I took the initiative to create a poll. If the team of Dorico agrees, you can give your answers, otherwise I can also give up …
I know that such a software is never finished, but today to be able to use in minima a musical notation software , it is necessary to have certain basics features.
Dorico has already many of these, maybe even more, and I know that we cannot have everything at once.
But “to break” sibelius or finale and work completely on Dorico, a few are still missing.
The necessary functions are not the same for all, and it is possible that I forgot some, that is why I made this poll
now it’s closed :
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I’ll give you the response only if they’re more than 10 !!!
Tomboul, you don’t need to create a poll to let us know which features you all think we should add to Dorico. We’re all quite aware of which features we need to add. I don’t know whether you are aware of it, but all of us on the development team are not only musicians ourselves, but nearly all of us also worked for more than a combined 100 years on another well-known scoring program. We are very well aware of what features need to be added, and we have a plan to add them as quickly as we can. Making lists and voting on them won’t make it possible for us to add them any faster, I’m afraid.
Daniel, If dorico was release with the basic features from the beginning, I would never have made this poll …
i have read many post on this forum and I tried to make a synthesis of what most of user need …
just for help …
I think most of us in this community mostly know the situation.
I for one am very grateful that Steinberg is taking this big expensive risk, with these brilliant software designers and engineers, and if I am frustrated with anything it’s simply reality: that something as vast as this programme can’t be done and done right in an accelerated time frame; while recognizing that, as a company, they had to release something to make the quality and potential of their product clear.
It seems to me that there are probably more than a few musicians in the upper echelons of Steinberg too, who would have liked it all, all at once, but had to make a decision to release when there were still some basic things wanting–which we only regard as basic because other older software spent decades on their version–in order to reassure people out here that it really existed, and could do good work already.
As it is I use it all the time, and it saves me a lot of time and frustration, already doing what I’ve wanted notation software to do for many years. As currently constituted it certainly isn’t for every composer/arranger/copyist/educator yet, but most of us still have the old software, if we really need to do those other things some of the time (personally i tend to put off doing those other things because I am becoming very fond of the Dorico environment and don’t want to confuse it by reviving Sibelius reflexes). I used to want a girlfriend to be everything to me. That’s not a happy road to tread j
I used to want a girlfriend to be everything to me
Girls are not like objects
cars are objects and If you have no headlights on your car you can driving in the daytime but not at night. At the moment, Dorico is almost like that …
I think it’s very unhelpful to talk about “basic features”, because each individual user has a different set of requirements. The truly basic features are things like note input, printing, playback, copying and pasting, importing and exporting, etc., and being able to handle a decent cross-section of conventional music notation. Dorico most certainly possesses all of the necessary basic features by that more reasonable measure.
Of course it would have been better if Dorico had more features sooner. But only if we had been able to implement those features to a professional level, such that using them in Dorico offers some advantages over using your existing program. We are committed to building a high-quality, next-generation tool for working with music notation. The team I am lucky enough to work with is amazingly good, and we have already built something that in many ways is measurably superior to its main competition, but we cannot work miracles.
You are welcome to feel however you feel about your purchase of Dorico at this stage, and you are also welcome to express those feelings here on our forum. Of course I and the rest of the team want you to be happy using the software. But I would prefer to expend my energy on helping the team to build the features you want, rather than endlessly responding to the same stuff posted over and over again by a tiny fraction of our user base. Thank you for supporting our efforts by purchasing our software at an early stage in its life. Now please let us get on with building the features you are asking for, without having to defend ourselves daily here on the forum.
Daniel, if you dont have CODA, SEGNO, 1st ending and 2nd ending, i should have to write them with a pencil after printing score ?
That’s one of the basic feature i talk about !
So i see that the team is not agree with my poll, i’m sorry …
but i have already 7 answers
I personally can get along without coda and segno signs just fine in the music I am writing with Dorico, but I am of course just one user, and you very well know that we plan to add support for repeats just as soon as we can.
You can of course run your poll, but it won’t affect our roadmap or our current set of priorities.
tomboul, admittedly I’m not a professional - but I looked at your poll and can manage without all of the listed features for the moment, given what’s already included and the time I’m saving by using Dorico.
Daniel, thank you so much to have answered with so much patience and simplicity
You can of course run your poll, but it won’t affect our roadmap or our current set of priorities.
so i will close this poll …
what was basic feature that i proposed :
filter selection, with preset and avanced feature
repeats (coda, segno, 1st ending, 2nd etc …)
chords (just have to write, recognized is not absolutely necessary)
correct import from xml, especially drum (coming from sibelius or final)
Drum notation
instrument configuration (transposition, key)
cue note
An exhaustive documentation
I personally can get along without coda and segno signs just fine in the music I am writing with Dorico, but I am of course just one user, and you very well know that we plan to add support for repeats just as soon as we can.
I have approximately 50 musicians who are going to play my scores, they can’t turn pages while playing, they playing on second line (like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_line_(parades) )…
I write one or two arrangements per week …
I know that there are many users out there for whom repeats, and chord symbols, and unpitched percussion, and keyboard pedaling, and cues, and many other things besides are absolutely essential features. That’s why we’re either working on them already or have concrete plans to work on them in the coming months. All we ask is that you are patient while we get on with building them. It will be worth the wait!
Hey Daniel, I enjoy watching as it develops from the ground up, I find it exciting, and I have the greatest confidence in the direction that this is taking. Can’t wait for these new features as they come. Toi, toi, toi…
“Of course I and the rest of the team want you to be happy using the software. But I would prefer to expend my energy on helping the team to build the features you want, rather than endlessly responding to the same stuff posted over and over again by a tiny fraction of our user base.”
Hear, hear.
Often, it’s the aggrieved tone of the “tiny fraction” that I find unacceptable. “I expected better… I was misled… This is a beta program…” etc, etc.
There is too much belief in entitlement around these days - in life generally, probably.
I’m sure the Steinberg team is grown-up enough to ignore it.
j