Who, Me? I never used DP. I had it a looooooooong time ago. It came with some MOTU gear I used at the time.
You could try here too:
http://www.motunation.com/forum/index.php
Er…
hehe… That would be Robin 
I figured that’s who you meant.
Northwood, Woodcrest, northcrest. I’m easy to confuse!
Should post it in Issues sub-forum ,it a BUG 
I install every update! Still no fix. I think a total rewrite is necessary!
I personally love DP8’s user interface and how customizable it is. Switching back and forth among Cubase’s gazillion windows is a pain in the ass. What an antique! So much for German engineering.
Mike
DP 8 is gorgeous with a vast and deep feature set. The highly customizable consolidated window does have it’s advantages.
But DP has become heavily lopsided towards audio while the MIDI side is now, with the passage of time… in need of a make over. Even long time users are grumbling about the need for additional and updated features. I’ve used it since v4.5, have RTFM with each version, plus worked with video tutorials leading to an understanding of how it works. But I then realized that I was tired of engaging in mouse-click gymnastics to complete basic steps taking up minutes when otherwise requiring seconds to complete in Cubase or Logic.
Speaking objectively about the need for a consolidated window and other personal preference wish list features makes sense. Use of words like “antiquated” serve no purpose as all modern DAW include incredible functionality as well as old clunkers that just never got updated.
Steinberg is to my knowledge, the only major DAW maker extending the envelope of MIDI functionality with it’s VST and Note Expression technology. That’s innovative, not antiquated.
Does DP support VST3 and expressions? If not, what an antique! That’s German engineering.
…Does DP8 have anything resembling VST Expression Maps? How does the score editor compare to Cubase?
DP does not have expression maps or an equivalent, and the score editor, while really good in some ways is missing stuff. No note attached articulations, no slurs, page view only.
No MusicXML either. These are weak points for me in DP. Also, the Windows version was supposed to have been released late last year, but hasn’t been.
DP does have: a find function that sort of rivals the logical editor, Versions (entire sequences) within the file, like Cubase had in the VST days. Excellent film scoring and some post facilities, infinitely configurable metronome, an equivalent to Cubase’s arrange track wherein you can fire cues from the alpha/midi keyboard (which we can’t do). The graphical user interface is very refined.
Burns CDs, well, it really just creates a file for OS X to burn the CD in the Finder, also burns enhanced CDs.
Also has docking windows and optional single window interface.
I am looking forward to the competitive pressure their Windows release will have on Cubase, but I can see the SB people chuckling about it. I don’t really think it will change SB’s plans for the gradual overhaul of Cubase.
I can see using DP for live performance– for me that would mean performing theatre or a dance piece where the chained sequences can be cued from the keyboard, but for writing I dunno. Just VST expressions (even without VST 3.5 features, which I have not been able to use due to no Kontakt support) is a big deal for me.
…So from that statement I take it you mean that Steinberg WILL go ahead regardless, with an overhaul of Cubase, Windows DP8 or not. As long as SB has a virtual monopoly on VST Expression or similar concepts, I’m not considering switching anytime soon. Though I long for those GUI and workflow advantages DP seems to have.
I really think there is a gap in the market for a sequencing program that also excels in sophisticated scoring capabilities. Surely there’s a great need for film composers/musicians to use such an integrated tool. The idea of hoping around from Sibelius to Cubase is highly unappealing to me.
I wait in anticipation for the ex Sibelius guys to get ‘cracking’ (and I don’t mean on crack!) and throw into Cubase some score improvements, else a standalone module.
Helge said in a German interview that I read about here that that’s what they are doing, and I think DP has a relatively small user base, and they are not Yamaha. They make very nice stuff though.
Daniel Spreadbury mentions that in a recent blog post–
…integration with Cubase (over time we will integrate the technology we are building more deeply with Cubase, but to begin with we are focusing on delivering a great stand-alone scoring application),
Thanks for the reply Steve.
An interesting article that gives me a feeling of renewed optimism. Though I was somewhat frightened at the talk of an iPad application first up. Not that I don’t like ipads - I use mine just about every day. But to attempt to write a sophisticated scoring program operating within the confines of a small touchscreen and iOS is a little much. Though I can see its uses as a kind of sketchpad - much like the smaller child of a larger parent so to speak.
Glad that consultation is happening with composers, musicians and other people in relevant fields. I only hope they are representative of core Cubase users as well. Because as you mentioned, the changes most likely will eventually be integrated into Cubase.
That is one of Spreadbury’s strengths.
It’s a long tern thing though, it’ll be a while before we see the fruits of this in Cubase.
That is the curious thing. It is more like the opposite of monopoly with Steinberg’s VST3.
VST2.4 was already being used by most vendors that did chose not to upgrade their plugins to VST3. I understand, of course, that there is a cost associated with it. But that does not take away the fact that it was a calculated choice.
There are however, plenty of vendors that have made (or is making) some or all of their plugins available as 64-bit VST3. Here is the list from my sig (for when I change it in the future): http://www.Algorithmix.com, http://www.arturia.com, http://www.audiodamage.com, http://www.bigmelonaudio.com, http://www.brainworx-music.de, http://www.dmgaudio.com, http://www.teamdnr.net, http://www.elysia.com, http://www.fabfilter.com, http://www.hamburg-audio.com, http://www.hofa-plugins.de, http://www.icedaudio.com, http://www.image-line.com, http://www.ismism.de, http://www.izotope.com, http://www.klanghelm.com, http://www.meldaproduction.com, http://www.molecularbytes.com, http://www.motu.com, http://www.neocymatics.com, http://www.novationmusic.com, http://www.nugenaudio.com, http://www.ntrack.com, http://www.presonus.com, http://www.softube.com, http://www.soniqware.com, http://www.spl.info, http://www.subsoniclabs.com, http://www.synchroarts.com, http://www.vsl.co.at, http://www.u-he.com, http://www.vengeance-sound.com, http://www.virsyn.com, http://www.waldorfmusic.de, http://www.waves.com and http://www.yamaha.com.
As can be seen, a fair amount of vendors listed are ones that are well known for their innovative and progressive software developments. Not in the list are a few vendors that have conversed about it and put forth various arguments why they are not developing VST3 versions. I’ve heard many different reasons where some are obviously plausable, and others that are not, IMO (i.e. as a customer).
We also see a lot of arguing in the forum about whether Steinberg has their customers in mind, etc. which when compared to some of these other vendors not supporting VST3, I would like to say something. Steinberg is spending time and money inventing new technologies and advancing the musical areana. VST3 is absolutely awesome, and has certainly helped me see the work of composing in a new light. To develop and re-constructing musical arrangements is now much faster and much more convenient for me. Before Note Expression was introduced, the process was significantly more time consuming.
Anyone that argues against VST3 is simply not a very efficient composer or arranger. It can be argued of course, that there ought to be no rush when performing such tasks or that they naturally can be made without VST3, but it ultimately comes down to either making music or making music using a DAW. A DAW should be transparent. I don’t want to sit and “operate a DAW”, I want to play with sounds and make music. That is what I bought Cubase for.
Oh and I have a number of external devices as well and NE even makes that better too, though of course not as convenient as a “native” VST3 instrument.
Anyways, just more rolling cents. 
A DAW should be transparent. I don’t want to sit and “operate a DAW”, I want to play with sounds and make music. That is what I bought Cubase for.
how does it helping u with more “real playing” than “operate” a DAW ?
note expression as i understand (not have much experience with it yet) is only for editing on already recorded midi material ! isn’t it ?
Based on what your understanding and experience there is still a lot to learn for you about the NE functionality available in Cubase, though it can ALSO do what you are saying.
BTW, I did not say “real playing”. If I was unclear, I meant that want to worry about making sounds and composing music, not how to operate software.
True , u didn’t mention “real playing” my misunderstanding 
Off topic, but is there a list of actual instruments that support VST3 and note expressions?