Yeah Jerry, vintage lost me with that statement.

jsg

vintagevibe
 If you want to compose in notation and also want to hear the highest quality sound Cubase, Protools or DP8 (DP8 Windows version is new and very buggy) are the best PC tools.  With any of these when you export via MIDI or Musc XML you will still have a lot of clean up and repair work ahead.

This is totally incorrect information.  The "highest quality sound" has nothing at all to do with MIDI or your DAW, it has to do with the quality of your sample libraries and your synthesizers.  It has to do with your technique as a composer and orchestrator, the quality of your monitors, actually many things, but your DAW and MIDI are not in the equation, unless your DAW has MIDI glitches and doesn't playback without error.  
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 
 

You fail to understand my point.  Let me rephrase for you.  It is not possible to do a professional mix in Sibelius.

vintagevibe

jsg

vintagevibe
 If you want to compose in notation and also want to hear the highest quality sound Cubase, Protools or DP8 (DP8 Windows version is new and very buggy) are the best PC tools.  With any of these when you export via MIDI or Musc XML you will still have a lot of clean up and repair work ahead.

This is totally incorrect information.  The "highest quality sound" has nothing at all to do with MIDI or your DAW, it has to do with the quality of your sample libraries and your synthesizers.  It has to do with your technique as a composer and orchestrator, the quality of your monitors, actually many things, but your DAW and MIDI are not in the equation, unless your DAW has MIDI glitches and doesn't playback without error.  
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 
 

You fail to understand my point.  Let me rephrase for you.  It is not possible to do a professional mix in Sibelius.

But you weren't even talking about Sibelius!  You referred to "Cubase, Protools or DP8". Looks like you're trying to cover your tracks.  Saying that I "fail to understand" is a way to avoid admitting error. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 
 

So you think it is possible to do a professional mix in Sibelius?

vintagevibe
So you think it is possible to do a professional mix in Sibelius?

I've never done it, I see no reason to mix in Sibelius, I don't know anyone who does.  Sibelius is designed to create scores, not recordings.


 
 

jsg

vintagevibe
So you think it is possible to do a professional mix in Sibelius?

No, it is not possible. 

Good then you agree with my point.  Now maybe you can dispense with the personal attacks. 

gonna crawl away .....

jsg

pbognar 

jsgI can play them in, or I can pop the notes onto the staff.  Either way, they won't look right, but they will SOUND right.  Yeah, here's a tip:  Let's say you begin a phrase with the 3rd note of a 16th note triplet.  With a timebase of 480, each sixteenth triplet gets 40 ticks, and the 3rd note of that triplet (let's say its on measure 22 beat 3) would be placed on the staff at 22 3 80.  If my memory serves me correctly I think I even did some embedded triplets within triplets a few times, again, its just simple math to figure out what tick the note goes on.  Of course this is easier and more likely to help if I could demonstrate rather than explain   ;>) If you want to use tied and/or dotted triplets, no problem. Just figure out where they go relative to the timebase and the number of ticks of the note, and you'll know where they go.  If you have your note resolution on its highest value (which I never change), the tied and/or dotted triplet will look a little weird, but plays back exactly as it should.   Believe me it works, listen to any of my orchestral works and you'll see Sonar's staff view gets the job done.  Let's say you want to enter a group of septuplets.  Again, with a timebase of 480, each septuplet gets 68.57 ticks.  Of course you have to round off to 69 ticks, but again, this is totally doable in Sonar. I have never once, in all my years of using Sonar used the PRV. The long-standing wrong displays of tied/dotted triplets is really no more than a minor nuisance, having no effect on the capacity to enter rhythms on off-beats, weak beats, groups of 7, 11, or whatever. Hope this helps!Jerrywww.jerrygerber.comwww.jerrygerber.com/symphony8.htm 

Your tips got me to sit down and try some things with the SV.  I rediscovered the <shift><right/left arrow> key combinations to step through the timeline by the currently selected note duration (this means I don't need to memorize tick values).  This made it easy to position myself to the 2nd 16th triplet of the 2nd beat - pretty cool.  What would be even nicer is if the quarter note bar ruler guide above the staff would display gradiations which match the duration you have currently selected, instead of just the quarter note lines.  It would be even nicer if there was a giant aim assist cross which graphically showed you where you were on the time line when moving the mouse with the pencil tool for inserting notes - but it's pretty nice that as you move the mouse left and right, the bar / beat / tick  are constantly updated. I have to agree that given all the other cool functions Sonar has, I could get used to the limitations of the SV, because unlike you, I am not classically trained, but I prefer notation for entering some things, and fixing existing things in the SV. I will probably never enter septuplets, however how are you able to set a non-duration so that you can position yourself at something like 22 3 69? Pete

 It's done manually.  You can click on any note's properties and move it to whatever part of the beat (tick) you want.  The same can be done with a group of notes using Process-Find/Change or Slide.   JGwww.jerrygerber.com

Ahh, thanks for clarifying.

To the OP:   I've blocked jsg so now we can have an adult conversation.  
 
I've used Sonar for many years and while it's a great program it is the weakest among it's competition with regards to notation.  Although I still use Sonar for some tasks when I do anything that needs notation I'm far happier and way more productive in Cubase.  DP8 and Protools might be fine for notation as well but if you spend most of your time in notation Sonar is not the best tool IMO.  They have told me there will be no major notation upgrades.  Sonar does some things better than Cubase but the Cubase notation is another world compared to Sonar. Scoring is well implemented and quite easy to use once you learn it.  I do teaching, composing and backing tracks for my live show.  When I compose I use notation quite a bit and I can compose and orchestrate and with EWQL libraries and get the exact mix I want and a score that looks correct without going out to Sibelius.  I hear a broadcast ready mix during the composing process.  For me that is the absolute best way to work.  I've tried going back and forth between Sonar and Sibelius vie Re-Wire and MXML but that is a time consumming, cumbersome and inspiration killing process.  I still use Sibelius for teaching but IMO if notation is important to you there are far better tools than Sonar.  I might even upgrade to X3 since I still use it for live performance tasks but I am blown away by experience of having great notation tools INSIDE a DAW.  Just my opinion YMMV yada, yada, yada...

jsg

vintagevibe
Sibelius great for printed scores etc.. but if you want to COMPOSE in notation Cubase is pretty incredible.  It does several things better than Sibelius and some things Sibelius doesn't do at all.  Although it is primarily a DAW and not as good as Sibelius its notation was specifically designed to get professional results and does a great job for quite a few tasks.  Sibelius is a Notation app and it is superb at that but it's not possible to get a broadcast ready mix inside Sibelius.  Its included library is decent but nowhere near the quality of dedicated libraries.  Sonar's notation is really a toy and the worst in the industry.  If you want to compose in notation and also want to hear the highest quality sound Cubase, Protools or DP8 (DP8 Windows version is new and very buggy) are the best PC tools.  With any of these when you export via MIDI or Musc XML you will still have a lot of clean up and repair work ahead.

Vintage Vibe wants to start a duel here, just like last time, but I have a better idea. Don't listen to him and don't listen to me.  Get Cubase if you want, get Sonar, get both, get neither, do whatever makes you happy.  Decide for yourself and know that any DAW can be used to good purpose.  I'm not sure why a person who uses Cubase finds the time and need to come to a Sonar forum and bash the staff view. 
 
Sonar's notation handles asymmetrical meters, alternating meters, changing meters, triplets, sextuplets, quintuplets and other asymmetrical groupings.  If a musician is having trouble creating complex rhythms, effective syncopation and intricate counterpoint in the Sonar staff view that says less about the staff view and more about a lack of know-how and technique.  Also, consider this:  Much of the detail in producing an electronic orchestration takes place in the event list, not only on the staff.  The velocities, controllers, envelopes, note lengths, location relative to the beat, volume, timbre--all of these parameters must be considered when sculpting phrases..
 
If Sonar's staff view is a "toy", as Vintage Vibe asserts, below is a link to what this so-called "toy" is capable of, listen to part 4:
www.jerrygerber.com/symphony8.htm
 
I'll be at the NAMM show in January presenting the workshop I created entitled "Beyond the MIDI Mockup", sponsored by Cakewalk, NAMM and the MIDI Manufacturer's Association.  For those musicians who want to learn more about how to use a sequencer to produce music that has expression, nuance, gesture and subtlety, this workshop will focus on these very topics.  Hope to see you there!  Here are the details:
 
http://www.midi.org/aboutus/news/2014HOT.php
 
Jerry

Hi Jerry...
 
I just looked/listened to some of your music on the page above (symphony8)... Very nicely done. It's very cool to hear someone using Sonar for Orchestral music as the majority of Sonar Users are not Orchestral composers/arrangers (no slight on anyone, just some raw numbers)...
 
Tho I did not try to examine the Staff Notation carefully, it sure looks "clean"...
 
I don't often use the SV myself, but I have had need on occasion... and it's nice to know that it's there if/when needed. I can't imagine players having trouble reading it due to Sonar's SV limitations... ;-)
 
Thanks for sharing the music as well as the info...
 
Keni