Page 2 of 2
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:21 pm
by ttf_Ellrod
I have an old version of Printmusic and an unfinished arr't of a D Ellis piece.
Nuff said
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:30 pm
by ttf_Geezerhorn
Quote from: timothy42b on Apr 21, 2017, 05:51PMAt one time I had several of the lower featured Finale versions. I forget which ones - Songwriter, Notepad, Printmusic?
Anyway, I decided to use it to notate something I was playing for a musical, and having trouble reading that handwritten script. I can read clefs all day before I can decipher some of that stuff.
I was doing fine until the first key change, which doesn't take long in a musical. Dropped in the key change, the whole piece changed. Say what? Read the manual. There was no way to change keys within a piece. I guess I could have worked around it, did multiple pieces and used a scissors, but it wasn't worth the effort. I went back to Noteworthy.
If that was ever an issue with Songwriter, it no longer is.
...Geezer
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Fri Apr 21, 2017 10:52 pm
by ttf_Exzaclee
Personally, I've found the other finale versions (songwriter, printscore, etc...) useless. Doesn't mean someone else can't get value out of them, I just can't.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:10 am
by ttf_savio
I think we have to consider there is a difference \ line between professional use and personal use. We can't compare what most of us do to what Exzaclee do in his work. Two different worlds.
Anyway I think the development of software has made life easier for all of us. Both for us that read and the writers. Still I think people with a pencil often are more creative. I feel the computer take away some focus from me. But I'm not the most creative in first place....
Leif
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 5:06 am
by ttf_Geezerhorn
Quote from: Exzaclee on Apr 21, 2017, 10:52PMPersonally, I've found the other finale versions (songwriter, printscore, etc...) useless. Doesn't mean someone else can't get value out of them, I just can't.
If I was doing your work on your level, I would want THE very best tools for the job as well. Otherwise, why pay for and learn something that would be largely wasted? It depends upon what your intended usage is. For some of us, paper and pencil is still quite sufficient for a lot of small & quick things. It's where I sometimes start, before going on with a little bit more formal notation.
For me, sometimes the biggest advantage of the simplest program is ensuring I get the proper number of beats per measure and/or the ability to change the key signature with one or two clicks. How's that for simple use of a basic notation program? lol
...Geezer
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:03 am
by ttf_BillO
So far, we have from the ones mentioned basically 3 that are worth the effort. Leaving cost out of teh consideration right now the order of preference seems to be:
1) finale
2) Sibelius
3) MuseScore
Does anyone have any experience with Encore, Notion, Overture or Score? Where might they fit into the scheme of things? Any others of note?
Of course you can get the full blown version of finale for only $250. First buy Notion ($100) then buy the upgrade from Notion to finale ($150). Then you will have both Notion and finale and save yourself $350.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:07 am
by ttf_boneagain
Quote from: Geezerhorn on Apr 22, 2017, 05:06AMIf I was doing your work on your level, I would want THE very best tools for the job as well. Otherwise, why pay for and learn something that would be largely wasted? It depends upon what your intended usage is...
Excellent question. Let's take a side-trip into the biking world. Decades ago when I was in that business I faced folks every day who asked why they should buy from me when they could get a perfectly good bike for less than half the price at K-Mart. Why pay for something that would be largely wasted?
This boiled down to a self-fullfulling prophecy. These folks thought the seats and position and ride would be uncomfortable, and did not want to spend much just to find that out. The result was that they paid top dollar. They paid 1/2 as much for a bike they never WOULD ride. If they had paid more they would have been riding every week. In the course of a year or two, cost-per-ride tilted totally to the "more expensive" bike.
I worked with Finale Printmusic for a while. I should have gone straight to the more costly full version. I always found out that something either could not be done, or took hours to fudge, JUST when I really needed output for an upcoming event.
I do NOT believe any of these programs have reached Microsoft Word status yet. For the last ten years of my technology career that program was the bane of my existence. Regular as clockwork new versions would come out with features I did NOT need, sometimes clobbering features I DID need. I would have been much happier with a simpler version that worked faster and correctly all the time.
Until these programs reach that level of "maturity" I think we need to not just what we intend FOR NOW but what we can reasonably expect. Going to transcribe some vocal music for quartet? Going to put together some flexibility exercises? Going to make up some parts BOOKS (not just individual parts?) Or, do you favorite groups need such things, but not have anyone who can/will do it? if this might be you, then the cheaper versions can be a problem.
Or you can use open source, which does NOT put out much in the way of crippled versions, but will likely keep playing catch-up.
On a fixed income, I'm going the open source route.
But the full versions of all the programs mentioned here are all GREAT!
This is a problem I would LOVE to have had back when I had to put together tunes for my big brass ensemble.
Aren't we lucky to have this embarassment of riches!
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:21 am
by ttf_bonenick
Quote from: BillO on Apr 22, 2017, 06:03AMSo far, we have from the ones mentioned basically 3 that are worth the effort. Leaving cost out of teh consideration right now the order of preference seems to be:
1) finale
2) Sibelius
3) MuseScore
Does anyone have any experience with Encore, Notion, Overture or Score? Where might they fit into the scheme of things? Any others of note?
Of course you can get the full blown version of finale for only $250. First buy Notion ($100) then buy the upgrade from Notion to finale ($150). Then you will have both Notion and finale and save yourself $350.
I think that Dorico is soon to be included in that list. I used once Encore, but wasn't impressed by. True, I did not make any efforts to learn the program. I never had any experience with the other 3.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:27 am
by ttf_Ellrod
Dorico - a Sibelius spinoff - looks like it's going to be expensive.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:32 am
by ttf_Exzaclee
Like I said in my first response, Finale is a PITA to use. I don't recommend it for people who are just wanting to fiddle around with a notation program. Andrew (the OP) isn't just fiddling around, so the requirements of the fiddlers wasn't what I was addressing. I was addressing the needs of the hobbyist, student and professional that's going to be needing to get practical use out of a program.
My main requirement for recommending anything boils down to one issue: time. That's why I don't recommend finale to fiddlers. Fiddlers don't have the time to devote to getting any real use out of the program and are likely to be the same people griping about how hard it is to use because there is a steep learning curve.
The cheap versions finale seem designed to get you into the big product. It's all good until you find you can't perform some basic function with the touch of a button, or add a key change, or some other function that takes 2 seconds in the full program and takes 20 minutes to an hour to perform in the cheaper version.
If you want to go "cheap" finale, get Musescore instead. Musescore has most of the features you'll need to produce scores, and it'll take less time than it might in one of the cheaper versions of finale. Musescore is better in pretty much every way than printscore, songwriter, and all that garbage.
You want a professional level scorewriter with all the functionality of finale but a little easier to learn? Get Sibelius.
College student? Find out what software they use at your school. Some schools might use multiple platforms - in that case, find out what your composition, theory and/or arranging teachers prefer.
Hobbyist? Find out what your church uses, or other musicians in the band you play in most, or whatever - this way you have someone you can ask questions of. If you find yourself using your scorewriter once a week or more, it really needs to be a good one: (Finale, Sibelius, Musescore, Dorico). Notice there are some other full featured score writers I haven't mentioned because they have a steeper learning curve than even finale and finding people who use them who can help is difficult.
I'll re-iterate, my own personal preference is based upon what I need to work. I feel that the other half of my argument has been largely mischaracterized, however. Finale is NOT the only game in town, and one doesn't need to drop that kind of money on a good scorewriter. I'm not here to shill for Finale, they couldn't pay me enough. I just recommend getting a scorewriter that is actually capable of handling scores, whether you go the expensive or cheap route. A version of finale that is stripped of many of its useful features is going to cost time in the long run, time that would be better spent learning how to use a full featured scorewriter, whether that be Finale, Sibelius, Musescore, Encore, Score, Dorico, or whatever one prefers.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 7:46 am
by ttf_Geezerhorn
Quote from: Exzaclee on Apr 22, 2017, 07:32AMLike I said in my first response, Finale is a PITA to use. I don't recommend it for people who are just wanting to fiddle around with a notation program. Andrew (the OP) isn't just fiddling around, so the requirements of the fiddlers wasn't what I was addressing. I was addressing the needs of the hobbyist, student and professional that's going to be needing to get practical use out of a program.
My main requirement for recommending anything boils down to one issue: time. That's why I don't recommend finale to fiddlers. Fiddlers don't have the time to devote to getting any real use out of the program and are likely to be the same people griping about how hard it is to use because there is a steep learning curve.
The cheap versions finale seem designed to get you into the big product. It's all good until you find you can't perform some basic function with the touch of a button, or add a key change, or some other function that takes 2 seconds in the full program and takes 20 minutes to an hour to perform in the cheaper version.
If you want to go "cheap" finale, get Musescore instead. Musescore has most of the features you'll need to produce scores, and it'll take less time than it might in one of the cheaper versions of finale. Musescore is better in pretty much every way than printscore, songwriter, and all that garbage.
You want a professional level scorewriter with all the functionality of finale but a little easier to learn? Get Sibelius.
College student? Find out what software they use at your school. Some schools might use multiple platforms - in that case, find out what your composition, theory and/or arranging teachers prefer.
Hobbyist? Find out what your church uses, or other musicians in the band you play in most, or whatever - this way you have someone you can ask questions of. If you find yourself using your scorewriter once a week or more, it really needs to be a good one: (Finale, Sibelius, Musescore, Dorico). Notice there are some other full featured score writers I haven't mentioned because they have a steeper learning curve than even finale and finding people who use them who can help is difficult.
I'll re-iterate, my own personal preference is based upon what I need to work. I feel that the other half of my argument has been largely mischaracterized, however. Finale is NOT the only game in town, and one doesn't need to drop that kind of money on a good scorewriter. I'm not here to shill for Finale, they couldn't pay me enough. I just recommend getting a scorewriter that is actually capable of handling scores, whether you go the expensive or cheap route. A version of finale that is stripped of many of its useful features is going to cost time in the long run, time that would be better spent learning how to use a full featured scorewriter, whether that be Finale, Sibelius, Musescore, Encore, Score, Dorico, or whatever one prefers.
Perhaps it is for you on your level. It isn't for me on my level. Then again, as an example, I know several guys on this Forum who swear by Band-In-A-Box for note entry. I, instead, swear at it. And it might possibly be the same with various notation apps. Dif'rent strokes.
So how is one to know what is right for their particular needs? Take an edumacated guess based on what you read here and elsewhere, pony up and find out, I suppose - just like anything else.
If I read Boneagain's post right, I believe he advocates buying the best and growing into it as a cost-savings measure in the long run and to minimize the frustration of coping with that which does not serve very well in the first place - on any level.
...Geezer
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:30 am
by ttf_BGuttman
Boneagain's comparison is that if you plan to spend a lot of time on your score writer you may reap benefits from the more capable (and expensive) product. I can certify that if I don't spend a lot of time writing music even the free score writer is expensive (in my time). But if I am constantly writing music for others to play getting familiar with a decent score writer is a help.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:39 am
by ttf_Exzaclee
Quote from: Geezerhorn on Apr 22, 2017, 07:46AMPerhaps it is for you on your level.
I'm not sure what you're replying to... What you've highlighted is that Finale is a PITA - and even beta testers I know would agree with that statement.
Quote from: Geezerhorn on Apr 22, 2017, 07:46AMSo how is one to know what is right for their particular needs? Take an edumacated guess based on what you read here and elsewhere, pony up and find out, I suppose - just like anything else.
I addressed this in my previous post. If something wasn't addressed there, ask a question more specific to your needs and you may get a more specific response that pertains to you.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:52 am
by ttf_Ellrod
Good discussion.
I'm hoping someone will weigh in on Notion. Some good reviews and not too expensive.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:34 pm
by ttf_fsung
Quote from: bonenick on Apr 22, 2017, 07:21AMI think that Dorico is soon to be included in that list.
Dorico may eventually carve out a share of the market, but given the laundry list of basic functions (such as
chord symbol support (and slash notation),
voice swapping, and
offsetting rests to avoid collisions, cues, and fingerings, to name but a handful) that aren't yet implemented, I think it's a stretch to view it as a viable alternative to Finale and Sibelius in the near term future.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:37 pm
by ttf_Graham Martin
A very interesting topic because it so happens that I am at a stage where I am looking for a really good notation program, mainly for small band arrangements although I do the odd big band arrangement from time to time. Frankly, in recent years I have spent more of my time on improving my playing and my notation software is a bit out of date.
I am probably one of those that Geezer was referring to when he said "I know several guys on this Forum who swear by Band-In-A-Box for note entry". IMO, It is certainly a faster mouse entry method than any of the proper notation programs, because you do not have to select the length of the note you are entering - the next note or space entered does that.
However, most of the other notation entries in BiaB are a PITA, which is a shame because a few years back they started to improve the program in that respect, even starting with an auto-collision avoidance that Andrew likes so much. However, all of that seems to have 'gone by the board' when they started to market mainly as a music backing program for the one-man-band strummers. Since then they seem to have abandoned the mainly jazz types who were using it for backing tracks for practice and for Lead Sheets for small jazz groups. A great shame because it still is the best backing track program and, if you know what you are doing and perhaps prepared to make a few manual entries on the finished score, it is still good for small band arrangements and lead sheets. I actually think the PG Music change in emphasis for the target customer is a big mistake by their marketing department and that the original users are a much bigger segment of the market. Speaking as a marketing type, you understand.
Also, the changes they made for the new market users have introduced some very unwelcome bugs for us older users. Mind you it still makes great backing tracks and saves arrangers a lot of time by having such things as automatic two/three/four/five part harmonising of section parts, automatically generated rhythm parts and solos etc. I used to do all my big band arrangements in BiaB, convert them to midi, and then drop the result into Sibelius or Overture 4 for the final score. They even made that easier by eliminating the need to convert to midi, offering file conversions that the proper notation programs liked better.
I never was very much at home with Sibelius and when I upgraded with the purchase of Sibelius 7, they lost me completely. I found it much too difficult to use and went back to using Overture 4. I always liked that program a lot but until reading this topic had not caught up with the fact it had changed hands. It is now what I think Ellrod was calling Sonic, but I do not see how that is a spin-off of Sibelius. Overture was originally Cakewalk Score Writer and the program writer left Cakewalk to start his own software company. They still have a lesser program called Score Writer. Are they going to change Overture to Doric? Like I said, I am a bit out of touch and was even surprised to find the old Overture website no longer exists. I did notice they are up to Doric Overture Version 5.2 and I wonder how much they have changed it from the Version 4 that I like so much and still use from time to time.
I do not think that I have contributed anything much to this discussion and you can tell that I am very much betwixt and between. But I just wanted to indicate that this is all very interesting and I really want to know what people on this forum are now using; particularly the professional arrangers - although I have no aspirations in that direction. I just think their judgement is probably better because they have to take a greater number of factors into consideration. A steep learning curve is another problem for me, of course.
I certainly like Sonic Scores claimed strategy: "Listen to our customers, develop the products they need, and keep the products simple and easy to use." An ideal marketing strategy for any product!
Quote from: timothy42b on Apr 21, 2017, 07:51AMI don't know if it's relevant, but I work for an engineering department.
When we contract a design, we require it to be AutoCAD V13.01a. (I'm not sure what version we're currently on, but you get the drift.) There are lots of equivalent CAD programs just as good if not better, but we're only willing to pay for that product. If you don't have it, and want to bid on our job, buy it. If you can beat the competitor's price by using Microstation, forget it; contracting will reject you as unresponsive.
How are you going with BIM Tim?
After many years of talking about it, we are about to launch our Buildsoft estimating system in the US. Look out for it!
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 1:56 am
by ttf_Andrew Meronek
More observations about Musescore. I'm working on a big band-type chart.
Creating a score layout is slightly odd; I'm not a huge fan. I really got used to Sibelius' ability to go in and out of a transposing vs. untransposed score, which Musescore technically can do, but it's not instantaneous and a bit of work especially with a score of a large number of instruments.
Altering a pickup measure at the very beginning of a score is IMHO handled pretty well, for those times when I change my mind about how a piece starts. That's actually something I wished were handled a bit more easily in Sibelius, at least up to version 6 which I had.
Musescore forces me to start filling in empty measures from the left side; there doesn't seem to be an ability to very quickly add a note to an arbitrary point later in a measure without first filling it with rests. That's not really a big deal in simple time signatures like 3/4, but can get a bit note-clicky with measures of larger subdivisions like 12/8. I'd recommend stashing some unused measures somewhere around the beginning of a score with rests of different divisions for copy-paste use later to help with this.
Musescore has some ability to instantly transfer score updates to parts, but the algorithm does *not* catch all changes. Therefore, a good visual scouring is highly recommend. Well, it is anyway even with the established notation softwares, but it's much more important in Musescore, and there will be more "tweaking" to get parts to look right than in Sibelius.
While Musescore doesn't have auto-collision-avoidance, it does have the ability to directly enter spacing variations via number input, if you're willing to track down where such things are in the interface. I think this is more Finale-inspired than Sibelius-inspired, and it's a convention that I like in some ways, although the ability to generally click and drag more things in a score (to adjust things like staff spacing) would be nice. THat said, plenty of things *are* click-and-draggable.
Chords in slash notation are handled fairly well. In particular, I like how the chords are left-aligned with the left edge of the slash symbol they are supposed to align with, as opposed to defaulting to something like being left-or-center-aligned to the center of a slash. (Sibelius 6!!!)
edit:
Concerning scores, one big whiff I've found is the inability to have different spacings between staves on different pages of a score. Changing a stave spacing, as far as I can tell, always applies on every page. That can really be a big problem if you want to make a score look professional.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 2:35 am
by ttf_Geordie
Andrew I use Musescore but am not sure what you mean about moving between transposing and non-transposing score. I use the Concert Pitch button near the upper right corner to move the whole thing in and out of concert pitch. Alternatively, use Control A to highlight the whole score and then use the transpose drop down to change key to whatever you require. In the latter case you need to check for some reader unfriendly accidentals and double sharps etc which I prefer to write enharmonically a simpler way. Is this the sort of issue you meant or, more probably, have I misunderstood the point?
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 3:58 am
by ttf_Andrew Meronek
Quote from: Geordie on Apr 29, 2017, 02:35AMAndrew I use Musescore but am not sure what you mean about moving between transposing and non-transposing score. I use the Concert Pitch button near the upper right corner to move the whole thing in and out of concert pitch. Alternatively, use Control A to highlight the whole score and then use the transpose drop down to change key to whatever you require. In the latter case you need to check for some reader unfriendly accidentals and double sharps etc which I prefer to write enharmonically a simpler way. Is this the sort of issue you meant or, more probably, have I misunderstood the point?
Aha! Thanks!
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:55 am
by ttf_boneagain
Quote from: Geezerhorn on Apr 22, 2017, 07:46AMSo how is one to know what is right for their particular needs? Take an edumacated guess based on what you read here and elsewhere, pony up and find out, I suppose - just like anything else.
If I read Boneagain's post right, I believe he advocates buying the best and growing into it as a cost-savings measure in the long run and to minimize the frustration of coping with that which does not serve very well in the first place - on any level.
...Geezer
Sorry for the late reply.
Bruce got my meaning closest. If what you buy hobbles you so badly you don't want to work with it (by lack of features) you've wasted more money-per-use than a more expensive product. But I was NOT advocating "The Best" but "most likely to meet YOUR coming needs." And that is pretty much what this thread is about (as you note in the first quoted sentence."
BTW: "opportunity cost" SHOULD be a big factor in anyone's choice. For Zac that includes jobs he cannot get because the customer won't accept a certain format. For folks like me it's time I can't spend practicing because I'm dubbing around with software that makes me stand on my head to get things done.
For me, at the moment, Musescore is hitting a nice point in MY functionality/feature/cost balance.
Everyone makes his or her own balance.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Mon May 01, 2017 5:30 am
by ttf_timothy42b
Quote from: Graham Martin on Apr 22, 2017, 06:37PM
How are you going with BIM Tim?
After many years of talking about it, we are about to launch our Buildsoft estimating system in the US. Look out for it!
In 2005 we started requiring a BIM model to accompany the design for major construction. Most of them were delivered in Revet. We have built a library of files, but <sigh> have never opened any of them. The design department does have hopes for the future. We are doing pretty well building the required GIS layers in ESRI.
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Fri May 05, 2017 2:14 am
by ttf_Geordie
Given the comments about Musescore it might be worth knowing that it has been updated. I have not yet tried the new version but here is what their site says about the main changes:
New note input modes allow you to play music on a MIDI keyboard in real time and have MuseScore transcribe both pitches and rhythms, either using the built-in metronome or your foot pedal to keep the tempo
New input mode to allow entry of rhythm first, pitches later
New command to rewrite rhythms to show beat divisions according to time signature rules
New and improved commands to change duration of existing notes while in note input mode, including adding and removing augmentation dots
Synthesizer improvements, including updates to the default SoundFont and better support for SFZ format
Ability to upload audio to MuseScore.com along with your score, so others can hear your score with your chosen SoundFont or SFZ
Improved historical tablature support, including lute bass strings
When changing instruments mid-score (e.g., from flute to clarinet), the transposition is now handled correctly
Improved selection controls, including the ability to select notes of the same pitch, duration, or notehead, and the ability to select or deselect all element types in the Selection Filter
New command to swap selection with clipboard (simultaneously paste to and copy from the selected range)
More controls: ability to reorder score tabs, customize pause length of breaths and caesuras, add/remove brackets on accidentals, set MP3 bitrate, add page breaks when creating albums, include fingering in tablature staves
New and improved templates and instruments, including various marching bands and percussion ensembles, a general percussion staff, more standard clefs for basses, additional ethnic instruments
UI improvements in Staff Properties, New Score Wizard, Edit Drumset, and other windows
Relative strengths and weaknesses of different music notation software programs
Posted: Fri May 05, 2017 2:14 am
by ttf_Geordie
Given the comments about Musescore it might be worth knowing that it has been updated. I have not yet tried the new version but here is what their site says about the main changes:
New note input modes allow you to play music on a MIDI keyboard in real time and have MuseScore transcribe both pitches and rhythms, either using the built-in metronome or your foot pedal to keep the tempo
New input mode to allow entry of rhythm first, pitches later
New command to rewrite rhythms to show beat divisions according to time signature rules
New and improved commands to change duration of existing notes while in note input mode, including adding and removing augmentation dots
Synthesizer improvements, including updates to the default SoundFont and better support for SFZ format
Ability to upload audio to MuseScore.com along with your score, so others can hear your score with your chosen SoundFont or SFZ
Improved historical tablature support, including lute bass strings
When changing instruments mid-score (e.g., from flute to clarinet), the transposition is now handled correctly
Improved selection controls, including the ability to select notes of the same pitch, duration, or notehead, and the ability to select or deselect all element types in the Selection Filter
New command to swap selection with clipboard (simultaneously paste to and copy from the selected range)
More controls: ability to reorder score tabs, customize pause length of breaths and caesuras, add/remove brackets on accidentals, set MP3 bitrate, add page breaks when creating albums, include fingering in tablature staves
New and improved templates and instruments, including various marching bands and percussion ensembles, a general percussion staff, more standard clefs for basses, additional ethnic instruments
UI improvements in Staff Properties, New Score Wizard, Edit Drumset, and other windows