Maybe with the “Sonar” reboot there will be renewed discussion with the chap who previously offered to have his notation app included in software. I even bought it but I’m not at my PC and can’t remember what it was called.

I wish the notation was more precise and easier to use. I usually write in Overture (a previous version was part of Cakewalk many years ago) then import in to Sonar for mixing.

I would love to see a good notation feature also. I start out in the last version of Master Tracks from 2005, then export the midi into Sonar. But if Sonar is going to be subscription, then it doesn't matter, I won't go for it.

marled

cparmerlee

Jimbo 88

cparmerlee
 There is no inherent reason why the notation function must be embedded in the DAW. 

I respectfully disagree...the notation function was there long before audio functions.  I've been making the case for years that notation was there before the DAW and notation will still be around after the DAW is gone.  Staying current with Notation would insure the software would always be current and have a market...thus more profitable. Can I get an AMEN!

It makes no difference where the function is in code.  What matters is how seamless it is to the user.  There is no reason a separate notation package cannot be highly seamless with the DAW.  After all, this is the kind of thing Rewire has done over the years.  Presonus is going that route and it seems to have some merit, although much higher integration is needed in that case.

Sorry, but I do not at all agree to this! As long as you think of a simple notation paralleled to the MIDI note values there is no problem (only the MIDI has to be saved). As soon as the user makes changes to the notation by hand not reflected in the MIDI data (short duration values, bindings, heavy swing, ...), these changes have to be saved. Thus it is more complicated to synchronize saving when the function is not integrated!

It seems to me that Bandlab might have a motivation to have a notation module that would work with ALL of their tools, not just the back-end DAW.  Yes, synchronization is part of the challenge.

Darn, just deleted my own post again, as I was editing it. Gotta stop doing that. Anyway, My hope is that whatever notation is included in the software, that it be seamless. Right now, I make revisions in staff view, and that's it, they are immediately reflected in the midi. I work on my piece in Sonar, then export the midi to Notion, to do an actual score. (Yes, I work backwards. I need the superior sound of a DAW to help with my orchestration. The sound in notation software is just not good enough). So, either keep but improve Staff View (possibly a Herculean task); or integrate another notation software. But make it seamless! Not too tall an order, right? ()

michael diemer
Right now, I make revisions in staff view, and that's it, they are immediately reflected in the midi. I work on my piece in Sonar, then export the midi to Notion, to do an actual score... So, either keep but improve Staff View (possibly a Herculean task); or integrate another notation software. But make it seamless! Not too tall an order, right? ()

Yes, I agree 100%.  Changes made in one place should immediately be reflected in the other views, regardless whether it is one product or two.  Synchronizing two products is probably (initially) harder than coding it all in one place.  But I think the modular approach is the better long-term strategy, as it gives the other tools in the Bandlab kit access to the notation functions as well.
We have already seen that tools like Melodyne can do a decent job of converting  (some) audio to MIDI.  It is only one step farther to show those audio files as music notation.  Of course there are many ambiguities in such a system, but that doesn't make it impossible.  It just means that some notes might not be editable of they cannot be reliably recognized from the audio.
And another problem inherent in bridging these two worlds is quantification.  You need to allow the music to be a little imprecise while the notation needs tight quantization, so it may be necessary to maintain two sets of start-stop values for each note.  Some products do this already.
I firmly believe that is is utterly pointless to try to make SONAR the "Best of the 2005-style DAWs".  That war has already been fought and lost.  The future will be won by the products that can reach deeper into the ENTIRE process of making music, and that includes the creative (songwriting tools) and the more prosaic (notation).
I don't want to leave any impression that I think any of this is trivial.  It is not.  But things like Melodyne, Band In A Box, Izotope RX and the like are hardly trivial.  If there was a central failing of SONAR, it was a lack of sufficient ambition.

I can live with all the bugs in the staff view.  With all those years I work with it I have learn my own way to get away from the problems going on.  But, it have to stay at least like that or better.  It's not that I like it, it's that I need it.  Sometimes,  I can get into the PR or Event list but 99% of the time I use the staff view and the metronome.  I rarely quantize anything but, I use the staff and the mouse.  Right clic on the notes and place it the way I want.  One bug that I would like to see go is the one on lower notes, I cannot do a right clic so I have to move the notes higher to fix it.
TY

Muzock
I can live with all the bugs in the staff view.  With all those years I work with it I have learn my own way to get away from the problems going on.  But, it have to stay at least like that or better.  It's not that I like it, it's that I need it.  Sometimes,  I can get into the PR or Event list but 99% of the time I use the staff view and the metronome.  I rarely quantize anything but, I use the staff and the mouse.  Right clic on the notes and place it the way I want.  One bug that I would like to see go is the one on lower notes, I cannot do a right clic so I have to move the notes higher to fix it.

Sorry, I cannot get with an attitude that "a certain level of bugs are expected and acceptable for the long term."  That is just wrong.
Yes, some bugs will inevitably happen, but any software that depends on users to accept workflow changes for years on end to avoid the bugs is crap.  Just plain crap.  No software that employs such an attitude will be successful as long as there is good competition. 
 
The only software I tolerate having such bugs is Band in a Box because it is a one-of-a-kind product with no competition.

Where have you gone, Don-o Williams
Our forum turns its lonely eyes to you
Wu wu wu
What's that you say, Mr. Hendershott
Dancing Don has left and gone away
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey, hey

mister happy

SandlinJohn
...when the "Score Editor" first showed up...

Cakewalk 3.01

I'm guessing this was Cakewalk Professional 3.01 For Windows?
 
The DOS version of Cakewalk 5.0 - I still a copy of have (and just installed to "DOSBOX") - does not have notation display or editing. The program runs as an MS-DOS program and does not use a graphics mode. But I've seen web pages showing the Score/Notation editor in Cakewalk Professional for Windows from around roughly the same time frame. I don't have copies of the first few Windows versions to look at, though. I was strictly an MS-DOS guy back then and then OS/2 for a while - which Cakewalk (for DOS) still worked under.

I did have a Windows 98 setup (probably in 1999 - It was Windows 98 SE), which would have been just right for the early Cakewalk Professional for Windows. I started using Windows versions of Cakewalk in 2000, first with Cakewalk Express (version 8) and then Music Creator later in 2000. Those definitely had staff view and editiing.