This is what I asked you, Daniel

Good morning, Daniel & S-team, this is what we talked about in one of my threads before the 1.0.10 update (10 Requests, point 5). The ability to have Indented systems/staves both from the right-left to change their width in just one flow.

Lucky I own Sibelius, I guess…at least now I can do it with the new 8.5 update: ¨Example showing how a snippet of music can now be shown with an extra small staff that’s independent of the stave above.¨(Picture & link attached)

  • ¨The new control of the staff sizes allows you to change individual bars, whole systems of one or more instruments, large passages of music, or entire pages at a time¨

By the way, this 8.5 looks like a direct inspiration from Dorico…Siberico 8.5.

If their next thing is to implement (aka to copy) native free time and extended printing options…uff…what are you gonna sell?

The way I see it, you should start to focus your time with Play Mode, to make it perfect. Perfect Rewire, perfect VST Expression Maps, perfect Modulation & Expression Lanes(like the one of the making of video_…I bought Dorico because of that video lane, that’s the big deal to me.

Play Mode it’s very attractive, that DAW look sells because it’s really useful and 2016. What old & new school composers need. Not that PetrucciDorico 17th Century/whatever thing…that’s OK, but it´s an elitist niche, not a best-seller.

As this Sib8.5 update demonstrates, Avid can implement very fast your engraving & design concepts. Avid can STEAL your ideas very fast. But can they make a proper Play Mode?

It’s up to you. I can afford to lose the 279€ of my Dorico dissapointment of fighting workarounds, missing chords, no drums, no 4 lines-percussion, no Rewire, bugs and no Midi Lanes. What can you afford to lose?

Un saludo,


I think … and, heck - HOPE that Dorico DARE to stay on their AMAZING release of an (extremely modern) .app, that ACTUALLY is INTENDED foremost to deliver exactly for those whacky weirdos, working in this mentioned niche!!
Steinberg / Dorico do something that is SO outrageously daring, in 2016, that I WILL pay for this program - no matter if I will use it or not!! :smiley:

When was the last time Steinberg DARED to support something like this?!?!

It’s NOT (only) about selling…
(scoring-programms hardly ever WILL be… I think).

I’d prefer to see the Dorico Team stay the course to implement their original design before worrying about every little nervous twitch of Sibelius or Finale.

I see the team slowly, methodically, meticulously, building an incredible program, brick by brick. Rome wasn’t built in a day. Rushed features are like building on sand. These guys are laying a foundation so thick and solid it will be able to support almost anything as time goes by.

I’m certain the Steinberg team could implement some wanted features very rapidly - but at what cost? Rushed code invites problems. They want to do it right. Like anything else in life…

Good things come to those who wait. :smiley:

The Sibelius team have been improving stave size options for well before Dorico appeared. I suspect this is actually in response to user requests and Finale’s capabilities in this area. I think here are some features of Dorico that could have equivalent features in Sibelius but I think there are other significant ones that would be next to impossible to port over without an complete rewrite of the entire program. The handling duration (including of course tuplets), flows and DTP structure, GUI, and I suspect engraving rules are all significantly different and these basically outclass both Sibelius and Finale.

I also think that Daniel and the team are right to target long term stability and developmental potential over short term fixes. There are many features that Sibelius has that I really miss in Dorico (particularly [in order of importance] 1st and 2nd time endings, filters, plugins and guitar chords) but I would rather wait for really well developed code than run into problems later.

There’s been a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that a demo page produced in Sibelius looks rather like one produced in Dorico. The underlying structure seems rather different ( ‘Flows’ ARE more than a clever implementation of ‘Hide Empty Staves’ I think?)

A similar criticism has been aimed at the redesigned Inspector. It has been ‘stolen’ from MuseScore. This seems based on them both using the currently-trendy grey-on-grey colour scheme (dark schemes are SO last-year) and on both of them showing signs of having been constructed in qt5.