# Pcoming Steinberg notation program



## dcoscina

I received a questionnaire about playback sounds for my current notation programs from Daniel Spreadbury & Co, presumably to get some feedback about what their prospective customer base feels about sonic realism of sounds. It was very heavily geared towards the quality and efficiency of the playback sounds and such. 

I'm hoping they take the cue from Notion as far as building a sample base library that will sound very convincing in the playback and expression. I'd love nothing more than to be able to work entirely in notation for all my orchestral scores and even film scores as it's the medium I compose best in.


----------



## ed buller

I was lucky enough to visit the lab.............it will be amazing...well worth waiting for

e


----------



## jsaras

Why don't they just integrate NotePerformer and be done with it?


----------



## Daryl

jsaras @ Thu May 08 said:


> Why don't they just integrate NotePerformer and be done with it?


l would imagine that some people want better playback and more flexibility than NotePerformer can deliver.

D


----------



## MikeH

To this day my favorite notation sample playback system was NOTION 2. It was very efficient and sounded excellent. I hope Daniel and Co. can come up with something similar. I'm not interested in something that involves hundreds of gigabytes of samples or tries to incorporate pseudo DAW features. Notation should be the number 1 priority.


----------



## Daryl

MikeH @ Fri May 09 said:


> To this day my favorite notation sample playback system was NOTION 2. It was very efficient and sounded excellent. I hope Daniel and Co. can come up with something similar. I'm not interested in something that involves hundreds of gigabytes of samples or tries to incorporate pseudo DAW features. Notation should be the number 1 priority.


I'm sure that Notation is going to be the priority, but equally those people who want to use the playback as a professional demo, to save time on sequencing, will also have to be considered.

D


----------



## MikeH

Daryl @ Fri May 09 said:


> MikeH @ Fri May 09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> To this day my favorite notation sample playback system was NOTION 2. It was very efficient and sounded excellent. I hope Daniel and Co. can come up with something similar. I'm not interested in something that involves hundreds of gigabytes of samples or tries to incorporate pseudo DAW features. Notation should be the number 1 priority.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sure that Notation is going to be the priority, but equally those people who want to use the playback as a professional demo, to save time on sequencing, will also have to be considered.
> 
> D
Click to expand...


Oh, absolutely. I think there's a sleek and efficient way to do it that won't feel like you're trying to pull an elephant around. I feel like Daniel and Steinberg are going to come up with something spectacular.


----------



## snattack

Daryl @ Thu May 08 said:


> jsaras @ Thu May 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why don't they just integrate NotePerformer and be done with it?
> 
> 
> 
> l would imagine that some people want better playback and more flexibility than NotePerformer can deliver.
> 
> D
Click to expand...


Today there's no better playback for notation software avaliable. But sure, the ideal would be to integrate it with Cubase to use with the libraries you use in production.


----------



## jsaras

A Cubase tie-in may be cool, but not everyone is on that platform. I certainly wouldn't want to switch to a new DAW at this point.


----------



## Jdiggity1

A couple of noteworthy comments by Daniel Spreadbury: "Our current plan is... to use VST Expression Maps as much as possible, and to try to give you as much direct control as possible over the way the assignment of sounds to playback techniques etc. is handled."

"Our plan is to use the core audio engine technology from Cubase and Nuendo: it’s battle-tested, high-performance code and far more capable than what we could come up with on our own."

"The long-term plan is to migrate some of the new technology we are building into Cubase."


----------



## Lassi Tani

Interesting interview: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/people/an-i ... preadbury/


----------



## Anders Wall

dcoscina @ Thu May 08 said:


> I'd love nothing more than to be able to work entirely in notation for all my orchestral scores and even film scores as it's the medium I compose best in.



+1

I'm on Sibelius and ProTools but would switch in seconds it this were to happen.

Cheers,

Anders


----------



## jamwerks

Interesting read. Sounds like the new program will be worth the wait!


----------



## Mahlon

sekkosiki @ Tue Feb 17 said:


> Interesting interview: http://www.sibeliusblog.com/people/an-i ... preadbury/



Thanks for linking that. An absolutely fantastic interview. Thank you Philip Rothman. And thank God for minds like Daniel Spreadbury's.

Mahlon


----------



## wcreed51

Here's the new one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBhPyTNkXKI


----------



## Anders Wall

And here's some news.
http://www.sibeliusblog.com/meta/mola-2016-conference-report-day-1/

"until Steinberg officially announces it. The good news is that you won’t have to wait long for that — details about the product, including its name, will be unveiled this coming Tuesday, May 17."

Can't wait,
Anders


----------



## Vik

MikeH said:


> I'm not interested in something that involves hundreds of gigabytes of samples or tries to incorporate pseudo DAW features.


IMHO it would be a major mistake not to incorporate DAW features, because I have yet to come across anyone who *wants* to compose in one program and mix in another. Or who insists that he is agains having the option to record (or play back) one or more audio track in the app he composes in.
How many of the VI-C members who use both a DAW and Sibelius or Finale would have used two apps (two different workflows, two different features sets, two different sets of key commands and so on) if they could do it all in one? And why would anyone want that?


----------



## Daryl

Vik said:


> How many of the VI-C members who use both a DAW and Sibelius or Finale would have used two apps (two different workflows, two different features sets, two different sets of key commands and so on) if they could do it all in one? And why would anyone want that?


I sort of agree, but I think that there are relatively few people who need the best mockup and then the best translation to notation. A v1 release has to appeal to one largish market, or it is doomed There are sufficient problems with current notation programs that releasing a program that concentrates on notation but with unique features is probably the best bet of getting enough users to justify the time and money.


----------



## jamwerks

Awesome, Awesome! Finally. There might be eventually some ties between Cubase and this new program, but I imagine it being an all out notation-only program.


----------



## Vik

http://www.sibeliusblog.com/people/an-interview-with-daniel-spreadbury/
"We had one developer work on just ties for nearly a year".
I like it already.


----------



## Daryl

jamwerks said:


> Awesome, Awesome! Finally. There might be eventually some ties between Cubase and this new program, but I imagine it being an all out notation-only program.


Yes, that is the plan, but for now the team are concentrating on delivering something that even with v1 is competitive with current notation programs


----------



## muk

Vik said:


> "We had one developer work on just ties for nearly a year".
> I like it already.



Don't hold your breath about that Vik. As Daryl wrote, the team is focussing on building a notation software that is up there with the contenders from v1 on. Somewhere in his Blog Daniel mentioned that integration with Cubase was definitely something they plan to do, but that it was not top priority for them (get the notation right first) and will take time until it's being implemented. From what I read about the program it sounded like they wanted to build Cubase integration step by step, so maybe some basic functionality could be integrated in v2, and then gradually more from there.


----------



## Vik

Well, Steinberg would of course prefer that people buy both Cubase and the new score app. Maybe they'll even, intentionally, leave out some functionality in the new score app. Personally, I think it's a big mistake not to make score apps more DAW like (in a transparent way), and I'm pretty sure that in the future, people will buy "modules", not apps. This could mean that they'll buy their favourite DAW, and then decide which fully functional "score module" they like to use inside that DAW. Steinberg has spent 3+ years preparing their new app, and most likely, they also have looked into what they think is the best solution - not only for now, but for a product that still will remain attractive after, say, 10 years.

Maybe they even have planned that The New App can be used as a score editor inside a future version of Logic or Performer. And while Cubase integration may not happen for a while, they must have taken future Cubase integration into consideration when building the new app from scratch. As a Logic user, I have seen for a long time now that Apple has demonstrated their lack of interest in notation, in composing features, in classical music in general (look at iTunes and "Music")... so there are no other companies I'm aware of which are close to having the focus on composing and all that implies (expression maps, a proper score editor etc etc) as Steinberg is. This is why I'm optimistic about the new app, at least until more info about it will be available tomorrow. 

Maybe the new app won't be brilliant for a while, but unlike Logic, at least it's being developed (in the areas which are important for me)!



muk said:


> Don't hold your breath about that Vik. As Daryl wrote, the team is focussing on building a notation software...


True. But they do know that people use notation software for composing, and that they prefer to use it with proper orchestral libraries. If they won't be focusing on those two aspects from version 1.0 (and during the 3+ years it has taken to get them where they are now with the app), their new app is IMO kind of on the wrong track already.


----------



## Daryl

Vik, the thing is that if the new program can't compete with Sibelius and Finale on a professional level, there is no point even thinking about a possible tie with Cubase; it would be dead in the water long before that ever happened. So it's notation for now, and then probably more integration 5-10 years down the line.


----------



## Vik

Daryl said:


> Vik, the thing is that if the new program can't compete with Sibelius and Finale on a professional level, there is no point even thinking about a possible tie with Cubase...


You may be right, although many users would want a very close tie between their DAW and their score app even if the score editor wasn't "perfect". And as you say, they are concentrating on delivering something which immediately will be competitive with Sibelius and Finale. So I'm not that worried about whether the score editor already after the presentation tomorrow will be seen as an upcoming and strong competition to Sib and Finale. 

I hope that the new app has built from day one with full future integration with Cubase and possibly even other DAWs in mind. If it has, I doubt that it will take as much as 10 or even 5 years before we can use the new new app as a score editor along with Cubase (or better; a score module inside Cubase totally behaving as if it was a part of Cubase). 

But since I'm not Cubase user (yet?), I hope Apple (due to their ongoing lack of interest in notation and proper CI support) will develop some kind of "CoreScore" functionality which will allow any score app developer create a fully fledged score editor for use inside Logic. But the thing I'm most excited about re. tomorrow's presentation is to see if the new app seems so good that it will increase my interest in Steinberg/Cubase enough to let go of Logic.


----------



## muk

Vik said:


> You may be right, although many users would want a very close tie between their DAW and their score app even if the score editor wasn't "perfect".



The team stated that they have other priorities, which I find understandable. Why should anybody want to buy a notation program that is far behind Finale and Sibelius, just because it integrates into Cubase? You already have a less than perfect score app in Cubase, no need for second one.


----------



## Vik

muk said:


> The team stated that they have other priorities, which I find understandable. Why should anybody want to buy a notation program that is far behind Finale and Sibelius, just because it integrates into Cubase? You already have a less than perfect score app in Cubase, no need for second one.


I agree that they won't get anywhere with their new app if would be (far) behind Sibelius and Finale. I just hope it's built around a core which makes it easy to keep developing towards full integration with at least Cubase, and hopefully other DAWs as well.


----------



## Lassi Tani

It's a nice bonus, if it works well with Cubase, but my top wish is a notation program, which would be as comprehensive as Sibelius, but would be much easier to use.


----------



## Daryl

sekkosiki said:


> It's a nice bonus, if it works well with Cubase, but my top wish is a notation program, which would be as comprehensive as Sibelius, but would be much easier to use.


The trouble with "comprehensive" is that it is all in the eye of the beholder. I probably use around 40% (at a guess) of the program but know that portion pretty well. the other 60 not so much, and I don't really care about it either.

As far as ease of use, there are a few issues with Sibelius, but for the most part I find it pretty intuitive. Please remember that the Steinberg team is the Sibelius team, so don't expect the thinking to be radically different. Just newer and with less bloated old code to deal with.

Having said that there will be some col new features that nobody has, so these may be enough to tip you over the edge.


----------



## ChristopherDoucet

Im really excited about this! I think it would be really cool if it was just an interrogated part of Cubase Pro and you can pay extra to unlock it! Using Sibelius until this is available.


----------



## InLight-Tone

They stated in the blog that they are incorporating the Cubase audio engine and VST handling and will be using Cubase Expression maps for articulation handling. Further integration into Cubase is on the roadmap...


----------



## Lassi Tani

Daryl said:


> The trouble with "comprehensive" is that it is all in the eye of the beholder. I probably use around 40% (at a guess) of the program but know that portion pretty well. the other 60 not so much, and I don't really care about it either.
> 
> As far as ease of use, there are a few issues with Sibelius, but for the most part I find it pretty intuitive. Please remember that the Steinberg team is the Sibelius team, so don't expect the thinking to be radically different. Just newer and with less bloated old code to deal with.
> 
> Having said that there will be some col new features that nobody has, so these may be enough to tip you over the edge.



With comprehensive I probably meant that 40%. I've been using Notion 5 a lot, but unfortunately it lacks a lot compared to Sibelius.

I find it unintuitive if I need to remember all kinds of shortkeys, which Sibelius uses a lot, too much to my taste. The short snippets they have shown of the UI look promising, modern.


----------



## wcreed51

And the answer is...

https://www.steinberg.net/en/products/dorico.html?et_cid=15&et_lid=22&et_sub=Dorico


----------



## DaddyO

I hope they extend the crossgrade offer to Notion users.


----------



## Daryl

DaddyO said:


> I hope they extend the crossgrade offer to Notion users.


Would be nice, but unlikely, as Notion is not really a competitor.


----------



## DaddyO

This Sibelius blog has a nice rundown of what is known of Dorico:

http://www.sibeliusblog.com/news/steinberg-announces-dorico-availability-in-q4-2016/


----------



## RiffWraith

Pcoming????


----------



## Guillermo Navarrete

Hello,



DaddyO said:


> I hope they extend the crossgrade offer to Notion users.



Well, Notation only costs 100usd, I guess you wouldn't expect to have the same price discount as someone that payed 500 or more? 

Best regards,
GN


----------



## DaddyO

Guillermo Navarrete said:


> Hello,
> 
> 
> 
> Well, Notation only costs 100usd, I guess you wouldn't expect to have the same price discount as someone that payed 500 or more?
> 
> Best regards,
> GN



$149, but this small difference doesn't affect your point, which is certainly valid. Expect? No. Hope? Why not?!


----------



## Guillermo Navarrete

Hello,



DaddyO said:


> $149, but this small difference doesn't affect your point, which is certainly valid. Expect? No. Hope? Why not?!



I think it totally does, Notion –it's so inexpensive in comparison to Finale and Sibelius that it will be unfair for the Finale and Sibelius customers, because then users would be able to buy Notion for $99 or 149, then our crossgrade for $299, and save themselves $200 on the price of a full retail version of Dorico... I don't see that happening; But this is only my personal opinion, lets be clear on that.

I have passed your suggestion to our sales department because we are still working out the final terms and conditions of the crossgrade and will publish them closer to the time of Dorico's general availability.

Best regards,
GN


----------



## wcreed51

Certainly true, but on the other hand, Finale and Sibelius accept Notion for _their _crossgrade offers. Just say'n.


----------



## DaddyO

Guillermo Navarrete said:


> Hello,
> 
> 
> 
> I think it totally does, Notion –it's so inexpensive in comparison to Finale and Sibelius that it will be unfair for the Finale and Sibelius customers, because then users would be able to buy Notion for $99 or 149, then our crossgrade for $299, and save themselves $200 on the price of a full retail version of Dorico... I don't see that happening; But this is only my personal opinion, lets be clear on that.
> 
> I have passed your suggestion to our sales department because we are still working out the final terms and conditions of the crossgrade and will publish them closer to the time of Dorico's general availability.
> 
> Best regards,
> GN



Guillermo. Thanks for the reply. I think if you re-check my response you will see I was acknowledging the validity of your point (see my phrase, "which is certainly valid." I was agreeing with you. I do appreciate you passing on the possibility of some sort of crossgrade pricing for Notion. I would completely understand if the discount were not as great.


----------

