Shakespeare practically invented irony. Americans don’t understand it generally, instead calling it sarcasm. Not infrequently I’ll say something with two meanings and get accused of sarcasm, when I explain the difference it’s just blank stares (American from the West Coast).
But everything is BIGGER in the U.S. right? Even our use of language has to be at the extremes, either drippy nice or caustic.
Just a pet peeve of mine. We all equally suck basically 
Oh I’m certain it’s a lost in translation issue. Both countries equally certain that they are using the language correctly, both countries equally certain that the other is being unnecessarily snippy / incapable of subtlety.
Neither is right, and the world works a lot better if everyone understands this.
The thing I am most guilty of most often is “But Someone On The Internet Is WRONG!” syndrome. Fortunately, Dorico is, ultimately, Japanese…
FWIW I don’t see that. Americans are generally charmed by British English. Interesting history there, obviously we started from the same point, but after the colonies split Britain upgraded their language via … oh what’s the term, rhoterization or something, anyhow it’s the silent R basically. I don’t know how Brits view American English.
lol … it’s a disease
Regardless of the content of the update, I’ve had dorico crash on me more times in the past 48 hours than in the 4 years before that. Not an exaggeration. Think I’m done until the next patch. This is unusable.
Try this if you like: I’ve had no issues with a brand V5 new project. I’ve seen something similar with some of older ones - but I’ve no desire to waste any of the Dorico team’s time with looking at what’s up with old projects that I can just as easily run on 4, but I do have a theory:
On those projects, something is up with loading plugins: Spaces II for example. The logs (the ones I can read) simply say “VST is not OK.” Don’t know what THAT means. I suspect it is like a return code coming from the VST and that Dorico may not know exactly why either. Just a theory, but new projects are fine for me.
Can you please provide a reference or hint about this procedure? I have looked all around and the only things I can find are references to recording the GA OUTPUT into another program such as Cubase. I can’t find anything that talks about recording MIDI INTO GA.
I am reluctant to criticize the Dorico team because I think they do brilliant work and I truly love working in Dorico, even with the handful of features I would still like to see improved. I fall in the notation-camp almost exclusively when I weight my priorities. For good quality playback and mockups I always export to Logic and work from the MIDI tracks, and then add audio for things like rhythm section instruments.
I have not purchased the upgrade to 5 but when I do (which I will soon if for no other reason than to support the product) I believe my list of most-used features will look something very much like those listed in the posts above. I still really want maximum notational flexibility, especially with things like chord symbols and ties into repeats. But I do like some of the new functionality like mouse dragging.
But here is the part about the playback leg of the stool that I still don’t get: if Dorico still cannot playback fermatas, for example—and it’s my understanding that this is the case—how is all of the added playback functionality really going to make Dorico playback a viable substitute for a DAW? Is there not still a pretty big gap between Dorico playback and what is really required for most score mockups? Can one really effectively export a big band score using the new drum features and achieve something approaching a realistic representation? Are people creating separate scores/projects exclusively for playback representation?
I do not intend my question above as rhetorical. I am truly asking especially those who are most invested in the playback features how and if you find you are able to use Dorico’s built-in playback to share your work. I recognize I may simply not know that part of Dorico well enough to judge.
However, if my impression is true, and that there is still a big gap between what’s available now and the features needed for exceptional playback, I do wish (just my personal feeling, I know others feel differently!) Dorico could first solve those remaining notation elements before investing so much time in playback features.
It would be helpful if you could send me your crash logs, @TylerE – please do Help > Create Diagnostic Reports and send the resulting zip file to me via email at d dot spreadbury at steinberg dot de. Thanks!
Can somebody please provide me a link to the Dorico forum? I seem to have ended up in the “got up on the wrong side of the bed” forum by mistake.
Agree. I don’t want to mute this thread, but I’d sure like to see it get back on track.
I’m not sure to whom the last couple of posts are directed, but the thread is about Dorico 5 thoughts. I truly am not complaining, and I have full respect for the Dorico team. I just wanted to express my thoughts as one of those users hoping the next round of updates will further address notation issues. I did understand that to be the focus of this thread.
Just my 2 cents. I think your points are well taken. I’d only add that there are different levels of playback realism corresponding to different levels of work. I certainly agree the lack of support for fermata playback is a common setback – but you might be able to work around that with hidden tempo marks.
And I truly wish it were a lot easier to do drum tracks. The MIDI triggers might do the trick, if only there was some conveniently packaged content. People writing for big bands and jazz combos need a basic set of patterns (ballad with and without brushes, moderate swing/foxtrot, samba, bossa, cha-cha, some smooth jazz beats, etc.) Over time, I have made up my own patterns and saved them in a Dorico file, then copy/paste from there. I’d be much happier if I could just buy a professionally produced Groove Agent package that does the same thing.
Having said all that, I am able to produce recordings that are good enough for my purposes. If I were trying to sell a project for significant money, this wouldn’t do. But each step is getting closer.
On the Steinberg (i.e. Cubase, GASE …) side, clearly there is a culture that is much more oriented to rock and techno. That is really true throughout the whole DAW industry. IMHO, it would serve Yamaha/Steinberg well to broaden their horizons.
My comment wasn’t directed at you. 
I was referring more to the squabbling.
So true, perhaps because it’s really hard to work with other styles. The algorithms in the iReal Pro app are the closest I’ve heard, though I’m no expert–there might be many others of which I’m not aware. I would definitely support something like that being integrated into Dorico!
I just looked in the GA user manual. It’s been quite a while and I remembered it wrong: Patterns can only be edited or recorded live in the full version. In the SE version, however, the patterns can also be set and saved in intensity and complexity (also automated).
I apologize for this.
By the way, there are test versions for “Simon Phillips Jazz and Studio Drums” at Steinberg.
Ich habe eben in der GA-Bedienungsanleitung nachgesehen. Es ist schon eine ziemliche Weile her und ich habe es falsch erinnert: Pattern können nur in der Vollversion editiert oder live eingespielt werden. In der SE-Version können die Pattern allerdings auch in Intenstität und Komplexität (auch automatisiert) eingestellt und gespeichert werden.
Ich bitte um Entschuldigung.
Übrigens gibt es bei Steinberg Testversionen für “Simon Phillips Jazz und Studio Drums”.
I think that’s a reasonable question and references a myth that I’d like to dis-spell. First, I HAVE had audio accepted straight from Dorico as broadcast quality. That’s my working norm. And when there are audio challenges, a DAW isn’t the magic answer. Working with libraries to get that kind of sound is just hard work. The weak link is always me. I rely on other components, but I find they work just as well in Dorico as elsewhere.
After much going back and forth (I’m not very bright sometimes) I’ve decided for myself that its actually easier for me to stay in Dorico as much as I can because invariably there is an arrangement problem that I will either a) have more trouble recognizing or b) stubbornly try to mix my way out of it if I’m in a DAW. YMMV.
Frankly, I consider using Dorico this way to be a competitive advantage. Y’all be sure and just use a DAW, okay? 
Consider this: who hasn’t written a climactic section that’s just messy? In Dorico, I tighten up the score properly as it should have been in the first place. Get that brass TIGHT. It is way faster to try options to a chord resolution that isn’t working, needs to change the whole arrangement…
Fermatas are a non-issue because there aren’t any places where I would use them. A 30’ cue has to be 29.5s EXACTLY. What I do is insert a 5/8 bar or something - as nearly anyone can get that duration right versus having super-human tempo sense.
One thing to remember is that I never deliver the true final master. A client puts that into a DAW alright (so Dan isn’t wrong IMO when he suggests Nuendo for different Atmos formats and such) but that’s past the point of being my problem.
Also, I cheat. I have a nicely scripted automated process using individual instrument audio exports for stems, cuts, and alts in various formats. That has nothing to do with it being Dorico or a DAW or not. But it makes it easy to pop stems back in/out of a DAW for live recording if that is what I’m doing. It’s not a pain if there is a script for it.
I can already tell you, using it the last few days, that MIDI regions will save me so much time and improve quality. The reason is that I can be lazy if allowed to be. EX: there are several options for a Timpani roll that are superior in a certain instance. I’m using them more and to greater effect when all it takes is shift- ).
So Say We All!
I’ve decided for myself that its actually easier for me to stay in Dorico as much as I can because invariably there is an arrangement problem that I will either a) have more trouble recognizing or b) stubbornly try to mix my way out of it if I’m in a DAW. YMMV.
No question. I also part time as 3D artist. Over there you need to model in one app (e.g. Blender, Max), bake in another (e.g. Marmoset), texture in a third (Substance), and render in a fourth (UE5). Oh but if you need a top drawer render for temps or something it goes back to Marmoset for that. This pipeline litters a bunch of extra assets, texture files and so on. Anyhow pipeline managment is one of the big issues in the industry, absolutely reducing tools is a huge benefit.
I would love it if I could stay in Dorico but stereo don’t cut it in my biz.
I am a little baffled by GA and its relationship with Dorico. It looks like the “MIDI triggers” can only work with MIDI patterns, and it appears to me that most of the GA content is audio patterns, not MIDI patterns. I also am confused by the GA GUI that has just 16 pads for patterns that can be triggered. It looks like you can call up additional banks of pads, but these are all empty on my GASE installation. I really don’t understand how to get access to most of the GA content.
Your experience was mone as well. Easy-peasy🙂
The Patterns in GA are sequences of MIDI data that play samples, just like any MIDI > Sound setup. Dorico’s MIDI Trigger Region sends a non-played MIDI note, like a Keyswitch, that … triggers the pattern. The pattern runs for as long as the region lasts.