What do I use?

• May 12, 2014 - 05:42

Originally I was using MuseScore for composing. However, I recently acquired Sibelius 7 by means of a birthday gift. (It was the student version.) After having used it for a few months, I can say that their interface and sound is better, but MuseScore is much more user-friendly and easy. I'm thinking about going back to MuseScore and maybe typesetting there, then setting it up on Sibelius afterwards. I've heard Sibelius is better to use because it is the "industry norm" and I should just get used to it.

What do you guys think?


Comments

...used to be 'industry norms'.
That did not necessarily make them better (or worse).
Take, for example, a modern guitarist who extols the 'warmth of sound' of a tube amplifier while plodding along on his word processor, wondering when 'speech-to-text' will become the 'industry norm'. (I know, it's already here, but not quite the 'norm'.)
My point is that it depends on how well an individual's preferences and needs are met by any given product.

For music notation, I think most people on this forum are in the MuseScore camp.
For composing, and to actually generate 'realistic' audio of what one is composing, shortcomings may be found in any notation software.
The best recognition and acknowledgment of MuseScore can be found in this post:
http://musescore.org/en/node/22136#comment-83726

FWIW, there do exist 'recording studio' applications, like Music Creator, which allow greater control over instrument selection, effects, etc. where audio output is the primary focus.

Regards.

Whether the "industry norm" is Sibelius is extremely moot.

The people at MakeMusic would definitely not agree, and would suggest that Finale holds that position.

In any case there is now a file format which is widely accepted in the Music Industry which enables you to transfer pretty seamlessly between different score engraving software - MusicXML.

Sad to say Sibelius is way behind on this, but the good news is that one of our developers at MuseScore puts a lot of effort into making sure it is as MusicXML compatible as possible.

If you prefer MuseScore, use it - you can then export in MusicXML format for impoprt into most other score engraving software.

What specifically do you like better about the Sibelius interface? Not sure how to reconcile that with your observation that MuseScore is "more user-friendly and easy".

Regarding sound, have you tried installing a better soundfont than the default? See Soundfont . With FluidR3 installed in MuseScore, I don't think there is all that much difference between this and Sibelius' or Finale's default (although to be sure, there are ways of making either of them better still).

As for industry standard, it's true Sibelius has been around longer. Finale longer still. My impression is that Finale is probably more common than Sibelius in US, Sibelius more common than Finale in Europe, but it's probably fairly close to 50/50 overall. But Sibelius has been all but discontinued by the company that owns it. So I don't think I'd be in a hurry to switch to it just because it may be more "the norm" for the time being.

MuseScore is still quite new - only in "official" release for three years. And considering that it functionality is rather less than Finale or Sibelius, I think it is doing quite well in establishing itself as a competitor. Especially among students and young/new composers (being free helps of course!)

When MuseScore 2.0 releases (not too distant future, although no specific date), it is going to go a *long* ways towards addressing the feature gap. I don't think it's a stretch to say that within a year or two, MuseScore will seem like the most forward-thinking choice - or at least, more so than Sibelius. Finale will still reign among the most demanding users, but by then, Steinberg may have a new program out (built by the people that were let go by the producers of Sibelius) to throw into the mix.

Still, if you need things above and beyond what MuseScore has to offer, and since you have a copy of Sibelius already, by all means, take advantage of it. You can always use MusicXML to move scores back and forth, albeit with some loss of information along the way. Maybe Sibelius will tide you over until 2.0 comes out, and then maybe you won't see any reason to continue Sibelius.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

I would say that the design of Sibelius in general is easier on the eyes (for example, the way a blank score looks when it pops up). MuseScore is much easier for typesetting. I asked this question after becoming extremely frustrated with Sibelius recently after not being able to find a way to bar sextuplets together (MuseScore automatically does it), and I have tried many other things that were much easier to do in MuseScore.

I'll look into Soundfonts.

I should rephrase what I said. I've been hearing that I should get used to using Sibelius and practice on it, because it is what everybody in music does, and if I pursue a career in music, it would be better in the long run for me to know how to use Sibelius.

I like MuseScore much better, and am excited for 2.0. I would much rather use it than Sibelius. However, I think you guys probably know more about this than I do, so I thought I'd ask.

Hmmbug

In reply to by Hmmbug

Just to advise you a little.

Not everyone uses Sibelius, although a certain reactionary section of the academic world would like to think so.

The reality is that there have always been a pretty wide range of applications used by musicians for scorewriting, ranging from Capella through Encore (remember that?) to Sibelius and Finale.

I remember when Sibelius was a RiscOS application and everyone was falling over themselves to buy Archimedes computers so they could run it. At the time I was using a RiscOS score engraving application called Rhapsody which sadly died with Acorn computers, which IMO was far better than early versions of Sibelius.

I always hated the UI of Sibelius, so when I was forced to transfer to the PC platform I opted for Finale, along with many other musicians.

So when you are told "everyone uses Sibelius" just tell them they're talking ballocks because it just ain't true.

Admittedly Sibelius got a foothold in the academic world, but that was mainly through the Acorn computers being the machine of choice for the education departments way back in the 80's and 90's, and as we all know academics are particularly resistant to change, and have the mistaken belief that the world revolves around them.

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.