# Notation-based step entry composing to match the quality of using a MIDI kbd/DAW ?



## Elephant (Feb 15, 2015)

Most composers making mockups for clients these days seem to use a MIDI keyboard to play into a DAW. I presume this because that is the fastest way to achieve a commercial-quality result. 
(Discussed in the thread last year "Is Notation-based composing a dying art ?") 

That works if you have the keyboard chops. Is it possible to achieve the same level of quality by entering notes step-time into a notation package and using all the articulation and dynamic possibilities in the notation software, and does that process and any subsequent steps you take when delivering mockups to your clients match the quality you would get from a DAW if you were a great keyboard player ? If so what are those subsequent steps ?

Or does it work better to enter the notes step time into a DAW but through the notation view, even though the articulations issue seems to become more difficult to handle in any DAW I have seen except Cubase ?

For Sibelius users, does it help to have a soundset for the sample library you are using (as that will also govern library choice) ? 

Any thoughts and success stories (and links to demos) would be much appreciated.

If the general consensus is that this is not possible and that you need to be a good keyboard player to make commercial-grade mockups, what are the going rates for an orchestrator or programmer to do the production job from a Sibelius file ? (Just as orchestrators take a DAW file and produce notation for live players ?

Thanks very much !


----------



## The Darris (Feb 15, 2015)

If you are using a notation program such as Finale or Sibelius, you are going to be limited in the quality of the sound output. This is due to the limitations in controlling multiple audio parameters such as modulation and vibrato, etc. Sure, there are ways to input these but it is not very intuitive if you are wanting to create really good mock ups. 

I work both ways though. I come from a notation based composition back ground, ye' ole pencil and paper. If I know my music is going to be played live, I work directly in Sibelius but, if I want to have a good recording too, I will perform the parts into Cubase with all my favorite sample libraries and produce the final piece. I did this with my mock-up of Danny Elfman's Etiquette cue from Edward Scissorhands. The material went from score to DAW via my own keyboard performance of the parts plus edits to fix my mistakes. The end results were one of my best mock-ups I've done and I learned a lot about orchestration and what samples can and cannot do. They cannot do a lot. 

In the end, you have to ask yourself, "Do I need to create the most realistic music ever?" or "Do I need to rely on my chops and abilities as a composer to know my stuff will sound how I want it to when recorded live?" Obviously, the industry of film/tv/commercial music requires a good sounding mock-up in the end so DAW orchestration has shifted to the norm. I said DAW orchestration because in a lot of cases, composers write notational/piano reduction sketches of their music and send them to the orchestrator to mock-up. However, if you are working in libraries or commercial music, then you need to compose and create a well polished piece of music like Two Steps from Hell. I would make a bet that their music would not sound that great if they worked in Finale or Sibelius. 

In the end, notation software captures notes whereas the DAW can capture a performance.

Best,

Chris


----------



## wst3 (Feb 15, 2015)

What Crhis said!

I use Finale, heck I still use a pencil or pen and staff paper sometimes. I can think about the music more when I am looking at the staff. Well, sometimes anyway.

But the technology just hasn't caught up with notation tools yet.

And I'm not sure it will... sequencers and scoring tools are really two different ways of looking at the same data, and you have to develop an appreciation for which one to use when.


----------



## Elephant (Feb 15, 2015)

So what would the counsel be for a composer who wants to produce a realistic sounding mockup but whose keyboard chops are pretty basic ?

a) Get a professional orchestrator/programmer to do the job who has the chops and get them to work from the score as you did Chris with the Danny Elfman score ?
b) Step enter into the DAW and tweak it by ear
c) Enter into a notation package, add all the dynamics and articulations etc in the notation package, export the file and keyswitches, open it in the DAW and then tweak it
d) another alternative (please specify !!)

Suggestions welcome. What have you seen people in that situation doing to overcome that ?

Thanks !


----------



## Mike Marino (Feb 15, 2015)

Probably a mix of B and C. Robin Hoffmann writes his music directly into Sibelius first, then exports the MIDI into his DAW (as far as what I've read). Keep in mind that a lot of what Robin writes ends up being recorded by live orchestra, so it's something that's worked for him.

Robin's here on the forum and posts every now and then.

In some cases there are sampled instrument libraries that are able to function pretty well within a notation program. There are pre-made templates that allow for keyswitching via Technique Text (for example, in Sibelius). Jonathan Loving has done this sort of thing for a number of products. BUT, as Chris and Bill have said, technology just hasn't caught up with notation programs and they just don't give you all of the control you'd have with a daw like Cubase/Logic/DP/PT, etc for CC info.


----------



## rgames (Feb 15, 2015)

Elephant @ Sun Feb 15 said:


> So what would the counsel be for a composer who wants to produce a realistic sounding mockup but whose keyboard chops are pretty basic ?


You have just described me - terrible keyboard chops and I "play in" very little. However, it's not that big a deal: I generally start on a piano track, play in what I can, then drag to other tracks as necessary. Whatever gets lost between my head and my fingers just gets written in via the MIDI editor (assuming it's still in my head after the take...).

Honestly I don't know that you can consistently get what you want from playing in live - my experience is that even guys with good keyboard chops still tweak as much as I do. Unless it's a piano part, of course, but strings/brass/WW/different libraries/different samplers all have different responses and I find it hard to believe you can adapt to all the combinations and produce consistent results. So regardless of your piano chops there's still a discrepancy between what's in your head and what you play and you're going to be in the MIDI editor doing tweaks. (Of course, that's true of any instrument and is the reason why musicians spend so many hours practicing their instruments - trying to reconcile what's in their head against what comes out of their horns. Just because you play something live doesn't mean it's exactly what you had in mind.).

Whether I use notation or the DAW to compose depends on the purpose - if it's for live players then it (almost always) starts and ends in Finale with a MIDI export to the sequencer for a mockup if needed. I've done a lot of arrangements that use only a few live players and I still do those in Finale then export MIDI to Cubase, so even if it's not all live players I still start in Finale a lot of the time. Bottom line is that I often go from Finale to Cubase but seldom the other way. But it's just how my workflow has evolved over the years - I know plenty of guys who do exactly the opposite and get great results.

So I wouldn't worry about it. What matters is how you learn to match what's in your head. You can do that playing it in or you can do it writing it in. In the end, the results can be indistinguishable and depend more on personal preference and workflow than anything else.

rgames


----------



## wst3 (Feb 15, 2015)

Interesting!

My keyboard chops are nothing to write home about, but I haven't found that to be a big disadvantage unless I am trying to play in a piano part<G>!

For most everything else the piano keyboard is a poor substitute, but it will get you the timing, and it will get you some nuance.

The nuance is important because even with zillions of round robins you need subtle differences that, at least for me, seem to come most naturally by playing it in.

The timing, well, that's the difference between what is on the printed page and what hits your ears.

Standard notation is a wonderful way to convey a basic musical idea, but there are limits to just how detailed you want it to be. I mean I guess we could learn to read 128th notes if we had to, but we don't.

We see all quarter notes and we know it is probably one thing, we see dotted notes and we expect something else, triplets mean yet another thing.

The way I like to differentiate is simple. Standard notation provides an outline that most musicians ought to be able to use to play a piece. MIDI, on the other hand, is a record of the actual events that create the sounds that make the music.

I hope that makes sense.

As for workflow, I try to make it uni-directional, if I start in a sequencer then I like to stay there until I am ready for printed output, at which time I create a copy of the project, quantize the tracks, listen, fix major problems, and then export to Finale.

If I start in Finale I try to get as much of it written as possible before exporting to MIDI.

Then I cheat<G>... I will listen to the imported MIDI tracks, if they are close to what I want to hear then I'll tweak, but as often as not they aren't, and so I print them out and play them in.

Warts and all!

Because that played in track almost always turns out to be easier to tweak, or rather the results of the tweaking sound better than if I had started with the imported MIDI.

If I'm being really picky I'll play in every part, but quite often I can play in the first chair, and then copy to other chairs, changing pitch and duration as required, and it still sounds pretty darned good.

And every once in a while I have a great night at the keyboard. In this most recent project I had to play in a bunch of piano parts. I had to edit out a few bad notes (either hit the wrong key or hit too many keys), but the result was really remarkable. When I listen to the track I have to remind myself that it was me playing<G>!

Doesn't happen often enough!!


----------



## The Darris (Feb 15, 2015)

I will keep this short this time. 

As far as chops go, you don't need to be a virtuoso piano player to get the thoughts out there. Play in what you can and then tweak within the DAW to get the performance you want. This comes with understanding your sample libraries and their features, not to mention knowing your DAW of choice inside and out. The more time you spend playing with them and learning how to create basic performances, the better you will be in the long run. Your ear is the most important asset when creating and mixing huge compositions such as orchestral works. 

I found that going directly into the DAW by playing yields better results versus going in with a midi file. The reason being, midi files are exact rhythms and velocities which means I have to tweak every note. In a performance, I am at least capturing 90% of what I want and the remaining 10% is minimal adjustments from there. 

I guess this ended up being longer than I expected. I hope that helps.

Best,

Chris


----------



## muk (Feb 16, 2015)

For me playing the lines in is faster and a lot more fun (more playing, less tweaking), but I think there's nothing that couldn't also be done with step time input or an imported midi file. Maybe give a listen to some of Jay Bacal's demos for VSL. He did most of them step time inputting all the notes, and the results are fantastic. Just a different workflow, you need to discover for yourself what works best for you.


----------



## Lassi Tani (Feb 16, 2015)

I tried both ways: 

1. First Sibelius, then Cubase.
=> Fast, when I made the score well, and not just sketching the score.

2. First Cubase, then Sibelius.
=> Incredibly slow. I stopped at half way, when I had used 3 days for getting it right.

When I don't need the score, I do it straight in Cubase, playing some easier parts, but mostly just clicking midi notes. When I compose only in Cubase, I have to trust my ears more though. In Sibelius it's much easier to see harmonies.

And yes, Noteperformer for Sibelius is a must .


----------



## Elephant (Feb 16, 2015)

@muk
Listened to some of Jay Bacal's demos for VSL, and looked at the forum page where he discusses his working methods. V interesting. That was a very useful reference. Thanks !
@sekkosiki
Why is Noteperformer a must as opposed to a sample library like Vienna Special Edition 1 (curious as I have been considering MP) ? I know this question is a bit of a sidetrack but just interested to respond here briefly.
Also, when you import a file from Sibelius, do you also import the keyswitches or just the raw notes ?


----------



## KEnK (Feb 16, 2015)

Elephant @ Sun Feb 15 said:


> So what would the counsel be for a composer who wants to produce a realistic sounding mockup but whose keyboard chops are pretty basic ?...


become a 'mouse virtuoso'
seriously- 

study midi files that "sound good"-
look at how notes fall on the grid-
imperfections in note length and position are key
velocity is easy to adjust
cc curves are a snap to draw in.

meantime-
practice scale technique w/ one hand-
this won't make you a good pianist- but it will get you 
towards being able to play lines in in less time.

it can work


----------



## Elephant (Feb 16, 2015)

> study midi files that "sound good"-





> interesting - can you suggest any links to good files - I am particularly interested in well-known classical works (Beethoven, Mozart) - like the suggestion.
> Thanks to all sofar - really useful tips


----------



## The Darris (Feb 16, 2015)

Elephant @ Mon Feb 16 said:


> > study midi files that "sound good"-
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As far as a database of midi files that contain the automation and such, I don't know of a single database of that content. Studying midi files only works well if you have the libraries used in the original mock-up. Different libraries yield different curves of automation and note placement so this would be a huge waist of time in my opinion. 

Again, I will highly encourage you to try different approaches for more than just a day or a few hours. Spend a few weeks learning one way and another few weeks another. See which works best for you as far as workflow goes. I have a mix of a few different approaches that work well for me personally. To each his/her own.

Best,

Chris


----------



## Fleer (Feb 16, 2015)

Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but in Notion (PreSonus) you can also use EastWest Symphonic Orchestra or other libraries.


----------



## KEnK (Feb 16, 2015)

Elephant @ Mon Feb 16 said:


> > study midi files that "sound good"-
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't personally check out this kind of thing any more.
but here's a site I used to check out when I was trying to figure this stuff out.
http://www.classicalarchives.com/midi.html

it might be what you're looking for.
only free for 14 days, but you can get a sense of what's out there.
after a while you'll notice which 'contributors' are making the better files.
Sorry, but I don't know exactly which files are the better ones.
I'm sure there's lots of great stuff out there easily found w/ a search.

I listened to a few versions of the Allegro con brio from Beethoven's 5th
none of them were "good", but all were different interpretations.
Thing to do to is find something that does sound good and study it,
It could also be the midi player used on the site is bad- (maybe it's a quicktime synth)
I don't know- but I do know there are some out there easily found worth looking at.

As mentioned, which libraries are used will affect performance issues-
but regardless of that, you'll still quickly get a sense what to do to make your
interpretations less mechanical.

that is after all, what you're wanting to do when you use step or notation input.

k


----------



## Lassi Tani (Feb 16, 2015)

Elephant @ 17/2/2015 said:


> @sekkosiki
> Why is Noteperformer a must as opposed to a sample library like Vienna Special Edition 1 (curious as I have been considering MP) ? I know this question is a bit of a sidetrack but just interested to respond here briefly.
> Also, when you import a file from Sibelius, do you also import the keyswitches or just the raw notes ?



If you are considering composing with Sibelius, then NotePerformer is great! It's easy to install and use, and it's inspiring, and also cheap :D. I guess you could connect any VST library with Sibelius, but you need to set it up, and it takes time. I'm lazy, thus NotePerformer is perfect for me . When I import a file from Sibelius, I just import the midi notes without keyswitches.


----------



## olajideparis (Feb 17, 2015)

In short doesn't exist. I hear good things about Note Performer but that really only sounds good compared to the results one typically gets from a notation program, compared to a well performed midi mockup with high end sound libraries it sounds god awful. Steinberg is working on a product geared towards this very thing and have employed many of the programmers who worked on Sibelius so I would look towards that as a solution in the future. You can read more about that on the official blog: http://blog.steinberg.net/

But if getting a realistic mockup is your goal I would not attempt to do so by means of notation exclusively. If you don't have the keyboard skills or the libraries then hire somebody to do that for you.

Regarding keyboard chops, one only need not be a keyboard virtuoso to produce good midi mockups which would be superior to what you would get from a notation program. I am a poor keyboard player since I was a guitarist my whole life and didn't touch a keyboard until my mid twenties when I went back to study orchestration and keyboard harmony. And while my chops can certainly stand to improve they are good enough to get me through being able to mockup up an orchestra or any other instrument for that matter a helluva lot faster than I could ever do so with finale. What helps make up for the lack of amazing keyboard chops is knowing the DAW very well...like an instrument. So I would not shy away from the challenge of getting to learn your DAW of choice well enough to be able to produce a good midi mockup and definitely would not shy away from learning the keyboard if you feel like that is a weakness of yours. 

If your ambition is to work as a full time composer understand that learning a DAW fluently and being able to produce a convincing mockup, sometimes in hours will be necessary. Also, the term "mockup" is a bit misleading since a lot of the time what we call a mockup is in fact the finished product, so unless you will be recording with an orchestra and your midi realization is in fact literally a mockup you are going to need it to sound as convincing as possible and the only way to do that in 2015 in a time-efficient way is with DAW and not a notation program, though that may change soon.

Good luck!


----------



## Lassi Tani (Feb 17, 2015)

olajideparis @ 17/2/2015 said:


> In short doesn't exist. I hear good things about Note Performer but that really only sounds good compared to the results one typically gets from a notation program, compared to a well performed midi mockup with high end sound libraries it sounds god awful. Steinberg is working on a product geared towards this very thing and have employed many of the programmers who worked on Sibelius so I would look towards that as a solution in the future. You can read more about that on the official blog: http://blog.steinberg.net/
> 
> But if getting a realistic mockup is your goal I would not attempt to do so by means of notation exclusively. If you don't have the keyboard skills or the libraries then hire somebody to do that for you.



I agree, I wouldn't use NotePerformer for creating realistic mockups. For me, it's one part of the process (Sibelius -> Cubase). Wow! I haven't noticed Steinberg's development on a notation application. Sweet!


----------



## snattack (Feb 17, 2015)

I disagree. Noteperformer is perfect for sending sketches, and convinces people at a quite high level. I haven't tried this yet, but the really strong point in NP is the brass, so a mixture when moving from Sib->Daw would be to export each track of the brass as audio and the rest as midi.

The problem (like always) with notation software is that it has predefined phrasing, vibrato, etc, whereas the "alive" part of mockups comes from the fact that all those things are irregular and inconsistent when played back by a performer.


----------



## Elephant (Feb 17, 2015)

@andreas 


> The problem (like always) with notation software is that it has predefined phrasing, vibrato, etc, whereas the "alive" part of mockups comes from the fact that all those things are irregular and inconsistent when played back by a performer



If improving kbd skills is going to be a problem, maybe a combination of slowing down input and using less fingers might work, after all most instruments are playing single notes anyway. 

For this kind of work, and for people with basic kbd skills, is there a type of MIDI keyboard that works best to give you the best control you can achieve ? Weighted, semiweighted, unweighted, type of aftertouch, joystick vs modwheel, etc ? Any particular models that are known to be great for this ?


----------



## lee (Feb 17, 2015)

Semi- or unweighted controllers are imo better suited for recording midi, especially if you're not a skilled piano player. Easier to play.

Regarding mod wheel, it's a must have in my world, but, as with step record and drawing notes in vs playing, you can also draw your own cc curves instead of "playing" them with a mod wheel.


----------



## SymphonicSamples (Feb 17, 2015)

Hey Elephant , given you asked , I'll throw this out there as an example . This is a real-time recording of a score from Finale 2012 for playback using standard music notation , no midi sequencer used . I personally prefer to compose in notation , but will also export to Cubase when needed . It's certainly possible to get decent results when composing with Notation software . 


[flash width=450 height=110 loop=false]http://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/107984208=false[/flash]

or

https://soundcloud.com/symphonicsamples/the-hours-after


----------



## Elephant (Feb 17, 2015)

Well thanks for that SymphonicSamples ! I like the piece. Now I am very curious ! Was all of that entered step-time with the mouse or PC keyboard, and without any tweaking of individual notes afterwards, or was any of it played in using a MIDI keyboard ? What overall tweaks did you use afterwards - eg tempo map changes etc ?
What specifically to Finale gives you that degree of control over and above Sibelius with soundsets ? Which libraries were used on the piece, and do you happen to have any examples of chamber music ideally well known pieces that you have done with the same approach ?
And if as I suspect that was EW CCC, what machine configuration do you use to get that kind of result ?
Thanks again


----------



## pmcrockett (Feb 18, 2015)

If you're a scripting wizard instead of a piano wizard, it's possible to use a MIDI scripting program such as Pure Data to load a MIDI file and feed the next note in the file to a DAW whenever MIDI input is received. So you can set up a johnny-one-note controller that will respond to your performed velocity and timing but will always play the right note no matter what key you press. Then you can write the music in the notation software, export parts as MIDI files, and use the scripted input remapper to record performances that are easier to input than "real" performances but sound better than Finale/Sibelius exports.


----------



## wst3 (Feb 18, 2015)

PMCrockett - that is a very clever idea!

I vaguely remember such a script included with a distribution, I think for KeyKey, but could have been PD, I have to do some digging!

It was overly simplified, you had to strike just one key, and I think being able to strike multiple keys would be a big step forward.


----------



## Elephant (Feb 18, 2015)

@pmcrockett - cool idea. Thanks v much to all for the posts. There are a number of ideas to explore. What strikes me after listening is that the human input factor is really important to get some kind of a feel. I listened to the VSL demos and actually prefer the feel of GB's work to that of JB - personal preference. Human feel is definitely not equal to random. That Pd idea has possibilities. Am investigating !


----------



## SymphonicSamples (Feb 19, 2015)

Hey Elephant , I'm glad you enjoyed the example piece . The piece was entered note by note via the standard note entry methods in Finale , in this case no midi keyboard used , just notation entered with the mouse , as you would expect when using Notation software . The dynamics heard in the piece were all controlled by standard dynamic markings / hairpins in the Finale score , so Crescendo and Diminuendo , intern standard notation . The tempo was the same , standard tempo score markings with ritardando / accelerando / Fermata markings playing back off the score . It's a real-time recording of the score from Finale playing back with no alterations . Pressed play and recorded the score . The reason for this level of detail and quality in playback is due to Finale Library Extension which are addons I developed for Finale some time back now originally for my own needs , which alter the midi from Finale real-time and automate everything so the result of the score is as realistic as possible . Intern all the standard instrument notation used in the score correctly triggers the supported articulations from the sample libraries used , and dynamics are uniform throughout each instruments articulation changes and of course a lot of under the hood automation . Like yourself , I wanted to compose in Notation and get good results without spending a lot of time editing CC data . Given the standard of sample playback quality in all Notation software is traditionally very poor , that was my motivation originally . If it's pure orchestra I'll write in Finale , and if I want to use Synths and so on in a piece for example , either do it all in Cubase (which I love using for many different reasons) or write the score in Finale and export to Cubase . Like most things in music it's whatever process that works for each person or what the piece requires and gets the results you want . I just prefer seeing voicing over the sections when writing . When I use Cubase I always find myself tweaking and not composing as much  As far as libraries used in the piece .

Strings - Eastwest Hollywood Strings
Brass - Eastwest Hollywood Brass
Woodwinds - Eastwest Hollywood Woodwinds Piccolo , Flutes , Oboe / and 8dio Clarinet/Bassoon .
Percussion - Eastwest QLSO
Choir - Soundiron - Olympus Elements and Strezov - Storm Choir 1

As for known Chamber music , no I haven't entered anything into Finale and exported it in the past , mainly my own music or score for other people . The machine Config at the time , given it's a long way back now was from memory a Win7 x64 i7-2600K machine with 32 gigs of ram , so nothing special by any means especially when compared to rigs now . Hopefully that answer a few question . If your interested in the Finale Library Extensions just drop me an email and I might be able to help you out


----------



## Sebastianmu (Feb 19, 2015)

I honestly believe all the Midi CC things that you HAVE to have going on in a realistic mock-up rule out the option of using a notation software only. You do need a proper DAW for that kind of thing. That said, I don't think you need anything more than basic keyboard skills. You could totally import a Midi file into cubase and tweak around and humanize phrasing and expression manually by adding imperfections, a good tempo track and drawing CC changes. It might not be the fastest, but it is certainly possible to achieve top-notch results that way if you have a good feeling for what the instruments would naturally do. 
Cheers, 
Sebastian


----------



## Mahlon (Feb 23, 2015)

SymphonicSamples @ Tue Feb 17 said:


> Hey Elephant , given you asked , I'll throw this out there as an example . This is a real-time recording of a score from Finale 2012 for playback using standard music notation , no midi sequencer used . I personally prefer to compose in notation , but will also export to Cubase when needed . It's certainly possible to get decent results when composing with Notation software .
> 
> 
> [flash width=450 height=110 loop=false]http://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/107984208=false[/flash]
> ...



This is very impressive. I've never heard output from a notation program reach this level of feeling.
Bravo. I'd love to know more nuts and bolts about how you actually accomplished this, but I understand that could be proprietary. :D 

Really, really cool.

Mahlon

Mahlon


----------



## InLight-Tone (Feb 23, 2015)

You could learn a scripting base application as opposed to learning keyboards as they can deal with midi CC also...

http://opusmodus.com/

http://www.symboliccomposer.com/page_main.shtml


----------



## waveheavy (Mar 11, 2015)

Don't know if anyone mentioned this yet or not, but creating a tempo map in your DAW can be an easy way to get the live played feel for your imported MIDI tracks. 

You'd play in a simple reduction of your score and then create a tempo map from it, then assign that map to all other instrument tracks in the DAW.


----------



## Hannes_F (Mar 11, 2015)

SymphonicSamples @ Tue Feb 17 said:


> Hey Elephant , given you asked , I'll throw this out there as an example . This is a real-time recording of a score from Finale 2012 for playback using standard music notation , no midi sequencer used . I personally prefer to compose in notation , but will also export to Cubase when needed . It's certainly possible to get decent results when composing with Notation software .
> 
> 
> [flash width=450 height=110 loop=false]http://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/107984208=false[/flash]
> ...



Impressive, thanks for sharing.


----------



## waveheavy (Mar 20, 2015)

I am very, very interested in those Finale Library Extensions if they are available!

Dave




SymphonicSamples @ 19/2/2015 said:


> Hey Elephant , I'm glad you enjoyed the example piece . The piece was entered note by note via the standard note entry methods in Finale , in this case no midi keyboard used , just notation entered with the mouse , as you would expect when using Notation software . The dynamics heard in the piece were all controlled by standard dynamic markings / hairpins in the Finale score , so Crescendo and Diminuendo , intern standard notation . The tempo was the same , standard tempo score markings with ritardando / accelerando / Fermata markings playing back off the score . It's a real-time recording of the score from Finale playing back with no alterations . Pressed play and recorded the score . The reason for this level of detail and quality in playback is due to Finale Library Extension which are addons I developed for Finale some time back now originally for my own needs , which alter the midi from Finale real-time and automate everything so the result of the score is as realistic as possible . Intern all the standard instrument notation used in the score correctly triggers the supported articulations from the sample libraries used , and dynamics are uniform throughout each instruments articulation changes and of course a lot of under the hood automation . Like yourself , I wanted to compose in Notation and get good results without spending a lot of time editing CC data . Given the standard of sample playback quality in all Notation software is traditionally very poor , that was my motivation originally . If it's pure orchestra I'll write in Finale , and if I want to use Synths and so on in a piece for example , either do it all in Cubase (which I love using for many different reasons) or write the score in Finale and export to Cubase . Like most things in music it's whatever process that works for each person or what the piece requires and gets the results you want . I just prefer seeing voicing over the sections when writing . When I use Cubase I always find myself tweaking and not composing as much  As far as libraries used in the piece .
> 
> Strings - Eastwest Hollywood Strings
> Brass - Eastwest Hollywood Brass
> ...


----------



## almound (Jun 22, 2015)

This is the question everybody is asking, Elephant. What I do is use Sibelius as a front-end for my sequencer (I happen to use Studio One 2). The method I show in my free tutorials works for any sequencer, and should work for most notation programs (including Finale).

It is as though I have multiple MIDI controllers being played simultaneously inputting MIDI into Studio One, using my favorite reverb plug-in (VerbSession) and with stereo placement/ separation (via Virtual Sound Studio 2.0). 

Look for Al Johnston on Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XeSTON5_iA


----------



## Samulis (Jun 28, 2015)

Great thread!

I have been using speedy entry in finale for all of my work for minor games for the past five years, and somehow I'm still alive. That's not to say I don't think finale is a p.o.s. that crashes every five minutes and I would borderline gladly give it up, but there are some odd perks with using speedy entry and finale that I enjoy greatly.
1. I find it's easier to visualize phrases, phrase units, and interaction between parts in a score. In a DAW, you have those little clips of MIDI data you have to squint to see or else open in a piano roll. In notation, you can see it all together, one part next to another. Looking at MIDI too long, I get a little cross-eyed, although I suspect that people who use it a lot feel the opposite way simply because of fluency.
2. Speedy entry after doing it every day for several years is FAST. It's quite often even faster than playing notes in if you're really well-practiced, and you have zero wrong notes to fix and zero issues.
3. You can doodle around enough with human playback to get passable results. I'm not interested in (nor do I own libraries that require) doodling around with CC's for three days straight on a track. HP does a decent job is you tweak it and throw blatant compliments at it every once in a while.
4. Expressions can give quick, scripted results. One-click crescendo, one-click ritard, one-click virtually anything. No keyframes, no dragging things, just enter in what you need and the curve you want, plug in a keybind, and you're good to go. You can even design things like rubato sections and more with minimal effort. Need detache? Set up an articulation to make notes shorter and drag it over all the notes. Need keyswitches? You can program articulations to trigger notes/keyswitches and place them at the start of the measure before notes. One click keyswitch.
5. It's personally easier for me to compose more complex and meaningful works in notation. I also find that I am vastly more conscious of ranges, of the idiomaticness of lines, and compositional features such as counterpoint and call and response when working with notation. When I work in a DAW, it feels like anything goes, but notation puts just the right limits to help me write in what I feel is a more natural way.

In my opinion, if you don't care about perfect results, have the required skills/background (fluent in reading/writing notation), and just need something that can get stuff done super fast but decently, notation is a good choice. If you like to utilize more complex compositional language, I think it can help you realize that more clearly. For a someone like myself, who is a hobbyist composer as a secondary interest, it's great. I can write a minute of material a hour and help indie game devs bring their worlds to life.

Here are some examples of (unfortunately slightly older) pieces I've created entirely using Finale. Note that they're not anything amazing in terms of quality or detail, but they, for the most part (particularly the clients' part), get the job done.
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/627130
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/610055
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/560069
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/550894

Of course, if you wanted to use a virtual orchestra to score a AAA game (despite the fact that hopefully you would be able to afford to record with some live musicians, at least partially), using $1,000's+ in sample libraries, then notation programs are probably not your best choice. For one, they are unstable using large amounts of virtual instruments (not to mention finale, in my experience, is just plain hopelessly unstable), not to mention, as said many times above, unless you really know what you are doing between Human Playback and automation via scripts or articulations, it just can't give you the level of control and detail some desire to antagonize over in their works.

A bit of an epilogue- 
Perhaps one day we'll see more "smart" virtual instruments that can automate all the more extraneous CC's for us, as musicians do and, as I think instruments should. I think the real-time nature of MIDI is a bit of a hinderance here. I've seen a few examples of this, but nothing in a really serious or high-quality nature. We can see the options and flexibility growing on big-budget libraries today- bow positions, string choices, etc. but all of these are things that most of "us" don't really know enough about to make a good decision. It's nice to be able to say every year after all the new releases that "mock-ups have never sounded this realistic before." It will be interesting to see how notation fares when (or if) this sort of technology comes our way. I think it will do a lot of good for notation users, especially if a "smart" instrument is designed to work closely with the notation software, but, like anything else, we'll see...


----------

