Were you expecting freely-played music to be auto-magically converted to readable notation? That’s not really going to happen in any of the current sequencer or score publishing programs. They work very much on the principle that if you know what notation you want, they’ll help you get it on paper. Not ‘you play it, we’ll tell you what the notation ought to be’.
It’s coming though. Have a look at a program called ‘Scorecloud’.
Indeed. Now, if only Avid had fired the ProTools developers same time they did the Sibelius ones, Steinberg hired them all to develop a fully-integrated music production/score publishing program without the baggage of Cubase or Sibelius… we’d have to put all our eggs in one basket
Pre-announcing a new product that everybody thinks they want to buy and which replaces one of your existing products can be a recipe for commercial suicide - sales of the existing product suddenly drop to zero while everybody is waiting for the replacement.
That strategy has killed many small tech companies in the past. Of course Dorico isn’t a “direct replacement” for any existing Steinberg products - not in version 1.0, anyway. Hurting your competitors with pre-announcements of products is a different strategy!
I’ve read stuff about Dorico suggesting that it certainly will try to show notation as correct as possible - based on playback. Why wouldn’t any score do that anyway?
I don’t think anyone wants just “integration”; they want the application they work in to handle notation, editing, audio tracks if needed etc… all in one app. So I’m sure they at least have have discussed how Dorico can work together with Cubase, and maybe with other DAWs as well. The question is only how long it takes until it feels like one workflow, because I’m sure almost everybody would prefer to have one file format, one set of key commands, a consistent UI/look across the various editors (piano roll, mixer, score editor) and so on. Logic have been closer to offer such program for some years, but development in the areas important for composers using notation and virtual instruments seems to have more or less stopped several years ago. But who knows what they are working on. Anyway, I think it would be a big mistake to plan the Cubase/Dorico combo as anything less than a result which feels like working on one program with two modules, as opposed to working in a DAW and a score application.
For many years now, I’ve used Cubase or Reaper to host all VSTs and audio. I’ve fed this setup with Midi out from Finale via virtual Midi cables (LoopBe). This works great because all the articulation switching in Finale (“Human Playback”) is Midi data only.
I do hope I’m wrong, but as far as I’ve understood, this scheme will not be possible with Dorico, as Dorico will use a variant of the Cubase Expression Map system. I assume Xmaps ares not only Midi data, and hence will require the VSTs and audio handling to reside within Dorico itself… (?)
No, expression maps are much more powerful and flexible than Finale’s human playback. You can send external midi channel change info, or keyswitches, or program changes, or really any other conceivable way of changing an articulation. It works great in Cubase hosting sounds externally in VE Pro. No reason it shouldn’t work in Dorico, as well.
but it makes me wonder why the Dorico team (apparently) has spent considerable time and effort implementing the Cubase audio engine… If the Dorico Xmap system can travel via virtual Midi cables into Cubase, they could have decided to sell it bundled with Cubase elements…
Why wouldn’t they implement the Cubase audio engine? You’d be nuts not to tap into all that expertise and development when it’s there within the same company.
Personally, I think Cubase and Dorico will link at some point in the future. Quite how and when, I’ve no idea but in strictly business terms it would make sense now for Steinberg to develop two distinct top-end programs, both aimed at different markets as opposed to inflating one major DAW with a next-generation top-end notation program - potentially the best there is - bundled as part of it. That’s selling Dorico way short, missing a bunch of opportunities that Cubase could never realise and, frankly, selling the entire notation software market short.
About integration with Cubase, earlier this week Notion 6 was released. One of the new features is closer integration with Studio One, PreSonus’ DAW sioftware program. See below. I have Notion 6 (but not Studio One), this might be interesting for Dorico as well. Although I’m kind of hoping that 95% of the tweaking could be done within Dorico itself. The ability to tweak just a few basic parameters (velocity, mod wheel, expression, maybe CC 7) and maybe insert an EQ or create buses to enable different reverbs would go a very long way.
I think “closer integration” is a vast understatement. It is very close to seamless. You can start in either product and very easily connect with the other product. Such details like instrument name are carried across automatically. In Notion (the scoring side) you can enable a view option that show the actual MIDI duration of the notes as a shaded extension to the normal noteheads, and you can make that level of MIDI adjustment right there in Notion, having it reflected in the StudioOne platform.
Basically this should be the road map that any developer of any notation product ought to be following if they don’t want to be seen as a glorified version of the 1990 engraving programs.
I decided to go with Cubase Score years ago after trying multiple times Finale and Sibelius in the past, and decided to keep using it every time over years, for this reason precisely : having a powerful scoring program inside a powerful and probably the best DAW in the market.
I’d like to add that my main use of Cubase Pro is … the scoring section !
Nope, I didn’t forget that load of old tripe. I was talking about professional notation programs and Cubase is not in the same universe as either Sibelius or Finale. If Dorico can’t compete with either of those, it is a waste of space.