I should mention, as a composer myself, who is highly interested in modern techniques and 20th/21st century composition in general, I have every intention of introducing ways to support those techniques in MuseScore once we introduce some remaining core missing features, which you rightly noted are still absent. Thanks for the review! We've got a way to go and we're blasting out expansions as quickly as we can! Our aim is to be a truly permissive and flexible, modern notation app.
As long Finale time user I installed Dorico and Musescore. For me Dorico is VERY hard to learn. Muse is more logical if you come from Finale. Just in one day on Muse I could do what I was struggling for a week in Dorico. Thanx for the video.
I haven't seen the video till the end. But regarding long measures at 3:50 - you can easily fix that by "Format > Reset entire score to default layout"
Yeah they don’t have stemless notes you have the go in engrave mode and pull them down/up to hide them. Many modern techniques are only do able with hack/work arounds. I miss staff styles.
This comment is for those curious of NotePerformer 4.5. Follow the link here and discover the magic of NotePerformer. I cannot recall any VST sounding like a recording like this. The music in the linked video was produced by Dorico 5.1 Pro driving NotePerformer 4.5.0. The music performance can still be tweaked using Dorico's MIDI lanes, but the listener will definitely hear how NotePerformer is not this 'in-between', medium quality VST as some claims. NotePerformer has a lot of power, if one knows how to use its magic! ua-cam.com/video/QfHQ5ZM4BaE/v-deo.html
Yeah, I haven’t really even reached into the playback stuff yet. For that Dorico looks light years ahead of Finale was. My final product is always sheet music for live performance so that is my first priority.
I also had this problem and after testing the available music music editing software I decided to choose Sibelius. Dorico is unacceptable for me (at least for now).
@@Music-from-Humans yeah Sibelius is 31 years old, and Avid has had a pretty hands-off attitude toward it in recent years, treating it a bit like their ugly stepchild in the closet which they only let out once a year to eat. They have had very few major updates in the past 15 years, mostly just system updates and bug fixes, some small things here and there. In 2012 Avid was doing a corporate restructuring and in order to save money on what they felt was an already dying niche product, they laid off their entire Sibelius team (based in UK), outsourcing the code to be primarily maintained by a foreign software firm - a new team which, as I understand it, had no experience in music notation. Seeing a new opportunity, Steinberg hired the newly laid off former Sibelius team to begin their new project which would become Dorico, released in 2016, giving them also a chance to start entirely fresh without the baggage of "old-world" computing methodologies baked into code since the 80s/90s. A fresh start meant a fresh approach. Since then, Steinberg has been extremely proactive with a very hands-on development team, releasing 5 versions within 7 years with a huge amount of changes for every major update - which is vastly more development at a pace which far exceeds Sibelius, when you compare feature-per-version or feature-per-year over time. Add on top of this, Steinberg is committed to only perpetual licenses, whereas Avid is obsessed with forcing the software subscription model. You can still purchase a perpetual license for Sibelius (same price as Dorico Pro I believe), but this is only after people demanded they continue offering them (originally they were attempting an all subscription model). I mention this in part because the lack of proper updates and major features do not justify Avid's annual subscription fee of $200. Between neglect and corporate restructuring and greed, I honestly would be very hesitant to devote all my time and energy into a software that already seems like it might be at death's door. Even if Sibelius offers some features Dorico doesn't currently have, one must consider the long-term investment of time, should Sibelius bite the dust in a few years (and I think it might), you'll be back at square one. Plus, at the pace of development of Dorico, I feel confident it will soon catch up with missing desired features. FYI I have no affiliations here - I'm just a guy who has used both Sibelius and Dorico (and Musescore too). Dorico (and MS to a degree) are the only scorewriters on the market I feel have an active and financially-invested future, and that's pretty important I feel when it comes to making a big decision like this.
@@Music-from-Humans Sibelius is much more future proof than Musescore. The company behind it right now is Avid, the maker of Pro Tools. They have just finished updating it to the modern standards, it is the only one that can run not only on x86 and ARM computers, but also on iOS devices (Dorico can also do that) and on Android devices (Dorico can’t). So Sibelius has the freshest code of all of those programs. For the music that you write, I would definitely recommend trying Sibelius as it can do staff type changes without workarounds, aleatoric boxes, cut-away scores, import and resize SVG files etc. They haven’t added a lot of new features in the recent years precisely because they were busy rewriting it almost from the ground up.
That’s good that they rewrote it from the ground up. That’s what you have to do from time to time. All I hear about is that they got rid of all their engineers, and they all went to Dorico. People keep talking about how it’s the same scenario as what happened to finale, they get sold off to another company and that company keeps them around for a little bit and then kills them right now. I definitely want software that’s more new music friendly.
Finale is already told me not to upgrade the OS to the latest macOS because finale may not work. I can’t operate on software that only runs on an old system for the next 30 years.
@Music-from-Humans if the current Finale version would get the job done for the next 30 years, and I was an expert in Finale, exporting pdfs, I'd keep a couple of dedicated pcs with their existing OS, offline and ready to do my bidding for years to come. I personally have a modern pc, but also own older pcs that have Win XP pro, as well as Win 98. They have old software that still works great. Anyway, it's a thought. Best of both worlds.
@@truthseeker502 I'm also a Finale expert and extremely computer savvy but it not the software, it is every thing around it. Computer die, interfaces change, other software moves on. It naive to think you'll be able to keep finale running for 30 years. It is not something I'm willing to risk.
@Music-from-Humans yes, when it comes to relying on certain software to make a living, these software companies have us by the short hairs. As a musician I've been using Cakewalk as a DAW since the 1990s, then It became Sonar, then It became free for the past few years under Cakewalk by bandlab, and now it's changing back to subscription based Sonar. So I know about having years of projects and files dependent on a particular software and the fear of discontinued platforms. But we just have to adapt, and that is what you are doing. Good luck and good fortune to you.
Well I am sorry Joshua but in this case I can be dismissive. It is ridiculous to compare a piece of lately much improved free software, which I encourage my students to use to get started, with the leading 2nd generation notation software costing hundreds of dollars.
Dorico is wonderful and is a revolutionary notation software. If you spend a little more time with Dorico and the Forum, you will see how receptive and open minded the developers are. Dorico is really mature for really professional engraving and playback, and is evolving from update to update with a tremendous amount of mind-blowing functionalities for composers of all genres. And yes, more "modern notation" functionalitites are coming soon ;-) (On the other hand, the producer/s of MS where not ashamed to steal the look and try to imitate Dorico's functionalities. Failing.)
There’s definitely some really cool features in it and things I like. It’s just so painful to do some of the things that I do frequently. I really miss staff styles. Having to do that instrument hack for my box notation to look the way I want it to look is gonna be a pain in the butt. Heck, I lost over half the notes on import of one of my compositions, having to rescue 30 years of work, I just wish it was closer to my needs.
@@Music-from-Humans The Dorico team will get some of these things fixed over time. Part of the reason why Finale became a mess is that they implemented quick band-aid features and fixes - not necessarily solving things the best way, but a way that was easy for them to do at the time. The yearly releases were the biggest issue there - back when they released Finale 2009, 2010, etc each year, they were putting too much emphasis on doing something quickly vs doing things the right way. Eventually piling these band-aids on top of band-aids for many years creates a mess. The Dorico team doesn't want to make a mess where they implement something a half-baked way and then have to completely redesign it in the future, because that's the sort of practice that got Finale into such difficulty. An example I always give for that is that the very initial Dorico release didn't even support piano pedaling - they wanted full support for half pedaling and quarter pedaling and whatnot and not just throw together a half-baked pedaling feature that they would have to fix later, so it didn't arrive until a free update for the program. So their general tendency is that they often don't really support something at all until they sit down and develop a very comprehensive solution for it, and suddenly they jump ahead from not supporting feature X at all to supporting feature X better than the other programs out there. They've already said cutaway scores are coming, and box notation is coming. They want to implement a better solution for these than we've had with other programs in the past, ideally something that understands what the boxes actually mean and are able to play them back automatically too, rather than just displaying them graphically. Dorico 6 is likely less than a year away, possibly only a few months away, so we'll see what that brings as far as this.
@@mjducharme Finale had lots of warts for sure, UI was stuck in the 90's but I could do everything I wanted and needed to do in it. So I'm just trying to find what will let me write my music my way like Finale let me. I hope that is true they are adding these features, none of these programs really did box notation truly. I found the lack of staff style problematic, causing creating the look I want in a way more cumbersome and time consuming then it needs to be. While I know I green and don't know much about Dorico, I'm extremely computer savvy but it took me 5 times long in Dorico to get things fixed then it did for other programs. I have heard many people have similar experience. Is there a coming soon to Dorico page somewhere? I'ld love to read where they are planning to take the program. I really in a race again time in some ways to save my music.
@@Music-from-Humans Unfortunately for competitive reasons they usually don't disclose what is coming soon until suddenly they release the version with support for it (to prevent a competitor from seeing what they are doing and developing something similar at the same time). This is also true for new major versions - the new headlining feature/features are often a surprise, not trumpeted before the release. This is a company wide policy at Steinberg from what I can tell, for all of their product lines they avoid giving any hints beforehand. The only thing they've disclosed recently is in the next minor update they've made some adjustments to the pitch-before-duration method to make it more like the Finale Speedy Entry, and that's coming soon. For your existing music you should make sure you have good PDF's of everything, and make sure it is exported to the latest MusicXML 4.0 from Finale in case you do want to revise it later when Finale is no longer working. Not everybody revises every previous piece they wrote. You shouldn't necessarily feel under pressure to re-engrave all of your previous works from Finale into some other program by some deadline, unless you do regularly need to revise them for some reason.
@@mjducharme OK thanks for the information, the reason there is pressure for me on saving them is 1. all the errors on import I'm having. I figure I might be able to fix what causing them in finale. But if you watched the whole video we can see I lost 50% of all my notes importing a newly created MusicXML 4.0 from Finale. 2. I do change my pieces at times for groups. 3. I was working on a big refresh of my scores and parts for a digital distribution system I was building. Plus some deadlines for getting new pieces out will be impacted learning new software. It is quite stressful.
No, not yet but it’s come along way and for some people that may be all they need. As you can see in the video actually handled import one of my pieces better than Dorico. Dorico lost half the composition ua-cam.com/video/2E3PO8-elcg/v-deo.htmlsi=VX2JvoMp9RgnA6N2&t=1002 so it seems I’m going to have to export it from Musescore to be able to import it into Dorico. Plus there is lots of active development on it so it is something to keep your eye on.
@@Music-from-Humans I've seen this before quite a few times with Dorico MusicXML import, and this is the biggest issue that I've had with the import. The cause of this is certain tuplets, particularly cases where you have tuplets in a multiple-voice texture on a single staff/instrument like double-stemmed writing in piano or divided strings with independent lines (or woodwind parts where they were manually condensed onto one stave in the original software). Tuplets with one voice come across OK, and multiple-voice texture comes across OK, but multiple voices and tuplets at the same time often create issues and this prevents Dorico from importing any notes after the problematic tuplet, then you end up with a score with no notes after that point. The workaround at the moment is to delete the problematic tuplet, or change the engraving of it in the original program so that you split off the extra voice onto another staff so you only need one voice per staff, prior to exporting with MusicXML, and then correct the problematic passage once it is imported into Dorico. When bringing MusicXML into Dorico, always check the original score for any cases where you have two voices on one staff at the same time, with tuplets in one or both voices, as there is a good chance that Dorico will trip up in that spot and not import anything later in the piece after that (aside from the text labels). Bringing the MusicXML into another program as an in-between step helps with some things, but my experience is not good with this with these types of multiple voice issues with tuplets. I usually find that re-exporting from the intermediate program like MuseScore has this same problem.
Dont be so dismissive. Yes atm its punching above its weight. Buts id say its very much in the league. Look how much progress they have made in 5 years and now the aquasition of hal leonard. They seem to have the desire, the leadership and community passion to keep doing great things for many years to come. And the low barrier of entry in terms of financial and time cost to get started is always going to make it compelling for the future generaton of composers. Then there is the issue that being open source, even if Muse group folds tommorrow, as long as people are interested in it, it will keep going. So this situation will most likely never happen again with Musescore.
I should mention, as a composer myself, who is highly interested in modern techniques and 20th/21st century composition in general, I have every intention of introducing ways to support those techniques in MuseScore once we introduce some remaining core missing features, which you rightly noted are still absent.
Thanks for the review! We've got a way to go and we're blasting out expansions as quickly as we can! Our aim is to be a truly permissive and flexible, modern notation app.
Keep up the good work it’s come a long way. Follow In Finale’s foot steps and work with composers to improve the product.
As long Finale time user I installed Dorico and Musescore. For me Dorico is VERY hard to learn. Muse is more logical if you come from Finale. Just in one day on Muse I could do what I was struggling for a week in Dorico. Thanx for the video.
Yeah I agree, but MuseScore does not have all the features I need as well. At Least MuseScore didn't loose half my composition on import.
I haven't seen the video till the end. But regarding long measures at 3:50 - you can easily fix that by "Format > Reset entire score to default layout"
Thanks for the tip, just wish it would have imported like the original and I would not to reset all my original layout work from Finale.
I mostly write for choirs
I had tons of problems with Dorico i could not find all the tools like printing lyrics and use stemless notes.
Yeah they don’t have stemless notes you have the go in engrave mode and pull them down/up to hide them. Many modern techniques are only do able with hack/work arounds. I miss staff styles.
This comment is for those curious of NotePerformer 4.5. Follow the link here and discover the magic of NotePerformer. I cannot recall any VST sounding like a recording like this. The music in the linked video was produced by Dorico 5.1 Pro driving NotePerformer 4.5.0. The music performance can still be tweaked using Dorico's MIDI lanes, but the listener will definitely hear how NotePerformer is not this 'in-between', medium quality VST as some claims. NotePerformer has a lot of power, if one knows how to use its magic!
ua-cam.com/video/QfHQ5ZM4BaE/v-deo.html
Yeah, I haven’t really even reached into the playback stuff yet. For that Dorico looks light years ahead of Finale was. My final product is always sheet music for live performance so that is my first priority.
I also had this problem and after testing the available music music editing software I decided to choose Sibelius. Dorico is unacceptable for me (at least for now).
I’m looking into Sibelius now. I need my long term solution. I don’t want to have to switch again.
@@Music-from-Humans yeah Sibelius is 31 years old, and Avid has had a pretty hands-off attitude toward it in recent years, treating it a bit like their ugly stepchild in the closet which they only let out once a year to eat. They have had very few major updates in the past 15 years, mostly just system updates and bug fixes, some small things here and there. In 2012 Avid was doing a corporate restructuring and in order to save money on what they felt was an already dying niche product, they laid off their entire Sibelius team (based in UK), outsourcing the code to be primarily maintained by a foreign software firm - a new team which, as I understand it, had no experience in music notation. Seeing a new opportunity, Steinberg hired the newly laid off former Sibelius team to begin their new project which would become Dorico, released in 2016, giving them also a chance to start entirely fresh without the baggage of "old-world" computing methodologies baked into code since the 80s/90s. A fresh start meant a fresh approach. Since then, Steinberg has been extremely proactive with a very hands-on development team, releasing 5 versions within 7 years with a huge amount of changes for every major update - which is vastly more development at a pace which far exceeds Sibelius, when you compare feature-per-version or feature-per-year over time.
Add on top of this, Steinberg is committed to only perpetual licenses, whereas Avid is obsessed with forcing the software subscription model. You can still purchase a perpetual license for Sibelius (same price as Dorico Pro I believe), but this is only after people demanded they continue offering them (originally they were attempting an all subscription model). I mention this in part because the lack of proper updates and major features do not justify Avid's annual subscription fee of $200.
Between neglect and corporate restructuring and greed, I honestly would be very hesitant to devote all my time and energy into a software that already seems like it might be at death's door. Even if Sibelius offers some features Dorico doesn't currently have, one must consider the long-term investment of time, should Sibelius bite the dust in a few years (and I think it might), you'll be back at square one. Plus, at the pace of development of Dorico, I feel confident it will soon catch up with missing desired features.
FYI I have no affiliations here - I'm just a guy who has used both Sibelius and Dorico (and Musescore too). Dorico (and MS to a degree) are the only scorewriters on the market I feel have an active and financially-invested future, and that's pretty important I feel when it comes to making a big decision like this.
I don't think there's anything that we said we'd never do? Just haven't had time yet.
Staff styles?
Why not try Sibelius?
Did you watch the video? Watch the end.
@@Music-from-Humans Sibelius is much more future proof than Musescore. The company behind it right now is Avid, the maker of Pro Tools. They have just finished updating it to the modern standards, it is the only one that can run not only on x86 and ARM computers, but also on iOS devices (Dorico can also do that) and on Android devices (Dorico can’t). So Sibelius has the freshest code of all of those programs. For the music that you write, I would definitely recommend trying Sibelius as it can do staff type changes without workarounds, aleatoric boxes, cut-away scores, import and resize SVG files etc. They haven’t added a lot of new features in the recent years precisely because they were busy rewriting it almost from the ground up.
That’s good that they rewrote it from the ground up. That’s what you have to do from time to time. All I hear about is that they got rid of all their engineers, and they all went to Dorico. People keep talking about how it’s the same scenario as what happened to finale, they get sold off to another company and that company keeps them around for a little bit and then kills them right now. I definitely want software that’s more new music friendly.
@@Music-from-Humans that was 12 years ago! Sibelius is a very different program now.
Why can't you just keep using the last version of Finale?
Finale is already told me not to upgrade the OS to the latest macOS because finale may not work. I can’t operate on software that only runs on an old system for the next 30 years.
@Music-from-Humans if the current Finale version would get the job done for the next 30 years, and I was an expert in Finale, exporting pdfs, I'd keep a couple of dedicated pcs with their existing OS, offline and ready to do my bidding for years to come. I personally have a modern pc, but also own older pcs that have Win XP pro, as well as Win 98. They have old software that still works great. Anyway, it's a thought. Best of both worlds.
@@truthseeker502 I'm also a Finale expert and extremely computer savvy but it not the software, it is every thing around it. Computer die, interfaces change, other software moves on. It naive to think you'll be able to keep finale running for 30 years. It is not something I'm willing to risk.
@Music-from-Humans yes, when it comes to relying on certain software to make a living, these software companies have us by the short hairs. As a musician I've been using Cakewalk as a DAW since the 1990s, then It became Sonar, then It became free for the past few years under Cakewalk by bandlab, and now it's changing back to subscription based Sonar. So I know about having years of projects and files dependent on a particular software and the fear of discontinued platforms. But we just have to adapt, and that is what you are doing. Good luck and good fortune to you.
Well I am sorry Joshua but in this case I can be dismissive. It is ridiculous to compare a piece of lately much improved free software, which I encourage my students to use to get started, with the leading 2nd generation notation software costing hundreds of dollars.
Who is Joshua? Who doing that comparison? Perhaps you should watch the entire video before commenting.
Dorico is wonderful and is a revolutionary notation software. If you spend a little more time with Dorico and the Forum, you will see how receptive and open minded the developers are. Dorico is really mature for really professional engraving and playback, and is evolving from update to update with a tremendous amount of mind-blowing functionalities for composers of all genres. And yes, more "modern notation" functionalitites are coming soon ;-)
(On the other hand, the producer/s of MS where not ashamed to steal the look and try to imitate Dorico's functionalities. Failing.)
There’s definitely some really cool features in it and things I like. It’s just so painful to do some of the things that I do frequently. I really miss staff styles. Having to do that instrument hack for my box notation to look the way I want it to look is gonna be a pain in the butt. Heck, I lost over half the notes on import of one of my compositions, having to rescue 30 years of work, I just wish it was closer to my needs.
@@Music-from-Humans The Dorico team will get some of these things fixed over time. Part of the reason why Finale became a mess is that they implemented quick band-aid features and fixes - not necessarily solving things the best way, but a way that was easy for them to do at the time. The yearly releases were the biggest issue there - back when they released Finale 2009, 2010, etc each year, they were putting too much emphasis on doing something quickly vs doing things the right way. Eventually piling these band-aids on top of band-aids for many years creates a mess. The Dorico team doesn't want to make a mess where they implement something a half-baked way and then have to completely redesign it in the future, because that's the sort of practice that got Finale into such difficulty. An example I always give for that is that the very initial Dorico release didn't even support piano pedaling - they wanted full support for half pedaling and quarter pedaling and whatnot and not just throw together a half-baked pedaling feature that they would have to fix later, so it didn't arrive until a free update for the program. So their general tendency is that they often don't really support something at all until they sit down and develop a very comprehensive solution for it, and suddenly they jump ahead from not supporting feature X at all to supporting feature X better than the other programs out there.
They've already said cutaway scores are coming, and box notation is coming. They want to implement a better solution for these than we've had with other programs in the past, ideally something that understands what the boxes actually mean and are able to play them back automatically too, rather than just displaying them graphically. Dorico 6 is likely less than a year away, possibly only a few months away, so we'll see what that brings as far as this.
@@mjducharme Finale had lots of warts for sure, UI was stuck in the 90's but I could do everything I wanted and needed to do in it. So I'm just trying to find what will let me write my music my way like Finale let me. I hope that is true they are adding these features, none of these programs really did box notation truly. I found the lack of staff style problematic, causing creating the look I want in a way more cumbersome and time consuming then it needs to be. While I know I green and don't know much about Dorico, I'm extremely computer savvy but it took me 5 times long in Dorico to get things fixed then it did for other programs. I have heard many people have similar experience. Is there a coming soon to Dorico page somewhere? I'ld love to read where they are planning to take the program. I really in a race again time in some ways to save my music.
@@Music-from-Humans Unfortunately for competitive reasons they usually don't disclose what is coming soon until suddenly they release the version with support for it (to prevent a competitor from seeing what they are doing and developing something similar at the same time). This is also true for new major versions - the new headlining feature/features are often a surprise, not trumpeted before the release. This is a company wide policy at Steinberg from what I can tell, for all of their product lines they avoid giving any hints beforehand.
The only thing they've disclosed recently is in the next minor update they've made some adjustments to the pitch-before-duration method to make it more like the Finale Speedy Entry, and that's coming soon.
For your existing music you should make sure you have good PDF's of everything, and make sure it is exported to the latest MusicXML 4.0 from Finale in case you do want to revise it later when Finale is no longer working. Not everybody revises every previous piece they wrote. You shouldn't necessarily feel under pressure to re-engrave all of your previous works from Finale into some other program by some deadline, unless you do regularly need to revise them for some reason.
@@mjducharme OK thanks for the information, the reason there is pressure for me on saving them is 1. all the errors on import I'm having. I figure I might be able to fix what causing them in finale. But if you watched the whole video we can see I lost 50% of all my notes importing a newly created MusicXML 4.0 from Finale. 2. I do change my pieces at times for groups. 3. I was working on a big refresh of my scores and parts for a digital distribution system I was building. Plus some deadlines for getting new pieces out will be impacted learning new software. It is quite stressful.
Oh for goodness sake MuseScore is just not in the same league as Dorico Pro
No, not yet but it’s come along way and for some people that may be all they need. As you can see in the video actually handled import one of my pieces better than Dorico. Dorico lost half the composition ua-cam.com/video/2E3PO8-elcg/v-deo.htmlsi=VX2JvoMp9RgnA6N2&t=1002 so it seems I’m going to have to export it from Musescore to be able to import it into Dorico. Plus there is lots of active development on it so it is something to keep your eye on.
@@Music-from-Humans I've seen this before quite a few times with Dorico MusicXML import, and this is the biggest issue that I've had with the import. The cause of this is certain tuplets, particularly cases where you have tuplets in a multiple-voice texture on a single staff/instrument like double-stemmed writing in piano or divided strings with independent lines (or woodwind parts where they were manually condensed onto one stave in the original software). Tuplets with one voice come across OK, and multiple-voice texture comes across OK, but multiple voices and tuplets at the same time often create issues and this prevents Dorico from importing any notes after the problematic tuplet, then you end up with a score with no notes after that point. The workaround at the moment is to delete the problematic tuplet, or change the engraving of it in the original program so that you split off the extra voice onto another staff so you only need one voice per staff, prior to exporting with MusicXML, and then correct the problematic passage once it is imported into Dorico.
When bringing MusicXML into Dorico, always check the original score for any cases where you have two voices on one staff at the same time, with tuplets in one or both voices, as there is a good chance that Dorico will trip up in that spot and not import anything later in the piece after that (aside from the text labels).
Bringing the MusicXML into another program as an in-between step helps with some things, but my experience is not good with this with these types of multiple voice issues with tuplets. I usually find that re-exporting from the intermediate program like MuseScore has this same problem.
@@Music-from-Humans ua-cam.com/video/NAiiyDdiMFo/v-deo.htmlsi=d9U9psEBnqL-Rhmr
ua-cam.com/users/livejhguCdTeq0E?si=xqc6Tx_IF4VCqckV
Dont be so dismissive. Yes atm its punching above its weight. Buts id say its very much in the league. Look how much progress they have made in 5 years and now the aquasition of hal leonard. They seem to have the desire, the leadership and community passion to keep doing great things for many years to come. And the low barrier of entry in terms of financial and time cost to get started is always going to make it compelling for the future generaton of composers. Then there is the issue that being open source, even if Muse group folds tommorrow, as long as people are interested in it, it will keep going. So this situation will most likely never happen again with Musescore.