vintagevibe

jsg
 
The staff views of all DAWS are very similar.  Cubase, DP8 for Windows--neither are any faster than Sonar's staff view.   There is far more musical detail that can be achieved using the staff view, in contrast to the PRV but knowledge of counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony is required to benefit from it.   I find the combination of the staff view and the event list gives me all the options I need to write detailed, contrapuntal music that has dynamics, phrasing, gesture, articulation, etc. 
 
Jerry
www.jerrygerber.com
 

 
With all due respect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  After many years with Sonar and 3 months working with Cubase 7, I can tell you that Cubase's notation facilities are in no way similar to Sonar X2. Sonar's notation facilities are one step above Band-in-a-Box notation whereas Cubase's is closer to Sibelius, which I own.  Cubase notation is far better than Notion 4 which I also own.  In more than one way Cubase notation is faster and easier then Sibelius.  To say that all DAW notation is similar, especially when you are comparing to Sonar, is simply misinformation.  I will not take the time to explain the features of Cubase because you can download a demo and see for yourself if interested.  I applaud your ability to compose symphonies in Sonar.  A house can be built without power tools but I certainly wouldn't do it that way.  To imply that hand tools are as good a way to build a house as power tools is ridiculous.   If you use notation Sonar is, in fact, the wrong tool for the job.

There's absolutely no purpose to preface a sentence "with all due respect" when there's no respect at all in telling someone who probably has far more knowledge than you do about music and music production that they don't know what they're talking about.  I have DIRECT EXPERIENCE with both Cubase's and DP's notation editor.  I wasn't writing about features, I was referring to ease of use in MIDI sequencing.   You're writing like a presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior.   Perhaps Sonar is the wrong tool for YOU, but if you have a shred of wisdom or discretion, you'd leave it at that.  I've already downloaded a Cubase demo and spent 2 months with it. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 

I guess I started a firestorm. If it'sall perfectly plagal with everyone, why the argument?
 
@jsg - I don't care one way or the other what experience you have. I'm glad you have it but there is no way to write the cadence I wrote in the SV. You said it yourself, "it won't look right but it will play correctly". (not exact)
 
It's all rudimentary and goes from one beat to the next. Whether you flam, flat, drag, ruff, drag with a ruff or even fancy a paradiddle, just keep the cadence going and just maybe it will be perfect and not plagal. After all, plagal is not a final as perfect.

jsg

vintagevibe

jsg
 
The staff views of all DAWS are very similar.  Cubase, DP8 for Windows--neither are any faster than Sonar's staff view.   There is far more musical detail that can be achieved using the staff view, in contrast to the PRV but knowledge of counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony is required to benefit from it.   I find the combination of the staff view and the event list gives me all the options I need to write detailed, contrapuntal music that has dynamics, phrasing, gesture, articulation, etc. 
 
Jerry
www.jerrygerber.com
 

 
With all due respect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  After many years with Sonar and 3 months working with Cubase 7, I can tell you that Cubase's notation facilities are in no way similar to Sonar X2. Sonar's notation facilities are one step above Band-in-a-Box notation whereas Cubase's is closer to Sibelius, which I own.  Cubase notation is far better than Notion 4 which I also own.  In more than one way Cubase notation is faster and easier then Sibelius.  To say that all DAW notation is similar, especially when you are comparing to Sonar, is simply misinformation.  I will not take the time to explain the features of Cubase because you can download a demo and see for yourself if interested.  I applaud your ability to compose symphonies in Sonar.  A house can be built without power tools but I certainly wouldn't do it that way.  To imply that hand tools are as good a way to build a house as power tools is ridiculous.   If you use notation Sonar is, in fact, the wrong tool for the job.

There's absolutely no purpose to preface a sentence "with all due respect" when there's no respect at all in telling someone who probably has far more knowledge than you do about music and music production that they don't know what they're talking about.  I have DIRECT EXPERIENCE with both Cubase's and DP's notation editor.  I wasn't writing about features, I was referring to ease of use in MIDI sequencing.   You're writing like a presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior.   Perhaps Sonar is the wrong tool for YOU, but if you have a shred of wisdom or discretion, you'd leave it at that.  I've already downloaded a Cubase demo and spent 2 months with it. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 

In the same paragraph that you call me a "presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior" you claim to have "far more knowledge than you do about music and music production".  You are entitled to think I am fool but your statement that you have more knowledge than me is not knowable by you and gives me a clearer indication of the type or person I am dealing with.  Your statement that "the staff views of all DAWS are very similar" is patently incorrect as is the paragraph that follows.  If you "have a shred of wisdom or discretion" you will stop spreading inaccuracies and skewed personal opinions as if they were facts.  In virtually all of your posts you make a point of lecturing everyone about how they must not know anything about counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony.  News flash: you are not the only one who has studied music theory.  Many of us have.  You could, however, benefit by better understanding your tools instead or being dogmatic about them.

vintagevibe

jsg

vintagevibe

jsg
 
The staff views of all DAWS are very similar.  Cubase, DP8 for Windows--neither are any faster than Sonar's staff view.   There is far more musical detail that can be achieved using the staff view, in contrast to the PRV but knowledge of counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony is required to benefit from it.   I find the combination of the staff view and the event list gives me all the options I need to write detailed, contrapuntal music that has dynamics, phrasing, gesture, articulation, etc. 
 
Jerry
www.jerrygerber.com
 

 
With all due respect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  After many years with Sonar and 3 months working with Cubase 7, I can tell you that Cubase's notation facilities are in no way similar to Sonar X2. Sonar's notation facilities are one step above Band-in-a-Box notation whereas Cubase's is closer to Sibelius, which I own.  Cubase notation is far better than Notion 4 which I also own.  In more than one way Cubase notation is faster and easier then Sibelius.  To say that all DAW notation is similar, especially when you are comparing to Sonar, is simply misinformation.  I will not take the time to explain the features of Cubase because you can download a demo and see for yourself if interested.  I applaud your ability to compose symphonies in Sonar.  A house can be built without power tools but I certainly wouldn't do it that way.  To imply that hand tools are as good a way to build a house as power tools is ridiculous.   If you use notation Sonar is, in fact, the wrong tool for the job.

There's absolutely no purpose to preface a sentence "with all due respect" when there's no respect at all in telling someone who probably has far more knowledge than you do about music and music production that they don't know what they're talking about.  I have DIRECT EXPERIENCE with both Cubase's and DP's notation editor.  I wasn't writing about features, I was referring to ease of use in MIDI sequencing.   You're writing like a presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior.   Perhaps Sonar is the wrong tool for YOU, but if you have a shred of wisdom or discretion, you'd leave it at that.  I've already downloaded a Cubase demo and spent 2 months with it. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 

In the same paragraph that you call me a "presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior" you claim to have "far more knowledge than you do about music and music production".  You are entitled to think I am fool but your statement that you have more knowledge than me is not knowable by you and gives me a clearer indication of the type or person I am dealing with.  Your statement that "the staff views of all DAWS are very similar" is patently incorrect as is the paragraph that follows.  If you "have a shred of wisdom or discretion" you will stop spreading inaccuracies and skewed personal opinions as if they were facts.  In virtually all of your posts you make a point of lecturing everyone about how they must not know anything about counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony.  News flash: you are not the only one who has studied music theory.  Many of us have.  You could, however, benefit by better understanding your tools instead or being dogmatic about them.

vintagevibe

jsg

vintagevibe

jsg
 
The staff views of all DAWS are very similar.  Cubase, DP8 for Windows--neither are any faster than Sonar's staff view.   There is far more musical detail that can be achieved using the staff view, in contrast to the PRV but knowledge of counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony is required to benefit from it.   I find the combination of the staff view and the event list gives me all the options I need to write detailed, contrapuntal music that has dynamics, phrasing, gesture, articulation, etc. 
 
Jerry
www.jerrygerber.com
 

 
With all due respect you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.  After many years with Sonar and 3 months working with Cubase 7, I can tell you that Cubase's notation facilities are in no way similar to Sonar X2. Sonar's notation facilities are one step above Band-in-a-Box notation whereas Cubase's is closer to Sibelius, which I own.  Cubase notation is far better than Notion 4 which I also own.  In more than one way Cubase notation is faster and easier then Sibelius.  To say that all DAW notation is similar, especially when you are comparing to Sonar, is simply misinformation.  I will not take the time to explain the features of Cubase because you can download a demo and see for yourself if interested.  I applaud your ability to compose symphonies in Sonar.  A house can be built without power tools but I certainly wouldn't do it that way.  To imply that hand tools are as good a way to build a house as power tools is ridiculous.   If you use notation Sonar is, in fact, the wrong tool for the job.

There's absolutely no purpose to preface a sentence "with all due respect" when there's no respect at all in telling someone who probably has far more knowledge than you do about music and music production that they don't know what they're talking about.  I have DIRECT EXPERIENCE with both Cubase's and DP's notation editor.  I wasn't writing about features, I was referring to ease of use in MIDI sequencing.   You're writing like a presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior.   Perhaps Sonar is the wrong tool for YOU, but if you have a shred of wisdom or discretion, you'd leave it at that.  I've already downloaded a Cubase demo and spent 2 months with it. 
 
JG
www.jerrygerber.com
 

In the same paragraph that you call me a "presumptuous fool who wants to appear superior" you claim to have "far more knowledge than you do about music and music production".  You are entitled to think I am fool but your statement that you have more knowledge than me is not knowable by you and gives me a clearer indication of the type or person I am dealing with.  Your statement that "the staff views of all DAWS are very similar" is patently incorrect as is the paragraph that follows.  If you "have a shred of wisdom or discretion" you will stop spreading inaccuracies and skewed personal opinions as if they were facts.  In virtually all of your posts you make a point of lecturing everyone about how they must not know anything about counterpoint, voice-leading and harmony.  News flash: you are not the only one who has studied music theory.  Many of us have.  You could, however, benefit by better understanding your tools instead or being dogmatic about them.

Dogmatic?  I'm not the one who sounds like a fanboy, but you do.  You're an idiot.   Don't engage me, I'll ignore you as conversing with you is a waste of time.   I stand by my statement about DAWs and notation and, apparently other composers do too:
 
http://www.stephenbarr.co...ere-is-the-holy-grail/
 
 

@jsg - Please don't comment anything in my threads again. Personally, I don't believe you. I tried to lighten the mood with jokes that one who knows the components of music theory would understand. They seem to be lost on everyone.
 
la-di-da... Time to work on some my project some more.

Guitarpima
@jsg - Please don't comment anything in my threads again. Personally, I don't believe you. I tried to lighten the mood with jokes that one who knows the components of music theory would understand. They seem to be lost on everyone.
 
la-di-da... Time to work on some my project some more.

I wish this forum had an ignore list.

jsg
For simple dance music or any kind of music that is very repetitious and rhythmically conservative, I imagine some people thing the PRV is the best thing to happen to DAWs.

 
I'm not sure sure about that.  PRV is the better tool when dealing with notes that start or stop not exactly on the beat.  For example a piano chord always consists of notes that don't hit exactly together and each have different velocity values.  PRV is essential for editing this sort of thing.  On the other hand, simple patterns can be entered equally easily in SV or PRV.

^^^^^^^^
 
I can read and write notation, but I wouldn't to input a track in the SV that's either "ahead" or "behind" the beat, not to mention notes that need a variety of start times and durations that simply don't fall on standard musical boundaries.  I find this fairly common with string parts in order to work the attack portion in.
 
That said, I'd really like to use the SV more than I do, but it's just not that comfortable for me.  So in the interim I'll keep using the PRV which works just fine for most of what I do... and look forward to the day when the SV is a friendlier face. 
 

One thing I love about Cubase is that there are many facilities to make the notation look correct without altering the underlying MIDI data.  So I can do anything I want in the PRV but still edit in correct looking notation without destroying the feel.

One thing I'm glad about....I'm glad I don't have to construct much to where I would see what you guys see. That would drive me nuts! Thankfully, I play drums so my V-Drums or real drum kit gets me through the whole notation part. It's easy enough for me to fix if I screw up either by fixing a note or quantizing.
 
Robert, have you ever thought of getting a little drum controller? Something like maybe a pad you can hit with sticks or even that Korg nano thing? As a person that just knows basic music theory, I would be so lost doing things like some of you. My worst case scenario is I play something on piano until I get it right. Sometimes quantizing it makes it worse for me, so I just keep punching something in until it's right. Time consuming and probably the long way around for me, but it does work. This way I really don't have to worry about how bad PRV or notation is. I mean don't get me wrong, I've step written plenty of things and in Sonar, I've never really had a problem. But again...in a sense, because I play something physically, it takes a lot of the stuff those that program/step write may see, out of my work flow.
 
Like, sometimes I don't even feel like going behind the V-Drums or moving over to my keyboard. So I use this little Bomes Virtual keyboard to type my drums in or my piano or string parts. As long as I'm not totally out of sync, I don't mind leaving things a little loose to where they don't sound too robotic. With the hybrid method of playing and then maybe fixing a few things here and there that need fixing, it makes it a more pleasant experience for me.
 
For example, Robert...if I was playing the cadence thing on one of my drums or whatever, I'd not even look at what it looks like. I'd be listening for what it sounds like and if something didn't sound right, I'd zoom in on the midi notes to see which one(s) may be making the thing sound wrong. Most times, it's a note or 2 for me that needs to be fixed and I just move on. The other cool thing here is, when I play things in real time, if they aren't too involved, I can set the auto-quantizer to on and it fixes things as I record.
 
I know none of what I said here may be helpful, but it works for me being I am almost completely clueless about theory as you know. If it can work for a dope like me, maybe there is a way you could try some of the stuff I do and see if it makes things any easier for you? Good luck bro. :)
 
-Danny