Anderton

Jimbo 88
You know it would not be so bad if you could rewire a notation software so that notation you create (say thru midi) would transfer into Sonar.

Don't people do that already with Notion or some other program?
 
And FWIW, the last time this was brought I'm pretty sure someone from Cakewalk said it was not a priority for the next update.

I use the very inexpensive Noteworthy Music Software.  Unlike some other programs, it does not transmogrify when exported to midi and imported into Sonar.  It is the easiest music software.  Users have maximum control over content.  Users can write a song with uneven bars.  I know.  I have done it - not intentionally - not yet, anyway.

cparmerlee

michael diemer
Orchestration is the one thing that nobody is born knowing how to do. You can study books and internalize rules, and above all, listen to the great masters; but only hearing what you have done, with as much realism as possible, is going to give to give you the necessary feedback.

My work flow is from the other end (beginning in the notation product), but we converge on the point that high-quality playback is really important for today's composer.  I have two colleagues who are both good arrangers and both work with Finale a lot.  In the span of 2 weeks, one of them advised me that it was best to play back in Finale's simply MIDI playback because that was the only way you could really hear the harmonies well.  The other one was even more extreme.  He said that he was most successful playing everything back as piano parts only.
 
I would never dream of doing that.  That may make is easy to head bad notes (notes that are simply mistakes.  But voicings must be carefully crafted to get the most musical effect.  Those simple playback modes don't have a chance of helping us hear the nuances of how instruments blend and how voices work together (or not).  Using the simply MIDI playback, one risks producing a poor quality orchestration that may require multiple readings by the ensemble and multiple revision before the arrangement is suitable for public presentation.
 
Indeed, you actually can get very realistic playback directly from Finale by using good VST libraries, and I do this every time.  This allows you to hear the timbres and the interaction of overtones.  Often I can produce a score that requires no revision at all -- or only minor revisions after the first reading.
 
In other words, it is about time and quality.  Isn't everything?
 
The problem with the notation programs is not that they are unable to use VSTs.  They do use the VSTi products if you are lucky, and that can do a good job on the viocings.  But there are many other nuances that are not so successful directly within the notation programs.  For example, swing feel or breathing/bowing just may not sound quite right without some detailed adjustments to the MIDI.  And of course, some additional DAW-style processing can help tremendously.  For example, it would often be desirable to use a ducking compression technique if a piece features a solo instrument or voice.  And I have often wished I could have automation of track volume/velocity within the notation program in order to bring out the important lines a little more than is indicated by the printed dynamic markings.
 
Basically, I see this as two sides of the same coin.  One world (DAW and notation), not two separate domains. That's the kind of flexibility we need regardless of which platform we use as our base for composition.
 

When I sit down to compose, my ideas are for small and larger ensembles.  I have written big band, string quartet and smaller ensemble music in the general classical style as well as both contemporary and classic jazz.  I guess everyone has their own composing style, but remember, Mozart did not always have the luxury of his good friend Haydn, a "house band" to flesh out his musical ideas.  In fact by his own hand, we know that Beethoven composed and orchestrated from what he heard in his mind - especially at the end of his career and life, when he composed almost completely deaf.

What I am saying is this, that what I have learned from most of my readings of the composing masters is that they already heard the instrumentation and orchestration for the pieces when or as they set out to compose.  Of course refinements (except in Mozart's case) were made once the piece was performed (Mozart reportedly merely transcribed whole works from his head to paper). 
 
I have suggested to those who have similar frustration as even I had that they use Noteworthy Music Composer, which has worked extremely well for me.  Usually what I compose in Noteworthy is at least substantially orchestrated there and once exported to midi and imported to Sonar, my ideas are reinforced. 
 
No, the midi synths in Noteworthy are not as refined as those in Sonar and other suites (for a class I had to sin and use Cubase Elements - still making penitence for that - 'cause I liked it).  However, they give me enough to supplement with my own inner musical ear to know what the actual instruments will sound like even before I export to Sonar.
 
Based on the history of music, having the most discreet synths does not an orchestrator make. Thus I have to conclude that at this point you are being a bit (and I say this more humorously with no malicious intent whatsoever) of a brat on this one - although I too wish Sonar would at least somehow link up with Noteworthy and create a mutually enriching partnership. Isn't this how Bill Gates built Office, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player and others?  I know Microsoft got sued on some of theseand had to pull back some, but in other cases where there was a mutually beneficial agreement and enough money changing hands, the original developers retired very happy in their 20s and 30s - and Microsoft is ubiquitous. 

How about a time when Pro Tools's next update is to make it possible to use its files in Sonar, the industry standard?
 

pbognar
So as not to soil another forum thread, I will post some thoughts here.

If Cakewalk is concerned about the ROI of fixing the triplet issues in the SV, I must conclude that the code is unmaintainble, and a full rewrite would be required. If that's the case, then I understand why we may never see any fixes.

If voting for DAW software / features is done with dollars toward purchases or upgrades, it would not be in my best interest to upgrade Sonar at this point. I would be sending the wrong message. I will wait for a release which has the fixes and features which are important to me, or I will move on to something else which emerges as a suitable replacement.

I am dismayed at the years of silence from Cakewalk regarding the SV triplet issue. There is at least one other DAW application out there, where the Devs have indicated that their SV is in development, but will not be present in the next major release, rathther, more likely in the dot release following it. How refreshing.

Seriously thinking about joining Jerry on the DP path. I am concerned that most of the enhancements to Sonar are add-ons, not changes to the core functionality in areas of Midi (especially staff view) but also video. I am paid up with SPlat through early next year, so this is not going to be a knee jerk. It seems to me that Cake can occupy themselves adding and fixing CCC, mix recall, drum replacer, vocal alignment tool, the new .,?!/;'n start page, etc and never get to fixing core functionality, which is more in-line with my needs. (To be fair, Cake have also done a great job of fixing bugs, and the audio engine is excellent.) DP crossgrade is pretty attractive at $395. Would be equal or less than the cost of next year's SPlat membership plus whatever I would pick up for notation (already have Notion and Progression) and Vegas (low end) or other video editor/converter.
DP has a 30 day demo which I am going to try out. Only concern is whether I am going to like the trial enough to want to jump sooner. Hoping Cake have something up their sleeves with respect to video, and midi before end of the year. Even touch is largely abandoned.

Yeah thay have been aware and postponed tacking the issues for years now, yet other stuff get fixed in line with their plans.  Cleary thier is a deeper issue with the codeing that they aren't willing to delve into for some reason.
 
I'm not going to say I won't be renewing in January next year, as they may offer me something that's too tempting. IF I saw something seriously done about staff view iun the next 7 months, then re-signing wouldn't be questionable, that would have renewed my faith.

 Leon de Vose, II said:



"When I sit down to compose, my ideas are for small and larger ensembles.  I have written big band, string quartet and smaller ensemble music in the general classical style as well as both contemporary and classic jazz.  I guess everyone has their own composing style, but remember, Mozart did not always have the luxury of his good friend Haydn, a "house band" to flesh out his musical ideas.  In fact by his own hand, we know that Beethoven composed and orchestrated from what he heard in his mind - especially at the end of his career and life, when he composed almost completely deaf.

What I am saying is this, that what I have learned from most of my readings of the composing masters is that they already heard the instrumentation and orchestration for the pieces when or as they set out to compose.  Of course refinements (except in Mozart's case) were made once the piece was performed (Mozart reportedly merely transcribed whole works from his head to paper). 
 
I have suggested to those who have similar frustration as even I had that they use Noteworthy Music Composer, which has worked extremely well for me.  Usually what I compose in Noteworthy is at least substantially orchestrated there and once exported to midi and imported to Sonar, my ideas are reinforced. 
 
No, the midi synths in Noteworthy are not as refined as those in Sonar and other suites (for a class I had to sin and use Cubase Elements - still making penitence for that - 'cause I liked it).  However, they give me enough to supplement with my own inner musical ear to know what the actual instruments will sound like even before I export to Sonar.
 
Based on the history of music, having the most discreet synths does not an orchestrator make. Thus I have to conclude that at this point you are being a bit (and I say this more humorously with no malicious intent whatsoever) of a brat on this one - although I too wish Sonar would at least somehow link up with Noteworthy and create a mutually enriching partnership. Isn't this how Bill Gates built Office, Windows Media Center, Windows Media Player and others?  I know Microsoft got sued on some of theseand had to pull back some, but in other cases where there was a mutually beneficial agreement and enough money changing hands, the original developers retired very happy in their 20s and 30s - and Microsoft is ubiquitous. 

How about a time when Pro Tools's next update is to make it possible to use its files in Sonar, the industry standard?"
 


Not sure who you are calling a brat here, so I'll let that slide, although I thought name-calling was a no-no on most forums (excuse me, that's "fora." I'm talking to an educated person here, someone with letters after their name).
 
Of course orchestration must be learned by studying basic principles, which take into account acoustics, music theory and the natural quirks of the instruments (which often conflict with acoustical science - pianos for instance, which have to be tuned equal-temperament, to accommodate the distortions common to stringed instruments). If you attempt to use a sequencer to orchestrate, and have no idea how to orchestrate , your music will probably be unplayable. And listening to the great masters, and studying their scores, is of course highly recommended.
 
But for someone who takes the time to first understand orchestration, and then uses a sequencer to provide the feedback, it can work. Like everything, it's a learning process, and it never ends. As the technology improves, the feedback improves, and provides a truer reflection of one's ideas. I and others here dream of the day when sequencers and notation have truly merged, and we can work in one program from start to finish. DP, Cubase, PT and Logic are the sequencers that are closest. The notation programs are getting there as well from the other direction. There is no good reason these two softwares have to be mutually exclusive. It's just a matter of time. Sonar will eventually be forced to follow the curve if it wants to remain viable.

+1 to the last 2 posts.    I would have jumped to DP8,  but DP8 does not handle VSTs and mixing as quickly as Sonar and I find comfort in spitting out the final product quickly under heavy time constraints.  If Sonar picked up some slack in the notation area and added something like streamers in DP8 I would never think about leaving Sonar.  

I agree, it seems like an obvious direction.  Finale got bought by some sports company  (the parent company).  It'd be nice if cakewalk just worked out something with them and brought finale back to musicians.  It's the last frontier of the perfect DAW.  I don't know why nobody pursues it.

eph221
I don't know why nobody pursues it.

Well, I surmise these are the priorities when you are dealing with what is principally a guitar company.  The Gibson acquisition has been great in many respects, but it is probably unrealistic to expect there are very many people within Gibson who think much about written music, or even understand that a DAW isn't just for garage bands and church bands.
 
I'd like to think I am wrong about that, but I don't think so.
 
I certainly think Finale would fit much better in the same group as Sonar than in its current home.  The company that bailed out Finale is mainly involved in developing software used for athletic training.  When the acquisition happened, the new CEO went to some length to tell the long-time Finale users how composing and producing music is just like athletic training.  (paraphrasing) "You have to get in enough reps, and abracadabra, out comes a symphony.  Now get down on the floor and give me 50 semiquavers.  Fortissimo!!!"
 
So I don't think anybody expects much from this outfit.  They closed the long-term offices in Minneapolis and took a few of the Finale people to Boulder and then hired a few more, but they haven't produced anything in the year since this happened.  There might have been one tiny patch (just a couple of bug fixes for a product that has hundreds of serious bugs) before the moving van shoved off for Colorado.
 
They are talking about releasing "Finale 2014.5" and actually calling it that, oblivious to the fact that we are now halfway through 2015.  That statement came out 3 or 4 months ago, and nothing has come of it.

eph221
I agree, it seems like an obvious direction.  Finale got bought by some sports company  (the parent company).  It'd be nice if cakewalk just worked out something with them and brought finale back to musicians.  It's the last frontier of the perfect DAW.  I don't know why nobody pursues it.

  Too expensive.  It would be in the price range of Nuendo or passing Pro Tools.  You lock out the hobbyist and greatly reduce revenue.
 

Also if the acquisition leads to nothing more than an add-in app connected by Rewire, what's the point? We can do that now, and with our choice of notation apps. Most users just want the staff view features to all work the way they were intended to work (or once did).