• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Topic: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    As some of you may have already seen, this week MakeMusic launched new MakeMusic, Finale, SmartMusic, Garritan, and MusicXML websites.

    The sites highlight MakeMusic’s new brand identities and emphasize how our growing portfolio of products work together. Powerful search capabilities and tools, informative content, audio and video demonstrations, weekly blogs and client testimonials enhance the visitor experience.

    Please take a peek and let us know what you think by replying below.
    Justin Phillips
    Senior Product Manager
    MakeMusic, Inc

  2. #2
    Senior Member rpearl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    1,904

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    Justin,

    Thanks for supplying all the links in one easy place. The sites look good, and from what I could tell, is fairly well laid out. I do have one issue, however. It has bothered me for a while now; I wouldn't bring it up, but you asked for feedback on how your sites look, and by extension, how things are being marketed.

    I will admit, up front, that I am a Sibelius user. I have no quarrel with Finale, have no interest in flame wars - in fact, the competition has been good for both companies, and we have all seen better products for it. My problem is with the way Human Playback is marketed. From what I can tell it is a very sophisticated enhancement to playback; and while I do believe that Sibelius users can get as good playback, this is a definite plus for Finale users. However, the way you are posting comparisons is, well... what word can I use? Not really honest? You have a number of Sibelius files followed by the same file played in Finale. Without exception, the Finale excerpts have a dramatic increase in Reverb; this, of course, enhances the sound, but has nothing to do with HP. Or does it? Does HP, along with the way it interprets score markings, also make decisions about reverb? I'm not saying that HP doesn't improve playback - many people posting here have attested to that - but to put, side-by-side, files that are worlds apart in terms of the reverb/ambience is to compare apples and oranges. I find it disappointing, and a bit misleading. Perhaps there is a point here I am missing. But when I am shown two pictures, one in color, and one in black and white, and am asked which is the preferable one...

    Please correct me if I am mis-hearing this. I honestly do hope that Finale continues to be a stable and viable program. As I said, we are all the better for it.

    All the best,
    Ron Pearl

    Website:

    ronaldmpearl.com

    myspace:

    http://myspace.com/rmpearl

  3. #3
    Senior Member fastlane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Shelton, Washington State
    Posts
    2,972

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    The sites look quite good. They are easy to read and understand. The standard white on black larger type is a welcome change for the Garritan site.




    Phil

  4. #4

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    I like the new look and navigational feel of the sites. Nice work.

    Ted
    Music and humor are healthy for the soul.

  5. #5

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    Quote Originally Posted by rpearl View Post
    Justin,

    I will admit, up front, that I am a Sibelius user. I have no quarrel with Finale, have no interest in flame wars - in fact, the competition has been good for both companies, and we have all seen better products for it. My problem is with the way Human Playback is marketed. From what I can tell it is a very sophisticated enhancement to playback; and while I do believe that Sibelius users can get as good playback, this is a definite plus for Finale users. However, the way you are posting comparisons is, well... what word can I use? Not really honest? You have a number of Sibelius files followed by the same file played in Finale. Without exception, the Finale excerpts have a dramatic increase in Reverb; this, of course, enhances the sound, but has nothing to do with HP. Or does it? Does HP, along with the way it interprets score markings, also make decisions about reverb? I'm not saying that HP doesn't improve playback - many people posting here have attested to that - but to put, side-by-side, files that are worlds apart in terms of the reverb/ambience is to compare apples and oranges. I find it disappointing, and a bit misleading. Perhaps there is a point here I am missing. But when I am shown two pictures, one in color, and one in black and white, and am asked which is the preferable one...

    Please correct me if I am mis-hearing this. I honestly do hope that Finale continues to be a stable and viable program. As I said, we are all the better for it.

    All the best,
    There is more reverb, and an absolutely fair question. The samples were created using stock settings, and that's what Finale does by default. The samples were created by:

    1) Launching the app
    2) Creating a score using the provided setup methods (letting each program pick the appropriate playback sounds)
    3) Entering the music
    4) Saving as an audio file

    I did it this way to try and use as "stock" settings as possible.
    Justin Phillips
    Senior Product Manager
    MakeMusic, Inc

  6. #6
    Senior Member rpearl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Baltimore
    Posts
    1,904

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    Justin,

    Thanks for the clarification. It sounds as though Finale has some default setting for Reverb. It doesn't seem likely that HP would make that adjustment - or would it. If it does, then it should be clearly stated that those choices are a part of the package, and why the comparison samples sound so different. I have had a number of people roll their eyes when they hear the Finale vs Sibelius, as they feel it is somewhat rigged. But, if in fact, HP is making those setting choices, then it should be stated as such - and it becomes a selling point for Finale. As it stands, I know several people who have viewed this as false advertising - to the point they will not continue their "tour" of Finale.

    I appreciate your response. We all benefit from clarity.

    All the best,
    Ron Pearl

    Website:

    ronaldmpearl.com

    myspace:

    http://myspace.com/rmpearl

  7. #7

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    Hi, Justin - Good to see you here, as it always is.

    Thanks for asking for feedback on MakeMusic's facelift. It looks very clean and compact, professional. Seems to me it will serve the company very well - nice work.

    Interesting point Ron Pearl brought up about the comparison recordings, Sib/Finale. I hadn't listened before, so found them on the site and played them. There's no doubt about it, that the Finale versions all have a lot more reverb which most people react to positively, as in, "That sounds more realistic."

    I appreciate your reply to Ron, how the demos were made by using the default settings in both programs. The panning defaults are consistently in better balance in the Finale versions, and it does sound like the default sound sources are better in Finale.

    But the demos also show, once more, why we hear so many Finale renderings which are way overboard on the reverb. The default settings make recordings sound cavernous, like the band/orchestra is a mile away from the listener, and in a huge cavern. Standard feedback on those recordings has been, for a long time now, for users to do some editing on the defaults so they can tame the size of the virtual spaces used in their Finale renderings - and when they do that, the results are consistently better.

    Randy

  8. #8
    Senior Member Silh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    350

    Re: New Garritan (and other MakeMusic) Websites

    After going through the pages associated with my account and purchased software, and reading about the recent Instant Orchestra update, I wanted to bring up that there is no easy way to check on version numbers or such.

    In the 'My Software' section, you should provide an indication on the page of what version is the latest (and being provided for download), so that I can tell if the version on my computer is up to date or not and whether I need to grab the latest update or not. The date of the last update would also be nice, but the version number would be the most important.

    From what I also remember, updates (for GPO, GWI, etc.) used to be available as patches, rather than having to re-download the entire library just to update what will only be a small subset of the files. I have a somewhat limited download quota at my home (which is out in the middle of nowhere), nevermind slower throughput, and re-downloading the entire thing is, quite frankly, wasteful.

    Also, the larger file gives a greater chance of file corruption happening somewhere along the line. If it does happen (rare as it may be, but it did happen to me back when World Instruments first came out), one would have to download the whole large package yet again when a smaller sized patch would be much more practical.

    I hope these issues can be addressed.
    -- Matt Wong

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •