Integration with Cubase

Discussions about our next-generation scoring application, Dorico.
Post Reply
Peter Roos
Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Peter Roos » Tue Sep 20, 2016 1:29 am

Mike Dunn wrote:
Peter Roos wrote:
If I understand what Daniel has told about Dorico, it will do a much better job at "integration" than any of the other programs, by allowing users to work in any of several different environments, and going back and forth; from setting up to the score, to playback, to engraving, printing, etc.

To get pretty decent results you don't need a full-fledged DAW, the ability to tweak a few things (velocity, mod wheel, expression, maybe some simple volume automation per instrument) would go a long way already. Key is really how easy and user friendly everything is going to be (also on the note entry front), given the experience of Daniel and his team I am pretty sure they thought this all out carefully and came up with something very clever.
Do I understand this correctly, is there going to be an option in Dorico to edit in the equivalent of the Key Editor window in Nuendo/Cubase ? That would be well funky, for me at least, I work the other way round, ie I write in a DAW then port it all over to Sibelius (with much sweat and tears) - if there is a key editor in Dorico I could simply export/import MIDI files and tweak them in there (always midi notes written in a DAW 'have' to be in the 'wrong place' to sound natural, ie strings slightly before the beat etc which is a nightmare to tweak back to the right place). Brilliant ! :)
Hi Mike:

Yes, your understanding is correct - see the post by Daniel below. I asked this back in May, between then and now things may have changed so it may turn out a bit different. But this is certainly very exciting as far as I am concerned.

"However, the intention is certainly that you will be able to use third party VST instruments and effects with Dorico. You will have direct control over which device, channel, patch (and other things like controller, keyswitch, etc.) should be used to play each playing technique played by each voice of each instrument, and that might mean that they are all played by the same device, all of them played by different devices, or anything in between.

The idea behind the MIDI editor in Play mode is to allow basic graphical MIDI editing; the intention is not to replace Cubase, but instead to give users who are savvy about how to bring virtual instrument playback to life the tools to do at least some of that work in Dorico, rather than forcing them to move to the sequencer or DAW right away."

viewtopic.php?f=246&t=97333&p=538682

Mike Dunn
Junior Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:46 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Mike Dunn » Tue Sep 20, 2016 11:56 am

Peter Roos wrote:
Mike Dunn wrote:
Peter Roos wrote:
If I understand what Daniel has told about Dorico, it will do a much better job at "integration" than any of the other programs, by allowing users to work in any of several different environments, and going back and forth; from setting up to the score, to playback, to engraving, printing, etc.

To get pretty decent results you don't need a full-fledged DAW, the ability to tweak a few things (velocity, mod wheel, expression, maybe some simple volume automation per instrument) would go a long way already. Key is really how easy and user friendly everything is going to be (also on the note entry front), given the experience of Daniel and his team I am pretty sure they thought this all out carefully and came up with something very clever.
Do I understand this correctly, is there going to be an option in Dorico to edit in the equivalent of the Key Editor window in Nuendo/Cubase ? That would be well funky, for me at least, I work the other way round, ie I write in a DAW then port it all over to Sibelius (with much sweat and tears) - if there is a key editor in Dorico I could simply export/import MIDI files and tweak them in there (always midi notes written in a DAW 'have' to be in the 'wrong place' to sound natural, ie strings slightly before the beat etc which is a nightmare to tweak back to the right place). Brilliant ! :)
Hi Mike:

Yes, your understanding is correct - see the post by Daniel below. I asked this back in May, between then and now things may have changed so it may turn out a bit different. But this is certainly very exciting as far as I am concerned.

"However, the intention is certainly that you will be able to use third party VST instruments and effects with Dorico. You will have direct control over which device, channel, patch (and other things like controller, keyswitch, etc.) should be used to play each playing technique played by each voice of each instrument, and that might mean that they are all played by the same device, all of them played by different devices, or anything in between.

The idea behind the MIDI editor in Play mode is to allow basic graphical MIDI editing; the intention is not to replace Cubase, but instead to give users who are savvy about how to bring virtual instrument playback to life the tools to do at least some of that work in Dorico, rather than forcing them to move to the sequencer or DAW right away."

viewtopic.php?f=246&t=97333&p=538682
Thanks ! I had seen a graphic implying this as well a few months ago (on the Making Notes Blog ?) but thought it was too good to be true. As you say, very, very exciting implications here. :shock:
Dorico Pro 3, Nuendo 10, Intel i7, 32GIG RAM, Windows 10 pro 64bit, (2nd machine - Win10 64bit 6 Gig ram, VE Pro), (Also 3rd Machine - Windows Surface Pro for transcribing to Dorico, particularly), EWQLSQ, EWQLSO, VSL, VEPro, Sibelius 8.4, Kontakt, Absynth, Omnisphere 2, Trilian, Reaktor 6 etc etc.

http://www.mldunn.net

matchavez
New Member
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 1:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by matchavez » Tue Sep 27, 2016 11:57 am

I think the Holy Grail is that if you own Dorico and Cubase, Dorico can replace the scoring part within Cubase.

That little "crap" editor is nice, but it doesn't follow symbols, of course. It's barely acceptable in that sense, but sure, you can make lots of decent looking paper from it.

I think the real concern is the development is incredibly complex... even from a rules perspective. Just think about this one... you set a midi note to a velocity of 104 by adding a 'f' to a note. Now, within cubase, you lower that to 28. Do you indicate that by changing the dynamic, changing its colour, changing the colour of the noteheads, or don't notify at all? Does invalidate the symbol going forward?

That's just a very simple example, and none of that is code - it's all opinion - so I fully understand that a wall might be a really good idea. However, it's fair to expect that while the midi may not be up for editing, I could see a "rendering" mode / ReWire mode that helps to master a rendering - something where the settings are stored as part of the score file. I'm also sure that Steinberg has something like this on the roadmap, because that's what turns it into the *only* product that can handle both worlds well. That is the competitive advantage... Sibelius doesn't attach to a DAW. Finale doesn't. If Dorico is all about output, print and audio, it becomes the de facto pair immediately.

User avatar
Alberto Maria
Junior Member
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Alberto Maria » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:08 pm

A solution to your example is very simple. Dynamic symbols in Cubase represent a percentage of the MIDI velocity. So there is always a clear link between the two. This is why integration is more important than just having the two programs.

Btw in my opinion while MIDI is a real standard to interchange information, MusicXml is not exactly at the same level... :?
AmM
Alberto Maria


wXpPro SP3 still working in C6.5] W10pro 64b et al. like Mac.., SX1.0.6.78, SX2.2.39, SX3.1.1.944, C4.5.2.274, C5.5.3.651, C6.5.5.176, C7.0.7.2276, C7.5.40.315, C8.0.40.623, C8.5.30.192, C9.0.40.292, C9.5.50.345, C10.0.30.288, TgSe 3.1.0.196, VidEng 1.2.1.12, H5.2.2.6.87, HsonicSe3.2.20.194, D1.2.10.139, D2.2.10.1286

notator
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:29 am
Location: Cologne, Germany
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by notator » Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:21 pm

Alberto Maria wrote: Btw in my opinion while MIDI is a real standard to interchange information, MusicXml is not exactly at the same level... :?
MIDI is the obvious standard for interchanging temporal information between Dorico and Cubase.
MusicXML was designed for interchanging information about scores written in standard music notation between standard music score editors. Its not designed for interchanging information with DAWS. Its the solution to a different problem, so I think we ought to forget about it here.

But MIDI is only part of the solution. Dorico needs to interchange both spatial (graphical) and temporal (MIDI) info with Cubase. I'd go for SVG as the mature, generally accepted, open standard for graphics. As I said above (19th September 2016), its perfectly feasible to use both SVG and MIDI in combination, and to use the combination to return Cubase-edited MIDI info to Dorico where it could be stored as part of the file.

User avatar
Alberto Maria
Junior Member
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Alberto Maria » Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:26 pm

You are absolutely right notator :)

What I wanted to express wasn't a comparison, but the fact that MIDI does its (limited) job, while Xml is something that doesn't work as soon as the score is a bit complicated... :?
AmM
Alberto Maria


wXpPro SP3 still working in C6.5] W10pro 64b et al. like Mac.., SX1.0.6.78, SX2.2.39, SX3.1.1.944, C4.5.2.274, C5.5.3.651, C6.5.5.176, C7.0.7.2276, C7.5.40.315, C8.0.40.623, C8.5.30.192, C9.0.40.292, C9.5.50.345, C10.0.30.288, TgSe 3.1.0.196, VidEng 1.2.1.12, H5.2.2.6.87, HsonicSe3.2.20.194, D1.2.10.139, D2.2.10.1286

Peter Roos
Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Peter Roos » Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:50 pm

matchavez wrote:I think the Holy Grail is that if you own Dorico and Cubase, Dorico can replace the scoring part within Cubase.

That little "crap" editor is nice, but it doesn't follow symbols, of course. It's barely acceptable in that sense, but sure, you can make lots of decent looking paper from it.

I think the real concern is the development is incredibly complex... even from a rules perspective. Just think about this one... you set a midi note to a velocity of 104 by adding a 'f' to a note. Now, within cubase, you lower that to 28. Do you indicate that by changing the dynamic, changing its colour, changing the colour of the noteheads, or don't notify at all? Does invalidate the symbol going forward?

That's just a very simple example, and none of that is code - it's all opinion - so I fully understand that a wall might be a really good idea. However, it's fair to expect that while the midi may not be up for editing, I could see a "rendering" mode / ReWire mode that helps to master a rendering - something where the settings are stored as part of the score file. I'm also sure that Steinberg has something like this on the roadmap, because that's what turns it into the *only* product that can handle both worlds well. That is the competitive advantage... Sibelius doesn't attach to a DAW. Finale doesn't. If Dorico is all about output, print and audio, it becomes the de facto pair immediately.
The way I see this work, is pretty straightforward. By default Dorico has a standard set of instructions that translate anything you notate, into midi information. So forte might have a velocity of say 104. With the built-in virtual instruments that come with Dorico (Halion) the playback will be ok for most people. Dorico also has a built in "mini-midi editor" allowing you to manually tweak the velocity, bringing it back down or up to whatever you want it to be, without changing the notation part. Then, if you change the forte back to piano, the velocity would automatically be lowered to say 30 (or, alternatively, once you manually tweaked the velocity, you could have a user preference to leave it at whatever level you manually tweaked it to).

Using something similar to Cubase's expression map you can also create a similar set of instructions for VSTs other than Halion, for example, if the note velocity is triggered not by velocity but by mod wheel. If you write forte in the score that will then trigger mod wheel midi information which, again, you can manually tweak as you deem fit.

And that goes for everything, from note duration to expression, technique (switching from arco to pizzicato and back), and so on.

This would be happening inside of Dorico. The ability to individually tweak note midi information is important if you want to create something that sounds human; yes it will be an opinion of the user, that's the whole point.

I have no real ideas about how all this is going to work with Cubase; in theory it could be pretty similar but I have no idea how to send over midi information automatically such that the two programs are synchronized. In my view, if the ability to tweak notes in Dorico is pretty straightforward and user friendly, you can 90% of the work done in Dorico, without even having to go to Cubase. I am talking about a "classic" notation based score (symphonic, film score, jazz or band etc.). If you going wild with all kinds of synths etc. obviously it makes more sense to do that in a sequencing program like Cubase or something else.

Mike Dunn
Junior Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:46 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Mike Dunn » Tue Sep 27, 2016 9:45 pm

I do hope that anyone from Daniel's team reading this thread is not thinking that the only integration people are going to want between Nuendo/Cubase and Dorico will be in the direction of Dorico >>> to Cubase (for making the audio more realistic etc) - in my own case the integration in the reverse direction will be equally, if not more, important :?

Best wishes to everyone (not long to wait now :twisted: )

Mike
Dorico Pro 3, Nuendo 10, Intel i7, 32GIG RAM, Windows 10 pro 64bit, (2nd machine - Win10 64bit 6 Gig ram, VE Pro), (Also 3rd Machine - Windows Surface Pro for transcribing to Dorico, particularly), EWQLSQ, EWQLSO, VSL, VEPro, Sibelius 8.4, Kontakt, Absynth, Omnisphere 2, Trilian, Reaktor 6 etc etc.

http://www.mldunn.net

Peter Roos
Member
Posts: 304
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 7:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Peter Roos » Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:13 pm

Mike Dunn wrote:I do hope that anyone from Daniel's team reading this thread is not thinking that the only integration people are going to want between Nuendo/Cubase and Dorico will be in the direction of Dorico >>> to Cubase (for making the audio more realistic etc) - in my own case the integration in the reverse direction will be equally, if not more, important :?

Best wishes to everyone (not long to wait now :twisted: )

Mike
I'm pretty sure that Daniel and his team are keeping a keen eye on everything that is posted here (in fact, that is what Daniel confirmed in his video interview with Sonicstate, which was posted today; see link below).

For me, the most important thing is NOT the workflow from Dorico to Cubase, or vice versa, but rather how easy and user intuitive it is to manipulate playback within Dorico itself. The ability to have fairly basic expression mapping, and tweaking the midi notes in the "playback" mode, would go a very long way.

http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2016/09/ ... preadbury/

Hans Nel
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:29 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Hans Nel » Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:58 am

I have also always wanted a single software that handles the whole deal...Notation, Audio Playback and Film Integration. Actually, I don't think it will be a big deal for Daniel's team to integrate Cubase to Dorico. Dorico will already contain the biggest deal of Cubase...THE AUDIO ENGINE! All that is needed is the "type" of integration...or "what is needed from Cubase" to be integrated for scoring requirements; eg. drawing volume, envelopes, velocities, panning etc. Dorico don't need instrument setup as is done in Cubase. Dorico will already handle that so THAT integration of Cubase is NOT required.

My point is, we don't need CUBASE in Dorico...but most of Cubase's FUNCTIONALITY, which is already available in Dorico's AUDIO ENGINE. Dorico (and other notation software) IS a DAW...it just does not LOOK and FULLY DEVELOPED like one. Each instrument stave is actually a track...with a lot of DAW functionality already built into each stave (track), like channel, panning, volume etc assignments. In a DAW, we see tracks, on which curves and audio manipulation can be done. The SAME is true for notation software. Instead of tracks, we see staves. now, Notion and StaffPad already "integrated" more DAW functionality into THEIR software. One can draw curves and adjust many properties etc. So when Steinberg developed Dorico until they are satisfied with it, they just need to go back, and tap into the engine and create the visual elements for us to work with it. WHAT WE SEE, is the only real difference between a DAW and Notation Software. BOTH can manipulate MIDI Data (to different extents allowed by the developers), but we see tracks in a DAW and Staves in Notation Software. I'm convinced that Dorico can already do everything Cubase can. Maybe what you want is a "mode"...instead of looking at staves, you click a button, and the staves turn into a "track view".
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intel i7 3.60GHz , 16Gig DDR3 Ram,2 X SSD's, Focusrite Scarlett Solo Sound Device (USB), Carbon 49 USB MIDI Controller, 64bit OS (Windows 10) - Dorico 1.2, Sibelius 8.4, StaffPad, Notion 5, Finale 2011, Encore, MuseScore 2, Cubase Elements 9, Studio One 3, Sonar X3, EWQLSO Platinum, EWQL S. Choirs, QL Spaces, NotePerformer V2.0.2 & EDIROL Orchestra.

notator
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:29 am
Location: Cologne, Germany
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by notator » Thu Sep 29, 2016 10:39 am

Peter Roos wrote: For me, the most important thing is NOT the workflow from Dorico to Cubase, or vice versa, but rather how easy and user intuitive it is to manipulate playback within Dorico itself. The ability to have fairly basic expression mapping, and tweaking the midi notes in the "playback" mode, would go a very long way.

http://www.sonicstate.com/news/2016/09/ ... preadbury/
Thanks for the link. It looks as if Dorico is indeed going to have some pretty fancy MIDI capabilities of its own, so many Dorico users are not going need Cubase at all. Similarly, there are going to be Cubase users who don't need Dorico because they are quite happy with Cubase's less sophisticated score editing capabilities. That's all as it should be, of course -- but not really what this thread is all about. :)

It would be nice if users who want to use Cubase from Dorico could unload Dorico's less sophisticated MIDI module, and those who want to use Dorico from Cubase could unload Cubase's less sophisticated score-editing facilities.
In general: Users should be enabled to tailor both programs to their own needs. There's no point in loading any MIDI-editing capabilities at all if you are not going to use them.

There are two approaches to this:
1. Internal: Dorico could load a (Cubase) plugin. Cubase could load a (Dorico) plugin.
and/or
2. External: Dorico and Cubase could agree on a common file format.

In both cases, the (plugin or file) interface needs to include interconnected spatial (graphical) and temporal (MIDI) information.

We now know that its best to program to such interfaces when they have become well established public standards.
For Steinberg and other software firms, that means higher quality software (ideally, expertees from the whole industry has been involved in creating the standard) and reduced costs because expensive reprogramming becomes much less likely.
For users, it means that they can build on their own experience using third party software (as that software implements the standard). Which in turn means steady growth and improving software in the industry as a whole.

All the best,
James

User avatar
Alberto Maria
Junior Member
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Alberto Maria » Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:28 am

Hans Nel wrote:My point is, we don't need CUBASE in Dorico...
My point is I need Dorico in Cubase, when it will demonstrate its superiority respect to CubScore, obviously... ;)
AmM
Alberto Maria


wXpPro SP3 still working in C6.5] W10pro 64b et al. like Mac.., SX1.0.6.78, SX2.2.39, SX3.1.1.944, C4.5.2.274, C5.5.3.651, C6.5.5.176, C7.0.7.2276, C7.5.40.315, C8.0.40.623, C8.5.30.192, C9.0.40.292, C9.5.50.345, C10.0.30.288, TgSe 3.1.0.196, VidEng 1.2.1.12, H5.2.2.6.87, HsonicSe3.2.20.194, D1.2.10.139, D2.2.10.1286

User avatar
TheMaestro
Member
Posts: 319
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by TheMaestro » Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:46 am

matchavez wrote: That little "crap" editor is nice, but it doesn't follow symbols, of course.
What are you talking about ?
With all due respect, you should learn more about this software, your knowledge about it, like many others here and elsewhere, seems to be limited. Please begin by reading the previous pages of this thread (especially page 3), maybe you'll realize that the term you used is not appropriate !


Mike Dunn wrote:I do hope that anyone from Daniel's team reading this thread is not thinking that the only integration people are going to want between Nuendo/Cubase and Dorico will be in the direction of Dorico >>> to Cubase (for making the audio more realistic etc) - in my own case the integration in the reverse direction will be equally, if not more, important :?
Sure, they should integrate Cubase into Dorico ! It should be fine :D

Seriously I guess that in the future there would be a standalone version with minimum/sufficient audio functionality for engravers and basic users who don't need realistic playback, and an integrated version inside Cubase/Nuendo for advanced users who will USE the audio output coming from the DAW, as Peter explained so well in the previous page.

I'm sure Daniel and his team keep an eye on every post in this forum.
I suppose If he doesn't jump in this discussion is because their only concern for now is to get the first release right, the integration being far from taking place.


notator wrote: There are two approaches to this:
1. Internal: Dorico could load a (Cubase) plugin. Cubase could load a (Dorico) plugin.
and/or
2. External: Dorico and Cubase could agree on a common file format.
No need to find compromises, at least between Dorico and Cubase, with your n°2.
I think the fact that the former Sibelius team being part of Steinberg is a great opportunity for them to benefit from the best DAW features to have great audio capabilities for the standalone version. And vice versa, this is a great chance for Steinberg to have the best scoring program to compete with the standards, and when it will be integrated into the DAW it will probably be no possible competition !
So your first approach is the most plausible for me, with Dorico loading as a plugin in Cubase/Nuendo.


Alberto Maria wrote:My point is I need Dorico in Cubase, when it will demonstrate its superiority respect to CubScore, obviously... ;)
Absolutely.
Cubase Pro 10 | Halion 6.1 | VEP 7
Windows 10 x64 | i7 920 | 48GB RAM | M-AUDIO Delta 1010LT | Yamaha S80

cparmerlee
Member
Posts: 552
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by cparmerlee » Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:44 pm

Hans Nel wrote:I have also always wanted a single software that handles the whole deal...
I guess that all depends on what "the whole deal" is. Certainly if one program can do everything I want to accomplish, then I have no interest in linking 2 programs. But let's be clear. Today's DAWs do a lot more than just providing a way to drive VSTi's. There are all sorts of techniques you can apply in the DAW that simply are not available in any notation program today. A good example is in the area of bus routing. I always use 2 reverb buses to manage the impression of blend and space. Some people use as many as 5.

I often will use a side-chain compressor to enable a vocal (or other solo instrument) to "duck" the other material.

And all the DAWs enable automation of the volume and any other control on the various synths and effects.

If all of that were in the notation program, then sure, one program would do the job.
Last edited by cparmerlee on Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dorico 2, Cubase 10.0, Windows 10, Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 audio i/f
http://sonocrafters.com/

Mike Dunn
Junior Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:46 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Mike Dunn » Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:43 pm

cparmerlee wrote: But let's be clear. Today's DAWs do a lot more than just providing a way to drive VSTi's. There are all sorts of techniques you can apply in the DAW that simply are not available in any notation program today.
Yes. And audio editing, 'logical' editing of midi, track arrange functions etc etc etc - it's a very long list (I'm in Nuendo). Just integration between the two apps will do me fine :) ;)
Dorico Pro 3, Nuendo 10, Intel i7, 32GIG RAM, Windows 10 pro 64bit, (2nd machine - Win10 64bit 6 Gig ram, VE Pro), (Also 3rd Machine - Windows Surface Pro for transcribing to Dorico, particularly), EWQLSQ, EWQLSO, VSL, VEPro, Sibelius 8.4, Kontakt, Absynth, Omnisphere 2, Trilian, Reaktor 6 etc etc.

http://www.mldunn.net

GTBannah
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by GTBannah » Thu Sep 29, 2016 9:08 pm

cparmerlee wrote:
Laurence Payne wrote:The market SO wants a notation-based music production system, with audio/video tracks and full access to their choice of sample sets.
There is a book that was rather famous in Silicon Valley during the 90s called "Accidental Empires". The thesis of the book was that some of the most successful companies actually missed the mark they were really shooting at, but ended up with something better, at least partly by accident. Their instincts put them in the right ballpark, but the real prize was different from what they thought it was. That is not to say that Bill Gates and Andy Grove were bumbling dummies who did everything wrong, yet just happened to stumble into success. Quite the opposite, they were people of great vision and instinct, but just didn't have their marketing radar fully calibrated. Their instincts got them close enough for the market to bring them the rest of the way.

That is the vibe I get from Dorico. Clearly the core team has been really focused on making a fundamental, generational step forward in how we go about building and expressing the notation. And nobody denies those advances will be most welcome. But it is does seem to be an accident of history that the product will be married to DAW technology, more-or-less from the ground up, like it or not. THIS, I believe, will prove to be the real breakthrough in the end.

Dorico won't end up there in the first release, but I hope there will be enough in the first release for the whole team to start to realize the power that can come from marrying notation and production much more seamlessly.
.... then, there are the visionaries like Lawrence and yourself, who, as they see the possibilities, will make the appropriate feature requests. ;)
Derrkins

If that's really what you hear, Play It, Sing It, Write It or Program It!

Mac Mini, 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7, 16 GB RAM; OS X Mojave 10.14.5; Nuendo 8.3.20.345; Sibelius 7.5; iPad Pro 13"; Cubasis, WaveLab 9.00; Dorico V2.2.0.1108 (Loving it).

cparmerlee
Member
Posts: 552
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:32 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by cparmerlee » Fri Sep 30, 2016 2:43 am

GTBannah wrote: .... then, there are the visionaries like Lawrence and yourself, who, as they see the possibilities, will make the appropriate feature requests. ;)
:) Part of the problem is that this isn't really a "feature". It is a new phase, just as sequencers took on the ability to handle audio streams, giving rise to the DAW world. Who would ever consider going back to a sequencer?

There were plenty of people who complained about the move from command line operating systems to GUIs. It is the case that once the new environment is reliable and people have the chance to experience it, they would never consider going back. But it isn't so easy to get people to look forward.

I wouldn't want to go back to a world that didn't include the kind of harmonies that Ellington explored (or Grieg for that matter). But there was a period of over 200 years where nobody could get their heads around that. That was ironic because JS Bach was already doing much of that, but people didn't seem to understand. All they heard was the fugue motion, not the incredible harmonies that Bach slipped into those fugues. It took the romantics to see the way.

And so on with our favorite analogies about progress. The thing about progress is that the majority is always against it. If they weren't, then progress would just happen on its own, and it always takes inspired leaders.

My purpose here is to not to criticize Steinberg, but to point out what a special opportunity they have to take a big leap that most others can't understand yet. I certainly don't expect much of this in the first release or two. But I think it would be very smart for them to evolve their architectural vision in this direction.
Dorico 2, Cubase 10.0, Windows 10, Focusrite Scarlett 18i20 audio i/f
http://sonocrafters.com/

GTBannah
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by GTBannah » Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:35 am

cparmerlee wrote:
GTBannah wrote: .... then, there are the visionaries like Lawrence and yourself, who, as they see the possibilities, will make the appropriate feature requests. ;)
:) Part of the problem is that this isn't really a "feature". It is a new phase, just as sequencers took on the ability to handle audio streams, giving rise to the DAW world. Who would ever consider going back to a sequencer?

There were plenty of people who complained about the move from command line operating systems to GUIs. It is the case that once the new environment is reliable and people have the chance to experience it, they would never consider going back. But it isn't so easy to get people to look forward.

I wouldn't want to go back to a world that didn't include the kind of harmonies that Ellington explored (or Grieg for that matter). But there was a period of over 200 years where nobody could get their heads around that. That was ironic because JS Bach was already doing much of that, but people didn't seem to understand. All they heard was the fugue motion, not the incredible harmonies that Bach slipped into those fugues. It took the romantics to see the way.

And so on with our favorite analogies about progress. The thing about progress is that the majority is always against it. If they weren't, then progress would just happen on its own, and it always takes inspired leaders.

My purpose here is to not to criticize Steinberg, but to point out what a special opportunity they have to take a big leap that most others can't understand yet. I certainly don't expect much of this in the first release or two. But I think it would be very smart for them to evolve their architectural vision in this direction.
+1
Derrkins

If that's really what you hear, Play It, Sing It, Write It or Program It!

Mac Mini, 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7, 16 GB RAM; OS X Mojave 10.14.5; Nuendo 8.3.20.345; Sibelius 7.5; iPad Pro 13"; Cubasis, WaveLab 9.00; Dorico V2.2.0.1108 (Loving it).

notator
New Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 9:29 am
Location: Cologne, Germany
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by notator » Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:00 am

cparmerlee wrote: My purpose here is to not to criticize Steinberg, but to point out what a special opportunity they have to take a big leap that most others can't understand yet. I certainly don't expect much of this in the first release or two. But I think it would be very smart for them to evolve their architectural vision in this direction.
+1. Apropos architecture:
TheMaestro wrote:
notator wrote: There are two approaches to this:
1. Internal: Dorico could load a (Cubase) plugin. Cubase could load a (Dorico) plugin.
and/or
2. External: Dorico and Cubase could agree on a common file format.
No need to find compromises, at least between Dorico and Cubase, with your n°2.
Having a common file format would not just be a compromise. It opens the door for other applications. Browsers in particular. Scores that can be played interactively on the web...

____________________________________________
Edit: I'm also not wanting to criticize Steinberg, but I would like them to embrace the idea of programming to open standards. To be very clear:
Programming to open standards increases the uses that can be made of music notation, and therefore increases the number of people who need its authoring tools. That means increased sales.
cparmerlee wrote:Part of the problem is that this isn't really a "feature". It is a new phase...
Part of the "new phase" is that we have finally left the paper ("desktop publishing") paradigm for music notation.
Writing music on glass changes the ball game completely.
George Herbert (1633) wrote:A man that looks on glass,
on it may stay his eye;
or if he pleaseth, through it pass,
and then the heaven espy.
All the best,
James
Last edited by notator on Sat Oct 01, 2016 10:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

Mike Dunn
Junior Member
Posts: 75
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:46 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Mike Dunn » Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:38 am

cparmerlee wrote:
GTBannah wrote: .... then, there are the visionaries like Lawrence and yourself, who, as they see the possibilities, will make the appropriate feature requests. ;)
:) Part of the problem is that this isn't really a "feature". It is a new phase, just as sequencers took on the ability to handle audio streams, giving rise to the DAW world. Who would ever consider going back to a sequencer?

There were plenty of people who complained about the move from command line operating systems to GUIs. It is the case that once the new environment is reliable and people have the chance to experience it, they would never consider going back. But it isn't so easy to get people to look forward.

I wouldn't want to go back to a world that didn't include the kind of harmonies that Ellington explored (or Grieg for that matter). But there was a period of over 200 years where nobody could get their heads around that. That was ironic because JS Bach was already doing much of that, but people didn't seem to understand. All they heard was the fugue motion, not the incredible harmonies that Bach slipped into those fugues. It took the romantics to see the way.

And so on with our favorite analogies about progress. The thing about progress is that the majority is always against it. If they weren't, then progress would just happen on its own, and it always takes inspired leaders.

My purpose here is to not to criticize Steinberg, but to point out what a special opportunity they have to take a big leap that most others can't understand yet. I certainly don't expect much of this in the first release or two. But I think it would be very smart for them to evolve their architectural vision in this direction.
+1
Well said
Dorico Pro 3, Nuendo 10, Intel i7, 32GIG RAM, Windows 10 pro 64bit, (2nd machine - Win10 64bit 6 Gig ram, VE Pro), (Also 3rd Machine - Windows Surface Pro for transcribing to Dorico, particularly), EWQLSQ, EWQLSO, VSL, VEPro, Sibelius 8.4, Kontakt, Absynth, Omnisphere 2, Trilian, Reaktor 6 etc etc.

http://www.mldunn.net

Hans Nel
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:29 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Hans Nel » Sun Oct 02, 2016 8:49 am

cparmerlee wrote:
Hans Nel wrote:I have also always wanted a single software that handles the whole deal...
I guess that all depends on what "the whole deal" is. Certainly, if one program can do everything I want to accomplish, then I have no interest in linking 2 programs. But let's be clear. Today's DAWs do a lot more than just providing a way to drive VSTi's. There are all sorts of techniques you can apply in the DAW that simply is not available in any notation program today. A good example is in the area of bus routing. I always use 2 reverb buses to manage the impression of blend and space. Some people use as many as 5.

I often will use a side-chain compressor to enable a vocal (or other solo instrument) to "duck" the other material.

And all the DAWs enable automation of the volume and any other control on the various synths and effects.

If all of that were in the notation program, then sure, one program would do the job.
Hi cparmerlee...you have not read my post properly. I mentioned 2 Notators (StaffPad and Notion), who can already perform quite a few DAW features. NOTION 5, eg, DOES support bus features, instruments as well as effects that can be routed through busses.

Like I said, Software Companies such as MakeMusic, AVID, STEINBERG etc only need to tap into their respective audio engines, design the appropriate visual elements for us to manipulate and VOILA!.

I agree with Peter Roos. He said the same thing...just from another angle. We CAN have only ONE software, but switched into 2 different modes...OR...OR...make use of layering, like StaffPad and Notion 5 does. Each stave has an invisible "DAW" layer and by clicking a button, the layer becomes visible and you can do your DAW-stuff on that layer.

Regarding BUSSES, PANNING, CHANNEL ASSIGNMENTS etc...that can be handled by the MIXER.

I tell you again, Dorico already has maybe 100% DAW capability (because Dorico uses Cubase's Audio Engine) and all that is needed is some attention from the developer's side as soon as they are ready. Dorico does not have to LOOK like Cubase...it is a notator after all...NO, we look at staves and all of it's musical visual elements. All that is needed is turning a stave into the APPEARANCE of a DAW track, and dim out the other tracks...opening a new mode with it's DAW windows and toolbars. The STAVE turns into a TRACK VIEW (like in Cubase). Then you can edit THAT STAVE/TRACK. Exiting this mode turns Dorico into NOTATOR MODE again.

I tell you, Daniel and his boys CAN do this...much easier than you think. But when the time is right. Other stuff must be done first. Daniel and his team is going to surprise us still...I have this gut feeling. Dorico is like a motherboard with LOTS of empty PCI slots. The PC can operate without those PCI cards but can even better when cards are added to those slots. They are creating Dorico the same way. As time goes by, Steinberg will create those Dynamic Link Libraries (DLL's) (Plug-Ins as Peter Roos suggested) and API's and fill those slots that access the Audio Engine of Cubase.

So, we do NOT need Dorico to LOOK like Cubase, we need a Cubase LAYER/MODE that manipulate each stave (which is actually a track).

Here are a few examples:

OVERTURE 5: (Scroll a bit down and look): https://sonicscores.com/overture/#

NOTION 6: (Read about it's DAW features) https://www.presonus.com/products/Notion

StaffPad: (Read the "Express Yourself" section a bit down the page) https://www.staffpad.net/

As you can see, software companies are already creating Notator-Daw hybrids!!

I'm convinced Daniel and his team have even BETTER things planned. I know there were talks about Daniel and David (StaffPad) talking about possible teaming up to something....I'm not sure exactly.

I guess...we have to wait and see..:-)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intel i7 3.60GHz , 16Gig DDR3 Ram,2 X SSD's, Focusrite Scarlett Solo Sound Device (USB), Carbon 49 USB MIDI Controller, 64bit OS (Windows 10) - Dorico 1.2, Sibelius 8.4, StaffPad, Notion 5, Finale 2011, Encore, MuseScore 2, Cubase Elements 9, Studio One 3, Sonar X3, EWQLSO Platinum, EWQL S. Choirs, QL Spaces, NotePerformer V2.0.2 & EDIROL Orchestra.

GTBannah
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by GTBannah » Sun Oct 02, 2016 10:21 am

Hans Nel wrote:
cparmerlee wrote:
Hans Nel wrote:I have also always wanted a single software that handles the whole deal...
I guess that all depends on what "the whole deal" is. Certainly, if one program can do everything I want to accomplish, then I have no interest in linking 2 programs. But let's be clear. Today's DAWs do a lot more than just providing a way to drive VSTi's. There are all sorts of techniques you can apply in the DAW that simply is not available in any notation program today. A good example is in the area of bus routing. I always use 2 reverb buses to manage the impression of blend and space. Some people use as many as 5.

I often will use a side-chain compressor to enable a vocal (or other solo instrument) to "duck" the other material.

And all the DAWs enable automation of the volume and any other control on the various synths and effects.

If all of that were in the notation program, then sure, one program would do the job.
Hi cparmerlee...you have not read my post properly. I mentioned 2 Notators (StaffPad and Notion), who can already perform quite a few DAW features. NOTION 5, eg, DOES support bus features, instruments as well as effects that can be routed through busses.

Like I said, Software Companies such as MakeMusic, AVID, STEINBERG etc only need to tap into their respective audio engines, design the appropriate visual elements for us to manipulate and VOILA!.

I agree with Peter Roos. He said the same thing...just from another angle. We CAN have only ONE software, but switched into 2 different modes...OR...OR...make use of layering, like StaffPad and Notion 5 does. Each stave has an invisible "DAW" layer and by clicking a button, the layer becomes visible and you can do your DAW-stuff on that layer.

Regarding BUSSES, PANNING, CHANNEL ASSIGNMENTS etc...that can be handled by the MIXER.

I tell you again, Dorico already has maybe 100% DAW capability (because Dorico uses Cubase's Audio Engine) and all that is needed is some attention from the developer's side as soon as they are ready. Dorico does not have to LOOK like Cubase...it is a notator after all...NO, we look at staves and all of it's musical visual elements. All that is needed is turning a stave into the APPEARANCE of a DAW track, and dim out the other tracks...opening a new mode with it's DAW windows and toolbars. The STAVE turns into a TRACK VIEW (like in Cubase). Then you can edit THAT STAVE/TRACK. Exiting this mode turns Dorico into NOTATOR MODE again.

I tell you, Daniel and his boys CAN do this...much easier than you think. But when the time is right. Other stuff must be done first. Daniel and his team is going to surprise us still...I have this gut feeling. Dorico is like a motherboard with LOTS of empty PCI slots. The PC can operate without those PCI cards but can even better when cards are added to those slots. They are creating Dorico the same way. As time goes by, Steinberg will create those Dynamic Link Libraries (DLL's) (Plug-Ins as Peter Roos suggested) and API's and fill those slots that access the Audio Engine of Cubase.

So, we do NOT need Dorico to LOOK like Cubase, we need a Cubase LAYER/MODE that manipulate each stave (which is actually a track).

Here are a few examples:

OVERTURE 5: (Scroll a bit down and look): https://sonicscores.com/overture/#

NOTION 6: (Read about it's DAW features) https://www.presonus.com/products/Notion

StaffPad: (Read the "Express Yourself" section a bit down the page) https://www.staffpad.net/

As you can see, software companies are already creating Notator-Daw hybrids!!

I'm convinced Daniel and his team have even BETTER things planned. I know there were talks about Daniel and David (StaffPad) talking about possible teaming up to something....I'm not sure exactly.

I guess...we have to wait and see..:-)
Exciting possibilities! :)
Derrkins

If that's really what you hear, Play It, Sing It, Write It or Program It!

Mac Mini, 2.6 GHz Intel Core i7, 16 GB RAM; OS X Mojave 10.14.5; Nuendo 8.3.20.345; Sibelius 7.5; iPad Pro 13"; Cubasis, WaveLab 9.00; Dorico V2.2.0.1108 (Loving it).

User avatar
Alberto Maria
Junior Member
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Alberto Maria » Sun Oct 02, 2016 11:23 am

Dorico is the name of an Editor of the past. So the program must become better than Finale for engraving scores. But also playing is important, and this is the Sibelius' field, as Robby tells us; but for this task there is Cubase (or Nuendo).

Exactly for this reason integration is important and once reached will determine the best tool in the market.

No competitors.
AmM
Alberto Maria


wXpPro SP3 still working in C6.5] W10pro 64b et al. like Mac.., SX1.0.6.78, SX2.2.39, SX3.1.1.944, C4.5.2.274, C5.5.3.651, C6.5.5.176, C7.0.7.2276, C7.5.40.315, C8.0.40.623, C8.5.30.192, C9.0.40.292, C9.5.50.345, C10.0.30.288, TgSe 3.1.0.196, VidEng 1.2.1.12, H5.2.2.6.87, HsonicSe3.2.20.194, D1.2.10.139, D2.2.10.1286

Hans Nel
Member
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:29 pm
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Hans Nel » Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:09 am

Alberto Maria wrote:Dorico is the name of an Editor of the past. So the program must become better than Finale for engraving scores. But also playing is important, and this is the Sibelius' field, as Robby tells us; but for this task there is Cubase (or Nuendo).

Exactly for this reason integration is important and once reached will determine the best tool in the market.

No competitors.
Agreed, though, I think Notion's playback is superior to that of Sibelius.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________
Intel i7 3.60GHz , 16Gig DDR3 Ram,2 X SSD's, Focusrite Scarlett Solo Sound Device (USB), Carbon 49 USB MIDI Controller, 64bit OS (Windows 10) - Dorico 1.2, Sibelius 8.4, StaffPad, Notion 5, Finale 2011, Encore, MuseScore 2, Cubase Elements 9, Studio One 3, Sonar X3, EWQLSO Platinum, EWQL S. Choirs, QL Spaces, NotePerformer V2.0.2 & EDIROL Orchestra.

User avatar
Alberto Maria
Junior Member
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:33 pm
Contact:

Re: Integration with Cubase

Post by Alberto Maria » Tue Oct 04, 2016 1:40 pm

Hans Nel wrote:Agreed, though, I think Notion's playback is superior to that of Sibelius.
Yes Hans, may be, but in my opinion the win factor resides in an engraving superior quality (if a decent integration with Cubase is reached)...
AmM
Alberto Maria


wXpPro SP3 still working in C6.5] W10pro 64b et al. like Mac.., SX1.0.6.78, SX2.2.39, SX3.1.1.944, C4.5.2.274, C5.5.3.651, C6.5.5.176, C7.0.7.2276, C7.5.40.315, C8.0.40.623, C8.5.30.192, C9.0.40.292, C9.5.50.345, C10.0.30.288, TgSe 3.1.0.196, VidEng 1.2.1.12, H5.2.2.6.87, HsonicSe3.2.20.194, D1.2.10.139, D2.2.10.1286

Post Reply

Return to “Dorico”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dankreider, elzouzou, gljm99, mhch4, pianoleo and 7 guests