Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

DORICO 3: finally a perfect match of notation and virtual instruments / sample libraries playback.

wcreed51 said:
It's come a long way; I hardy have any crashes lately (on PC).
Click to expand...

Hardly is not within the acceptable tolerance of my professional work... Have you sorted the routing problem you had? I'm assuming you're the same wcreed from the Dorico forums...
 
Bollen said:
True... If only you could get Overture to actually do anything without crashing...:grin:
Click to expand...

I used and enjoyed very much Ov4 some years ago, but Ov5 has not been a smooth experience for me on the mac. I paid for a beta that has never really worked right. Maybe it will get there some day but in my view its an understaffed product that will remain a boutique notational program for a relatively small group of people and I don't have time to mess around with it until I see a lot more critical mass, which it currently does not have. Dorico is becoming an industry work horse and I believe it will become everything that ov5 won't.
 
Yes, that's me. I need to start a fresh score and try again. I have the proverbial day job and a house that needs endless attention, so haven't had a chance
 
Dewdman42 said:
I used and enjoyed very much Ov4 some years ago, but Ov5 has not been a smooth experience for me on the mac. I paid for a beta that has never really worked right. Maybe it will get there some day but in my view its an understaffed product that will remain a boutique notational program for a relatively small group of people and I don't have time to mess around with it until I see a lot more critical mass, which it currently does not have. Dorico is becoming an industry work horse and I believe it will become everything that ov5 won't.
Click to expand...

No to mention that the difference in support is like that difference between heaven and hell! I found the Overture guy to be the most insufferable and rude person I've ever dealt with...
 
wcreed51 said:
Yes, that's me. I need to start a fresh score and try again. I have the proverbial day job and a house that needs endless attention, so haven't had a chance
Click to expand...

Well let me know if you need help, since we are both working on similar things...
 
ptram said:
The Play mode in Dorico is a totally different concept than any DAW. In Dorico, two layers always exist – one for visual representation, the other for playback. The Score mode of most DAWs tries to do their best automatic interpretation of realtime data. The Play mode of Dorico lets you finely edit the relation between the two layers. It's something a typical DAW user, only interested in correct playback and acceptable score production, doesn't need, while a composer working with written score absolutely needs.

Paolo
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing the difference between the playback "layer" in Dorico vs. how a DAW like Cubase plays back Midi files. I'm assuming that Dorico is playing back Midi derived from the score, sending Midi messages to whatever VST you have configured just like Cubase. Of course, Cubase has great Midi editing/viewing capability that you'd want to take advantage of, all the controller lanes, midi functions, logical editor etc. All of that would be useful to someone wanting more refined playback from a notated score. So I could see at least the Cubase Midi functionality being integrated with Dorico in some way.
 
Vadium said:
Modern libraries like CSS have complex patches with delays, depending on velocity. And fully functional sequencers have a compensation delay possibility (and in some cases, even it is not enough). Dorico 3 hasn't yet.
Click to expand...
If you're talking about negative track delay for patches that require early attack, Dorico already had that. You have to select the notes and apply a negative ms to it but it works. I don't know how they handle it in Dorico 3.
 
joebaggan said:
I'm not seeing the difference between the playback "layer" in Dorico vs. how a DAW like Cubase plays back Midi files. I'm assuming that Dorico is playing back Midi derived from the score, sending Midi messages to whatever VST you have configured just like Cubase. Of course, Cubase has great Midi editing/viewing capability that you'd want to take advantage of, all the controller lanes, midi functions, logical editor etc. All of that would be useful to someone wanting more refined playback from a notated score. So I could see at least the Cubase Midi functionality being integrated with Dorico in some way.
Click to expand...

I think he’s referring to the way you can edit midi in playback (change lengths, add negative delay etc, nudge notes etc) and it won’t necessarily be reflected in the notation as opposed to most DAWs where the piano roll/midi editor is just a different visual reepresentation of the same information as the score. Hence the two independent “layers”?

I think that’s the gist anyway?
 
TimCox said:
Dorico already had that. You have to select the notes and apply a negative ms to it but it works.
Click to expand...
as I wrote in previous posts, this way is uncomfortable. overall track delay must be present as a minimum for fast work. Also, input midi monitoring on/off switch must be present
track delay.jpg
 
prodigalson said:
you can edit midi in playback (change lengths, add negative delay etc, nudge notes etc) and it won’t necessarily be reflected in the notation as opposed to most DAWs where the piano roll/midi editor is just a different visual reepresentation of the same information as the score. Hence the two independent “layers”?
Click to expand...
Yes, it's what I’m referring to. Thank you for clarifying!

Paolo
 
Is the crossgrade option from Sibelius no longer available? It's mentioned on the Buy page but when I try to make the purchase, the verification options don't include Sibelius. No answer from Steinberg support.
 
Vadium said:
as I wrote in previous posts, this way is uncomfortable. overall track delay must be present as a minimum for fast work. Also, input midi monitoring on/off switch must be present
Click to expand...
Definitely agree, I must've just missed your other posts.
 
the funniest thing to me is that we are now in version 3 and the software still requires a whitelist text file to recognize some very popular Virtual Instruments (Omnisphere, Komplete Kontrol, etc..), and VST's are listed alphabetically in a drop down list, instead of a tree format by category or manufacturer.
 
C-Wave said:
the funniest thing to me is that we are now in version 3 and the software still requires a whitelist text file to recognize some very popular Virtual Instruments (Omnisphere, Komplete Kontrol, etc..), and VST's are listed alphabetically in a drop down list, instead of a tree format by category or manufacturer.
Click to expand...

The whitelist is only needed for VST2 instruments and effects, not VST3 instruments and effects. Unfortunately most vendors have not yet updated to VST3.
 
mducharme said:
The whitelist is only needed for VST2 instruments and effects, not VST3 instruments and effects. Unfortunately most vendors have not yet updated to VST3.
Click to expand...
OK, that is the technical explanation;how this is happening.. But you know, my question was not how is this but WHY this is? at version 3.0?
 
C-Wave said:
OK, that is the technical explanation;how this is happening.. But you know, my question was not how is this but WHY this is? at version 3.0?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that they were running into issues with VST2 plugins causing Dorico to become unstable, so they disabled them by default. All VST3 plugins (due to the different architecture) did not experience this problem. I believe they were hoping that most plugins would be updated to VST3 soon enough that it would not become an issue. Unfortunately that has not happened yet.

Dorico was never meant to be a DAW. The playback functions are always secondary to notation. I don't think it makes sense for them to spend time on making VST2 plugins work globally, given that context. I would rather see notation improvements.
 
Last edited:
mducharme said:
My understanding is that they were running into issues with VST2 plugins causing Dorico to become unstable, so they disabled them by default. All VST3 plugins (due to the different architecture) did not experience this problem. I believe they were hoping that most plugins would be updated to VST3 soon enough that it would not become an issue. Unfortunately that has not happened yet.

Dorico was never meant to be a DAW. The playback functions are always secondary to notation. I don't think it makes sense for them to spend time on making VST2 plugins work globally, given that context. I would rather see notation improvements.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that for a second. VST2 was not supported because Steinberg is on a mission to force everyone to VST3 and is trying to move in that direction by having this new product never support VST2 in the first place. Obviously, given the state of the plugin market and lackluster adoption of VST3, that's untenable, thus this whitelist nonsense.

Dorico uses an external Cubase-derived process to host VSTs and certainly Steinberg can do VST2 stably: they invented the tech and Cubase can do it. The Dorico team has been saddled with some corporate strategy here, there's no technical reason - they didn't feel like spending effort supporting VST2. But of course they can, and the whitelist proves it.
 
mducharme said:
Dorico was never meant to be a DAW. The playback functions are always secondary to notation. I don't think it makes sense for them to spend time on making VST2 plugins work globally, given that context. I would rather see notation improvements.
Click to expand...

What is the point of having Playback functionality at all if it's going to be done half baked? Users of notation software are pretty used to lousy Playback support, so if Steinberg just wants to meet the bar set by others, that's fine. But if they want to stand out from the pack and reach musicians/composers and not just engravers, they're going to have to build out Midi playback/editing support to allow high quality mockups, or allow integration with Cubase to do the job.
 
joebaggan said:
What is the point of having Playback functionality at all if it's going to be done half baked? Users of notation software are pretty used to lousy Playback support, so if Steinberg just wants to meet the bar set by others, that's fine. But if they want to stand out from the pack and reach musicians/composers and not just engravers, they're going to have to build out Midi playback/editing support to allow high quality mockups, or allow integration with Cubase to do the job.
Click to expand...

Yep. And it's obviously something they want to claim, as this is the first sentence of their description of Dorico:

Dorico helps you to write music notation, automatically producing printed results of exceptional quality — and plays it back with breathtaking realism.
Click to expand...

I keep waiting for a release that demonstrates in the playback area the same deep thinking and quality of implementation they've done elsewhere - e.g. when adding percussion, trills, guitar notation, condensing etc - all extremely impressive.

So far the playback support has seemed ad hoc, incremental, inconsistent, incomplete, not well thought out and quite frankly broken. I'm concerned that they don't have someone with the deep understanding of what's needed as they obviously do with the notation side.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom