# Any news on new notation program on the way?



## Steve Steele (Dec 25, 2013)

I read here on VI about possible new notation programs coming soon. What's the story or the latest on that? Any recent links?

I started using Finale in 1992. Stopped using notation programs for awhile. Have dabbled in Finale and Sibelius lately but I'm ready to get back into it full time.

Before I choose one or the other, or try both again, is there something new coming out? (Not Notion 4).

Let me add that at this time I'm probably more interested in playback and some minor printing than full on engraving and publishing. I'd like to use it as a composition tool also so I can try and skip the step of going from pen and paper to app.

I'd rather not scan my handwritten notation.

Thanks


----------



## kclements (Dec 25, 2013)

I think you may be referring to the project Daniel Spreadbury and the former Sibelius team are working in for Steinberg. It's a ways off, but I am looking forward to it.

Check oh his blog here:http://blog.steinberg.net

Cheers
kc


----------



## Steve Steele (Dec 25, 2013)

kclements @ Wed Dec 25 said:


> I think you may be referring to the project Daniel Spreadbury and the former Sibelius team are working in for Steinberg. It's a ways off, but I am looking forward to it.
> 
> Check oh his blog here:http://blog.steinberg.net
> 
> ...



That's the one.

Thanks!


----------



## kclements (Dec 25, 2013)

You're welcome 

Cheers
kc


----------



## wcreed51 (Dec 25, 2013)

We must be about due for another update...


----------



## The Darris (Jan 26, 2014)

Sibelius 7.5 is out. This is an interesting blog/review about the semi-new features: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/sibelius-7-5-announced/


----------



## snattack (Jan 26, 2014)

The Darris @ Sun Jan 26 said:


> Sibelius 7.5 is out. This is an interesting blog/review about the semi-new features: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/sibelius-7-5-announced/



Aw man, 7.5 is a fracking joke. 18 months of adding crap features while still lack BASIC functions and bugs that should have been taken care of years ago.

If it wasn't for Noteperformer, I would change to Finale right away. Sibelius is a perfect program for teachers, but I need to write sometimes up to two full arrangements/day, and using 15 minutes/score to correct non-magnetic glissando/portamento lines and moving rehearsal marks in parts is plain stupid.

Finale 2014 now seems better than Sibelius.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 27, 2014)

I don't do nearly as extensive work in Sibelius but for what write on a professional level (Percussion Ensembles) it gets the job done without hassle. I agree that 7.5 is a joke and I refuse to upgrade as I have a solid performance with 7.1.3. I am waiting for the new Steinberg team's work in the coming year or two. I feel they are going to provide a great alternative to Fin and Sib.


----------



## Daryl (Jan 27, 2014)

snattack @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> If it wasn't for Noteperformer, I would change to Finale right away. Sibelius is a perfect program for teachers, but I need to write sometimes up to two full arrangements/day, and using 15 minutes/score to correct non-magnetic glissando/portamento lines and moving rehearsal marks in parts is plain stupid.
> 
> Finale 2014 now seems better than Sibelius.


What's the problem with rehearsal marks? They are magnetic, so as long as your House Style is set correctly, you shouldn't have to spend hours doing anything

I would agree that glissando and portamento lines are not as intelligent as they could be, but they are magnetic.

Before you switch, I would check out whether or not Finale actually has a usable version of Magnetic Layout. This feature alone has saved me hours over the years.

D


----------



## snattack (Jan 27, 2014)

Daryl @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> snattack @ Mon Jan 27 said:
> 
> 
> > If it wasn't for Noteperformer, I would change to Finale right away. Sibelius is a perfect program for teachers, but I need to write sometimes up to two full arrangements/day, and using 15 minutes/score to correct non-magnetic glissando/portamento lines and moving rehearsal marks in parts is plain stupid.
> ...



The problems is that rehearsal marks can only be linked to bar AFTER the accidentals, so different keys (for instance in transposed instruments) places the rehearsal marks on different horizontal position in the beginning of the bar. I (and most other orchestrators I know) usually want the rehearsal marks centered above the first bar line BEFORE the clef in the parts, and this is not doable. This way you can auto break every rehearsal mark and prevent it from being in the way in the middle of a musical passage (most of the time).

A solution would be to select all marks, reset position and then move it sideways with the keys when all are selected, but for some stupid reason the rehearsal marks are one of very few elements in Sibelius which cannot be moved in group, it will only move one rehearsal mark at a time, even if several are selected.

Also, changing the rehearsal mark position in the score horizontally (it snaps to the bar line which is far from optimal at all times) using the Inspector and changing the X-note value also changes the position in the parts.

Regarding glissandi: they aren't magnetic, or at least they aren't linked to start/end note. One would argue that the algrothm is already placed with slurs (and the slide on the keypad that I won't use because it's not a clear enough instruction for i.e strings IMO, and when doing a system break it's impossible to make it look right), so it shouldn't at all be a problem reusing one of those, but it's been YEARS now and still this time consuming banality haven't changed.

There are more stuff:
- empty ties spill over to the next system and can only be hidden with a white square or shape written over it
- glissando/slurs behaves appaling in the same situation
- the 1.&2. repeat houses (don't know the correct term in english) are always to long and needs to be corrected, the same with trills, etc etc etc.

LOTS of stuff that just unnecessary time thieves when it comes to layout. They should consult people that are in a hurry with tight deadlines, because only then the leaks in workflow gets more obvious.

I guess the features they applied are relevant to people who aren't in the top professional field, but if they are going to market software meant for professionals, the focus needs to be to fix EVERYTHING that is time consuming, before adding crappy stuff like ribbon, online sharing etc.

Sorry for the grumpyness, but after 600+ orchestrations in the last 4 years I've been working with Sibelius, these stuff pisses me off =)


----------



## Daryl (Jan 27, 2014)

Andreas, no need to apologise for being grumpy. There is at least one bug that has been there for nearly 15 years that drives me mad, so I fully understand your frustration.

As far as stuff taking too long, I learned a long time ago that certain things in the House Style/Text Style were better left alone if I wanted to save time. Sure, if I was engraving they would annoy me, but like you, I have to get a decent looking result in the shortest amount of time, so I let them go.

I am still using Sibelius 6, because it suits my workflow better. There are improvements in Sibelius 7, but they don't outweigh the negatives for me. I am hopeful about the new Steinberg notation program though, not least because they don't have to incorporate 15 yeas of old code.

D


----------



## snattack (Jan 27, 2014)

Daryl @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> Andreas, no need to apologise for being grumpy. There is at least one bug that has been there for nearly 15 years that drives me mad, so I fully understand your frustration.
> 
> As far as stuff taking too long, I learned a long time ago that certain things in the House Style/Text Style were better left alone if I wanted to save time. Sure, if I was engraving they would annoy me, but like you, I have to get a decent looking result in the shortest amount of time, so I let them go.
> 
> ...



I think it's a matter of "honor" when it comes to delivering really good looking score, for me it is anyway. I've shaped the house style to my liking, so there's a lot that works automatically which is wonderful, but there are so many SIMPLE things that could speed up the workflow. For instance:

- Priority of positioning tempo text. According to engraving litterature (or at least some of it) the first letter/note in the metronome mark should be positioned horizontally above the time signature if avaliable. If not, horizontally above the first note.

- "first bar line" should be an element that stuff could relate to (i.e. rehearsal marks)

- Glissando and lines should be optimized so that they are the corresponding lenght of what you select (i.e. select a bar, put a repeat house 1., the repeat house should end at the barline, NOT 5 point AFTER the bar line, why would ANYONE want that!?)

Three simple points that IN EVERY SCORE I WRITE needs to be taken care of and hogs the workflow.

Two other bugs that are simply amazing:

1. In perc, when switching from a percussion staff (1-5 lines) to a pitched base staff (i.e Vibraphone) THERE IS NO WAY to add the accidentals of the key signature on the same system. It shows up on the next system. I've entered rehearsals where glockenspiel played my stuff in C major instead of B major because the accidentals was just gone.

2. When changing to another transposed instrument in the beginning of the system (i.e. English horn in Oboe 2) it ADDS the new keys AFTER the original key signature. Solution is to zoom in 1000% and position the sharps on top of the original time signature. If the transposition changes to a flat key (which can be the cause for instance when changing to Clarinet in A) there's no solution, the changing of instrument needs to occur in the middle of a system.

These two bugs are not just annoying, they are DANGEROUS in an orchestral rehearsal, it places several musicians in the wrong key signature.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 27, 2014)

These issues you have should be sent to Steinberg's new Notation Software devs. I'm sure most of them are aware of it but their goal is to put out a product for professionals and not tailor to the everyday 'wannabe' composers/orchestrators. I'm sure they would be thrilled to get some feature requests and complaints with current notation programs. http://blog.steinberg.net/


----------



## snattack (Jan 27, 2014)

The Darris @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> These issues you have should be sent to Steinberg's new Notation Software devs. I'm sure most of them are aware of it but their goal is to put out a product for professionals and not tailor to the everyday 'wannabe' composers/orchestrators. I'm sure they would be thrilled to get some feature requests and complaints with current notation programs. http://blog.steinberg.net/



Yes, I'm very much looking forward to this, and hope that they intergrate it into Cubase as well. It would be a great time saver to be able to use any sounds avalible in Cubase and also to just be able to print nice parts straight out of the sequencer. Hope they intergrate some kind of "print quantize" feature to that you can record stuff "off perfect time" and still have a nice printout.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 27, 2014)

I would honestly prefer a seamless integration through rewire or something that is intelligent enough in the routing to process the midi data into the full notation program to alleviate the time spent in exporting midi, importing, cleaning, etc. Being able to do everything real time with an intelligent quantize to notation would be essential to me. I know the current Cubase notation can ultimately quantize to score and not effect the midi data, just being able to do it cross application in real time would be great.


----------



## Harcourt (Jan 28, 2014)

The Darris @ Mon Jan 27 said:


> ....their goal is to put out a product for professionals and not tailor to the everyday 'wannabe' composers/orchestrators.


 Not sure what you mean by that. All so called "professionals" start out being "wannabes" at one stage. There is nothing wrong with amateurs and hobbyists wanting a quality product as well. 
I see the main problem with Cubase is that it's trying to appeal more to the cut and paste loop EDM crowd, than maybe to orchestral composers; I gather this is probably representative of the majority of users based on the Cubase forum responses to score based requests.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 29, 2014)

Harcourt @ Tue Jan 28 said:


> Not sure what you mean by that. All so called "professionals" start out being "wannabes" at one stage. There is nothing wrong with amateurs and hobbyists wanting a quality product as well.
> I see the main problem with Cubase is that it's trying to appeal more to the cut and paste loop EDM crowd, than maybe to orchestral composers; I gather this is probably representative of the majority of users based on the Cubase forum responses to score based requests.



That comment was not to be taken in that context. The point I was making is that they are wanting to develop a notation program that caters to the working professional verses the everyday musician. Ironically, that is backwards from Steinberg's recent release of Cubase 7.5. As someone who uses Sibelius for a lot of jobs, it is frustrating to see a .5 upgrade that doesn't have any major improvements from 7.1.3.

Also, there is nothing wrong with amateurs wanting a quality product but in reality, most amateurs want all the little hoaky features that I am talking about.


----------



## kdm (Jan 30, 2014)

The Darris @ Wed Jan 29 said:


> As someone who uses Sibelius for a lot of jobs, it is frustrating to see a .5 upgrade that doesn't have any major improvements from 7.1.3.



I assume you may be specifically referring to the score editor in 7.5, but if not, there are some significant additions to 7.5 that benefit us composers - track visibility allows you to setup key commands to show/hide selected tracks, tracks with data, etc - incredibly powerful way to quickly focus on sections of a large template. And it's the "show/hide" feature that was requested several years ago by Andrew of AudioBro (LASS). Track versions is another nice addition. 

In reference to the score editor, I doubt we will see a lot of major updates until the new editor is released, and I'm guessing that's another year or two away at least. I'm curious to see how closely it will be integrated into Cubase/Nuendo at first, and keeping my fingers crossed. For now I'll stick with Sibelius rewired to Nuendo.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 30, 2014)

Sure, it has become more user friendly for DAW users with the Timeline feature. As I stated in my opinion, those types of features aren't revolutionary to me as someone who has been using Sibelius and Finale since 2002. Avid failed to fix a lot of issues with Sibelius editor. It isn't need of a new one, just in need of fixing features with how the editor treats articulation markings and other score design features that we have to spend in upwards of an hour tweaking just to get the score to look right. This is just in the full score view, not mentioning the pain in the ass it is to have to go through the individual parts and make sure the formatting stayed the same throughout. Fixing that would entail the means of a .5 upgrade because you aren't changing the engine or look, just how the features respond. Even then, 7.5 uses a slightly different engine than 7.1.3 which makes it an even bigger fail in my book that they didn't fix IMPORTANT issues with the Sibelius title.


----------



## kdm (Jan 30, 2014)

Hey - I don't know if I mixed up the two references to 7.5 - I was referring to the Cubase 7.5 update, but I am now thinking you were referring to Sibelius' impending 7.5 update. I apologize if I misunderstood. 

Either way, you are right. Now that Avid has Sibelius, I am not expecting much. Avid sat on their score editor integration in ProTools (and the Sibelius export) since it was introduced, and it had major bugs making it unusable. Not one update since then. And I haven't seen anything in Sib 7.5 that seems worthy of the .5 update. Unfortunate to see really. 

I am more optimistic about Steinberg's new application than Sibelius updates at this point, despite the growing pains that will no doubt accompany the 1.0 release.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 31, 2014)

Haha, no problem. I didn't see the disconnect with the 2 7.5 comments I apologize for not being clear, I do that sometimes. 

Yeah, the 1.0 version of the new notation software will be rough at first but as long as the early adopters keep track of the fallacies or gremlins and actually report them to Steinberg support, they will hopefully get updates out frequently. I mean, Cubase received updates multiple times throughout last year which is more than I can say for Sib 7 or some other Avid products. They tend to be more of the, "let's sit on the update until we have a lot of the quirks fixed first before releasing one." That is a totally okay way to release updates but not when the issues it is addressing are serious ones. And for crying out loud, a .5 update should fix the major issues, not implement more options and features that need to be bug tested. ::I digress::

We all have our hopes and dreams of the perfect notation program. I can only hope Steinberg follows through with their initial vision. I was glad to hear they picked up the original Sibelius devs who got fired from Avid. That makes me think they want to provide something revolutionary.


----------



## InLight-Tone (Jan 31, 2014)

This is something new and completely different...

http://opusmodus.com/


----------



## wcreed51 (Jan 31, 2014)

That's pretty scary! Hard to imagine that it will appeal to very many composers.


----------



## neve (Jul 6, 2014)

InLight-Tone @ Fri Jan 31 said:


> This is something new and completely different...
> 
> http://opusmodus.com/



Apparently just 3 days away from being released. When I first saw it I thought it was kind of surreal, but looking more into the specs it actually looks quite promising - specially if the values could also be input with a midi controller.

I wouldn't be personally too inspired by writing code as a way of composing, but if the very specific values for articulations could be assigned to midi controller values then I could see some really good uses to this.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 6, 2014)

There's already a free program that uses a similar approach. Don't know if it uses the exact same scripting though.

Apparently people who take the time to learn the language can reproduce even the most complex scores in a relatively short period of time. Though I tried it and the learning curve is too steep for me to bother with.

Here's a link to the GNU version: http://www.lilypond.org/


----------



## neve (Jul 6, 2014)

The lilypond project looks interesting. I think the learning curve would be very steep for me as well. 

I hope in a couple of years from now these technologies can be integrated with friendlier graphical user interfaces.


----------

