I did not read @wcreed as trying to be dismissive of your feature request, @Alfredo_Migliavacca. I hope you did not, either. Since the vast majority of us here are “mere users” (i.e., not with Steinberg/Dorico Dev Team), our “default setting” is generally (or at least ideally) towards offering whatever solutions we know of in the hopes that they help others needing to be able to do something in the present, be it a “native” solution or a “workaround.”
2 Likes
Thank you — I understand and appreciate the spirit of helpfulness in this forum.
That said, I believe help is truly helpful when it’s based on understanding the specific request. Sometimes, before offering quick suggestions, it’s worth asking a question or two to clarify the situation.
My request was very specific and aimed at a possible future implementation — I wasn’t asking for a workaround, just expressing a need for a native feature. That’s all.
Unsolicited tips, especially when off-target, can be more distracting than useful. I say this with all due respect, hoping it helps improve the conversation for everyone.
4 Likes
That’s exactly the point — if Dorico wants to stay focused only on notation and playback, that’s a choice. But it would also mean leaving out a highly practical and requested feature that other notation software (like Sibelius) already offers natively — and yes, I still use Sibelius for that reason alone.
It’s not about replacing screen capture tools — it’s about integrating a professional, clean solution that composers, educators, and performers can use right away without extra steps or technical setups.
Sometimes I get the feeling that instead of supporting a good feature request, some try to appear cool by explaining why it’s not needed. But honestly — wouldn’t Dorico gain even more users (and budget for new development) by making smart, useful features like this a priority? It’s not hard to see the value.
6 Likes
Not a question of need. The question is whether it is a good business decision in light of the many other requests confronting the Development Team. I certainly will not protest if Dorico makes this possible, but there are a lot of other features that users have been waiting for.
Presumably Steinberg and Dorico do market research far beyond the informal survey that is this forum. I trust them to evaluate it and act on it as they deem appropriate. Certainly forum users are welcome to express their opinions.
5 Likes
Absolutely — and I’m glad you’re not against the feature itself.
But let’s be honest: a feature isn’t less valuable just because there are other requests out there. That logic would block any progress. It’s not about whether I “need” it personally — it’s that many of us work professionally with students, ensembles, or online platforms where video export is simply a game changer.
Sibelius understood this years ago. If Dorico wants to continue expanding its user base, especially in education and digital content creation, it would be smart to consider this seriously — not as a “nice to have”, but as a real step forward.
Market research is great — but it often starts with user feedback like this. That’s why we’re here, right?
1 Like
I’m jumping in and probably this has already been stated (too long to read that whole thread, I’m sorry) : it’s the team that has been developing Dorico that created Sibelius’ video export, and that seems to have been a problem with them developing that same tool for Dorico. Maybe copyright is involved, I don’t know the details. But it’s been years we ask for it, and something is clearly getting in the way (since they do know how to do that…)
10 Likes
There are about a hundred things that you can say that about. There are several posts where people are saying “it’s absurd that Dorico still can’t do this”.
I’m sure that this is “on the list” of things to be added to Dorico; but the list is long, and the team is small. And if the person who knows about video/playback is working on something else, then they can’t do this as well.
No, but it has to fight for its place in the queue, based on limited resources.
9 Likes
Not all feature requests carry the same weight.
Some touch on marginal workflow enhancements, others have the potential to deeply affect how we use Dorico in real-world, professional settings.
I firmly believe that native video export is one of those high-impact features — not just for me, but for educators, composers, arrangers, and anyone who collaborates remotely or publishes music online.
Being able to export a clean, readable video of the score with synced playback — directly from within Dorico — opens the door to more efficient teaching, better communication with performers, and broader dissemination of one’s work. It’s a matter of practicality, not luxury.
Another example of a high-impact request would be the addition of submixes, buses, and advanced routing in the mixer. That would bring Dorico much closer to the flexibility of a DAW, allowing composers and orchestrators to manage large templates more professionally.
There may be hundreds of user suggestions — and that’s a good thing. But the relative importance of a feature is not determined by how many people mention it, or how loud the forum gets about it.
It’s determined by how central that function is to professional workflows, how many steps it saves, and how significantly it expands what Dorico can do — not just for one niche, but for entire categories of users.
That’s why I think this kind of discussion is crucial — not to debate who’s “right”, but to help identify what kind of features really make Dorico grow.
2 Likes
That decision is the sole responsibility of the development team.
(And I’m sure they are quite competent to understand their priorities and the market)
Your “firm beliefs” are irrelevant (as are mine).
4 Likes
Sure, many requests are enhancements, but there are plenty of requests that are notation based, not only in this thread. When it comes to the practicalities of a notation application, I think most here would put natively supported aleatoric boxes, ties that work correctly with repeat endings, and a host of other current notation deficiencies at a higher priority than video export.
4 Likes
Everything is a series of pros and cons. Developing one feature means not spending that time on another. It’s all too easy to presume that a feature that is important to ourselves is something that ‘everyone else’ wants too… but I think it’s really a fallacy. It’s entirely possible that that thing is very low on the priority list based on overall feedback and R&D. There’s also the fact that various features are not equal to develop. Something might seem straightforward, but be technically complex, so then the consideration may be that two or three features could be developed in the time it would take for the one we desire for ourselves. Talk about “gaining more users.” 
7 Likes
True — the final decision lies with the development team.
But let’s not pretend that user feedback is meaningless. If that were the case, this forum wouldn’t exist, and none of us would be here discussing features or priorities.
Of course they’re competent. And exactly because they’re competent, they’ll be interested in understanding not just abstract “market trends” but how real users work, teach, and create music today.
So no, my “firm beliefs” aren’t irrelevant — they’re part of the broader picture that helps shape a better product.
And I trust the team to distinguish between empty noise and meaningful feedback. Hopefully, this is the latter.
1 Like
Thank you — and yes, I agree: there are always trade-offs and many valuable features waiting their turn.
But I think we sometimes underestimate how crucial certain additions can be, not only technically, but in terms of widening the user base and usage contexts of Dorico.
Video export isn’t just another feature. It changes how we can present our work, teach with it, share ideas, and reach others — from students to performers, clients to the wider public.
Other programs offer this, and it’s not by accident: it responds to a real, growing need.
So while I totally respect the complexity of setting priorities, I just hope features like this aren’t dismissed as “nice-to-have” or secondary. In some workflows, they’re transformative.
Sibelius introduced their video export feature 18 years after the initial launch.
FWIW, I, too, would like to see this being introduced and my guess is that the Dorico team would as well. It’ll arrive at some stage and when it does I have no doubt it’ll deliver what we want, and more.
1 Like
I totally understand what you’re saying — of course, everyone tends to feel that their suggestion is important. That’s human.
But that doesn’t mean all requests are automatically on the same level just because they’re subjectively valued.
Some features impact niche preferences or personal workflow style.
Others — like native video export — impact how Dorico can be used in entirely new contexts: education, online sharing, digital collaboration, professional presentations.
The difference lies in the scope and reach of the feature, not just in who requests it.
So yes, it’s good to stay humble about our own ideas. But we also shouldn’t fall into the trap of thinking that all ideas are inherently equal, because in terms of actual impact on professional use, some features have objectively greater weight.
That’s not opinion — it’s reality.
You’re right about Sibelius introducing video export 18 years after launch — but let’s put that in perspective: Sibelius was released in 1993. 
The world (and tech standards) were completely different back then. No YouTube, no online learning, no remote collaboration, no digital-native students.
Today, we’re in 2025. Expectations are different, needs are different, workflows are digital from day one — and software like Dorico was born into this reality. That’s why requests like this one aren’t about impatience — they’re about relevance.
So yes, I’m confident the Dorico team will deliver a great implementation when the time comes. I just hope that time is seen as now, not 2034 
Do you know what your solution actually means?
Imagine you have 20 minutes of music and 20 instruments to export.
20x20 — in real time?
Are you sure? 
Of course I already know about tools like OBS — I actually use it regularly, but for totally different purposes, like creating lessons where I need to show multiple windows and explain things step by step.
Thanks for the suggestion, but that’s really not what I’m talking about here 
I think this section of the topic is just going round in circles. You’ve made a request. It will go on the list. Now you just have wait until it’s done.
12 Likes
I see that you raised this a year or so ago and Daniel replied to you.
On a different tack - I have no idea what’s coming in Dorico 6 but if I had to guess I would think we’ll see deeper integration with Cubase and more functionality to help Finale Users.
3 Likes
I remember reading responses from Daniel on this…
There’s no lack of desire on their part (Dorico team) to want to provide this for the user base. But the crux of the matter seems to be, this needs co-ordination across several dev teams at Steinberg to implement properly/fully. Scheduling of that type/level of workload and collaboration is a major hurdle. For example, big changes to the video engine functionality impacts many SB products - its not one where individual updates can (easily) be ‘plumbed in’ to specific hosts that use it. Adding a feature to this one component means it has to be compatible across the board - or it can’t get added.
Getting everyone happy inside Steinberg, with all their competing priorities, will take time.
FWIW, of the many and varied demands on the team, I believe adding solid audio track playback/handling (with full timestretch/time warp capability) natively in Dorico would be a ‘higher’ priority over video export. Musescore Studio is stated to be including this (borrowing tech from Audacity) within 12 - 18 months. For film, TV, Game/Media composers or content creators, this will offer a seismic change to the notation software market.
1 Like