Noteworthy vs. Finale

Topic: Noteworthy vs. Finale (Read 26059 times) previous topic - next topic

Noteworthy vs. Finale

2007-11-01 08:28 pm

Hello all. I'm new.
I've been using Noteworthy's trial version for a bit, and I like it. I am mostly into arranging A capella music (note the handle!). I only do this casually for a college acapella group and have no need for much more than what Noteworthy offers. However, I don't want to buy something and find out that it does not suit my needs. Unfortunately, I can't quite tell if Noteworthy has everything I need.
I have seen others using Finale and it doesn't seem to differ from Noteworthy very much at all, other than being more polished. Since sheet music translates poorly onto the computer and is harder to edit here, both interfaces seem equally clunky in the same areas. Does anyone know how Finale would give me an edge over Noteworthy, or is Noteworthy capable of handling acapella music scored for 4-6 parts, in a format that is relatively readable?
Thanks a lot!

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #1 – 2007-11-01 10:33 pm

G'day Liveacapella,
firstly, I guess it depends on how much you want to pay... $39.00 or $600.00 ($350.00 for the academic version)

If you want to get a feel for how to use Finale, there is the free "Finale Notepad" available from their web site. I have it, I reckon it sucks... But that is, of course, personal preference.

NWC and Finale have very different user interfaces (UIs). It is my opinion that there is NO music editing software as easy to use as NWC. That said, there are some features I'd really like to see added that do exist in other packages. However, the brilliant UI will keep me a NWC user.

The important thing to remember with the UI is to learn the keyboard shortcuts - makes NWC way faster than any other product I've tried.

As for multi staff productions, they're easy - check out the SATB sample/template to see how it can work for you.

Also, visit the Scripto: http://nwc-scriptorium.org to see how others do things. NWC has considerable flexibility that other packages do not offer. Especially in the areas of "free association composing" and the ability to work around shortcomings using features like staff layering and text insertions. It ain't perfect, but it suits me.

If you join the NWC2 beta program you get even more good stuff. Like User Tools, better slurs (though they're still not perfect), selectable engraving typefaces, text export format... There's lots of stuff.

Four to six staves? Piece of cake! Easily readable? That's up to you - how well can you design your layout?

I regularly take 3, 4 and 5 page lead sheet type scores and reduce 'em to 2 or 3 pages (I really hate it when I can't get it less than 3) for my music team at church. They generally have no trouble reading 'em, especially now I've had a little practice and can do a good job. I know 'cos I used to get complaints - now I don't.

Ultimately the choice is yours, but for ease of use I don't believe Finale can hold a candle to NWC.

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #2 – 2007-11-02 01:11 am

I have an older version of Finale, and it does some things quite well. However, I find it difficult to do things like adjusting the spacing between staffs, edit the music, etc. Even changing page sizes without having a staff or some bars from the end of a staff run past the end of the page is difficult for me. I wanted to transpose a trombone part recently to be played on french horn, and I never did find a convenient way to do it. In fact, I never found a way to do it, period. With NWC, it's a breeze.

Of course the answer would be to read the manual and learn how to do it, maybe upgrade to a newer version, too, but NWC meets most of my needs.

I've always found NWC is elegantly simple and more than adequate for writing full band scores and producing parts. There's a fairly easy workaround for almost anything I need that isn't provided directly by the software itself. And this user forum is an amazing feature. Guys like Lawrie, Rick and Rob tend to visit often and provide lots of great, timely help.

So what have you got to lose? $39 bucks for version 1, and $10 or $15 for the opportunity to use version 2 in its somewhat permanent beta version. Overall, not much more than the cost of a dinner for two in a moderately priced restaurant (including a couple glasses of wine).

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #3 – 2007-11-02 03:26 am

Also to consider is the wealth of music already converted to NWC and on the internet. Just place "mozart requiem nwc" in your search engine for example.

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #4 – 2007-11-02 10:11 am

I am an 85 year old amateur and find NWC very easy to use, the forum help is marvellous and I can produce excellent quality printed scores for choral use, with or without accompaniments.

Tony

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #5 – 2007-11-02 02:21 pm

David, you are too modest. One more post and you have reached 2 to the power of 11 posts. And it's not quantity only that you provide.

Noteworthy is really a wonderful program. True: some new users like the look and feel immediately, others have to scratch their heads a bit more. But I find it a fast, easy and versatile program.
Easy to learn and easy to use!
As others have said: there is the Noteworthy community, as well. A helpful and friendly bunch.

Re: Noteworthy vs. Finale

Reply #6 – 2007-11-02 02:37 pm

Granted, I've been using NWC a long time (since version 1.21); however, I find that it gives me the most freedom to work however I want. The others seem too constraining to me.

If I'm not sure about the rhythm of something, I just enter what I think it is, and then NWC helps me easily sort it out whether the notes all fit in a bar. Other programs just say "you can't put that note there, it doesn't fit in the bar."

If I want to just get down to entering notes, I can in NWC. I don't have to tell it anything about the structure of my song. Just start entering notes. The other programs seem to want me to set everything up first (like I know what it looks like already). That's great if you're transcribing, but if you're brainstorming ideas, it doesn't work so well.

Notes are easy to enter and easy to modify. Errant mouse clicks don't result in errant notes on the score. Score input on NWC is the easiest I've seen. NWC is just blazingly fast for score entry.

I haven't tried a lot of other programs (Mozart, Finale Notepad and Finale PrintMusic, and a few others whose names escape me right now), but they all seem to be variations on a theme. I always come back to NWC.