This YouTube link that I posted below is from a PreSonus presentation 6 years ago…
I personally used the DAW and notation software. I have to say it’s good, but i have been using Cubase for so long that it’s like changing instruments for me. But if you see the level of integration between these 2 softwares Studio One (DAW) and Notion (Notation software) and you’re starting out with Cubase or Dorico, you’d definitely go for for the PreSonus.
This feature request should also be considered as a point of interest for Steinberg. As we committed Steinberg users choose to stick with something that works, others are going for innovation.
Please check the video below, and imagine Cubase and Dorico working side by side in this manner and imagine the fluidity and transparency in working like that. (And that was 6 years ago).
Hope this puts things into perspective to both Steinberg and Steinberg users, old and new.
Thanks for posting this video. We at Steinberg are very well aware of the ways in which Studio One and Notion can be used together, and we are likewise very well aware that many of our customers are looking forward to being able to use Cubase and Dorico in a more integrated way (it was, for example, by some distance the most requested new capability in the recent survey we asked our users to complete).
We have limited resources (i.e. a fixed number of developers, and the same 24 hours in every day as everybody else) so we can only work on a certain number of things at the same time. We have to balance the work we are doing carefully in order to try to deliver functionality that satisfies the needs of our very diverse user base, whose needs are much broader than any single functional area. But we know how important this area is to many of Steinberg’s customers, and we also have some good ideas about how to make progress in these areas. For the time being, all I can do is appeal to your patience and reassure you that we know how important this is to many people.
I’m on the other side of the fence. I have no desire or need for Cubase integration and would rather the team spend their resources just on notation. So, please remember not everyone has the same needs and the team has to balance their resources.
Notion’s notation capabilities are no where near what Dorico can do. It may be more integrated but meh.
Dan I respect the work you and your great team are doing and truly appreciate it as I’m sure many other users are. Dorico in and of itself is phenomenal for music creation. But one can’t forget the DAW side of creating music… I know you and your team are working really hard on it and just stating that it’s still top priority for many of us users.
I’m very curious about the workflow when people talk about “integrating” the two apps.
Cubase already has (admittedly Not Very Good) score writing; and presumably DAW users see Dorico’s audio/midi functions as limited in a similar way.
Is the goal of integration for Dorico to become Cubase’s score-writer; and for Cubase to become Dorico’s audio/midi editor? So the point of integration is using two tools to overcome the weaknesses of each one?
But at the same time, Dorico’s “DAW-like” feature set has been growing, which surely reduces what needs to be done in Cubase? There are regular requests for better handling of audio tracks, looping, and other DAW functionality in Dorico.
If Steinberg makes Cubase a better score-writer, and Dorico a better audio/midi editor, then eventually, won’t each product will become the same thing? On the other hand, being told that you need to drop another $500 for a separate product to get Audio in Dorico or Decent Parts™ from Cubase is not what users want to hear either!
The point being that if you’re used to composing with midi and want to export the score for live players, (which I’m beginning to find more and more on the Steinberg forums that it’s less than 1% of the people here), and want to change a note or rearrange the composition in either Cubase (midi) or Dorico (notation) they will sync the changes instead of going back and forth which kills the vibe of trying to improve the composition.
But it’s completely understandable why you or many other users on this forum can’t understand the importance of this workflow.
I am a user of Cubase and its Score editor.
Integrate, not integrate Dorico… this is the problem!..
The important thing is to update the Score editor!.. Update it to the best techniques of the moment.
Call it Dorico, DoricOne, Cubase Super Score, Dorico Super Cubase, Score eDitor…
PLEASE UPDATE!
Currently we leave the Score editor only to “see” a worthy score on another program… Dorico, MuseScore, Finale, and on with all the rest of the market… IT NO LONGER MAKES SENSE during the work of the Musician Composer!
It would make sense if Cubase and Dorico were integrated! If they spoke the same language… The technologies have been there for years (see first post)…
I prefer to stay in Score editor, in Cubase, because it is “ideally correct”…
Will Dorico and Score editor/Cubase be similar? I hope so!
Thank you, Dan, please carry on with your plans of world score domination.
Some of us realize that the legacy of Cubase depends on it, and that the current primary Steinberg score developer is inching closer to retirement, and whatever roadmap you have of Dorico “integration” with Cubase is by now long-decided (mostly). Please roll ahead full-steam with that roadmap! Crossing fingers for Cubase 14 but I’m realistic about Cubase 15. (Hopefully not longer than that!)
What would be really nice is a little more transparency from time to time. I know you have to carefully watch what you say about future features and timeline, etc., but a little more transparency would be super welcome.
In any case, please keep up the great work, and have a very Happy New Year!
Unfortunately, there is a number of features in Dorico that seem to be little more than an attempt to reinvent the wheel from Cubase. Of course, it’s clear that Dorico needs some basic audio functionality at a minimum. What’s less clear is why the team took Cubase’s audio engine “as is” but did not similarly expropriated other well-developed assets and instead chose to redo them from scratch - often only pared-down versions of them! I’m sure there are valid reasons for this from the immediate “here and now” vantage point (and yes, it would be great to have a bit more transparency!), but it can appear as somewhat inefficient way of doing things when the team is so small.
My personal wish list for Dorico-Cubase integration would be for Steinberg to agree they have branded “core assets”, such as their audio engine, the mixer, the full suite of MIDI functionality and make it a corporate policy to use existing and developed assets where such functionality is needed in another program:
I dream of the day when I could work in Dorico with notation and then open Cubase from inside Dorico as an advanced editor to start recording MIDI and/or audio to what I notated. This way I could use Cubase’s amazing Track Versions, do MIDI comping from its Track Lanes, use Note Expression to edit CC’s per note and have an easier way to store and manage the notated material and its multiple recorded versions. To do this live, track by track, in a large score would be a dream. Likewise, when mixing in Cubase with its groups routing, surround, VCA faders and the like, I would love to be able to open Dorico as an editor from inside Cubase and see any changes in notation, flows or added/removed instruments be available in real time in Cubase.
This approach to Dorico and Cubase as two front-end editors of Steinberg’s underlying assets could also transform how Dorico can be segmented into versions. For example, the Dorico Pro basic version could be available that works with Note Performer but doesn’t include much or anything in the recording and MIDI editing capability and is meant for engravers, teachers or composers for live performers; and Dorico Pro Plus that unlocks full integration with Cubase and Nuendo for game and media composers.
But then I come down to Earth and think perhaps its far too late for this level of integration now - the two programs have diverged too much and a golden opportunity was missed. But still, one can dream.
So, started wondering… just going to put this our there…
What if, whether possible or worth considering, part of the journey could lie in creating an ARA2 or equivalent plugin version of Dorico.? A bit like we have SpectraLayers 10 or Melodyne apps now… I know nothing about programming but understand it would mean this Dorico VST ‘plugin’ interpreting MIDI more strictly. Like the notation editor in Cubase or Reaper too.
Downside being it may all be more trouble than its worth, adding development overhead managing yet another distinct version of the app…
EDIT - @ebrooks has expanded on (technicalities of) this better than I, later in the thread…
As a long-time Notion user, I had always hoped that PreSonus would simply “swap out” their notation editor with Notion (was the main reason I started using Studio One). Unfortunately, I believe they are just letting it die on the vine. I still use Studio One occasionally but since real integration hasn’t materialized and I’ve long-since abandoned Notion for Dorico, my usage of it is minimal.
As for sharing the mixer and MIDI editing capability, I’m fully on-board. I never really understood all the Key editor work in Dorico when those core assets, as you call them, were already present in Cubase.
But, realistically, there are too many things in Dorico that simply don’t translate to a DAW. The whole concept of Layouts and Flows would need to be addressed in Cubase, e.g.
I recently used Ableton and Logic together via Ableton Link, and realized how powerful that could be in the future. I could do all the midi stamping in Ableton’s piano roll, and have Logic’s Alchemy play it in perfect sync. I could record midi and bounce audio both in Logic and Ableton via loop back and virtual midi ports. If Dorico adopt Ableton Link, it could deliver most of what everyone asks for.
The fact of the matter is that Dorico was written on a completely different platform (Qt) to Cubase, meaning that “borrowing” “assets” just isn’t that simple.
“Why was Dorico written in Qt, when Cubase already had its own platform?”, you may ask. Because Dorico’s development team came to Steinberg with something in the region of 100 combined years’ experience working with Qt.
That’s totally fair and an obvious strength of the Dorico team. But I would find it very hard to believe that Steinberg management didn’t think at the time about how the integration between Cubase/Nuendo/Dorico might be handled down the road and didn’t have some kind of a plan.
So let’s say that they did think about it, then, and that there are sound technical and commercial reasons why it hasn’t progressed as far in the direction that you would like.
This thread is veering into “it should be easy for the developers to do this” territory, by assuming what is, or was, technically possible or desirable for the team to do.
I’m fairly sure that Daniel has explained somewhere why it’s not just as simple as building Dorico in Cubase’s image from the outset --given the world-beating levels of “transparency” and candour that he already supplies.
From what I understood from one of his replies that it’s a legal issue with the current developer of the Cubase Score Editor.
PS. Like I said this thread is to push the idea of integration forward, not to accept the developer capabilities. Just a reminder that we paid for this software, it wasn’t given to us for free, so we need to feel that if we keep paying for upgrades that this essential feature will be worked on in the future. Whether it’s essential to you personally or not is not the issue here.
I have no doubt that you are right and that Daniel will, as he has done so many times before, write something a bit more in depth to let users understand and appreciate the particular type of challenge this issue presents.
I guess it was a matter of time until a comment like this. Haven’t noticed anyone here saying anything of the kind, but it sure seems that a tiny number of users on this forum can be far more insecure about certain topics than the developers themselves. Why not just straight up tell people to abandon Dorico and Cubase for Notion and Studio One if they want this damn integration? Just think how peaceful the threads will be.
