Dorico

[kpc]

Well, the cat is out of the bag - kind of. The new notation app from the makers of the original Sibelius have an announcement. I have been following along with their blog and anxiously awaiting news of its release. Seems like they are getting close.

I beta tested for many version of Sibelius before they were purchased ruined by Avid. I am very curious to see how this new notation app holds up. From what little I have heard, it is going to be really great right out of the gate. I know the former Sibelius guys have been working hard to make it a great version 1.

Dorico

[Daryl]

I think that there will be limitations in feature set. It is almost impossible that it will be as fully featured as SIbelius in V1, but it will have features that no other program has and certainly for me, dumping Sibelius for Dorico is something of a no-brainer.

[Marius]

Nice to see some concrete info at long last. If nothing else I'm excited to see a notation package that's built fresh, without the cruft of decades of old code being dragged along.

[Daryl]

I think that for many, the best bit will be the performance on Mac. Both Sibelius and Finale are slow as molasses.

[Guy Rowland]

What surprised me when I talked to someone at Steinberg about this a few months ago is that it doesn't interface directly with Cubendo. You'd think it could import tracks couldn't you? Ah well, this has a lot of talent behind it and goodwill for it, here's hoping it delivers on what folks want.

[Daryl]

What surprised me when I talked to someone at Steinberg about this a few months ago is that it doesn't interface directly with Cubendo. You'd think it could import tracks couldn't you?.

It was never designed to that or anything like that in V1. I'm sure there will be some way of importing audio, just like there is with Sibelius, but for more advanced audio related stuff we'll just have to wait.

[Guy Rowland]

What surprised me when I talked to someone at Steinberg about this a few months ago is that it doesn't interface directly with Cubendo. You'd think it could import tracks couldn't you?.

It was never designed to that or anything like that in V1. I'm sure there will be some way of importing audio, just like there is with Sibelius, but for more advanced audio related stuff we'll just have to wait.

I meant midi tracks, not audio. It's hardly the end of the world to have to export from Cubase first, but at least being able to import a midi track from Cubase would save a few steps. They've got the integration quite slick now between Wavelab and Cubase, so I believe.

[Daryl]

Oh, you mean a sort of drag and drop? I can see that being more of a hassle at times, unless you had already quantised it including lengths. Is this what you wanted?

Currently, the best way to get tracks into a notation program, without screwing up your playback is to use the Score to MIDI function in Cubase.

[kpc]

Here's a nice write up over at the SibeliusBlog.

http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/steinb ... n-q4-2016/

[SBmusic]

Thanks for posting that write up Kayle. This got me very excited about this release. I like the "players" concept for instrument doublers. Linked dynamics sounds like a great time saver. And a piano roll that allows you to adjust the playback of the written notes? Sounds like we might be able to make a pretty decent mockup without ever leaving the program. The only downside is the lack of chord symbols. I hope there is some kind of work around for that. I'm not sure I will be able to completely jump ship from Sibelius since I'm not sure the team I work on will want to learn a new piece of software, but I will probably be picking this up for my own use.

I would love to beta test this software, anyone know if they are looking for beta testers?

[Daryl]

. The only downside is the lack of chord symbols. I hope there is some kind of work around for that. I'm not sure I will be able to completely jump ship from Sibelius since I'm not sure the team I work on will want to learn a new piece of software, but I will probably be picking this up for my own use.

Chord symbols are planned. It's just that they may not make the V1 release. However, there will be several (free) updates in the few months after released, so I would imagine that one of those would give you chord symbols.

I'm sure that no team will want to learn to use a new bit of software, but when they find out how many days of their lives they can save, I'm sure that most will change their minds.

[wst3]

My original thought, way back when it was first announced, was that I've been using Finale for far too long to ever consider switching.

These early reports make me think that I need to be more open minded about such things. There are some really exciting bits in there!

[Daryl]

My original thought, way back when it was first announced, was that I've been using Finale for far too long to ever consider switching.

These early reports make me think that I need to be more open minded about such things. There are some really exciting bits in there!

I've been using Sibelius since 1993, and I'm already sold on Dorico.

[wst3]

My original thought, way back when it was first announced, was that I've been using Finale for far too long to ever consider switching.

These early reports make me think that I need to be more open minded about such things. There are some really exciting bits in there!

I've been using Sibelius since 1993, and I'm already sold on Dorico.

Yeah, I'm not sold, but I am sold on checking it out, which surprised me - I'm generally not a fan of switching platforms, there has to be a really compelling reason. But the more I think about their approach to storing and representing the data the more I think they may just have the answer. And if it works I like it a whole lot better than my solution, which was to use MusicXML and rule sets to move the data between scoring and sequencing environments.

I will be downloading the trial version as soon as it is available, and I've rearranged my studio budget to make room, just in case.

I will have to keep Finale around until the decide to support guitar, but that's ok, can't remember the last time I both notated and sequenced a guitar part - always one or the other, and usually just notation.

[Daryl]

Yeah, I'm not sold, but I am sold on checking it out, which surprised me - I'm generally not a fan of switching platforms, there has to be a really compelling reason.

Understandably, but then again I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you prepare that many hours of full orchestral material a year, so our end uses are very different.

[Ashermusic]

I've been using Sibelius since 1993, and I'm already sold on Dorico.

Such a Steinberg slut

[Daryl]

I would say it's more a Sibelius slut, considering that the Dorico team is actually the ex-Sibelius team..! Steinberg hardly gets a look in these days, as I spend more time in Sibelius and Pro Tools (pause for spitting).

[Ashermusic]

I would say it's more a Sibelius slut, considering that the Dorico team is actually the ex-Sibelius team..! Steinberg hardly gets a look in these days, as I spend more time in Sibelius and Pro Tools (pause for spitting).

'

My bad, I thought that you were primarily a Cueball....,err,....Cubase guy.

[Daryl]

My bad, I thought that you were primarily a Cueball....,err,....Cubase guy.

To be fair, if I had to lower myself to using samples, I would be using Nuendo, so you have a point. I also have a lack of hair, so maybe you have another point...

[Ashermusic]

My bad, I thought that you were primarily a Cueball....,err,....Cubase guy.

To be fair, if I had to lower myself to using samples, I would be using Nuendo, so you have a point. I also have a lack of hair, so maybe you have another point...

Lack of hair? That would be the pot calling the kettle black. I look a lot like Larry David.

[Daryl]

Lack of hair? That would be the pot calling the kettle black. I look a lot like Larry David.

So that's what's going on under the hat.

[wst3]

Yeah, I'm not sold, but I am sold on checking it out, which surprised me - I'm generally not a fan of switching platforms, there has to be a really compelling reason.

Understandably, but then again I don't think (correct me if I'm wrong) that you prepare that many hours of full orchestral material a year, so our end uses are very different.

I use notation several ways...

I might prepare a score and parts for a project, usually the 'soundtrack' for a live theatre presentation. When I'm lucky these are still played by real live, breathing musicians. As good as it gets!

However, that isn't several times a year, or even every year anymore...

So mostly I use notation as a writing tool. I'll compose in Finale, and then when it is time to render a mock-up or even the finished track I'll export MIDI or XML to Sonar or Studio One. One transfer is usually enough for me<G>. Sometimes I do end up finishing the score in Finale, which means I either have to go back and make any changes a second time (painful) or I have to import the MIDI data and clean it up (also painful.)

I think that the answer is separating performance data from presentation data, and that appears to be the direction that Dorico is taking. The use of rule sets is simply too complex, and too personalized maybe.

Oddly, while it is important to have good readable parts, I'm not spending a lot of time with the finer details. Well, sometimes I do<G>, but mostly I need to get the notes write, and readable, and the rehearsal marks, comments, and the like readable, and I'm happy. And Finale does that for me - although it hasn't always been easy!

[Daryl]

Oddly, while it is important to have good readable parts, I'm not spending a lot of time with the finer details. Well, sometimes I do<G>, but mostly I need to get the notes write, and readable, and the rehearsal marks, comments, and the like readable, and I'm happy. And Finale does that for me - although it hasn't always been easy!

Yes, and this is what I'm expecting Dorico to make much quicker and easier. There are so currently many compromises that one has to make for quick part prep, and I don't like it. I'm sure that not all of what I'm used to will be there (I don't think Comments is), but the rest will save so much time that I don't care...!

[Lawrence]

I would like a combination of MIDI import and artificial intelligence that takes really great guesses as to how you want the part actually played (note lengths, etc.) . Smart interpretation of MIDI data like Dragon does with text. The closer to perfect it gets, the less time I have to spend fussing over a MIDI part, the happier I'll be.

[Daryl]

I would like a combination of MIDI import and artificial intelligence that takes really great guesses as to how you want the part actually played (note lengths, etc.) . Smart interpretation of MIDI data like Dragon does with text. The closer to perfect it gets, the less time I have to spend fussing over a MIDI part, the happier I'll be.

As long as one can switch it off, that's fine by me.