# What's your process when writing in Sibelius/Finale....then moving the piece to your DAW?



## Mike Marino (Aug 30, 2011)

Hey all,

I'm finding that I tend to use Sibelius as my starting point from just about everything I do that's orchestral in nature. It seems there are a number of you guys who do the same thing....write the draft in a notation program, then move it to your DAW.

My question is: what's your process of getting things programmed once you move the piece over? For instance, are you printing your sheet music, then playing everything in and tweaking from there? Are you exporting the MIDI stems then loading that into your DAW for sound replacement and programming?

The only orchestral library I have is EWQLSO Platinum. I've tried writing things first, then printing the music and performing back into the DAW. I've also tried exporting the MIDI stems, then using DXF patches, using the modwheel to color/add expression to the playback. I haven't found my groove in either process.

How are you doing what you're doing?

Thanks!
- Mike


----------



## windshore (Aug 30, 2011)

Funny, I do the opposite. I sketch in Logic for themes, layout, and timing. Then when I don't really need to look at picture, I import that to Sibelius, do the more intricate work and orchestration, then export back to Logic.


----------



## Casey Edwards (Aug 30, 2011)

For me it goes: paper/piano -> Cubase -> Finale


----------



## Mike Marino (Aug 30, 2011)

Interesting Windshore. Do you find that when you add the details (expression, dynamics, etc) in Sibelius that they stay true when you import back into Logic?


----------



## Mike Marino (Aug 30, 2011)

@ Casey: I need to start doing that....if nothing else, just for the experience of doing it.

Yeah, maybe I'm working backwards, lol.


----------



## rgames (Aug 30, 2011)

I'm not a Sibelius user but it's almost impossible to get anything but pitches and rhythms out of Finale.

So, yes, export everything as uber-quantized MIDI, import into the DAW and start tweaking.

With Finale you have to be careful, though, because I've found that it occasionally puts the exported MIDI data in the wrong octave. Usually pretty obvious, though.

rgames


----------



## JT (Aug 30, 2011)

My usual workflow is to compose in Finale first. Next, I prefer to play each part in Logic manually, but I'm a trumpet player, not a pianist. So if the piece is too much for me to comfortably play, then I'll export a midi from Finale and use that as my starting point and edit the heck out of it.

On my last project, I composed directly in Logic. This was a big change for me. When composing in Finale, I tend to "think" a lot, about compositional techniques, voice leading and so forth. So starting directly in Logic I ended up with some different ideas that I might not have come up with if I started in notation.

I'll probably stick with notation first, but it was good training for me to be able to work both ways when needed.

JT


----------



## windshore (Aug 30, 2011)

No. The ability of Sibelius to render a performance that has all of the nuance I want is limited at best. The dynamics don't really translate in a way that is useful. 

You have to consider too, that a performance with samples has to take into account their attacks and releases - which are different across different libs. Sibelius is great for arranging, orchestrating and notation.... you can't expect much more than that.

I tell my students at UCLA that trying to use Sibelius for production is like trying to use Photoshop for word processing. It's possible to do, but that's not what the program was really designed to do, so you face an uphill battle.


----------



## rgames (Aug 30, 2011)

windshore @ Tue Aug 30 said:


> I tell my students at UCLA that trying to use Sibelius for production is like trying to use Photoshop for word processing. It's possible to do, but that's not what the program was really designed to do, so you face an uphill battle.


That's a good analogy.

I'm not sure about Sibelius but Finale has wasted a lot of time over the last few versions trying to make it behave like a sequencer. I wish they'd have spent the time on other features because, like you say about Sibelius, its utility as a sequencer is solidly in the "bad" category.

rgames


----------



## windshore (Aug 30, 2011)

rgames @ 8/30/2011 said:


> I'm not sure about Sibelius but Finale has wasted a lot of time over the last few versions trying to make it behave like a sequencer. I wish they'd have spent the time on other features because, like you say about Sibelius, its utility as a sequencer is solidly in the "bad" category.
> 
> rgames



Wow, EXACTLY the same with Sibelius. They really have to learn to stick with what they do best. I think the push for both is with the education market but it ends up degrading usability for pro users.


----------



## Mike Marino (Aug 30, 2011)

Ok, very cool. Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## mverta (Aug 30, 2011)

Print it, and play it.

Humans aren't quantized. Even Dave Weckl isn't quantized.


_Mike


----------



## Mike Marino (Aug 30, 2011)

@ Mike: Nope, lol...but Vinnie might be! <>


----------



## nikolas (Sep 1, 2011)

Well...

When I have prepared a 'full' score with articulations, dynamics and tempo markings... I delete all those leaving only the notes. I can edit all those features in Cubase, rather than finale which is semi-automatic and silly when it comes to such features...


----------



## careyford (Oct 6, 2011)

I agree with Mike. If I want a mock-up for my own preparation and it's going to be played by humans, I live with Finale or Sibelius playback which isn't horrible these days. If the mock-up is going to be the final product, then I play them in one at a time as musically as I'm able.


----------



## Mahlon (Oct 7, 2011)

rgames @ Tue Aug 30 said:


> windshore @ Tue Aug 30 said:
> 
> 
> > I tell my students at UCLA that trying to use Sibelius for production is like trying to use Photoshop for word processing. It's possible to do, but that's not what the program was really designed to do, so you face an uphill battle.
> ...




Now, if only VSL would come up with a DAW/Notation software. I can only imagine, with their great design and technical skills (as proven with VE Pro), that it would be covered with all kinds of awesome sauce.

Mahlon


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 7, 2011)

windshore @ Tue Aug 30 said:


> Funny, I do the opposite. I sketch in Logic for themes, layout, and timing. Then when I don't really need to look at picture, I import that to Sibelius, do the more intricate work and orchestration, then export back to Logic.



Really? While Finale may give you a more elegant score for engraved publishing purposes, there is little for orchestration you can do in it that you cannot in Logic's Score Editor if you know it well.

I am currently working on my third book, and this one is specifically on the score editor.


----------



## nikolas (Oct 7, 2011)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Oct 07 said:


> Really? While Finale may give you a more elegant score for engraved publishing purposes, there is little for orchestration you can do in it that you cannot in Logic's Score Editor if you know it well.
> 
> I am currently working on my third book, and this one is specifically on the score editor.


Personally I find working straight to the computer (for complex scores (and not recordings and renderings) a pain in the arse... I just can't help to feel helpless when I don't have sketches, drafts, info, pencil, markers, etc in front of me... I'm too used to being a copier I guess which makes it hard to work straight on Finale/Sibelius... :-/


----------



## Daryl (Oct 7, 2011)

mverta @ Wed Aug 31 said:


> Print it, and play it.
> 
> _Mike


Yep, that's what I do.

D


----------



## Pochflyboy (Oct 7, 2011)

Daryl @ Fri Oct 07 said:


> mverta @ Wed Aug 31 said:
> 
> 
> > Print it, and play it.
> ...



+1 It really is the fastest way to getting everything programmed in correctly.


----------



## JaredJn (Oct 21, 2011)

It looks like I need a new system then!

I almost always play it directly into Logic... 
I have personally noticed that I wind up coming up with ideas and not really knowing
what I want to play where, but I just put everything in as I go along.
I think that I will start writing it into Sibelius first and then play them into Logic. this way I can actually focus on every line and what the music is doing.

I guess I get ahead of myself and start "Improvising" a song...

time for a change!!



-Jared J.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 22, 2011)

JaredJn @ Fri Oct 21 said:


> It looks like I need a new system then!
> 
> I almost always play it directly into Logic...
> I have personally noticed that I wind up coming up with ideas and not really knowing
> ...



There is nothing wrong with improvising. All the great Classical composers were fantastic improvisers. Beethoven was famous for it. However, you only have to look at his notebooks to see how hard he worked when trying to compose music, rather than just improvise some sort of disposable nonsense. Of course Beethoven's nonsense would be far superior to anything that I would ever come up with in a million years, but I hope that you get the point.

Another thing to remember is that unless you really are a world class improviser, your hands will always tend to fall into the patterns that they are comfortable with. This is one of the reasons I think that many Media composers seem to write the same track over and over again.

However, there is one useful thing that improvising can achieve; the happy accident. Sometimes, when noodling, suddenly by mistake you can hit a few wrong notes that sound great, or give you a really individual idea. The art is in knowing when to run with it, and when to abandon it.

D


----------



## JaredJn (Oct 26, 2011)

Daryl I do agree.
The only thing that I feel a tad different about is the improvising hand tendencies. Since I'm also a pianist, I'm always practicing new things and actually find myself creating new patterns from old material and new ones.
Yes, I can agree that many composers have music that begins to sound the same because of the tendencies, but I seem to find myself writing things that are different because I DO know when to Abandon something that my hand is doing out of familiarity or to keep something brand new.

I try to also remember not to sound like everything else I've heard over and over again. I'm always aiming for something new and different. I'm not talking SUPER out there but something new to my ear at least.

-Jared J.


----------



## danika (Nov 17, 2011)

Casey Edwards @ Tue Aug 30 said:


> For me it goes: paper/piano -> Cubase -> Finale



I use a similar process:

Cubase + Keyboard > Music XML > Finale Print Music


----------

