# Staffpad vs. NotePerformer



## Arthur Lewis

I’m considering my long-term investment in notational composition software, and while I know that Staffpad and Noteperformer do very different things, I keep hearing them get compared in threads here. My understanding at the moment is that NotePerformer has AI that processes your score in Finale/Sibelius/Dorico (and eventually MuseScore 4) to make the phrasing and dynamics sound more human, though the sounds aren’t very realistic, while Staffpad is just very usable notation software with really good sounds (i.e. no fancy AI).

But I’m struggling to reconcile this with the pieces I’ve been hearing here exported directly via Staffpad and the comments that tend to accompany them about sounding as good as a mockup in the DAW with less of the work. I agree that they sound good but don’t have the ear yet to go further than that.

Does StaffPad’s output actually stack up to NotePerformer’s in terms of the things that makes Noteperformer valuable? If so, how is this possible without WI’s fancy AI? Or is this just a case of good samples sounding “good”, even if the phrasing isn’t necessarily there?


----------



## dcoscina

I have both and before StaffPad debuted for iOS, I was an ardent supporter of NotePerformer used with Dorico (and Sibelius to a lesser extent). 

The pros of using NP and the notation program of your choice is far more flexibility for engraving and finished work. If your goal is to have music performed by real musicians, all paths lead to Finale/Sibelius/Dorico eventually. NP is terrific resource to help with checking things. But, while it's expressive, it doesn't have the same realistic quality we have all become attuned to from sample libraries. 

StaffPad benefits from 2 things as far as I have experienced (and I've been in that app everyday since it was launched in Feb 2020 for iOS).
1. It's GUI is transparent and immediate. Write notes on a page instead of using keyboard shortcuts or MIDI keyboard. It took a while to acclimate to since I had been using keyboards as input since the mid 80s on sequencers (yeah, I'm old). However, I dare say working with StaffPad has improved my notation reading and compositional abilities because I'm not longer leaning on the keyboard crutch. 

2. Its playback engine that utilizes the custom versions of OT, CineSamples, Spitfire, etc takes the work out of finessing a line. You write it, StaffPad plays it. That's it. I find it rather amusing that some people asked me twice whether I mastered by recent OCD concert work outside StaffPad, which I most certainly did not. I had thought about it, but I didn't export stems and master. Just exported stereo WAV file right from StaffPad. 

My current workflow is
1. Write in StaffPad
2. Mix and Master if it's going to be a commercially used track OR
3. Export via XML to Dorico and clean up for concert performance

That's it. No screwing around with samples and articulation switching to get the perfect line. That shit takes hours and has very little to do with actual composing. It's ostensibly programming/production and it hinders the integrity of the music in my experience (and my own, I'm not declaring this as an absolute).

DISCLAIMER- I have been involved with music technology since 1985. I studied theory and composition at university in the late 80s. I do read music and have worked on several orchestral pieces since my early 20s. StaffPad won't magically make you Mahler or John Williams. If you have a background in composition and orchestration, it will reward you. If you would to pursue these avenues, StaffPad is a terrific resource to be used in tandem with books like Piston's Harmony and Adler's Orchestration. Also, if you are after orchestral writing LISTEN LISTEN LISTEN. Study scores from classical masters and look at live performances on YouTube.


----------



## Arthur Lewis

dcoscina said:


> That's it. No screwing around with samples and articulation switching to get the perfect line.


Thanks! This is the part I don’t understand - how is Staffpad able to do this without the large development effort that the Noteperformer folks clearly had to go through to meet the same goal?


----------



## dcoscina

the creator DWH with his team developed an engine that is not realtime playback so they were able to get rid of some of those parts of the full Kontakt versions of these libraries while improving (IMO) the expressivity of those samples within the SP playback.
Now, at this time, some articulations don't produce the intended effect so some of it is trial and error. I find that I have to use a tenuto instead of an accent but to have the same effect on the note. 

It's all fun for me to try to maximize StaffPad's playback to what I want to hear. So far, I've rarely been unable to produce the effect I want.


----------



## Ashermusic

Is there a list of the libraries that work with it?


----------



## Arthur Lewis

Ah fascinating @dcoscina . So a little context might be helpful: I have a degree in music, but somehow every time I tried to study orchestration, the class changed out from under me and became a composition seminar.  So while I own Adler's Orchestration, I've never actually gone past the first couple chapters. I'm planning to do ScoreClub at some point in the next year and definitely looking forward to studying scores.

My goal for this software is to start understanding the medium. I _can_ write music and work in the DAW at the same time (I'm a self-producing singer-songwriter and I do it for my own stuff all the time), but when it comes to skill-building, I'd rather focus on one at a time. Learning orchestral writing while also learning about articulations and specific software, and trying to figure out whether a passage sounds wrong because it's not voiced well or because I'm using the wrong libraries sounds horrendous. So I'm looking for the platform that will best translate notation into "this works or doesn't work" or "this feels huge here or this feels thin", etc. I imagine strict realism (where I totally understand Staffpad has the edge) is less important for this phase of my education than, for lack of a better term, conveying the musical meaning?


----------



## Arthur Lewis

@Ashermusic I'm not sure if this is up to date, but: https://vi-control.net/community/th...sample-libraries-available.89798/post-4558833


----------



## dcoscina

Notation software will always have a place. It just depends on what you are looking to get out of it. Sounds like Staffpad could be beneficial for you however. It’s immediate and offers complete portability. Compose anywhere and anytime, something that notation programs don’t allow unless you have a surface tablet.


----------



## PaulBrimstone

A few more have been added to that list:

StaffPad Ambience One (wobbly droney textures, ambient piano etc.) $19.99
StaffPad Essential Drummers (machines, pop, modern, jazz) $19.99
Cinesamples Tina Guo Cello $39.99
Cinesamples Taylor Davis Violin $39.99


----------



## Arthur Lewis

Thanks again! I'm not sure I'm quite getting my question across. The Staffpad option and the desktop notation plus Noteperformer option both sound like they could be beneficial for different reasons. What I'm trying to discern is the difference between NotePerformer's "sounding good" magic and Staffpad's "sounding good" magic. I'm not looking for a single-bit data point of which one I should choose — I'm looking for information that clarifies what I've been hearing about the playback of both, which I can use to inform my decision-making down the line. I probably should have called the thread "Staffpad Playback vs. NotePerformer".

It's clear that Staffpad playback beats Noteperformer playback hands down on realism. What I'm trying to figure out is whether it somehow also beats (or comes close enough to) Noteperformer playback on NP's own turf — this thing I don't quite have a name for, but which their site sort of summarizes as "intelligent musical phrasing." It seems like that's what I'd want if I'm trying to learn orchestration without much access to real players, but it's not clear to me whether Staffpad's combination of great samples and the expressivity work you mentioned above compares to what NotePerformer does with AI.

I hope this clarifies a bit what I'm asking?


----------



## PaulBrimstone

Arthur Lewis said:


> Ah fascinating @dcoscina . So a little context might be helpful: I have a degree in music, but somehow every time I tried to study orchestration, the class changed out from under me and became a composition seminar.  So while I own Adler's Orchestration, I've never actually gone past the first couple chapters. I'm planning to do ScoreClub at some point in the next year and definitely looking forward to studying scores.
> 
> My goal for this software is to start understanding the medium. I _can_ write music and work in the DAW at the same time (I'm a self-producing singer-songwriter and I do it for my own stuff all the time), but when it comes to skill-building, I'd rather focus on one at a time. Learning orchestral writing while also learning about articulations and specific software, and trying to figure out whether a passage sounds wrong because it's not voiced well or because I'm using the wrong libraries sounds horrendous. So I'm looking for the platform that will best translate notation into "this works or doesn't work" or "this feels huge here or this feels thin", etc. I imagine strict realism (where I totally understand Staffpad has the edge) is less important for this phase of my education than, for lack of a better term, conveying the musical meaning?


@Arthur Lewis I think you've answered your own question here. I have certainly found that StaffPad affords an exquisite freedom from the faff of DAW composition. For the first time since leaving paper/piano for Logic, I'm concentrating on harmony and orchestration from the get-go, with no music production distractions or fiddling with articulations. Also, StaffPad, for me at least, is a lot more rewarding in the instant than Dorico/Sibelius/NP. I'm pretty much sure you will find the same if _immediate_ orchestral writing is your goal.

Also, everything @dcoscina said is quite right. His overview above is probably the most perceptive I've seen so far.

Good luck!


----------



## JohnG

So maybe I should go to Youtube and look for a video, but I have a few questions:

1. Does StaffPad work with, say, just an iPad Pro and a stylus? So you have a stave and just start writing, and your score is there in front of you?

2. Is the end result that you can either export to, say, Sibelius or even a DAW and finish out your orchestration?

3. This can play back almost immediately if you have it set up?


----------



## JJHLH

JohnG said:


> So maybe I should go to Youtube and look for a video, but I have a few questions:
> 
> 1. Does StaffPad work with, say, just an iPad Pro and a stylus? So you have a stave and just start writing, and your score is there in front of you?
> 
> 2. Is the end result that you can either export to, say, Sibelius or even a DAW and finish out your orchestration?
> 
> 3. This can play back almost immediately if you have it set up?



Hi John,

I can help answer a couple of your questions:

1. Yes. I use StaffPad on my iPad Pro and it also works on windows tablets, although I don’t know much about them. It‘s a very easy app to use. There are a handful of short (~5 min each) videos in the app which explain how everything works. It’s all very intuitive. You choose the instruments you would like for your score and just start writing the music with an Apple pencil. The handwriting recognition takes a few hours of practice to become comfortable with but the videos go a long way towards showing you how to become proficient at it. 

3. Yes. You can playback what you’ve composed at any time. There is a play button on the top of the screen and all you have to do is position the playhead where you would like to start hearing the music and then press play. And the music sounds great when using the add-on sample libraries. 

I don’t know the answer to question 2 since I stopped using my DAW when StaffPad arrived. It’s just so fiddly and tedious to compose music that way for me compared to StaffPad. 

I agree with everything @dcoscina said at the beginning of the thread.


----------



## dcoscina

Ashermusic said:


> Is there a list of the libraries that work with it?


StaffPad uses the samples from various existing libraries released by the major developers. However it is re-programmed for StaffPad rather than interfacing with the program like a plug in. David William Hearn and his team spend countless hours tailoring the raw samples from OT, Spitfire, CineSamples, etc for the playback engine inside StaffPad so it is a proprietary type of library.

Current libraries ported over to StaffPad include

Orchestral Tools
Berlin Woodwinds
Berlin Strings
Berlin Brass
Berlin Percussion
Berlin Harp
Steinway Pianos
Berlin First Chairs

Spitfire
Symphonic Winds
Symphonic Brass
Symphonic Percussion
Symphonic Strings
Chamber Strings 

CineSamples
CineWinds
CineBrass
CinePerc
CineStrings
CineStrings Solo
Tina Guo Solo Cello
CinePiano
CineHarp
VOXOS


----------



## dcoscina

JohnG said:


> So maybe I should go to Youtube and look for a video, but I have a few questions:
> 
> 1. Does StaffPad work with, say, just an iPad Pro and a stylus? So you have a stave and just start writing, and your score is there in front of you?
> 
> 2. Is the end result that you can either export to, say, Sibelius or even a DAW and finish out your orchestration?
> 
> 3. This can play back almost immediately if you have it set up?


Yup, there really isn't any set up aside from purchasing/downloading the expansion libraries. Much like notation programs, you can select from available instruments in a pop up window. From there, you assign and then begin writing. You will not hear pitch or notes when you write in the notes but touching on an existing note with the pencil afterwards will generate playback so you can adjust the note up/down and hear its pitch. Writing in articulations will trigger the proper playing technique. Some text based instructions will also dictate whether you're playing long or short notes, or pizz or stuff like that. It depends on the expansion library and what samples it has. The Berlin strings have a built in run simulator so writing quick passages up or down give one that authentic sound. The other string libraries don't do as well with that particular thing.


----------



## JohnG

JJHLH said:


> I agree with everything David said at the beginning of the thread.



Thank you @JJHLH and @dcoscina ! I will be getting this at some point and will then have to try to understand how to port over to my iPad the Spitfire and other libraries. On a project now so can't any time soon, but will look forward to it.

A very exciting development!!


----------



## dcoscina

JohnG said:


> Thank you @JJHLH and @dcoscina ! I will be getting this at some point and will then have to try to understand how to port over to my iPad the Spitfire and other libraries. On a project now so can't any time soon, but will look forward to it.
> 
> A very exciting development!!


Unfortunately as some have lamented (rather loudly here), the libraries from those developers aren't ported over but tailored by David and his team for StaffPad and its engine. This means even if you have the kontakt versions, you would still need to pay for the libraries again. But most are $99 USD which is really not bad. Yes, they add up but as you can hear from the playback, they sound pretty amazing. Leagues better than anything else out there that works with notation....


----------



## agarner32

dcoscina said:


> Compose anywhere and anytime, something that notation programs don’t allow unless you have a surface tablet.


Why can't you use a laptop? I can take my MacBook Pro anywhere and use Dorico/Note Performer. Although I have an iPad Pro and Staffpad and it's great, for me I can get notes in just as fast by typing into Dorico and it's way more powerful for me.


----------



## dcoscina

agarner32 said:


> Why can't you use a laptop? I can take my MacBook Pro anywhere and use Dorico/Note Performer. Although I have an iPad Pro and Staffpad and it's great, for me I can get notes in just as fast by typing into Dorico and it's way more powerful for me.


I was talking more about tablets but hey, whatever works for ya!

But let's be honest, Dorico and NP do not yield anywhere close to the results that StaffPad does sonically. I have both, and still use Dorico/NP but mostly just for finished print work now. All mock ups are in StaffPad..


----------



## agarner32

dcoscina said:


> I was talking more about tablets but hey, whatever works for ya!


Sorry, I guess I misunderstood.


----------



## Gene Pool

Arthur Lewis said:


> Does StaffPad’s output actually stack up to NotePerformer’s in terms of the things that makes Noteperformer valuable? If so, how is this possible without WI’s fancy AI? Or is this just a case of good samples sounding “good”, even if the phrasing isn’t necessarily there?



No way to do this neatly since the two programs simultaneously address different + similar goals.

So far I haven't heard any of the excellent Staffpad examples presented by dcoscina, OleJ and brandonwalk where the performance aspect would make one cringe, and they all write really effective music throughout, which shows SP in its best light.

But if you were to put that same music into one of the notation apps and have NP play it, while certain aspects of the performance would be better than SP, tone-wise there would inevitably be some cringe, which seems almost rude when it applies to music that's been well scored. This problem rears its ugly head most noticeably with any sort of expressive string line. (Staccato winds and brass seem to work the best in NP. Timpani is pretty good; percussion, not so much.)

That said, NP's out-of-the box performance still has a noticeable edge on SP overall, and it can be made better in its response to your notation if you make the necessary adjustments in the playback dictionary (which is highly recommended). What Wallander did with NP was and is a real breakthrough. NP has facilitated certain pretty common composer requirements that before were very problematic—particularly with respect to reference tracks—but I hope they can make some big improvements to their tone pretty soon.

N.B., You can give your NP output plus the score itself to another composer who is competent with orchestra and (s)he will get your intention right away. But a non-composer client is going to respond better to SP.

The problem with some aspects of SP's playback is not really the fault of SP, but of the silly way some of the sample libraries are recorded. Too big, too forward, and too wet. This really hurts when your target is real world orchestra—especially with doublings, dynamic balance, blend, and textures (which come out as more opaque than they would be with a real orchestra). From a strictly commercial point of view it's understandable that the sample developers record with the current flavor of popcorn flick film scoring in mind, but it _does_ impede natural scoring practice.

The three big areas for improvement for both programs _performance-wise_ are:

(1) a much better response to dynamic markings, which are way off, though certainly better than the note-on/note-off world of the DAW;

(2) an understanding of the things orchestral musicians do when they encounter certain types of motifs, phrases, note groups, articulations, rhythms and the like, which all change dramatically according to tempo and context;

(3) an understanding of the things the musicians do, on the fly, in their constant effort to blend and play in tune with one another (i.e., the reference guides they use for performance blending, and the ones they use for intonation blending, etc.).

Methinks that in all three cases this is a very, very tall order, and a lot of it is limited by the samples you're working with.

Neither NP nor SP will teach you how to orchestrate, and you'd screw yourself up by using them for that. Especially in terms of dynamics, doublings, and ensemble problems. But they _can_ give you a helpful idea of how your notes, rhythms, textures and form are working out. For orchestration practice within either SP or NP, you'd be better off using scoring models from the most straightforward, transparent orchestral and chamber scores you can find as a point of departure.

And one thing is for sure, which is that notation app/NP and Staffpad both free up your scoring approach considerably when compared with a DAW.


----------



## Arthur Lewis

Thanks @Gene Pool !! You’ve definitely given me a lot to think about. How would you characterize the edge that NP has over SP?


----------



## dcoscina

agarner32 said:


> Sorry, I guess I misunderstood.


no apologies necessary. I would use whatever is the most efficient way for you to compose.


----------



## Gingerbread

StaffPad is remarkable. In terms of a comparison with DAWs, it's fair to say that a DAW will allow much more flexibility and options in a whole range of ways, from alternate mic positions, to more options to finesse a phrase. Certainly, if your goal is to produce a professional-grade soundtrack for a film, a DAW remains a necessity. But if you're simply producing great-sounding orchestral music, StaffPad works wonderfully and simply.

Really, my only "complaint" with StaffPad is those 5% of times where it stubbornly refuses to recognize a symbol entry (8th-note rests being a prime example), where it can take 8 or 10 tries before it finally accepts it. In those cases, it would be so nice to just have a dropdown menu to choose the symbol, and be done. But these are rare examples; 95% of the time, it does exactly what I want.


----------



## Ashermusic

dcoscina said:


> StaffPad uses the samples from various existing libraries released by the major developers. However it is re-programmed for StaffPad rather than interfacing with the program like a plug in. David William Hearn and his team spend countless hours tailoring the raw samples from OT, Spitfire, CineSamples, etc for the playback engine inside StaffPad so it is a proprietary type of library.
> 
> Current libraries ported over to StaffPad include
> 
> Orchestral Tools
> Berlin Woodwinds
> Berlin Strings
> Berlin Brass
> Berlin Percussion
> Berlin Harp
> Steinway Pianos
> Berlin First Chairs
> 
> Spitfire
> Symphonic Winds
> Symphonic Brass
> Symphonic Percussion
> Symphonic Strings
> Chamber Strings
> 
> CineSamples
> CineWinds
> CineBrass
> CinePerc
> CineStrings
> CineStrings Solo
> Tina Guo Solo Cello
> CinePiano
> CineHarp
> VOXOS




Ah, then dealbreaker for me.


----------



## PaulBrimstone

Ashermusic said:


> Ah, then dealbreaker for me.


@Ashermusic There again, you don't have to buy the custom libraries. The included StaffPad stock sounds are extensive and not half bad and will certainly suffice for many users.


----------



## dcoscina

PaulBrimstone said:


> @Ashermusic There again, you don't have to buy the custom libraries. The included StaffPad stock sounds are extensive and not half bad and will certainly suffice for many users.


I actually like the timp and piano quite a bit from the SP core library. But to be honest, none of my posted pieces use any of the stock sounds.


----------



## Gene Pool

Arthur Lewis said:


> Thanks @Gene Pool !! You’ve definitely given me a lot to think about. How would you characterize the edge that NP has over SP?



Regarding my experiences and preferences only, the overall performance values. For example, articulation marks in NP _usually_ produce results more consistent with my expectations. I don't know why that is, but maybe it's because with SP, certain samples are triggered per the articulation mark, which makes it a little more hit and miss since you can't possibly have enough articulations per dynamic + tempo to work ideally in all situations. Seems like NP does a bit better job per the context.

In addition to the out-of-the-box NP, you also have so many things you can customize in the playback dictionary to suit yourself, which is one of its best but most underused features.

I don't know a thing about how NP does its thing, but it would be interesting if the technology could allow Wallander and OT to team up on something, if the two parties were willing. Add in tons of complete rules for onsets, motifs, phrasing, rhythms and releases, all tempo-dependent, along with a deeper sample set, and you'd really have something.


----------



## Arthur Lewis

Gene Pool said:


> Seems like NP does a bit better job per the context.



It really is surprising to me, given the stated focus of each piece of software - NotePerformer specifically on playback performance values, StaffPad on notation, composition, AND playback - that the difference isn’t more striking. I guess it’s an example of an 80/20 situation? At any rate, knowing this definitely causes me to lean towards Staffpad, so thanks for putting in the time to go into detail.




Gene Pool said:


> it would be interesting if the technology could allow Wallander and OT to team up on something, if the two parties were willing. Add in tons of complete rules for onsets, motifs, phrasing, rhythms and releases, all tempo-dependent, along with a deeper sample set, and you'd really have something.



This sounds awesome.


----------



## dcoscina

Arthur Lewis said:


> It really is surprising to me, given the stated focus of each piece of software - NotePerformer specifically on playback performance values, StaffPad on notation, composition, AND playback - that the difference isn’t more striking. I guess it’s an example of an 80/20 situation? At any rate, knowing this definitely causes me to lean towards Staffpad, so thanks for putting in the time to go into detail.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This sounds awesome.


Not likely to happen. Two very different methods of sound/playback at work here.


----------



## Arthur Lewis

Could you elaborate a bit @dcoscina? I’m also a software dev, so if you have specific info about the implementation of NotePerformer, I’m very curious. I’m guessing it would have to take more of a modeling approach?


----------



## dcoscina

Well I don't presume to speak for David William Hearn so it's probably best for you to direct your inquiries to him or his team via his site.


----------



## Nirvana

Hi guys, don't want to hack the thread.

But I am very tempted by Staffpad. I am spending too much time on Daw instead of composing and I am still an old school guy, sketching at the piano before putting everything in the Daw.

I have three questions :

Currently, which are the best sounding pack in order to get the best finished product ? 

When finishing a music, what are the mix options ? Do I get a wav. file and I can only polish the main mix in my protools or are every part available separately ?

Can I get an XML file if I decide to finally recreate my music with my actual sample libraries ?

Thanks a lot for your help


----------



## PaulBrimstone

Nirvana said:


> Hi guys, don't want to hack the thread.
> 
> But I am very tempted by Staffpad. I am spending too much time on Daw instead of composing and I am still an old school guy, sketching at the piano before putting everything in the Daw.
> 
> I have three questions :
> 
> Currently, which are the best sounding pack in order to get the best finished product ?
> 
> When finishing a music, what are the mix options ? Do I get a wav. file and I can only polish the main mix in my protools or are every part available separately ?
> 
> Can I get an XML file if I decide to finally recreate my music with my actual sample libraries ?
> 
> Thanks a lot for your help


@Nirvana Regarding sample libraries, it's really a matter of taste. I suggest you pick through the earlier StaffPad threads on VI-C, where there are a few posted comparisons. Also check out the StaffPad User Group on Facebook, where you will find many more side-by-side comparisons. I've noticed that users tend to mix and match rather than plump for one developer only.

There are lots of output options, and yes, you can export individual stems for polishing in ProTools or any DAW. You can also export XML for tinkering in Sibelius, Dorico etc., but be warned the output is not perfect and will need some massaging.

Have a look at https://www.staffpad.net/june-2020-update and other parts of the StaffPad website for more info. Also their zendesk, which has a lot of info re your questions: https://staffpad.zendesk.com/hc/en-us

Good luck...


----------



## dcoscina

PaulBrimstone said:


> @Nirvana Regarding sample libraries, it's really a matter of taste. I suggest you pick through the earlier StaffPad threads on VI-C, where there are a few posted comparisons. Also check out the StaffPad User Group on Facebook, where you will find many more side-by-side comparisons. I've noticed that users tend to mix and match rather than plump for one developer only.
> 
> There are lots of output options, and yes, you can export individual stems for polishing in ProTools or any DAW. You can also export XML for tinkering in Sibelius, Dorico etc., but be warned the output is not perfect and will need some massaging.
> 
> Have a look at https://www.staffpad.net/june-2020-update and other parts of the StaffPad website for more info. Also their zendesk, which has a lot of info re your questions: https://staffpad.zendesk.com/hc/en-us
> 
> Good luck...


What Paul said. I do find that there is some compression with the output even when Dynamic Compression is turned off or as far down as possible. DWH recommends turning the master volume down if it's a loud piece with loud dynamics and then applying a touch of the dynamic compression however.


----------

