Do it! It's like Sibelius; the last few upgrades make things pretty speedy very easy.As a DP4 owner (!) I qualify for an upgrade. I'm tempted to take another look after all these years.
Do it! It's like Sibelius; the last few upgrades make things pretty speedy very easy.As a DP4 owner (!) I qualify for an upgrade. I'm tempted to take another look after all these years.
That sounds interesting, I always write better when I work in notation, but I don’t like jumping between programs. All I want is a DAW that does notation really well. Maybe DP is it?Leaving aside the Cubase comparison (about which I am in the dark), DP's notation and the speedy ability to drag bar lines around is just indispensable for my workflow. I don't know what I'd do without it.
As @cmillar wrote, the DP notation has an uncanny ability to recognise what you intend, musically. And with MusicXML export it is 10x faster to move over to Sibelius / Finale (if you even want to).
Moreover, with version 11, I see they've added a lot of symbols to the notation so who knows where that goes?
Quite pleased so far.
I was a devoted Mark of the Unicorn Performer/Digital Performer/Composer's Mosaic user back in the '90s and early 2000s, before the term "DAW" was coined. I wonder if DP's current notation ability has finally caught up with MOTU's old Composer's Mosaic notation program. It was very good for its day and had lots of features, but it was as slow as molasses at rendering on those old Motorola processors.Leaving aside the Cubase comparison (about which I am in the dark), DP's notation and the speedy ability to drag bar lines around is just indispensable for my workflow. I don't know what I'd do without it.
As @cmillar wrote, the DP notation has an uncanny ability to recognise what you intend, musically. And with MusicXML export it is 10x faster to move over to Sibelius / Finale (if you even want to).
Moreover, with version 11, I see they've added a lot of symbols to the notation so who knows where that goes?
Quite pleased so far.
DP's QS although nice in many ways does not provide drum or percussion notation.That sounds interesting, I always write better when I work in notation, but I don’t like jumping between programs. All I want is a DAW that does notation really well. Maybe DP is it?
So any initial impressions on DP11 yet? Gamechanger?DP's QS although nice in many ways does not provide drum or percussion notation.
I suspect the playing field is pretty level these days. Each DAW will have its advantages or niche ways that might appeal to some over others. DPs film scoring features were the primary reasons i used it for so long. Additionally, it’s layout and navigation seemed better for orchestral composing to me over other software. I’ve been big into Studio One this past year but getting back to DP was not as hard as I thought. I still remember all of the short cuts! Muscle memory I guess from using it for so many years.So any initial impressions on DP11 yet? Gamechanger?
I haven't updated to DP11 yet.So any initial impressions on DP11 yet? Gamechanger?
Digital Performer never made much headway in Europe, and a lot of our forum members are from there; so that might explain it.In my view the big four daws for this space are logic, cubase, studio one and Dp. Dp doesn’t get talked about much on this forum I’m not sure why as it is quite capable.
Digital Performer never made much headway in Europe,
I can only speculate as to why. Perhaps MOTU wasn't very good at marketing there. Perhaps it's because DP lacked the object-oriented approach that Cubase and Logic (and later, Studio One) favored.why?
Good point, Al. I believe that the Atari Falcon (which ran Notator Logic and Cubase) was also a more popular platform for sequencing software in Europe than in the US, back in the '90s when product loyalties were forming. Its timing was reportedly superior to PCs and Macs.PCs for many years reigned supreme on this side of the pond; unlike in the US, where Apple previoulsy was more dominant. Things have kind of levelled out here in the last few years, as the creative and IT fraternity have grasped onto the Macs as their platform of choice.
I wouldn't use DP on windows, macs are maybe more pricey but they are less fuss but more importantly DP has been on mac for a long time. (wait, I didn't start a flame war did I?).PCs for many years reigned supreme on this side of the pond; unlike in the US, where Apple previoulsy was more dominant. Things have kind of levelled out here in the last few years, as the creative and IT fraternity have grasped onto the Macs as their platform of choice.
DP only over the last couple of years has been ported to PCs, and although it's less flaky than it was. DP tends to open up lots of files as it goes along, so over time your memory count starts decreasing. When it first opens up, I've noticed it grabs quite a bit of memory just to load in its plugins. I tend to use an app to release the memory from these apps. But still DP keeps grabbing memory as it plays through.
That's not great for Windows, as opening up lots of files leads to a crash fest down the line, when the OS thinks the program is behaving unresponsively, and eventually to prevent the OS from throwing a blue screen attempts to put the offending app into a Zombie state or worse of all throws a signal to close the app. DP then goes into a crash, and your only hope is to recover your work later when it reopens. Hopefully none of the files it's been holding open haven't been corrupted.
So I say it's a work in progress on Windows.
On the Mac version, you can turn off as many of the FX as you like under Preferences. Would that help on the PC enough, or is there something else?DP tends to open up lots of files as it goes along