There are a lot of things that we were looking for, that haven’t appeared. Buying the update is your choice, of course.

I’m afraid they’re losing it. If this is the result of 2 years’ work I sense that MM simply not is able to develop Finale any further. And that’s to bad. I’ve used Finale for 23 years now, customized it, made shortcuts, macros and scripts. I really hope that this is not the end of the road.

The fact that they have updated the anouncement at the top for the page for Fin26 show how much attention they pay to things posted here.

Oh, we don't have it so bad. Check the last date on the Garritan Blog.

https://www.garritan.com/blog/ 

Hi Skjalg, we have made some significant changes in the recent release. Although we may not have necessarily made the specific changes that you are looking for (I too would like to see an overhaul of the MIDI Tool), there is definitely value here for many users. You should download the free trial and see if this holds value for you as well.

Robert, I enjoyed your review of v26. Thanks.

For the record: I will update to F26. Of course I will! I love Finale, and after 23 years I know its ins and outs quite well. In my opinion, F’s development story so far has been impressive and all updates have been most useful to me. That is why I am somewhat disappointed with what seems like a minor upgrade compared to earlier ones. My workflow relies heavily on customized templates, libraries, sound engines, plugins, macros and scripts to manipulate the Finale defaults; all of this working just fine, but there are no ways to script around the MIDI tool UI. And most MIDI functionality is present in Finale, it is only a matter of UI design (graphic in addition to numerical). And: If a part is assigned to ch 1 and - during the piece - changes to ch 2, there is absolutely no way to access those MIDI parameters. In some cases it is possible to do workarounds with channel-assigned layers, but not always.

What is actually going on here is represented very clearly in your responses above, which not only outline the diversity and disparity of individual user needs, but showcases the need for greater working capital and human resources for MakeMusic specifically to develop Finale. MakeMusic needs to generate more revenue from Finale (or restructure funds allocation within the company) to promote ongoing improvements at a more rapid pace (something we are feeling right now as Finale users as the larger teams of Sibelius and Dorico are making headway into Finale market share).

1) Skjalg, you request 4 features at the top of this post. I strongly agree that the 3 of them which apply to voiced linked parts have been long needed: a way to flip Enharmonic spelling (when working with voiced linked parts), improved grace note spacing (when using voiced linked parts)  and working w/ Special Tools (within voiced linked parts).

To address this, whenever I have parts in a score which have grace notes or I know I will need to use Special Tools, I manage the parts in another way; I break them out into separate hidden parts staves in the score so they are not under Managed Parts and I have complete control. | http://www.rpmseattle.com/of_note/finales-managed-parts-grace-note-spacing/  | http://www.rpmseattle.com/of_note/keep-it-together-in-finale-or-sibelius-score-parts-in-the-same-file/ 

But there is something even more basic when working in Parts, and is a productivity killer whether or not the part is a voiced linked parts which is that most of the Plugins are greyed out - unavailable in Parts, whether or not voiced linked parts are in use. And the real kicker here is that these plugins are not only unavailable when voiced linked parts are active, they are just *always greyed out*, even for simple, unvoiced parts.

So, the user has to round trip to the score from the parts to use something as simple as the Cautionary Accidentals Plugin in a Tuba or Violin part for instance. This has always felt to me like a Hail Mary from the programmers when Managed Parts were introduced because it was too much work to isolate the plugins related to linked voices and make only those unavailable.

2) William, your post shows a concern for the fact that you, as an end user of Finale, are not being listened to on this forum. Sadly, I agree. I certainly haven't seen sweeping change as a result of peoples' concerns on this forum (or the previous forum when it was up).

I applaud you David C. for being on this forum and taking the time to respond to posts such as this, but if an employee of MakeMusic, I'm sure you have many other responsibilities with the company and have limited availability to be here.

I see a total of 171 interactions from David since December 22, 2016, which speaks to the fact that we really don't have full time "support" on this forum from MakeMusic; any support here mostly comes from other users. I've seen posts from Mark Adler and other MakeMusic familiar names on occasion, but these guys are all obviously spread too thin to be answering posts here on a daily basis. It really just comes down to MakeMusic's resources and available bandwidth and finances.

So, the Finale division of MakeMusic does not have enough Human Resources to answer everyone's questions, quiet everyone's fears, implement proper damage control when things get out of hand, or log every feature request and problem put forth on this forum. Even when users post to Support through the proper channels to make a feature request or a bug report, there are not enough resources to address all of those. The task for this small team of developers and administrators must be daunting.

3) Adrian, your comment about Garritan's website (still advertising a sale that expires on the Fourth of July) above is another sad commentary that really points out how short-staffed and under-funded the Finale and Garritan divisions of this company is.

4) The question of the MIDI tool is an interesting case, and points to why it must be so hard for MakeMusic to satisfy everyone. Skjalg, your requirement for an updated MIDI tool that allows access to regions of MIDI parameters rather than one note and parameter at a time is certainly valid (in fact, across the board, no edit operation should be limited to one bar at a time - take a look at Note Mover, badly in need of an overhaul).

As a music engraver and copyist rather than a composer, meanwhile, I am lobbying MakeMusic for a completely different wish list. In other words for the work I do, I don't really *need* a greatly improved MIDI editor. 

I'm looking for things like auto-save as a background operation, for instance. I'm looking for them to complete the implementation of the articulations they started. I'm looking for better consistency in the UI throughout Finale, and to fix long standing and recently introduced bugs.

No one is more right here. It would be *great* to have all of our needs addressed for the kinds of work we do, right? But with MakeMusic's limited resources currently, the sad fact is that is not going to happen. Someone at MakeMusic has to decide which deficiencies get addressed and which bugs get fixed and which features to pour human resources and money into.

And there is another factor here - if you have a favorite list of bugs you need fixed (nested dialog boxes getting stuck behind other dialog boxes and inaccessible is my current focus if you will pardon the pun), you'll need to be patient. MakeMusic pushed this articulation update out in favor of fixing bugs and improving productivity with existing things (like plugins not working in Parts view or auto save in the background which are both huge productivity sumps) because you can't sell software by saying you fixed something - you sell software by showing off new exciting features.

All that to say, if we want to keep Finale around and viable, we must keep supporting the company by continuing to upgrade, even if everything on our personal wish lists are not implemented.

(a) I'm sure you are all aware, Finale and Garritan) are not MakeMusic's cash cow product / service at this juncture. That said, it is my strong opinion that MakeMusic needs to bring a few more good programmers onboard, if only to stay in the game. The existing programmers need more minds in the building working on the same lines of code to bounce implementation off of for Finale to really improve. In many ways, expanding on this legacy code base is a technical challenge that requires more resources.

Anyone know how many programmers MakeMusic currently has working on Finale? I'd be surprised if there are more than two or three programmers working on Finale currently. Total. That is not enough for a program with as much depth and power as Finale. Again, Avid and Steinberg both have deeper pockets here, with teams of over a dozen programmers each. Shuffle some more money around into Finale's development, Mr. CEO; a bigger push needs to be given to Finale development under the current climate for the foreseeable future (that is, if you want to stay in the game and remain competitive).

(b) In my opinion, no disrespect to any Finale beta testers which may be here, but more of you are needed. And if you *are* currently a tester and are reporting bugs that are not getting squashed, Makemusic, pay attention - headquarters needs to take beta reports more seriously if things are being reported and not addressed. You have to do a better job of fixing existing bugs so great new features aren't soured by incomplete implementation or unresolved issues from a previous version of the program. 

5) Pyongyang, you are exactly right when you say "I think the Finale Users … would leave Finale if they feel their requests are not respected. … Finale team must carefully listen to the requests of the users."

Amen.

Counting the folks who appeared in the Finale 26 promo videos, there were ten apparent programmers (if you include Mark Adler, who might be considered more a supervisor than a programmer).

I, too, worry how well Finale will be able to keep up with Dorico as it comes into its own.

I have posted several suggestions on this forum, but will probably not post more, since at the present pace of development the chances are nil that any of them will ever appear in the program.

In any case, after years of experimentation, tweaking, and supplementation, Finale does most of what I need to do. Unfortunately, it still lacks an essential, very basic "feature" of fine engraving that I have requested since 2000:  a better system of control points for slurs.  5 control points do not give enough control over slur shape, particularly with very long slurs. Dorico gave the user complete control over slur shape in its very first version; its designers understood the significance of this capability and prioritized it. The designers of Finale never have. The designers of Finale tend to improve what can be worked around while ignoring glaring omissions and bugs in their program that cannot. 

I plan to switch to Dorico as soon as it reaches full maturity and can handle all of my engraving needs as well as it does slur shape. 

John,

I can understand how you, as a long-time Finale user would be frustrated. Still, I hope you will keep suggesting improvements you think are needed, even if the exercise seems futile. Perhaps one or more of your suggestions will (eventually) make it through to the program and benefit others even if you have moved on to Dorico. Your experience gives you an insight into the potential needs of users that new arrivals may be less likely to see even if they don't yet know they will benefit.

J Adrian Verkouteren, 

Ideally, I would certainly do that, but ars longa, vita brevis.

"Hi Skjalg, we have made some significant changes in the recent release. Although we may not have necessarily made the specific changes that you are looking for (I too would like to see an overhaul of the MIDI Tool), there is definitely value here for many users. You should download the free trial and see if this holds value for you as well."

Not only has the Midi Tool not been updated, you've kept all the Midi Tools bugs that were in Finale 25 and added new ones that renders it even more unusable.

You won't update the Midi Tool, fine, but at least try to fix the bugs that have been there for 2+ years.

With the entry of new competitors into the notation marketplace, much depends on how this will affect Finale's "values proposition" going forward. I hope MakeMusic will make that increasingly clear as time goes on.

Perhaps the notation marketplace will evolve into something akin to the synth market: professionals will own several and move from one to the other as is appropriate for each project. I hope that will not happen, as it would make both producing and archiving content more of a hassle.

Hola me siento un poquito extraño a este programa, VERSIÓN FINALE 26.3 FULL ESPAÑOL. Sin REPRODCCE, ya hemos formateado varios veces y medí cuenta. El programa, tiene muchos ERRORES y el sonido REAL. Yo duran en UNA HORA, Siempre reinicio, varias veces, después de que no quieres abrir el programa, se me borra. Ante que cierre el programa, hemos guardado. Mi trabajo y cómo abrir donde nos guardamos guardado, mi trabajo - de mi composición. Yo venta, error y otras cosas, LE CRACK Ó NÚMERO DE SERIE. Comprenda un este OFICIAL, de este programa, la verdad no se puede hacer pasando, un este VERSIÓN y ahora. Otra Versión 27, acaba de publicar hace poco meses. Creo que van a salir parecido EL ESPAÑOL. Pero no quiero hacer problema. Como la versión 26.3 de anterior:

Final 27? | Foro final

Un Vistazo por Adelantado #2: Soporte para SMuFL - Finale (finalemusic.com)

¡Finale v27 Viene en Camino! - Final (finalemusic.com)

Sneak Peek #2: Soporte SMuFL - Software de notación musical final

Software de notación musical Finale | Facebook

NEWS: Finale 27 and SMuFL - Dorico - Steinberg Forums

I too have found it disheartening that certain bugs were not fixed in v26. The bug that makes the "Rebar Music" function make complete mincemeat of a score, for instance. And the bug when copying a section of music that begins at the start of a bar, onto a place that begins at the middle of the bar - the note lengths end up mangled, with a dotted crotchet becoming a crotchet tied to a quaver, etc. There is a way to fix this using the retranscribe tool, but it then deletes the lyrics in that section if you have lyrics. I tried Dorico but found it too tedious to learn a whole new way of doing things, when my workflow is in Finale.

Esto si es verdad y encima, equivocamos. el formato: XML y ahora MXL. La verdad, no lo sé. Cuales original, hay algunos que agregan y confundimos las cosas. Yo trabajo MAKE MUSIC - FINALE y estudié en particular académica musical - el 2017, está bien que ACTUALICE, pero no debemos cambiar las cosas a veces, todos el mundo confundimos y hay algunas personas que se, quedaron. Por que, se confunde las cosas y esto tiene que tener en cuenta.

Atte: Músico PERUANO: Segundo Cabrales Sax Perú.

Google Translate was not much help translating this particular message, but if the difficulty is that exporting XML from Finale 27 does not work in other programs, one can change the XML settings to export XML 3 (rather than the default XML 4, which only Finale can interpret so far).