Now it stays clear and fun! 
Bertram
I notice that you use VSL libraries. In Vienna instruments you can use the speed control to trigger different samples. Why do you prefer the conditions rule - note length instead?
Sorry, its the wrong place here.
greeting
Bertram
I think that is the difference between playing live (perf legato over speed controller) and playing the music you have written down, where the first and all subsequent note lengths are already known. It works well in Dorico, but I still donât know which is better in the end.
greeting
Bertram
Just to echo the titular sentiment of this thread, I continue to be impressed/amazed at the Dorico teamâs attention and devotion to quality playback. Itâs gotten to the point that they have exceeded my expectations for this aspect of the application. I didnât see coming the support for mapping based on note duration, which has significantly improved the playback of my Spitfire woodwind and brass sections. Super cool! 
Now, if I can just figure out how to keep my strings from occasionally beginning too softly when I hit the play button⊠gotta figure out which values to apply to the âInitâ condition.
Making xmaps has become much easier with 3.5.
What I still canât understand fully, is how exclusion groups work. But since there is the Auto button, I just trust Dorico for doing it for me!
Paolo
A basic entry is added to the current list of play techniques. However, if this entry is in an exclusion group with another entry that already exists in the current list, this will be replaced by the new entry so that the new entry remains the only one of the two in the current list of play techniques. This is how it works - as I understood it.
greeting
Bertram
Yes, this is the basis of how xmaps work. But there is a lot more, when starting to have to decide how to group techniques together â from choosing the categories, to the group to which each techniques pertain.
The new Auto feature creates some basic groups, that are a hint on how the system should work.
Paolo
Mutual Exclusion Groups: The General principles are pretty simple. If two types of playing technique cannot happen together then they go in the same group. The bowing style canât be arco and pizz at the same time. You canât play âsenza vibratoâ and âcon vibratoâ at the same time. You canât have âstraight muteâ and âcup muteâ at the same time. So thereâs an exclusion group with each of these (eg primary brass contains straight mute, cup mute, harmonic mute, etc). Dorico can create the groups automatically for playing techniques that are in the default library.
On the other hand, consider âarcoâ, âcon sordâ, âcon vibratoâ. These are all independent; you can play arco with or without a mute, and with or without vibrato, so you donât put them in the same group.
Another way of thinking of mutual exclusions is that it defines what happens when the player encounters a new playing technique in the score. If a brass player is playing with a straight mute and then sees âcup muteâ, then they know that this replaces the straight mute, but it doesnât replace âcon vibratoâ, âlegatoâ, etc.
You shouldnât need to worry about Exclusion Groups at all unless you are doing one of a few things:
- Doricoâs default groups arenât doing the right thing for you, eg because you have defined a new bowing technique that isnât in the Primary String group
- Youâve created some custom playing techniques, and Dorico needs to know that âScratch back of violinâ and âScratch front of violinâ canât occur at the same time, so need to be in a group.
The âAutoâ button will deal with this second case for most simple cases, but if you have a more complex setup where you have also defined switches for multiple combations (eg âScratch back of violin + legatoâ) then Dorico wonât be able to work out the correct groups.
Paul, very useful clarifications, thank you!
Paolo
Ditto. Best description Iâve seen. I linked to it in my Dorico Reference Word document.
1 Like
Iâm glad youâve found it useful - Iâve now added to the sticky Expression Maps thread
Sorry double post 
Bertram
This is great: With the help of the new âAdd-Onâ switch in the âX-Mapâ, a playback technique that is defined as an âattribute without durationâ can still be extended in the text of the score
without affecting the subsequent techniques⊠
For the future I would like to have a special class for these âplayback techniquesâ in addition to the existing âplay techniquesâ, which depend on the X-Map, only have a text symbol for the âPop overâ window, so that there only those that are actually supported by the current âX-Mapâ of the instrument are listed and can be filtered separately to hide in the notationâŠ
greeting
Bertram
Das ist groĂartig: Mit Hilfe des neuen âAdd-Onâ -Schalters in der âX-Mapâ kann eine Wiedergabetechnik, die als âAttribut ohne Dauerâ definiert ist, im Text der Partitur noch erweitert werden
ohne die nachfolgenden Techniken zu beeinflussen.
FĂŒr die Zukunft wĂŒnsche ich mir vieleicht eine spezielle Klasse fĂŒr diese âPlaybacktechnikenâ neben den vorhandenen âPlaytechnikenâ, die in AbhĂ€nigkeit zur X-Map stehen, nur ein Text-Symbol fĂŒr das âPop overâ-Fenster haben, so dass dort nur die jeweils von der aktuellen âX-Mapâ des Instrumentes auch wirklich unterstĂŒtzen gelistet werden und gesondert zum Ausblenden in der Notation gefiltert werden können.
GruĂ
Bertram
A problem with the speed control is that it makes it decision based on the real time transition from the previous note. So at an extreme, letâs say you have an instrument that uses staccato for fast notes and a sustain for slow notes. If you had 4 sixteenths going to a whole note then Vienna will use the last sixteenth note to decide and play a staccato instead of the whole note. With Doricoâs condition rules it will analyze before playback starts and put in the appropriate switches for the sixteenths and whole note.
⊠which is one reason why NotePerformer âlooks aheadâ by having a playback latency of 1 second.
I fully agree however I have encountered kind of bug or perhaps an overlook that I would search any help here. Several of my libraries have separate sets for chosen articulations, like f.e.âsus-shortâ, âlegatoâ or âeffectsâ. Within these sets the articulations are switched by key switches and it works perfect, but each of the sets requires individual channel, so the line containing marcato notes followed by legato notes and then some effects requires changing channels (in expression map it is âchannel switchâ) from 1 with sus-short to 2 with legatos and 3 with effects. My problem is with the effectiveness of channel switching. It does not work as it should, because the switching happens on the note after the note where it is placed. Example: if I play 4 notes legato (samples from channel 2) and then 3 notes staccato (samples from channel 1), the first staccato note is still played legato. Of course, there is a workaround putting ânat.â over the 4th legato note or dividing the last legato note in two, putting ânat.â over the second note and then adding a tie. It results in note being back to its previous value with ânat.â still in the previous place. But that is an unnecessary gymnastics that should not happen. From what I observed the articulation requiring channel switch should be executed âat the beginning of the noteâ while the situation suggests it is executed once the note has actually begun, so for this note the previous articulation is still valid.
If anyone has a suggestion or solution better than the ones I have just used your help will be greatly appreciated.
Witold
Can you cook up a simple example with a single instrument and a couple of bars that demonstrates this problem, Witold, so we can look into it further?
Hi,please excuse the question: Are you talking about an (absolute or relative) channel change and donât you mean a program change?
greeting
Bertram