# Is anyone else using notation software more than a DAW?



## andyhy (Nov 6, 2021)

Three months ago I reversed my workflow and started writing directly into notation software. I now use Dorico Elements 3.5 with its dawlike features far more often than my Reaper DAW. It took me a few days to build the expression maps linking Dorico to my external sample libraries but it was time well spent. Now as I write it feels like having the musicans right in front of me, a very different experience. Feels so much closer to the finished result. I wonder has anyone else made the same switch to notation software?


----------



## ed buller (Nov 7, 2021)

yup...basically switched to Dorico for writing music.

best

e


----------



## andyhy (Nov 7, 2021)

ed buller said:


> yup...basically switched to Dorico for writing music.
> 
> best
> 
> e


Are you on Elements or Pro and do you use it with external libraries? I may upgrade to pro if there's a good offer this year and I'm also thinking of buying a stream deck xl plus notation express. How about you?


----------



## ed buller (Nov 7, 2021)

all here :https://vi-control.net/community/th...ico-i-have-some-questions.114252/post-4909938

best

ed


----------



## PhilA (Nov 7, 2021)

Both Dorico and StaffPad here.
If I’m sat playing and practicing and something appears that I like then I’ll fire up Dorico and record it directly into that.
Sat on the sofa or anywhere else then writing directly into StaffPad is that thing.

I’m a rank amateur though.


----------



## GNP (Nov 7, 2021)

andyhy said:


> Now as I write it feels like having the musicans right in front of me, a very different experience.


How so, just because you're looking at "paper"? Lol
To literally feel "musicians being right in front of you" lies more in mixing, spatial panning, etc etc, which is what DAWs can do.


----------



## andyhy (Nov 7, 2021)

PhilA said:


> Both Dorico and StaffPad here.
> If I’m sat playing and practicing and something appears that I like then I’ll fire up Dorico and record it directly into that.
> Sat on the sofa or anywhere else then writing directly into StaffPad is that thing.
> 
> I’m a rank amateur though.


I'm still a hobbyists myself but enjoy messing around with composing for my own pleasure.


----------



## andyhy (Nov 7, 2021)

GNP said:


> How so, just because you're looking at "paper"? Lol
> To literally feel "musicians being right in front of you" lies more in mixing, spatial panning, etc etc, which is what DAWs can do.


Good point. I guess we all see the process in our own individual way.


----------



## d.healey (Nov 7, 2021)

Yup, always have. I compose 90% in Musescore, the DAW is for performance, mixing, mastering, and tweaking the composition/orchestration.


----------



## Dear Villain (Nov 7, 2021)

Always compose music first in Finale, using built-in Garritan sounds, then export midi file to Cubase to do a proper rendering. After finishing the virtual recording, I go back and polish up the score based on the choices I made during the recording (ie. adding dynamics, tempi, articulations, etc.)


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Nov 7, 2021)

It is actually the case that the two types of programme are of course intended for different tasks. The notation programme to ultimately provide notation for musicians and the DAWs to bring all the dead samples and midi modules to life, i.e. to make music. Both are specialised to do their main tasks as well as possible.
With the advent of samples, it was thought that now music programs simply had to play the correspondingly composed sample. But it is not that simple. The notation does not usually correspond to how the music is actually played. The baroque style may serve as an example, where the notes are played differently than they are written.
Nevertheless, as a composer you should be happy that you get a relatively good idea of how the music could sound with real instruments.
However, if the music is in the foreground and not the notes for musicians, then you are better off with a DAW. A score software already has trouble assigning a different midi volume level to each note out of the 127 possible midi volume levels... - https://youtu.be/Qcv61DicWA4 (like here)...

Here is the difference:
"Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" composed by Mozart

once by music notation program (a typical score example (from the internet))
https://www.musik-produktion-createc.ch/store/7e/5b/0b/00/w7e5b0b003700c999a42718888051622/eine_kleine_nachtmusik_mix.mp3 (once by DAW) (example Beat Kaufmann).
Of course, you can get a lot out of a score software for the musical, but the comprehensible notation suffers. Nevertheless, Dorico, for example, sets excellently fast beautiful sheet music - score and individual excerpts... Thus, I would not want to miss either of the two programmes.

Beat


----------



## andyhy (Nov 8, 2021)

Dear Villain said:


> Always compose music first in Finale, using built-in Garritan sounds, then export midi file to Cubase to do a proper rendering. After finishing the virtual recording, I go back and polish up the score based on the choices I made during the recording (ie. adding dynamics, tempi, articulations, etc.)


That workflow makes good sense.


----------



## andyhy (Nov 8, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> It is actually the case that the two types of programme are of course intended for different tasks. The notation programme to ultimately provide notation for musicians and the DAWs to bring all the dead samples and midi modules to life, i.e. to make music. Both are specialised to do their main tasks as well as possible.
> With the advent of samples, it was thought that now music programs simply had to play the correspondingly composed sample. But it is not that simple. The notation does not usually correspond to how the music is actually played. The baroque style may serve as an example, where the notes are played differently than they are written.
> Nevertheless, as a composer you should be happy that you get a relatively good idea of how the music could sound with real instruments.
> However, if the music is in the foreground and not the notes for musicians, then you are better off with a DAW. A score software already has trouble assigning a different midi volume level to each note out of the 127 possible midi volume levels... - https://youtu.be/Qcv61DicWA4 (like here)...
> ...


Very helpful thank you


----------



## Nando Florestan (Nov 8, 2021)

I think keeping music in sync between 2 programs is hell. So I host all VIs in Reaper, but I keep all the music in Notion. Notion sends MIDI to Reaper. In Reaper I have a few MIDI effects that help make the MIDI more accurate and more complex. I pay all sorts of prices in order to avoid needing to sync 2 programs.

I wonder if it's time for me to switch to Dorico. I hate the eLicenser intrusion software with a passion and Dorico's expression maps are much less powerful than Notion's rulesets. But Dorico is a much better notation program...


----------



## devonmyles (Nov 8, 2021)

Nando Florestan said:


> I wonder if it's time for me to switch to Dorico. I hate the eLicenser intrusion software with a passion and Dorico's expression maps are much less powerful than Notion's rulesets. But Dorico is a much better notation program...



Is it the USB Dongle you hate? or just the whole eLicenser software, full stop?
I run Dorico Pro on my Nuendo USB licenser, which of course, means I can use it on more than one Computer. 
But, I believe to run Dorico on one computer, you can use the soft eLicenser.


----------



## Nando Florestan (Nov 8, 2021)

Even the software is a drag. It works badly, it delays the availability of plugins. When I suddenly feel inspired and rush to my music computer but have to wait for it to boot and load everything, the last thing I need is for intrusion software to be scanning my entire hard drive for pirated software, and to be asking the Internet whether I am worthy of stuff I paid for. It means you won't be able to use your plugin if one of those companies goes bankrupt. That's absurd and unacceptable.

No other industry does this that I know of -- only musicians are so gullible as to allow this kind of thing in their computers. It became a matter of principle, but also, I have found I can do everything I need to do with plugins that do not use this misguided piracy protection. And that's where my money goes.


----------



## Saya (Nov 8, 2021)

I personally use Dorico more than any DAW
the score and chord is much easier reading in notation software for me.

Also it is much quicker flow for me, especially for some articulations. I might spend lot of time adjusting some legato or pizz in DAW and think I can finish in one pass and never come back. But the reality is the later more I write, I will realize some other choices might be better at the places that I have been adjusted for decades, turns out to be a waste of time. In notation softwares only limited settings in playback and I know no much how I adjust, I will need further work for either recording or VI. So I wont waste time in digging one special feel/articulation, just quick drafting and inspiration.

And later to DAW, other than detailed control, most other missing/newly added sound/library/inst will just be double/shorthand or 3rd with bass which is also quick.

Last but not the least, score is much more handy than DAW files when you need to collaborate with other non-composer musicians, like violinist for special recording.


----------



## ed buller (Nov 8, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> It is actually the case that the two types of programme are of course intended for different tasks. The notation programme to ultimately provide notation for musicians and the DAWs to bring all the dead samples and midi modules to life, i.e. to make music. Both are specialised to do their main tasks as well as possible.
> With the advent of samples, it was thought that now music programs simply had to play the correspondingly composed sample. But it is not that simple. The notation does not usually correspond to how the music is actually played. The baroque style may serve as an example, where the notes are played differently than they are written.
> Nevertheless, as a composer you should be happy that you get a relatively good idea of how the music could sound with real instruments.
> However, if the music is in the foreground and not the notes for musicians, then you are better off with a DAW. A score software already has trouble assigning a different midi volume level to each note out of the 127 possible midi volume levels... - https://youtu.be/Qcv61DicWA4 (like here)...
> ...


Dorico can do all that. You can vary the velocities and ALL CC data as much as any DAW. I can make Dorico sound just as Good as Cubase.

best

ed


----------



## Pappaus (Nov 8, 2021)

A Plus One on the Stream Deck XL you mentioned. Ridiculously expensive but it just makes the workflow with dorico so much easier. I bought the Notation express profile and used it to create custom keys and pages of keys that help. One hand on the keyboard and one hand on the streamdeck. (no need to memorize keyboard shortcuts or do tricky 3 key shortcuts (such as Ctrl-Alt-+). As the other posters mentioned, you can then export your midi to a DAW for final cleaning up/using different libraries etc.


----------



## youngpokie (Nov 8, 2021)

I love Dorico but it's still missing a lot of MIDI related functionality. 

Note Expression? Drawing curves? Track versions? Arranger track? Cycle Markers? I use all of those in Cubase and thanks to them I have a workflow that's really customized to how I write (which is the closest emulation of pen+paper+piano that I've found so far). 

But I'm really looking forward to Dorico 4!


----------



## andyhy (Nov 8, 2021)

youngpokie said:


> I love Dorico but it's still missing a lot of MIDI related functionality.
> 
> Note Expression? Drawing curves? Track versions? Arranger track? Cycle Markers? I use all of those in Cubase and thanks to them I have a workflow that's really customized to how I write (which is the closest emulation of pen+paper+piano that I've found so far).
> 
> But I'm really looking forward to Dorico 4!


Me too. I'm sure it will be worth the wait when Dorico 4 appears. Maybe some more DAW-type features. I appreciate the comments from everyone on this question. Very interesting to see how different composers integrate notation into their creative process and DAW workflow. I have learned a lot from the comments.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva (Nov 10, 2021)

Dorico 4 is now promised for Q1 2022 and no physical key necessary. 
Cubase 12 will follow.

For many simpler pieces or ones containing a lot of unusual instruments I still compose straight into Cubase. It also gives better control so far.

Scoring in Dorico helps me plan and think about more complex pieces so composition is easier for me there. Playback using VSL or other expression maps-supported libs is great but why didn't they use _the exact same _expression maps as their own Cubase?!? Doing so would give us access to all/most libs using the BabylonWaves maps for example. So, for the time being, for better final render, mixing, etc. I still have to go back to Cubase.

Hopefully, one day, both tools will merge or at least integrate better.

Edit: I must add that using a Stream Deck XL for example or MetaGrid makes things much easier for new users, at first. Dorico, I've read, has 1100+ keystrokes or shortcuts which can be a bit overwhelming at first. 

Edit 2: another nice option for composing simpler pieces is Notion. Notation is easy to enter and sounds are ok for sketches while writing. Not super sophisticated of course but inexpensive and easy to learn.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Nov 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> Dorico can do all that. You can vary the velocities and ALL CC data as much as any DAW. I can make Dorico sound just as Good as Cubase.
> 
> best
> 
> ed


*You can always claim something quickly!*
I gladly take up this race - and let myself be taught better.
If you really think you can do the same with Dorico, then try to make the beginning of the "Kleine Nachtmusik" sound like I showed it here above (and once more blelow) with Cubase.
After that, please also show us what your score looks like.

*You have to achieve this:* Eine kleine Nachtmusik
_Below is my midifile that I used as a base. The double bass has the same voice as the cello - just one octave lower. 
When I open the midifile in Dorico, the note image is as shown as in the PDF (attached file). I should have chosen a resolution of 32nd notes during the import... So you can let go right away._

Good luck
Beat


----------



## Tralen (Nov 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> Dorico can do all that. You can vary the velocities and ALL CC data as much as any DAW. I can make Dorico sound just as Good as Cubase.
> 
> best
> 
> ed


What do you do if one part is a recorded part? Does Dorico have functionality for handling audio?

EDIT: On a similar note, can you play/record a midi passage in Dorico?


----------



## Tren (Nov 10, 2021)

I think if the score editor in Cubase was as clean as those of Studio One or Digital Performer, people would feel less need to care so much about it.

Cubase's Score Editor feels a bit Windows 95, still. It gets really messy really quickly. Some other DAWs have a better experience there.


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Nov 10, 2021)

ed buller said:


> Dorico can do all that. You can vary the velocities and ALL CC data as much as any DAW. I can make Dorico sound just as Good as Cubase.
> 
> best
> 
> ed


Dear ed
You are of course right, Dorico can supply a midi instrument with all controllers and also change the velocity. How comfortable this is to handle, remains to be seen. Also I have honestly never counted how many effects you can push into the audio output of each instrument. Nevertheless, it's great what Dorico offers to produce music despite notes. 

Unfortunately, many sample users stop at the instrument side and mix everything into a whole that just comes out of the instruments. With Dorico and other notation programs, you can't help but stay on the instrument side. After all, this is usually enough to get an impression of the composition. 

Doing a mix finaly in an audiomixer opens once more a lot of new possibilities.
My "little night music" is mixed as audio tracks. There I have again quite supported the dynamics via track automation. So the audio tracks contain, among other things, an EQ that - when the instruments play quieter - darkens the sound a bit and so on... 

Again, it's not my intention to badmouth different programs. Nevertheless, it must be admitted that DAWs can make more complete music than score programs, but those can set notes better than for example the DAW Cubase. 
It's good to see that both sides can do more and more of the other. The downside is that the programs are becoming more and more complex. 

All the best
Beat


----------



## ptram (Nov 11, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> I have honestly never counted how many effects you can push into the audio output of each instrument. […] Doing a mix finaly in an audiomixer opens once more a lot of new possibilities.


While Dorico includes a mixer, the obvious choice is to couple it with Vienna Ensemble Pro. There, you can do what you do with any other DAWs, and (as you know) possibly more than most DAWs.

Paolo


----------



## ptram (Nov 11, 2021)

Tralen said:


> What do you do if one part is a recorded part? Does Dorico have functionality for handling audio?


Not a direct one. You have to import audio as a video file. At that point, I must say that synchronizing with tempo changes is very effective.



Tralen said:


> On a similar note, can you play/record a midi passage in Dorico?


Yes, with a metronome click. Dorico then tries to clean the score. Nothing as fancy as Smart Tempo, however.

Paolo


----------



## Beat Kaufmann (Nov 11, 2021)

ptram said:


> While Dorico includes a mixer, the obvious choice is to couple it with Vienna Ensemble Pro. There, you can do what you do with any other DAWs, and (as you know) possibly more than most DAWs.
> 
> Paolo


Hello Paolo
Yes Dorico has a mixer. It mixes all audio outputs of the integrated midi instruments. I'm talking about a mix of audio files in a DAW, which really offers completely new mixing possibilities than if you only stay on the midi instrument level. Making music in perfection does not only happen via midi controllers in the instruments - although you can do a lot.

The same with Vienna Ensemble. This host plug-in is great if you want to use samples from different computers at the same time, you can save whole ensembles pre-mixed and then load them when needed (time saver). Above all VE is also suitable for easy integrating MIR. *But* - and we are back to the same story of Dorico and Co. - we remain on the midi level of the instruments. So no one has been able to tell me how to automate all the integrated audio effects within Vienna Ensemble. What use is an EQ in Vienna Ensemble if it can only remain fixed throughout the whole piece of music? You should be able to control and change all the effect parameters. --> DAW!!!

Of course, everyone can agree with themselves that score programs are at least as good for making music as DAWs. My experience is different. That's why my music finally always goes through a pure audio mix (in the DAW). This is also because it allows me to save my music for the future, when we will have even better effects - for a new mix... The story behind this is, that I lost all my projects in Logic because it changed to the MAC side. Unfortunately I saved no Audio-Files at that time. Hours of work are lost.

Again, I am of course also of the opinion that today's score programmes offer enough possibilities to show the composer how his music could sound - no question.

Beat


----------



## ptram (Nov 11, 2021)

Beat Kaufmann said:


> […] I'm talking about a mix of audio files in a DAW, which really offers completely new mixing possibilities than if you only stay on the midi instrument level


Yes, Dorico is not a DAW, and is not intended for pure audio works. But this is switching to a completely different domain, and Dorico can't obviously been taken in consideration in this phase.

Where it comes into play, it is in being able to export audio stems from the instruments in the score. Export woodwinds, brass, percussion, mallets and strings as separate audio files, and you can go to the next step – audio mixing in a dedicated program.



Beat Kaufmann said:


> […] no one has been able to tell me how to automate all the integrated audio effects within Vienna Ensemble. What use is an EQ in Vienna Ensemble if it can only remain fixed throughout the whole piece of music?


I'm probably misunderstanding, because all parameters in Vienna Ensemble Pro can be automated. It seems also very simple, since all you have to do is to choose any of the parameters of an inserted plugin (for an EQ: Band, On, Type, Q, Freq, Slope, Gain, Output Level, Output Solo). I immediately see these parameters in Logic's list of automation parameters.

The same type of automation can be alternatively (or at the same time) assigned to any MIDI port, channel and CC, so that even if integration is not as transparent as in Logic, it can be done.

But I've probably not understood what you meant, and I apologize for this.



Beat Kaufmann said:


> Again, I am of course also of the opinion that today's score programmes offer enough possibilities to show the composer how his music could sound - no question.


For us "ordinary composers", not professional audio engineers with a long experience with audio, this is incredibly revolutionary. The result may not be "production ready", but it is a lot more than what we could do with the old Sound Canvas.

Paolo


----------



## ed buller (Nov 11, 2021)

This is a

View attachment Flight Risk Thursday Afternoon - Flight Risk v8Dom fiddle BBC.mp3

very ruff work in progress , straight out of DORICO. There is some added bus compression and a little EQ. The only data is CC from the dynamic markings and articulation switches via text. No other automation or tweaking. I would print of the individual tracks and import into CUBASE for mixing IF it was finished. But that would just be audio at that stage. I really see no point now in doing a PART 2 midi fiddle in a daw.

Best

ed


----------



## andyhy (Nov 11, 2021)

ed buller said:


> This is a
> 
> View attachment Flight Risk Thursday Afternoon - Flight Risk v8Dom fiddle BBC.mp3
> 
> ...


Amazing - thank you for sharing


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 15, 2022)

ed buller said:


> This is a
> 
> View attachment Flight Risk Thursday Afternoon - Flight Risk v8Dom fiddle BBC.mp3
> 
> ...


Which libs are in play? Because that is what matters mostly in the renders to sound believable.


----------



## ed buller (Jan 15, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> Which libs are in play? Because that is what matters mostly in the renders to sound believable.


I’m sorry which libraries did I use ?

e


----------



## RogiervG (Jan 15, 2022)

ed buller said:


> I’m sorry which libraries did I use ?
> 
> e


yes.. since it's straight out of dorico (as you said)


----------



## ALittleNightMusic (Jan 15, 2022)

Dorico is a wonderful tool for score study as well, especially with the new smart midi import feature. Also much faster to write out some exercises and visualize the entirety of your orchestration and counterpoint. Great learning tool!


----------



## JohnG (Jan 15, 2022)

Digital Performer has a very serviceable notation editor built in, and it has been improved further just recently with additional articulation marks.

I used to start in notation and then move to the DAW, but I changed for several reasons:

1. DP's notation is pretty good, AND it allows you to drag baronies around if you have changing tempos;
2. Nobody who's going to pay for an orchestra wants to listen to what comes out of notation programs, or at least is not going to find them as appealing; and
3. It was much slower, with more mousing.

So now I work in DP, but I sort of follow the "notation first" approach, because I keep the notation editor open all the time I'm writing. Then export as MusicXML to Sibelius or Finale.


----------



## ed buller (Jan 15, 2022)

RogiervG said:


> yes.. since it's straight out of dorico (as you said)


Strings:

VSL synchron, spitfire symphonic & chamber, Berlin, Sphere, BBC , Cinematic Strings , 

Brass: 

VSL Synchron, Cinebrass, Ark, Berlin, Spitfire, BBC 

Woodwind:

Berlin, BBC , Spitfire , VSL 

assorted perc 

e


----------



## waveheavy (Jan 15, 2022)

Dear Villain said:


> Always compose music first in Finale, using built-in Garritan sounds, then export midi file to Cubase to do a proper rendering. After finishing the virtual recording, I go back and polish up the score based on the choices I made during the recording (ie. adding dynamics, tempi, articulations, etc.)


I'd like to know more on how... you do articulations in that, and make that work from your MIDI file imported in your DAW.


----------



## Rudianos (Jan 15, 2022)

Have always composed on the piano and moved it to Finale. Got into Cakewalk late last year and started to see what would happen live. Wow! Very inspiring sounds and potential more than the rigidity of Finale. But I am finding the need to ground myself back into sheet music - trying to find a balance. Maybe that Dorico competitive crossgrade might be the balance and it appears Finale is static.


----------



## waveheavy (Jan 19, 2022)

Rudianos said:


> Have always composed on the piano and moved it to Finale. Got into Cakewalk late last year and started to see what would happen live. Wow! Very inspiring sounds and potential more than the rigidity of Finale. But I am finding the need to ground myself back into sheet music - trying to find a balance. Maybe that Dorico competitive crossgrade might be the balance and it appears Finale is static.


All Dorico is designed to do is be like Finale except with a DAW inside it. If you play piano, you really don't need more than what you've got. Do the sketch and development composing in Finale, and then play the individual parts into your DAW. Then mix and master. Playing in the notes is still the best way to get a believable sounding performance.

(I admit Dorico has some other nice features that Finale doesn't.)

The Studio One 5.5 DAW has a honed down version of Presonus Notion 6 notation program within it. This is attractive for the same reason Dorico is, because you can compose in a truly good looking staff display and it automatically inputs the MIDI in your DAW for you. Tweak from there. Dorico I've noticed uses VST3 also, but so does Studio One 5.5.


----------



## waveheavy (Jan 20, 2022)

andyhy said:


> Three months ago I reversed my workflow and started writing directly into notation software. I now use Dorico Elements 3.5 with its dawlike features far more often than my Reaper DAW. It took me a few days to build the expression maps linking Dorico to my external sample libraries but it was time well spent. Now as I write it feels like having the musicans right in front of me, a very different experience. Feels so much closer to the finished result. I wonder has anyone else made the same switch to notation software?


I have Studio One 5 on a Windows Surface which is a DAW by Presonus with a version of their notation program called Notion 6. Haven't used it much yet, I don't think it has expression maps like Steinburg though, which would be a plus for using Dorico. But, I got that solved, because I have StaffPad also.


----------



## Francisco Lamolda (Apr 27, 2022)

I'm sorry for writing here, but I find it a very interesting topic and I have had similar questions for myself recently. I started using Musescore when I didn't even know that orchestral libraries existed (and I thought they would be too expensive to bother researching). Then, just when BBC Core came out, I was doing projects in the trial version of Cubase for a course at university, so I took the opportunity and bought BBC Core and Cubase with the student discount. The choices I had then were either Musescore and its bad sounds, or Cubase and BBC.

I followed the latter and made a good template with several tracks for sketching that could help me to some extent to compose. But it was a very slow process if I wanted to make a good composition. I always have been studying music with sheet music, and the change to the Cubase key editor is too big. Furthermore the score editor is horrible for large instrumental ensembles. 

I had Dorico in mind, but the problems I saw in several youtube videos like Tanctacrul's made me wait. Until last January, with Dorico 4, when I decided to buy it. And it is one of the best decisions I have ever made. I find it a thousand times more comfortable and faster to compose there than in Cubase. Noteperformer is perfect for listening to an approximation of what the final piece is going to be. And when the score is ready, I export the midi to Cubase and I use there the libs. If something is changed because of the libs, then I came back to Dorico with the inteligent MIDI import and voilà. So yes, I prefer Dorico to composing in a DAW.


----------



## Jotto (Apr 27, 2022)

At the moment 100% Staffpad. Two reasons for that. I can take it with me everywhere and my old IMac isnt up to the task anymore. It takes forever just to load up a prosject.


----------



## waveheavy (May 6, 2022)

Jotto said:


> At the moment 100% Staffpad. Two reasons for that. I can take it with me everywhere and my old IMac isnt up to the task anymore. It takes forever just to load up a prosject.


I love the playback in StaffPad (with added libraries). It doesn't like the way I scribble yet though.


----------



## ed buller (May 6, 2022)

I'm getting closer. My aim was to be able to replace noteperformer with my samples and write directly in Dorico without using any processing or automation, just live playback. It's taken a long time and I have used a tiny bit of plug ins ( in VEP pro ) . All i am doing is on each staff switching between articulations and Library's . So the strings that you hear are actually 18 different patches at various times, Same with the brass and WW. The most important part was getting Dorioc to change patches for various note lengths. I have disabled velocity and only use CC1 to control dynamics . All other CC are disabled .

this is the latest version, straight out of Dorico


View attachment Flight Risk Finished - Flight Risk v8Dom fiddle BBC.mp3



Best

ed


----------



## Michael Antrum (May 8, 2022)

I think this largely depends on how you compose - and what you are composing.

Composing in a daw was always difficult for me, as I was classically trained on the piano, and so I read notation, the piano roll not so much. 

Looking at a full score sheet and I know where I am. Move to a DAW and I don't understand how everyone can keep track of the voicing and harmony as it is all so cluttered.

But of course, some people don't compose that way.

I suppose it really comes down to personal preference.

For myself, Staffpad, for all its niggles, is just a dream to use. I travel a lot and in a hour I'll be getting on a short flight, and guess what I'll be doing. If my grandfather had lived long enough to see it - well, there would have been in tears of joy.

Dorico 4 - yup - certainly my favourite by far on the desktop. I hope we'll see Cubase and Dorico become ever more intertwined over the years.


----------



## tressie5 (May 8, 2022)

I like using DAWs (Cubase or Studio One) because they allow me to cheat. When I'm playing music on a keyboard, rhythmically, I know pretty much where a note or chord should fall in time. _Those_ specific notes or chords? Not so much. I just plunk down space savers then go back, grab all the notes, and snap them to whatever scale the piece is in. Voila! Instant Mahler, more or less.


----------



## Michael Antrum (May 8, 2022)




----------



## Pappaus (May 8, 2022)

tressie5 said:


> I like using DAWs (Cubase or Studio One) because they allow me to cheat. When I'm playing music on a keyboard, rhythmically, I know pretty much where a note or chord should fall in time. _Those_ specific notes or chords? Not so much. I just plunk down space savers then go back, grab all the notes, and snap them to whatever scale the piece is in. Voila! Instant Mahler, more or less.


Great tip!! If I ever go back to a daw, I will remember that. I have pretty much gone 100% to StaffPad. I am not a professional so any advantage of my PC is overruled by the portability and relatively instant startup that StaffPad offers.


----------



## jbuhler (May 8, 2022)

Michael Antrum said:


> I think this largely depends on how you compose - and what you are composing.
> 
> Composing in a daw was always difficult for me, as I was classically trained on the piano, and so I read notation, the piano roll not so much.
> 
> ...


I am also classically trained but never took to notation programs for various reasons and leapt straight from paper to DAW. Generally these days I prefer to compose in the DAW, using paper only to sketch and then infrequently. I rarely even use the notation capabilities of the DAW. And the music can get pretty dense and so seemingly more amenable to being worked out in notation. I wonder sometimes why I find the DAW such a better composing environment than notation programs.


----------

