# This is why I abandoned Sib



## Thundercat (Jun 3, 2020)

Got an email for the “new version” of sib.

Oh boy, look at ALL THE NEW FEATURES! 🤪




Create beautiful, accurate scores fast  



 The newest version of Sibelius and Sibelius | Ultimate includes intelligent importing features and enhancement to custom UI colors.  



 
>Intelligent Import: with a touch of a button you can transform MusixXML into beautifully formatted scores. Without having to do any manual work, you can import score data directly into your go-to template or into a new Sibelius file.
 



 
>Custom UI Colors give complete control to change the color of nearly every score element, from notes to layout marks.


----------



## brek (Jun 3, 2020)

Yup, the color thing is great. I can finally work in Sibelius late at night with a blue light filter.


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 3, 2020)

I do love sib ❤

however I am not pleased with the dearth of development. Colors is nice but for me not essential, and not worth a dollar in upgrades. I’m glad it’s exciting for you.

But when they roll out a a new version, and this is IT?! I paid for a year a couple years ago and not one new feature was useable, or even noteworthy. Oh! Except it did render all my old files un-openable in my previous version! $120 for that!

I’m part of the sib clan, but now a distant cousin.


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 3, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> Colors is nice but for me not essential, and not worth a dollar in upgrades. I’m glad it’s exciting for you.



Hehe. Sorry. I was being sarcastic. I should have appended a "sarc" tag.

I'm still on Sibelius out of necessity, but still on 8-point-something. I'm not going to rent software.

Sibelius has _a lot_ of things that just need to be fixed. I'd care less about new features than about half the program not seeming like it's something out of the 90's.

I haven't really felt like it was Sibelius ever since Avid fired the dev team.


----------



## MauroPantin (Jun 3, 2020)

Still on a perpetual license. No way I'm renting Sib, I love it but there's virtually no development going on, I consider it almost static software. I've got clients still on 7 and it's hard to tell the difference.

I want to get my hands on Dorico but I'm not totally sold on it yet, at least in the SE version. There are things about the workflow, particularly for guitar notation, that take a lot more steps than in Sib, like changing notes to a different string in a tablature. I do a lot of work with TAB book companies and small business owners and I need to have that assigned to a keyboard/OSC shortcut or it's a dealbreaker, it is that critical for me.


----------



## rudi (Jun 3, 2020)

I don't know if it's possible in the Dorico SE version, but in Pro you can simply use N and M to move selected notes up and down a string:

https://steinberg.help/dorico/v3/en/dorico/topics/notation_reference/notation_reference_tablature_string_changing_for_notes_t.html

There is also a slew of new guitar features in 3.5, including automatically adding chord diagrams before the first system:



I am also on a permanent license (2018) in Sibelius and I am not going to rent any newer versions.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 3, 2020)

Yeah.

The upgrade in January was very good, one of their best in post-Daniel years. The last two have been "not sure I need to even download this".

I'm a lifer. I've been using it non-stop for 15 years. I've tried Dorico, it will be great someday, maybe someday soon. It's too late for me to switch. Sibelius is an excellent program, despite the lack of development. I did install the new one today and I got a good chuckle: "Hey, I can change the note colors, whippee". And then it was over.


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 3, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> Yeah.
> 
> The upgrade in January was very good, one of their best in post-Daniel years. The last two have been "not sure I need to even download this".
> 
> I'm a lifer. I've been using it non-stop for 15 years. I've tried Dorico, it will be great someday, maybe someday soon. It's too late for me to switch. Sibelius is an excellent program, despite the lack of development. I did install the new one today and I got a good chuckle: "Hey, I can change the note colors, whippee". And then it was over.


I came from painful days in Finale, over to Sibelius. It was ❤️.

I bought every version faithfully. Still ❤️.

but when they fired the devs, and released an “update” fully two years later - that had virtually nothing in it - I knew something was terribly wrong.

dorico is great, but I find it clunky and very, very non-intuitive. Shocking, coming from the same devs as Sibelius. I often have to google - again and again - how to do basic shit. It just doesn’t stick because it’s quite oddly structured.

however - even with that perpetual pain - I still get better looking scores, faster and easier, than I can get with sib.


----------



## Stringtree (Jun 3, 2020)

I went back to Passantino and Carta staff paper. Then I came back to look at Sibeliius. 

Oh gosh, it looks exactly like Adobe rentware. This is so disappointing. 

I became a Photoshop monster, then got tired of paying on an ongoing basis for what used to be a completely satisfying image suite. That killed it for me. Can't own it. Gotta rent it. So there's Affinity.

Sibelius looks exactly as it did fifteen years ago, when I had the license for the old version. Nice output. Love the numeric keypad shortcuts and I know them like the back of my withered hand.

Avid, indeed. Hey, Avid, ever take a look at Blackmagic Design and realize that paying for a video editing software tool is passé? How about you, Sony, who purchased the Magix crap? Adobe Premiere? Lol. I knew you since I didn't have hair on my upper lip.

This is not avid at all; it's lazy. Davinci Resolve is the most capable and professional video editing and sweetening software suite. AND BECAUSE CREATIVITY SHOULDN'T BE COMPLICATED, WE MADE IT INTO THIS. AND BEST OF ALL, IT'S FREE!

The purchase of old IP by tired old companies unwilling to further develop their "properties" and rejuvenate income streams solely through marketing is gross. 

Imagine beautifully typeset musical notation that looks like it was engraved or came steaming hot off a Linotype. Those days were sweet. Yeah, but how long ago was that, and you could buy the software.

It's absolutely bizarre to create a sales model that sells film to digital photographers, and musical notation is stupid-simple. I haven't had the need to come back to this, but I feel very sorry for people forced into a subscription service to dots and lines and curves that were solved well over twenty years ago to a professional level. 

I will never pay Adobe for junk again, or Avid, or any of the others that are lazy enough to peddle old crap and hook junkies on continuing functionality. 

Wake up and stuff doesn't work. Must've not paid the software bill. 

Bunk.

Greg


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 3, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> I still get better looking scores,


It's an interesting subject, the whole concept of "better looking scores". Most players who don't write would think we are nuts. I've never had a player ask one question in regards to technical matters with notation. I mainly do symphony pops charts. I did this one, it's a classical piece. I didn't write it, I made a reduced orchestration. IMO this looks great. Any improvement would be on my end. At the top, "Violin 1" could probably go up a tad so it's not too crowded. But.... that's nitpicking. Measure 135, I could have moved the FF to the left a tad. The grace notes in 134 aren't grace notes. That's an improvement that Sibelius needs to make, I had to fake it. 

But... if you put this on someone's stand, they wouldn't notice any of that. At a place like 133, I could have/should have hid those triplet 3s, they aren't needed by that point. I made the hairpin too long in 134. So, Sibelius can get anything done, at least in "traditional" notation. This looks damn good, and the errors are mine.


----------



## Stringtree (Jun 3, 2020)

It's gorgeous typography. Completely readable by a player. Truth. I'm not angry at the technology, but at the damnable subscription model.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 3, 2020)

Stringtree said:


> I'm not angry at the technology, but at the damnable subscription model.


Oh, there's a lot to be angry at.  I was watching the entire drama unfold when they let Daniel go etc. It was corporate greed at its worst, and at its most myopic. Ironically (or perhaps not) that CEO who did so much of this stuff was let go too. Seems good ol Lou was being a bad boy...









Avid’s CEO Ouster Over Workplace Misconduct Claim Leaves Staffers Stunned


Many longtime employees were shocked by the abrupt exit as new CEO Jeff Rosica says the company is commited to “providing a workplace that’s welcoming, inclusive and respectful.”




www.hollywoodreporter.com


----------



## Stringtree (Jun 3, 2020)

Oh I didn't know about any of that. That was vague. Probably something in the lunchroom, when we could have lunch with each other.

That company used to be on top. A lot has happened since then.

Seriously, that music looks delicious to read. I really like Sibelius. Lol. My old version that I own.

I love the dark against light, the unambiguous stamped musical notes, the thoughtful distance kept by the performance notes.

Maybe I could suggest they release a "legacy" version?

Truly a class clown.

Greg


----------



## MauroPantin (Jun 3, 2020)

rudi said:


> I don't know if it's possible in the Dorico SE version, but in Pro you can simply use N and M to move selected notes up and down a string:
> 
> https://steinberg.help/dorico/v3/en/dorico/topics/notation_reference/notation_reference_tablature_string_changing_for_notes_t.html
> 
> ...




Thanks for the heads up!

This is great. Haven't tried it on SE but it'll probably work. Still, there are other minor things I need in order to jump ship. Right now my ecosystem is completely Sibelius, all of my clients proof-read on it, etc. If I switched over to Dorico I would still have to export XML and double-check in Sibelius, meaning twice the work. There are other minor details, too, a complete reconfiguration of my OSC touch screen, transferring all macros to Dorico, etc.

Dorico is definitely the future and I will be slowly getting my feet wet with it but at the moment it seems like a lot of downtime and loss of productivity and I'm not really sure the grass is that much greener on the other side. Sibelius is a really high-end application, it's just not getting the love it deserves. If you're working with Cubase it is probably a different perspective regarding Dorico.

But hey... At least we're not using Finale. All deliverables in college were in .musx format. I've never had my workflow so interrupted as in my times with it, browsing through pre-Y2K forums looking for how to do the most basic shit imaginable. I hated every second of it.


----------



## Daryl (Jun 4, 2020)

I've been using Sibelius for 26 years now, and am still using version 6. However, it is 50/50 between Sibelius and Dorico now, and I expect that by the end of the year, I will only be using Sibelius for projects where that's what the client requests. Dorico still frustrates me at times, but that is becoming less and less, and I hope that the next big update will solve most of my issues.


----------



## jsaras (Jun 4, 2020)

I'm 97% content with version 6. I think that when MuseScore hits version 4, I'll make the jump. If it had native VST support it would be more than adequate for most things.


----------



## d.healey (Jun 4, 2020)

jsaras said:


> I'm 97% content with version 6. I think that when MuseScore hits version 4, I'll make the jump. If it had native VST support it would be more than adequate for most things.


I've been using Musescore since it first came out and only had a piano sound, VI support would be nice but I'm hoping they just add more MIDI output capabilities so I can load up my VIs in an external host.


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 4, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's an interesting subject, the whole concept of "better looking scores". Most players who don't write would think we are nuts. I've never had a player ask one question in regards to technical matters with notation. I mainly do symphony pops charts. I did this one, it's a classical piece. I didn't write it, I made a reduced orchestration. IMO this looks great. Any improvement would be on my end. At the top, "Violin 1" could probably go up a tad so it's not too crowded. But.... that's nitpicking. Measure 135, I could have moved the FF to the left a tad. The grace notes in 134 aren't grace notes. That's an improvement that Sibelius needs to make, I had to fake it.
> 
> But... if you put this on someone's stand, they wouldn't notice any of that. At a place like 133, I could have/should have hid those triplet 3s, they aren't needed by that point. I made the hairpin too long in 134. So, Sibelius can get anything done, at least in "traditional" notation. This looks damn good, and the errors are mine.




What one can get by with is different from what is advisable. Musicians actually _do_ notice lousy notation, and much prefer a part that can be cleanly-read. It doesn’t have to be perfect by publication standards by any means, but they deserve _at least_ an acceptable part, even for a one-and-done, in-house score.

For various reasons, they keep a lot of grievances to themselves, but maybe in certain regions and settings they might not expect too much—I have no idea. But mostly what you will find, if you know them well enough, is that they tire of poorly notated parts (among other things) and are reticent to mention it to those who are guilty as charged.

They earnestly try to respect the music, and greatly prefer it if that respect is returned in kind—excellence for excellence, a fair trade—which one cannot do with an amateurish approach to notation. I don’t know if anyone has ever delivered publication-quality parts for an in-house score, probably not. But there _is_ a threshold below which any self-respecting notator should not go if (s)he wishes to be well-regarded by the musicians.

Most of the problems in this example are, of course, the aforementioned spacing problems. Unacceptable crowding, misalignments, etc. Of course, it takes too much time to get every bit of spacing to publication-level quality for an in-house score, but much of the spacing here is still too far off the mark to be passable, and it would only require a quick adjustment to at least get it in the ballpark.

Other glaring problems include the non-clarified hairpins, the triplet notation mess, the incorrect rhythmic notation in bars 123, 129 and 132, which are all inconsistent with _modern_ notation standards, etc. The aforementioned grace note problem is a disaster, and easily fixed in about five seconds in Sibelius (see below). But I _do_ agree that they should have addressed this years ago. So on and so forth.

I have no hope for Sibelius, even though I understand that the current rental version is better than the one I’m still on. Dorico seems geared towards taking care of a lot of things so that notators don’t have to, but they just have to get their usability issues worked out a lot better.

Correctly notated trill cap:


----------



## cmillar (Jun 4, 2020)

Well, I've been using Sibelius since version 2, and have a perpetual license now with the latest version. (did everything to avoid the subscription plan)

Then I bought Dorico (thinking I'd get more inspired or something) and gave it a good shot for a year. I haven't upgraded to the latest yet, but I'd like to see how their version of 'pitch before duration' is working out.

I raved about Dorico to people...but...am very happily back using Sibelius.

Many things are so much faster and more intuitive in Sibelius (at least to me). I was trained as a 'pencil/scorepaper' composer/arranger, and Sibelius just feels more 'natural' to my way of thinking.

I love not having to switch between Write and Engrave mode in Dorico. In Sibelius I don't mind moving the odd thing around, because it feels like a natural thing to do to me. But Sibelius does a wonderful job with Magnetic stuff....so, that's really no problem.

And using the fonts from ScoringNotes (Norfolk/Pori) makes Sibelius more appealing, because I do a lot of music with jazz chords which Sibelius is also great at once you set up what you like.

Anyways....whatever works, right? To me, I'm way faster and composer/arrange/print parts just fine with the current Sibelius.

All the upgrades since version 6 have made life easier, by the way, for those of you still on version 6 (which I still keep handy!)


----------



## Bollen (Jun 4, 2020)

I jumped to Dorico in version 2, but only played around with it on weekends or when I had nothing else to do. I found the same issues as everybody else i.e. unintuitive, complicated and well... Just too different from Sib. But eventually after a year and a half I felt confident enough to try and make my first professional project on it and despite some discomfort I've never looked back again! I rarely, if ever, have to go into Engrave mode, 9 out of 10 the score is perfect for printing when I'm done, when with Sib it used to take as long formatting as it used to take to write it....


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 4, 2020)

cmillar said:


> All the upgrades since version 6 have made life easier, by the way, for those of you still on version 6 (which I still keep handy!)


Yup, and some of the best updates have been in the past few years. That in no way excuses them for upgrades like the past 2 ("Malibu Stacy got a new hat!"), but it's miles beyond 6 or 7.

Sibelius has a huge image/PR problem. That's entirely their fault of course and well deserved. They blew it back in 2013 or whenever, and still blow it by saying "Longtime customers, if you miss one update you have to buy the whole damn thing again".

But... multi-edit (adding hairpins etc on all selected staves), auto-optimize, etc. Little things like raising a tied note and having both notes move instead of one. Clicking on a measure and hitting "S" puts a slur on the notes even if they don't fill the whole measure. I'm sure there's so much more (flexible staff size etc). Probably the most important part- it's rock solid, never crashes, has never been faster blah blah.

And that's also why it's a shame and why Avid sucks.  If I had ver. 6 or 7, I'd say "Hey, maybe I should spend $120 and get back in the game". Nope. Gotta buy the whole damn thing again. Either that or "rent" it at absurd prices. And if I were a renter (I'm not, I still own it) I would be pretty peeved at upgrades like the one yesterday which isn't even worth the time to download unless perhaps one has a serious vision problem and different color schemes help it.


----------



## JJP (Jun 4, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's an interesting subject, the whole concept of "better looking scores". Most players who don't write would think we are nuts. I've never had a player ask one question in regards to technical matters with notation. I mainly do symphony pops charts.



Symphony/pops versus recording/TV/film/Broadway is an important distinction because one assumes there are rehearsals. The other has to be sight-read and potentially under less than ideal circumstances (think bad lighting, glare, or smoke for live TV and Broadway).

I was discussing sight-reading and notation with a very busy LA studio musician who actually confessed, "Part of why we are so good is because you copyists make things so easy to read. I find myself thinking 'I can read anything!' Then I go back to my orchestra gigs and I'm working twice as hard to read the same stuff."

Musicians who sight-read a lot of music under pressure definitely notice and appreciate the difference. I've seen musicians gobsmacked at how much easier it is to read when they are finally handed a truly excellent part. I've personally heard musicians say, "It's so clear! I don't know how you did it," and "Wow, I could read this from across the room."

That's because good sight-readers use note spacing as a key element to quickly determine rhythm, and they use alignment as a subconscious indicator of how items are related when they scan the page. Then there are the issues of elements being too close which can cause legibility issues in poor lighting or conditions when they have to glance up for a cue. It all adds up to a very large difference in the readability of a part, even if the performer can't articulate all the reasons why.


----------



## mducharme (Jun 4, 2020)

In the Tantacrul video for Dorico, I saw him using the most inefficient ways to use the program. Dorico is fantastic, but you can't use the mouse. You have to use the keyboard (plus optionally a MIDI keyboard). If you try to use the mouse alone it is like tying one hand behind your back, and you will find everything frustrating with the program. If you move from the mouse to the keyboard, everything changes, and you can become really fast working with it. Someone likened it to trying to write a letter in Microsoft Word using the mouse only and not the keyboard, and I would agree with that.

Dorico also does a great job of magnetic stuff, but many people don't realize how to get stuff to be magnetic (including Tantacrul), the easiest way is by entering it with the keyboard and not the mouse. Those dynamics he had to manually align don't need to be manually aligned if you use the keyboard to enter them. Even with the mouse there is a better way, by "grouping" them, which basically puts them on the same "magnetic layout" line, vs manually moving things up and down.

To me the big advantage of Dorico, and also the reason people have so much trouble with it, is that it basically converts notation to be the same as piano roll. Rests do not exist (for the most part), they are just the absence of notes. Two tied notes are actually one note, like how it is a single rectangle on a piano roll. You enter notes on a grid, like a piano roll, and simply leave blank space between notes when you want a rest. If you want to slice a note into two, you use a scissors tool, same as in a DAW. If you want to glue two notes together, you use the "tie" tool, which is the same as the glue tool in a DAW except with a different name. These are the things Tantacrul was complaining about, but actually these can be quite powerful once your wrap your head around them.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 4, 2020)

JJP said:


> Symphony/pops versus recording/TV/film/Broadway is an important distinction because one assumes there are rehearsals.


They probably assume a bit incorrectly. Usually a runthrough before the show, that's it. "Rehearsal", no. If it's a traveling show that picks up a backing string section (Steamroller, Neil Diamond, Johnny Mathis etc) no music is sent in advance. 4pm rehearsal, 5:30 sound check, 6 dinner, 8 show, bye. A lot of those shows don't even let you take the music off the stand to practice after dinner, mainly so you don't get ketchup on the charts.  A symphony pops show will have one rehearsal. 2 hour rehearsal for a 2+ hour show. 

Most symphony players can read at the highest levels. They have to. Unless one is in Chicago Sym or something, it's usually "Fri night rehearsal, Saturday rehearse for a different show on Sunday, then play a show Sat night, wake up and read a church gig, then do a Sun. matinee show". It can be nonstop, especially during the busy months (Oct-Christmas, March-June). There's not much time to practice and little need. And a show like Steamroller is footballs, anyone can read it down. Woodwind principals might practice since they can be exposed. String section? Umm, no.

There was a fiddle player named David Nadien, probably the most recorded player in history. TV, film, jingles, Billy Joel albums, Muzak, just nonstop. He took some time off to be Concertmaster of the NY Phil. Now, obviously the cat is the real deal. He went back to sessions because he "couldn't afford the pay cut".  But most studio/sym. players are interchangeable, assuming they are first rate of course.



JJP said:


> Musicians who sight-read a lot of music under pressure definitely notice and appreciate the difference. I've seen musicians gobsmacked at how much easier it is to read when they are finally handed a truly excellent part. I've personally heard musicians say, "It's so clear!


Symphony players often end up with the exact same part. For example, the Harry Potter scores are played all over. AFAIK it's literally the same notation that was used in the sessions (and the older ones are hand-written). Honestly, not much difference. The one difference is Time sigs, where film uses Big-ass time sigs. 

A lot of symphony music, whether classical or pops, is hand-written and looks like dog doo. The classics are one thing, but if you're doing a pops gig and it's Gershwin, R&H, Cole Porter etc, they look horrible and you still have just a run-through. So, everybody, doing symphony whatever, has to read well or fake well.  This is the Firebird violin 1. It's not some obscure printing of it, this is the one in the libraries of most symphonies in the US. Ouch. Would be so much easier if it were modernized, but...


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 4, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> It's an interesting subject, the whole concept of "better looking scores". Most players who don't write would think we are nuts. I've never had a player ask one question in regards to technical matters with notation. I mainly do symphony pops charts. I did this one, it's a classical piece. I didn't write it, I made a reduced orchestration. IMO this looks great. Any improvement would be on my end. At the top, "Violin 1" could probably go up a tad so it's not too crowded. But.... that's nitpicking. Measure 135, I could have moved the FF to the left a tad. The grace notes in 134 aren't grace notes. That's an improvement that Sibelius needs to make, I had to fake it.
> 
> But... if you put this on someone's stand, they wouldn't notice any of that. At a place like 133, I could have/should have hid those triplet 3s, they aren't needed by that point. I made the hairpin too long in 134. So, Sibelius can get anything done, at least in "traditional" notation. This looks damn good, and the errors are mine.


Agreed - your score looks great!

and I wasn’t actually nit picking about little spacing stuff so much as wholesale, Dorico scores look better with no effort on my part. I almost never have to fix things like clashing lyrics. On the whole Dorico scores just look terrific with little effort. That’s a joy to me.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 4, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> Agreed - your score looks great!
> 
> and I wasn’t actually nit picking about little spacing stuff so much as wholesale, Dorico scores look better with no effort on my part. I almost never have to fix things like clashing lyrics. On the whole Dorico scores just look terrific with little effort. That’s a joy to me.


I think what many people might not realize is that Sibelius has had some new features that take care of most of this. One is called "Auto-optimize" and it works. It's spaces the staves very well.

I always feel like a Sibelius salesperson in these threads.  Maybe I'm just telling myself "Man, you're too old to switch now so justify that as much as possible."


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 4, 2020)

I did pay for a year of sib recently and got burned. No new useful features for me. Plus it was just rental - and I accidentally jacked up all my old 7.5 scores by saving them in the new format that I couldn’t open after the subscription ran out.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 4, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> I did pay for a year of sib recently and got burned. No new useful features for me. Plus it was just rental - and I accidentally jacked up all my old 7.5 scores by saving them in the new format that I couldn’t open after the subscription ran out.


They really go out of their way to screw everything and everyone up, don't they? It's really a shame.


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 4, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> They really go out of their way to screw everything and everyone up, don't they? It's really a shame.


Yeah - 'cause I was a huge fan!

I hear some praising Dorico for it's excellence when using keyboard shortcuts, and that's fine. But I feel it's an excuse for a larger problem - the program is just not intuitive, especially with the mouse. Many have criticized Tantacrul for his video, but honestly all he did was highlight basic useability issues. He made fun, and made it entertaining, but the larger point stands - Dorico is the pits when it comes to intuitive usability.

That's what sib excelled at, mostly.

I expect better things from the Dorico team. And I shall continue to fund them with every update, as I have. ƒingers crossed!


----------



## J.T. (Jun 4, 2020)

The original vision for Sibelius was that it be more like notating on paper. I think it was a reaction to the other notation apps at the time. But at some point it turned a corner, circa the ribbon. I got the impression from many of Mr. Spreadbury's replies to peoples' complaints that to fix some of the big problems, Sibelius would have to be rewritten.


----------



## rudi (Jun 4, 2020)

It's the same here. I followed Daniel's blog as Dorico was conceived and loved the concept, the attention to detail. I bought Dorico and found the workflow... frustrating. I understand that no matter what package you use, there's always going to be a period of adaptation and getting used to it. Tantacrul's video is IMHO perfectly on point - I remember facing a blank system and trying to extend the number of bars, then after failing to add any by using the toolbar having to look it up and find out how to do it.

I also understand the use of key commands - I spent several decades as a software developer for a large company using various packages and tools. I even used vi, so there is a context where it is appropriate, but we live into a visual UI age, using mice or touchscreens.

For me there is a dichotomy in Dorico where some things are mouse driven, along with associated shortcuts - but others purely keyboard driven. I would love to have the choice to decide which way works best for me.

To be fair my focus is more as a composer rather than a copyist or publisher. I tend to take my time to write music and prefer using a mouse with a few judicious note value shortcuts. Copying an existing score would be a different matter.

I am still upgrading to each new version, as the development team are great and they are gradually adding really useful facilities.


MILD RANT STARTS HERE 

It doesn't help that the help manual is very wordy. This is fine for printed material, but it becomes tedious when reading on screen when looking for something specific.

Here's an example from the V2 manual about adding bars:

https://steinberg.help/dorico/v2/en/dorico/topics/write_mode/write_mode_bars_inputting_panel_t.html

_"You can input bars using the Bars and Barlines panel, both during step input and by adding them to existing music."_

- it's nice to know that when you look up how to add bars it tells you that you can indeed add bars during input and to existing music. It could simply say "To input or add bars:"

Then look at section 3:

_ "In the Insert Bars section of the Bars and Barlines panel, change the number of bars you want to input by changing the value in the value field. "_

- the previous section already tells you to go to the "Bars and Barlines" panel.
- the whole "change the number of bars you want to input by changing the value in the value field" could be reduced to "input the number of bars you want."

Next it says: _ 

" Select one of the following options for where you want to input bars: "_

- it already lists the three possible options underneath_, _including a description of what they do. It could be reduced to: "Select an option"

Then there is this tip:

_" If you selected Start of Selection, bars are input directly after a selected barline, and directly before a selected note, bar, or time signature." _

- they could simply have two bullet points as in the previous sections instead of being put in a "Result" section. It could also be simplified to "Start of Selection: bars are added after a selected barline, but before a selected note, bar or time signature."

END OF MILD RANT


----------



## J.T. (Jun 5, 2020)

Gene Pool said:


> Correctly notated trill cap:



How? When I try to drag the ends of the slur, Sibelius does this weird thing where, when I’m “almost in the neighborhood,” the slur suddenly flips, moves way down, makes a weird shape not even seen in notation, and no amount of re-dragging and fighting it with my teeth clinched results in anything else. I can't get it anywhere close to what I need.

TIA


----------



## ptram (Jun 5, 2020)

One of the things making the early approach to Dorico harder is the limited use of the contextual menu. If you could simply right-click on an object, and see all the possible operations for that object, you would not have to look around for commands. All would be there, immediately.

This limitation is not only an issue for beginners, but also for those going to full speed, but with not enough memory to remember the shortcut, or the menu command, for a less-used operation.

Paolo


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 5, 2020)

ptram said:


> One of the things making the early approach to Dorico harder is the limited use of the contextual menu. If you could simply right-click on an object, and see all the possible operations in that object, you would not have to look around for commands. All would be there, immediately.
> 
> This limitation is not only an issue for beginners, but also for those going to full speed, but with not enough memory to remember the shortcut, or the menu command, for a less-used operation.
> 
> Paolo


Dorico team would do well to listen to great suggestions like these. Hope they actually watch Tantacrul’s video and get some ideas/needed feedback.


----------



## Bollen (Jun 5, 2020)

ptram said:


> One of the things making the early approach to Dorico harder is the limited use of the contextual menu. If you could simply right-click on an object, and see all the possible operations for that object, you would not have to look around for commands. All would be there, immediately.
> 
> This limitation is not only an issue for beginners, but also for those going to full speed, but with not enough memory to remember the shortcut, or the menu command, for a less-used operation.
> 
> Paolo


That's why I bought a couple of those streamdeck switch thingies and never looked back... Got a medium one and a big one sitting right on my MIDI keyboard, I find it easier than even handwriting at this point...


----------



## JJP (Jun 5, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> 4pm rehearsal, 5:30 sound check, 6 dinner, 8 show, bye. A lot of those shows don't even let you take the music off the stand to practice after dinner, mainly so you don't get ketchup on the charts.  A symphony pops show will have one rehearsal. 2 hour rehearsal for a 2+ hour show.



I guess this is still tangentially on-topic. Mods, feel free to slap me if I'm going too far off.

I've been on both sides of classical/pops and recording divide. The quote above is luxury for musicians compared to many of the live TV jobs I've worked. First time seeing the music is in a run-through for dancers who have never heard the live version of the song, and they only have 10 minutes to check their choreography, discuss camera blocking, costumes, and lighting. Any stops for music could throw off the entire day's production schedule. Then one more play down during a compressed full-show run-through to check cameras, sound, and timings; and it's live on-air with changing lights, noisy cheering crowd, and a close mic right on your instrument in front of 20 million viewers. This may all be done with click and has to be exactly the same as the run-through to match lighting cues, camera blocking, titles. Oh, and the music director and show director may be talking to you through your headphones calling out changes because they need to make up time from actor/host ad-lib bits running long or whatever. The show has to end at a specific time, literally down to the second.

Recording sessions are often one quick read-through (which may be recorded), then the red light goes on and we're making a recording. I've also worked in time-challenged situations where we've strived for one take of things, literally the first read-through. If the booth says it's good, turn to the next cue and move on. With excellent musicians, arranging, and copying it can be done.

These are the situations where all those little things in a notated part start to add up and musicians truly appreciate good copying. It's also why the arrangements need to be very clear and be played with no explanation. There may be no time for someone to put up a hand and ask a question, and no one wants to risk a wrong note because of poor spacing or some other minor issue. "Good enough" parts aren't good enough in these situations.

FYI - I use Finale for 99% my work these days. I too have been disappointed by the situation with Sibelius' development of late. I haven't upgraded in years. Dorico holds promise -- watching carefully.


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 5, 2020)

Bollen said:


> That's why I bought a couple of those streamdeck switch thingies and never looked back... Got a medium one and a big one sitting right on my MIDI keyboard, I find it easier than even handwriting at this point...


How does that work for you? I guess I don't get the usefulness of those things. Perhaps a google is in order.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 5, 2020)

JJP said:


> I guess this is still tangentially on-topic. Mods, feel free to slap me if I'm going too far off.


No, it's a great and interesting subject. I'm really enjoying discussing it with you.


JJP said:


> "Good enough" parts aren't good enough in these situations.


I think we're talking two different things here. In fact I'm sure of it. I was talking about the engraving and notation process, the actual "look" of sheet music. By all means, charts should be as pro, thorough, wll marked, metic... well I don't need to go on because "pro" covers it all.

My original point was about Sibelius, Dorico, Musescore, Finale, quill and paper etc being "good enough" to read. I don't think one particularly "looks" better than another in 2020, which was what I was getting at. I think skill level of the engraver is the only thing that matters. So if I say "Sibelius looks better than Finale", I think that's hogwash. One might be easier, this and that etc, but I've seen Finale charts look as pro as anything I've ever seen. And the same for Dorico and Sibelius. I wouldn't use that as a "selling point" of how one certain software looks, they all can look great. 



JJP said:


> Recording sessions are often one quick read-through (which may be recorded), then the red light goes on and we're making a recording.


AFAIK, I've played on 65 CDs. Been there done that. In the 80s it was "jingles" and local documentaries etc. Local TV still existed, regional ads, things like "Miss Texas" pageant had pre-recorded tracks made in a studio (I was on one). Almost all of that is gone unfortunately. But those of us of a certain age know that any mid-size city had a "scene". Not an LA or Nashville "scene" but recording was far more plentiful. Did a lot in ye olden days. So much of it went overseas, synths, ummmmm, _"V.I"..._  

My point about comparing classical and recording: look at the musician's roster for the last few John Williams (or similar type) movies done in L.A. Then look at the roster for the L.A.Opera, Hollywood Bowl etc. Same people. 

I was very blessed in the early 90s to play backup on a rock CD that had 2 mega smash hits. I still get a few grand every year. I wish I had 10 of those.


----------



## Bollen (Jun 5, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> How does that work for you? I guess I don't get the usefulness of those things. Perhaps a google is in order.



Like this






Just play something on the keyboard and simply press the button that has the correct symbol...


----------



## JuanSebastianBach (Jun 5, 2020)

Bollen said:


> Like this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Boy I'm having flashbacks. This reminds me my last year at Composition!
That series sounds cool!, have you got the finished work?


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 5, 2020)

Bollen said:


> Like this
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Interesting! I’ll have to do more research because I still don’t get it. But thank you.


----------



## JJP (Jun 5, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> No, it's a great and interesting subject.



Okay, I'll geek out with you a little more! 



Sears Poncho said:


> My point about comparing classical and recording: look at the musician's roster for the last few John Williams (or similar type) movies done in L.A. Then look at the roster for the L.A.Opera, Hollywood Bowl etc. Same people.



There is a lot of crossover, but it's not all by any stretch. Most of us in the music prep world have done our share of bouncing around. I've done the HW Bowl, LA Opera/Music Center myself along with the LOTR films, Disney films and TV, Oscars, Emmys, Grammys, Dancing With the Stars, records, jingles, telethons, you know the life. (We should get a drink sometime if you're in LA after Covid!) 

Agreed, you can get pro results from any of the big 3 notation programs. The quality of the engraver is indeed paramount.

However, and I apologize if this offends, the Sibelius part which was posted earlier wouldn't make it to the stand on my jobs. It would get marked-up in red pen by proofreaders and sent back to the copyist for the spacing, proximity, and alignment of certain items because they affect the instant sight-readability of the part. Anything that can cause the tiniest mental pause or possibly be misread is regarded with suspicion. (On one gig a colleague started calling proofers the "red ink trolls".) 

I have a motto which was given to me from the last of the great Hollywood hand copyists under whom I first worked as they transitioned to computer engraving: "It should look like it sounds."

That's also why phrasing becomes important to part layout. However, that's a whole other complicated discussion which really is getting off topic.


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 5, 2020)

J.T. said:


> How? When I try to drag the ends of the slur, Sibelius does this weird thing where, when I’m “almost in the neighborhood,” the slur suddenly flips, moves way down, makes a weird shape not even seen in notation, and no amount of re-dragging and fighting it with my teeth clinched results in anything else. I can't get it anywhere close to what I need.



You can't do it by dragging.

Click on the slur > open the Inspector > go to Lines > End > click the up and down arrows to adjust the x and y coordinates.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 5, 2020)

JJP said:


> There is a lot of crossover, but it's not all by any stretch. Most of us in the music prep world have done our share of bouncing around. I've done the HW Bowl, LA Opera/Music Center myself along with the LOTR films, Disney films and TV, Oscars, Emmys, Grammys, Dancing With the Stars, records, jingles, telethons, you know the life. (We should get a drink sometime if you're in LA after Covid!)


Very cool!



JJP said:


> However, and I apologize if this offends, the Sibelius part which was posted earlier wouldn't make it to the stand on my jobs.


Now... THIS is interesting!  (Not offended in the slightest). My part by the way is an excerpt from a 37 minute enormous classical work that I was hired to make a reduced orchestration for (and was supposed to be March 28th so you know the rest). At first I wanna say "I don't believe it" but there might be something I don't know. For example, if most of these things are inter-connected, there might be some overzealous (IMO) personnel. This I could understand. There are a few things in the non-L.A. world like traveling broadway shows that have a certain overzealous crowd, so this I get. And I'm an arranger and orchestrator (and fiddle player) and not involved in "music prep"of the type of gigs you're talking about.

As you know, the music world is insanely small. We probably know a zillion mutual people. But... in a non-L.A. world, I've done a national awards show broadcast kinda like the sort you mentioned. I think the charts were hand-written. SOS I've read all my life. Like you, I've been involved in a ton of stuff....everywhere. Except L.A. So the only possible explanation is that the L.A. crowd has some really anal people.  Traveling "celebrity" shows don't, they just whip out charts and people read em down. Same old. I don't know if I have any charts (by other people) around, I moved last year and through out a lot. But let's just say this.... for the rest of the known universe outside L.A., including every type of gig imaginable, it's all about the same. 

Great conversation BTW!


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 5, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> At first I wanna say "I don't believe it" but there might be something I don't know.



I think we’ve had a breakthrough here!



Sears Poncho said:


> There are a few things in the non-L.A. world like traveling broadway shows that have a certain overzealous crowd, so this I get.



Doing things at a professional level is not “overzealous.”



Sears Poncho said:


> But let's just say this.... for the rest of the known universe outside L.A., including every type of gig imaginable, it's all about the same.



Not really. Not in New York. Not in Nashville. Not in Dallas. Not in Canada. Not in Australia. Not in New Zealand. Not in Europe. Not in Japan. Et al. Professional standards are not limited to the greater Los Angeles area.

And nothing says “Welcome to amateur hour” quicker than incorrectly notated rhythms, vertical alignments off by one or two beats, collisions and clutter, ambiguous hairpin markings, poor phrasing and layout, etc.

Effective notation is not an academic exercise. Notation practices have increasingly improved over the centuries because a professionally copied part greatly facilitates the act of reading and performing music. Musicians have more than enough to think about as it is without being burdened with errors and slop. When any self-respecting composer is responsible for delivering the part files, (s)he has an obligation to the job and to the musicians to then put on the hat of a copyist. Berlioz had a lot to say about certain performances of his music that flopped all on account of crappy parts being copied by the local boys choir. Again, what one can get by with in certain environments is not the same as what’s acceptable to the rest of the world.


----------



## JJP (Jun 5, 2020)

I don't want this to turn into any kind of "my parts are better than your parts" battle, with everybody pulling their parts out and waving them around and... Oh brother, this is sounding like something very not safe for work.


My main point was to illustrate the extreme focus on sight-reading as a philosophy in creating parts for situations that commonly put the musicians under extreme pressure. It's a philosophy I've seen among great copyists in NYC and LA in particular.

On average in Hollywood I think the professionally prepared parts people are reading today are better than they have been in the past, but that's not guaranteed. It's still dependent on the skill of the copyists. There have been some changes in the business that are eroding the passing on of skills, and I'm a little concerned that we're seeing more "good enough" start to creep back in for a variety of reasons, human and technical.

Aside: The idea that getting the "Hollywood standard" Sibelius, Finale, or Dorico template will allow people to create professional parts is definitely cringe-inducing.

Okay, now I've definitely dragged this thread way off-topic, so I'll bow out.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 5, 2020)

JJP said:


> My main point was to illustrate the extreme focus on sight-reading as a philosophy in creating parts for situations that commonly put the musicians under extreme pressure.


I think we can sup it all up thusly: Those who read for a living, regardless of genre, have to be able to read like a mofo. And those who write or do music prep: that speaks for itself since they know what to do to keep the gig.


----------



## Bollen (Jun 5, 2020)

JuanSebastianBach said:


> Boy I'm having flashbacks. This reminds me my last year at Composition!
> That series sounds cool!, have you got the finished work?


I do indeed... 



Thundercat said:


> Interesting! I’ll have to do more research because I still don’t get it. But thank you.


Well basically you don't have to remember any shortcuts because the buttons replace the shortcuts i.e. you click on the button with the appropriate picture and the gadget keys in the right shortcut for you.


----------



## rudi (Jun 6, 2020)

Thundercat said:


> Interesting! I’ll have to do more research because I still don’t get it. But thank you.



@Thundercat it's a hardware keyboard unit with programmable LCD buttons that sends shortcuts to your software. It's made by a company called Elgato. There are the regular hardware size model, an XL one or a mini one you purchase. There is also an iPhone app which is only available as a subscription... (grrr!!)

You can create your own buttons and icons, have multiple pages etc., use existing one or buy pre-made profiles.

Here's an example of a pre-made profile by a company called Notation Central who sell pre-made Stream Deck templates for various notation programs:


----------



## nglez (Jun 6, 2020)

Gene Pool said:


> Other glaring problems include the non-clarified hairpins, the triplet notation mess, the incorrect rhythmic notation in bars 123, 129 and 132, which are all inconsistent with _modern_ notation standards, etc. The aforementioned grace note problem is a disaster, and easily fixed in about five seconds in Sibelius (see below). But I _do_ agree that they should have addressed this years ago. So on and so forth.



just out of interest, what is wrong with the rhythmic notation?


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 6, 2020)

Bollen said:


> you click on the button with the appropriate picture and the gadget keys in the right shortcut for you.


The key to Stream Deck is saying "bam" out loud. "Delete voice 2, bam!"  Amazing gizmo. Can even act as a simple hardware transport (play, stop, record, rewind etc).

Write a quickie string quartet chart for a gig. The melody is all in first fiddle. Then, "exchange staff contents". Now it's not. Instant arrangement. Some things like "transpose" merely open that dialog box, it takes learning the helpful ones. "Reset position"- very helpful. For Sibelius, it can do things like put in a rehearsal number and double bar with one click. For the ribbon haters, one can toggle the Ribbon off and on.


----------



## Bollen (Jun 6, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> The key to Stream Deck is saying "bam" out loud. "Delete voice 2, bam!"  Amazing gizmo. Can even act as a simple hardware transport (play, stop, record, rewind etc).
> 
> Write a quickie string quartet chart for a gig. The melody is all in first fiddle. Then, "exchange staff contents". Now it's not. Instant arrangement. Some things like "transpose" merely open that dialog box, it takes learning the helpful ones. "Reset position"- very helpful. For Sibelius, it can do things like put in a rehearsal number and double bar with one click. For the ribbon haters, one can toggle the Ribbon off and on.


Although personally, I prefer to control transport and navigation directly from the MIDI keyboard, that way I truly have everything at the press of a button!


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 6, 2020)

123: trespassing dotted quarter

129 & 132: secondary beam problem


----------



## sbarrettmusic (Jun 6, 2020)

nglez said:


> just out of interest, what is wrong with the rhythmic notation?


also m138 obscures beat 4


----------



## Sears Poncho (Jun 6, 2020)

sbarrettmusic said:


> also m138 obscures beat 4


I have no idea what you're talking about.

The notes and the rhythms and the choice of rhythms were by the composer, Frederick Delius. One of my jobs was to reduce the orchestration. This meant that I had to do very little with strings, it was mainly winds and brass. It was also an "emergency" due to a publisher's error, the publisher had lost a previous orchestration. Had to work day and night.

My point in posting it wasn't to bask in its glory. It was this: Any pro orchestra who can't read that down...well they probably aren't a pro orchestra player to begin with. I'm not in music prep, I'm an orchestrator. 


nglez said:


> just out of interest, what is wrong with the rhythmic notation?


I had to un-ignore Mr. Poop for a minute. As you can see, Mr. Know-it all once again is an idiot. It has nothing to do with "modern notation standards" as it is not a "modern" piece'. And to be honest, I couldn't give the slightest fuck about "modern notation standards', whatever that implies. My job was to copy exactly what was on the page. I did.

On an off-topic note: Is there a way I can block someone completely on this forum? I can only ignore. I've had it. I'm not putting up with this Gene Poop motherfucker any more. He came here to agitate and be a giant douchebag. Enough. Mr Poop Shitstain: you're really just a waste of oxygen. Unless there's a way to block this sack of shit, I'm out. Bye gang, it's been real. Life is too short to put up with some stupidass troll little bitch.


----------



## sbarrettmusic (Jun 6, 2020)

Sears Poncho said:


> I have no idea what you're talking about.
> 
> The notes and the rhythms and the choice of rhythms were by the composer, Frederick Delius. One of my jobs was to reduce the orchestration. This meant that I had to do very little with strings, it was mainly winds and brass. It was also an "emergency" due to a publisher's error, the publisher had lost a previous orchestration. Had to work day and night.
> 
> My point in posting it wasn't to bask in its glory. It was this: Any pro orchestra who can't read that down...well they probably aren't a pro orchestra player to begin with. I'm not in music prep, I'm an orchestrator.



Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you or criticize your work. I totally understand where you are coming from in regards to honoring the intention of the composer. I was just trying to answer someone's question about how the rhythm would be notated on a part for a typical Hollywood scoring session. We would notate it this way:




I think most players (at least in a studio sight reading situation) would prefer it this way because it more clearly shows where beat 4 is, so there is less room for error on a first read-through. But that doesn't mean the other way is "incorrect". Any pro musician should have no problem reading it down either way.


----------



## Gene Pool (Jun 6, 2020)

I don’t understand the controversy or the outrage, but I’m wrong even when I’m not. It was asserted that players wouldn’t notice that they had been handed an unacceptable part. The spirit of musicians helping musicians is not well served by bad information being offered as stuff pros do when it is not. Other people matter. People trying to learn the lay of the land matter. My interest is in them. Always has been. Seems not really equivalent to “trolling” or any of that other nonsense, but on this forum, who knows. This is not "arguing," it's just me clarifying some things for the aforementioned, earnest, serious-minded composers.



Sears Poncho said:


> The notes and the rhythms and the choice of rhythms were by the composer, Frederick Delius. It has nothing to do with "modern notation standards" as it is not a "modern" piece’.



Professionals make the necessary adjustments to align with the latest modern standards unless it is for freshly engraved archival purposes of the original notation. A scaled-down orchestration is obviously not for archival purposes. Old notation is updated all the time. A re-notated version of, say, Mozart’s _Mass in C Minor_ will not use soprano clef, et cetera. Some music is not even playable unless it is re-notated. Doesn’t matter if it’s old. It matters if it’s being played/sung by modern musicians/singers. Sorry, but there are professional standards and practices. Some people not liking that doesn’t make it wrong.

I’m actually a little surprised that Sibelius didn’t automatically correct some of that. And if replicating the Delius original was the goal, I doubt that the original had the wacky spacing, the grace notes disaster, or any of the other stuff. Just normal Sibelius entry would have rendered a less embarrassing part than that one. I’m not saying this to irritate anyone, but so that those who're trying to learn what’s what have a better idea of what is and is not acceptable. It does them a disservice otherwise.



Sears Poncho said:


> Any pro orchestra who can't read that down...well they probably aren't a pro orchestra player to begin with. I'm not in music prep, I'm an orchestrator.



I say again that, what one can get by with is not the same as what is advisable. Players notice. Players don’t like it. They will adjust, but should not have to just to make up for someone else’s poor job. Sessions are long and tiring. They don’t think much of those who deliver a subpar product. It is unprofessional. Professional orchestrators know how to notate rhythms—not just copyists. And when the orchestrator is responsible for delivery of the finalized parts files from which the musicians will read, (s)he at that point is professionally obligated to put on the copyist's hat, even if (s)he feels that that is a lowly task beneath notice. That said, everyone is entitled to doing things as (s)he sees fit; the decision is his or hers, and so are the consequences.
____________________

I won’t address anything else in the post to which I am replying, as it is extraneous to the topic, and it wouldn’t make a dent anyway. I don't understand it, but people will think what they will think, and that is fine with me.


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 6, 2020)

rudi said:


> @Thundercat it's a hardware keyboard unit with programmable LCD buttons that sends shortcuts to your software. It's made by a company called Elgato. There are the regular hardware size model, an XL one or a mini one you purchase. There is also an iPhone app which is only available as a subscription... (grrr!!)
> 
> You can create your own buttons and icons, have multiple pages etc., use existing one or buy pre-made profiles.
> 
> Here's an example of a pre-made profile by a company called Notation Central who sell pre-made Stream Deck templates for various notation programs:



Oh! I get it now!

Thanks!


----------



## Thundercat (Jun 6, 2020)

Woe everyone...it's just dots and lines on paper...peace!


----------



## Bollen (Jun 7, 2020)

What happened here? Usually this forum is so friendly and polite... Someone struck a nerve.


----------

