Most people only need their notation software to the basics, and for that, yeah, some new hot product can deliver those basics (and so can free stuff like MuseScore).
The thing is, complicated software like this abides by the 80/20 rule: 80% of users only use 20% of the features. It's completely absurd to think that a new product is going to overtake something with that much of a head start. I know how much work goes into 30 years of software development.
Finale and Sibelius have been around for about 30 years. For decades they're known to be unable to make software founded on good UX.ĮDIT: Wow, I think your answers were pretty good, thanks. TL DR - I have the impression Dorico isn't immune to the Steinberg way. I also used Pro Tools but I'm not good w/ it.Īnyways, of all DAWs I ever touched, only Cubase spent me many hours of watching videos, reading and asking forums, and opening support tickets, etc. Recently I tried Ableton Live and loved it. Personally, at home my recording DAW is Digital Performer, and I'm a longtime FL Studio user, esp. I don't buy into that argument to defend cumbersome software, cause everything has a learning curve and if the steepness isn't intrinsic to what you're trying to do, then the design is bad. I'm not a composer though, we only need scores in minute occasions, so maybe that's why I didn't see a problem.Īnd of course, there's the folks who like talking about learning curves.
Now, people criticise Sibelius, I downloaded a trial yesterday and I'm impressed as how it gets out of my way and lets me actually write music. It is still there, the jurassic Steinberg way. I also own Cubase myself.Įven though Dorico gets the job done and it is not neartly half as cumbersome as Cubase, learning it feels just like learning Cubase: spend 80% of the time trying to find out how to do the stuff, 20% actually doing it. The thing is, I work in a studio where everything is Steinberg's. People are parroting all around that Dorico is the future of notation software.
0 kommentar(er)
