What's new

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

Bollen

Vintage Member
It's come a long way; I hardy have any crashes lately (on PC).
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...
 

Dewdman42

Senior Member
True... If only you could get Overture to actually do anything without crashing...:grin:
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.
 

wcreed51

Senior Member
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
 

Bollen

Vintage Member
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.
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...
 

Bollen

Vintage Member
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
Well let me know if you need help, since we are both working on similar things...
 

joebaggan

Member
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
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.
 

TimCox

Active Member
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.
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.
 

prodigalson

Senior Member
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.
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?
 

Vadium

Active Member
Dorico already had that. You have to select the notes and apply a negative ms to it but it works.
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
 

ptram

Senior Member
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”?
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.
 

TimCox

Active Member
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
Definitely agree, I must've just missed your other posts.
 

C-Wave

Senior Member
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.
 

mducharme

Senior Member
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.
The whitelist is only needed for VST2 instruments and effects, not VST3 instruments and effects. Unfortunately most vendors have not yet updated to VST3.
 

C-Wave

Senior Member
The whitelist is only needed for VST2 instruments and effects, not VST3 instruments and effects. Unfortunately most vendors have not yet updated to VST3.
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?
 

mducharme

Senior Member
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?
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:
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.
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.
 

joebaggan

Member
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.
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.
 
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.
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.
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.
 
Top Bottom