 I’ve written at some length about designing notation templates (read some previous blog posts here), but now I want to explore some general guidelines on using your templates for various projects. But wait, you say, I thought the whole idea of creating a template was to use it for every project, in the same way, every time. Or is this some strange grammatical puzzle? I promise you, it’s not a trick of English grammar (there are enough of those already), or that I’ve led you astray on my template recommendations. Let’s dive in.
What really affects the way in which you use a template starts with two factors: 1) Where is the project starting? (There’s a sub-question here about what role you have in the project, but I’ll cover that another time.) 2) What notation program are you using? The first question is concerned with what format the notation starts. I know a lot of composers still begin their works with pencil and staff paper, sketching out ideas and melodies here. If this is where you are starting, whether you are the composer, arranger, orchestrator, or copyist, then the answer to the second question of which notation software you use is a personal preference. Any full-featured notation software will do, and if you have a template all set and ready to go, just start inputting your notes and you’re off and running. If you are starting your sketches in a notation program from the beginning, then the process is the same. Starting the notation process here is an example of working “in” a template, meaning you have created the template to be an environment in which you work, and everything started and finished in this template will now have all the characteristics and functions you want since you began the process in the template. Where things become less straightforward is a situation like this: what if you are given the task of updating an existing notation file? In this case, the notation may come to you in various conditions and needs to be revised and modified. This is primarily where I start on a project; a composer, arranger, orchestrator, etc., has a piece of music that needs to be cleaned up and formatted properly for the specific use. If this is where you are starting, reinputting the entire piece by hand would likely be impractical or impossible given the time or budgetary constraints of the project. This is where the question of whether you rework the piece “into” your template or impose “onto” the piece the settings from your template comes in play. For a Finale user, this is a job for copying the original piece into your template. For shame, you say! Once I copy this other piece into my Finale template, the articulations may not match the settings in the template, and the expressions are all wrong and using the wrong settings! How is working in a template helpful when what you’ve copied into it looks wrong? Relax, breathe… Finale’s expression menu and articulation design menu make it easy (to a degree) to correct this. For example, let’s say you have a lot of different text directions, like pizz. or arco, that are not using the correct font style or placement now that you’ve copied them into the template. All you need to do is go into the expression menu, find all the different texts you copied in, move them to the correct expression category that has the settings you want, and then click the dropdown menu to reset font and position, and then you’re done. Go out of the expression tool, highlight the staves you want, and go to utilities/change/expressions… and hit ok to reset the position of all the expressions. Now, these will use the correct fonts and have the correct spacing as if you had created them in the correct expression category to begin with. You can also do a similar method in the articulation menu. If there is a staccato marking from the old file that isn’t the one you want to use, simply select it, delete it, and then from the pop-up menu, select replace and find the correct one you had in the template already, hit ok, and then all occurrences of that articulation will be the one you originally designed in the template. Go back out of the articulation tool, highlight the staves you want, go to utilities/change/articulations, reset the position, and everything will now appear as you originally intended. If you are a Sibelius user, the concept of copying into a template also works, but the process of resetting different elements changes. Once you’ve copied in the notation, highlight what you want, and go to the appearance tab and select reset design and reset position. These should generally update everything to look and behave like the settings you already have in the template. If you have lots of custom font styles for symbols and other elements, it will be a longer process to get those looking exactly as you intended, but it’s still possible. A new and often better method is to import an old file into your template using the file/import function. From this menu, you can assign the existing staves to the corresponding instruments in your template and keep the settings from your template (make sure to uncheck settings that import the house style from the old file), and away you go. There is still a good bit of updating to do after this, but this is a very useful method. Sibelius also offers a way to impose your template settings onto an existing file by using a house style. First, go to your template file, export the house style, and then import it into the file you are updating. Once you do this, follow that reset procedure from above. A house style will take settings and presets from your template file and superimpose them onto another file, making the settings in this old file the same (largely) as your template. In my experience, this isn’t a foolproof method, but it does work and can be a great way to import all the various settings from a template to a new file without having to go line by line and find them all and change them. Where Finale uses a “copy into a template” workflow, and Sibelius can use either a “copy into a template” or “impose settings from a template onto a new file” option, Dorico squarely falls in the onto camp. The limitations and imperfections of the import house style function in Sibelius are completely absent from Dorico. Dorico’s library manager feature is incredibly powerful and user-friendly. First, open your template and navigate to Library> Export Library. Save the file. Now go to the piece you’re updating and go to library/library manager. From her,e either select that library file or drag the icon of your Dorico template file into this menu. Dorico will now have a long list of all the various settings in the correct file that don’t match the library from your template. Simply click to change all the settings you want (or click the major categories of notation options, engraving options, layout options, etc.) and Dorico will take care of the rest. It’s very effective, and I’ve found it to be seamless in almost all instances I’ve used it. Next, you can also import page template sets in engrave mode (again, export these from your template), and you can use them in this file. Now, all the engraving, notation, and layout settings and your page templates are the same in the old file as your template file. Ok, I know that was a lot to digest, but as you can see, depending on which notation software you are using and where the project begins can change how you use your template. Remember, your templates aren’t just a file; they should contain concepts, workflows, and ideas that can be used on any file. This makes your template more useful and flexible, saving you time and headaches. Got questions, contact me and I’d be happy to help.  There has been a rather seismic shift in recent weeks in the world of music notation. As you may have heard, Finale music notation software is being sunset (what a pleasant term) by its parent company MakeMusic. This has caused a large outcry, lament and shift in this corner of the music industry. Finale was/is a beloved, at times thoroughly frustrating and long-standing piece of software with thousands of users over the last 35 years. It’s quite an achievement to have a software platform last this long, go through so many various updates in computing in general and the music industry at large. Finale, along with Sibelius and other programs during the 80s and 90s, really brought the music engraving world into the digital age and fundamentally changed the job of a music engraver and copyist, just as much as it changed the creative workflow of composers, arrangers, and orchestrators.
The surprise timing of this announcement was met with shock, sadness, resignation, and I think, some excitement. I have heard from dozens of my clients who work in Finale, wondering what to do now and what to do going forward in the near-term and the long-term. First, let’s go over the facts and dispel some of the panicked concerns I’ve heard from many:
What all the above DOES NOT MEAN:
Knowing all this, the next question is, now what? MakeMusic has partnered with Steinberg to offer a crossgrade to Dorico, and Avid, the parent company of Sibelius, has now matched this offer. MakeMusic is making the case that Dorico is the logical successor to Finale, in terms of capability, functionality, and user customization of the program. Personally, this remains to be seen, but my initial work in Dorico is promising. I’ll post further updates on my progress in Dorico another time. My advice to my clients has been to, first, take a deep breath and slow down any decision making. As I mentioned above, Finale is not going away and if you keep your current set up the same, it will work, in theory, for as long as you want it to. Musicians in this area tend to not be on the bleeding edge of all tech advances and I’m sure many are not running the latest OS on either Mac or PC, so there’s no immediate danger of waking up and all your Finale files being inaccessible. Whatever may be in store for you and your future workflow or notation program of choice, begin by assessing what you actually need, not only out of your current set up, but how to deal with any sort of archive you have. Many of my clients have asked whether they should completely convert their older Finale files into Dorico files. I would not rush to do this. First, make sure you have good backups of all your files, finale or PDFs (this is really important). Next, if you have not accessed a file in 5 years or more, are you really worried about needing in the future so desperately that it needs to be completely re-engraved today? Probably not. What may be a good idea is to export a xml file of the score to have that to go along with your finale file and PDFs. That way, you have access to the notation in whatever form you need, whenever you need it. However, converting files via xml to another notation software does not mean it will load in perfectly without having to edit anything. Also, any formatting in linked parts, etc., will not copy over. So, you will essentially be starting over again on each piece. Next, and this is a highly personal decision, decide if it’s worth learning a new software. I often compare learning a notation software to learning an instrument. You can learn basics fairly quickly, but mastery can take years depending on how much you use it. If you are a composer largely working on your own self-published pieces, then you may be fine working in Finale for the next 3-5 years or longer. Again, there is nothing about Finale today that will completely stop working in the future (depending on your OS, etc.). No one knows for sure if some random security update will interfere with Finale, but it seems like if you keep things as they are, you can just keep using the software. Even publishers and other larger companies shouldn’t feel the need to rush out and change everything today; there’s no advantage. Another question I have gotten frequently from my clients since this announcement is if Dorico is the best option to replace Finale. It may be, but it may not be the best fit for you and your workflow. Dorico does have more of a menu-based workflow and settings structure like Finale, but that doesn’t necessarily follow that it’s the best option for you. If you are writing mostly small ensemble or single instrument pieces, chord charts and rhythm parts, etc., Finale had way too many features and functions that you would never use. The same would be the case of either Dorico (specifically Dorico Pro) or Sibelius Ultimate. Both Dorico and Sibelius have less expensive versions and even free versions of the software that may do all you need. The learning curve on these versions will be much less as there are not as many features and functions in these versions as there will be in the top-tier versions. Also, there are several iPad-based options, like StaffPad, that can give you great features and ease of use without the high initial expense in time and money of these other programs. So, what is the plan for Engraver’s Mark Music and how best can we serve our clients in this new reality? First, we are continuing to use Finale, the latest version 27.4.1, today and will continue to do so for as long as the program remains viable. We maintain an archive, both onsite and off-site, of all files associated with everything project we work on so you can feel secure knowing whatever work we have done together in the past is still available to you. We will continue to share our Finale files with our clients at the end of the project, for no additional fees. Many music preparation companies do not do this or charge extra fees for source files. We do not; never have, never will. Our team is currently putting Dorico through its paces and learning the new workflows and processes we need to ensure our clients have the best experience in the program and the best final product from the software. We currently offer engraving, editing, copying in Finale and Sibelius, and will bring Dorico online within the coming months. Our clients who wish to learn or work in Dorico for future projects with us can be assured that we will be ready and able to accommodate that and bring our full knowledge and experience to each and every project. If you have any questions about steps forward for you and your music in this new era, please reach out to use here and let’s start a conversation. If you are looking for a great writeup on this, check out this Scoring Notes article. It gives some good insight into the history of Finale and how it got to this decision.  In the first of a two-part series, I wanted to go over some basic ideas, concepts, and issues you want to think about as you create a custom template for your music notation. There are so many topics to consider here that I could not cover them all, however, I do want to go over some the guiding principles as you begin to develop a music notation template.
Whenever you are designing anything, it is best to start with a vision of the end product; how it will be used, what it will look like and how it will function. Smart design means carefully thinking through all your steps with the end in mind. Yes, you will adjust and change your design as you go, but without that clear goal in the beginning, your final product will not fulfill all the purposes you originally intended. In the music engraving world, design, implementing and updating templates is a larger part of any engraver’s day to day work. Every time a new feature is added to a notation software, or a new workflow is developed, it can create new possibilities or challenges that need to be addressed in the templates that we use every day for our clients. By constantly updating the templates we designed, our clients benefit from our increased abilities, capacities, and efficiencies. So, how do you start to design a template in any music notation software? Well, I always start with considering the needs of the end user/customer. Knowing who will be reading and using the music informs all the choices that will be made afterwards as you design the template. Key questions are:
The answers to all these questions will completely change the trajectory of the design of your template since each of these scenarios will necessitate your template having difference features and formats. The next step to is come up with a top-down approach, starting with features like page sizes and staff sizes for the score and parts, instrumentation, font choices and a whole host of other issues. A great place to start for all orchestral music is to study the MOLA Music Preparation Guidelines. This gives a ton of information on industry standard practices and requirements and really does a great job in explaining and giving examples. Choral music has many different requirements, and it is usually best to check with your publisher on what features they will want to see from your music. Once you have all this information, it’s time to start making your score as readable as possible. Before any music is added to your score is the time to make sure the score and part pages have consistent and standardized placements and spaces. Where will the title information and other information be placed? How about the spacing between each staff on the score pages or the distance between the systems for each part? As simple as this sounds, spending time and thought on these basic elements will improve not only the look of your music, but the overall presentation and quality as well. Always aim for consistency and clarity. As always, if you have questions or need some help designing a template for your music, Engraver’s Mark Music is here to help. We have templates ready to go for just about any musical situation or we can create a custom template or modify your existing template. Just contact us and we’ll be happy to help. In the next post in this series, I’ll go over some more specific details and best practices of not only how to set up a good template, but how to use it and what modifications you may want to consider. One of the standard tasks I get asked to do as a music engraver/copyist is to take someone’s finished score and format the parts either for a recording session or live performances. Simple enough, right? Well… sometimes yes and sometimes no. Often, I have found that while the composer or orchestrator has spent a great deal of time thinking about and formatting how their scores will look, they have not really considered the needs of the parts and the formatting thereof. So, this brings up an interesting dilemma for those of us in the music engraving world: Should I, no matter what condition the file is in, good or bad, perfect, or lacking, automatically copy everything into one of my own templates and then proceed OR should I make it work with the file I’ve been given? This is a rather complex question and can have many potential answers depending on the situation. I’ll do a deeper dive on this question in another blog post. For this exercise, I’ll say our client used Finale version 26. Let’s also assume the file you have is in good shape, i.e., all elements of the music seem to be input correctly and all things are in the right categories and places, etc. The next step is to assess the end goal of the parts. Do you know the page size that is required for the given scenario and other considerations? Once all this information is gathered and established, you can now proceed on to formatting parts, right? Oh, not so fast. In Finale or Sibelius, the standard look and feel of the parts is already in the document menu and if it doesn’t match what you need, you’ll have to change it. In Sibelius, just go to Parts/Part Appearance/Configure All Parts. From here you can set page size, staff size and a host of other features that all affect all the parts in one go. Super helpful. For Finale, go to Document/Page Format/Parts. This window gives you the ability to preset all the default options you’ll need for all the parts. Now, let’s assume the default page format in the file you are using is letter size and you want to use either A4 or 9x12. Do you have to go through every linked part and change the page size? No! If you have changed the default page size, then just go to Page Layout tool/Redefine Pages/Selected Pages of Selected Parts/Score. Then select all your parts and click ok. Bam! Everything is now in the correct page size. There are lots of other features in the Parts Format menu in Finale for you to establish the default page margins and staff size as well. Again, depending on your situation, your page margins and staff sizes need to be set to very specific values. Knowing what all those are for any given music project is one of the jobs of a good music copyist. If you are only doing this on one chart, it’s easy to just type in all the values, click ok and move on with life. However, what if this is a major project, with multiple files to adjust. Do you want to be typing all that information in every time? That would be annoying and time consuming. Instead, use a script that will do it all for you. And before you get freaked out that you don’t know how to use FinaleScript or another macro program, never fear! I have provided a zip folder that contains FinaleScripts that will do it all for you. The macros will set up default part format to either A4 or 9x12, a staff size to 7.8mm and page margins at around ½ inch. In the folder you’ll find versions for both Windows and Mac. To copy the scripts into your FinaleScript folder, please reference this webpage for Mac and this webpage for Windows. Click on the “To Share a Script with other Finale users” and this will show you the steps to find the folder on your computer (also go to your preferences window, then folders) where the FinaleScripts are stored. Open that, and then copy appropriate script there. Restart Finale and all should be set to go. * A note on the number values used in these scripts. I typically use EVPUs as my measurement unit of choice. Yes, I know it’s a strange numerical value and can be slightly subjective depending on you monitor set up, however, its’ easier for me to remember whole numbers than a lot of decimal points. Typically, if I am setting up a template to have very specific measures, whether in inches or millimeters, etc., I will change my measurement unit to that, set all my defaults I want in the correct values, and then switch back to EVPUs. The measurements will still be the same, but the numerical value will look different and be a bit easier for me to remember. If you are using another measurement unit, that’s totally fine, however, you’ll need to go into the scripts and adjust the numerical values accordingly. Or, switch your measurement unit to EVPUs before running these scripts and then switch them back to your preferred one after. Contact me for help on this. I offer Finale instruction for $60 per hour if you want to dive deeper on this kind of feature. I have tested these scripts on all my systems and other members of my team have used them as well. They were written in Finale v26, but can be used in other versions, like Finale v25, though you may have to adjust the script. As with anything freeware, use at your own discretion and I cannot guarantee results. * (for more information on this, check out this blog post from Scoring Notes and this post here at Engraver’s Mark Music) Now you have an easy, repeatable way to adjust default part page parameters in any Finale document! As always, if you need advice or assistance with any music engraving, copying or printing project, contact me and let’s start a conversation! 
|
AuthorSammy Sanfilippo, CEO of Engraver's Mark Music Archives
January 2026
Categories
All
|
||
RSS Feed