Hello,
I use the midi CC, is it possible to rename them for ease of visibility?
Thank you
1 Like
In any case, this automation story is not optimized.
That we cannot rename ok.
But optimizing is possible.
I am from Ableton. Ableton is so optimized for creating automation, that Dorico next to it is primitive.
Personally I was on Sibelius, I switch to Dorico to find a functional system in terms of automation but in fact, it is not at all the case.
I’m pretty frustrated actually. My money ??
-
- "
Welcome lvbeethoven1.
The only thing you can do with CC right now is… write on them (either record with a cc controller or use the pen or line tool). And they do work, as long as the right expression map is used on the instrument and it makes something out of the CCs.
This would be helpful, although it needs to be kept in mind that it is common for different VST’s always to use a given CC number to control the different parameters. This is surely true if the VST’s are from different companies, but it can also be true for the library offerings of a single company.
I use VSL libraries, and their CC assignments for Velocity X-Fade, for example, vary between CC1 and CC2. There are plenty of other examples, just within VSL. Now within a single VSL library there is usually consistency of CC assignment.
All this means that the renaming would have to be specific to each instrument, since instruments can be assigned to various libraries and VSL instruments. Using the example above, if I named CC1 as Velocity X-Fade, then this would be misleading for a library that used CC2 for that function.
I should add that most libraries allow the user to change the CC assignment for most functions, so it would be possible for the user to standardize most CC assignments across libraries. It would take some serious work to do so.
Also, generic expression maps made by a company or user for a particular library would use the library’s default CC assignments. So if you started customizing these assignments, you would have to do all the work yourself of making the corresponding changes to expression maps.
If you are willing to do all the work involved, it can be done, but the amount of work is not trivial for those who work with a large number of orchestral instruments.
1 Like
The purpose of the (generous) 30 day Free Trial is to give you enough time to make these judgements without spending money.
Steinberg doesn’t want to reimburse me.
I bought Cubase and Dorico.
I have to deal with it.
Actually, it would probably be more useful for you to let us help you with your CC problem… After all, Dorico is a very powerful tool and a hell of a precious piece of software that you might appreciate, once you have gotten the grips on it.
Would you share your file? Or a cut down version? We simply need to access the expression maps to guide you there.
1 Like
Thank you Marc, your answer is really nice.
In fact, my problem is very global.
It’s a long story, CC commands are a detail.
First I must say that where I am most agile, it is the score.
Writing on partition.
The problem is, computer writing systems are thought of in a “linear” fashion. We mainly edit the score.
When it comes to automating, controlling sound, controlling background effects, there is virtually nothing.
So from the score, we go to software like Cubase or Ableton, which allow great functions that cannot be found in an editor, the problem is that in these software writing on a port is practically not possible. Cubase offers an editor which is so underdeveloped and Ableton has no editor.
In fact, it’s simple, the writing system once you know it, is 1000 times better than the piano roll.
If, Dorico could be the best of Cubase to merge with the score writing system then I would be the happiest.
So when I come across this medieval CC control system, I am disappointed.
I don’t understand that a designer like Ableton or Steinberg doesn’t face the link surgically.
Both of them mainly think about money, rather than developing a modern solution.
So there you have it, you know part of what I’m angry about between Dorico, Cubase or Ableton.
I will end up inventing my own software.
It’s translated by Google. I’m French in fact
FR___
Merci Marc, votre réponse est vraiment sympa.
En fait, mon problème est très global.
C’est une longue histoire, les commandes CC sont un détail.
En premier je dois dire que là ou je suis le plus agile, c’est la partition.
L’écriture sur partition.
Le problème est que les système d’écriture informatique sont pensés de manière “linéaire”. On édite de la partition principalement.
Quand il s’agit d’automatiser, de controler le son, de controler des effets en arrière plan, il n’y a rien pour ainsi dire.
Ainsi de la partition, on passe à des logiciel comme Cubase ou Ableton, qui permettent des fonctions génial qu’on ne retrouve pas dans un éditeur, le problème c’est que dans ces logiciel écrire sur une porté n’est pratiquement pas possible. Cubase offre un editeur mais qui est tellement peu développer et Ableton n’a aucune éditeur.
En fait, c’est simple, le système d’écriture une fois qu’on le connait, est 1000 fois mieux que le piano roll.
Si, Dorico pouvait etre le meilleur de Cubase fusionner avec le système d’écriture sur partition alors je serais le plus heureux.
Donc quand je tombe sur ce sytème de commande CC digne du moyen âge, je suis déçu.
Je ne comprends pas qu’un concepteur comme Ableton ou Steinberg ne face pas le lien de manière chirurgical.
L’un comme l’autre pense surtout à l’argent, plutôt qu’a développer une solution moderne.
VoilĂ , bref, vous savez une partie de ce pourquoi je rage entre Dorico, Cubase ou Ableton.
Je vais finir par inventer mon propre logiciel.
C’est traduit par Google. Je suis française en fait
Perhaps this is why some folks start a piece in a notation program like Dorico and then transport it to a program like Cubase to massage the sounds–or do the reverse depending on their preferred workflow…
Je suis Français également — j’ai créé le groupe des utilisateurs francophones de Dorico sur Facebook, vous y êtes la bienvenue.
Je pense que vous pourriez être surprise par Dorico, puisque j’ai l’impression que c’est la volonté de l’équipe de développement d’aller dans le sens que vous décrivez. L’effort principal est porté sur la qualité de gravure, mais le côté play-back est également développé. En revanche, on ne peut pas leur reprocher de passer par un piano-roll ou des CCs… car les instruments existants fonctionnent ainsi. C’est un peu le serpent qui se mord la queue : les DAWs se sont développés pour permettre l’utilisation des sampleurs avec les paramètres accessibles, les librairies se sont développées en fonction des gens qui les utilisaient (via des DAWs et ces paramètres) et maintenant, il y a un parc disponible qu’on ne peut pas négliger. Je vois mal un éditeur de logiciels partant de zéro.
I also created the group of French users of Dorico on Facebook, you are welcome.
I think you might be surprised by Dorico, since I feel like it’s the will of the development team to go in the direction you’re describing. The main effort is focused on the quality of engraving, but the playback side is also developed. On the other hand, we cannot blame them for going through a piano roll or CCs… because the existing instruments work in this way. It’s kind of the snake that bites its tail: DAWs have grown to allow samplers to use with accessible parameters, bookstores have developed according to the people who used them (via DAWs and these parameters) and now there is a park available that cannot be ignored. I can’t see a software publisher starting from scratch.
1 Like
Merci Marc pour le groupe Facebook (édit: je viens de le trouver, c’est bon ;)) , si vous me donner le nom, je viendrais avec grand plaisir :).
J’espère être surpris par Dorico, vraiment cette jonction entre éditeur et… comment appeler ça ?
Cubase/Ableton est, je pense super important.
La partition est d’une précision est d’une ergonomie remarquable. Tandis que Cubase ou Ableton présente des fonctions complémentaire incroyables, mais le talon d’Achille ? Aucun ne centralise la partition comme système principal. A la place ? Le piano roll.
Le piano roll ??? C’est quoi ce truc, quand on veut analyser le contrepoint, l’harmonie, ou encore noter des informations autour d’une porté ? Rien. Je ne sais pas pour Cubase… je sors d’Ableton.
Pour moi, “La partition devrait être au centre du processus de création.” C’est un outil tellement puissant et précis… et en complémentarité tout ce que propose Cubase/Ableton derrière.
Merci Encore Marc 
ravis de vous savoir français
Thank you Marc for the Facebook group (edited: I just found it, it’s okay ;)) , if you give me the name, I would come with great pleasure :).
I hope I’m surprised by Dorico, really this junction between publisher and… what do I call it?
Cubase/Ableton is, I think it’s super important.
The partition is of precision is of remarkable ergonomics. While Cubase or Ableton has incredible complementary functions, but the Achilles’ heel? None centralizes partition as the main system. Instead? The piano roll.
The piano roll??? What is this thing, when you want to analyze the counterpoint, the harmony, or even to write information about a wear? Nothing. I don’t know about Cubase… I’m getting out of Ableton.
For me, “Partition should be at the center of the creative process.” It is such a powerful and precise tool … and complementary to everything that Cubase/Ableton proposes behind it.
Thank you again Marc:slight-smile: thrilled to know you French:slight-smile:
1 Like