# NotePerformer 2.0 for Sibelius is pretty wonderful



## cmillar (Mar 15, 2017)

I just bought NotePerformer 2.0 to go with Sibelius.

Have to say I'm very impressed!

It's an amazing way to hear decent playback of your notated music in Sibelius.

I dare say that the improved sounds (when playing back from a proper and carefully notated score) are more musical and realistic than many mockups I've heard from more inexperienced composers trying their hand at writing for real instruments.

Having taken out a couple of old pieces of mine that I haven't heard in years, and using NotePerformer, I actually got a better reading than the some of the ensembles that had actually played the music in live performance years ago.

So, a decent investment to make me realize that my original musical thoughts didn't really 'suck', and make me want to pursue getting some of the music performed again!


----------



## peter5992 (Mar 17, 2017)

NotePerformer is absolutely wonderful - it has a very musical approach to things and is super light on resources, loads in a second or so. Tremendous addition to Sibelius.


----------



## JT3_Jon (Mar 18, 2017)

Is it still compatible with older versions of Sibelius?


----------



## ulrik (Mar 18, 2017)

JT3_Jon said:


> Is it still compatible with older versions of Sibelius?


It's working for me with Sibelius 7.5, on Noteperformers site it says, "working with v.6 and higher"


----------



## bryla (Apr 16, 2017)

I bought a new laptop for on-the-road orchestration work. The hard drive is not very large and I chose that intentionally, since I would only be working on files that would be on cloud services for the specific projects that I would be working on.

Installing the Sibelius Sounds with its whopping 30+GB of samples was a big no-no, so I bought NotePerformer 2 with its modest 1GB footprint.

I just input the first 10 bars of Danse de la Terre from The Rite of Spring and compared the two:

Listen to the Sibelius first:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/c5g29zw59fhiir4/Danse de la terre SIB.mp3?dl=0

Then NotePerformer 2:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yguj7df1mtzknrd/Danse de la terre NP2.mp3?dl=0


----------



## Nathanael Iversen (Apr 16, 2017)

It works fine with 8.5 on Windows10....


----------



## Phryq (Apr 21, 2017)

bryla said:


> I bought a new laptop for on-the-road orchestration work. The hard drive is not very large and I chose that intentionally, since I would only be working on files that would be on cloud services for the specific projects that I would be working on.
> 
> Installing the Sibelius Sounds with its whopping 30+GB of samples was a big no-no, so I bought NotePerformer 2 with its modest 1GB footprint.
> 
> ...



It "plays" very well, but still sounds synth. Could concept though.

I wish regular DAWs and VST samples would go in that direction 'look ahead' etc. I wonder if SampleModeling could do something like that.


----------



## bryla (Apr 21, 2017)

I've been inputting a lot of different classics the past week and keep checking back and forth. There is no doubt that NotePerformer is MILES ahead of Sibelius sounds and much more pleasant to work with.


----------



## dcoscina (Apr 21, 2017)

Phryq said:


> It "plays" very well, but still sounds synth. Could concept though.
> 
> I wish regular DAWs and VST samples would go in that direction 'look ahead' etc. I wonder if SampleModeling could do something like that.


I've been hoping some developers work harder on integrating superb sounding orchestra sounds wiTh a notation environment. I very much enjoy Noteperformer and love working in Sibelius thanks to it.


----------



## Phryq (Apr 21, 2017)

Reaper notation is now very good. I left Sibelius after using nothing else for over a decade.

But the problem with DAW performers is the lack of 'look ahead' I guess.


----------



## sherief83 (Apr 27, 2017)

Spent time transcribing a simple Tchaikovsky piece to test it out. Not too bad, I observe I'll have to work on string dynamics as they are a bit off but just transcribing straight from original score without adding any additional dynamic marking, I think it is good enough for its size. I like it mostly because as everyone said, it is light on the system and it runs well on a ancient 2008 macbook I have here so absolutely wonderful! definite a winner.


----------



## MarcusMaximus (Apr 28, 2017)

Yeah I'm a big fan of NP as well. I always go from short score to full score to mockup so to be able to hear the piece performed as well as that within Sibelius before embarking on the mockup is a fantastic resource. It's got to be one of the best products around for those who actually write scores (rather than play straight into the sequencer while composing). Like others have said, my dream would be to have the 'real' sample libraries be able to achieve the same thing, i.e. interpret and play back a score complete with articulations, dynamics etc. I know this would remove the human element of playing all the parts and dynamics in by hand, making it a bit 'messy' in terms of little or no quantization and so on but how many of us would secretly trade the ability to render a decent version of a score without _all that work _of creating a mockup against that loss of realism and 'human-ness'? I know that a lot of people would scoff at the notion - "We have automated mastering, now automated mockups? Where will it all end?!" The real answer would be to have a programme that could respond to the composer's preferences, preferably voice-activated..

Now, I wonder if that droid has finished making my lunch yet?


----------



## Kaan Guner (Aug 14, 2017)

Did any of you tried exporting the stems from Sibelius with Noteperformer and tried to mix them for a professional end result? I'm curious what would the end result be.


----------



## Prockamanisc (Aug 14, 2017)

Kaan Guner said:


> Did any of you tried exporting the stems from Sibelius with Noteperformer and tried to mix them for a professional end result? I'm curious what would the end result be.


I've done that when I was in a hurry. For some reason, NotePerformer 1 sounds better than NP2 when doing this. I'm just guessing here, and could totally be off, but I'm thinking that NP2 adds detail to the instruments, but that detail takes away from the realism of the non-detailed NP.


----------



## Kaan Guner (Aug 15, 2017)

Prockamanisc said:


> I've done that when I was in a hurry. For some reason, NotePerformer 1 sounds better than NP2 when doing this. I'm just guessing here, and could totally be off, but I'm thinking that NP2 adds detail to the instruments, but that detail takes away from the realism of the non-detailed NP.


Do you perhaps have the end ressult?


----------

