Hi there,
I wonder where staccato is in the Score Editor? Although the notes (imported from a Dorico project) contain staccato symbols, Cubase won’t trigger the corresponding key switches as if it doesn’t recognize this technique. Moreover, staccato is not even an option on the articulations String tab. I have to switch to the Key Editor and input dots on the Staccato lane.
Cubase Pro 14.0.20, Win 11/64 bit, Amadeus Symphonic Orchestra
For some reason the staccato option is not included in the left-side dropdown for articulation. BUG?
But under the transport panel in your picture there is a tool-panel where the staccato (point) option is available. If you don’t see it, select the cogwheel in the upper right side of the window and the ‘articulation’.
It isn’t a bug. Staccato isn’t in the playing techniques panel because it isn’t a playing technique. It is an articulation. In Dorico (which this is based on) it is similarly in the articulations panel instead of the playing techniques panel. The articulations panel is at the top on one of the toolbars, I believe obscured by the floating transport panel in the screenshot above.
It won’t trigger the keyswitches. The import does not handle any keyswitches, it just brings the notes in. You’ll have to manually configure expression maps for each track on the Cubase side and go through the articulations lane in the piano roll and add the correct articulation information for every note, outside of the score editor, to hear a difference.
Thanks, Buer!
I wonder why legato and detache, the essential articulations, are not present in this articulations panel?
Thanks, mducharme!
Yeah, my Transport panel has been covering the Articulations panel. 
How come detache is in the Techniques panel and not in the Articulations panel? Why are there no legato and non-legato (or detache) articulations?
I did load the VST’s expression map that contains staccato and the rest of essential articulations. I’m just wondering why I have to “go through the articulations lane” and rewrite these articulations? Why can’t Cubase understand the original MIDI and scoring data imported from Dorico? Is their integration limited?
Because there are only 8 things called “articulations” in Dorico, it is a fixed list of the following:
That is the list of eight articulations, and there is unlikely to be anything new added there I should think. Most other things are in either Playing Techniques or Ornaments. This is the way it always was in Dorico. There are many different reasons they are split in this way I believe, partially because there would be too many things to put them all together, but also partially how they work. Some are separate symbols that can be free floating where you might want to move them left or right (most playing techniques would fall into this category), others are properties of notes (think a staccato dot, you don’t want to move it left or right usually), other things attach to multiple notes (arpeggiation lines or glissandi).
I’m not sure what you’re looking for regarding the legato vs non-legato. You might find playing techniques for such a purpose, but with most instruments notes under a slur are legato while notes not under a slur are non-legato, so you don’t usually have to specify “legato” or “non-legato” on a score or part for live musicians since he presence of absence of slurs communicates this.
EDIT: Something that might be confusing you is that Cubase expression maps by chance have always used the same term “articulation” but with a very different meaning and context. Dorico uses a different definition of what “articulation” means (only one of those eight I listed above, and not specific to playback) and what are called “articulations” in Cubase Expression maps are called “Playback techniques” in Dorico. There’s no confusion in Dorico because what Cubase has long called “articulations” are called Playback Techniques there, so they were free to use the term “articulations” differently within Dorico, but now there is potentially some confusion in Cubase because the Cubase Expression Maps use the same word “articulations” with a meaning very different to the “articulations” in the Score Editor.
The import currently gets the notes only and the appearance of everything on the score page and basically nothing else. You don’t get playback of any articulations or most dynamics unless you re-add everything in the articulations lane in the key editor and rewrite your CC1/CC11 lanes.
I suspect the cause of the current situation is that most of the MIDI data is likely not currently saved with the Dorico project file format. They’ve never explained this specifically, but it stands to reason because the majority of the detailed MIDI could easily be dynamically constructed on the fly by Dorico itself by taking the score and notes and running it all through the expression maps which are saved with the file. An example would be a crescendo driven entirely by dynamic markings in a Dorico score and hairpins - p<f. This would result in some kind of CC automation ramp like CC1 or CC11 or maybe key velocity depending on the instrument, but this is “dynamic” automation that the user did not manually add themselves by adding dots or lines on the CC1 or CC11 lanes in Dorico. As far as Dorico is concerned, this dynamic MIDI probably doesn’t need to be saved with the file and only needs to be temporarily stored in RAM, because Dorico itself is easily able to take the score upon opening the file, run it through the expression maps, and generate the dynamic MIDI itself instantly (and it will be the same as the old dynamic MIDI).
This gives a problem when Cubase opens the score, because it doesn’t understand Dorico expression maps (it uses its own maps format that is very different) and so it can’t generate this missing data at the moment. So aside from the appearance of the score on the page which is largely preserved, in terms of playback you end up getting only the notes and maybe the velocities, and losing all dynamic MIDI like keyswitches and dynamic CC lane contents like CC1/CC11 because those were not likely saved in the Dorico project file to begin with since Dorico can so easily regenerate that (but Cubase currently cannot).
The other way of going from Dorico to Cubase is to use MIDI export and import. Using MIDI you will preserve all keyswitches and CC data and other performance details, but the visual appearance of the score on the page in the Score Editor will not be preserved. Depending on what your goal is, this may not be a problem.
Unfortunately at the moment, it seems like you have to choose between either preserving the appearance and losing most of the playback information (with the new Dorico project import), or preserving the playback information and losing most of the appearance (with MIDI).
You can see more information in this thread: Expressions maps still doesn’t appears in 14.0.20
This is pretty much it. Dorico and Cubase have completely different playback models. We hope, over time, to bring parts of them closer together, but this is a huge job.
Thanks for your meticulous explanation, mducharme!
I usually transfer the score from Dorico to Cubase (via MIDI export), replace the default VSTs (HSO by some more advanced Kontakt-compatible libraries) and continue editing velocities so that the output audio can sound less robotic. I can’t say that MIDI export preserves articulations. I don’t use my favorite Kontakt libraries in Dorico because Dorico can be really temperamental when arranging playback through them (as opposed to Cubase, which has proven to be far more stable and reliable in that respect). Could this loss (in original articulations) be attributed to that switch between the VSTs? How could I streamline my production, which currently can be described as follows:
I create a score in Dorico, using the default instruments (HSO). I pay a lot of attention to articulations and techniques, but not so much to dynamics as I leave this part to Cubase. I export the MIDI file, export the pdf of the score, and brace myself for the drag of practically re-writing articulations in the Score editor and drawing curves in the Key editor to improve rather robotic dynamics.
No doubt! Dorico (its creators, to be precise) has advanced tremendously. I believe I’ll witness the platform managed by AI that will be able to take the score, analyze any VST library, assign all the articulations/techniques to the corresponding VST files; even create the missing articulations by modifying the available samples (!); evaluate the overall dynamics of the piece and adjust the dynamics of each each instrument/group the way a human conductor does. Not to mention voice control. I can imagine myself listening to the rendered audio file and giving voice instructions to Dorico 55 while sipping tea on the front porch… 
Yes. Using HSO in Dorico means that the keyswitches for HSO will be included in the MIDI export from Dorico, which are completely the wrong keyswitches for libraries that are not HSO because there is no standardization of keyswitches across libraries from different vendors. If they do fall into the same keyswitch range, it would be the wrong keyswitches chosen - it might be a staccato passage and it is triggering pizzicato or something. If the keyswitch range is different, it won’t do anything - you’ll just see the keyswitches added by Dorico as weird extra notes in the piano roll that don’t do anything and are out of range.
If instead of HSO you use your final libraries in Dorico with correct expression maps, then the keyswitches for those libraries will be triggered by Dorico and included in the MIDI export as notes. Then when you export MIDI from Dorico and bring that MIDI into Cubase, and load up the same instruments and hit play, all of the articulations will be correctly triggered because the keyswitches will be there in the correct spots. (Keep in mind they don’t show up as “expression map entries” in Cubase but simply keyswitch notes in the piano roll - but still they trigger the correct playback which is the important thing.)
I do this all the time but I use the same libraries in Dorico that I use in Cubase instead of using the built in HSO. Then I’m starting from playback in Cubase that is identical to how it was sounding in Dorico.
Hello @PaulWalmsley and @paulxoro,
Well @PaulWalmsley, I completely understand the @paulxoro 's confusion about how the things are organized in Cubase’s Score Editor. Especially for those of use who are using both Dorico and Cubase.
The Cubase’s Score Editor just reminds for Dorico, but still it’s organized in a completely different way, which wasn’t a good decision at all.
If it’s going to replicate Dorico, then it should be designed, completely after Dorico.
With the panels and tools exactly as they are placed in Dorico. I have even suggested the Score Editor to become a separate Mode in Cubase, with it’s own Key Commands, that are the same as in Dorico.
The familiarity of the UI and the UX are of key importance to attract more Cubase users to Dorico, and vice versa!
I was one of those who were waiting for the new, Dorico-style, Score Editor in Cubase.
Well, as a long time Dorico user I find it still useless. Why? Because it forces me to learn one more workflow.
Let separate Dorico, Cubase and the Score Editor into 3 different pieces of software.
I don’t understand the reason why both teams decided to preserve many things from the previous Score Editor, which was the most terrible on the market?!
Cubase, at all, is not meant to be used as primary notation software, so there is no good enough arguments behind the current Score Editor design. Would be far better if you make it exactly as it is in Dorico. That way would be much easier for the Cubase users to adopt Dorico, and for the Dorico users to work with the Score Editor.
The current slogan would be: “Why we should make your life easier, since we could make it harder?!”
Please, consider, implementing the Dorico’s UI, properly in Cubase’s Score Editor, to be organized the same way!
Best regards,
Thurisaz
@thurisaz They already said before that they can’t give the score editor its own separate key commands because the custom framework Cubase is written with (not Qt like Dorico) has limitations around key commands where they can only exist globally. I’m sure extending the framework to support key commands that are not global is a non-trivial job that risks breaking a lot of things. And Cubase is its own program with its own user experience and look and feel that is different from Dorico’s, so you can’t very well suddenly bring the Dorico UI over without things feeling a bit all over the place.
Also, you’ve posted this same thing essentially previously, at least once if not twice, because I recall reading it before. You’ve said your piece - give the developers room and time to do things. For quite a few years now, every time there is a new release of Dorico or anything, you are always appearing to tell them exactly how the new release falls short of your expectations and provide usually several long posts with itemized lists of what is missing, with exactly what you feel they should have done instead. It gets a bit tiresome, honestly…
