Except that you do not know how Dorico interacts with the Audio Engine (which handles the VSTs)
2 Likes
One does not need to see the code to be able to assess the the underlying issues. That is what experience teaches.
And pride comes before a fall…
4 Likes
Wow, not helpful.
Ending this conversation now, I’ve asked for the request and tried to explain the reasoning.
You are welcome to make a request (or three), but not to dismiss the amount of work programming the feature will impose upon the Development Team to put your requests at the head of the line.
I might agree with one or two of your requests, but you are not the only person here with years of programming experience, and none of us knows enough about the Dorico back end to say how easy or difficult a new feature will be to program, test, and debug any ripple effects.
6 Likes
Hi. I have some request for additional options for chord symbols.
- The ability to make altered bass lowercase (C/e instead of C/E)
- An option in Appearance of succesive chord symbols with different altered bass notes where the chord letter is replaced by a dash/hyphen. F.ex. (C -/e instead of C /E or C C/E )
- An option to replace Chord letter with dash/hyphen when an added alteration comes to a chord. F.ex. (D -7 instead of D D7)
I have seen these appearances in Danish, Swedish and German publications. Examples can be seen in this thread.
another plea for some way of being able to duplicate the data points in the dynamic lane to a CC. Currently as far as I can see, you can only copy points from one CC lane to another. Another option (ideally we could have both) would be for a third dynamics control in the EM so it would be possible to link in an additional controller. Many libraries will have three basic controllers 1. dynamics/tone 2. instrument volume 3. vibrato. It’s frequently useful to be able to link all three (and sometimes even more than that!) together but there are currently only the two.
It would, for instance, save me quite a bit of time if vibrato (CC20) in my current VSL string quartet was linked directly to dynamics (the correlation is obviously not perfect but is fine as a starting point)
I agree. I would like to see that feature too of course - but I suspected from the start that there are likely some challenges/difficulties/issues involved or they probably wouldn’t have restricted the ability to delete instances to the last slot from the outset (and likewise restricted the ability to reorder the instances, presumably for similar reasons).
We can assume since it is Cubase and Dorico working together (since the audio engine is Cubase) that it is probably effectively two collections, a list of instantiated VST instruments in Dorico and a list of instantiated VST instruments in the audio engine (Cubase), which have to be synchronized. Both programs would have to coordinate the delete operation to ensure it happens in tandem to keep their lists the same, and check to make sure it was successful with a way of backing out of the operation if it did fail.
If something went wrong the delete/renumbering process, you could get a mismatched VST instance list between Dorico and Cubase causing all sorts of havoc. I remember another thread where there was an issue with some kind of communication glitch between the Dorico front end and Cubase back end that caused the mixer faders to appear in different positions in the Dorico front end than they were in reality in the Cubase back end. Something like a mis-communicated renumbering (a glitch in the process somewhere) could conceivably result in similar sorts of issues.
I’m approaching 50 years of experience getting paid to write software, and here’s what I have to say with all the authority that provides:
10 Likes