lol, fun forum eh?

Example: First note tied to a second note, and the second one is tremolo; no software currently crossfades that automatically. No one is saying VSL should reinvent the wheel or even compete with other DAW's. What we are saying is that no other software currently allows a real implementation with VSL's playback flexibility in an intuitive way that would save users time.

Sibelius is my notation preference but its soundset management is horrendous. I time stretch and more... so I don't use the VSL presets. Creating my own Sibelius presets would be an utter nightmare. So for people who customize samples, notation isn't really an option. VSL would face the same customization issues, BUT unlike Sibelius (or others), VSL would actually care to address them. THIS is why we want it. Some want automatic. Some want custom... but no notation offering currently implements with VSL in a way that could even remotely be called efficient.

Many people already use more than one DAW and no one toolbox currently does everything anyway. VSL could allow people to make presets for other libraries (in a more 'complex library' way than other notation programs, and it wouldn't be more work cause designing it to work with VSL's complexity would already do most of that work) - OR... VSL wouldn't even have to. If VSL's notation editor worked with VSL and no one else... this doesn't prevent you from using other libraries with VSL. Like others have said. These features take nothing away... but would only add. Not only do they add, they serve what many have only ever wanted. I think some people have just been away from notation too long. I'll never prefer any other system but notation, for good reason.

Hopefully that helps. I kind of half-rushed my points.

-Sean

A far more contributive way to continue this discussion would be to suggest things that this could solve, or feature requests relating to this so we can at least gauge what needs users have in relation to this area. I mean no offense, simply that bickering over the 'why do we need it' forgets that every user has different needs'. The main point here, is that some users want a better notation implementation for VSL- one that is more automatic in setup and in playback. Currently not one program accomplishes this. So there is really no discounting that this could benefit the user. What's more important here is to gauge how many users want it or gauge what other problems this might solve. - it would be better to focus our time on what this could offer, rather than talk about comparing this idea to current offerings (especially where we've clearly defined why current offerings aren't addressing some problems).

Any suggestions out there relating to a VSL DAW or VSL Notation editor? Or even a way for VSL to implement these things in other software. If VSL could tie to Cubase and Sibelius in ways that would solve our problems, then fine... we want to hear it! lol - We simply feel that those methods are far less likely to succeed or even happen because of the different companies involved. So again, what VSL benefits or suggestions are there? That seems to me the better way to continue this discussion.

-Sean

The company resource issue is a big one.  Most companies that fail do so by over expanding without a corresponding increase in actual cash flow.  Another prime cause of failure is moving away from core successful areas.  Sometimes one has to, and sometimes one can be very successful (witness the transformation of Apple), but successful transitions are not that common.

It is interesting that no one yet has come up with a truly fully integrated outstanding notation/sequencer program.  Many sequence users (thinking the Sonar forum) simply do not want a sequencing program to be bogged down with notation capabilities.

If VSL could profitably create such a program - great.  The question is what is the risk/return ratio?  How many additional resources would be required to do it well, and would the interest be sustained, or would only a handful of core customers be interested?  In the end, could they differentiate their product from all the other competitors?  It is easy, and with good reason, to wish for a VSL DAW.  For VSL to really do it, and do it well, all sorts of complex financial and marketing questions become key.

Hi noldar12,

As I said on other thread ( Sibelius 7 ) I think, there are a lot of places where VSL can make its entry. For example clases of composition and orchestration from conservatories or universities are struggling with Finale and some "light" libraries. I already mentioned that the campain to promote  their product must be more "agresive". Put some flyers on the move ( even it costs a little) but in the end, they will add that something. I remember the demonstration that Paul had it in Montreal, beautifully done..indeed we were basically a core of people as you said ..but that because we, the users, received an email alert...( or maybe was more than that , I really don't know exactly about advertising that event). But sending to the entire music universities around, definetly would have been other thing. 

    As to conclude, as a theory assistant I presented some works done with VSL to my class...there were probably more than 25 students who received them as giant musical leap ( refering more to the samples here) :))). These samples integrated in a notation program help composers but also orchestration professors. 

 I know the description is not the same with making a marketing plan ...but just adding some thoughts..

@Another User said:

It is easy, and with good reason, to wish for a VSL DAW.

That's what we're trying to address. I think it's long needed in the orchestral sampling community. It's one of only two things I've ever really wanted from a sample library- This and convincing sound quality and performance, thus why I have VSL to begin with. VSL has tackled sound very well... but they also pursue software to help their users work flow and process... this simply is another branch in the same feild.

A notation compositional tool, that would be designed to work with VSL could effectively bring notation and good performance together. Good performance is the only real need I have for Cubase right now... if I could get it through notation, why bother with other software? The point here is that VSL could accomplish what others are missing.

And if it helps your concern, I think that this would attract more schools, as previously pointed out by bogdan. But it would also attract scores of composers (pun intended, lol) - Pro Tools implemented Sibelius notation... did they do this because of 2 users wanting it? No... because nearly everyone wants notation to succeed here. Sure, we make do without it and some people don't feel it's neccesary... but where 1)  many of us wanted it from the start and still want it, being unhappy with the current options... and 2) Where many people get discouraged from even starting in the digital world... Yeah, I think it's safe to say that VSL would make money at it. This could essentially bring in the user-base that never starts because of their desire to use notation. That means money.

Can we safely say that there is a potential market here? lol - At this point, let VSL worry about that. I'll keep worrying about my notation needs. [:)]

-Sean

And like I said in the original thread - to which no one apparently refers, where these questions have already been addressed - VSL has already done most of the hard work creating the instruments, VE PRO and Vienna Suite. All that remains is an arrange page, a piano-roll, and automation lanes in a package. So I don't think the outlay would be so considerable in order to offer everything in an integrated package. That's as far as the DAW is concerned. 

As far as notation is concerned, it's no mystery to me why no one has put out a DAW/Notation platform (I'm not counting Logic's and others' notation editors, you can't possibly use those seriously). Until relatively recently, notation software was addressing symphonic composers and DAWs were addressing pop composers (as well as DJs sadly), for the most part. In any case I have already agreed that this aspect might require the hiring of additional staff and/or licencing/acquisitions.

Personally, although I'd more than love the idea of a VSL pencil-to-CD solution, I'd very much welcome the implementation of my first idea, regarding the DAW, notation can wait (if it must). It wouldn't surprise me though if companies like Apple or Avid offerd to buy VSL (or some other company) en route to such an all-in-one workstation. Apple would need instruments and notation, Avid the instruments, and perhaps the computers...

I know we've mentioned time stretching... but I just realized how this could benefit us so well...

Imagine having an articulation that is 2 seconds long... but the tempo of your peice and the note length in the score would come to 3 seconds... VI Pro and this notation editor would be communicating and automatically create the timestretch needed to accomplish the performance written. That is an amazing time-saver and it would provide a more accurate performance. This is one place I think a VSL DAW would accomplish more than 3rd party software.

I also thought that all the pitch ranges of VSL instruments could be built into it (very small feature, I know)... but it's a nice thought- although VSL may not want that... the lack of selling those range posters might destroy them financially, lol

-Sean

@Another User said:

notation can wait (if it must).

No, no, no... lol - This isn't just coming from my wanting notation and your wanting vsl sequencing more... I think that a VSL DAW is a great idea. But I think that notation is only a little more work than a piano roll or something similar. Any kind of VSL Notation paradigm does not need to be Sibelius or highly advanced... it's a composing tool that would simply be what Cubase and others are lacking. Think of it more like the new Sibelius notation window inside Pro-tools. It's far less advanced than sibelius... but it exports to sibelius. Maybe if Avid made the notation editor have enough options and could send the data out... then VSL could access the data (slurs, trill markings, etc) like VST expression.... and VSL could play the articulation accordingly... but also perform it accordingly... like in the time-stretch tempo example I just mentioned... I just doubt Avid would ever work towards that... Which is why I'm suggesting VSL do it... cause it wouldn't be that advanced... but it would serve users very well.

-Sean

Sean, I empathize with you regarding notation (I said so back in March). It's just that if VSL develops anything like Logic's score editor, I'm just not going to use it. Like I said, I'm interested in a proper Sibelius-like notation program where I could comfortably score Harry Potter III or The Rite of Spring. If VSL hears us and creates a wonderful DAW but with a minor score editor, it's just not good enough for my needs (I haven't seen and I don't know the Pro Tools' Sibelius' capabilities, so maybe I'm unaware of some advantages...). If what you're after is a scoring program that will create accurate parts from a MIDI realization that's fine, but I would make parts from my own prior-to-MIDI score.

Of course I'd love the all-in-one (as I said from the beginning), it would exponentially improve my experience of putting notes down and subsequently mixing a track (quite a bit of the work will have already been done), but if I can't have the sophistication of Sibelius' notation, for me the integrated DAW means a great deal anyway.

I'd be happy with a VSL piano roll daw simply because I also prefer to make my isntruments more customized, only for more flexibility. But much of that could be automatic… like the time-stretching.

Another point.... I generally don't like bringing up perfect pitch as it comes off poorly to people. (despite the fact that people should simply be able to have an intelligable discussion about it) - But this is how I view this. I write on paper and hear it in my head performed as it should be. I hear a note, I see the note on the staff. I grew up with this mentality that a piano roll just work the same way. I feel like notation makes more sense contrapuntally to me... it's just better for how I learned (and how most composers learn, via notation) - so when I go to the computer to make a mock up for someone... I want it to do what I hear. It doesn't have to be a flawless interpretation of style... but it could at least perform the peice as close to a human performance as possible. VSL notation seems the way to accomplish this. - If not, I'll look for what will. But a VSL DAW without notation, to me... fine- it would be good... but still lacking what I think many want because it's the natural environment that so many are used to.

-Sean

So you agree with me, the notation program has to be at least as sophisticated as Sibelius to be of use to us, and just a score-editor alla Logic, whether it's there or not, it makes no difference. So either VSL develops/buys/rents a notation program in all its might for the proposed DAW, or as far as we're concerned they oughtn't include a substandard notator in there at all. I share the work-process you describe, that's why if VSL includes a sub-standard notator for this proposed DAW, I'll still be working in Sibelius first. However, if that's what's holding back VSL from developing a DAW, I'd say go ahead, and leave (sadly) the notator for later.

@Errikos said:

So you agree with me, the notation program has to be at least as sophisticated as Sibelius to be of use to us

No! lol - That's my fault... I made a 3x as long post... but in cutting down I left things out. I don't feel there would be a need. Just like Pro Tools has a BASIC Sibelius editor... if you want to do more, then export for Sibelius. VSL could do the same thing. The Music XML format would support this.

If Sibelius and Finale offer everything we need for notation in the printing sense... great... but they have no playback functionality and composers want notation software to have that. Being that these programs have only very basically addressed this, I'm saying that either VSL should make a basic notation editor tailored entirely to their library and the flexibility of that library with VI Pro - OR VSL should find a way to read Sibelius notation in real-time and essentially do the same thing. But as I think the latter is less likely for various reasons... and as others could benefit from a few of the basic core elements of these features, with a piano role instead... that it makes more sense for VSL to have a DAW with notation and piano roll editing, that accomplishes what were wanting.

So essentially I'm saying that VSL SHOULD include a sub-standard editor. Why would VSL want all the page design features of Sibelius? No way! lol - I just want a notation editor that will work with what VSL's articulations and VI Pro will allow for. Sibelius has a LOT more features than VSL is either capable of performing, or that VSL would even apply to. It would behove VSL to approach it with that paradigm. IMO anyway.

-Sean

O.K., based on what you said previously, the way you work, you'd still need Sibelius/Finale in order to properly compose, and subsequently go to the VSL DAW for MIDI work. So, I don't understand what you'd need a sub-standard notation editor in the DAW for, when your score would have been completed in SIbelius/Finale first, and then entered into the DAW in MIDI form.

As far as I'm concerned if VSL or anyone else wished to adopt my idea of a from-idea-to-media composition package, they should go all out and develop/obtain the most sophisticated notation program available. After all, why need to go somewhere else for parts and conductor scores? All-in-one and one-in-all [:)]

@Errikos said:

So, I don't understand what you'd need a sub-standard notation editor in the DAW for, when your score would have been completed in SIbelius/Finale first, and then entered into the DAW in MIDI form.

At least I can answer this one in a few words...lol

While notation is the 'natural enviornment' for me because I see the pitch I hear, etc... I still like to have playback while I compose.

Example: I have an orchestra. I want a crecendo in Vi I, tremlo that diminuendo's in Vi II, and different things going on in the other string voices... The more going on, yes the ability to imagine things like this is there... but I'd rather hear it any day so that I can listen very speficially for one voice to determine that I like something or want to change something about it.

The composing process is different for everyone... and that's only a small example of the different challenges I think people (who feel as I do) face without having a decent compositional notation enivornment. I guess I want improved notation playback more than anything. But I also like the idea of a little more general DAW from VSL, thus the this thread is still not entirely notation.

In the end, if somehow between VSL and Sibelius these things could be accomplished, GREAT! - I'd prefer sibelius in many ways. Sibelius has things like the 'idea' saver that VSL may not implement... etc. So yes, I would even prefer it be through Sibelius... the only reasons I avoid that mentality are that 1) I don't believe VSL and AVID will jump in the same bed and 2) Sibelius has such a bad history in playback performance that I can't see this changing anytime soon... unless VSL did it. (Besides, this started in a notation forum anyway, lol)

I got it... Sibelius in all it's beauty and functionality... but with no playback features at all... from the ground up, build the playback engine and midi articulation interpretation, etc to be tailored to VSL in articulations and in performance abilities, time-stretching, midi-crossfading (like the tremelo thing) and so on. THAT would be great! - I realize that people would say 'use notion' but notion has not accomplished this how I said. - Plus, I'm stuck with presets that I don't even like... it's so painful to set it up in a workable way... why? Because notation software features like Sibelius Sound Sets were not created with VSL in mind and they are violently unfriendly to trying to setup your own. It would take forever and if I make changes... even worse. I want notation, whether VSL or not, to automatically work with what I'm doing in VSL (at least as automatic or easily setup as possible).

I still have uses for a DAW in all honesty. So despite my love of notation... Many of the same features apply to a piano roll - this is another main reason why I feel that a VSL DAW makes more sense than approaching it just from the notation program or just from the DAW... Why change Cubase AND Sibelius (and notion, and pro tools, etc) to work better with VSL? Why change VSL to have to interpret things from each of these companies? It would be easier just to have a VSL DAW that handles notation for these orchestral instruments and handles the DAW functionality that VSL users need.

Any thoughts? Any other suggestions on this front? Features? I want to add more to the idea rather than debate the merits of any one idea. The more feedback or ideas for VSL the better. I would think anyway... lol

-Sean

P.S. On the Sibelius 7 thread people kept saying 'Come on VSL, chime in and give some feedback to us users, are we dreaming or could it be considered?' - I think some feedback from VSL would be nice. That and I wonder whether anyone from VSL read the 'Sibelius 7' posts also. Worst case, VSL hates the idea... I'd still like to know if there are any parts of this they'd consider or that at least appeal to them as something needing to be addressed.

I still don't understand how a reduced notator like those we've seen so far in DAWs will help you in the stage of composition (unless you're scoring Inception). I need the full capabilities of Sibelius - and more that it doesn't give - at the time of writing. So in that sense, proper playback at that time would be invaluable to me (maybe more than the DAW). My feelings which I expressed earlier this year, were that VSL were so close to a DAW (as opposed to notation) with their current product line; that's why I encouraged them to take the next logical step. Now if they wished to put the icing on the gestalt cake and provide us with a Sibelius like notator, that would be bliss, but it also would be a leap - which as much as I wish for it, I can understand it's out of their immediate know-how.

Also, if they took to heart what a few others and myself were asking them back in March and this DAW is currently in development, I realize they cannot announce it, so their participation in this or the other similar threads is not to be expected. However, if they have no intention of ever doing this, a little negative comment from the company here would save us all some time (see what I did there?[:)])

Now if you guys in VSL are already working on this DAW and are including a notator, please make it one that Stravinsky or Williams would be happy working with. Middle-earthers only need a sequencer, a mouse, and two digital turntables. We need a little more...

@Errikos said:

see what I did there?

lol, yes

I have three fairly simple points that I think will justify my reasoning...

Say that they make VE into a DAW or make a DAW in general. What daw isn't serve by having notation? Cubase and Pro Tools certainly have notation editors for a reason, people want them. Simply put, I would want one in a VSL DAW just the same.

Now that we've established that many DAW's have them... lets assume that the VSL DAW does also. If so, would you want it to be the exact same as the Cubase score editor? I wouldn't at all. Now, let's just say that having every Sibelius feature is not an option. It's either a Cubase editor, or one that has some of the basic Sibelius notation features that are most common in music (like slurs, hairpins, glissando's, etc). -- I'd like every Sibelius feature like you would... I simply think it's not neccesary for a DAW, but that if they did include notation, I'd like at very least more than Cubase's editor... as I described.

Now... say we have the notation editor as many want them in DAW's... and say it's better then Cubase, as many wanted and got with Pro-tools- NOW I'm simply saying... there is potential for enhanced playback compaitiliby, where VSL would know to play a glissando, to crossfade to a tremolo on tied notes that tremolo on the second note, and so on.

Recap:

So if you have a orchestral oriented DAW, notation editing to me is essential. Why would VSL not have it, but Cubase does?

If you have notation for a playback engine (not a printing one), you may not need slurs, etc. but for an orchestral library it would certainly be better than not having them. And if you can make it play your samples as they should, without all the midi work involved... all the better again. This allows people to fine-tune and tweak their playback... but have a lot of work done for them automaticaly.

What about that isn't good? Nothing. Is it essential? Maybe not for all DAW's, but if there was a VSL DAW I would expect such features. If VSL only added a piano roll editor, do you think users wouldn't then ask for notation? I think they would. VSL usually does things right from the start, then adds great things continually. The notation system as I've described, seems to me to be a 'right from the start' feature for a VSL DAW.

Hopefully that helps, lol.

-Sean

@iscorefilm said:

Hopefully that helps, lol.

-Sean

Not really [:)]...

Like I already said (this is one thread that for some reason I have to keep repeating myself), IF VSL created a DAW and included a reduced-features notation editor, I wouldn't use it; so be it there or not it doesn't make a difference to me. I said that the way I work is first compose fully on "paper", and then transfer the information into a DAW in MIDI format. If there are any further edits necessary (there usually are) it depends: If they are major edits I go back into Sibelius and re-import the relevant part(s); if the edits are minor I just correct them in the piano-roll. 

So: I need the best possible playback from my professional, fully featured notator. None at this point provide me with that - I have never had any serious luck with the VE/Sibelius or Notion SLE solutions to the point that I prefer my GPO4 instant playback, at least that doesn't cut into my composition workflow, an imperative I cannot compromise on. I hope that VSL creates a notation solution equal or better to Sibelius, otherwise whether they include a sub-standard notator into a DAW or not, it makes no difference to me.

From some previous post of yours I gathered that we work very similarly, so I ask you again, how is it that a sub-standard notator in a DAW is so essential in your workflow. Maybe I'm missing something important...

I can't say that I would want VSL to turn in the direction of doing a Notation program. Although the company has a remarkable record for producing quality products, which are enthusiastically accepted by professional composers, I feel that a Notation program would have VSL venturing too far from their core expertise and business model. And if I could put something at the top of their project list, it would be Dimension Strings.

If someone asked where is the biggest single  bottleneck, in the Notation Software to DAW workflow, it occurs at the generation and editing of key velocity and controller data. Every notation software, I have ever used, fails to scale dynamics properly. The translation of symbols like sfz and pf is too rigid. So I am forced to bring a composition from Notation to a DAW so I may use "better" controller editing to straighten out dynamics--that is, to balance the key velocity, expression and cross fade.  Sure, there are other issues but this is the one which uses up the bulk of my editing time.

But some well considered editing tools for controllers, either in the Notation software or the DAW,  would simplify composition work flow. This project is not so innovative or large that I would suggest that a company start from scratch building a Notation package, just to add this feature.

I'd venture that Dimension Strings must already be in the company's main priorities. I have also acknowledged the leap required of them to develop notation properly, that's why I suggested a) that maybe an acquisition or partnership with companies like Opus1Music or Lilypond might be a way to go, and b) that the DAW is the next natural step for VSL. My main problem so far with current notation programs is instrumental realism and colour in playback, although I empathize with your concerns as well, and there are of course others...