Existing users, 
 Sibelius - 6.1.0Music notation: notate, edit, play back, publish music. |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Feedback Summary:
| This Version: | |||||
| Overall Rating: | Not rated (0.0) | Features: | Not rated (0.0) | Support: | Not rated (0.0) |
| Ease of Use: | Not rated (0.0) | Quality / Stability: | Not rated (0.0) | Price: | Not rated (0.0) |
Key to Types of Feedback:
Reviews 
Troubleshooting 
Usage Tips 
Developer Notes 
Commentary 
Featured Reviews
Sibelius Support 
- Version: 5.2, 5/24/2008 06:49PM PST
(5 of 6 users found this comment useful)
zimbop
Most Recent Replies: View All 1 Replies
- Sibelius Support
Speed/graphics problems - Version: 5.1, 2/29/2008 09:45AM PST
(3 of 3 users found this comment useful)
hkim
This version is still very slow in entering notes and performing many graphically-related tasks, i.e., selecting notes, entering notes. This happens with the GPO not being used as well. Though support personnel tell me a G4 is a slower computer to run this on, that should not be since I also do photoshop work that taxes the CPU even more than any music notation software should! In short, there appear to be programming issues that have not been resolved as of yet.
Though Sibelius potentially offers much for music notation, it does not bode well for OSX software to have such a problematic version as this. I suspect this software works better in Windows than OSX, despite their attempt to re-write the code for OSX. Does this thing even support openGL!?
Though Sibelius potentially offers much for music notation, it does not bode well for OSX software to have such a problematic version as this. I suspect this software works better in Windows than OSX, despite their attempt to re-write the code for OSX. Does this thing even support openGL!?
Not ready for prime time - Version: 5.0, 7/15/2007 11:30AM PST
(3 of 3 users found this comment useful)
dshertz
I am a long time user of Sibelius 4 and a software engineer. When I installed Sibelius 5 I had nothing but problems. The installation was not very well integrated: there was a .net upgrade which had to be run separately. Plus it was suggested that files should be copied from Sibelius 4 to Sibelius 5. Later the installation guide suggest that these files may not work because of software changes. Since the job of an installation program is to copy and install the correct files, one gets the impression that the installer was very hastily done.
The principle flaw was the removal of means to edit sound set plus no guide on how to create these in the new XML format. So if you were using an external synth, (I'm using Motif Rack) suddenly you old work is now unplayable. Tech support has offered the ususal banality of a fix will be ready "Real Soon, Now." Much of the functionality in the play menu is greyed out or unresponsive. (The manual only mentions that menus have been 'removed' but offers no recourse as how to replace this functionality).
My recommendation is to wait six months to a year and look for positive reviews before buying this 'upgrade'.
The principle flaw was the removal of means to edit sound set plus no guide on how to create these in the new XML format. So if you were using an external synth, (I'm using Motif Rack) suddenly you old work is now unplayable. Tech support has offered the ususal banality of a fix will be ready "Real Soon, Now." Much of the functionality in the play menu is greyed out or unresponsive. (The manual only mentions that menus have been 'removed' but offers no recourse as how to replace this functionality).
My recommendation is to wait six months to a year and look for positive reviews before buying this 'upgrade'.
Many nice features, not as friendly as it claims, needs work - Version: 4.1.5f105, 10/12/2006 09:28AM PST
(8 of 8 users found this comment useful)
sonicraft
The craft of notation is a complex and tedious one. Making software to do this is no doubt very challenging. The test is: "Would this be quicker by hand?" Ideally, the software should be intuitive and simple on the surface, and have "power-user" settings just below the surface that allow us to make settings that speed things up, and make things clear. In short, it needs to be kept simple, but with the power, flexibility and speed to make it worth choosing over the pen.
My first few sessions with Sibelius had more than the usual number of snags and confusing moments. Fortunately, Sibelius has excellent support which answered questions within 24 hours.
There are aspects of the program that I found needlessly cumbersome. For example, the keypad has a button for note values, a generic "rests" button and a "dotted" button. I think I'd have preferred to press one button for a dotted note, rather than to have to press a note value plus a dot, or to have to press the rests button plus a note value plus a dot. It does give more range of possible values with fewer buttons, but it's cumbersome and it creates problems when editing existing music.
I chose a swing piece in 6/4 which I wanted to playback in 6. Sibelius insists on forcing a dotted-half to be a beat. There was no way to change this, but I could slow the tempo down to 33 bpm, and set the click to do sub-divisions.
Sibelius allows you to have straight-eighths with "swung" playback, but it doesn't let you input "swung" notes without adding a step to unswing them.
Along with time-signature settings, Sibelius should allow the user to define what value equals a beat, and what kind of click we want. It should also have an edit grid which the user could set to any note value (including tuplets) so that notes can be nudged left & right by grid points.
The music itself looks good, the spacing is easily managed (better than Finale).
Admittedly, I have only spent a few hours with the program & manuals, but I can safely say that in the "battle" between Sibelius & Finale, the differences are more subtle than I had hoped. Both programs require dealing with some limitations, and confusing interface elements. Sibelius does more hand-holding than Finale.
Sibelius gives better feedback for what is in the score. Selecting a note plays the correct sounding notes / chords. (Selecting transposing notes in Finale sounds notes as they are written -- not as they should sound!)
My most greatest wish for a future (UB) version of Sibelius is to have a user-defined shortcut/commands list. Have a long list of navigational commands, note & rest values, nudge, etc. etc. and let the user assign key combos and MIDI notes to any of them.
It is possible that Sibelius could evolve into a more clear and usable system. The problem is that in order for the software to become that, current users would have to let go of the complicated procedures they've learned and replace them with simpler more intuitive ones.
Perhaps Sibelius will prepare for a little face-lift.
My first few sessions with Sibelius had more than the usual number of snags and confusing moments. Fortunately, Sibelius has excellent support which answered questions within 24 hours.
There are aspects of the program that I found needlessly cumbersome. For example, the keypad has a button for note values, a generic "rests" button and a "dotted" button. I think I'd have preferred to press one button for a dotted note, rather than to have to press a note value plus a dot, or to have to press the rests button plus a note value plus a dot. It does give more range of possible values with fewer buttons, but it's cumbersome and it creates problems when editing existing music.
I chose a swing piece in 6/4 which I wanted to playback in 6. Sibelius insists on forcing a dotted-half to be a beat. There was no way to change this, but I could slow the tempo down to 33 bpm, and set the click to do sub-divisions.
Sibelius allows you to have straight-eighths with "swung" playback, but it doesn't let you input "swung" notes without adding a step to unswing them.
Along with time-signature settings, Sibelius should allow the user to define what value equals a beat, and what kind of click we want. It should also have an edit grid which the user could set to any note value (including tuplets) so that notes can be nudged left & right by grid points.
The music itself looks good, the spacing is easily managed (better than Finale).
Admittedly, I have only spent a few hours with the program & manuals, but I can safely say that in the "battle" between Sibelius & Finale, the differences are more subtle than I had hoped. Both programs require dealing with some limitations, and confusing interface elements. Sibelius does more hand-holding than Finale.
Sibelius gives better feedback for what is in the score. Selecting a note plays the correct sounding notes / chords. (Selecting transposing notes in Finale sounds notes as they are written -- not as they should sound!)
My most greatest wish for a future (UB) version of Sibelius is to have a user-defined shortcut/commands list. Have a long list of navigational commands, note & rest values, nudge, etc. etc. and let the user assign key combos and MIDI notes to any of them.
It is possible that Sibelius could evolve into a more clear and usable system. The problem is that in order for the software to become that, current users would have to let go of the complicated procedures they've learned and replace them with simpler more intuitive ones.
Perhaps Sibelius will prepare for a little face-lift.
Most Recent Replies: View All 4 Replies
- Many nice features, friendly... (3 replies)
Installation trouble - Version: 4.1.5f105, 9/6/2006 03:19PM PST
(2 of 2 users found this comment useful)
jmsuijkerbuijk_dotmac
If you have applied the 4.1.5 build 104, make sure you remove the receipt before running this updater. The installer might otherwise claim 'there is nothing to install'.
Still not UB - Version: 4.1.5f105, 9/6/2006 09:45AM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
version7
MakeMusic got their lesson when there was a switch to OS X.
Now Sibelius is late. Finale is out as UB already!
Sibelius lacks some essential features such as scroll view and few expression defining options etc.
Tried to swich but sadly Sibelius just doesnt provide enough options for professional composers.
Now Sibelius is late. Finale is out as UB already!
Sibelius lacks some essential features such as scroll view and few expression defining options etc.
Tried to swich but sadly Sibelius just doesnt provide enough options for professional composers.
Most Recent Replies: View All 3 Replies
Good, but unreliable on network - Version: 4.0, 1/8/2006 01:54AM PST
mikekd_dotmac
Hi, been using network version on Macs at school since Sept. Very good, but really unreliable - "network server not responding" messages occur all the time.
Would recomend it provided 4.1 sorts out the stability.
Would recomend it provided 4.1 sorts out the stability.
Here's the download link... - Version: 4.1, 1/5/2006 04:04PM PST
(2 of 3 users found this comment useful)
wscody_dotmac
Here's the download link for 4.1. It also lists "what's new":
http://www.sibelius.com/helpcenter/updates/sibelius4/from_4_0.html
GREAT program, by the way.
http://www.sibelius.com/helpcenter/updates/sibelius4/from_4_0.html
GREAT program, by the way.
Sibelius 4 - A composer's delight - Version: 4.0, 9/11/2005 06:06PM PST
(2 of 3 users found this comment useful)
aehsmu
For many years, I used "Composer's Mosaic" from Mark of the Unicorn to notate my music. Around 1997, MOTU abandoned it's loyal base of "Mosaic" users, although to this day the company has NEVER admitted the product has been "End-of-lifed."
Enter Sibelius. I made the switch from Mosaic to Sibelius when the latter was only in version 2. Version 3 made great improvements and now Version 4, with DYNAMIC PARTS, is a composer's delight. One file for score and parts. Make a change on a part and your score will reflect the change.
I teach music composition and many of my students struggle with Finale. I show them the simplicity that is Sibelius and generally they make the switch.
Having just finished a concert band work using the first release of Sibelius 4, I can attest to the software's stability and useability. It just works.
Enter Sibelius. I made the switch from Mosaic to Sibelius when the latter was only in version 2. Version 3 made great improvements and now Version 4, with DYNAMIC PARTS, is a composer's delight. One file for score and parts. Make a change on a part and your score will reflect the change.
I teach music composition and many of my students struggle with Finale. I show them the simplicity that is Sibelius and generally they make the switch.
Having just finished a concert band work using the first release of Sibelius 4, I can attest to the software's stability and useability. It just works.
Wow, I think they've fixed my pet peeves... - Version: 4.0, 7/10/2005 02:04PM PST
Woolie
I must admit that I have some rather non-musical pet peeves with the application. Mostly that it didn't look like a Mac application nor work or feel like one (At least this was the case on the Mac).
They have fixed some basic usuability issues that have long bothered me (I've been using since 1.0), and finally the MacOSX application is Mach-O. It works relatively well, although in the demo there are some noticeable graphics bugs in the toolbar, the whole thing looks a lot better and appears to work nicely overall.
It seems that have actually made an effort to be more Mac-like (and probably more Windows like on Windows) while maintaining a good working app.
Now if only Photoscore Pro would follow suite.
I can't wait to get the copy I ordered last week.
They have fixed some basic usuability issues that have long bothered me (I've been using since 1.0), and finally the MacOSX application is Mach-O. It works relatively well, although in the demo there are some noticeable graphics bugs in the toolbar, the whole thing looks a lot better and appears to work nicely overall.
It seems that have actually made an effort to be more Mac-like (and probably more Windows like on Windows) while maintaining a good working app.
Now if only Photoscore Pro would follow suite.
I can't wait to get the copy I ordered last week.
In contrast, I needed to talk to MakeMusic about an EPS issue between a previous version of Finale (2007) and Adobe Illustrator CS3. They happily spent 10 or 15 minutes troubleshooting with me and flagged up the issue which I found could be worked around easily, and was fixed by an update.
I guess this isn't a "negative" for Sibelius (I don't fancy my chances getting live Tech Support from Apple for Logic) as much as it is a plus for Finale. Either way the issue took a few more days to solve with Sibelius than I think it probably should have.
My overall impression is that the famous "ease of use" is only sustained for as long as you want to do things "the way sibelius wants to do them", and as soon as you try to use conventions outside of Sibelius sphere of comfort, it's poor and hacky. It seems to me that Sibelius is akin to "Pages" and Finale is more like "InDesign". You'll be up and running quickly in Sibelius, and if you don't want to make anything too challenging you'll probably be OK.