@Errikos said:

VSL has already developed the more demanding and expensive aspects of a DAW, and don't forget, a VSL DAW doesn't have to include those features that are necessary in pop music; it will be a symphonist's sequencer, not a ProTools competitor.

Well said!

 I don't know if the notation software would be a viable option for VSL.   It takes years and a lot of efforts to perfect and provide feature-rich software like Sibelius.   It's hard to compete with Sibelius unless VSL can come up with something that is sufficiently better.   Looking around,  it looks like Avid/Sibelius is the only company right now that has the technologies for this type of integrations (Notation, DAW, sample libraries).  So far, Sibelius have concentrated more on the notation/engraving side.   However, with Sibelius 7 they start providing their own sample libraries which is a baby step (maybe to avoid royalty) but they can get sophisticated quickly if they need to.   The danger of Sibelius providing their own sample libraries is that the integration for other third-party libraries can become a second thought.

I would suspect that the thrust of Sibelius' marketing has been to provide one stop shopping to education. I would not expect, even with their integration with Pro Tools, that aim has changed. So I would not expect to get a product from Avid that would be integrated enough to suit professional composers but rather it will provide a "good enough" package for educational institutions. After all they will follow the money, just as Notion has with the iPad development. Remember these are the folks who want $25 for a customer service call.

@Errikos said:

VSL has already developed the more demanding and expensive aspects of a DAW, and don't forget, a VSL DAW doesn't have to include those features that are necessary in pop music; it will be a symphonist's sequencer, not a ProTools competitor.

Well said!

In his thread there are those who think that a VSL DAW and/or notation editor would be useful, and others that don't. Put it this way:

My VSL-DAW argument:

Could a VSL-DAW include features that would serve VSL users in ways that currently aren't possible with 3rd party DAW's? Is it possible certain feature concepts are only achievable through VSL, or at least best achievable through VSL? I believe the answer to that is an obvious, all-around yes. If there are features out there to be had, then that should always be a goal. Whether the goal is met or not is simply the $$$ - If enough people show interest to VSL, then there you have it.

My Notation argument:

If VSL users could have features that would serve us better, then it's definately a goal. Then it's up to VSL to determine whether it's an option or not. If VSL did in fact build a DAW (whether into VE or not), then the next question is 'what features are essential to making it a VSL-tailored DAW?' - The examples mentioned earlier are all relevant to that question, but once I again I think notation is as well. Does notation benefit the DAW world? If it didn't, other general purpose DAW's wouldn't have it; therefore the answer is yes. Would you expect an orchestral-focued DAW to have a notation editor? I certainly would, without any doubt.

The point? If you're going to make a VSL daw, notation would practically be required. Think I'm wrong? There are certainly plenty of VSL users who's start pestering VSL until they did it. lol. Whether it needs to be as flexible as Sibelius or just above other DAW offerings is entirely up to VSL (assuming they made a DAW)... but if they did make a DAW, I think notation would happen in the long run, if not from the start. If they did, I'd want some of the features I mentioned earlier.

-Sean

@civilization 3 said:

I don't write pop music. I require demanding aspects of a DAW such as the ability to do things with the tempo, the timeline (such as to get the performance together and then conform or warp a grid to fit that rather than the other way around such as a notation bound person would have it, which is a cart to pull the horse), which VSL, having never made a sequencer at all has surely not developed. Given that it wasn't until Cubase 4 that the tempo track as it is today was developed at all, I do not have any notion that it is the cheaper part of the package to develop and it isn't a negligible consideration. I do not know what is a 'symphonist's sequencer'. I think it is made of straw same as your pop musician and her needs. It seems like a very insular notion out of an insular and to be frank ignorant world view.

My wanting a VSL-tailored DAW does not equate to an "insular and ignorant world view" [:'(] If all software was developed with guitarists in mind, how would a pianist fare using such software? Look, I mean this in the friendliest way you can take it; but if someone ignores the needs of other users, simply because they don't have the same need- that practically defines ignorance.

Onto productive discussion- A tempo editor is hardly a programming masterpeice. I know college students who aren't even the best programmers who could easily mimic the Cubase temp editor. I'm not discounting the work it would take, programming, support, testing, etc. but that's not a demanding aspect of a DAW, imo anyway.

How would a timeline-warping feature benefit an orchestral-oriented DAW? I'm not saying it couldn't, I just don't see how it would. Ultimately, if VSL made this DAW a reality, it certainly wouldn't negate the use of other DAW's for some people. I still own a copy of Cubase and have all it's great features. I'd just prefer to be using a VSL-tailored DAW, which imo is not an unreasonable request. Unlikely? Maybe, ask VSL. Unreasonable? Absolutely not. [8-|]

-Sean

BTW,  I don't think you can reasonably infer that VSL has built the lion's share of a Notation DAW. What they have built is a midi extention cord with VST plugs and sockets, a midi driven rompler and, of course, great sample libraries. There is not even a hint of sequencer engine or Notation-to-midi-event translation or graphics-to-print interface in VSL's portfolio.

@dshertz said:

I would suspect that the thrust of Sibelius' marketing has been to provide one stop shopping to education. I would not expect, even with their integration with Pro Tools, that aim has changed. So I would not expect to get a product from Avid that would be integrated enough to suit professional composers but rather it will provide a "good enough" package for educational institutions. After all they will follow the money, just as Notion has with the iPad development. Remember these are the folks who want $25 for a customer service call.

I somewhat agree with you.   Sibelius would like the students to use its software as early as possible because most people will stay with the software unless they have a very compelling reason to switch.   Avid/Sibelius have the technogies but it doesn't mean they are going to do anything anytime soon.   Which notation software are you using now for composing?

@Errikos said:

VSL has already developed the more demanding and expensive aspects of a DAW, and don't forget, a VSL DAW doesn't have to include those features that are necessary in pop music; it will be a symphonist's sequencer, not a ProTools competitor.

Well said!

Hi there Gianna!

You have a strong straw-fetish, don't you? Everything other people think is made out of straw for you isn't it? It could never be the product of erudition and intelligent deliberation. Time and time again you have superciliously referred to my insularity and ignorance in so many things musical, that you've made me think I haven't even been born yet. You have been nothing but contemptuous of any standard or value I hold high, summarily dismissing Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, and "all that scene..." - they all wrote puerile melodies, you've called Williams a fraud and Zimmer innovative, you have compared Bruckner's musicianship (unfavourably!) to that of a street-corner rhythm-soloist's - something I might have entertained if I believed you'd ever actually heard one bar of Bruckner's music - and worst of all, you thought that a composition would still be yours even if half the material had been imported and merely re-ordered and collated by you. On this occasion, my understanding of what a 'symphonist's sequencer' should be, is a straw construct of an insular and frankly ignorant man... I mean, what would a symphonist ever do with the tempo track?..... All the accelerandi and ritartandi happen magically, all by themselves..... Also, what would a symphonist do with the ability to warp the grid to fit? A symphonist never writes for anything other than for orchestra; he never writes for solo instruments or duets or trios..... A symphonist is strictly "notation bound"; he would never dream of possessing skill enough to play in a part and conform the grid to that part, would he now?..... And where did I say that these features were unecessary to a symphonist exactly?....

I also have been dismissive of other people's tastes and musical knowledge here (especially yours), sometimes in a rather powerful manner. The difference is, I remember making cogent arguments and offering a lot of examples of what I considered artful and worthy, for two reasons: a) To provide an opportunity for comparison, b) to create a basis for discussion. You insist on just brushing everything off with a wave of your regal hand, but never have you sought to educate, to elucidate, to even justify your dismissals. Either leave me to rot inside my Platonic cave (Plato to you must be another funny straw man with little or no understanding on anything at all, isn't he?), or enlighten me with your superior understanding. Show me what great music really is, I've been waiting for years now for those profound celestial melodies that will make me forget Mozart, Schubert, Tchaikovsky, and Puccini instantly, those rhythms that will shame me for ever having studied Beethoven, Scriabin, Stravinsky, Bartok, Prokofiev, Messiaen, etc. Please Mistress, don't leave me here, I'm ready to receive your Wisdom now...

@dshertz: How many sequencers are available free on the Internet or through the purchase of a magazine? It seems to me that more than the lion's share has already been developed here. Plus, why this insistense on Sibelius (or Finale for that matter)? There are other companies/individuals that might be interested in combining forces with VSL. Score for example - now dead - was considered a titan notator in my day - excreting on both Sibelius and Finale in their erstwhile respective versions. I mean there are many solutions; VSL may choose to reincarnate a program like that. Anyway, if there's a will, there are options.

@EP: I'm using Notion and discarded Sibelius 6.2 after a two day trial of Notion SLE.

However I found that when VSL midi tracks are exported from Notion, the midi file contained redundant keyswitch and and CC11 information and would not play properly in Cubase. I wrote code to strip this redundant info out. My test case is Hewig's Theme which went from 402K before stripping to 170K after stripping!  Now files play as well in Cubase as they did in Notion.

I export to Cubase to do the controller editing and final mixing. Composition has always been a two step process. If Notion would just tighten their act a bit, they could be the "VSL DAW".

@Errikos: Your point was VSL has done the lions share of a DAW, my point is that they haven't. Most of the better Open Source sequencers and Notation translations are just that--open source and so are not available to be incorporated as a commercial product. I'm not trying to be a buzzkill here but forgive me if I apply occasional autocorrection to that buzz.

@Errikos said:

The difference is, I remember making cogent arguments and offering a lot of examples of what I considered artful and worthy, for two reasons: a) To provide an opportunity for comparison, b) to create a basis for discussion.

Errikos, I don't know how many times I've said almost that exact same thing to people on this subject. I only usually debate with people in person I know, but no matter what... because it's not the popular view, it's automatically dismissed without any intelligent disussion. Sadly I feel if I'm reading something from plato, I get a more intellectual discussion regarding music than half the people I've ever met. And like Plato I believe that Math, Music, and Philosophy go hand in hand and all merit study. And after reading The Republic, I wonder if he could have only heard Bach, how intellectually stimulating it would have been. Maybe that seems crazy, maybe I'm wrong... but I believe the study of music intellectually is more contrapuntal or more anything else, that most modern music simply abandons. If people like that, fine. I'm not complaining in the slightest. But if I think that something else offers more intellectual stimulation and therefor merits more study, then let me be.. that isn't ignorant, it's a peaceful and intellectual approach to wanting to learn something. Something that how many composers, as you listed, have had similar paradigms about (on some level anyway) for hundereds of years, if not longer.

(Okay, seriously... I just wrote that paragraph and didn't even see your Plato reference until now, lol. I love it!)

Back to being on topic... "If there's a will, there are options" - I have had a hard time simplifying that very point on here. Seriously, all hail master Errikos, the great wordsmith! lol - Now that you've enlightened me, I remember the best quote here... "Where there's a will, there's a way".

Maybe VSL's silence means something is coming? Maybe I'm dreaming, but I'll enjoy my dream while it lasts. Seriously though, I think people would be nuts if they didn't realize that if VSL doesn't address these issues, someone else will. And that has the potential of hurting VSL a little if it happens. In software, VSL is usually ahead of other similar market offerings; in order to serve VSL users as anything that assists users, saves time, or increases in ability is good. These requests only serve that same telos.

-Sean

Thanks Sean, interesting coincidence regarding Plato; he certainly did have his strong ideas regarding music - as expounded in The Republic, and wasn't shy about them either.

@dshertz: I don't know how much autocorrection you have applied to the general buzz since I don't think you got the point. My uneducated contention is based on logic, instinct, and whatever experience, but as I have never made any money from programming, I don't know the logistics and time needed for such projects. Be that as it may, I feel that VSL shouldn't have that much to invest, at least financially, in order to offer a DAW (perhaps excluding notational facilities). However, when I mentioned the open-source/cheap sequencers, by that I meant that perhaps a sequencer's development does not require untold billions of investment, especially if it is developed for a specific kind of use instead of trying for a more universal application. And VSL already has the sounds, the mixer, and the plug-ins for symphonic composition. If only they can secure a Nobel prizewinner to design Gianna's timeline and grid-warping intangibles, all that remains is the Arrange page and the work that's done there, the Piano-Roll, and the Automation lanes.

Two questions:

Does anyone know of a DAW (excluding pro tools) that has a decent notation editor? or instead...

Does anyone know of a notation editor with more midi capabilities/friendly features than Sibelius? I only of know of notion, which only supports 4 midi channels. I want notation, but in Sibelius I can't do any sort of automation. I like notion's automation abilities and it's sequencerstaff. GREAT features... and I'm not expecting other editors to have those... but I would like an alternative program with more midi channels. That or if anyone knows how I can use Sibelius in a way that would serve the same DAW-like purposes. it would help.

-Sean

@Errikos: Please go to LilyPond's web page and just look at the size of the development team (and notice how they are begging for additional help).

And all LilyPond does is to convert script into printable notation. What I am trying to suggest is the reality of the scope of the effort to develop a Notation/DAW hybrid.

Which is why I suggested that VSL is very close to a DAW - perhaps excluding notational facilities. And that's why I suggested they perhaps went with an already established developer as far as notation is concerned - or even an established developer for the remaining DAW features - but not household names who wouldn't be interested. Lilypond was one of my suggestions but just as an example.

@dshertz said:

Please go to LilyPond's web page and just look at the size of the development team (and notice how they are begging for additional help).

First, LilyPoind is a text-based editor, which has a lot less interest from the masses than programs like Sibelius or Finale. Second, it is cross-platform. How many programs like these have more people in their developement than in the private market? Just because more people develope Firefox, doesn't mean that 10 people can't make something like Chrome. (Not that less is always or ever ideal, but it certainly doesn't prevent VSL from having a notation editor. What would determine this is cost, user demand, and how much work will need to be put into developing a score editor, based on how fully-featured or semi-featured it would be.

Those things are up to VSL to determine; the only thing worth doing is letting VSL know whether we'd desire such features (and other feature ideas) and if we'd pay for them. Let them worry about if it's doable, through a VSL-DAW or some other method, and so on.

-Sean

Errikos, you keep refering to your desire to work with only a full-featured notation editor, that if VSL implemented any notation at all, it should be fully featured. Have you looked at Rosegarden? I normally don't care for most Linux offerings. I firmly believe that Linux has potential, I simply think many aspects have not yet matured enough (or in the right way) for my liking.

All that aside, I'll have to install Ubuntu again to test it out. I was reading on their page and they promote the notation editor as being much more capable than other DAW offerings. Looking at the screenshots, it seems they aren't lying. I'm wondering (if it works decently anyway) if something like that would work. Just thought I'd mention it as I just found it.

-Sean

My reason for "insisting" on a comprehensive notation editor is very simple, maybe I haven't expressed myself adequately so far... 95% of the time I compose in Sibelius. Most of the time I wouldn't even call what I do sketching. I write straight on a full score (depending on instrumentation), and work from there. Most trials and errors take place in Sibelius - including changes in orchestration, material, anything really - and of course all audio feedback takes place there as well. When I transfer my work into Logic, all composition/orchestration is already "finalized" (there will be some minor material or orchestrational tweaks, emphasis on "minor"). Basically, I need to use the DAW for all the engineering reasons in the world, but very few creative ones. I don't need the arpeggiator, I don't need the transformers (99% of the time), I don't need Ultrabeat, etc. I need the external libraries' sounds, the EXS, the timeline (there, I said it...), the automation, and the plug-ins. Whatever minor tweaks in the material itself can easily be performed inside the Piano-Roll. I have never used the DAW notation editor, I wouldn't know what for...

So, since all composition takes place in the notation editor, I need it sophisticated enough to score The Phantom Menace - not Inception, not TRON 2 - The Phantom Menace, to the point where all parts can be extracted and given to studio players for performance with every detail, straight from my printer; conductor's score too. I don't care for Sibelius' 'Ideas' feature, or its education packages (although I have used them occasionally for some of  my private tuition), and generally any of its beginner-features or plug-ins (not that they shouldn't be there, just that I don't need them). I do need however the majority of its notational and layout capabilities. I have to be able to follow my complicated score like I follow a Boosey edition - if not better, and as I compose, I don't want the hassle of having to constantly stop thinking music and try to move everything into place, etc. And I do want the easy access, the clever palettes; basically everything that makes me compose as hassle-free as possible, and with the best audio feedback possible. Since I work on the page from scratch, for the life of me I can't understand how the standard DAW notation editor (say Logic's) would be of any use to me - and no one tells me!

P.S.: I was always peripherally interested in Linux (since my days of learning Unix at university), even this OpenOctave thing they've done with the VSL. However, one look at this Rosegarden notation jpg. tells me that one just couldn't do The Phantom Menace with it (sadly). Be that as it may, I do like to know what's happening with all platforms, thanks for the link.

Errikos, that cleared up a great deal for me. I agree with your first paragraph almost entirely. The only reason I brought up the DAW notation in Rosegarden was that I thought it might address some issues. After reading that paragraph and realizing how much I agree with it, I would be plenty happy with two things taking place.

1) VSL having far better integration into Sibelius, as discussed.

2) A VSL-DAW (notation or not) - Although, the first one would be more important to me in the end, but I'd still want both.

@Errikos said:

for the life of me I can't understand how the standard DAW notation editor (say Logic's) would be of any use to me - and no one tells me!

I only want this as a means of hybrid'ing notation with good performance, like what notion attempted. If I could simply use Sibelius will complete and automatic integration and get decent playback results... then I'm satisfied, all DAW discussion would end for me at that point. After that, I'd simply export the midi into the DAW for fine tuning the performance if neccesary.

Having a full-featured Sibelius inside a daw, with notation and performance kept separate, would accomplish the same thing to me. Where I could draw things in sibelius, and fine-tune the performance in the piano roll. I'm basically wanting notion. The only reason I don't use notion now is that it has only 4 midi channels, a ridiculous hinderance for big templates. Now that Notion is dead, what other option do I have? This is why I would like either Pro-tools to add more of Sibelius in it's editor, or for VSL to have a notation editor, or Sibelius to have full integration with VSL, etc. But like I said, in the end I could sacrifice all my views posted here if I could have a more automatic Sibelius integration with decent playback results. (I still feel this thread is valid. Like I said, A VSL-DAW could offer more integration than Cubase, so I'd still want such a thing to happen. I'd simply use Sibelius, then use VE instead of Cubase.

I have never even heard of OpenOctave until now... looks VERY cool! I'll have to look into it. Thanks!!

-Sean

Errikos, totally off topic, but the Sibelius Ideas thing is very handy, when you have unorthodox (according to Sibelius) rhythmic notation that appears at various times in the piece. I find that if I have a motif or fragment (that I've spent time re-beaming and putting articulations to) that is likely to appear at various times in the music, storing it in Ideas is much quicker than searching the score to be able to copy and paste. Obviously it is much quicker to re-pitch this Idea than create it from scratch.

DG