No, at the present time, only note duration conditions are currently implemented, but we certainly plan to expand this in future versions.
1 Like
It would be great if you could share with me the expression map you have created for Berlin Woodwinds… Do you have any expression maps for the Cinematic Studio Series? I’m a newcomer to Dorico and notation software in general. After two weeks experimenting with SE I have now upgraded to Elements as it impressed me so much.
I was wondering if I could get some information on the way that the Dorico BBC SO Expression Map has been programmed. I attempted to use BBCSO with the Dorico Expression Map on one of my compositions for String Orchestra and Timpani in order to make a good quality demo of the work. I found the BBC SO Expression Map to be a complete disaster on this quite rhythmically dynamic, rapidly moving composition (please note: I feel that many of the string library programers such as Spitfire seem to forget that strings are the rhythmic core of the orchestra rather than just a mushy mood machine). The problem I encountered was the complete inability of the string legatos to meet the demands of legato 8th notes and 16th notes at 130 beats per minute or more. I understand that it is possible to program the Expression Maps to compensate for differences in tempo. What I need to know is if the problems I encountered were due to an inherent fault in Spitfire’s BBCSO or if the needed programming of the Expression Map for rapid tempo playing had not been done yet in the current version of the Expression Map. Noteperformer has no problem rending this composition and does some quite musical things in the work if the dynamics for the musical lines are properly marked up. BBCSO in its current state is a complete non-starter. Unfortunately, the string sound in Noteperformer has an overall harsh sound that is very hard to tame. I would like the sound of BBCSO combined with the legato tempo management and musicality of Noteperformer. Cheers, Paul
1 Like
As would we all. A forlorn hope at present.
1 Like
Indeed, it seems like the AI of Noteperformer is a much needed component of its somewhat more musical playback. It really is a very impressive product. I would pay a lot of for a “broadcast quality sound” version of it. Despite what many say, I still feel many composers are “composing to the sample” when using sample libraries rather than freely writing what they might want to express. I also think that the sample libraries are distorted by a certain lack of understanding of strings, as well as a certain musical laziness, on the part of many over worked and underpaid film composers. I can’t stand hearing endless staccato/spiccato lines when real string players use a lot of variety in their bowing. All of this is set up by using these sound libraries across a myriad of tracks. This is where the flexibility of Dorico Expression Maps should shine as opposed to composing somewhat crudely in DAWs, and it’s sad when they don’t, perhaps due to the limitations of the libraries themselves. My question is still whether the BBCSO itself is the fundamental problem for me or if the BBCSO Expression map is not fully developed enough to deal with the musical challenges of my not really all that untypical Dorico file.
2 Likes
Sorry, I’m not skilled enough to answer. But I share your frustration (especially about string articulations). My current conclusion (perhaps erroneous) is that only NP approaches the problem from the notation - which it does with its own clever algorithms, so its expression map is nigh on impossible to tweak. All other libraries are strictly for the DAWs!
I would seriously welcome some contributions from experts here on how to set up expression maps to tweak the capabilities of various sound libraries that don’t immediately descend into the esoteric… For example, I have yet to see a simple explanation of how and why secondary dynamic is manipulated (which just exemplifies my ignorance).
I’d say the problem is the way the libraries are built up. I wish some modeling for strings were more developed, as it could probably more be an answer to those needs. I purchased the Swam quartet and… it’s not there yet (as opposed to PianoTeq that I find superb). Probably because strings is way more complicated.
Sorry not to bring any solution here. I feel your pain and share it (and also think that library thing is shaping a whole decade of movie/media music instead of letting composers really deliver what they have in mind).
I don’t think this is rocket science. Most of the more sophisticated libraries use three basic dynamic controllers: velocity, tone/crossfade and volume. Velocity is usually used for percussive instruments but is often also used for short articulations of orchestral instruments where the tone will not be manipulated after the initial sound. Some libraries use it for specialist controls as well such as modifying initial attack, applying portamento etc.
If we assume that we want to use instruments where the sound can be altered after the initial contact, then we have two types of “aftertouch” controllers. The one most commonly used as the main dynamic controller is usually the one that alters the tone of the instrument, often by cross-fading into different dynamic layers. This where the expressive nature of the libraries can be most brought out. It’s most often programmed to CC1. The secondary controller, often mapped to CC11, on the other hand,deals purely with the volume of the individual track. Therefore you manipulate the secondary controller in the Key Editor CC lane when you don’t want to change the timbre but do want to change the actual volume. This is frequently required with brass instruments in particular where you know what sound is required but find the volume inappropriate.
I don’t know whether this clarifies things at all?
On @pnicholls point that you raised, I would say that the Expression Map is not particularly a limitation, rather it’s the actual functionality built into the BBCSO which is the determining factor. That doesn’t mean the EM cannot be improved – it certainly can in my view – but, after all, everything which is in the interface, as far as I can see, can be programmed into the EM. However, because the BBCSO, like most other instruments, is primarily designed to be played live, it may require experimentation to ensure that the MIDI messages sent when playing live also get sent to the DAW/Dorico when entering the notes manually (this can be done by observing the BBC UI and of course carefully listening out for any differences in the two modes).
When I first heard the BBC SO - and especially Core, I was not very impressed by most of the demos which often seemed rather treacly. Quite why I decided to buy in the end on sale, I’m still not sure but I somehow recognized the potential (which I still have some way to go in fully realising probably). Of course the endlessly varied bowing techniques used by real musicians can only be realised in so far as there are sufficient samples, sufficiently sophisticatedly programmed to capture all of this. The BBC libraries are far from class-leading as regards sample and articulation depth – the Pro version is fairly large only by virtue of the multiple microphone positions.
Hi David,
great that you created expression maps for Spitfire Studio Strings. I got the library working fine using UACC KS. However, I have a problem with the articulation “portamento” and also with fast repetitive sixteenth notes.
As soon as you play the legato patch of the Spitfire Studio Strings live on the keyboard, the portamento playing works fine. At low velocity portamento is played, at higher velocity it switches to legato.
But how can I implement this in the expression maps for Dorico? Portamento simply doesn’t work. It sounds like legato.
The second problem concerns fast sixteenth notes. Note repetitions in tempo quarters equal to 148 sound terrible in Vln 1, for example. The NotePerformer sounds much better in this respect.
In contrast to the first violin, the second violin has 8 round robins (the first has only 4). Here it works a little better. The problem applies to all short articulations (spicc., spicc cs, brushed and brushed cs).
Have you encountered these two problems with the Spitfire Studio Strings?