# Dorico 2 - scoring to video



## bryla

Game changer





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buXy7JEI5cE&t=0s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlW3PbKm6tM&t=0s


----------



## Sami

And a new version of NotePerformer! Jeez I didn't expect May to become that exciting!!!


----------



## jamwerks

That cc drawing looks better than in Cubase!


----------



## JT

This looks like it's starting to be what users hoped for. It'll be interesting to see what real users have to say about it.


----------



## bryla

It might have taken 18 months but I like the fact that features are implemented the right way first time around.


----------



## Maximvs

Superb update from looking at those videos...


----------



## antonyb

Still $99 to upgrade for users of the full version of 1??? Seriously?
I gave up on Dorico's lack of features, despite loving the flow.

Had to jump on the Sibelius bandwagon... and now I get excited again about Dorico, only to have to pay another $99?

And is it me or their site is down? https://www.dorico.com/new-in-2/


----------



## jamwerks

Guess it might be finally time to make the move from Finale and Sibelius!


----------



## HeliaVox

I'm thinking the time is nigh for a switch myself


----------



## bnz

Looks like fun stuff. Looking forward to hear the first full blown orchestral mock-ups made with Dorico that come along with some nice engraving.


----------



## Prockamanisc

antonyb said:


> Still $99 to upgrade for users of the full version of 1??? Seriously?
> I gave up on Dorico's lack of features, despite loving the flow.
> 
> Had to jump on the Sibelius bandwagon... and now I get excited again about Dorico, only to have to pay another $99?


This is my thoughts exactly. 
2016: Dorico! ($600)
2018: Dorico! Now with wheels! (extra $100)


----------



## joebaggan

It does seem a bit steep for an upgrade. Looks like there's some new Midi playback/editing and video features. What exactly is the long term Steinberg strategy for this in Dorico given that Cubase has all of the Midi playback/editing/video stuff covered? I'd rather see them work on integrating Dorico (as the engraving tool) into Cubase (as the Midi DAW) rather than trying to reinvent the Midi editing/playback wheel in Dorico. 

I bet there's some confusion at Steinberg central as to what the future role of Dorico and Cubase should be.


----------



## ptram

Can someone do a comparison between Dorico and Sibelius, both for the film and the concert composer? I know the previous version still missed something, but it seems they have been recovering fast (with something exclusive to Dorico, and not available in the other software).

Composing a piece in the style of Jerry Goldmith in his more experimental mood, and one in the style of Lutoslawski. Can it be done easily with Dorico 2?

Paolo


----------



## Dewdman42

I will most likely do a competitive crossgrade at some point but not sure if we are there yet. Dorico looks to be shaping into what overture5 is, only better.


----------



## tmhuud

If only NOTION supported Note Performer....


----------



## Sami

Does Dorico natively read Cubase Expression maps?


----------



## rudi

Sami said:


> Does Dorico natively read Cubase Expression maps?



Yes, there is a facility to "import Cubase Expression Map..." in Dorico.

However, there might be expressions in Dorico that do not exist in the Cubase version or use a different name and vice versa, so you might need to do some editing.

BTW Dorico 2 has a new facility that lets you create your own expressions as well as using the default ones, but I haven't had time to look into it yet.

Rudi


----------



## pinki

Abandoned Sibelius years ago for it's terrible early implementation on Mac. Went via Overture 4 to Notion 6. Which I like for it's straight forward approach and a not inconsiderable parallel iOS app. 
But Dorico 2 does look like the thing everyone got excited about for Dorico 1. (What a botched release that was!)
Dorico 2 looks good.


----------



## Dewdman42

I just threw down for Dorico. I think it will be the future for a number of reasons.


----------



## MrCambiata

Just finished my first piano arrangement with Dorico 2. Getting used to the work flow which is quite different from Sibelius. Score looks beautiful.


----------



## joebaggan

Dewdman42 said:


> I just threw down for Dorico. I think it will be the future for a number of reasons.



Care to elaborate? I find I can do everything I need to do in Sibelius for notation but curious what advantages Dorico has.


----------



## Dewdman42

I feel that overture had s lot of promise but the developer, a one man shop, simply does not have the resources to keep up. Dorico seems to be headed in a similar direction but with resources to get it done right. The direction is first of all a lot less fiddling around. Input the music and it just looks right. Secondly is the sequencer aspect with a focus on being able to render a mock up that is just as good as could be done in a daw such as cubase. I think many composers will eventually make Dorico the center of their studio rather then cubase. That’s what I mean when I say the future.

Finale and Sibelius are both great programs and will continue to be around for a very long time because of the sheer number of scores and people already experienced using them. But they are both long in the tooth in terms of old school ways of working, they are both encumbered by massive amounts of feature creep that has been tacked on to them over decades. Dorico is a fresh restart by the same team that brought you the Sibelius that you love so much, and they are backed by Steinberg with the resources to make it happen. Dorico will be the future. I suspect that at version 2 the hard core copyists will still prefer finale and Sibelius, but as a composer I prefer to use notion but I hate the look of its scores. I have done some very nice looking scores years ago with overture 4 but it did require a lot of manually nudging things around and version 5 is buggy as hell but both notion and overture are headed more in this direction applicable more to a composer that wants to both work with notes and print out nice looking scores and make decent mock ups. Dorico is going to bridge that gap between Sibelius and notion/overture with spreadbury’s team. I think it’s the future


----------



## Prockamanisc

This was my complaint to Dorico. They turned me down, and I'm very disappointed in the way they've handled this update. I bought into this software in good faith, and they've tainted that.

_I feel the need to voice my displeasure with my purchase of Dorico in 2 ways. First is that I purchased Dorico 1 with the idea that it was a “half-baked” version, and that we would be given updates that would give us further functionality (missing functionality that has prevented me from using the program for more than a combined hour over the year that I’ve owned it). Now that some worthwhile additions are being included (like slash notation), I’m being forced to pay $99? It seems like I just paid for the full version yesterday, and I got very little out of it. 

My second problem is how the licenses are handled. Since this software is optimized for a laptop, I installed it on my soft eLicenser on my MacBook Pro. Now that there is added support for sample libraries and video playback, it makes sense to install this on my main studio computer (the one with Cubase and all of my sample libraries). But as soon as I transfer the license to my studio computer, I lose the functionality of my soft eLicenser, which puts me into a terrible predicament of either 1) using a dongle in my MacBook Pro, which is USB-C, so it would require an additional dongle just to use. This goes against any idea of convenience. Or 2) buy a second license so that I can leave one license on my soft eLicenser, and have another on my dongle. Most days I leave my dongle at my studio, so it is an extra burden to have to bring it with me. And also, this is excessively expensive.

I was an early adopter, and I got burned. I have always had a lot of faith in Steinberg and in Dorico (and Dorico’s team) to take me to the right place, but this feels like it’s abusing my faith in the company. Over the years, many companies have extended generosity with their licenses to accommodate my setup, and I am asking for that same generosity from Steinberg. My request is this: to grant me an affordable discount on two licenses, so that I can use Dorico on both my laptop and my studio computer.

I am happy to provide any proof of my setup to show that my needs are legitimate. Basically, I have a studio computer, a home computer, and a laptop. Sibelius granted me an extra license so that I could use them all interchangeably, and I am very grateful that they did. I really want to make the jump from Sibelius to Dorico once and for all, but right now the excessive costs are preventing me from doing that._


----------



## Dewdman42

The current licensing scheme definitely sucks and I respect your decision not to continue feeding them money. Unfortunately the Steinberg message boards are filled with users complaining about the exact same thing and Steinberg has made their position clear that they are a one license per dongle company. I agree though that much more so then any other product I need to be able to take my laptop over to my piano to work on stuff and yet be able to also work on my studio computer. I can move the dongle around but that is simply a PITA. A much more reasonable policy would be two soft licenses, or even two dongle licenses. But they say for now there is no chance for that so you gotta do what you gotta do. I chose to get it anyway and I will be annoyed by the licensing but I want to get on the Dorico train. I hope Steinberg will reconsider their draconian licensing policies though.


----------



## shnootre

Any word on when and if a free trial of 2.0 will be available?


----------



## JJP

Dewdman42 said:


> I agree though that much more so then any other product I need to be able to take my laptop over to my piano to work on stuff and yet be able to also work on my studio computer. I can move the dongle around but that is simply a PITA. A much more reasonable policy would be two soft licenses, or even two dongle licenses.



This has the potential to be a deal breaker for freelance copyists in Hollywood who may have a main machine at home, then a laptop for work when called in to work at an office or to attend a session. Having to constantly keep track of a dongle would be a nightmare.

Imagine frantically grabbing the laptop and running out the door to the session while exhausted from a late night the previous night. While sitting in traffic you wonder, "Did I remember to reach around the back of the USB hub and grab my dongle? Will I be able to work when I get there?"  Some people would buy two licenses to avoid this, but for many copyists that could be an unacceptable expense.


----------



## Piano Pete

Still too many missing features, things I consider should be standard in any notation program, to convince me to switch over. That they will not offer multiple licenses when most engravers use both stationary and mobile setups is ridiculous.


----------



## Dewdman42

Agreed. I actually almost didn’t buy it because of this licensing issue. But in the end I decided to try it for a while.


----------



## tmhuud

That is inconvenient. Many composers are on the move and need at least 2 licenses. I guess their trying to push multiple licenses.


----------



## pinki

We've been living with dongles for years. Not saying I like them but I'm used to them by now. What I mean is I remember not to forget it, when I'm going out of the door. Like my power supply...it's engrained in my brain.

As to the $99 upgrade: that sucks. Early adopters have been screwed by Steinberg and it makes me think I might stay with Notion.


----------



## joebaggan

Dewdman42 said:


> Secondly is the sequencer aspect with a focus on being able to render a mock up that is just as good as could be done in a daw such as cubase. I think many composers will eventually make Dorico the center of their studio rather then cubase. That’s what I mean when I say the future.



Mockups "just as good as could be done in a daw such as cubase"? That would be a dream for me since I long for a notation based DAW workflow, but is the Dorico sequencer and Midi editing/playback tools really on par with Cubase Pro? Until they are, I don't think Dorico would really be comparable to Cubase Pro for Midi orchestration mockups. Currently I do notation in Sibelius and import to Cubase to do mockups and it's a PITA, so would welcome a truly integrated tool.


----------



## Prockamanisc

joebaggan said:


> Currently I do notation in Sibelius and import to Cubase to do mockups and it's a PITA, so would welcome a truly integrated tool.


I mockup in Noteperformer, it skips the Cubase step. Is that not good enough for you?


----------



## Dewdman42

joebaggan said:


> Mockups "just as good as could be done in a daw such as cubase"? That would be a dream for me since I long for a notation based DAW workflow, but is the Dorico sequencer and Midi editing/playback tools really on par with Cubase Pro?  Until they are, I don't think Dorico would really be comparable to Cubase Pro for Midi orchestration mockups. Currently I do notation in Sibelius and import to Cubase to do mockups and it's a PITA, so would welcome a truly integrated tool.



not yet, perhaps, but that is the direction they are going and I expect that it will be. It will not have audio track recording like cubase, beat mapping, bla, bla, bla, but it will have the ability to create automation on all tracks, to handle note expressions and expression mapping, cc curves, etc...all the stuff that we typically do in a DAW like Cubase...Dorico is heading in the same direction..except that instead of using piano roll, you will be using a fully functional notational program to do it that is capable of printing out final scores and parts for real players without having to export to something else.


----------



## joebaggan

Prockamanisc said:


> I mockup in Noteperformer, it skips the Cubase step. Is that not good enough for you?



No, Noteperformer may be a useful initial tool to hear what something sort of sounds like, but if you want pro level mockups, you'll need pro level sample libraries and Noteperformer limits you to using its samples. Granted its "look ahead" algorithms are pretty cool, but until someone can figure out how to de-couple that "look ahead" tech and use it with any sample library, I think Noteperformer is gonna have a pretty limited use.


----------



## Dewdman42

I think the main advantage of NotePerformer is that it does a better job then anything else of interpreting standard musical notation into the correct articulations and thus sounding the way the musical phrasing is intended, without writing a single lane of CC curves or key switches. This allows a composer to focus on composing and not have to worry at all about midi sequencing. Notion does this also, quite well, but not as well as NotePerformer. That being said, while NotePerformer's result is quite remarkable considering you don't have fiddle around with any CC's, its still not really good enough for a final mix...by a long shot. Note Performer is remarkable for what it is, and as a composer it allows you to get much closer then anything else, while in the composing phase...but in the end, if you are going to produce the final result on the computer (rather then record real musicians), then you'd end up having to go back to all your expensive sample libraries and all the CC lanes of automation, etc to get anything that sounds reasonably awesome enough.


----------



## bryla

NotePerformer gets my arrangements approved without having to mocking it up! Time equals saved


----------



## joebaggan

Dewdman42 said:


> I think the main advantage of NotePerformer is that it does a better job then anything else of interpreting standard musical notation into the correct articulations and thus sounding the way the musical phrasing is intended, without writing a single lane of CC curves or key switches. ...but in the end, if you are going to produce the final result on the computer (rather then record real musicians), then you'd end up having to go back to all your expensive sample libraries and all the CC lanes of automation, etc to get anything that sounds reasonably awesome enough.



Yea, what I'd like to see is NotePerformer creating "drivers" for certain popular sample libraries. So instead of playing back its own samples, it has a lib-specific driver that understands how to send midi messages to certain sample libraries based on the notated dynamics, articulations, e.g. you point it to a certain Spitfire string lib and it applies its "look ahead" tech with knowledge of how Spitfire implements midi cc's and keyswitches. And of course you'd still be able to tweak/override if you want the playback slightly different. Now that would be something I'd pay for and could potentially save a lot of time.


----------



## Michael Antrum

I currently have Notion, and find it rather amusing that it is less expensive for me to buy a crossgrade to Finale, and then another crossgrade to Dorico, than it is for me to get Dorico on its own.

I love Notion's iPad app too, particularly with Apple pencil. Presonus give you FIVE activations for Notion. I have one of my Mac Laptop, One on my home iMac, and one on my work machine. 

If I could crossgrade directly to Dorico (and you used to be able to) and can get a couple of activations, I'm pretty sure I would make the jump. But not as it stands now I won't.


----------



## tmhuud

mikeybabes said:


> I love Notion's iPad app too, particularly with Apple pencil.



Same here. Use it everyday. That’s very amusing reg. the cross grade/purchase of D2.


----------



## Dewdman42

Dorico is considerably more expensive then Notion, so it is what it is. I cross graded to Dorico from Finale, and makemusic hasn't charged for an update in quite a long time, so I consider that a pretty good deal.

I agree with you about many advantages of Notion...the iPad app is huge...5 activations...and honestly...pretty decent sounds. Not quite as accurate as NotePerformer, but pretty good. Relatively easy to enter stuff also.

The main problem with Notion is very mediocre engraving. Its probably better then you get from your DAW's score editor and does let you extract parts, etc..so its got some usefulness, but me personally I feel compelled to export XML over to Finale or MuseScore to get it to look like something I can be proud of putting in front of people.


----------



## Piano Pete

With what I want in a notation software, I am sure Dorico will get around to it eventually. From what I have been told about the first versions of Finale and Sibelius, they were not much to look at either.


----------



## gyprock

Piano Pete said:


> With what I want in a notation software, I am sure Dorico will get around to it eventually. From what I have been told about the first versions of Finale and Sibelius, they were not much to look at either.


Are you suggesting that Dorico Pro 2 is not much to look at? Just curious as to some of the reasons. I for one would like tablature but many of the other features have surpassed what is included in the current mature versions of Sibelius and Notion.


----------



## Piano Pete

On the contrary, I think it is something to keep a watchful eye on!

For me, it is not _yet_ in a state where I would be able to comfortably leave Finale behind and do all my work within it. Yes, Finale takes some work to do certain things; however, with my shortcuts, templates, plug-ins, and years of experience with it, I have access to everything I could want, and I can tweak a score to any house's style very quickly. Also most jobs require it or Sibelius, so there is that. 

Dorico is missing some core functionality that I need to do my work, and I am sure that they'll get around to adding it in! There are still some standard formatting features that I and many others would love to see. In all honesty, I am a little confused why certain notation elements havent made it in yet when these were requested by so many engravers from the get-go at several of the original demo events. (There is a lovely rant about this somewhere on one of the engraving sites, but I cannot remember where it is). There are many engravers who want to jump ship from both Finale and Sibelius, but we are tied to the standard features that we _need_. If they had taken a lot of the professional feedback from the onset, they may have had more converts from that percentage of the user-base population. Now, do not get me wrong, I completely understand that implementing even the simplest formatting options may take more time in Dorico since they have unique, modern methods to input information more intuitively-- hence my comment of the original versions of Finale and Sibelius. I am sure they'll get there, but until then, they may not have as many engraving houses dedicate their resources towards their product.

Honestly, I am curious if this was a strategic choice, as it seems that they got a lot of younger, mainstream musicians grabbing it out of the gates. Maybe if they had gone straight for the professionals' requests, they may not have had the same amount of early adopters since the number of "professional" engravers is relatively small in comparison, and the priorities between the professional and mainstream consumers do not always line up exactly. This is just a personal curiosity; I definitely do not have that answer!

That aside, I love the features they are adding, so for now, I'll be on the sidelines waiting to jump in. I may actually pick up a license to start learning it for that day that I can finally leave MakeMusic behind for my professional work. Honestly, what company abandons phone support while also closing their own forum? Cubase is my main DAW workhorse, so it will be nice working in similar environments. Additionally, between Steinberg and MakeMusic, Steinberg has a better current track-record of actually updating their software features. MakeMusic seems to drag their feet to fix even the smallest bugs. 

Finale and Sibelius have been coasting for awhile now, and as soon as Dorico fills in the checkboxes of "standard" features, and hopefully current plugin developers support it (fingers crossed), the two notation giants will probably lose a lot of customers. Until that day, I'll wait.

(I can live with a dongle; however, since I tend to do more engraving on the road than midi-mockups, I would prefer if they would enable computer based licensing.)


----------



## gyprock

Thanks Piano Pete. I appreciate your pro engraver perspective. You raised some interesting points.


----------

