see pictures below from C15 and C13. The 16th triplets are a mess in C15, no setting in ‘Instrument Settings’ or any sort of DQ will make look it better, or has anyone a suggestion?
C13 is a bit better but not grand either. Sibelius does a better job, but only when I export from C13.
All note lengths are correct, key editor shows it correctly. Shortening the notes to avoid overlap has no effect at all.
In other songs I also have problems with 16th notes, when there is a swing quantization in the 16ths.
really, I only find deterioration in this score editor as compared to C13. So many things that either just can’t be done, or look useless, editing facilities that have been removed.
Instead of adding all kinds of new features, that cost me days (weeks really) of work with some 500 projects to update I would really want more continuity. Did anyone at Steinberg ever work with the score editor and try to get some decent looking music together? I know I’m being critical and there are some improvements, but I’m a professional arranger/composer, and this I can’t use. If I have to update all my projects anyway maybe I’ld better move to another application.
and I still don’t agree with you in a previous discussion: The score editor should be able to show the real length of notes, not the tidied up lengths. As a composer I want control over every aspect. I don’t just put a few samples together!
Or try for instance the select-all command in one part in the score editor. click in empty space. now you see that tempo track events are still selected. They would have been edited as well without you realizing it!
It isn’t that “editing facilities have been removed” - the whole old score editor was removed and this was put in. So the features are not there.
It has a different purpose now than it did in the past. It is meant to quickly generate a notation that captures what was composed in the piano roll. If what you are doing is quite simple then you can finalize it in Cubase, otherwise you would bring it into Dorico.
You should of course be able to create the triplet manually using the triplet feature in notation and then it should get properly stamped the way you want it. The problem there is that it looks at what you have in terms of notes on the piano roll and it decides how to display it based on those piano roll notes, not really knowing how you entered it to begin with.
The notes are correct in the piano roll editor, but the scoring engine makes a mess of it. this is just not a notation, this is crap. It shouldn’t be too hard to get it right (for the programmers I mean). Look how much better a job C13 does. This is no improvement.
And having read that the cubase score editor is based on the Dorico engine: this is no advertisment. No way I am moving to Dorico, quite happy with Sibelius.
I am very sorry that I spent 200 euros on the C15 update. Done a lot of work to move the music into C15, but it looks like I’m heading back to C13. Too bad for all the time lost.
And yes you can have a quick score result with the C15 score editor, but it’s only superficially correct. And not something you would hand out to a performer.
Probably Steinberg wants to force you into Dorico. Bad policy.
If you’re that happy with Sibelius for everything, why are you even using Cubase 13/15 score editor? What’s the point?
I don’t see much point in continuing to do music notation on a dead platform. It is like people still making scores in Finale notation software this year, a year and a half after it was discontinued. The old score editor is a similar situation - I don’t know why you would want to give yourself more scores to have to potentially move to another software program later.
No, I doubt this, but very few people used the Cubase Score Editor before really. There are some fans in this forum, but outside of that, very few people did.
They’re not limiting the C15 score editor on purpose. It takes work to plug any features from Dorico into Cubase, so duplicating it all makes very little sense, when most people aren’t going to use it anyway.
Because the editing and inputting was always much easier in Cubase. Combining editing in the score editor, project window, key editor and drum editor is (was) an efficient workflow. But to make it look good I use Sibelius.
and that’s my bad luck.
Of course I don’t really want to move back to C13, being a dead end street. Maybe I’ll have to look for a replacement. For now I hope some of these bugs will get fixed. If you call something a Score Editor I can expect it to work, can’t I?
What is your workflow? Notation programs all generally have pretty effective and fast workflows for adding and editing notes. I know lots of people who work directly in Sibelius and input notes directly. I used to be one of them (until moving to Dorico in 2018). What part of working directly in a notation program do you find inefficient? (Or, rather, in the case of Sibelius).
Granted, I have no experience with directly inputting large pieces of music into notation software. I’ll give it a try.
the project window is handy for structure reasons: moving verses, intro’s, choruses, bridges, across an arrangement. Introducing gaps to fill with a new idea. Surely a lot handier than notation software could do.
the drum editor for changing rhythmic patterns, the score editor for more detailed work, lengthening notes, changing timings, figuring out voicings. In combination with my digital piano this works fast.
But I have been on cubase since 1993, and ever since this has been my workflow. Looks like I may have to change it.
Notation software in general is not too bad about moving things around. You can add some empty bars and cut and paste the music into them and delete the bars from earlier. So there is some flexibility there.
My concert music tended to alternate between metrical music and more free-flowing music that had less of a sense of meter, sometimes no sense of meter, with the 4/4 only being there for coordination. This free flowing stuff was for me the only really awkward part of working in Sibelius. I would often find that I needed another quarter beat (or something of the sort) for pacing and this was much easier to accomplish in either a DAW or Dorico, and was the reason I moved to Dorico. Sibelius is very much based around bars so as long as you are moving entire bars around it is easy. When I need to add another beat and want everything later in the piece shifted right, that’s where it is more difficult. I would often have a change to 5/4 in those pieces not because it really felt like 5/4 but because I needed one extra beat and didn’t want to have to renotate the rest of the piece from scratch to be one beat later in the bar.
But when I was working with more clearly metered music there was rarely a need for this, and I found working in Sibelius pretty good.
yes I see your point, but I don’t think anything beats the project window. you can have overlapping parts (handy for pickup notes), you can make cuts where you want them, anywhere in a bar. Move entire portions easily. You can see the entire song/composition in one screen. You can adjust the tempo.
But it’s got to look like something in the score editor to be able to use it for scoring!
The step from cubase to Sibelius is easy, having templates to do most of the work.
Apart from scoring for bands I use Cubase for productions, of my own work as well and then notation is just not important, only what it sounds like. And then cubase is great.
This is sort of an issue because of Dorico being more targeted towards people doing engraving work than composers. Not to say you can’t use it for composing, but it is so strict you have no choice but to work the way it wants to. Since the new score editor is based off it, it would be no different.
It is quite different actually in terms of working with notes and things like that - the fundamentals are almost completely different from the Cubase Score Editor. It is only similar in the appearance of the score and the arrangement of some of the menus, like for adding key signatures and time signatures and various other symbols, as well as some of the settings menus.
People who are used to Dorico will be pretty lost in the Cubase Score Editor when it comes to basic note entry because it is completely different in that area.
Dorico stores the playback start and end as offsets for the notated start and end of the note. Cubase uses the playback values as the master and the notated versions are determined using the display quantize algorithm. So it is the complete opposite when it comes to working with the notes and note values and how they are stored and how you enter and edit notes.
funnily after a lot of juggling with the note values in the info line I somehow got the 16th triplets to show correctly. And even better than in C13 or Sibelius.
Not all that funny because it takes a lot of steps for just one triplet. Copy/paste is not always an option. Bizarre sometimes how the score editor behaves. The numbers in the info line are still the same values as before, but now it looks good.
Maybe it’s been fixed in the 0.20 update, but I never tagged this as an issue, so I doubt it.
(I’m not updating yet, waiting to see if there’s going to be a quick fix for apparent problems with the logical editor)
