Finale 2000: Music Notation Software (review)

Finale (2000) music notation software. Coda Music Technology, Inc., 1999. Windows and Macintosh versions available. $545.00 list price, $275.00 academic price (variable pricing available for upgrades and site licenses). Minimum system requirements: Macintosh System 7.1 or higher, Windows 95/98/NT4 or higher, 8-16 MB RAM minimum (32 MB recommended), 20MB hard disk space (plus 20MB disk space for documentation).

In his recent review of Sibelius (Notes 56, no.4 [June 2000]: 1005-7), David Gilbert discusses the commitment one makes to a relationship with a piece of software. His analogy falls short, however, in not considering the possibility of actually deciding to "tie the knot." In 1987, after two unhappy years in a relationship with Professional Composer, I began using Finale version 1.05, and I can now say that we are "married." After thirteen years, I know how to manipulate my partner to get whatever I want, and when I am about to go too far. This, however, is not a dysfunctional marriage; the results are generally good, and we no longer fight a lot. But the downside of this long-standing relationship is that some of Finale's minor faults loom disproportionately large, while I scarcely notice other defects that would drive other people mad. I will return to these defects--including problematic documentation and a steep learning curve--after describing the enormous potential of Finale, and the ways in which it has been improved in recent years.

As both a composer and a theorist, I put Finale through its paces. Examples 1-3 demonstrate some of Finale's potential to the composer: the use of alternate note heads and symbols (ex. 1); some symbols used in harp music (ex. 2); and free graphic notation (ex. 3). Examples 4-8 are drawn from theoretical work: stemless notes in organal notation (ex. 4); C-clefs and barlines placed between the staves for Renaissance music (ex. 5); the use of lines to indicate harmonic prolongations in a Bach chorale (ex. 6); a metrical hierarchy without the use of staves or clefs (ex. 7); and a Schenkerian analysis of a portion of a Beethoven string quartet (ex. 8).

Some of these non-ordinary examples, such as the barlines in example 5, are easy to produce. Others, such as the note heads in example 1, are easy but time-consuming. Generally, the less the notation is based upon notes placed metrically within measures, the more difficult it is to manipulate. Examples 7 and 8 require a fair amount of experience to produce.

Finale is based upon the following two conceptual premises: 1) music consists of notes occupying specific metrical positions; and 2) all other parameters (dynamics, articulations, etc.) are attached to those notes or measures. This contrasts with applications such as Score, which (somewhat oversimplistically) view music as a collection of graphic symbols, including the notes themselves. While a Score file is thus a listing of the graphic location of symbols on the page, a Finale file is a listing of pitches and durations and their metric placement in measures and staves, with all other information dependent upon that list. Finale also distinguishes between "Scroll View" (an infinite horizontal scroll of notes and measures) and "Page View" (the layout of the music in systems on the page), much as most word processors distinguish between a "normal" view (an infinite vertical scroll of words and lines) and a "page layout" view (the layout of the paragraphs on the page). The arrangement of systems on a page, page [Begin Page 978] numbers, and so forth, are a separate component of a Finale file.

Although Finale's complexity grew with its ability to produce professional-quality results, it is still possible to use Finale in the simple way in which it was conceived. There are three methods in which notes can be entered: Simple Note Entry, Speedy Note Entry, and Hyperscribe. Simple Note Entry is a point-and-click method of entering notes: slow and steady, and easy to learn...