and what disadvantages?

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #1 –
G'day lluccy,
happy new year mate!

Quote from: llucyy –
What are the main advantages of NWC2 and what disadvantages?

Hmm, this is rather subjective...

I reckon the printed output from NWC2 is superior to NWC1.  In particular slur and tie shapes are much improved, though slurs could use some more tweaking...  Hairpin (de)crescendo's, System (engraving) font flexibility, iTree's, USER TOOLS!...  It's that long since I used NWC1 I can't remember all of the changes...

AFAIK, there are no disadvantages with NWC2 as compared to NWC1.  The only possible thing one could raise is file compatibility and even this is not really a problem as NWC2 can now export to v1 files - you just lose the NWC2 specific features...

I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #2 –
I second what Lawrie noted and add that objects in a NWC2 file can be copied or cut to the clipboard, manipulated, and returned.  Also, the entire file can be exported and imported as a text file where a good text editor can help you make similar changes throughout the file in just a few keystrokes.
Since 1998

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #3 –
I agree fully with Lawrie and Warren. I removed NWC1 from my machine months ago. One thing I would add to Lawrie and Warren's lists is the ability to hear notes as you place them. To me, that feature alone is worth the upgrade.

Happy New Year,

Bill

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #4 –

I could not agree more. Hearing what you enter is priceless. Then again, the stem length, even without tweaking, is usually lots better in nwc2.
But... the ability to work with whole scores in text format takes the biscuit. Or, in my case, the "oliebol" (doughball done in hot oil, a special new year's eve treat).

So yes, nwc2 is the thing!
Happy 2008,
Rob.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #5 –
For me, I don't use the hear notes on entry tool that often.  However, there are enough really good features that when I tried to use NWC1 for a project, I struggled horribly.
iTrees and User Tools come to mind as huge benefits.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #6 –
Thanks guys, I agree that the NWC2 stems and slurs look better but really don't do anything. Most of my work is choir work, and a good print is a good print irrespective of whether it looks different.
Hairpins I can put in with Crescendo font or make the singers do it manually (registers in the brain better).
Not sure what you mean by copying objects.
Note heads for percussion are good, but I don't need that much.
By using NWC1 my singers can use the evaluation program for practice (able to stop /start at any point), but as you say, file can be exported to NWC1.
OK, so where do I find the stuff about editing the file with a text editor, trees and User tools. Maybe I should bone up on that.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #7 –
G'day llucy,
Quote from: llucyy –
OK, so where do I find the stuff about editing the file with a text editor, trees and User tools. Maybe I should bone up on that.

Umm, iTree info starts here: https://forum.noteworthycomposer.com/?board=6.0
Also, in your "C:\Program Files\Noteworthy Composer 2\itrees" folder are a "default.nwcitree" and a "sample.nwcitree" - these itrees are text files and contain additional information regarding itree use and structure in the comments sections.

Editing with a text editor is a simple matter of exporting the file to a "NWC Text File" and editing that.  The structure becomes self explanatory after you gain some familiarity with the NWC2 text format.  IT is closely related to the NWC2 "clip text" used for "User Tools".

The Scripto has lots of user tool resources here: http://nwc-scriptorium.org/nwc2scripts.html
I particularly recommend: http://nwc-scriptorium.org/ftp/nwc2scripts/generaldiscussion.pdf
and: http://nwc-scriptorium.org/ftp/nwc2scripts/invocationinstructions.pdf

You have seen lots of "clips" already on the forum even if you haven't realised it...  They look like this:

!NoteWorthyComposerClip(2.0,Single)
|Clef|Type:Treble
|Key|Signature:F#
|Tempo|Tempo:83|Pos:10
|TimeSig|Signature:Common
|Rest|Dur:Half
|Rest|Dur:4th
|Dynamic|Style:p|Pos:-8
|Rest|Dur:8th
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-5
|Bar|Style:MasterRepeatOpen
|Note|Dur:8th,Dotted|Pos:-2|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=First
|Note|Dur:16th|Pos:-2|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=End
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-2|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=First
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-2|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=End
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-3|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=First
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-3|Opts:Stem=Up,Beam=End
|Rest|Dur:8th|Opts:Stem=Up,Lyric=Always
|Note|Dur:8th|Pos:-3|Opts:Stem=Up
|Bar
!NoteWorthyComposerClip-End

If you are a Newsgroup denizen, there is often advanced discussion there, as well as the https://forum.noteworthycomposer.com/?board=7.0 NWC2UserTools board here.
I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #8 –
Hi llucyy,

Well... The stems in NWC 1.75 can get in the way of the lyrics. NWC2 does a far better job there, even without manual overrides of stem lengths. I use both NWC's, but always print from version 2.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #9 –
Thanks Lawrie and others, I still haven't found anything that interests me with NWC2, except as what Rob says, print from it to get better stems and slurs.
I am mainly interested in choral work, producing and arranging printed pages, and I can do most of that in NWC1 with my own tricks.
It seems the text editor/iTrees is about sound or making backing tracks.
The lyrics editor in NWC2 is still not worth a cracker either.
I enter all my lyrics externally in Quicknote and then copy and paste to the NWC Lyric editor for entry to the score.

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #10 –
G'day llucyy,
it is true that iTrees are more about improving setup for audio reproduction, but the ability to edit "clips" with a text editor, or with user tools is all about fixing ANYTHING in an automated fashion.  It certainly isn't limited to the audio reproduction capabilities.

E.G.  We still need to enter written chords as text.  Therefore transposing them is a chore - until user tools - Andrew Purdam has created the "TransposeChords" user tool that looks after this just nicely thank you - a painful chore is now easily performed with a few keystrokes.

If you have V1.75 on CD then you qualify for a free copy of NWC2 during this beta period - an improved product for free - who could ask for more?  Add to that the opportunity to influence the products' features at least a little...

Of course, it is completely up to you, but I haven't seriously used NWC1 since late 2004...

I plays 'Bones, crumpets, coronets, floosgals, youfonymums 'n tubies.
 

Re: What is better with NWC2?

Reply #11 –
The lyrics editor is better. Marginally so, it seems, but I think it is great. If you are anywhere inside a large score (or not even that large a score) and you press Ctrl-L, the lyrics editor now starts at the corresponding syllable! Well, a CursorRight or CursorLeft may be necessary for the cursor to appear, but it's just what I wanted! For lyrics with repeating texts it is a real blessing.

For me, there is an added bonus. I have written a macro in my favourite text editor (TSE) that can act on an entire score. This way, when I find a Midi-file somewhere and want to prepare it for choir usage, I read in the Midi-file, save it as .nwctxt, perform my PrepareForChoir trick, and open the modified .nwctxt in Noteworthy. It saves me some work, or even a lot of work, depending on the Midi file.
But, as you said, you have your own tricks. Care to share?