# Sibelius vs Dorico in 2022



## Electric Lion

Are there any Sibelius users here that still prefer Sibelius after trying Dorico? I'm not talking about familiarity reasons like memorized key commands but actual features or things you can do better in Sibelius than in Dorico? I'm likely going to be purchasing Dorico Pro after completing my trial period and I'm wondering if there is any real reason to give Sibelius a try too or to just go ahead with Dorico.

Thanks


----------



## Daniel S.

Dorico's product manager here, so I'm certainly not impartial, though given that in the past I was also Sibelius's product manager, I'm pretty well-informed about the strengths and weaknesses of both applications.

I would guess that since you're a denizen of this forum, being able to achieve decent-sounding playback is reasonably important to you. In that area, I don't think Sibelius has anything to commend it above Dorico. NotePerformer is compatible with both applications and sounds pretty much the same in both (with a few notable exceptions, such as glissandos, which work in Sibelius but not yet in Dorico). Sibelius's built-in sounds are more extensive than Dorico's, but I don't think this really amounts to Sibelius sounding any better than Dorico out of the box.

Where Dorico leaps past Sibelius in terms of playback is in areas such as support for other virtual instruments, MIDI editing capability, and use of effects. Sibelius has nothing comparable to Dorico's Key Editor. Sibelius's Mixer is not as flexible as Dorico's, and Sibelius comes with no effects plug-ins nor really any meaningful way to use them.

In terms of note input and editing features, Sibelius is much more constraining than Dorico. In particular, Dorico's handling of rhythm, and the ways in which you can modify, rework, expand, contract, re-bar etc. your music, is streets ahead of Sibelius. Dorico's intelligent beat grouping ensures that the rhythm is always notated clearly, no matter what manipulations you put it through. You'll need to proof-read less with parts produced in Dorico.

The quality of Dorico's default output is also considerably superior to Sibelius. You get scores and parts out of Dorico that need almost no tweaking. Dorico's rhythmic spacing is more refined, and its music looks better proportioned and balanced on the page by default. Dorico also has a pretty sophisticated DTP-style system of frames and page templates, which Sibelius has nothing like.

Sibelius still has the edge (for now) in areas like producing cut-away scores and faking various graphic notations, but these advantages are slender and it will be much easier for Dorico to close the gaps in this area than it will be for Sibelius to catch up in all of the areas in which it is currently deficient.

Sibelius provides no project management features, and doesn't even handle works in multiple sections/movements within the same file particularly well. Dorico's Setup mode provides you with many advantages in terms of being able to make large- and small-scale tweaks to your project, such as easily moving a doubling instrument to another player, re-ordering movements, creating multiple part and score layouts with different combinations of movements and players, and so on.

And Avid will these days try to push you very hard to take a subscription rather than buy a perpetual license, which may or may not be to your liking. If you don't have a perpetual license, if your subscription lapses, you lose all but read only access to your projects. If you buy a perpetual license, you still need to keep your "support plan" current on an annual basis unless you want to buy a costly "reinstatement" package when you later need to move up to the current version.

Dorico is simpler: buy the current version, receive free maintenance updates to that version, decide when you want to buy an update. We'll provide free support to you even if you're not on the latest version, and you will in any case be able to get super-fast help and support from our forum.

That's my (completely biased) view. Happy to answer any other questions you might have.


----------



## Electric Lion

Thank you Daniel. One thing I must say is how impressed I am with support from the Dorico team. No matter how far down the rabbit hole I go into obscure forums or Youtube comment sections there you are answering questions. (How does he do it???) I feel like if I was lost in the desert with no way to call for help I could just shout out a question about Dorico and you would immediately pop out from under a cactus lol.

Seriously though I've never seen that from any company before and it is immensely impressive and reassuring.


----------



## ed buller

so far this year I've got about 7 people to switch. None regret it, in fact anything but. The things you can do with Dorico leave Sibelius standing

best

e


----------



## tressie5

Before and after shots of a composer waiting for Notion 6 or Forte to get some love from VI-C.


----------



## Piotrek K.

I think going Sibelius in 2022 is like forcing yourself to time traveling - the bad kind of time travelling though, you know, you end up in alternate version of 1989 where steam engines are still THE thing. I trialed Finale and Sibelius before I chose Dorico - I started on Dorico 2, some time later 3 appeared so I upgraded, and when the best changes happened with 4 I sold it as I felt that I'm on a subscription and decided to focus on DAW. Saying that Dorico is imo a new standard for notation except for default playback, because this one is crap. But outside of that it is extremely powerful, with great VST integrations and a DAW-like workflow, awesome note transformation features, super sweet note insertion, shortcuts for everything etc. I may come back when version 5 hits in an unknown future.

I think you can trial Finale, Sibelius, so just do it. And then go back to Dorico and compare.

PS.
Notice that there is close to no screenshots of UI on Avid / Sibelius site. There is a reason for that ;D


----------



## Robin

One thing to consider unfortunately still is industry compatibility. Especially in the scoring world established working methods are hard to break up because many professionals don't have the time to retool.
I'm all into Dorico and love it and when I write or do lead orchestration I'm happily using it exclusively on these jobs. However I'm still regularly forced to use Sibelius when I'm for instance part of an orchestration team because that is just still the default of the industry. Unfortunately still to a degree where it is simply assumed that you work on either Sibelius or Finale.
I know that Dorico is slowly but surely making grounds in this field but my assumption is that it will take a few more years until the industry adapts more to it.

If you are free to choose and only want to use it for your own stuff, there really is no need to still consider Sibelius. 98% of what you need to do on a daily basis can be done better in Dorico. And the remaining 2% are likely to follow sooner than later, considering Dorico being the only software that is being actively developed while Sibelius barely does more than cosmetics on each update.


----------



## Inventio

I have not written much contemporary concert music in Dorico yet (surely nothing graphical or particularly "avangarde" or spectralist etc.) but I must say that Dorico has reduced the time I spent in many areas of the work by two thirds, to me. It's the first software I encounter that does this to my worflow.

For example as said parts that come out almost effortlessy, but also inputting notes, polyphonic writing and so on... 
Plus MIDI import is a huge time-saving feature if you start a mockup in a DAW and then you need to produce the score.


----------



## bryla

I have used Sibelius for 17 years and Dorico since it came out and I fully agree with Daniel and Robin. My reason for not using Dorico only is that I regularly need the last 2% that Sibelius can do, that Dorico can't. 
I really like that Dorico is much smarter but it also makes it less able to be wrangled to do things it isn't supposed to. Sibelius is more flexible in that regard and I assume Finale is the most flexible of the three and in that regard it makes sense that people that started with Finale, built their workflow to make it do exactly what they need, both Sibelius and Dorico are not really viable options.


----------



## pefra

Daniel S. said:


> Dorico's product manager here, so I'm certainly not impartial, though given that in the past I was also Sibelius's product manager, I'm pretty well-informed about the strengths and weaknesses of both applications.
> 
> I would guess that since you're a denizen of this forum, being able to achieve decent-sounding playback is reasonably important to you. In that area, I don't think Sibelius has anything to commend it above Dorico. NotePerformer is compatible with both applications and sounds pretty much the same in both (with a few notable exceptions, such as glissandos, which work in Sibelius but not yet in Dorico). Sibelius's built-in sounds are more extensive than Dorico's, but I don't think this really amounts to Sibelius sounding any better than Dorico out of the box.
> 
> Where Dorico leaps past Sibelius in terms of playback is in areas such as support for other virtual instruments, MIDI editing capability, and use of effects. Sibelius has nothing comparable to Dorico's Key Editor. Sibelius's Mixer is not as flexible as Dorico's, and Sibelius comes with no effects plug-ins nor really any meaningful way to use them.
> 
> In terms of note input and editing features, Sibelius is much more constraining than Dorico. In particular, Dorico's handling of rhythm, and the ways in which you can modify, rework, expand, contract, re-bar etc. your music, is streets ahead of Sibelius. Dorico's intelligent beat grouping ensures that the rhythm is always notated clearly, no matter what manipulations you put it through. You'll need to proof-read less with parts produced in Dorico.
> 
> The quality of Dorico's default output is also considerably superior to Sibelius. You get scores and parts out of Dorico that need almost no tweaking. Dorico's rhythmic spacing is more refined, and its music looks better proportioned and balanced on the page by default. Dorico also has a pretty sophisticated DTP-style system of frames and page templates, which Sibelius has nothing like.
> 
> Sibelius still has the edge (for now) in areas like producing cut-away scores and faking various graphic notations, but these advantages are slender and it will be much easier for Dorico to close the gaps in this area than it will be for Sibelius to catch up in all of the areas in which it is currently deficient.
> 
> Sibelius provides no project management features, and doesn't even handle works in multiple sections/movements within the same file particularly well. Dorico's Setup mode provides you with many advantages in terms of being able to make large- and small-scale tweaks to your project, such as easily moving a doubling instrument to another player, re-ordering movements, creating multiple part and score layouts with different combinations of movements and players, and so on.
> 
> And Avid will these days try to push you very hard to take a subscription rather than buy a perpetual license, which may or may not be to your liking. If you don't have a perpetual license, if your subscription lapses, you lose all but read only access to your projects. If you buy a perpetual license, you still need to keep your "support plan" current on an annual basis unless you want to buy a costly "reinstatement" package when you later need to move up to the current version.
> 
> Dorico is simpler: buy the current version, receive free maintenance updates to that version, decide when you want to buy an update. We'll provide free support to you even if you're not on the latest version, and you will in any case be able to get super-fast help and support from our forum.
> 
> That's my (completely biased) view. Happy to answer any other questions you might have.



Hello Daniel,

user's question was: "Are there any Sibelius users here that still prefer Sibelius after trying Dorico?"

With emphasis on users. While I definitely appreciate that PMs write in these forum's, and I always absolutely enjoyed the way you interact with forum members, I am a bit on the edge about you jumping in at the first post after the OP and delivering argument after argument pro Dorico. As a user who has been watching and reading in VI-Control for years but only started to post myself not long ago let me say that I feel a bit uneasy about this.

Your judgement of Sib vs. Dorico may be different from a user's view, given the position you have now and the underlying (ex-)changes that have been happening between the two companies. Yes, you clearly stated that you are biased, and your technical points do absolutely stand, but still...

I would have enjoyed your post more had it come at a later point in the discussion.


----------



## Inventio

bryla said:


> I have used Sibelius for 17 years and Dorico since it came out and I fully agree with Daniel and Robin. My reason for not using Dorico only is that I regularly need the last 2% that Sibelius can do, that Dorico can't.
> I really like that Dorico is much smarter but it also makes it less able to be wrangled to do things it isn't supposed to. Sibelius is more flexible in that regard and I assume Finale is the most flexible of the three and in that regard it makes sense that people that started with Finale, built their workflow to make it do exactly what they need, both Sibelius and Dorico are not really viable options.


I think you summed it up very well, Thomas.


----------



## stigc56

Hi
I have been with Finale from 1996 and to 2004, then Sibelius and Dorico since day one - version 1. Right now I prepare a score for a musical, and the contractor need the score in Sibelius. So all my work is done in Dorico and the exported as XML to Sibelius. A musical with around 40 numbers is a challenge in Sibelius, because it means 40 files! In Dorico it's one file. That means a lot to me, when I need to edit ex. a layout detail. And the time spend in Sibelius to make a decent layout simply ruins my business, where in Dorico I go from editing to the final result VERY fast. I still have a license for both Finale and Sibelius, but to me Dorico is superior, unless you need some of the features that Daniel and Bryla mention.


----------



## stigc56

pefra said:


> Hello Daniel,
> 
> user's question was: "Are there any Sibelius users here that still prefer Sibelius after trying Dorico?"
> 
> With emphasis on users. While I definitely appreciate that PMs write in these forum's, and I always absolutely enjoyed the way you interact with forum members, I am a bit on the edge about you jumping in at the first post after the OP and delivering argument after argument pro Dorico. As a user who has been watching and reading in VI-Control for years but only started to post myself not long ago let me say that I feel a bit uneasy about this.
> 
> Your judgement of Sib vs. Dorico may be different from a user's view, given the position you have now and the underlying (ex-)changes that have been happening between the two companies. Yes, you clearly stated that you are biased, and your technical points do absolutely stand, but still...
> 
> I would have enjoyed your post more had it come at a later point in the discussion.


I welcome the posts from Daniel, since he has a completely unique knowledge of BOTH applications. Thats hard to get from anyone but him.


----------



## pefra

stigc56 said:


> I welcome the posts from Daniel, since he has a completely unique knowledge of BOTH applications. Thats hard to get from anyone but him.


So do I! Still I found this to be a bit too much on the marketing side of the story. But that's just me.

Have fun


----------



## JohannesR

pefra said:


> So do I! Still I found this to be a bit too much on the marketing side of the story. But that's just me.
> 
> Have fun


His post is 100% transparent, I can’t see any problem with it!


----------



## pefra

One point I would keep in mind is the question where we are headed with all these programs. Feature wise you shouldn't have a problem with Sibelius and also not with Dorico. If you want a program with a proper development team and a robust roadmap for the near future I would go with Dorico. But in the end it also depends on what you need the program for. If it's you and nobody else you can happily go with Dorico. The moment you start interacting with colleagues, publishers or studios that might be different. Same old story with Cubase (DP, Logic etc whatever) vs. Pro Tools. You can do all your work in Cubase (like a very famous bunch of composers does) but in the end it will be ProTools.
Same with Dorico vs. the usual suspects. I'm pretty sure that will change in the future, it might take a while, but I'm sure Dorico will take over. So...

I'm personally still on the edge, I'm still with Sibelius and this is, amongst other reasons, because I like it. I don't like Avid, but I like the program. Software can have a look and feel that moves you, or it doesn't. After so many years it's hard to let go. So there is definitely more to the story than just features.

Have fun!


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

pefra said:


> So do I! Still I found this to be a bit too much on the marketing side of the story. But that's just me.
> 
> Have fun


And not to forget: Daniel is not just a marketing guy who gets paid for raving on a product. He is the mastermind behind Sibelius and Dorico who knows probably more about the topic of notation than we all together. So him participating on the forum is a big win for all of us IMO. I don't know of any other premium software where we have access to the creators like this. Do we? 
Him being the first to answer to me shows that he is passionate about it which is a good sign for the future I'd say.


----------



## pefra

Fine


----------



## Electric Lion

bryla said:


> I regularly need the last 2% that Sibelius can do, that Dorico can't.


Can you be specific about what that is? This is what I want to know.

Thanks.


----------



## bryla

Electric Lion said:


> Can you be specific about what that is? This is what I want to know.
> 
> Thanks.


The last thing I remember was a project I was both composing and orchestrating so I thought I would give Dorico a try. The project demanded 4-way divisi in each string section and I simply wanted the staff label to say "Vln. I" when unison and "Vln. I / div." (with / being a line break) when divided and only have two staves each divided without the numbering of divisions (1. 2. 3. 4.). Because Dorico tries to know what you want it doesn't let you wrangle it. I spent waaaay to much time trying to figure it out. In the end I should have not used the divisi function and instead fake it. I thought that the meaning of the divisi function was to do these kinds of situations though.


----------



## ScoringFilm

Electric Lion said:


> Are there any Sibelius users here that still prefer Sibelius after trying Dorico?


Short answer yes! Simply because I've been using it over 20 years which gives me speed of use rather than learning a new product, also sharing of scores is easier as most of my fellow composers are still using Sibelius. With the addition of the new Graphical Midi Tools (GMT) I can now do all the midi tweaking.






Graphical MIDI Tools 2: Plugin for Sibelius


This plugin adds a piano roll to Sibelius allowing you to edit MIDI (CC automation curves, velocities and notes) and create great sounding scores.




www.graphicalmiditools.com





That is not to say that I won't switch to Dorico; once it's more mature and the niggles below are addressed.

My (subjective) long answer (from my other post on the subject):

*Dorico Positives:*

Audio latency is significantly better than Sibelius.

VST 3 support

There are CC and keyboard editors; although it would be nice to be able to view more than one automation lane at a time.

The initial setup is relatively simple (i.e. route midi channel 1 of the mixer to midi channel 1 of the sampler without complex Sibelius soundsets); however see below!

*Dorico Negatives:*

There is (an acknowledged) bug which means that occasionally the audio only plays out of one channel, or complete audio feedback overload.

The playback appears to be streamlined for Halion, however this doesn't help if you want to use other VST instruments/samplers:

Dorico's instrument mixer (unlike Sibelius/Finale etc) is based on audio rather than midi; it requires that the instrument on channel 1 is on audio out 1, channel 2 on audio out 2 etc. This means that, if like me you load several instruments into one instance of Kontakt, you have to setup a separate output for every instrument to get it to solo/mute/fade (audio).

There is a workaround for NotePerformer here:








Playback Template: Individual Mixer channels for NotePerformer


Hi all, I’m attaching a Playback Template that creates separate outputs / mixer channels for all NotePerformer instruments that show up in Dorico’s Project Templates. To do this without overloading the system, all the endpoints have the Instrument and Master reverb settings set to 0. Reverb...




forums.steinberg.net





You can solo the midi on the score page by selecting the notes you want to hear, but there is no way to mute/solo on the midi mixer (this would also be a nice addition).

Percussion staves are split into separate instruments/notes in the midi mixer - probably useful once time is spent programming, however would be nice to be able to turn off and keep the perc clef (but have one fader in the midi mixer).

It would be useful to be able to group instruments into families for audio fx/balance etc (maybe you can, I have just not discovered it yet!).

Getting VST2 plugins to be whitelisted (allowed) is a pollava as they keep moving back to the blacklisted (blocked) list.

There is still a noticeable latency when using a midi keyboard to input; although not anywhere near as bad as Sibelius.


----------



## Electric Lion

bryla said:


> The last thing I remember was a project I was both composing and orchestrating so I thought I would give Dorico a try. The project demanded 4-way divisi in each string section and I simply wanted the staff label to say "Vln. I" when unison and "Vln. I / div." (with / being a line break) when divided and only have two staves each divided without the numbering of divisions (1. 2. 3. 4.). Because Dorico tries to know what you want it doesn't let you wrangle it. I spent waaaay to much time trying to figure it out. In the end I should have not used the divisi function and instead fake it. I thought that the meaning of the divisi function was to do these kinds of situations though.


Ah I see what you mean. This kind of thing was the only thing I didn't like about Dorico. It tries to be "smart" which most of the time is good I guess but it is also inflexible. It MAKES you do it its way instead of how it should be which is more of a first suggestion. This felt a bit babyish and condescending at times. Like I didn't know what I was doing and I needed the program to tell me what to do or do it for me.

For example I was regularly having trouble with the condensing/conductor view. I am *VERY* OCD about how I want every bar of every page of my score to look and often this would clash with Dorico's "opinion". Things like having 8 horns grouped up differently on each page depending on their function like in Mahler symphonies was virtually impossible for example. And weird things like me having trumpets a4 on a line and it putting 1, 2, & 4 on one staff and 3rd trumpet on a seperate staff for no reason (yes I checked for different articulations and everything, they were copy pasted and re-copy pasted just to be sure and I tried doing the reset trick too and it still did nothing). They really need a way to brute-force things onto the staves you want no matter what it "thinks" or to just simply turn this off. Maybe a button called "condense" which when you click it it could say "differences detected (and it could show you what they are so I'm not searching for something invisible or whatever) and then ask "condense anyway"? Something like this is badly needed. This was frustrating enough to make me consider abandoning the whole "players" thing altogether. 

I am someone who is primarily concerned with making highly detailed scores perfectly tailored to my sometimes idiosyncratic wants and needs and less about mockup audio libraries, automatic parts, or having things done the "conventional" way for me automatically. If Sibelius is more free in this regard which as I understand it is, it may still be worth it for me to check out and more satisfying in the long run. I hope in future updates Dorico really takes the training wheels off so to speak and lets you completely configure everything the way you want. Maybe in a different mode or something.


----------



## Bollen

Electric Lion said:


> I am someone who is primarily concerned with making highly detailed scores perfectly tailored to my sometimes idiosyncratic wants


That's me, I moved to Dorico permanently at version 2.5 (after trying to learn it since v1.5) and I have never looked back. I write a lot of avant-garde stuff with lots of graphics and extended techniques notation. But I also occasionally write Big Band stuff and so far, on the notation side, I have not found anything Dorico can't do.



ScoringFilm said:


> There is (an acknowledged) bug which means that occasionally the audio only plays out of one channel, or complete audio feedback overload.


Oh! I thought I was alone on this... Apparently they found it and a fix is coming in November.


----------



## Daniel S.

@Electric Lion, your difficulties with condensing can all be overcome. There is a button that tells Dorico exactly how to condense the music, via the Engrave > Condensing Change dialog; normally you don't need to actually go all the way in forcing the result, but simply creating a condensing change for a given condensing group at a particular point is sufficient to let Dorico know that a new phrase starts there, which will cause it to reconsider the way the music is condensed. But you can also go all the way and specify which voice on which staff should be used for each instrument in a condensing group if you want to.

There are no training wheels to remove in Dorico: the misconception that we somehow need to remove arbitrary restrictions in order to expose functionality that is somehow locked away is wrong, I'm afraid. It's just not how software works. We try to design smart solutions that meet as wide a range of user requirements as possible, and I think it's the fact that we actually try to make the software work in a smart and assistive way that makes Dorico different (and better).


----------



## Vik

I bought Dorico when it was released, since I somehow believe in the hype about Dorico was 'the new standard in scoring software'. I monitored the following released and discussion over at the Steinberg forum about all the functionality and features that were missing back then. I was so disappointed with Dorico that I felt I needed to figure out how long time it would take before most of the missing features were implemented – I even created a spreadsheet file collecting the comments from Steinberg about when, approximately, the missing stuff would be implemented. I gave up rather early and instead stopped using Dorico and stopped experimenting with Cubase. Sure, it's rather nerdy to create such a spreadsheet, but I saved a lot of time and some money by doing that,

I should, of course, not have bought version 1 of Dorico. But since the printed results look so good, and due to the fact that it exists as an iPad app, and have functions that clearly are better than competing score apps (and DAWs), I stlll consider upgrading my old version.

I haven't included my own wishes in the excerpt from my overview from the early days (see the pic should you be interested), and I assume that most of – if not all – these wishes now are in there.

Personally, I wouldn't use Dorico as my main app, so a main wish from me was ro enable ways to NOT be dependent on key commands for essential tasks – even if I mainly use key commands when I work in Logic. For instance, I missed a way to simply grab a note and transpose it or move it back/forwards in time. After 5-6 years, maybe that's in there as well.

But the main thing I had been hoping to see in Dorico was an improved version of a Sibelius function I really liked: In Sibelius, I could use a key command to transpose a note up or down (eg. a semitone), and when doing that, Sibelius would play that transposed note _in context – meaning that it wouldn't only play that single note if was part of a chord, it would play the transposed note and the other chord notes simultaneously. In Sibelius, IIRR, this would (back then) work for all notes in the same clef/stave, but not for a chord that was spread over the bass and treble clefs when appearing as a Piano staff style. Has that, by any chance, been implemented yet?



_


----------



## Daniel S.

The only things from your spreadsheet list that aren't yet implemented are direct support for music scanning in Dorico itself (though you can use any suitable third-party software for this – my own favoured solution these days is PlayScore 2), and the ability to specify that a cautionary time signature should appear at the end of a flow.

Dorico 1.0 was obviously not a mature application, but Dorico 4 is really pretty mature and has gained thousands of features over the past six years.


----------



## gzapper

I think Daniel fixed a lot of the Sibelius issues, like the ridiculous toolbar, replacing with consistent keystrokes and commands. For me its just way faster for input and editing and the project management runs more like DP, which makes it so much easier to put together a full show.

I've had some issues with some functions but find the forum and web access great. Having a developer be this active bodes really well for the future of the program.


----------



## dcoscina

The aspect I love the most about using Dorico is how I barely have to use the mouse. Almost everything I need is a shortcut key away and this increases workflow immeasurably. Of course, its playback of 3rd party VSTs is incredible (don't get me started on how bad it can be... **cough**Musescore**cough)

I'm scoring a friend's film that will require both orchestra and synths and I'm happily writing it all in Dorico. No DAWs. I've worked with him before so I don't need ultra-slick demos. Noteperformer is fine until we get to the scoring stage. He wants a Jerry Goldsmith-styled score and working in DAWS will be much too slow with mixed meters and such.


----------



## Ivan Duch

I can't compare to Sibelius since I didn't work extensively with it, but I purchased Dorico last July and I can say it completely changed my workflow for good. 

I'm still working on my own playback template and finding ways around doing as much as possible within Dorico, by submixing in VE Pro.

As @dcoscina mentions, the whole popover thing + shortcuts is amazing. I can write way faster in Dorico than in any DAW I tested, not to mention the frictionless experience helps me to focus more on the actual writing.


----------



## ChrisHarrison

Notation programs are for notation. In that regard, Dorico crushes. You can do so much in note input that others can’t. Rhythm first then notes… cmon!!!! Notes first then rhythm!!! Come oooonnn. Insert mode. It’s like… that would take foreverrrrrrr to do in other programs. For composing, it’s sooooo fun to use and creative. The midi playback options with plugins is so comprehensive too. I personally write in dorico and dump the midi to cubase and mock up there. 

The day dorico and cubase talk to each other is the day that everything else dies a quick death.


----------



## inthevoid

Robin said:


> One thing to consider unfortunately still is industry compatibility. Especially in the scoring world established working methods are hard to break up because many professionals don't have the time to retool.
> I'm all into Dorico and love it and when I write or do lead orchestration I'm happily using it exclusively on these jobs. However I'm still regularly forced to use Sibelius when I'm for instance part of an orchestration team because that is just still the default of the industry. Unfortunately still to a degree where it is simply assumed that you work on either Sibelius or Finale.
> I know that Dorico is slowly but surely making grounds in this field but my assumption is that it will take a few more years until the industry adapts more to it.
> 
> If you are free to choose and only want to use it for your own stuff, there really is no need to still consider Sibelius. 98% of what you need to do on a daily basis can be done better in Dorico. And the remaining 2% are likely to follow sooner than later, considering Dorico being the only software that is being actively developed while Sibelius barely does more than cosmetics on each update.


Echoing Robin's point here - Sibelius is still used in 100% of my work with orchestration teams. So it is absolutely worth becoming familiar with if that's something you would be interested in. The sooner the industry can adapt to Dorico the better, though! I'm using Dorico almost exclusively now for my personal notation work.

However, as bryla also mentioned, in my experience Sibelius is much easier to be 'forced' to do things that it isn't supposed to and that really does come in useful, especially on tight deadlines when you just need something unconventional on the page quickly!


----------



## Electric Lion

Daniel S. said:


> @Electric Lion, your difficulties with condensing can all be overcome. There is a button that tells Dorico exactly how to condense the music, via the Engrave > Condensing Change dialog; normally you don't need to actually go all the way in forcing the result, but simply creating a condensing change for a given condensing group at a particular point is sufficient to let Dorico know that a new phrase starts there, which will cause it to reconsider the way the music is condensed. But you can also go all the way and specify which voice on which staff should be used for each instrument in a condensing group if you want to.
> 
> There are no training wheels to remove in Dorico: the misconception that we somehow need to remove arbitrary restrictions in order to expose functionality that is somehow locked away is wrong, I'm afraid. It's just not how software works. We try to design smart solutions that meet as wide a range of user requirements as possible, and I think it's the fact that we actually try to make the software work in a smart and assistive way that makes Dorico different (and better).


Thanks for the reply. 

I'll admit I probably didn't spend enough time with figuring out that system. I only had the 30 day trial and there was tons of other stuff I wanted to focus on in that time. It's good to know that you have thought things through though.


----------



## Electric Lion

ChrisHarrison said:


> The day dorico and cubase talk to each other is the day that everything else dies a quick death.


It's also the day I finally buy cubase. Let's hope that day comes soon. That's the dream workflow.


----------



## Electric Lion

inthevoid said:


> Echoing Robin's point here - Sibelius is still used in 100% of my work with orchestration teams. So it is absolutely worth becoming familiar with if that's something you would be interested in. The sooner the industry can adapt to Dorico the better, though! I'm using Dorico almost exclusively now for my personal notation work.
> 
> However, as bryla also mentioned, in my experience Sibelius is much easier to be 'forced' to do things that it isn't supposed to and that really does come in useful, especially on tight deadlines when you just need something unconventional on the page quickly!


Yeah that's just how industries are. When I worked as a studio producer and session player 10 years ago we were all already calling Pro Tools "Old Tools". Fast forward to now and nothing has changed really. It's hard to displace an industry standard even when many better options exist. Although I think it may be easier when there is one clear better option (Dorico) as opposed to a dozen DAWs which no one can agree on.


----------



## Bollen

ChrisHarrison said:


> I personally write in dorico and dump the midi to cubase and mock up there.


That's what I used to do with Sibelius, I hated that workflow and it's the primary reason I moved to Dorico...


----------



## ChrisHarrison

Bollen said:


> That's what I used to do with Sibelius, I hated that workflow and it's the primary reason I moved to Dorico...


I still need to fine tune my vst playback in dorico. I find cubase to be way more detailed in getting the sound with the detailed cc editing. It is a pain and if I had to do a major project I still feel like I’m wayyy slow.


----------



## Daniel S.

The forthcoming Dorico 4 update (coming within the next few weeks) has a great deal more attention paid to the Key Editor to make MIDI editing feel better and more productive. This includes lots of ergonomic improvements (the ability to show multiple editors, sized however you like), workflow improvements (e.g. sensible copy and paste of MIDI data, including being able to paste to other instruments or indeed to paste values to a different controller), plus lots of powerful new features (e.g. the ability to edit controller data and velocities for multiple instruments at the same time, the ability to sync data from a primary instrument to one or more secondary ones, the powerful histogram and transform tools not only for velocities but also for MIDI CCs), and so on.

Obviously Dorico still has nothing like Cubase's Logical Editor (at least not yet!) but I hope you will find it much easier to work with the Key Editor in Dorico in the next update when it arrives.


----------



## DaddyO

Music to my ears, Daniel. Literally and figuratively.


----------



## Ivan Duch

Daniel S. said:


> The forthcoming Dorico 4 update (coming within the next few weeks) has a great deal more attention paid to the Key Editor to make MIDI editing feel better and more productive. This includes lots of ergonomic improvements (the ability to show multiple editors, sized however you like), workflow improvements (e.g. sensible copy and paste of MIDI data, including being able to paste to other instruments or indeed to paste values to a different controller), plus lots of powerful new features (e.g. the ability to edit controller data and velocities for multiple instruments at the same time, the ability to sync data from a primary instrument to one or more secondary ones, the powerful histogram and transform tools not only for velocities but also for MIDI CCs), and so on.
> 
> Obviously Dorico still has nothing like Cubase's Logical Editor (at least not yet!) but I hope you will find it much easier to work with the Key Editor in Dorico in the next update when it arrives.


That's awesome! I find myself aiming to simply export audio stems from Dorico to my DAW for mixing. Between practice and Dorico's team amazing job, I'm getting closer and closer.


----------



## ZeroZero

Electric Lion said:


> Thank you Daniel. One thing I must say is how impressed I am with support from the Dorico team. No matter how far down the rabbit hole I go into obscure forums or Youtube comment sections there you are answering questions. (How does he do it???) I feel like if I was lost in the desert with no way to call for help I could just shout out a question about Dorico and you would immediately pop out from under a cactus lol.
> 
> Seriously though I've never seen that from any company before and it is immensely impressive and reassuring.


Daniel in particular, considering how busy this man must be, is A*+++ with support. I have never posted a question on Dorico which he has not answered


----------



## Bollen

Daniel S. said:


> The forthcoming Dorico 4 update (coming within the next few weeks) has a great deal more attention paid to the Key Editor to make MIDI editing feel better and more productive. This includes lots of ergonomic improvements (the ability to show multiple editors, sized however you like), workflow improvements (e.g. sensible copy and paste of MIDI data, including being able to paste to other instruments or indeed to paste values to a different controller), plus lots of powerful new features (e.g. the ability to edit controller data and velocities for multiple instruments at the same time, the ability to sync data from a primary instrument to one or more secondary ones, the powerful histogram and transform tools not only for velocities but also for MIDI CCs), and so on.
> 
> Obviously Dorico still has nothing like Cubase's Logical Editor (at least not yet!) but I hope you will find it much easier to work with the Key Editor in Dorico in the next update when it arrives.


----------



## Thundercat

One thing I can't get past with Dorico is how counterintuitive so many operations are. The Tantacrul video from a year or two ago really nailed it for me.

I know this is subjective - some of you will immediately say it's SO INTUITIVE!!! I get it, peace.

For me, I find anytime I want to do even the most basic things, I have to google, or in my case re-google it, over and over. I'm not using it everyday - that's part of the problem admittedly - but with Sibelius, I learned it once and pretty much could use most things without constant googling.

That's me. I have bought every single version of Sibelius until Avid ate it, and now I have bought every single version of Dorico since God rested on the 7th day, so please no flames. 

I teach software for a living and for the life of me, I just can't get on with Dorico without a lot of wrangling. But I'm determined to keep using it until I can be the fanboi who says how great it is bar none hands down.

Tomorrow I meet with a wind ensemble, and they are going to rehearse a piece of music I wrote using Sibelius, and then rescored using Dorico.


----------



## Bollen

Thundercat said:


> One thing I can't get past with Dorico is how counterintuitive so many operations are. The Tantacrul video from a year or two ago really nailed it for me.


I started on Finale and then a friend introduced me to Sibelius and I learned the basics in an afternoon. That to me meant it was far more intuitive than Finale. I would love to have that experience but going to Dorico (without Sibelius in the middle) to get an objective opinion, but alas... I have since learned other programs that are incredibly unintuitive (e.g. Blender), so Dorico didn't seem too hard in that context, but after all these years I can't seem to figure out if what I'm looking for is in Notation Options or Engraving...????


----------



## Thundercat

Bollen said:


> I started on Finale and then a friend introduced me to Sibelius and I learned the basics in an afternoon. That to me meant it was far more intuitive than Finale. I would love to have that experience but going to Dorico (without Sibelius in the middle) to get an objective opinion, but alas... I have since learned other programs that are incredibly unintuitive (e.g. Blender), so Dorico didn't seem too hard in that context, but after all these years I can't seem to figure out if what I'm looking for is in Notation Options or Engraving...????


I hear you. And I'm not trying to bash Dorico AT ALL! Because I think it's a triumph.

I just don't find it intuitive, which is a shame, because the same team made Sibelius which I felt was incredibly intuitive for the most part.


----------



## pefra

Thundercat said:


> I just don't find it intuitive, which is a shame, because the same team made Sibelius which I felt was incredibly intuitive for the most part.


Finding out how to do what I wanted to do took me 20 minutes in Sibelius (I do composing, though, not engraving). Dorico? Not so... Finale? Try to have it play from a specific bar...

There are so many UX /UI specialists worldwide whose only profession is to make software usable (as in user friendly), and then Steinberg brings Dorico.


----------



## Thundercat

pefra said:


> Finding out how to do what I wanted to do took me 20 minutes in Sibelius (I do composing, though, not engraving). Dorico? Not so... Finale? Try to have it play from a specific bar...
> 
> There are so many UX /UI specialists worldwide who's only profession is to make software usable (as in user friendly), and then Steinberg brings Dorico.


To be fair, sooo many people seem to find Dorico easy and intuitive once they have mastered the keyboard shortcuts.

I feel like it should not require shortcuts to be easy to use, and I don’t find memorising a bunch of shortcuts very user friendly.

But I’m not using it everyday, and if I was, I might say how easy it was too.

Anyway I don’t want to turn this into Dorico bashing. Fact is I get better looking scores with much less fiddling than with Sibelius. And unfortunately I think the Dorico team is in love with their UI so I don’t see this changing anytime soon. The Tantacrul video was spot on.

Finale? Oh God I gave up on it 20 years ago…


----------



## cmillar

Thundercat said:


> The Tantacrul video was spot on.


I watched the Tantacrul 'Dorico interface' critique as well, and I especially agree as to where Dorico is different from Sibelius when it comes to 'Durations as King'.

I stopped using Dorico at version 3.5 after really giving 'pitch before duration' a good try, and gladly returned to Sibelius (using StreamDeck and Notation Central presets for scores/parts as well).

Sibelius lets me compose and think like a composer. If I want a tie going over a barline to a certain notelength, I write it and there it is! I don't have to spend several minutes doing 'mathmatics' trying to second guess what the notation is going to look like as I had to do in Dorico.

So, they're both great programs. But the Tantacrul video is excellent to watch.


----------



## ChrisHarrison

cmillar said:


> I watched the Tantacrul 'Dorico interface' critique as well, and I especially agree as to where Dorico is different from Sibelius when it comes to 'Durations as King'.
> 
> I stopped using Dorico at version 3.5 after really giving 'pitch before duration' a good try, and gladly returned to Sibelius (using StreamDeck and Notation Central presets for scores/parts as well).
> 
> Sibelius lets me compose and think like a composer. If I want a tie going over a barline to a certain notelength, I write it and there it is! I don't have to spend several minutes doing 'mathmatics' trying to second guess what the notation is going to look like as I had to do in Dorico.
> 
> So, they're both great programs. But the Tantacrul video is excellent to watch.


To tie a note in dorico, I believe the shortcut is letter T. 

I love the panel on the right and left. Everything you need is right there.


----------



## Daniel S.

I have never provided any kind of written response to Martin Keary's video about Dorico, and I should perhaps continue to keep my counsel. Martin's two most popular videos – his "critiques" of Sibelius and of Dorico – happen to take a big old dump on products that I have spent my entire career (such as it is!) working on, so I'm certainly not dispassionate in my response to them.

But I think it's only right to consider that the video Martin made about Dorico is not any kind of objective critique of the design of the software – or at least that to whatever extent that is true, it is undermined by the fact that it is in Martin's interest to make the video as extreme, incendiary and viral as possible. He benefits in a direct financial way (certainly in terms of Patreon income, and presumably also in terms of monetisation on YouTube) from leaning into his edgelord persona. It's also significantly undermined, no matter how much he might protest it, by the fact that he had already been in the direct employ of Muse Group for more than 6 months when he made the video. (The fact that prior to his employment at Muse Group he also made an excoriating video about MuseScore is beside the point – that is one of the main factors that led to him becoming employed there.)

And, it's worth saying, Martin didn't buy Dorico, instead asking Steinberg to provide him with a license for Dorico free of charge, which we did, and which to my recollection he does not declare in the video.

The criticism of the onboarding process for Dorico 3.1 (as it was at the time of the video's publication) was absolutely fair, and as a company we were – and are – well aware of our shortcomings in this area. We didn't need somebody to spend 25 minutes in a YouTube video to tell us that this experience needs improving.

We've done our best to make improvements in those areas, and continue to do so. In particular, the switch away from the eLicenser in Dorico 4 has removed a lot of the pain points covered in the video, and we have also been working on Steinberg Download Assistant (SDA) in order to make the initial download and install of the software easier. When you buy Dorico now, you receive a Download Access Code that you enter directly into SDA, which then shows you the specific product you've bought, and for Dorico 4, you can simply click a single "Install All" button to download and install everything that's needed with no further interaction, beyond perhaps needing to enter your computer password once.

However, much of the criticism of the note input and editing workflows in the software fails to ring true. Martin says that he used the software for some eight months before he made the video. He is an experienced composer, musician, and well attuned to the world of software, having worked for more than a decade in the field of user experience and design. As such, it is simply not credible that he would not at any point in that eight months have taken the time to learn how the software actually works, even if having done so he would prefer it to work in a different way. The several minutes he spends criticising the handling of tied notes in Dorico are particularly egregious, since there are of course designed solutions to all of those situations built into the software, and which have been there since the very start. They aren't the same solutions as those we chose to implement in Sibelius, or that MuseScore subsequently copied, but that doesn't make them bad. However, he never even presents them, instead making it appear that many input and editing operations either impossible or are at best unwieldy and awkward, when in fact they're simply done, provided you do them the way we intend.

We know that because we have tried to design new solutions from first principles in Dorico that tackle the field of music notation in a more semantic way than previous applications, its approaches often feel unfamiliar at first, particularly to those who have well-developed muscle memories for previous-generation music notation apps. But we have tried hard to make the new idioms and interactions that we have introduced work consistently so that you can apply them in lots of situations.

The video (of course) also completely misses many of Dorico's unique benefits. It doesn't have anything to say about the flexibility that its notation engine provides, in terms of being able to insert or remove music anywhere and have everything shuffle along, in terms of its automatic system for rhythmic re-notation, its native support for extended tonality, its support for automatic condensed conductors' scores, its DTP-style page layout features, its ability to handle multi-movement works in a profoundly different way to all other notation software. It doesn't even mention its system of popovers, which – like them or hate them – are one of the most "Dorico-y" things about the application. 

For better or worse, people like Martin Keary truly are "influencers". According to YouTube's statistics, more people have watched his video on Dorico than have ever downloaded the trial version, for example. And the video is referenced by somebody or reposted on social media all too often, despite being out of date and (in my opinion, at any rate) outright wrong in many respects.

It has an outsized influence on the narrative around the application, and actively dissuades people from trying it for themselves. Getting people who are already using software of a particular kind to try something new is difficult enough as it is, and videos like this make it all too easy for those people to shut themselves off to the possibility that a new application might allow them to work more efficiently, more creatively, or even simply get to the same kind of result more quickly. Instead, they can say, "Oh, that video with more than half a million views must be right", and not think any more about it.

I don't pretend that Dorico is perfect – we work hard every day to continuously improve it – but it doesn't deserve the kind of hatchet job that this video serves up.

It perhaps goes without saying, but I am much more interested in the real, lived experience of actual Dorico users who are trying to use the software to get the job done, than that of people who have a very obvious agenda against an application because of their position as head of design for a competitor, and who stand to gain in a direct, monetary way from this kind of criticism going as viral as possible, however strong their own credentials and expertise in the field of design and user experience might be.


----------



## dcoscina

Thundercat said:


> One thing I can't get past with Dorico is how counterintuitive so many operations are. The Tantacrul video from a year or two ago really nailed it for me.
> 
> I know this is subjective - some of you will immediately say it's SO INTUITIVE!!! I get it, peace.


Keep in mind he also shat on Sibelius and he was already employed by Muse Group when he did those videos. A little conflict of interest wouldn't you say?


----------



## Thundercat

Daniel S. said:


> I have never provided any kind of written response to Martin Keary's video about Dorico, and I should perhaps continue to keep my counsel. Martin's two most popular videos – his "critiques" of Sibelius and of Dorico – happen to take a big old dump on products that I have spent my entire career (such as it is!) working on, so I'm certainly not dispassionate in my response to them.
> 
> But I think it's only right to consider that the video Martin made about Dorico is not any kind of objective critique of the design of the software – or at least that to whatever extent that is true, it is undermined by the fact that it is in Martin's interest to make the video as extreme, incendiary and viral as possible. He benefits in a direct financial way (certainly in terms of Patreon income, and presumably also in terms of monetisation on YouTube) from leaning into his edgelord persona. It's also significantly undermined, no matter how much he might protest it, by the fact that he had already been in the direct employ of Muse Group for more than 6 months when he made the video. (The fact that prior to his employment at Muse Group he also made an excoriating video about MuseScore is beside the point – that is one of the main factors that led to him becoming employed there.)
> 
> And, it's worth saying, Martin didn't buy Dorico, instead asking Steinberg to provide him with a license for Dorico free of charge, which we did, and which to my recollection he does not declare in the video.
> 
> The criticism of the onboarding process for Dorico 3.1 (as it was at the time of the video's publication) was absolutely fair, and as a company we were – and are – well aware of our shortcomings in this area. We didn't need somebody to spend 25 minutes in a YouTube video to tell us that this experience needs improving.
> 
> We've done our best to make improvements in those areas, and continue to do so. In particular, the switch away from the eLicenser in Dorico 4 has removed a lot of the pain points covered in the video, and we have also been working on Steinberg Download Assistant (SDA) in order to make the initial download and install of the software easier. When you buy Dorico now, you receive a Download Access Code that you enter directly into SDA, which then shows you the specific product you've bought, and for Dorico 4, you can simply click a single "Install All" button to download and install everything that's needed with no further interaction, beyond perhaps needing to enter your computer password once.
> 
> However, much of the criticism of the note input and editing workflows in the software fails to ring true. Martin says that he used the software for some eight months before he made the video. He is an experienced composer, musician, and well attuned to the world of software, having worked for more than a decade in the field of user experience and design. As such, it is simply not credible that he would not at any point in that eight months have taken the time to learn how the software actually works, even if having done so he would prefer it to work in a different way. The several minutes he spends criticising the handling of tied notes in Dorico are particularly egregious, since there are of course designed solutions to all of those situations built into the software, and which have been there since the very start. They aren't the same solutions as those we chose to implement in Sibelius, or that MuseScore subsequently copied, but that doesn't make them bad. However, he never even presents them, instead making it appear that many input and editing operations either impossible or are at best unwieldy and awkward, when in fact they're simply done, provided you do them the way we intend.
> 
> We know that because we have tried to design new solutions from first principles in Dorico that tackle the field of music notation in a more semantic way than previous applications, its approaches often feel unfamiliar at first, particularly to those who have well-developed muscle memories for previous-generation music notation apps. But we have tried hard to make the new idioms and interactions that we have introduced work consistently so that you can apply them in lots of situations.
> 
> The video (of course) also completely misses many of Dorico's unique benefits. It doesn't have anything to say about the flexibility that its notation engine provides, in terms of being able to insert or remove music anywhere and have everything shuffle along, in terms of its automatic system for rhythmic re-notation, its native support for extended tonality, its support for automatic condensed conductors' scores, its DTP-style page layout features, its ability to handle multi-movement works in a profoundly different way to all other notation software. It doesn't even mention its system of popovers, which – like them or hate them – are one of the most "Dorico-y" things about the application.
> 
> For better or worse, people like Martin Keary truly are "influencers". According to YouTube's statistics, more people have watched his video on Dorico than have ever downloaded the trial version, for example. And the video is referenced by somebody or reposted on social media all too often, despite being out of date and (in my opinion, at any rate) outright wrong in many respects.
> 
> It has an outsized influence on the narrative around the application, and actively dissuades people from trying it for themselves. Getting people who are already using software of a particular kind to try something new is difficult enough as it is, and videos like this make it all too easy for those people to shut themselves off to the possibility that a new application might allow them to work more efficiently, more creatively, or even simply get to the same kind of result more quickly. Instead, they can say, "Oh, that video with more than half a million views must be right", and not think any more about it.
> 
> I don't pretend that Dorico is perfect – we work hard every day to continuously improve it – but it doesn't deserve the kind of hatchet job that this video serves up.
> 
> It perhaps goes without saying, but I am much more interested in the real, lived experience of actual Dorico users who are trying to use the software to get the job done, than that of people who have a very obvious agenda against an application because of their position as head of design for a competitor, and who stand to gain in a direct, monetary way from this kind of criticism going as viral as possible, however strong their own credentials and expertise in the field of design and user experience might be.


I have said it here, and I'll say it again - Dorico is a triumph. My posts in particular are not to be taken as bashing your amazing product, which I have bought every single version of, and use. If what I said felt unkind or critical, I deeply apologize, as that is not my purpose.

I still don't find the workflow to be very easy, and I can't retract that because it is true for me. I just have to google practically everything that comes up, and that's a frustration for me, having been a composer for 40 years using both Finale and Sibelius, and actually teaching computers for 30 years. But I still use it, and when I start new scores, I use it, every time getting a little better.

That is not to be taken as a fault of the software - rather a fault of mine, or my inability to get along with the design philosophy, or perhaps my lack of understanding.

But oh how I simply wish things were more intuitive without keyboard shortcuts, but that is a wish that I will live with.

Daniel - thank you kindly for your thoughtful and lengthy response, and I appreciate you and all your company does.

All my best,

Mike


----------



## proggermusic

I, for one, think this thread has been refreshingly civil and articulate – I didn't take any of Mike's posts as bashing, or Daniel's posts as very salesman-like. There's some really good discussion in here and it's been interesting for me to read!

I'm definitely in the "built my workflow around Finale for two decades and probably won't switch" camp, even though I think Dorico looks great. When I get an arranging gig, I need to work fast, and haven't had the time or inclination to rebuild my methods. I respect Steinberg/Yamaha a lot and I like that they've introduced a competitive new player into the notation software arena, and I think it'll force Finale and Sibelius to improve some things.

I also think that, in the end, we're stuck with the fact that sheet music notation itself comes with some serious counter-intuition issues, and as a result a workflow that's intuitive for one person will inherently be counterintuitive to others. I found Sibelius surprisingly frustrating to work with when I tried it, and never ended up switching (a decision I was thrilled with when Avid bought the program and forced it into subscription-land). I teach a lot with MuseScore since it's free and dramatically improved from its original version, but I'm still a snail with it compared to Finale. Plenty about it makes sense, but whenever I go back to what I'm used to, it's a relief. 

For all its foibles, I do think Finale is still the industry standard for a handful of good reasons, and I find it relatively easy to make polished, publisher-ready, sellable scores and parts with it. It's also much better than it used to be, probably specifically because of competitors like S and D. If they all keep pushing each other forward, we'll all win.


----------



## Daniel S.

Thundercat said:


> If what I said felt unkind or critical, I deeply apologize, as that is not my purpose.


No, not in the least. I don't find anything you have said unkind or critical, and in any case I'm absolutely fine with criticism.

I am always very interested to hear in your own experiences – the shorthand of "Martin Keary's video was right" isn't helpful to me, because while there is legitimate criticism to be found in there, it's not coming from the right place. Martin doesn't want to use Dorico – he's building a competing app, after all. But if *you* do want to use Dorico, then I want to understand what's making it awkward for *you*, in your own words.



Thundercat said:


> But oh how I simply wish things were more intuitive without keyboard shortcuts, but that is a wish that I will live with.


This, for example, is something I'd really like to dig into more. We certainly do lean hard on keyboard shortcuts in Dorico because I think it really is the quickest way to work. You have 102 (or more) buttons right in front of you and you can press them in all these combinations to quickly achieve almost anything. Using the mouse is almost always going to be less efficient – except in the kinds of places where only a mouse makes sense. For example, I don't think anybody is suggesting that, say, editing MIDI CC data in the Key Editor would be more efficient with the keyboard!

We also took the decision to limit the use of the mouse in editing because I know from my own experience of talking to thousands of Sibelius users over the 13 years I worked on that product that the mouse is the root of a lot of problems in that software. Yes, being able to click and drag anything in the music at any time is very immediate, but it is often exactly the wrong thing to do.

For example, the right way to change vertical spacing in Sibelius is to change a couple of values on one specific page of the Engraving Rules dialog. This allows you to quickly make global changes that ripple through the whole score and produce a consistent result. But the easy way to change vertical spacing in Sibelius, and the way that everybody first discovers, is to click and drag the staves up and down. This makes it very hard to get a consistent result from system to system and page to page. If you're OK with eyeballing everything, then it works just fine – but you will normally run into problems with this approach sooner or later.

Being able to drag any item with the mouse in Sibelius makes it quick to move that item, but also very quick to create an error. For another example, you can drag a dynamic in Sibelius to move it, and it will automatically attach itself to new positions you drag it. A little grey attachment line (which goes progressively redder the further from the staff the item goes, but which is nevertheless easy to miss) shows the rhythmic position and the staff to which the item is selected, but as you drag the item around, you can accidentally drag it such that it becomes attached to the wrong staff. You only find this out when you're preparing your parts, and you discover an extra unwanted dynamic in one, and a missing one in another. Even with notes, you can accidentally click and drag a note when you're panning through your score (some people prefer to scroll by clicking on the paper and dragging than to use e.g. a trackpad or mouse wheel with keyboard modifiers).

These are the kinds of unforced errors that we wanted to make it much more difficult, or ideally impossible, to make when using Dorico. Possibly we have erred too far in the other direction by locking down the score more, but you can still drag all non-note items wherever you want in Write mode, and they will remain attached to the right instrument, so you can never end up with them accidentally turning up in another part. With the Key Editor now nicely integrated into Write mode, you can do a wide range of rhythm and pitch edits with your mouse as well, and we will very probably make it possible to (optionally) drag notes in the notation view in future as well.

What are the specific things that you find yourself wanting to do with the mouse that you can't do in Dorico, or you find awkward?


----------



## ptram

Daniel S. said:


> We certainly do lean hard on keyboard shortcuts in Dorico because I think it really is the quickest way to work.


How can you think that we musicians want to press keys when making music! 

Paolo


----------



## Ivan Duch

Daniel S. said:


> It has an outsized influence on the narrative around the application, and actively dissuades people from trying it for themselves.


For what it's worth, I watched his video long before purchasing Dorico. I think it definitely had a negative influence on my opinion of Dorico, and I even downloaded the trial a few times and discarded the software because of it being very unlike what I was used to (Sibelius and Musescore). But I was always frustrated by Musecore as well which made me stick to pencil, paper, and a DAW.

But in the end, by the time Dorico 4 came out and everyone started praising the new improvements to the DAW-like features, I tested it again with patience and saw the great workflow benefits and the design behind it.

I now write way faster (thanks to the amazing popovers, shortcuts, and other clever designs) in it than in any software I tried before (DAWs included).

Now, I'm able to export decent mockups for my client's approval just from Dorico. Before committing to something and starting the final production in a DAW. That's something I wouldn't dare to do with just Noteperformer's playback (as good as it is for writing).


----------



## Thundercat

Daniel S. said:


> No, not in the least. I don't find anything you have said unkind or critical, and in any case I'm absolutely fine with criticism.
> 
> I am always very interested to hear in your own experiences – the shorthand of "Martin Keary's video was right" isn't helpful to me, because while there is legitimate criticism to be found in there, it's not coming from the right place. Martin doesn't want to use Dorico – he's building a competing app, after all. But if *you* do want to use Dorico, then I want to understand what's making it awkward for *you*, in your own words.
> 
> 
> This, for example, is something I'd really like to dig into more. We certainly do lean hard on keyboard shortcuts in Dorico because I think it really is the quickest way to work. You have 102 (or more) buttons right in front of you and you can press them in all these combinations to quickly achieve almost anything. Using the mouse is almost always going to be less efficient – except in the kinds of places where only a mouse makes sense. For example, I don't think anybody is suggesting that, say, editing MIDI CC data in the Key Editor would be more efficient with the keyboard!
> 
> We also took the decision to limit the use of the mouse in editing because I know from my own experience of talking to thousands of Sibelius users over the 13 years I worked on that product that the mouse is the root of a lot of problems in that software. Yes, being able to click and drag anything in the music at any time is very immediate, but it is often exactly the wrong thing to do.
> 
> For example, the right way to change vertical spacing in Sibelius is to change a couple of values on one specific page of the Engraving Rules dialog. This allows you to quickly make global changes that ripple through the whole score and produce a consistent result. But the easy way to change vertical spacing in Sibelius, and the way that everybody first discovers, is to click and drag the staves up and down. This makes it very hard to get a consistent result from system to system and page to page. If you're OK with eyeballing everything, then it works just fine – but you will normally run into problems with this approach sooner or later.
> 
> Being able to drag any item with the mouse in Sibelius makes it quick to move that item, but also very quick to create an error. For another example, you can drag a dynamic in Sibelius to move it, and it will automatically attach itself to new positions you drag it. A little grey attachment line (which goes progressively redder the further from the staff the item goes, but which is nevertheless easy to miss) shows the rhythmic position and the staff to which the item is selected, but as you drag the item around, you can accidentally drag it such that it becomes attached to the wrong staff. You only find this out when you're preparing your parts, and you discover an extra unwanted dynamic in one, and a missing one in another. Even with notes, you can accidentally click and drag a note when you're panning through your score (some people prefer to scroll by clicking on the paper and dragging than to use e.g. a trackpad or mouse wheel with keyboard modifiers).
> 
> These are the kinds of unforced errors that we wanted to make it much more difficult, or ideally impossible, to make when using Dorico. Possibly we have erred too far in the other direction by locking down the score more, but you can still drag all non-note items wherever you want in Write mode, and they will remain attached to the right instrument, so you can never end up with them accidentally turning up in another part. With the Key Editor now nicely integrated into Write mode, you can do a wide range of rhythm and pitch edits with your mouse as well, and we will very probably make it possible to (optionally) drag notes in the notation view in future as well.
> 
> What are the specific things that you find yourself wanting to do with the mouse that you can't do in Dorico, or you find awkward?


Daniel I'm humbled and grateful for your lengthy and kind response.

I will in the next week or two try to create a list of a few items, but now that you have explained the reasoning behind why you've opted for a more keyboard-shortcut-centric workflow, it does make a whole lot of sense, and makes me want to slug it out until I "get it."

I develop and make a fader product, and in the course of that endeavor have learned how to program Arduino code to at least some degree of proficiency, surpassing 20,000 lines of code, which is a lot for someone who is not actually a programmer.

I'm sharing this because I've had to make a lot of design decisions, and decide on workable compromises, to a ton of things, so I'm sensitive to the fact that there are often legion regions that things are the way they are.

Many thanks for your amazing, awe-inspiring support and presence - I'll never forget your legendary support in Sib and I hope your wife and kids get enough time with you at home.

All my best, and great gratitude,

Mike


----------



## Bollen

I almost never learn shortcuts, not in Sibelius, nor Word, Adobe Acrobat, Blender nor Dorico. I used to have an old gaming keyboard with several “Hotkeys” on the left which I would assign things and sometimes glue a piece of paper with an icon of what it was supposed to do. When that broke down I got a Stream Deck XL to do the same, although there are plenty of cheaper alternatives.

If you can't be bothered learning new shortcuts (like me), then buy a hardware that will do it for you.


----------



## UDun

I personnally don't feel that Shift + T for Tempo, M for Meter, B for Bars, K for Key, D for Dynamics, P for Playing Techniques, O for Ornaments, R for Repetitions, T for Tie, S for Slur... can be considered to be a steep learning curve. The pop-over system is Dorico is absolutely awesome and so intuitive when one takes more than 5min to try it. No useless clicks and very fast.


----------



## pinki

Thundercat said:


> One thing I can't get past with Dorico is how counterintuitive so many operations are. The Tantacrul video from a year or two ago really nailed it for me.
> 
> I know this is subjective - some of you will immediately say it's SO INTUITIVE!!! I get it, peace.
> 
> For me, I find anytime I want to do even the most basic things, I have to google, or in my case re-google it, over and over. I'm not using it everyday - that's part of the problem admittedly - but with Sibelius, I learned it once and pretty much could use most things without constant googling.
> 
> That's me. I have bought every single version of Sibelius until Avid ate it, and now I have bought every single version of Dorico since God rested on the 7th day, so please no flames.
> 
> I teach software for a living and for the life of me, I just can't get on with Dorico without a lot of wrangling. But I'm determined to keep using it until I can be the fanboi who says how great it is bar none hands down.
> 
> Tomorrow I meet with a wind ensemble, and they are going to rehearse a piece of music I wrote using Sibelius, and then rescored using Dorico.


Im sorry to say I have to agree with this. I so want to like Dorico but everytime I demo it I come to the same conclusion. It’s one of those programmes that has me continuously saying “why!” out loud for even basic things. I never liked Sibelius’ workflow either..one of the most infuriating designs ever: those ridiculous menus and sub-menus that then led to the desperate redesign with microsoft thing at the top. I just don’t get on with either. Horses for courses.

EDIT: I didn’t see your replies Daniel. I will try Dorico again and try to get on with it in light of your comments. Is there a limit to how often I can demo?


----------



## matthieuL

UDun said:


> I personnally don't feel that Shift + T for Tempo, M for Meter, B for Bars, K for Key, P for Playing Techniques, O for Ornaments, R for Repetitions, T for Tie, S for Slur... is really learning. The pop-over system is Dorico is absolutely awesome and so intuitive when one takes more than 5min to try it. No useless clicks and very fast.


Don't forget that english is not the first language for anybody, some letters don't "work" for anybody.
Same thing for the name of the notes : I learned do re mi fa sol la si and I'm still not used to A B C D E F G (still need an effort to convert), so the inputing method by letters on keyboard in Dorico is useless for people like me


----------



## UDun

matthieuL said:


> Don't forget that english is not the first language for anybody, some letters don't "work" for anybody.
> Same thing for the name of the notes : I learned do re mi fa sol la si and I'm still not used to A B C D E F G (still need an effort to convert), so the inputing method by letters on keyboard in Dorico is useless for people like me



I am french so we are in the same boat 😊 I was definitely not referring to the note names. Pop overs and other shortcuts can be changed in the preferences to suit your needs.


----------



## Thundercat

UDun said:


> I personnally don't feel that Shift + T for Tempo, M for Meter, B for Bars, K for Key, D for Dynamics, P for Playing Techniques, O for Ornaments, R for Repetitions, T for Tie, S for Slur... can be considered to be a steep learning curve. The pop-over system is Dorico is absolutely awesome and so intuitive when one takes more than 5min to try it. No useless clicks and very fast.


Agreed - some shortcuts are very intuitive and quick.

But I have tried it for more than five minutes, five hours, even five years…I’ve produced scores and written music with it too.

I am going to take it on even more seriously in the light of Daniel’s comments. I hope the intuitiveness will start to kick in.


----------



## Daniel S.

pinki said:


> I didn’t see your replies Daniel. I will try Dorico again and try to get on with it in light of your comments. Is there a limit to how often I can demo?


If you haven't had a trial of Dorico 4, you can certainly have another 30-day trial now. It's a good time to take another look at Dorico because we have a pretty significant free update coming in the next week or two that continues the focus on workflow that we have had through the Dorico 4 development cycle. The Key Editor in particular has had a great deal of attention paid to it, to try to make it as fast and efficient as the Key Editor in Cubase (though with some unique additional functionality), but Dorico 4 in general has been focused on improving workflow, so I hope you would find the software easier to get to grips with.

I'm also more than happy to try to help if you run into problems or if you find things frustrating – please share those experiences with me. Even if I can't instantly change the software to lessen your frustration, I can hopefully shine a light on why we have chosen to pursue a particular workflow, because I can assure you that a great deal of thought and consideration goes into every change we make to the software in order to try to keep its idioms consistent and everything logically placed within its existing framework.


----------



## sinkd

pinki said:


> Im sorry to say I have to agree with this. I so want to like Dorico but everytime I demo it I come to the same conclusion. It’s one of those programmes that has me continuously saying “why!” out loud for even basic things. I never liked Sibelius’ workflow either..one of the most infuriating designs ever: those ridiculous menus and sub-menus that then led to the desperate redesign with microsoft thing at the top. I just don’t get on with either. Horses for courses.
> 
> EDIT: I didn’t see your replies Daniel. I will try Dorico again and try to get on with it in light of your comments. Is there a limit to how often I can demo?


It took me three failed initial attempts (and multiple demo trial periods ) to switch from Finale to Dorico, but I found I just had to persist. I will never go back.


----------



## Thundercat

Daniel S. said:


> If you haven't had a trial of Dorico 4, you can certainly have another 30-day trial now. It's a good time to take another look at Dorico because we have a pretty significant free update coming in the next week or two that continues the focus on workflow that we have had through the Dorico 4 development cycle. The Key Editor in particular has had a great deal of attention paid to it, to try to make it as fast and efficient as the Key Editor in Cubase (though with some unique additional functionality), but Dorico 4 in general has been focused on improving workflow, so I hope you would find the software easier to get to grips with.
> 
> I'm also more than happy to try to help if you run into problems or if you find things frustrating – please share those experiences with me. Even if I can't instantly change the software to lessen your frustration, I can hopefully shine a light on why we have chosen to pursue a particular workflow, because I can assure you that a great deal of thought and consideration goes into every change we make to the software in order to try to keep its idioms consistent and everything logically placed within its existing framework.


Daniel will help anyone anywhere, I worry to the detriment of his health, unless Steinberg have found a way to clone him...Wait...that's it! We are interacting with an amazing Daniel Spreadbury AI! This finally explains how he manages a work-life balance!

The real Daniel is a millionaire living in Patagonia and has been so for the last 5 years. The new Dread Pirate Roberts/I mean Daniel Spreadbury is all digital!!

If that's the case, Steinberg, you have the know-how to fully and completely integrate Cubase and Dorico into one gigantic seamless app...


----------



## Wensleydale

As a disaffected Sibelius user, I well remember how excited I was when I read that Daniel and co were working on a rival app. I went round telling anyone who would listen that Sibelius would soon be obsolete. Yet here I am, in late 2022, still not using Dorico. This thread has got me asking myself why not.

Partly it’s because, although I much prefer notation to piano rolls, for me a specialist notation app is a nice-to-have rather than a must-have. And partly it’s that I’m not sure whether to get Dorico Elements or crossgrade to Pro. But mainly — and rather ridiculously, I now realise — it’s because the existence of a demo version actually _discourages _me from taking the plunge. What happens is that I install the demo, find that it isn’t instantly intuitive, and (with Tantacrul‘s criticisms in mind) start wondering whether I really want to invest the time involved in getting used to it. Since I haven’t invested any _money _in it, I dither about this until the demo period expires, thus saving me from any more dithering. If there were no demo option I would probably have just bought the thing and knuckled down to learning it, because deciding that I wasn’t willing to make the effort would not be an option!

Hmm, I seem to have persuaded myself. Daniel did hint that there might be a sale soon, including a discount on the (already generous) crossgrade price. And it would be so satisfying to get some return on the cost of Sibelius 6, without having to give another penny to Avid!


----------



## Daniel S.

Indeed, there will be a very good opportunity to pick up Dorico at a keen discount very soon, so I really do think it's an excellent time to give it another try. And I am very happy to provide whatever assistance you might need to help get you over the jump. Just ask!


----------



## Page Lyn Turner

After 25 years in Finale I’ve been using Dorico the last couple of months. Many shortcuts and menus are easy to learn with common sense in mind, however there are about 400 shortcuts, mouse can be used sometimes I guess.
Also the bottom menu where you can mute notes, add a L.V, or put them in parenthesis etc makes things so easy. Just to mention that Dorico becomes a little slow when working on a file with many bars (>300 a current piece). There is an issue with -change the duration of the tied noted after the bar line- but I can live with that, just need few extra steps. Lastly, the manual is 1600 pages a bit discouraging to read it. Overall I think Dorico is my new software now.


----------



## Daniel S.

Page Lyn Turner said:


> Lastly, the manual is 1600 pages a bit discouraging to read it.


Yes, it is quite daunting if you try to read it like a real book, but actually that's not how we would recommend trying to learn the software. Our documentation is designed to be Google-able, so that if you want to know how to accomplish something, if you search for "how do I do X in Dorico", the relevant page from the manual (as an individual web page) will be right at the top of the search results. As such, although we have tried to structure the PDF version of the Operation Manual such that it hangs together if you read it cover to cover, it's really intended for dipping into when you want to know how to do a specific thing.

If you're looking for a manual to help introduce the software to you that _is_ designed to be read cover-to-cover, I'd recommend the Dorico First Steps guide. (It's not yet been updated for Dorico 4, but it's 99% applicable to Dorico 4, so you should have no problems following it.)









Dorico First Steps Documentation


Dorico First Steps: Get quick and easy access to all the relevant manual resources on steinberg.help.




steinberg.help





This is intended to take you through two small projects from start to finish and to introduce all of the important features of the software in an easy-to-follow, conversational style.

I think it's also worth spending 30 minutes reading the "Dorico concepts" section at the beginning of the Operation Manual:






Dorico concepts


Dorico is based on a number of key concepts that come from its design philosophy.




steinberg.help





This is intended to give you an overview of the philosophy behind the application's design, and to introduce the key concepts (projects, players, flows, layouts, popovers, page templates, etc.) so that you will hopefully start to understand how it is structured.

Dorico is really different in a bunch of ways to the apps that came before it, but never for no reason, or simply because we thought it would be fun to do things in a different way. Everything has been motivated by a desire to make a smarter, more useful tool in response to the more varied needs of today's digital musicians than to the needs of their predecessors in the 1990s (or even 1980s).

Page, I'm really glad to hear that Dorico is probably your software now. Anything I can do to help make that transition stick, just let me know.


----------



## RogiervG

Thundercat said:


> I just don't find it intuitive, which is a shame, because the same team made Sibelius which I felt was incredibly intuitive for the most part.


I have the same feeling.. after not having used it a while, i have to relearn everything basically in dorico.
Yes, it has very nice features... true.. 
but sibelius is like riding a bicycle, once you've learned it, you never unlearn it.


----------



## Daniel S.

I don't think that there is anything intrinsically harder to learn about Dorico than Sibelius. I wonder whether it is more that, because Sibelius (and Finale) have been around for so very long, Sibelius feels natural because you learned it years ago, and perhaps you were doing more scoring-related work at the time, which means that you internalised it really well. But if you use a newer app less often, you perhaps don't get the opportunity to internalise it to the same extent.

What sorts of things do you find yourself unable to remember when you come back to Dorico after a time away?


----------



## Page Lyn Turner

Daniel S. said:


> Page, I'm really glad to hear that Dorico is probably your software now. Anything I can do to help make that transition stick, just let me know.


Thank you!


----------



## Thundercat

Daniel S. said:


> I don't think that there is anything intrinsically harder to learn about Dorico than Sibelius. I wonder whether it is more that, because Sibelius (and Finale) have been around for so very long, Sibelius feels natural because you learned it years ago, and perhaps you were doing more scoring-related work at the time, which means that you internalised it really well. But if you use a newer app less often, you perhaps don't get the opportunity to internalise it to the same extent.
> 
> What sorts of things do you find yourself unable to remember when you come back to Dorico after a time away?


For example a pickup bar. I don’t know how to do it with the mouse and I really don’t want to memorise codes. I have to google it every time. Is it in the menu somewhere?


----------



## Daniel S.

Thundercat said:


> For example a pickup bar. I don’t know how to do it with the mouse and I really don’t want to memorise codes.


It's not in the menus, no, but it is in the right-hand panel. If you click the time signature icon in the toolbox on the right-hand side, you'll see the time signature panel with the various presets at the top, and in the *Create Time Signature* section at the bottom, you can activate the *Pick-up bar of* checkbox to specify the pick-up bar for the time signature you're about to create.


----------



## RogiervG

Daniel S. said:


> What sorts of things do you find yourself unable to remember when you come back to Dorico after a time away?


It's actually very basic operations. How to insert notes, get me thinking.. trying... How to move notes (pitch/transpose or position on a bar), but many other things too.. (note length, copy block of notes, measure changes etc)
I find that dorico is very hotkey oriented (even tutorials/lessons tell you that using hotkeys is the preferable way), while sibelius is very mouse oriented. Thats a different mindset to operate in.
Again, i am not bashing Dorico at all.. it has very nice features, and once i relearned things again, it working nicely.
It's just that i forget how to work with it, quite easily, if i don't use it say, weekly. Infrequent is a better word.
Maybe my mindset is more "mouse" oriented.


----------



## Thundercat

Daniel S. said:


> It's not in the menus, no, but it is in the right-hand panel. If you click the time signature icon in the toolbox on the right-hand side, you'll see the time signature panel with the various presets at the top, and in the *Create Time Signature* section at the bottom, you can activate the *Pick-up bar of* checkbox to specify the pick-up bar for the time signature you're about to create.


Thank you Daniel.


----------



## Daniel S.

RogiervG said:


> It's actually very basic operations. How to insert notes, get me thinking.. trying... How to move notes (pitch or position on a bar), but many other things too..


Yes, certainly Dorico actively prevents you from using the mouse for these kinds of operations. (You may have read an earlier post from me in this thread where I go into a lot more detail about _why_ we chose to do that.)

Now that we have integrated the Key Editor into Write mode, you do have a quick way to make adjustments to the pitch, rhythm and placement of notes with the mouse, though I grant you that this is a bit indirect, because of course you have to adjust them in the piano roll rather than in the notation.

As it happens, we do expect to make adjustment of pitch, duration and rhythmic position for notes in the main notation view via the mouse possible in the next major version of Dorico (not the update coming in the next week or so), though it may well still be turned off by default, for the reasons I explained in that earlier post.


----------



## Daryl

If I may butt in here.

I understand the daunting aspect of learning a new notation program. I've possibly been using Sibelius longer than Daniel, and definitely have things which are so ingrained that it is very difficult to change.

However, I've mostly solved this by re-thinking my workflow, and for the bits I can't, by changing the Key Commands to be the same as those I've used for many years in Sibelius.

There are still a few gotchas with Dorico, where there is no simple (or even difficult) solution, but in spite of that, I would never go back to using Sibelius by choice. The things that used to drive me nutty with Sibelius are so easy and quick in Dorico, that, for the most part, I don't even think about them any more. In fact, when I have to go back to Sibelius, I find myself gritting my teeth at how (comparitively) clunky it is.


----------



## ptram

UDun said:


> I personally don't feel that Shift + T for Tempo […] can be considered to be a steep learning curve.


In addition to this, there is always a shortcut to go directly to a command or option: the Jump Bar, invoked with a simple Modifier Key + J command.

I wonder how long will take to MuseScore to copy it!

Paolo


----------



## Wensleydale

Actually my initial failure to “click” (no pun intended) with Dorico was absolutely not because I like using a mouse. On the contrary, I _love_ keyboard shortcuts. But I find it much easier to use a mouse when I’m starting to find my way around an app. In Logic, for instance, I initially used the mouse for nearly everything; now I’m learning more key commands and gradually removing the clickable buttons from my screen because I don’t need them any more. But if they hadn’t been there when I started, I would probably have given up in despair.


----------



## RogiervG

funny how brains work.. how inertia has a saying in it
Yes, on the surface it's just some reajustments (muscle memory and such), but emotionally it's a different thing all together. The rewire you need to do, workflow wise.. it's (for me) relearning it, retrain muscle memory.. etc
but i'll await the update Daniel has mentioned, and see from there.. until that time i just have to relearn and relearn till i feel confident operating Dorico, and work with it pleasantly again... that cycle repeats itself several times per year  

Again not bashing Dorico, i see a very bright future ahead for it.  (otherwise i wouldn't have bought it  )


----------



## synergy543

RogiervG said:


> I find that dorico is very hotkey oriented (even tutorials/lessons tell you that using hotkeys is the preferable way), while sibelius is very mouse oriented. Thats a different mindset to operate in.
> Again, i am not bashing Dorico at all.. it has very nice features, and once i relearned things again, it working nicely.
> It's just that i forget how to work with it, quite easily, if i don't use it say, weekly. Infrequent is a better word.


I have the same issue and my solution has been to create a google doc page called "Dorico Notes" with my personal notes on various short-cuts how to overcome each issue I run into. I organize them by operation and build the notes as I go. I just add them one-at-a-time as I run into an issue and then next time, if I forget, I can quickly find the solution in my notes. For issues which I find very important, or I find myself forgetting many times, I highlight them, or make them bold. This makes the my notes a simple learning tool for myself which works great for me.

Another tool I find helpful for learning new apps and other things is Notion. With Notion, I can make pages of notes and links that are quick to access, clickable, and personalized. Sort of the "second-brain" approach if you will. I've found that this speeds up my learning tremendously. There are lots of other tools as well. You just have to find which ones resonate with you. Google search is my favorite.


----------



## pinki

synergy543 said:


> Another tool I find helpful for learning new apps and other things is Notion. ... Sort of the "second-brain" approach if you will.


I'm sure no pun intended but Notion for me is the one I always go back to because the workflow in Notion is so clear and flowing. It's a composing tool mind you...you wouldn't want to print anything with it. And it's very mouse orientated, but I really don't have a problem with that. It's such an elegant approach to notation. But obviously has lots of problems too! 

Each time I demo Dorico I very quickly hit a brick wall with the mouse and have to start searching for the shortcut. But I think that an app should cater to both mouse users (I really like my Apple Mighty Mouse- it's a wonderful tool!) and shortcut users in equal measure with a continuum between the two. 

Where Sibelius went wrong was that it had too much mouse thinking driven by those 7 feet drop down menus which then led to that thing that should not be mentioned beginning with r...
And where Dorico seems to be alienating people is with a hardcore shortcut approach. So yes Daniel, if you are going to change your approach to that in the next version as you mentioned with an option to go the way of the mouse, I will be very interested.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

pinki said:


> I'm sure no pun intended but Notion for me is the one I always go back to because the workflow in Notion is so clear and flowing. It's a composing tool mind you...you wouldn't want to print anything with it. And it's very mouse orientated, but I really don't have a problem with that. It's such an elegant approach to notation. But obviously has lots of problems too!
> 
> Each time I demo Dorico I very quickly hit a brick wall with the mouse and have to start searching for the shortcut. But I think that an app should cater to both mouse users (I really like my Apple Mighty Mouse- it's a wonderful tool!) and shortcut users in equal measure with a continuum between the two.
> 
> Where Sibelius went wrong was that it had too much mouse thinking driven by those 7 feet drop down menus which then led to that thing that should not be mentioned beginning with r...
> And where Dorico seems to be alienating people is with a hardcore shortcut approach. So yes Daniel, if you are going to change your approach to that in the next version as you mentioned with an option to go the way of the mouse, I will be very interested.


The Notion App synergy543 is referring to is probably not the notation app- is it?


----------



## Wensleydale

Markus Kohlprath said:


> The Notion App synergy543 is referring to is probably not the notation app- is it?


I think that was the “pun”, wasn’t it?


----------



## ed buller

Dorico is a dream come true for me. And I know it will keep getting better.

Best

e


----------



## Thundercat

pinki said:


> Each time I demo Dorico I very quickly hit a brick wall with the mouse and have to start searching for the shortcut. But I think that an app should cater to both mouse users (I really like my Apple Mighty Mouse- it's a wonderful tool!) and shortcut users in equal measure with a continuum between the two.


For me, ^^ this sums up what I've actually been trying to say. And Daniel has confirmed now they have "actively" been discouraging the use of the mouse for a lot of things - which is a design decision built into the DNA of the sofware itself.

So that leaves me with simply accepting the designers' philosophy that the keyboard is better in most cases, or using other software that I resonate with that is more mouse-orientated, and for a loosey-goosey term, "more intuitive."

I think there's a groundswell of sentiment here that Steinberg should listen to, that not everyone is a keyboard maven - I had to learn that myself over 3 decades of teaching computers in classrooms - not everyone wants or likes a keyboard shortcut.

That's funny coming from me, because I do love shortcuts - but when I'm composing, I think I use a different part of my brain, and being able to click an icon (visual) keeps me in the "right side of the brain" where I'm already working. Having no way to do something without a keyboard shortcut interrupts my flow and causes endless googling - which to be fair isn't really endless, although quite a few times I've landed on the Dorico help pages and then without complete context had to google externally to really figure it out.

Sometimes the Dorico help pages reference things without a picture or complete context so I don't know what they are referring to - this is actually another issue I've been frustrated with. I'm sorry I don't have an example page to link to - but this is common in help systems, everything is so broken down and modularized that when you drill into a topic it assumes you know what they are referencing.

In any case - I feel we are all incredibly lucky here to have Daniel's ear, and thus the ear of the company itself - I don't think there's been better user support or empathy from any company on the face of the earth!

So thank-you Daniel, regardless the direction Dorico proceeds with. I will likely continue to upgrade as I have from the very first, as I feel Dorico is the future. Sibelius is great in its own way, but the simple fact they fired the development team, haven't done any major updates in the MANY years since that date, and worst of all, require a subscription or penalize users with large upgrade prices for the whole thing, leaves me struggling to want to continue with Sib.

Also I demoed the "latest Sibelius" a couple years ago and made the foolish decision to open a bunch of my old files and update them - I wasn't thinking! - so now I'm stuck with a bunch of old Sib projects I can't even open! Because they made the file format not-backwards compatible, which is what I wasn't realizing at the time.

I'm happy there will be additional support for the mouse in a coming major update, so kudos to the Dorico team for that!

I'm grateful for all the ideas and support here.

Mike


----------



## pinki

Thundercat said:


> That's funny coming from me, because I do love shortcuts - but when I'm composing, I think I use a different part of my brain, and being able to click an icon (visual) keeps me in the "right side of the brain" where I'm already working. Having no way to do something without a keyboard shortcut interrupts my flow and causes endless googling - which to be fair isn't really endless, although quite a few times I've landed on the Dorico help pages and then without complete context had to google externally to really figure it out.


 This exactly sums up what I feel.. When I'm composing the mouse keeps me in the zone. I don't mind shortcuts (for notes for example) but I definitely want an onscreen alternative and that onscreen alternative better be either text or a symbol that makes visual sense (looking at you Studio One).

But no, I don't want to be forced to use shortcuts. If that's in the dna of Dorico it explains why I struggle with the workflow.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

Wensleydale said:


> I think that was the “pun”, wasn’t it?


My english leaves me there....😏


----------



## andrzejmakal

As a long term Sibelius user, classical orchestra musician, big band leader and arranger, I made a switch for a year for dorico, and I must say I’m still much faster on Sibelius then on Dorico. Engrave mode on dorico drives me crazy. Sorry.


----------



## synergy543

Markus Kohlprath said:


> The Notion App synergy543 is referring to is probably not the notation app- is it?


Sorry no pun, intended. Not sure what gave you that notion. I was referring to Notion, the organizational tool, not the notation app, but I thought that was clear from the topic of discussion.

Notion, the organizational tool www.notion.so is very useful for taking notes when learning new apps such as Dorico as you can customize your notes in many ways that can help you to learn much faster. At least I find it very useful as a central "hub" with both notes and clickable links. YMMV.


----------



## cmillar

andrzejmakal said:


> As a long term Sibelius user, classical orchestra musician, big band leader and arranger, I made a switch for a year for dorico, and I must say I’m still much faster on Sibelius then on Dorico. Engrave mode on dorico drives me crazy. Sorry.


Yes.

Not all 'engravers' and software designers have ever been composers (and, of course, vice versa). And, there have been some actual composers have been who have been in on creation of notation software design (and, we've seen some resulting notation programs over the years that are real 'head-scratchers')

- if someone (lets say, an engraver/copyist) is using a notation program in order to make an engraving or finalized score for printing, they are given a music score and they proceed to input the written score into the computer....in a 'linear' manner....they simply have to start at the beginning and work to the end of the score.
As they proceed, they barely need a mouse to choose things, and therefore the Dorico method of having almost total reliance on the keyboard and typing into popovers works very well for working in a 'linear', engraver/copyist mode.
It's safe to say that many engravers don't actually do a lot of the actual 'creating' of the actual piece of music. They're just typing into the software program.

- if someone is using a notation program in order to actually compose and arrange music, then they have a myriad of creative decisions to make as they work.
In the same manner of using a pencil and paper, they have to go flip forwards through their score in process, backwards, up/down the score, cut music here and there, paste music, delete music, change music, start all over again, make constant changes and adjustments, etc. etc. etc.

It's very different than being just an 'engraver'.

Many composers/arrangers just want to compose in a software program and try to make it as quick and easy as just using pencil and paper. And when you get up to speed in a program, it's very useful indeed and has many benefits over pencil/paper when it comes to making revisions, being a self-publisher and parts maker, etc. etc.

I think actual composers/arrangers that are using computer notation software need to be able to incorporate the use of a mouse in their work in order to quickly point and grab/choose items. They need to be able to 'just write music' with the same thinking of putting pencil to paper for writing down pitches and durations.

So, I think that's why Sibelius and Finale are still the dominant programs for actual composers/arrangers. They actually help the create process and let composers be composers....not making them think like 'engravers'.

I say this with all due respect to the brilliant Dorico team, of course. They've all been 'around the block' and are pretty ingenius.

It's just that I've truly had this conversation with other composers that I know and respect, and the vast majority of composers I know of just like the way that either Sibelius or Finale lets them think more creatively once they are used to it and 'have it under their command'.

And....certainly not all composers/arrangers are not really all that super concerned about having DAW like abilities from their notation program. NotePerformer, Sibelius sounds, Finale/Garritan, and Notion all provide sounds that give a 'good enough' musical rendition for most people in order to get an idea of what their piece is sounding like as they compose, and that are usually excellent enough to give to conductors and performers as demo score mockups in order to give and idea of what the music will be like when performed as to timing, tempos, interpretation, etc.

The capabilities of Sibelius and Finale right now are really fabulous, when you think about it. As is Dorico.

For most of us mere mortals, none of us ever use or even need most of bells and whistles that are built into notation programs. I know that I'm still discovering things about Sibelius that amaze me as to what the program is capable of!

And to make composing/arranging life even better, there are third-party resources available from ScoringNotes/Notation Central, numerous Finale plugin producers, soundset creators, articulation map providers, and useful hardware/software like StreamDeck and others.

We live in pretty amazing times when all is said and done.

The best sage advice I ever heard was: "Just pick a software program that feels good to you and really get to know it. Learn how to be creative with it."

But, I'm not in the engraving business. I just compose/arrange and need to get scores and parts out to people that want me to compose something for them or just get music ready for my live performance projects.

Maybe my needs and wants aren't where the real money is for software companies.

Anyways, just my two cents.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

cmillar said:


> So, a mouse is very, very useful. It becomes a 'second pencil' for choosing bars, notes, and other items in a score in a quick manner.


But you can do that in Dorico. Can you? I use a trackpad or a trackball and can jump/scroll around as I like. No difference to Sibelius. Or did you mean something else?
And with flows you can jump from one to the other in no time. Even if you have 50. With Sibelius you would have to open and close different files.


----------



## Daniel S.

The key differences between Dorico and, say, Sibelius with regard to mouse handling are that Dorico doesn't allow you to drag notes up and down in the music with the mouse (though it does allow you to drag them up and down in the piano roll of the Key Editor – and indeed it's _more_ permissive than Sibelius in this regard because you can also drag them left and right to move them to other positions), and that when you drag other (non-note) items with the mouse, there is a separation between moving an item purely graphically (Engrave mode) and moving it musically (Write mode), whereas in Sibelius these two kinds of adjustment are combined.

There are pros and cons to each approach, of course: as I've written (at possibly too great a length) earlier in this thread, the Dorico advantage is that you cannot make unforced errors that result in wrong notes or non-note items ending up in the wrong place or attached to the wrong instrument; the Sibelius advantage is immediacy. The strength of one is the weakness of the other.


----------



## pinki

cmillar said:


> Yes.
> 
> Not all 'engravers' and software designers have ever been composers (and, of course, vice versa). And, there have been some actual composers have been who have been in on creation of notation software design (and, we've seen some resulting notation programs over the years that are real 'head-scrathcers')
> 
> - if someone (lets say, an engraver/copyist) is using a notation program in order to make an engraving or finalized score for printing, they are given a music score and they proceed to input the written score into the computer....in a 'linear' manner....they simply have to start at the beginning and work to the end of the score.
> As they proceed, they barely need a mouse to choose things, and therefore the Dorico method of having almost total reliance on the keyboard and typing into popovers works very well for working in a 'linear', engraver/copyist mode.
> It's safe to say that many engravers don't actually do a lot of the actual 'creating' of the actual piece of music. They're just typing into the software program.
> 
> - if someone is using a notation program in order to actually compose and arrange music, then they have a myriad of creative decisions to make as they work.
> In the same manner of using a pencil and paper, they have to go flip forwards through their score in process, backwards, up/down the score, cut music here and there, paste music, delete music, change music, start all over again, make constant changes and adjustments, etc. etc. etc.
> 
> It's very different than being just an 'engraver'.
> 
> Many composers/arrangers just want to compose in a software program and try to make it as quick and easy as just using pencil and paper. And when you get up to speed in a program, it's very useful indeed and has many benefits over pencil/paper when it comes to making revisions, being a self-publisher and parts maker, etc. etc.
> 
> I think actual composers/arrangers that are using computer notation software need to be able to incorporate the use of a mouse in their work in order to quickly point and grab/choose items. They need to be able to 'just write music' with the same thinking of putting pencil to paper for writing down pitches and durations.
> 
> So, I think that's why Sibelius and Finale are still the dominant programs for actual composers/arrangers. They actually help the create process and let composers be composers....not making them think like 'engravers'.
> 
> I say this with all due respect to the brilliant Dorico team, of course. They've all been 'around the block' and are pretty genius.
> 
> It's just that I've truly had this conversation with other composers that I know and respect, and the vast majority of composers I know of just like the way that either Sibelius or Finale lets them think more creatively once they are used to it and 'have it under their command'.
> 
> And....certainly not all composers/arrangers are really all that super concerned about having DAW like abilities from their notation program. NotePerformer, Sibelius sounds, Finale/Garritan, and Notion all provide sounds that give a 'good enough' musical rendition for most people in order to get an idea of what their piece is sounding like as they compose, and that are usually excellent enough to give to conductors and performers as demo score mockups in order to give and idea of what the music will be like when performed as to timing, tempos, interpretation, etc.
> 
> The capabilities of Sibelius and Finale right now are really fabulous, when you think about it. As is Dorico.
> 
> For most of us mere mortals, none of us ever use or even need most of bells and whistles that are built into notation programs. I know that I'm still discovering things about Sibelius that amaze me as to what the program is capable of!
> 
> And to make composing/arranging life even better, there are third-party resources available from ScoringNotes/Notation Central, numerous Finale plugin producers, soundset creators, articulation map providers, and useful hardware/software like StreamDeck and others.
> 
> We live in pretty amazing times when all is said and done.
> 
> The best sage advice I ever heard was: "Just pick a software program that feels good to you and really get to know it. Learn how to be creative with it."
> 
> But, I'm not in the engraving business. I just compose/arrange and need to get scores and parts out to people that want me to compose something for them or just get music ready for my live performance projects.
> 
> Maybe my needs and wants aren't where the real money is for software companies.
> 
> Anywas, just my two cents.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> - many composers and arrangers need to jump around all over the place on a score while they are in the midst of composing/arranging in order to make cuts, additions, paste notes to other instrument section, go backwards in the score to make changes, etc. etc.
> 
> So, a mouse is very, very useful. It becomes a 'second pencil' for choosing bars, notes, and other items in a score in a quick manner.


Thank you for this post. It goes to the very heart of the problem going back to day one for software notation programmes. I remember buying Sibelius 2 over 20 years ago and subconsciously thinking the same thing. Is it for printing or is it for writing? 
And what I discovered over the years is that nobody even to this day has answered the problem. Sibelius is still a dog, but a dog actual composers have come to accept and run with. Same with Finale. Composers need nothing other than flow, complete immersion in the creative process, not even a moment of “how do I do this?”, a simulation of pencil and paper. And none of the big three provide this in my opinion.

So over a decade ago I started using Notion to compose, purely mouse driven and purely with its built in sounds. I did nothing but Apple mouse and Notion. And I have to say it’s worked for me.

Engraving and/or printing…I would buy a different programme for that. I want to keep those two worlds as far away as possible from each other after my experience with Sibelius 20 years ago. My theory is that Sibelius success was partly driven by its identity crisis on the engraving/composing spectrum.


----------



## Kristoben

cmillar said:


> But, I'm not in the engraving business. I just compose/arrange and need to get scores and parts out to people that want me to compose something for them or just get music ready for my live performance projects.
> 
> Maybe my needs and wants aren't where the real money is for software companies.
> 
> Anywas, just my two cents.
> 
> - many composers and arrangers need to jump around all over the place on a score while they are in the midst of composing/arranging in order to make cuts, additions, paste notes to other instrument section, go backwards in the score to make changes, etc. etc.
> 
> So, a mouse is very, very useful. It becomes a 'second pencil' for choosing bars, notes, and other items in a score in a quick manner.



This is why I'm hoping the Dorico and Cubase teams together really overhaul and improve the score editor in Cubase itself. I understand the need and desire to make Dorico more DAW-like but many composers will always need a full DAW such as Cubase.

I had to use Digital Performer at a job for a couple years and I really liked how their score editor with its nice transcription worked for using notation to quickly get ideas together and compose/arrange. My dream is for the Cubase score editor to become the best at this.


----------



## pefra

cmillar said:


> For most of us mere mortals, none of us ever use or even need most of bells and whistles that are built into notation programs.



This! As an example, for me Cubase was ready for prime time ten years ago, maybe even longer. Since then 300 (500? 800?) new features have been added. While I'm still using the same maybe 20 features that give me all I ever wanted from a DAW.

Same with notation software, and I'm afraid that's where we are heading with a program like Dorico. I can absolutely see and admire the huge effort of Dorico's developers to rethink notation software from the ground up. The results are showing, and for anyone starting new with notation one can only recommend to start with Dorico because in the long run it will definitely at least co-exist alongside the usual suspects.

I like software, and just for the fun of it I have been using Finale lately. It takes some time to wrap your head around it but after a while you stop thinking about the process. Create a new file, put it in Full Screen Mode, add some instruments going to NotePerformer. You are left with an empty sheet and some tools. Fire away. At this point in the process, you don't need much. It's all there.

It's about the composition, not about the software. That's what drives me crazy with the current development we are seeing. All these programs shouting "Look at me!!!". "Now with 3,000 new features. IS THAT NOTHING?" And then you look at the software and see they don't give you a chance of building a mental model of their program. Because for example they are showing you note symbols that stack vertically in pairs. Your brain doesn't work like this. It wants the symbols in a line (in ONE line), it wants the symbols sorted. And it wants the quarter note on key 4, not 5, 6 or 3, in order to build a mental model.

Imagine clicking on the quarter note in the next pictures with a mouse. Try to remember where it is. Close your eyes. Where is it? Where are you going to click next time?

Try with both screenshots:




..........................................................







T.b.h I don't know, if you can realign the symbols in Dorico so that they show up in one row. But you get the picture. It's way easier to build a mental model of the software with the picture on the far left. And if you close your eyes you can literally feel how your brain is scanning the list up and down. Even if you don't 100 % remember where the quarter note is - you_ know 100 % where to find it spot on_. That's the difference.


I also think that's what attracts users to MuseScore. It doesn't overwhelm you with features you can't figure out how to apply. One can only suggest developers of notation software watch what's going at MuseGroup, because one year after the release candidate hits the market MuseScore 4 will be on every student's computer. MuseSounds included.

That doesn't necessarily mean MuseScore is getting everything right. A certain Mr. T. is also very very wrong on some important aspects with regards to how people interact with software.


----------



## ed buller

pefra said:


> Now improve NotePerformer to the point it gives me what my libraries give me, but without the burden of endless line drawing of control changes!


This is already there in Dorico. You can ( once you have set it up ) just type in notes and dynamics and nothing else and it will play back beautifully using all the best Sample Libraries you can throw at it. 

The only thing still needing a tweak is the disparity between the behaviour of the dynamics in those libraries. Both the level at various markings and the distance ( in volume ) between them need another point at which to be tweaked. A separate page for pppp to ffff settings, per articulation in the expression maps would be ideal . But to be fair this is Dorico fixing our sample Libraries, and this can easily be done with a small fiddle in the CC lane. 

The difference in quality from Noteperformer is pretty much what you'd expect. And this gives you almost as much flexibility as a DAW

best


ed


----------



## pefra

ed buller said:


> This is already there in Dorico. You can ( once you have set it up ) just type in notes and dynamics and nothing else and it will play back beautifully using all the best Sample Libraries you can throw at it.


Hi ed,
but I will still have to use articulation changes to have it play legato lines for example? What I find interesting in NP is the concept behind it, not necessarily the sounds, and because I only need a half decent mockup the sounds are fine for me anyway.

I see Dorico gives me almost the flexibility of a fully fledged DAW - but that's exactly what I want to avoid. I compose in notation and then I need something that plays it back - that's it. Because I no longer produce perfectly crafted mockups I only need something for me to check on the composition and for the client to get an idea what we are talking about.

And after a good friend of mine had his perfect recording of a longer orchestral piece rejected because the client preferred the mockup coming from libraries (!) I'm wondering if we should go back even further 

Happy times when the first time a client would actually hear the music was at the recording stage...


----------



## ed buller

pefra said:


> I compose in notation and then I need something that plays it back - that's it.


This is from a while ago. I just opened the session and printed it off. There is nothing in here accept Dynamic markings and articulations. No programing at all. All live, just like NOTEPERFORMER.


Best

ed


View attachment Fligght Risk Nov7.mp3


----------



## pefra

ed buller said:


> This is from a while ago. I just opened the session and printed it off. There is nothing in here accept Dynamic markings and articulations. No programing at all. All live, just like NOTEPERFORMER.
> 
> 
> Best
> 
> ed
> 
> 
> View attachment Fligght Risk Nov7.mp3


Impressive! Thanks for posting. I will re-read your post "Dorice playback samples vs NP"...


----------



## ptram

Markus Kohlprath said:


> […] I use a trackpad or a trackball and can jump/scroll around as I like. […] And with flows you can jump from one to the other in no time.


Add to this the list of comments, that can be used as a list of bookmarks that lets you immediately jump to the commented point.

Paolo


----------



## ed buller

pefra said:


> Impressive! Thanks for posting. I will re-read your post "Dorice playback samples vs NP"...


let me know if you need any expression maps

best

e


----------



## ptram

cmillar said:


> Not all 'engravers' and software designers have ever been composers (and, of course, vice versa).


That's the beauty of Dorico: you can entirely ignore the Engrave mode, and just Write or Play your music.



cmillar said:


> - if someone is using a notation program in order to actually compose and arrange music, then they have a myriad of creative decisions to make as they work.


That's the beauty of Dorico: you can work in a traditional score, or in the pianoroll, or in both at the same time. Changing a duration can be done with the mouse in the pianroll, or by changing the value of the written note. You quickly choose the fastest way for a task.

You can copy and paste in any editor. You can set the way in which inserting passages moves or overlaps the existing music, in a staff or everywhere. It's not, indeed, like using pencil and paper, but as using wet clay.

Finale was create for engraving, and it seems to me that it has remained the same though the decades. I'm surprised it is considered more "for composers" than "for engravers".

But I've had affirmed composer friends, in the past, returning to Finale from Sibelius for the same reason: they were accustomed to how Finale worked, and felt more at home there, more in their "natural" environment.

Paolo


----------



## pefra

ed buller said:


> let me know if you need any expression maps
> 
> best
> 
> e


Thanks a lot ed, but I will no longer take that route. My libraries will have to move out of the house!


----------



## cmillar

This is truly a great forum for musicians! We're all able to share ideas and learn from some of the best in the world at what they do! (the same way that MOTUnation is fantastic for Digital Performer users!)

I'm a musician. A trombone player for hire, having my own bands and live music projects, a composer, an arranger, some teaching, some sound design work, creating scores for dance choreographers, equine show producers, some video/film scoring projects once in while, and more.

I've had great musical training and have been fortunate to work with many excellent musicians and to be able to play a lot of great music in all genres and styles.

I believe in live music and humans, and certainly don't want the world to turn into a world that believes AI music library (and library music 'composers' whose whole world is just trying to emulate others over and over again by supplying yet more library that sounds the same as other library music) becomes the epitome of artistic culture.

(the above might be harsh, and I've been guilty of being in that 'camp' myself....so...have at it!)

I'm not famous or anything. Just a musician 'working in the trenches'.

So, my musical requirements and needs are pretty basic. My notation program helps me get music out to people for performance, and my DAW of choice enables me to do anything I need to do for film/video, and other multi-media projects.

This is where I'm 'coming from', for anyone's information.

And......all of our problems are truly very small in the big picture.

I feel for the people of Ukraine. They don't even have any electricity, courtesy of a once great culturally rich country that seems intent on destroying another country's culture and a history.

And here in the USA, we have a political party of culturally illiterate Neo-fascists wanting to drive this country backwards a century or two in time.

We should all be thankful that a forum like this is truly an open forum for people from all over the world to share our thoughts and concerns on matters that we are all truly passionate about.

Happy creating to all in whatever you do and however you do it!

JUST KEEP CREATING!


----------



## youngpokie

ptram said:


> That's the beauty of Dorico: you can entirely ignore the Engrave mode, and just Write or Play your music.


I think this is a very important point. It took me a while to fully comprehend the many positive implications this could have on my workflow. Indeed, the beauty of Dorico is in its modularity and adaptability. It's not always obvious but it's there and can be very powerful. 

I used to have insane anger issues when Dorico wouldn't react like a f*&$ DAW or a word processor or whatever is someone's favorite reference point. It got pretty bad and eventually I stepped back and started thinking "big picture" through steps in my physical workflow and where exactly the problems appeared when transplanting it to the computer. This turned out to be the missing piece in this puzzle, because that's when Dorico suddenly revealed itself to me and I realized how responsive it can be to my needs.

For example, I compose via piano improvisation, writing a piano part and then orchestrating from it. After thinking it through and tinkering with the Setup Mode, I arrived at a rather particular combination of custom layouts, custom instruments, Filters in galley view and Tab configurations that follow all of the steps in my workflow as I would go through them on paper. Then I looked for ways to do them faster. My needs now are easy copy/paste/reduce/explode, zoom/drag/scroll, add/delete temp staves, inserting and deleting gaps. Note input is via MIDI keyboard, and I use a custom 1-line staff as a compositional Marker Track for the form, highlighting it with lines, bar counts, "memo" notes, chord and functional symbols. 

I love it! In retrospect, taking this specific step to design my own workflow was the most important thing I'd done. To go back to pen and paper now would be a real step back in functionality. I also can't think of any step that still remains faster for me with paper (except maybe for eyesight and the mental zooming in and out that no software has managed to mimic). My only regret is that I didn't see the possibilities for so long! 

In Play Mode, once I realized that Endpoints are really like DAW "track presets" only better! - because they can be loaded in sequence AND selectively combined into Playback Templates and the expression maps and routing would be saved along with all that - it then became obvious that there is quite a bit more to it than my traditional DAW approach! I used to create a track for every single instrument and then go mad trying save RAM. But here I can have a "Mahler Berlin Brass" template and "Mahler SWAM Brass" template, among many other concepts, and I can swap them out without leaving the project or touching any instruments in the Setup mode. In Setup Mode, too, project templates can be made with custom-designed Percussion Stations with fixed players or for particular workflow stages or whatever else might be needed. 

The point I want to make is that even though each of these steps can take a minute, they are really worth it and Dorico's modularity has now become an incredible asset for me. As the program grows, perhaps it can be hard to maintain this modularity, but I think it's part of Dorico's "secret sauce" maybe because it affects how everything is conceptualized on the development side. 

It's true, sadly, that some areas in the Play Mode have now been neglected for several years. Saving the volume (CC7) per articulation to balance the instruments in the Endpoint or setting the track offset per articulation and many other critical features have been talked about endlessly a long time ago, but they still are not there. 

As a result, playback quality or the ability to make great mockups remains a big issue for Dorico in part because for now it's either Note Performer that many simply do not like or the manual process that unfortunately hits a brick wall rather quickly with issues like that. I admit I am jealous when I hear Muse Score playback - but only because it's taking so long for Dorico to address the issues that currently prevent users from matching or beating that quality level from within Dorico.

One thing I learned though - once the team finally put their mind to something, they often go above and beyond and take it to another level. I'm very hopeful this will happen on the playback side too. And the fact that @Daniel S. is so open to engaging with people here is in itself remarkable and a very good sign!


----------



## pinki

youngpokie said:


> I used to have insane anger issues when Dorico wouldn't react like a f*&$ DAW or a word processor or whatever is someone's favorite reference point.


I guess my point of reference is writing notation.

But I really like that you "cracked it"...I suppose my other reaction would be: is it necessary for a user of software to have a eureka moment? Or to make a shape that fits the software as opposed to the other way round?

I mean kudos to you, I'm jealous! Maybe you could expand on what you said because I didn't understand a word of it! eg:
_"I realized that Endpoints are really like DAW "track presets" only better! - because they can be loaded in sequence AND selectively combined into Playback Templates and the expression maps and routing would be saved along with all that" _


----------



## Thundercat

youngpokie said:


> I think this is a very important point. It took me a while to fully comprehend the many positive implications this could have on my workflow. Indeed, the beauty of Dorico is in its modularity and adaptability. It's not always obvious but it's there and can be very powerful.
> 
> I used to have insane anger issues when Dorico wouldn't react like a f*&$ DAW or a word processor or whatever is someone's favorite reference point. It got pretty bad and eventually I stepped back and started thinking "big picture" through steps in my physical workflow and where exactly the problems appeared when transplanting it to the computer. This turned out to be the missing piece in this puzzle, because that's when Dorico suddenly revealed itself to me and I realized how responsive it can be to my needs.
> 
> For example, I compose via piano improvisation, writing a piano part and then orchestrating from it. After thinking it through and tinkering with the Setup Mode, I arrived at a rather particular combination of custom layouts, custom instruments, Filters in galley view and Tab configurations that follow all of the steps in my workflow as I would go through them on paper. Then I looked for ways to do them faster. My needs now are easy copy/paste/reduce/explode, zoom/drag/scroll, add/delete temp staves, inserting and deleting gaps. Note input is via MIDI keyboard, and I use a custom 1-line staff as a compositional Marker Track for the form, highlighting it with lines, bar counts, "memo" notes, chord and functional symbols.
> 
> I love it! In retrospect, taking this specific step to design my own workflow was the most important thing I'd done. To go back to pen and paper now would be a real step back in functionality. I also can't think of any step that still remains faster for me with paper (except maybe for eyesight and the mental zooming in and out that no software has managed to mimic). My only regret is that I didn't see the possibilities for so long!
> 
> In Play Mode, once I realized that Endpoints are really like DAW "track presets" only better! - because they can be loaded in sequence AND selectively combined into Playback Templates and the expression maps and routing would be saved along with all that - it then became obvious that there is quite a bit more to it than my traditional DAW approach! I used to create a track for every single instrument and then go mad trying save RAM. But here I can have a "Mahler Berlin Brass" template and "Mahler SWAM Brass" template, among many other concepts, and I can swap them out without leaving the project or touching any instruments in the Setup mode. In Setup Mode, too, project templates can be made with custom-designed Percussion Stations with fixed players or for particular workflow stages or whatever else might be needed.
> 
> The point I want to make is that even though each of these steps can take a minute, they are really worth it and Dorico's modularity has now become an incredible asset for me. As the program grows, perhaps it can be hard to maintain this modularity, but I think it's part of Dorico's "secret sauce" maybe because it affects how everything is conceptualized on the development side.
> 
> It's true, sadly, that some areas in the Play Mode have now been neglected for several years. Saving the volume (CC7) per articulation to balance the instruments in the Endpoint or setting the track offset per articulation and many other critical features have been talked about endlessly a long time ago, but they still are not there.
> 
> As a result, playback quality or the ability to make great mockups remains a big issue for Dorico in part because for now it's either Note Performer that many simply do not like or the manual process that unfortunately hits a brick wall rather quickly with issues like that. I admit I am jealous when I hear Muse Score playback - but only because it's taking so long for Dorico to address the issues that currently prevent users from matching or beating that quality level from within Dorico.
> 
> One thing I learned though - once the team finally put their mind to something, they often go above and beyond and take it to another level. I'm very hopeful this will happen on the playback side too. And the fact that @Daniel S. is so open to engaging with people here is in itself remarkable and a very good sign!


What an amazing post! Thanks for sharing.

I didn’t understand most of it but it did alert me to some deeper possibilities with Dorico. I like that you took a holistic view of your workflow and discovered inefficiencies and found ways for Dorico to fill the gaps. Marvellous!

Thanks for taking the time to share.


----------



## cmillar

An FYI public service:

If any Sibelius users haven't done so yet, please check out the 'preset score' packages offered by Philip Rothman and his ScoringNotes team at their Notation Central site.






Templates - Notation Central


Notation Central has fonts, utilities, templates, plug-ins, and more for music notation software to help you create music at the highest level.




www.notationcentral.com





They have packages that include 'Home Styles' built in to the scores and the parts that truly make life easy. 

I don't think I've had to make any 'magnetic adjustments' since using these templates! These are real time-savers as far as the ease of having your parts and scores look fantastic (with hardly any work on our part! They've already done the 'heavy lifting' of setting note spacing, bar and staff spacings, etc. etc. for different musical composing and engraving needs).

And...these scoring templates are available for users of Dorico and Finale.

Thanks to Philip Rothman for his contributions that make life far more enjoyable for us all!


----------



## Bollen

@Daniel S. After following this thread from the beginning, it sounds like Steinberg could really use a Hardware device to quickly access all the features visually... Something akin to the old CMC series.


----------



## youngpokie

pinki said:


> Maybe you could expand on what you said because I didn't understand a word of it! eg:
> _"I realized that Endpoints are really like DAW "track presets" only better! - because they can be loaded in sequence AND selectively combined into Playback Templates and the expression maps and routing would be saved along with all that_


I'm sorry!! Here's what I meant to say in that particular bit:

- The traditional method in a DAW is to create hundreds of tracks for each instrument inside a single project, then load it up and mute/unmute tracks as necessary while you work. You must load everything if you want to work with only a few instruments, say writing brass ensemble for a few hours. 

- In Dorico, it's possible to set up either the same giant template or to create several small endpoints (aka instrument presets) one by one, for example just for woodwinds, or perhaps EWQL Diamond Strings. These endpoints (all of them or only some of them) can be arbitrarily saved into some kind of a Playback Template. When the playback template is applied, it will load only the instruments for which a preset/endpoint was included in it and a player was "hired" in Setup Mode.

- This modularity of endpoints creates several interesting possibilities. For example, you could have context-specific templates. Let's say you have two brass libraries with same instruments but different tone color. You could use them for two templates differentiated specifically by that sonority. For example - a Romantic template and an Epic template. 

- Now as you compose the music in Write Mode you could try it out with a different sound -you simply apply that particular template in Play Mode. Dorico would load the VSTs, their maps and routings exactly you saved them into Endpoints, although you might still have to go to Mixer to adjust the balances. 

- I think the idea of Dorico templates can also match well with the various commercial DAW Templates that are currently popular - for example CSS-based template, the Witcher template, some genre specific template. I guess Ed Buller might call his a "John Williams template" because he matched it like that. I wonder if perhaps in the future even a room-based template might become practical (e.g. the Teldex reverb that's being released soon) if Mixer and inserts can be saved and recalled in their own endpoints and someone really wants to go down that rabbit hole. 

- This kind of conceptual framework can work if you load VST directly in Dorico, or via VEPro plugins or even hosting completely externally and running Dorico as MIDI out only. Dorico file sizes would become much bigger if the VSTs are loaded directly within it. This (and save times) are why VEPro is so popular. 

Personally, I have three templates for that workflow I was describing earlier: an improvisation template (a single piano hosted in Dorico itself), and two templates hosted externally: full orchestra (template 2) and finally the same one with totally different woodwinds as template 3. Piano is the endpoint I included in all 3 templates so it's always on regardless the configuration I apply. It's all pretty basic I think but it did wonders for my workflow.


----------



## cmillar

Bollen said:


> @Daniel S. After following this thread from the beginning, it sounds like Steinberg could really use a Hardware device to quickly access all the features visually... Something akin to the old CMC series.


Hi Bollen, you should check out the 'StreamDeck' profiles available from NotationCentral for Dorico.

They are a terrific starting point, and then you can easily do further customization in order to suit your workflow.

I like the basic StreamDeck so much that I might have to get the larger XL version someday soon. It's hard to imagine not using one once you incorporate it into your software of choice.


----------



## pinki

youngpokie said:


> I'm sorry!! Here's what I meant to say in that particular bit:
> - Now as you compose the music in Write Mode you could try it out with a different sound -you simply apply that particular template in Play Mode. Dorico would load the VSTs, their maps and routings exactly you saved them into Endpoints, although you might still have to go to Mixer to adjust the balances.


No need to apologise! 

I understand now, you explained it very clearly, thanks. 
...and yes that seems very useful.


----------



## sinkd

pefra said:


> but I will still have to use articulation changes to have it play legato lines for example?


You can change one setting in Noteperformer expression maps to do this. Create an endpoint config (I call mine NP Jazz) and edit the base switch for Natural so that it has Controller 19 set to 1 (same as legato). Then assign the endpoint to your wind and brass section instruments. Boom. Eighth notes play back smooth without slurs or articulation switching.


----------



## pefra

sinkd said:


> You can change one setting in Noteperformer expression maps to do this. Create an endpoint config (I call mine NP Jazz) and edit the base switch for Natural so that it has Controller 19 set to 1 (same as legato). Then assign the endpoint to your wind and brass section instruments. Boom. Eighth notes play back smooth without slurs or articulation switching.


Thanks sinkd, 
I'm no Dorico user as of now. But everything I'm reading sounds very interesting, so I will keep an eye on it.


----------



## Daniel S.

I thought you might enjoy seeing this screenshot from our forthcoming update that we just shared this morning on Twitter:


----------



## pefra

Thanks for sharing.

Bézier curves, like in Cubase?


----------



## Daniel S.

No, no curves in the MIDI CC editor at the moment, but it's certainly something we are open to adding in the future.


----------



## Woodie1972

ed buller said:


> This is already there in Dorico. You can ( once you have set it up ) just type in notes and dynamics and nothing else and it will play back beautifully using all the best Sample Libraries you can throw at it.
> 
> The only thing still needing a tweak is the disparity between the behaviour of the dynamics in those libraries. Both the level at various markings and the distance ( in volume ) between them need another point at which to be tweaked. A separate page for pppp to ffff settings, per articulation in the expression maps would be ideal . But to be fair this is Dorico fixing our sample Libraries, and this can easily be done with a small fiddle in the CC lane.
> 
> The difference in quality from Noteperformer is pretty much what you'd expect. And this gives you almost as much flexibility as a DAW
> 
> best
> 
> 
> ed


You can influence this dynamics behavior globally by changing the dynamics settings in the playback options by a few tenths.


----------



## pefra

Daniel S. said:


> No, no curves in the MIDI CC editor at the moment, but it's certainly something we are open to adding in the future.


Thanks, Daniel


----------



## ed buller

Woodie1972 said:


> You can influence this dynamics behavior globally by changing the dynamics settings in the playback options by a few tenths.


yeah but it's global

best

e


----------



## Bollen

cmillar said:


> Hi Bollen, you should check out the 'StreamDeck' profiles available from NotationCentral for Dorico.


I recommended this just a few posts back.


Daniel S. said:


> I thought you might enjoy seeing this screenshot from our forthcoming update that we just shared this morning on Twitter:


Ew...! Looks claustrophobic, I hope we can have the editors in Play mode on a different window...(?)


----------



## Daniel S.

Bollen said:


> Looks claustrophobic, I hope we can have the editors in Play mode on a different window...(?)


You can make the lower zone take up the whole height of the window if you like, yes, so you could have one window showing only the notation and another window that could be nominally in either Write mode or Play mode but with the Key Editor filling the whole height. You can choose which track(s) to look at using the track selector in the top left corner of the Key Editor, so you don't need to choose the track in the Play mode track overview or by selecting anything in the score view.


----------



## Bollen

Daniel S. said:


> You can make the lower zone take up the whole height of the window if you like, yes, so you could have one window showing only the notation and another window that could be nominally in either Write mode or Play mode but with the Key Editor filling the whole height. You can choose which track(s) to look at using the track selector in the top left corner of the Key Editor, so you don't need to choose the track in the Play mode track overview or by selecting anything in the score view.


Fabulous! How about when selecting a note/staff on the score (in Write Mode), will the view sync with the editor in the Play Window?

And will the track selector ('top left corner') on the Key Editor tell me the name of the instrument or will it be the silly upstem/downstem voice x thing it is at the moment?


----------



## Daniel S.

Hopefully this will answer your questions (it's an animated gif, so click it to open it if it doesn't automatically play on your system):


----------



## Bollen

Daniel S. said:


> Hopefully this will answer your questions (it's an animated gif, so click it to open it if it doesn't automatically play on your system):


It's very low res, but I think it answers my first question and perhaps the 2nd one...? If you have 1 instrument with multiple voices, will it be as easy as just selecting it on the score? And how about being able to view more than one (e.g. upstem voice 1 AND downstem voice 1)?

And also something I've been missing since 3.5, will we be able to place the Play line wherever we want for alignment and navigation purposes?


----------



## Daniel S.

The movement of the playhead isn't any different in this coming release than in previous Dorico 4.x versions (it can only be positioned at intervals described by the current Key Editor grid setting), but a vertical crosshair now appears as you move the mouse over the Key Editor to allow you to see whether e.g. CC data and note onsets are aligned.

When you select a note in a different voice, that voice becomes the active one, and it will be the one that shows in the voice selector on the toolbar, but you don't need to use the voice selector to change voice: just select a note in the voice you want to use.


----------



## Bollen

Daniel S. said:


> The movement of the playhead isn't any different in this coming release than in previous Dorico 4.x versions (it can only be positioned at intervals described by the current Key Editor grid setting), but a vertical crosshair now appears as you move the mouse over the Key Editor to allow you to see whether e.g. CC data and note onsets are aligned.
> 
> When you select a note in a different voice, that voice becomes the active one, and it will be the one that shows in the voice selector on the toolbar, but you don't need to use the voice selector to change voice: just select a note in the voice you want to use.


Sweet! But there isn't a way to align events from different instruments or voices within the same instrument then?


----------



## Daniel S.

You can show multiple instruments in the Key Editor if you want. They appear overlaid, so the same crosshair will allow you to align things in different voices. In the piano roll, you can edit all of the notes freely; in the MIDI CC and dynamics editors, etc., you can edit any data that is common between all of the selected tracks, and you can sync the data from the primary track to all of the secondary tracks.

However, you can't have multiple separate Key Editors stacked on top of each other in the way you could with the old Play mode display in Dorico 3.5. That's not something we are planning to bring back.


----------



## Bollen

Daniel S. said:


> You can show multiple instruments in the Key Editor if you want.


That's impressive!


Daniel S. said:


> That's not something we are planning to bring back.


I can live with that, as long as we're able to have multiple voices/instruments displayed together why would we need it? Bravo Daniel, looking forward to working with that version!


----------



## Daniel S.

I hope you'll find it really powerful and comfortable to use. Not long to wait now until you can get stuck in.


----------



## zolhof

Daniel S. said:


> You can make the lower zone take up the whole height of the window if you like, yes, so you could have one window showing only the notation and another window that could be nominally in either Write mode or Play mode but with the Key Editor filling the whole height. You can choose which track(s) to look at using the track selector in the top left corner of the Key Editor, so you don't need to choose the track in the Play mode track overview or by selecting anything in the score view.


Hi Daniel, the update looks really promising for us heavy Key Editor users, I can't wait.  Are the key lanes finally freely resizable like in Cubase? If so, will they be independent from each other? i.e. I can have velocity and multiple CC with different heights. 


View attachment 2022-11-09 14-50-36.mp4


View attachment 2022-11-09 14-52-58.mp4


----------



## Lannister

Daniel S. said:


> I hope you'll find it really powerful and comfortable to use. Not long to wait now until you can get stuck in.


It's looking like Steinberg should be offering Competitive Crossgrades not just from other Notation programs but from DAW's too (that's a good thing!)


----------



## Daniel S.

zolhof said:


> Are the key lanes finally freely resizable like in Cubase? If so, will they be independent from each other? i.e. I can have velocity and multiple CC with different heights.


Yes, and yes.


----------



## zolhof

Daniel S. said:


> Yes, and yes.


Now you are just showing off! What a great early Christmas present, thank you 🎅

We need another one of these, by the way:


----------



## PhilA

This all sounds fantastic now all we need is the perpetual Dorico for IPad license option to go on sale for BF. 😉


----------



## Daniel S.

With apologies for cross-posting this news in two threads:

We've just released the new Dorico 4.3 update. If you'd be interested in finding out more, please visit the Dorico blog for more details, including links to the YouTube videos describing the new features, and the full Version History PDF:









Dorico 4.3 released with refined Key Editor and much, much more – Dorico


We’re pleased to announce the release of Dorico 4.3, our eighth (and very probably final) release of 2022, and it’s a big one. This release is headlined by a brand new feature that automatically generates voicings for chord symbols, which should be a boon for arrangers, and significant...




wp.me


----------



## devonmyles

I must say, a pretty stunning update. I've only been onboard Dorico since January, but I'm glad I made the switch.
The App just keeps getting better all the time, and I find it a joy to work with.


----------



## Freudon33

Daniel S. said:


> Hopefully this will answer your questions (it's an animated gif, so click it to open it if it doesn't automatically play on your system):


Hello
I own Cubase 12 Pro and am very interested in Dorico.
I also have Sibelius Ultimate 2020 and I'm hesitant to crossgrade
because I would like to be able to go from one to the other easily(Cubase and Dorico)
but since there is no more rewire in Cubase 12
I also saw that the drag and drop which was I believe in Dorico 3.5 would no longer be in Dorico 4 for the moment.
Quick question that has nothing to do with the topic.
how do you put gif files?
I couldn't find the last time I wanted to do it because it only appears as screenshots


----------



## Daniel S.

At the moment, there's no sync between Cubase and Dorico, though some users are using the TXL Timecode plug-in to provide transport sync. We are definitely looking at ways of bringing Dorico and Cubase closer together in future.

Drag-and-drop of MIDI (and video files, to place them on the timeline in a flow at a particular point, and indeed chord symbols from Cubase's chord track) is back in Dorico 4.3.


----------



## Freudon33

Is Drag and drop valid in both directions from Cubase to Dorico and Dorico to Cubase?


----------



## Daniel S.

Only Cubase to Dorico, at the moment.


----------



## Freudon33

thank you for your reply
Another question I have many expression maps in Cubase 12
Are they transposable in Dorico?


----------



## Daniel S.

You can import Cubase expression maps into Dorico, but because Dorico's expression map format is quite a bit richer than Cubase's, you'll only get pretty basic information imported. It might save you a bit of time when it comes to creating an initial set of switches, but you should expect to need to spend a bit of time building out your expression maps. You should probably also check to see whether any existing Dorico expression maps or playback templates already exist for the libraries you're using:









Playback Templates for Dorico – Dorico


Playback templates (containing endpoint setups, expression maps and percussion maps) are available for various sample libraries. Below is a list of the options currently available, including expression maps that you can use to create your own playback templates. This page will be updated as new...




blog.dorico.com


----------



## ed buller

Good review and description of the new update:



Best

e


----------



## Vik

Daniel S. said:


> Dorico 1.0 was obviously not a mature application, but Dorico 4 is really pretty mature and has gained thousands of features over the past six years.


Sounds good, thanks. Is there a public list somewhere showing all the major stuff that's been implemented since Dorico 1?


----------



## Daniel S.

Not exactly, but the post on the blog that describes the benefits to users of Dorico 2, Dorico 3, and Dorico 3.5 when considering upgrading to Dorico 4 at least provides the headlines:









Save 50% on Dorico in Steinberg's Cyber Weeks sale – Dorico


Until 30 November, you can save a massive 50% on new licenses, crossgrades, updates and upgrades for Dorico Pro 4 and Dorico Elements 4 in the Steinberg online shop and at selected reseller partners. You can also save 50% on the Lifetime Unlock in-app purchase for Dorico for iPad. This is only...




blog.dorico.com


----------



## Vik

Wensleydale said:


> Actually my initial failure to “click” (no pun intended) with Dorico was absolutely not because I like using a mouse. On the contrary, I _love_ keyboard shortcuts. But I find it much easier to use a mouse when I’m starting to find my way around an app. In Logic, for instance, I initially used the mouse for nearly everything; now I’m learning more key commands and gradually removing the clickable buttons from my screen because I don’t need them any more. But if they hadn’t been there when I started, I would probably have given up in despair.


This.
I use key commands in Logic all the time, but my main reservation with Dorico 1 was the key command/mouse thing. To offer only key commands for most functions is fine for those who has Dorico as their first score app, or their only music app.
Not only did I find the way to customize the key commands in D very cumbersome (it took circa 9 steps), but even if D 'only' has 400 key commands, it will take quite some time to learn, say, the first 50 or 100 of them.
Besides, those who are used to score editing in, say, Finale, Sibelius, Logic or some other app, don't want to deal with two or more sets of key combinations. Most of them probably keep using their original DAW (since learning Cubase as well is another major learning process), and for a long time, they may use both Dorico and eg. Sibelius or at least their DAW. The reason I have up D without updating to version 2 was that Dorico didn't offer, back then, what I find being the most essential method to lean a new app: use of _mouse versions and contextual menu versions_ (and meny options) for – everything. With contextual menus I mean menus that pop up if one clicks on an object (or right clicks on it) to see all or most relevant actions for that object. Had these two options been there in Dorico 1, I's probably have continued to use it and maybe even moved over to Cubase (which I bought at the same time).




Thundercat said:


> For me, ^^ this sums up what I've actually been trying to say. And Daniel has confirmed now they have "actively" been discouraging the use of the mouse for a lot of things - which is a design decision built into the DNA of the sofware itself.



"for a lot of things... The reason I think there should be mouse + key command + contectual menus + menu options for everything is exactly what Wensleydale described. 

If there are mouse options or key commands or contextual menus I don't need, it won't bother me that exist – but it bothers me a lot that they don't exist when I need them the most: in the learning process. And if it's correct that the Dorico manual has 1600 pages, there's certainly a lot to learn! 

I know that I also had UI issues with Synchron Strings as well, but I still haven't sold SS1 or SS Pro. I've been teaching music software both to amateurs and professors, and usually learn them quickly, but not so with Dorico – and even even if D1 was the most counterintuitive piece of software I had seen in the 40 years of my music career, I'm still seriously considering giving it another try now, since the results look so good and since it has lots of functions.


----------



## Vik

Daniel S. said:


> Not exactly, but the post on the blog that describes the benefits to users of Dorico 2, Dorico 3, and Dorico 3.5 when considering upgrading to Dorico 4 at least provides the headlines:


Thx, that's just what I needed.


----------



## Lassi Tani

Daniel S. said:


> At the moment, there's no sync between Cubase and Dorico, though some users are using the TXL Timecode plug-in to provide transport sync. We are definitely looking at ways of bringing Dorico and Cubase closer together in future.
> 
> Drag-and-drop of MIDI (and video files, to place them on the timeline in a flow at a particular point, and indeed chord symbols from Cubase's chord track) is back in Dorico 4.3.


Is the drag-drop of MIDI functional from Cubase to Dorico 4.3? Dorico crashes every time I try to do it.

Dorico 4.3.0.1110
Cubase 12.0.51 Build 391


----------



## Daniel S.

Lassi Tani said:


> Is the drag-drop of MIDI functional from Cubase to Dorico 4.3? Dorico crashes every time I try to do it.
> 
> Dorico 4.3.0.1110
> Cubase 12.0.51 Build 391


Yes, it's certainly meant to be. Can you do *Help* > *Create Diagnostic Report* and send me the resulting zip file so I can take a look and see what's going on?


----------



## DaddyO

On Thanksgiving day as always, I am thankful for the tireless efforts of all the Dorico team.


----------



## Lassi Tani

Daniel S. said:


> Yes, it's certainly meant to be. Can you do *Help* > *Create Diagnostic Report* and send me the resulting zip file so I can take a look and see what's going on?


Hi Daniel, thanks a lot, that's such great support! It's here


----------



## Daniel S.

Lassi Tani said:


> Hi Daniel, thanks a lot, that's such great support! It's here



Thanks for these – you can remove this from your Google Drive now if you wish.

I'll need to confer with a colleague about what's going on there. In the meantime, I wonder if the problem is easily reproducible? If so, could you share with me (via direct message if you like, or via email to d dot spreadbury at steinberg dot de) the project you're trying to import MIDI into, and the MIDI file you're trying to drag and drop, so I can see if I can reproduce the problem here?


----------



## Lassi Tani

Daniel S. said:


> Thanks for these – you can remove this from your Google Drive now if you wish.
> 
> I'll need to confer with a colleague about what's going on there. In the meantime, I wonder if the problem is easily reproducible? If so, could you share with me (via direct message if you like, or via email to d dot spreadbury at steinberg dot de) the project you're trying to import MIDI into, and the MIDI file you're trying to drag and drop, so I can see if I can reproduce the problem here?


You're welcome! Actually I tried to drag and drop MIDI *straight *from Cubase's Key Editor . I didn't think that it meant importing a MIDI file.


----------



## Daniel S.

Ah, you might need to try dragging and dropping a region rather than from the Key Editor itself. I've not tried that, but I'll give it a go!


----------



## Lassi Tani

Daniel S. said:


> Ah, you might need to try dragging and dropping a region rather than from the Key Editor itself. I've not tried that, but I'll give it a go!


Woah, it totally works! Thank you so much! Drag and drop MIDI from Cubase couldn't be easier now.


----------



## Electric Lion

So I've decided to take advantage of the Black Friday sale and I've gone ahead and pulled the trigger on Dorico Pro 4.3 and Noteperformer. I want to thank everyone who contributed to my thread, especially @Daniel S. for answering so many of my questions. I'm sure there will be many more in the future as I continue to learn the program.

Thanks, and happy writing.
- E. L.


----------



## Lassi Tani

Lassi Tani said:


> Woah, it totally works! Thank you so much! Drag and drop MIDI from Cubase couldn't be easier now.


This gets even better! If change the notes in Cubase, I can just drag and drop it again over the previous midi in Dorico and it just works 🤩


----------



## pryan

Electric Lion said:


> So I've decided to take advantage of the Black Friday sale and I've gone ahead and pulled the trigger on Dorico Pro 4.3 and Noteperformer. I want to thank everyone who contributed to my thread, especially @Daniel S. for answering so many of my questions. I'm sure there will be many more in the future as I continue to learn the program.
> 
> Thanks, and happy writing.
> - E. L.


Same. The enthusiasm and unstinting engagement on this and other fora add a huge amount of value. I’m in too 👍


----------



## Chi

pefra said:


> Hello Daniel,
> 
> user's question was: "Are there any Sibelius users here that still prefer Sibelius after trying Dorico?"
> 
> With emphasis on users. While I definitely appreciate that PMs write in these forum's, and I always absolutely enjoyed the way you interact with forum members, I am a bit on the edge about you jumping in at the first post after the OP and delivering argument after argument pro Dorico. As a user who has been watching and reading in VI-Control for years but only started to post myself not long ago let me say that I feel a bit uneasy about this.
> 
> Your judgement of Sib vs. Dorico may be different from a user's view, given the position you have now and the underlying (ex-)changes that have been happening between the two companies. Yes, you clearly stated that you are biased, and your technical points do absolutely stand, but still...
> 
> I would have enjoyed your post more had it come at a later point in the discussion.


To be fair though, he did clearly state that he wasn't impartial and it was obvious that he was the Dorico project manager. However, if we're going to get into technicalities, he was a Sibelius user I'm guessing before Dorico picked him up, so I mean it kinda still applies to him. And he did provide useful feedback, biased though it may be. Also, I'm completely pro Dorico. I didn't even try Sibelius, the features for Dorico just looked so much better, especially since 4 had just been released when I got it.


----------



## Chi

Thundercat said:


> One thing I can't get past with Dorico is how counterintuitive so many operations are. The Tantacrul video from a year or two ago really nailed it for me.
> 
> I know this is subjective - some of you will immediately say it's SO INTUITIVE!!! I get it, peace.
> 
> For me, I find anytime I want to do even the most basic things, I have to google, or in my case re-google it, over and over. I'm not using it everyday - that's part of the problem admittedly - but with Sibelius, I learned it once and pretty much could use most things without constant googling.
> 
> That's me. I have bought every single version of Sibelius until Avid ate it, and now I have bought every single version of Dorico since God rested on the 7th day, so please no flames.
> 
> I teach software for a living and for the life of me, I just can't get on with Dorico without a lot of wrangling. But I'm determined to keep using it until I can be the fanboi who says how great it is bar none hands down.
> 
> Tomorrow I meet with a wind ensemble, and they are going to rehearse a piece of music I wrote using Sibelius, and then rescored using Dorico.


Are you on 4.3? (I think that's the newest version). It not only looks cleaner but they've added a few features, my personal favorite being the ability to display more than one CC editor at a time. I almost went on a happy dance throughout all of the New World when I found that. Thank you ever so much, @Daniel S. You have saved my life, as I do all my CC curves by hand.


----------



## VSTHero

I'm more and more impressed by Dorico - the flexibility with expression maps (despite my initial grumbling at having to learn it haha) has been incredible - and customizable popup commands make things lightening fast to work with.


----------



## ThomasS

OK! - I guess I'll give Dorico a try. I don't want to. I'm just _too _used to Sibelius, having used it for nearly 30 years. Before that I was fluent in Finale, and used it for many orchestral projects with great success. But in the mid 90's, Finale got beat _(Sibelius-ed?)_ and I took the trouble to learn it and have never looked back.

But it looks like Sibelius is now getting Doricoed! Re-learning new software is a pain in the arse, but when something ultimately looks superior, it's inevitable. I was the last to switch from Word Perfect to Microsoft Word in the late 80's because I thought nothing could be better than Word Perfect (some people _still _actually swear by it.)

Finale is Myspace, Sibelius is FaceBook, and Dorico looks like TikTok (or something.) Dorico appears to be the future _(as long as Elon Musk doesn't buy it.)_

Reading this forum has added to my insecurity, because I'm wondering if I'm a dinosaur when it comes to sticking to old software. I've used Cubase since it ran on the Atari St and there was nothing better - but now people show me things they do in Studio One, and I'm thinking WTF! Why can't Cubase do that? I guess the architecture of long-standing programs sooner-or-later makes them unable to keep up with newcomers (who copy and learn from the best without pre-coded limitations.)

I always knew I would have to switch to Dorico one day _(especially after Avid pulled an earlier version of Elon Musk)_ but I've been waiting for it to mature sufficiently before jumping the Sibelius ship.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

VSTHero said:


> I'm more and more impressed by Dorico - the flexibility with expression maps (despite my initial grumbling at having to learn it haha) has been incredible - and customizable popup commands make things lightening fast to work with.


Popup commands are customizable? How? I've been searching for this recently. Couldn't find it in the key commands area.


----------



## Daniel S.

I guess @VSTHero is probably referring to the jump bar, which allows you to set up your own aliases for frequently-used commands:


----------



## VSTHero

That is what I was thinking of, apologies for the imprecision!


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

Ah ok, thank you for clearing up. I've been searching for a possibility to create double barlines faster. In the moment I always have to write double in the popup.II does not work for some reason.


----------



## Daniel S.

You should find that typing *||* into the *Shift*+*B *popover is sufficient to create a double barline.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

Daniel S. said:


> You should find that typing || into the Shift+B popover is sufficient to create a double barline.
> 
> This what I tried. Probably I missunderstood. It's not two times the letter I is it? It's a vertical bar line which I don't know how to find yet. Will check.


----------



## Daniel S.

Exactly, it's the pipe character. On an English keyboard, it's found on the key just to the right of the left *Shift* key.


----------



## Markus Kohlprath

Daniel S. said:


> Exactly, it's the pipe character. On an English keyboard, it's found on the key just to the right of the left Shift key.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel I have to say your responsiveness is so outstanding that I can hardly believe it. The Sibelius via Dorico thread turns into a Dorico support thread. I wonder where are the developers of Sibelius to make their point.
> Anyway many, many thanks and a happy New Year to you and your beloved!


----------

