Questions from a prospective buyer

Ah, it seems like the "Overview" page it's only available in Pro. I'd been looking for it, but Sparks only has a very small set of parameters. Then I guess I'll have to find a workaround in the short term for when I get Sparks, until I can afford an upgrade. Not a deal breaker.

Yes, that is helping.

Though I must say, by this point, my head is starting to explode from how complex the software is. I can wrap my head around how figures work and the various elements of harmony (like the horizontal and vertical scales). But as I tried to (re)create a complex chord progression and some figures loosely based on an example piece from a course I'm following, the output is going all over the place. Even basic neighbor tone or arpeggio figures in the melody often don't line up as I desire them to. I assume it has to do with parameters like "Interpretation", and the underlying scales that might be different per chord, but trying to follow this is where my head feels like it'll explode. Lots of experimentation with Interpretation doesn't affect the output at all (I guess it also has to do with the instrument, if I read the manual correctly).

I've had some fun and "luck" just putting some figures and chords together, but trying to do anything more "directed" to what I want to write causes me to fiddle around with things and never getting anywhere productive (and even then it relies on things only available in Pro).

In one way, I feel like I'm going against the flow of the software, trying to make it do what I specifically want rather than letting it do what it wants. I know the learning curve is steep. But it means I don't entirely know what I'm doing, and therefore makes it hard to ask the right questions. It also makes me feel like that for my workflow I can only use it for some basic sketching and prototyping, before going into my main composing software (Dorico) to actually write the sketch. And that makes me weary of investing that much money into it, especially considering Sparks seems to be quite basic.

I guess what I'm really looking for, as far as I can define it, is what Synfire does "under the hood" so that I can better anticipate how a figure and harmony is interpreted.

Thank you so much!

I can see how this requires a different mindset than what (most) composers are used to. But in a positive way, at least for me.

Passing tones are controlled by Interpretation's strategy. A green symbol should render a chord tone no matter what (maybe there's a bug, I will check).

It wasn't a green chord symbol. I just drew a three-note figure with the blue horizontal symbol, with the middle note one step down. When rendered, the third note was not the same as the first, and the second was not one step down (a neighbor). I assumed it was because of voice leading, but many things I tried with Interpretation didn't get it to work right.

In any case, I feel like at this point, especially with the more limited Sparks version, I can use Synfire to quickly outline an arrangement and iterate on it with basic figures and accompaniment patterns. I can definitely see the incredible potential to quickly work out ideas and settle on a broad but good sounding sketch. And then I will just use it as a rough sketch to write the actual composition in either my notation software or DAW, where I will add more detail (like neighbor or additional passing tones, which are usually embellishments anyway). In case something doesn't work well while orchestrating it, I can always go back to Synfire to refine the sketch, which is faster and easier, and then continue.

I think that's a decent potential workflow, at least as a starting point until I've climbed the learning curve hill and can afford an upgrade. Still need to explore the trial further before I make a final decision, but after this I feel hopeful.

Again, thanks for the pointers, I'm very grateful for the help thus far.

Well, that's pretty cool actually. Saves me a headache to analyze and memorize every scale, and speed up sketching and iteration. Which is exactly what I was looking for. Learning music theory only gets me so far; recalling everything to know what to do for a specific composition is part of why I struggle to write anything more than a basic 8-bar melody with sustained block chords. One reason I looked around and found Synfire.

On a different note, I've heard about that in certain musical styles, predominantly film music where traditional structure is less significant and functional harmony can therefore be less important, the composer often creates a chord progression based around other patterns like planing or moving by thirds. Can Synfire do this in a convenient way (like, say, by customizing Scales/Palettes), or would it still require one to pick the chords deliberately?

Nice, thanks.

I also reread parts of the manual, especially "Fine Tuning Interpretation", and things make a lot more sense. Going to try and sketch something more specific to see if I can make something cool. That should be enough to make the final decision.

Now I'm curious how to allow for accidentals, though I assume that since Interpretation features are limited in Sparks this isn't as easy, or possible at all. I tried everything I could think of, but the figure still snaps to the nearest scale or chord note.

And by extension (no pun intended), how to make sure that when using the chord symbol with extended chords in the progression, it will only use base chord notes when drawing three-note segments (triads). According to the manual on fine tuning Interpretation, using extensions would "extend" the vertical scale so figures can use those notes too. But in some cases I would only want the melody to use the extensions, while the underlying chords should stick to the triads.