@iscorefilm said:

I want to build a flexible instrument and have it play for me, using notation.

I think you perfectly defined all my frustrations with that single statement.

@Tralen said:

I think you perfectly defined all my frustrations with that single statement.

That's part of why I wonder if the only way is through a VSL notation software...

Unless Sibelius improves I imagine the only way is if VSL somehow made something to allow a conversion of our presets to sibelius presets. I realize I can do this myself but the problem is that I create a new template from time to time.... and it would take so long to build the sibelius info each time I set things up again. I always find new ways to build a better setup and because Sibelius is horribly unfriendly in setting up 3rd party libraries... there's just no hope there.

If I had to define what I want most in digital music in two things, they would be:

Divisi, as much as possible. I'd want 12 F Horns and a 34 Violin I section that were both 100% divisible if I could... but I'm dreaming...lol

A way to compose with Notation (I prefer Sibelius), with as good of playback results as Cubase can get. BUT with far faster and easier ways to fine-tune for that natural sound. (Things like humanize)

Ultimately I want to spend most time composing, with only a little time 'programming' the performance. I can get this with other libraries, but only in sacrificing the great quality of VSL... which I just can't do 😊

-Sean

About presets, I'm still trying Notion prules (I'm on the demo), and have found that I can set a rule system for ALL instruments, which means, in comparison with Sibelius soundsets, that as long as I make my matrices in VI consistently, they all work instantly. If I remember correctly, when creating a new soundset in Sibelius, you have to create rules for each instrument individually, is that correct?

I wonder if there's a way of accomplishing the same thing, setting a general soundset for all my instruments and adding exceptions if needed. I noticed that on VSL soundsets, the instruments are declared as part of a switch-category, which contains the instructions for the articulations, thus, If one uses an undeclared instrument, it would be unaffected by the articulations. So I would need to know all instruments I would need beforehand. Is it possible to make Sibelius apply the instructions to ALL instruments, regardless?

@Tralen said:

I wonder if there's a way of accomplishing the same thing, setting a general soundset for all my instruments and adding exceptions if needed. I noticed that on VSL soundsets, the instruments are declared as part of a switch-category, which contains the instructions for the articulations, thus, If one uses an undeclared instrument, it would be unaffected by the articulations. So I would need to know all instruments I would need beforehand. Is it possible to make Sibelius apply the instructions to ALL instruments, regardless?

I have no idea, but you've got my attention. Hopefully someone else could answer. I'll certainly look into it when I have time.

My custom presets are all as consistant as possible so I'm definately interested!

-Sean

What would be a fantastic feature of such a software would be a function that creates matrices while the piece increases, so you start with only one basic articulation per instrument (probably a sustain with a mediium or hard attack, so that you can play around on the keyboard), and the first time you add for instance a staccato symbol in the music, a new cell in the VI will be created, along with the corresponding control change settings to trigger it. When you later decide to remove this articulation, you can let check the software for unused patches, delete them and shift the other ones.

THAT would be a real Time saver!!!

That was my concept. Patches and articulations would be loaded and triggered according to musical typography; if VI Player "saw" a violin line with a slur, that included some repetitions, beginning on mezzo-piano and going all the way up to fortissimo at [8]= 120 for example, it would load the appropriate patch(es) for the articulation(s) and the expression(s), choosing the right repetitions for the tempo and automatically X-fade the dynamics. Of course not all users would agree with the default interpretation and - like with Sibelius/Finale - would adjust the values to their liking, however that kind of integration would save me tremendous time, even in the compositional stages (sketching, etc.).

P.S.: Where the text reads 'BLOCKED EXPRESSION' I have written 'e-x-p-r-e-s-s-i-o-n-(s)' without the dashes, it won't allow me to write the word by itself without turning it in caps and adding 'BLOCKED'. I have no idea what browser bug that is...

@MassMover said:

the first time you add for instance a staccato symbol in the music, a new cell in the VI will be created, along with the corresponding control change settings to trigger it.

At least in my experience with VI Pro, the entire purpose of even having the matrices is to customize things to work for you. I started using VSL with VI Pro so I don't know VI very well... maybe such a feature would work for VI. The problem is, that if you want to load things on an 'as-needed' basis, I would imagine you'd want a Solid State Drive, with the feature coming in VI Pro 2.0 - That may be harder to implement in VI, who knows...

I don't think it would work to have VI load patches and create cells based on what Sibelius is doing. If instead the cells were already loaded and VI simply switched cells, I think that would work. The idea of VI seeing a slur from Sibelius and switching to the appropriate patch would seem hard to properly implement unless there is a way to send all of that information from sibelius to VI, slurs and all. If it couldn't be done then I could only imagine a VSL notation program to accomplish this.

-Sean

I am talking about the imaginary VSL Notation Software.

The cells being loaded already is basically what we have with the sound sets for the SE; and a huge sound set for all libraries  exists; if you ask andi in the notation forum he might send it to you.

Problem with all articulations pre-loaded simply simply is performance. Thatswhy the idea of loading them just on demand: it’s exactly what you describe as "customizing", but the programm does the customization for you.

So 'VSL Notation software" inteprets the notation and either picks the best patch OR makes a time-stretched patch that crossfades to a tremelo (as I would have made on my own) all automatically?

Don't get me wrong... I would LOVE such a programming masterpeice... but I doubt that will happen about 10 times more than I doubt the VSL notation software happening. I simply think the programming-man power and cpu load would be great enough that I don't see it happening any time soon. That's seems more like a 'years down the road' thing to come. Maybe I'm wrong.

-Sean

I don't know. We should remember that VSL developed softwares that are unusual for a sample library. Vienna Ensemble, Vienna Suite, I believe those were developed because VSL felt the available alternatives were actually interfering with the quality of their samples. So they designed their own software and now they are able to tell us: "see, this is how VSL is *supposed* to sound".

The same concept can be applied to a notation software: "the available notation software is not good enough for our samples, lets build our own". Of course, I'm dreaming aloud here, but if there were a bigger uproar of the user base, I'm sure they wouldn't pass the chance of making a dent in that market. I always felt that the piano roll is the biggest gap between the traditional musician and the midi-trained musician, by stablishing an integrated notation platform VSL could very well capture a large part of the userbase of the competition.

@Another User said:

I always felt that the piano roll is the biggest gap between the traditional musician and the midi-trained musician

Yes, yes, and yes! I think much more naturally in notation. I prefer it.

-Sean

And there's also the Notion SLE experiment (which I own), that plays along with any changes on the fly, using about 2-4Gb of RAM only. So a VSL notation package would better that, and loading times (after the initial one) should be non-existent to minimal on a big system, since we mostly make one alteration on one instrument/staff at a time. There are notational reasons and some bugs that didn't endear me to Notion, but I think a VSL Studio Package (Pro) which would take one from inspiration all the way to post-mastering would be phenomenal. 

As with the other post I had created on this topic, there is no contribution at all from the 'brass'. Come on guys, you can at least tell us not to waste our "breaths" on this one...

@Errikos said:

there is no contribution at all from the 'brass'. Come on guys, you can at least tell us not to waste our "breaths" on this one...

Yeah! ...what he said! lol

It would be nice to know that VSL was working on something like this... but whether they would even consider it is something I don't picture them making vocal at all. I imagine they wouldn't want to create an expectation unless they know for sure that it will happen.

I also think that most VSL users are not using notation. I think we've already covered the 'why' there... but because of this, if VSL has any real sense of being able to gauge this... I think it wouldn't be in this forum section. VSL would have to see how all users react to the idea of such a program. I believe that most people would love it!

-Sean

I'm not sure; I think most people using Symphobia and Cinescamples might not be using notation, but I think there are a lot of film-composers and orchestrators who have used VSL products long before those products came about, and who still do. I believe that all these people still use notation proper at least at some stage of production - there's no reason for them not to, so I think the majority of their customers would qualify for such a package. However, this would be a leap for VSL, as they would have to either hire new blood, or pay Sibelius/Finale/NoteAbilityPro/Lilypond etc. for a collaboration on a VSL specific notation platform on the side, whatever.

@Errikos said:

However, this would be a leap for VSL, as they would have to either hire new blood, or pay Sibelius/Finale/NoteAbilityPro/Lilypond etc. for a collaboration on a VSL specific notation platform on the side, whatever.

I don't see this as big leap. VSL products are already tailored to respond to midi, to handle most of the available audio hardware and software, and most of all, to interact with each other. Like you said before, the hard work is already done. They have the reverb, the host, the mixer AND the samples. Making a simple midi-notation platform shouldn't be that difficult, unless they intend to handle the other aspect of notation: printing and publishing. This is where I agree a big leap would be necessary, as the technology involved is completely alien to audio.

But, if the midi-notation scope is kept, and the software only handles composing and performing, I believe the hard work was already done. Of course we users would need to bring the composition to sibelius or finale for printing, or maybe to a DAW for fine-tuning a mock up.

Hi Errikos,

I have to say that NoteAbilityPro really impressed me!!

At that notation quality , adding  a VSL playback ....is going to be a real  breathtaking !!

Anyway, any other notation program which will be willing to embrace VSL probably would be a great assest !!

That doesn't mean that VSL has to abandon their own idea (if they have one) about a notation software integrated in their own package ;))

 Nice and intersting thread

Hey Bogdan, you see there's a lot out there that's impressive but not marketed well. 

And Tralen, I hope you're right, however I was hoping for a notation program that would replace Sibelius for me (not just for printing), that means a program where the Rite of Spring, Daphnis and Chloe, or Harry Potter III could be fully input and interpreted - let alone a late Lutoslawcki work. I'd certainly not be happy with a VSL notation program that could just handle divisi Zimmer quavers, a few Taiko hits, and some brass held-chords; I don't think the professional clients I mentioned earlier would be either. Now if a proper notation program would not be a big deal for VSL to develop, so much the better!

I'm wondering about the player capability of notationability pro since they have not posted anything in this matter.

I read through their features and it says that suports 6 audio units ..but nothing more.It would be intersting to hear some of their notation features played by some library.

err..wait in one pic I think I've seen  synful orchestra ...

Regarding the VSL notation software, I think I agree with Errikos ..indeed is better to avoid aproaching things just for the sake of having something covered...we have a lot of other guys doing exactly the same thing.

 But if they really start looking into it, is going to take a little bit longer till we get something profesional with full implementation of contemporary music notation and interpretation...it's a lot of work to cover ..

@bogdan said:

 But if they really start looking into it, is going to take a little bit longer till we get something profesional with full implementation of contemporary music notation and interpretation...it's a lot of work to cover ..

The reality, like Errikos said, is that the majority doesn't use notation as their prime composing tool, therefore expecting VSL to take that road is feable speculation. But, I think, if they take the chance, they would captivate a lot of users that, like myself, are trying to settle with one library and one notation software, two concepts that, at the moment, appear to be mutually exclusive.

The lack of interest of VSL people in the topic also disallows our imagination.

@Tralen said:

the majority doesn't use notation as their prime composing tool, therefore expecting VSL to take that road is feable speculation. But, I think, if they take the chance, they would captivate a lot of users that, like myself, are trying to settle with one library and one notation software, two concepts that, at the moment, appear to be mutually exclusive.

The lack of interest of VSL people in the topic also disallows our imagination.

Just because most VSL users use a traditional DAW doesn't mean that they don't want Notation. I don't use VSL and Sibelius, I use cubase... but if I felt like I could adequately use notation to compose, I'd do it in a heartbeat! There are others who do also, so the idea isn't ready to dismiss.

Question for anyone:

What about a "Vienna Composer" instead of V-notation, basically a VSL DAW instead? In Cubase VST Expression is nice, but still isn't quite built in a way that perfectly compliments VSL. DAW's have piano rolls AND notation and we all know there's a gap there. Most times I prefer notation, but no daw adequately accomplishes this with the complexity of VSL and the piano roll certainly has uses that traditional notation doesn't serve as well. So instead of a new concept, simply give VSL these features.

VE is already half way there... I agree with the points that VSL has a lot of what they need already done. Imagine "Vienna DAW" or even "VE Daw edition" or just a new version of VE - The DAW could be built on VE. VE is already a VST host, a mixer, a network program, and so on. In addition to it's features, just add midi sequencing, with a piano roll and notation editor and you're done. Maybe add some VI or VI Pro features that work better for playback in those editor - but I think it would be much easier to build these features in VE than create a new program. It wouldn't need to have every feature that Cubase has. Cubase, Pro Tools, DP, and others don't all have the exact same features and design. VSL could have VE simply add what VSL users want from DAW's that we currently aren't getting... Personally, I think this approach would solve a lot of problems without creating new ones.

Any thoughts on this? I love the idea.