Yes this exactly. The new Dorico will certainly make my job a lot easier when I finally transfer a composition to Cubase (less endless fiddling with MIDI CC and massaging performances), but there is no way it’ll replace it (for me anyway) from a final production and mastering point of view… and I wouldn’t expect to either.
That said 2.0 is an amazing upgrade, I’m looking forward to digging through it and experimenting just as soon as I’ve got my latest film project out of the way.
@Daniel: velocity editor is cool. I think a velocity editor alone is not sufficient to deal with instruments like that in a score editor. The point is more that of how the timing is compensated depending on the velocity. For example, in Cubase there are multiple ways to deal with this:
you compensate for the timing during recording with the keyboard playing (i.e. you hit the keys earlier, needs a bit of practice, but works pretty well). If you are going for a midi export to create the score, you need to push the midi notes to the right, for example, by applying the logical editor with shift to the right rules depending on the velocity.
you use another instrument without such a complicated delay behavior, for example non-delayed strings, play the part with that and apply the logical editor on the Midi part to shift the midi notes to the left (-333ms, -250ms etc.) depending on the velocity and switch to the Kontakt instrument.
I think what is needed to deal with instruments that try to simulate realistic instrument behavior like that is something like a non-destructive midi processor where you can enter rules for an instrument how notes are shifted to the right or left before the midi notes arrive in Kontakt or similar depending on some midi conditions (velocity, controller data, whatever - I’m not really sure what other Kontakt instruments are doing). It’ll be also pretty interesting to see how the legato transitions will work out in Dorico as they require some overlap between the midi notes.
There is a really nice video on Youtube explaining all that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p19v9VrESKo (starting at minute 44:43 - ~60:00). It’s lengthy, but I think it demonstrates some typical procedures working with that particular library pretty well. I’m assuming that similar procedures are needed for other libraries as well.
Yes, thanks for your feedback on this – I had a chat with another composer who works a lot with mock-ups recently and he said exactly the same thing, that these days the biggest job is compensating for the time it takes samples to speak, and that we should provide an easy way to offset notes to compensate. This is certainly on our list of ideas for the future.
No, not yet I’m afraid, but this is of course still planned.
I love Love LOVE the direction that Dorico is going! The MIDI CC feature additions to Dorico was about the best surprise I’ve had in the past couple of years! However, Cubase definitely still has a place. In my world, I find myself using a combination of Sibelius and Cubase via Rewire. Why? The directors I work with are looking for a “hybrid” sound where it is part orchestra and part something else. Sibelius (to be hopefully replaced by Dorico very soon!) is great for composing classical/orchestral arrangements and cues. Cubase is perfect for pop/rock/sound design/etc. By using Rewire, I can craft a cue using both styles with relative ease. Except Sibelius sucks when it comes to handling VSTs. I can’t describe how much I HATE Sibelius sound sets! Ugh! Which is a major reason I am so excited about where Dorico is going.
BTW, another cool thing I spotted was the ability to add as many actions as you want for a particular articulation. WAY SUPERIOR to Sibelius!! Kudos! And a graphical tempo track too?? I’m swooning!
Anyway, I am NOT looking for Dorico to replace Cubase (I don’t think Steinberg is either) but I would like to see a few features released before I can make the switch from Sibelius to Dorico:
Rewire or some kind of tempo-sync with Cubase. This is what facilitates composing for hybrid styles and cues. I don’t want to bog down Dorico with a bunch of Omnisphere/Heavyosity/Whatever staves…
Able to see two or more MIDI CC controller lanes - especially as I use both CC 1 and CC11 for most libraries.
Speaking of libraries, I don’t use HSSE. I’m using Kontakt-based or EW Play exclusively. So loading the HSSE bogs things down quite a bit. Can we unload it or not load it in the first place.
+1 to the velocity-based legato where lower velocity = earlier note on.
Track delay in ms to also help with the “pulse” landing on the downbeat. Maybe as part of an articulation/VST/instrument profile.
A video thumbnail track. Just to make finding scenes a little easier.
That’s my wish list but I’m totally digging where Dorico is headed!!
We plan to add video thumbnails, and we plan to make it possible to show more than one controller lane at once, too. In the future I’m sure we will find a good solution for sync with Cubase – I hope it will be something better than ReWire, but it’s not something we’ve started discussing in earnest with the team in Hamburg just yet.
It’s not specifically on the roadmap, but some sort of sync solution with Cubase certainly is, so it remains to be seen whether that turns out to be ReWire or something else. We don’t want to actively shut out users of other DAWs either, but if we can provide a better and more useful integration with Cubase by using something bespoke instead of ReWire, we would give that serious consideration.
I know you don’t have any specifics as of now, but that is slightly disheartening to hear, because the practical effect would be that yes, other DAW users — not even necessarily DAW, even, since I could need to sync the transport with Max — would be shut off. That being Steinberg’s priority makes total sense (not specifically the shutting off part, though that is a nice bonus, I guess), even from a technological point of view, but… Is there an alternative to do at least that, sync clocks?
I’m baffled by Steinberg’s direction with Dorico vs Cubase. You’re adding Midi/playback/video features to Dorico which are already very robust in Cubase Pro, so why reinvent the wheel in Dorico? Currently as a composer, if I want to create pro level Midi mockups for playback, I’d use Cubase for that due to all its Midi editing/features. Is the intention of Dorico now to be the Steinberg tool to do Midi editing/playback/mockup work?
Seems like a smarter solution would be to create a version of Dorico that integrates with Cubase Pro, so each tool can do what they do best?
eboats, I think there’s room for both approaches, and approaching these workflows from different directions. Dorico is not going to turn into Cubase – adding a few MIDI editing tools to Play mode hardly comes close to approaching the sophisticated functionality that Cubase provides. Obviously we intend to provide greater integration between the two products over time, but this has to be done incrementally and requires a lot of time and attention from the engineering teams of both products.
Luis, early in the discussions of the video feature last summer, we were talking about sync via things like MIDI timecode, which apparently wouldn’t necessarily be too hard to add to the audio engine. But MTC, like ReWire, has its problems: it’s a very simplistic kind of sync that leaves all of the difficult business of keeping the project timelines up-to-date to the user. Ideally, we are shooting for something a bit smoother.
Daniel, to add another vote in favor of sync capability—I do music preparation for a company in Hollywood, and linking timelines between DAW and notation has become vital for ensuring a score matches the composer’s mockup. ReWire has worked well for this, though I agree a smoother solution would be ideal.
I recognize that a sync solution limited to the Steinberg ecosystem is the natural leaning; however, as I’m sure you’re aware, Cubase’s tempo track is in need of some additional capability. Metric modulations, dotted quarter pulses, alla breve, etc. can only be achieved in Digital Performer and Pro Tools, which makes those programs very necessary for this process.
I know this workflow is very industry-specific, but I wanted mention it in case it hasn’t come up yet.
I’m really curious what such an integration with Cubase would look like in the end as in my opinion something bidirectional score <-> midi will probably always yield bad results on both ends. I think, it would be much better to have one side as master and then tune the other end when finished. For example, you build your score in Dorico, edit all your additional fine-tuning midi data in Dorico and this then appears as non-mutable midi tracks on the Cubase end that cannot be edited any more, but copied etc. From there you can add additional midi tracks, doublings, audio tracks, effects and so on to build orchestral mock-ups and so on. If the direction is something like this, Dorico will have some overlap in midi functionality with Cubase, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing in my opinion when it is taylored for a score-based workflow.
The other direction could be somthing similar. Here it is again interesting how sample instruments delays are compensated. When I have the Cinematic Studio Strings legato patch on, there will need to be some functionality that translates the midi data properly with some milliseconds delay depending on the velocity into Dorico. Otherwise all the notes would be misplaced and I wouldn’t want to do what I do currently, i.e., build a second Cubase project, shift all the midi data to the correct place and then export and import the midi data into the scoring software. Ideally, such compensation timings would be delivered through the actual plugin interface of the VST plugin and be provided by the sample library vendor so that the end user doesn’t have to worry about that.
Yes, please Daniel. As a media composer is a must, as a minimum:
1-Note velocity edit lane in Play Mode
2-Real-time Input & recording of controller data
With this implementations Dorico 2 would be the top of the game, ´till then I don’t know if I’m going to purchase the update. Of course I appreciate the divisi, Smart Staff, System Track and Markers, they are really very good features and I’m impressed…but I do really need the list above in order to get the job done fast without any workaround.
Congratulations Daniel and the team, Dorico 2 is the most exciting software since…Dorico 1… that was a bit of a disappointment for me. But you are making it up and now its very clear that this software is gonna make it. You all in Dorico understand the needs we have, and I’m very happy for that. Thank u
I can’t wait to have the list implemented, plus other nice surprises that we´´ll get from you, for sure.
Daniel - after being so excited to see the Tempo Track graph that can be easily edited (that I was waiting years for it in Sibelius),
and the new automation + CCs (hope you will implement the option to open several CCs for automation like in Cubase) - I can tell that I’m really thrilled by the fact you are aware of the customer needs and I really wish to see the Real time Midi input including catching the real velocities as I play it. Hopefully it will be able to capture live free playing without metronome to be more easy to convert to score than Cubase currently can.
The real problem I have with Cubase score from midi is that you can have a score editor properties per whole song, instead of treating it as several elements (parts), so if I know some parts has maximum of 8th notes without triplets and other parts has 16th or triplets I’ll be able to do it more selectively. This is my biggest problem with Cubase scoring from live midi track.
I can assure that I will be the first to jump happily into the Dorico boat when it is ready
So - you’ve asked for feedback - here is my 2 cents.
I would wait for Guitar tabs as well as Composition tools (Retrogrades, flip intervals…).
Thanks again for your teams dedication and hope for more great surprises along the way from your creative team that really taking Dorico to the right direction as it looks like currently. Thumbs up!
I love Dorico but when it comes to playing virtual instruments it’s no where close to the kind of ‘power user’ audio engineering tool as something like CuBase Pro. I don’t really expect it to be for quite some time yet (Maybe never).
The potential is there to get really good playback results right out of the box someday, but it’s going to take years for folks to develop Libraries and Dorico techniques enough to fit even the most common of styles/tempos/instrumentation templates or models.
Until then, a ton of user intervention will be required. CC Lanes help get us in the ballpark that much quicker while still in a Scoring work-flow, and it’s plenty for collaborative purposes, which will please the lion’s share of Scoring Application Users.
These are a few reasons I still need Cubase…
MIDI Logical Editors (Perhaps Dorico can already do this sort of thing via LUA scripts?)
Real-time recording via keyboard, MPC, or wind-jammer.
VST3 Note Expression (Not many Plugins use this yet, but for HALion 6 Users this can be a big deal).
All great news. I look forward to seeing all this shape into being.
The news about NE is actually exiting to hear, and the reason I say this is because I’m thinking that LUA scripts might ultimately be far more powerful/flexible than the simple Logical Editors we get in Cubase. We could gradually begin to work in NE for each individual note rather than MIDI channel-wide CC events as LUA would make it ‘more practical and easier to manage’. One could start out with simpler CC lanes, but eventually pack it into NE for every note, than go back and fine tune individual notes, etc. A daunting task without scripting abilities to automate alot of mundane and repetitive steps.
I don’t know if Cubase has plans to implement some kind of ‘more advanced’ user scripting scheme into the DAW, and if Dorico beats them to the punch on supporting this I’d definitely get a LOT MORE done in a single App during the composition and collaboration stages of projects.
LUA can also be a major sling-shot tool for grooves/styles. Right?