I am a professional trombone player and private lesson teacher in the DFW area. Everytime I have ever tried to discuss, with a MakeMusic customer rep at midwest or TMEA, why smartmusic does not cater more to the professional player crowd I have always been met with arrogance and dismissal. This "new smartmusic" seems to be more of the same. There is even less quality repertoire on here for trombone, in addition to the quality of the piano parts being garbage. Can someone explain to me why the company that makes Finale, with all of their sound libraries, chooses to use a piano sound that is worse than anything I would use on finale? I am speaking specifically about the Bordogni/Rochut accompaniments. The old Smartmusic sound files had sustains, rubato, and surprise, surprise DYNAMICS. The sounds on this new one are horrible. 

I honestly have no idea why I am leaving this note because band directors will continue to give them money for a horrible product. Nothing will change until someone comes up with something better. 


  • Avatar
    Cece Worrall
    Dear SmartMusic/MakeMusic,
    Your SmartMusic online backing tracks are pretty "hokey" and stiff. I can't articulate how sad I am that Classic Smart Music is going away. It was such an important tool when working with students. The backing tracks were so much more "human" on the classic version. 
    Using the latest piano track K313 for flute, Mozart the feel is stiff and the instrument quality of the piano is edgy and bright. Also the flute trills represented on the solo track is scary.  There are better flute samples that can be used and to have students try to learn from and emulate those flute trills, one word -- UGH! If that is a word!
    SmartMusic has taken a huge step back. Will you please consider bringing back Smart Music Classic. I'd be more than happy to pay more for this great tool that I know I can use the subscription fee as a write off. 
    I hope there are others writing in requesting SmartMusic Classic to come back. 
    PS: LOVED and MISS the backing tracks for all the advanced solo pieces. Why are they re-inventing the wheel? It was great. So sad!!!!


    Edited by Cece Worrall
  • Avatar

    I agree with you totally. As a private wind teacher, I didn't need all the classroom functions. I opted for the $40 version. The sight reading exercises were fantastic, but they MakeMusic said they would not include it with the New SmartMusic subscription unless I enrolled as a teacher for $80. I was willing to do that, so I downloaded the trial to test it out. My wife, who also teaches with SmartMusic, tried the trial. Neither of us could get anything to open up. Understanding that this is now internet based, I checked my internet speed and it was very good. Still, all of our mp3 files, all of our methods, all of the solo accompaniments we had in our libraries were all gone. I've used SmartMusic since the Vivace days in the 1990s. It is sad to see such a great teaching tool disappearing. And the company could care less.


  • Avatar

    I totally agree and there was nothing really wrong with the old interface.   I have sent them many emails about 440 is not the only standard around.  Many of my friends use 442 for their bands.   The old smartmusic would even handle the old lower Baroque tuning.   There are times I need to work with 446 and many would think why.  Lets just say the new version needs to be tunable.   The new interface is not easy to find things.  The old version seemed to work well for the beginner all the way to a professional.   I guess they are using college kids to do the arrangements and scan everything.

    I will send in mistakes I have found and there are things that it has been over a year and it is still not corrected.   Wrong notes and things like that.

    It seems apparent that the person who works on a solo for a certain instrument may not actually play that instrument themselves.  Case in point I find parts that will be supposedly a beginner level book but the ranges are way too high.  If that person actually played that instrument that mistake would be caught.   All some seem to know, well it is in the range of the instrument, I guess they pulled out an orchestration book on ranges and suddenly they are experts.   When my subscription runs out on the old classic I think I will too.   I am thinking if they do not fix this they will be hard press to get this going.   We shall see.  

    John G.

Post is closed for comments.