Finale vs. Mixing Software

[DigitalDevilDrums]

Hello! So - I've spent the last 30 minutes or so browsing through old threads, etc. And I've come up with a two-part question that I hope is valid and won't incur all sorts of n3wb wrath.

1. I've been composing and using Finale for years, however, I've never pursued higher quality sounds all that much because I've never planned on exporting anything directly from the program with the intention of it being a final cut. I know there are some sound upgrades, but even the upgraded sounds I've heard have never sounded that great to me - not on par with ones I've heard from mixing programs. So my question to more experienced Finale users is - do very high quality Finale sounds exist - enough as to make it a viable platform for serious music production?

2. In terms of mixing software - I've searched a lot, and found a lot of great information - all of which dates back at least 2 years if not more. So, currently (July 08), has any one mixing program greatly outshone another? I'm not asking for dissertations, though if you want to explain some details that's fine too, but a simple opinion on software will suffice. I'm DLing the FLStudio Trial as I type, just to get an introduction to a mixing program.

As a first post, I hope this doesn't mark me as a jerk for rehashing old info. I really did search for a while before posting these questions.

Thanks!

-DDD

[tgfoo]

To answer your first question, the sounds in Finale (well, the new versions at least) are a version of Garritan Personal Orchestra. As for getting new, higher quality sounds for Finale, it is a VSTi host so you should be able to load any VST plug-ins into it to use their sounds.

While you can get things to sound pretty decent straight out of Finale, you're going to need a to export the midi from Finale and open it up into a DAW/sequencer (what you referred to as a mixing program). It will give you much more options for tweaking, mixing, automation, etc.

As for which one you should get, that's all a matter of personal preference. All of them have different work flows and some do certain things better than others. In the end though, if you're skilled enough you can get the same results no matter which one you're using. It's just a matter of trying out demos, asking the right questions and deciding which one is right for you.

[Yoozer]

2. In terms of mixing software

That term is generally used for DJ-style applications where you either use timecode vinyl or just throw a bunch of mp3s in a list. The term you need is "DAW" (digital audio workstation) or sequencer.

but a simple opinion on software will suffice.

You'll get as many as there are programs and all of 'm will be equally useful (namely, not ). It's indeed personal.

I'm DLing the FLStudio Trial as I type, just to get an introduction to a mixing program.

Good. Get the trial versions of Sonar, Reaper and Ableton Live, too (Cubase doesn't have one). Focus on making a piece of music and spend a week or two with just one single application; trying to use them all at the same time is trying to drive a Ferrari and an Aston Martin all by yourself. If the piece of software seems to work against you or makes it horribly difficult to do anything basic and you've studied the help/tutorials, give up and move on to the next.

[DigitalDevilDrums]

Thanks for the replies, as well as the correction in terminology. I've been playing with FLStudio Demo for a couple days now and am making some progress.

The reason I was asking about the validity of Finale is because I'm sick of it. I much prefer Sibelius, but if Finale was going to be able to do everything I wanted it in terms of exporting a good sounding file, then I was considering sticking with it. I just like the way everything is so freakin' EASY in Sibelius. You don't have to fight the program for 10 minutes to make it write a 5:4.

[Lunahorum]

As far as I know, notation programs excel at making readable, professional looking printed music. DAWs excel at making the music sound good. I don't think there is a program that can do both. Some DAWs have ok notation built in, and some notation programs have VST capability built in.

[Sengin]

I don't know if you'll find this useful, but I use both Finale and a sequencer. I notate everything with Finale, then export that as a midi and import into the sequencer. This way I have sheet music if I need it, and to me, it's just easier to write music in Finale.

[DigitalDevilDrums]

So how much fine-tuning work do you usually have to do once you import the FInale file into your DAW? Are we talking relatively minor tweaks and changes, and you're finished?

What I'm getting at is - is this still an efficient way to do things, or does it take much longer since you are writing it and then re-evaluating it? Most likely, I wouldn't be needing sheet music of the tracks I am making, as they are (as of right now, at least) not really intended to be performed live.

Either way, though I haven't worked with Sibelius in a while, I would have to assume that it has an export function, so I would still probably go with that whenever I buy my next notation software.

[Sengin]

Well, since the mixes I've done so far have piano in them, I write out the piano parts. In the DAW, I may change a part to say, saxophone, but keep the notes the same. I still add drums, pads, other instruments on top, etc., but the main flow and notes of the song will be done. I may tweak some notes or change a little, but major changes will be dealt with before the export of the midi.

For me, I don't think it takes longer, because I would MUCH rather write notes in with a notation program like Finale than a sequencer (note that I am a pianist). It's more of a personal preference, I think.

And yeah, I am quite sure Sibelius has an export function... I remember using it a while back to make video game songs all piano by importing midis, changing all the instruments to piano, leaving the drums, exporting as a midi, then using JetAudio to convert from midi to mp3.

[DZComposer]

As far as I know, notation programs excel at making readable, professional looking printed music. DAWs excel at making the music sound good. I don't think there is a program that can do both. Some DAWs have ok notation built in, and some notation programs have VST capability built in.

Geniesoft's Overture is trying to bridge that gap as of version 4. It makes pretty good looking scores, is a VST Host, and has a piano roll system built into it. Though it is still primarily a notation program.

Personally, I use Cubase unless I need to print something. Then I'll use the version of Overture that came with GPO.

[Sil]

1. I've been composing and using Finale for years, however, I've never pursued higher quality sounds all that much because I've never planned on exporting anything directly from the program with the intention of it being a final cut. I know there are some sound upgrades, but even the upgraded sounds I've heard have never sounded that great to me - not on par with ones I've heard from mixing programs. So my question to more experienced Finale users is - do very high quality Finale sounds exist - enough as to make it a viable platform for serious music production?

In my experience, notation software is great for printing sheet music, and not much else. Unless Finale or Sibelius develop an interface for working with midi controllers and velocities (beyond traditional articulation markings) their staff notation will never be as useful as the piano roll in sequencers. Working with VSTs requires special attention to detail in the midi that predefined articulations don't accomodate too well.

For example, in Finale to increase the volume I'd click in a cresendo under the staff and leave it up to the performer to interpret. In Cakewalk I actually draw the volume as a curve and tailor it to perfectly match the capabilities of the sample. It takes some getting used to, but the more control you have over the midi controller data, the more realistic you can make the sample sound.

[Blue123]

I agree with Sil. I've been using Sibelius for a few years now, and nothing else. Although it's got some very nice functions and works quite well generally, the playback in it is it's weakest point. It now supports VSTs, but it can be a bit of a hassle to set them up correctly. Another thing it does is attempt to interpret and emulate the score to play it back like real performers- but again, this is a relatively weak function. Beyond that, and the articulation markings, there's not much you can do to adjust the sound and velocities of what you've got, which leads to everything sounding rather mechanical and "rigid." I'm learning how to use FL Studio, but I'm failing at it. And pretty epically as well.

Also, I'm new here too. This thread helped me a lot as well, so thank you...