I have been running Linux for 11 years and if the tools don't exist I code them.

As far as I can tell the real issue here is not the OS, but the dividing line which exists between notation programs

and sequencers. What falls into that gap, is the fine control which is need to bring the variations in sound libraries and

rigid text-to-midi rules together so that compositions sound as realistic as possible.

BTW, I have used linux for over a decade too, and have hated every poorly documented, committee designed and occasionally GUI phobic

moment of it.

@Another User said:

 On another topic, I would like to add that I've been trying MusicXML between Sibelius and Notion. I've been doing some tests, composing in Notion and then exporting everything to Sibelius for printing and I'm very happy with the results, at least for small ensembles, I'm yet to try a full orchestral score.

are there some preliminary tasks to accomplish? because I swear when I tried it was a mess ... all the note were on their own (no beams ...) a lot of hairpins and dynamics were not correctly placed and so on ... 

anyway a single solution would be great

there also a lot of people on the notion forum that dream of collaboration between reaper and notion ...

But I start to fear collaborationsand company acquisitions... nothing good from them

it seems that the needs of musicians are not very satisfied ... only the market needs ... look at PT and Sibelius ... at yamaha and steinberg ... did they have produced something near the expectation of the musicians ? leader companies united together only to produce toys for beatmaking .... 

@Another User said:

BTW, I have used linux for over a decade too, and have hated every poorly documented, committee designed and occasionally GUI phobic moment of it.

I think dshertz hit this right on the mark on each point. The democratic nature of Linux developement is great!I love the philosophy, but it isn't perfect either. The problems it poses, such as constistancy and other things are real issues that are largely ignored. I saw an MSDN page (Microsoft) that was part of an encyclopedia on Windows design. While there is a lot of clutter in Windows, it really has a great deal that other OS's don't. Aside from what windows includes, this page I came across talked VERY intelligently about dialog box's and windows and how they are text-formatted. They showed how things should be done a very specific way, that made users feel less intimidated, made the software feel more usable and readable, and when to break from this. It was brilliant. EVERY thing I have ever seen in linux has not followed this at all. I notice inconsistent formatting, shabby 'thrown together' design, and other problems that are heavily 'gui and user-friendly' nightmares.

The biggest problem with linux, is that when Ubuntu said 'we're upping the gui', a large chunk of Linux geek users/developers said 'uh, you're ruining linux'. Aesthetics are the last thing on many linux developers minds, but this deters a great deal of potential user base. There are plenty of logical reasons for aesthetics that are overlooked in favor of people who quite frankly should still be living in a dos enviornment by their mentality. If Linux can grow up and compete visually (and the recent Ubuntu changes are a start, not an end... they have catching up to do) then Linux could well take over the world for all I care... and they could probably even become a major player.

In the end, I really only think that gui (not just shiny looks, but intelligently functioning gui) is what we need for Linux to be mainstreem. Only then, I think companies like Steinberg and others start to develope Cubase and others. When that happens, THEN VSL will finally jump on. So I have no false hopes here. And I have no serious problems with Linux. I only wish that the development direction would focus more on things that will attract more users, because my sole thought process in that is "I want VSL on linux!!! NOW!!!... oh yeah, and Cubase!" lol

I hope that answers your question.

-Sean

@arkham said:

anyway a single solution would be great

there also a lot of people on the notion forum that dream of collaboration between reaper and notion

I'm a HUGE reaper fanatic. Great program. I love Notion, Sibelius looks georgious to me... but Notion is 10x more functional for what I need, with few Sibelius features I wish it had. Notion development has slowed to a crawl, so little may come here... but If I could have a Notion/Reaper/VSL hybrid setup that was a one-stop and shop sollution... that handled things the way that most comments earlier in this thread were suggesting... if I could have that, screw divisi, screw everything. I'd sign in blood and sell every last thing I had to get it! That 'dream program' essentially would save what I think are the majority of users, a LOT of time and headache! PLEASE! Someone from VSL or somewhere hear us out and by sympathetic on us! lol

-Sean

@clruwe said:

The main reason I didn't move to Notion, which at first looked quite exciting, is because it didn't do either job (Cubase and Sibelius) well. The scores were unacceptable and the tweaking limited and complicated.

If they create a notation software that you can truly tweak for realistic performance it would be a major bonus in the sense that I can tweak from an actual score (instead of a piano roll that I just find confusing)

Agreed! I think that Notion doesn't do either job as well as it should. Note entry in Notion (via mouse) is more work than Sibelius. Notion doesn't have enough scoring features, but I don't think it's horribly far off. Cubase can do loads more than Notion. I don't think people expect that from Notion, but at least more than what's there. 4 midi ports kills me! I use 10!! (And I'm ALWAYS expanding! lol) I'm anti piano role! It has it's uses and I love it, but I hate it. I LOVE notation. I think notation. When I see a G on the score, I hear a G. When I see a piano role, I hear nothing! Growing up, playing instruments... we don't read piano roles. I read notation, so that's what's ingraved into my brain! Notion is notation, but not as powerful as cubase. More scoring features to me is secondary... as long as the score looks accurate enough to the performance in timings, etc. Then I'd be happy exporting to Sibelius or something for printing work and adjusting the performance for real performers. I basically want Cubase, but with the ability to use notation as I think. But everything else about Cubase is spot on to me.

-Sean

@iscorefilm said:

Sibelius was the first program to imbed in my brain "Hit Ctrl-S or face your DOOM!" as I once lost 46 bars of fully-orchestral, climatic glory because of an auto-save file was corrupted.

@clruwe said:

The main reason I didn't move to Notion, which at first looked quite exciting, is because it didn't do either job (Cubase and Sibelius) well. The scores were unacceptable and the tweaking limited and complicated.

If they create a notation software that you can truly tweak for realistic performance it would be a major bonus in the sense that I can tweak from an actual score (instead of a piano roll that I just find confusing)

Agreed! I think that Notion doesn't do either job as well as it should. Note entry in Notion (via mouse) is more work than Sibelius. Notion doesn't have enough scoring features, but I don't think it's horribly far off. Cubase can do loads more than Notion. I don't think people expect that from Notion, but at least more than what's there. 4 midi ports kills me! I use 10!! (And I'm ALWAYS expanding! lol) I'm anti piano role! It has it's uses and I love it, but I hate it. I LOVE notation. I think notation. When I see a G on the score, I hear a G. When I see a piano role, I hear nothing! Growing up, playing instruments... we don't read piano roles. I read notation, so that's what's ingraved into my brain! Notion is notation, but not as powerful as cubase. More scoring features to me is secondary... as long as the score looks accurate enough to the performance in timings, etc. Then I'd be happy exporting to Sibelius or something for printing work and adjusting the performance for real performers. I basically want Cubase, but with the ability to use notation as I think. But everything else about Cubase is spot on to me.

-Sean

@clruwe said:

Ha! So true! Mine has actually developed to the level of a nervous twitch!

lol, I love it! "nervous twitch" describes it perfectly. I do it out of habit every minute or so, then any time I do something I like, and every now and then when I realize it's been longer than the normal 'minute interval or so' I do the nervous twitch thing and attack my keyboard. I had a professor ask 'what's the most important 'first thing' in computer music work you should learn?' and I said "Make ctrl-s a habit" jokingly... turned out that it was what he was going to say.

Cubase truly is amazing, but I also don't think they will improve notation anytime soon. My hopes WERE with Notion, thinking they'll just improve until they can do what Cubase is capable of... but with the slow development, I've lost hope altogether. Now I just wait thinking maybe someday someone will do it. - The sad thing is, I absolutely think there is a market for it. Cubase 7 with decent notation editing (bare minimum like Notion, hopefully more like Sibelius for me personally) and I think MANY users would convert to Cubase in a heartbeat! (Not to mention existing Cubase users that want it.)

Anyway, I don't mean to keep you... but I'm always willing to talk about this point, as I think it's the most crucial for me personally in getting more use of the time I'm at my workstation to compose. The second most crucial thing, as I mentioned much earlier on in this thread... was the desire for less work in 'programming the sound'. I think the goal is 'no programming necessary for realistic performance; the only programming done would be to adjust the style of performance or how it's performed' - Any thoughts there? This comes from taking a LONG time to 1) draw out crossfades (I don't have a mod wheel or breath controller, which is horrific but will soon change) and the fact that I don't just plunk out a Violin I part. I take the orchestral strings, chamber, and sometimes solo Violin... to make a more dynamic string section where the pitch is less perfect (only enough for variance, not a bad performance) and where the timings are looser, and where the chamber gets a little louder or softer faster or slower than the rest of the performers. DVZ string library has got the right approach in many ways to do this very thing. But 1) I think VSL sounds much better and 2) I think VSL has the best philosophy on building things well from the ground up, so any future divisi library we see will surely be impressive. - The point though, is that I wish that getting a 'realistic' playback performance takes far more work than it really should. This and the Cubase notation point are the most concerning to me.

If you don't have time to answer that, I understand. That could open a whole other long discussion. [;)] But at least this is relevant to the original ideas in this thread anyway, so it isn't off-topic.

-Sean

@clruwe said:

So I don't see why developers can't run their own GUI on Linux.

Somehow I saw the ctrl-S reply and forgot to keep reading...lol 1) I can't believe I never considered that... Great point! 2) There are plenty of sites devoted to making things look the way you want. I agree. But personally I rarely like these gui themes, and the few that I think are good are often not 'complete' where there are parts where things don't look right, etc. I guess I'm being a bit picky there... but my main concern with GUI isn't so much personal preference, but wanting Linux to get more followers. I WANT Linux to succeed. I just worry that the development of it isn't doing a couple things right for that to happen. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'd be happy to be wrong about that...lol. Yes, I went the WindowBlinds route - crashy crashy, that's for sure. I find that no one does enough for mult-monitor users. I've tried a couple programs for extending the taskbar, etc. But these programs don't maximize windows properly, etc. I've wished that Cubase and VE would have more flexibility in their window design (more so with Cubase).

Maybe OpenOctaveMidi will show promise... I hope it does. I can't remember from when I looked into it... but I thought that the Notation options (rosegarden? can't remember...) weren't up to what I wanted. I didn't like a couple things about how much work it seemed to take to get OpenOctaveMidi up and running, but maybe I'm remembering wrong. Either way, I'm glad to see some work being done there. My biggest complaint about it wasn't notation or setup though. I NEED VST EXPRESSION! lol as I don't care for the side articulation menu... I build my own instruments, with keyswitches, etc. Without VST expression, I'm very limited.

Is our OpenOctaveMidi guy still following this thread?

-Sean

I don't think that the only  problem with linux would be daws and libraries, but also drivers for audio cards and other gear ...

I know that there are some reverse engineering projects to write drivers for some audio cards, but honestly it would look like to go back 10 years in the past, desperately looking for a compatible nic or modem or whatsoever ...

I'm an IT professional and a huge linux fan, but even if I'm convinced that linux is good for a lot of stuff, it is clear that audio, video and gaming industries simply don't care about linux ...

Anyway Openoctave looks amazing, but just know, with which libraries is supposed to work ?

@clruwe said:

Thus a slightly better notation in Cubase or slightly more tweaking in Sibelius wouldn't really change anything for me. I would still have to use both of them.

Yeah, that's where I differ from most on this thread. I don't mind exporting to something like Sibelius, so long as the 'Cubase notation' is at least accurate enough to what it should be.

I'm more focused in a good notation midi editor. I want to put a staccato, and have a staccato played (like VST expression, or Sibelius sets) ... so I want notation in that regard... but I want playback flexibility, mixing, and everything else like Cubase has. Notion is really the only option out there for guys like me. But I certainly wouldn't complain if Cubase added fully capable notation features. I believe Errikos (a user on here) said something like you, wanting full out notation features, etc. VSL has a market for MIR, VEP, even VIP. I REALLY hope they see some potential for users in a daw or notation program, or some kind of extention to, or version of VEP with such features.

-Sean

Notion 3 has done something smart trying a hybrid of piano roll-type control of durations in the horizontal and staves for the note placement.

 'I want a staccato played' is problematic; how long is that staccato? They can't all be uniform in reality, so we have a way to determine that absolutely.

I wouldn't want Cubase to be a full fledged Finale or something, it would be bloated and less stable almost certainly.

@civilization 3 said:

Notion 3 has done something smart trying a hybrid of piano roll-type control of durations in the horizontal and staves for the note placement.

 'I want a staccato played' is problematic; how long is that staccato? They can't all be uniform in reality, so we have a way to determine that absolutely.

I wouldn't want Cubase to be a full fledged Finale or something, it would be bloated and less stable almost certainly.

@clruwe said:

 But wouldn't it be lovely if we could do it straight on a score? A panorama type view that has MIDI controllers below the staff... Mmmmh... I'm drooling...

Yes, this would fill the gap between notation and sequencer packages. There is room for a new class of control lane editing tools like "anti-machine gunning" or sfz scaling. I feel that Notion took a step in the right direction, with their controller lanes, but they did not develope any useful editing tools. Randomizing tools, like Frank's midi plugin, could help with that staccato problem: put gaussian variation on the length of the notes.

How is VST expression preventing you from randomizing? How are you randomizing without it?

I am not disagreeing, but not understanding. If you don't mind elaborating, it may help me a great deal. I agree with the comment about Notion having the right idea, but lacking proper 'editing tools'. Spot on.

I simply want to use notation LIKE I use Cubase. VST expression is simply an articulation switcher to me, nothing more. VST expression is great for the piano roll, but there are 2 problems. 1) It is NOT dynamic at all. I'm not talking expression, but the lanes are very stuck. If I could expand a stacatto menu or an even more intuitive approach to having so many matrices in VI Pro- this would be great. 2) VST expression is a MASSIVE screen hog. I have 40 different articulations taking up WAY too much space (and yes, I use them all! I could use much more really). Notation is FAR more friendly to screen real-estate. I have multiple instruments SEPARATELY on one page. I have a dot as an articulation, a line, a word, etc. These are FAR less intrusive than an entire line for legato stretching across the whole window. Your screen real-estate is directly impacted by the number of articulations you have. With Notation, it isn't. I can't stress how much that matters, the fact that I THINK in notation NATURALLY matters, and that as a composing tool (as I hate using paper, I lose it, I'm disorganized, etc.) this would save me SO much time and headache. I could compose in Sibelius without decent sound, then move it over... but this only takes more time again, which is what I'm wanting to eliminate.

-Sean

@iscorefilm said:

I simply want to use notation LIKE I use Cubase. VST expression is simply an articulation switcher to me, nothing more. VST expression is great for the piano roll, but there are 2 problems. 1) It is NOT dynamic at all. I'm not talking expression, but the lanes are very stuck. If I could expand a stacatto menu or an even more intuitive approach to having so many matrices in VI Pro- this would be great.

The only experience I have with VST Expressions is, I helped a student very briefly with a project. There was a lane in the piano roll in his Cubase project, 'articulations' which was from VST expressions. If you need an 'articulations' lane for each articulation, it seems like a problem to me. It seems like there were more than one in the one lane but I'm foggy, I didn't use it as I wasn't using his VSL instruments. What you want is to explode or collapse an articulations lane... seems like a very useful feature.

I am suited to how it works now well enough, as I don't think in notation anymore. I keep my hand in with teaching... If I were to prepare a score from what I have, it would be a whole workflow, quantizing it and getting rid of all the keyswitches. Notation and realistic sequencing are just very different animals. When I started sequencing I did conceptualize it in notation, wrote in Finale and exported a .mid and brought it into a sequencer. The result was so robotic and the amount of work to make it breathe or live was so daunting I abandoned that idea.as a waste of time. I need the sound to know what to write anyway. It's come a ways since then; I don't know Notion 3 but if I was doing notation I would opt for that.