do you have any evidence that CSS’s low latency mode is designed mainly for recording parts in? That’s not the impression I gained from correspondence with Alex on this matter who has stressed the quality of the sound using it while testing.
As for Kirk Hunter, I do have his Emerald library but like most don’t really use it these days. I never noticed latency but that’s maybe because I don’t go out of my way to find these things. With CSS, you can’t really miss it.
I do not wish to debate with you are anyone here about CSS speculation. What I can say is that generally, if you truncate the sample attack in order to eliminate latency, then you are going to compromise the sound. Period.
CSS has particularly big latency on the Legatos. Kirk Hunter’s latency is there too, I measured them, they are in the 20-50ms range… I haven’t tested his legatos. You might not notice 50ms of latency, but I sure do.
lots of libs have articulation latency actually, see the other thread I quoted earlier. That is why people end up nudging notes all over the place, or using negative track delays so that they don’t have to nudge the notes.
It’s not something we’re working on at present, I’m afraid, so it’s not imminent.
I will join the choir here. This feature is now the single most important thing that I would like Dorico to have. Most libraries have delay even if you are not aware of it. Modern Scoring Strings, which is very full-featured, has a delay as high as 440 ms, almost half a second, and it varies from articulation to articulation. If I want to use it with Dorico, I need to apply a POSITIVE midi delay, using a simple plugin before every and each virtual instrument.
Also note that the negative track delay must be implemented for MIDI out too, not just for VIs hosted in Dorico. Just sayin’.
The delay is everywhere – just take a look at the spreadsheet, which contains several sheets. I will link it again for your convenience.
What does everyone think about extending the start of the note to the left in the piano roll (when the actual note length is displayed rather than it’s notated value). Extending doesn’t have to snap to the grid. In a way this is like negative track delay but on a per note basis. I tried it with some violin legato passages (admittedly using just NotePerformer) and it sounded better.
Manually doing all that grunt work is basically the only option you have right now if you’re using only Dorico and your sample libraries. This feature request is all about avoiding all that menial labor, since it’s something the computer can do for you, and better than you. I mean, I think we are all aware that we can do all these manual edits, and this feature request is to avoid that nonsense so we can make more music.
Could you make a series of hidden text expressions to accomplish this and then drop them in the various sections as needed?
I don’t think so, but there were two new key commands with 4.3: increase/decrease note start offset by 25 ticks and increase/decrease note end offset by 25 ticks. Select all your legato notes and use these commands to edit quickly. Very useful until we get articulation offset settings in expression maps.
Oh ok. I didn’t know that one. Yeah I guess if it could be included in expression maps that would be the place so you could build in whatever negative delay with each expression as needed.