Improvements for Expression Maps

This is my first post and, though I have searched the web, maybe I didn’t search well. But I think this proposal hasn’t been made yet.

First of all, I am a “classical” composer and the PianoRoll is a bit odd for me, but I’m getting used to it.

I have notice that the Expression Maps are not as intuitive as they could be and that they have a slow workflow. I have some suggestions.

  • Articulations: It would be useful to change completely the layout in the MIDI editor and make it similar to Sibelius or Dorico. This means the following:
  1. The ability to put several articulations at the same time (the groups are inefficient, I think). For instance, combine a sustain articulation with an accent one, in order to have an accented sustain. Now you can do it, but the way I suggest would be faster.
  2. A drag-and-drop system for articulations. You have a list of articulations and then you drag one from the list and drop it to the lane (instead of having a huge lane with all the articulations). In order to support the ability to put two articulations at the same time, every time you drop an articulation in the lane, a new lane appears. If you drop an articulation in the same lane, then a third appears and so on (until four or five). Now this is made using groups, but I think this way would be more intuitive, as it is more similar to the notation programs like Sibelius or Dorico.

And I also think that the Expression Maps editor itself should be remade so as to improve its workflow. Currently it feels slower than it should and, at least, not very much intuitive. Maybe it’s my fault, of course, but I haven’t found a proper tutorial for this feature, which could be a wondrows feature if improved.

Of course, I know these are quite huge changes and maybe they aren’t worth the effort. But I though I should suggest them.

Thank you.

+1 I agree with your points. They are absolutely worth the effort, since Cubase is used by many composers. Using expression with Cubase is clunky and could be far more efficient and faster with workflow.

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but people like -us- who compose with Cubase are the minority. The assumption appears to be that if we wish to use EMs we’ll put in the time and suck it up. They haven’t improved on EMs or NE in YEARS.

And yes, that sucks.

Yes, I’ve seen that the Expression Maps have been the same since Cubase 6 or 7, more or less.

Now I don’t use them because they are counter intuitive and they have a lot of innecessary limitations.

It’s a shame they won’t improve them :frowning:

Yeah, but the good news… if you do suck it up… they are time savers. It’s largely PRIDE that keeps us from doing that. (At least it is for me.) I sooooooooooooooooooo resent the fact that they won’t do the right thing.

Expression maps is one of the best innovation of Cubase (congratulations for that)… but it 's a time consuming process to create one. I suppose it could be possible to simplify… For example i’m not convince that it’s necessary to write a name (in the list af command) and an articulation name for it … Only one name (ex : articulations) could be suffisant… i my opinion. I suppose it’s also possible to increment automatically some parameters when we add articulations (ex1 : if the first keyswtich is c*2…we could imagine that the second one is c#-2 and so on…). Finally, i’m not convinced by the interest of “group”…