?Any VSL updates for Finale 25 Human Playback preferences in the pipeline?

[Ariam]

Hi Andi, and all,

Firstly many thanks for the VSL announcement ^^ of this special area dedicated specifically to notation software support 😊

I'm using Finale 25 (current version) and have been with Finale since 2004. I'm used to it and often feel that even after all these years and updates that I'm barely scratching the surface of what it can do. Yet like some other members here, I've bought/bookmarked Dorico since it seems to be a promising new notation program by Steinberg with a different approach (and apparently undergoing fairly rapid development, even if currently in its early days at Version Pro 2). 

I've searched this forum and VSL site for a more up-to-date Finale Human Playback Preferences library dump (which VSL very kindly produced several years back). But that was only for the VSL Special Edition 1 libraries(?) (Plus a VSL drum expression map for Finale). Even after checking under MyVSL/notation-related folder today there's nothing I can see that's new/recent for Finale users (although I see there's very recent updated support for Sibelius).

I love the VSL libraries and delved initially into quite a few of the Special Edition libraries, and now an increasing number of  VSL standard VIs (with a complete articulation set here and there). I'm tempted by this month's Synchron Chamber Strings special, but am wondering how it will work in Finale as a VI, articulated in Finale, and as auditioned by Finale's Human Playback.

Is the new Synchron Player *intelligent* in selecting patches in a way that surpasses VI Pro? Even (maybe) without needing to set up articulation rules/maps for Finale, Dorico, Notion, etc??

Also I'm currently using just the standard VI Player.

If I upgraded to the VI Pro player could that give me better somewhat-automated VSL articulation-patch selection for various articulations as notated in Finale? 

Btw I have Cubase Pro.. but would still love to be able to get a good/better wav render of an ensemble or orchestral composition (using VSL's VIs) exported from Finale if at all possible , and thus without having to export an XML, import into a DAW, etc

Any help/recommendations/feedback 💡would be greatly appreciated 😊 Thanks++ in advance..

[andi]

Hello Ariam!

The Finale Human Playback system offers only a limited number of articulations, which is ok for the Special Edition volumes 1 to 4. The Special Edition PLUS volumes, the Intrument collections, Single instruments and Synchron collections offer way more articulations. If we would make Human Playback Preferences for these libraries, we would limit the usage. That's why there is a keyswitch dump file for Finale. With the help of this file, you can add keyswitches and MIDI CC commands to your Finale score. This way every articulation can be triggered. This keyswitch dump file works for the Vienna Instruments player just the same as for VI Pro and the Synchron Player.

The VI Pro player will not give you better playback with Finale by itself. It simply offers more tools for finetuning the sound. You can try it with a free demo license.
https://www.vsl.co.at/en/Vienna_Software_Package/Vienna_Instruments_PRO

Best regards,
Andi

[Ariam]

Thanks Andi,

Thank you very much for the info and recommendations 👍

Have gone ahead just now and bought the VI Pro player anyway as I tried it once before on 30-day trial offer (but did not have a real opportunity to try it in a DAW situation etc at that time but could see it was very good). It definitely seems the way to go with the main VIs..

Thanks again, and for your very prompt reply :) 

[Bill]

>> The Finale Human Playback system offers only a limited number of articulations

Using custom text allows setup up any articulation you want...

[andi]

Hello Bill!

I made some tests with custom text with an earlier version of Finale (2012 or 2014). It didn't lead to satisfying results. I must admit that I don't remember what exactly the problem was though.

Best,
Andi

[Ariam]

Hi Bill, 

Thanks for the additional tips there with Finale and articulations in conjunction with VSL VIs..

Yes I too have tried what you suggested and it seemed to work in Finale 25.
However, I found it quite time-consuming (maybe I wasn't using some shortcut available for this). Also I had a problem with some of the keyswitch markings being printed in the PDF of the score which shouldn't have occurred (but most of them were hidden as is meant to happen). Maybe I had done something wrong with some of those, but the problem seemed inconsistent. (I might check on the Finale forums/support) ..

There are a huge number of articulations in Finale 25 I've found Andi, but I guess you may be referring to (for example) full VIs with patches that have 2,3,4,5 second samples (in timing like pfp)?

Bill or Andi have you had experience with Notion 6? Have you found it easier to use VSL VIs in that?  I have Notion 6 but haven't really tried it as I'm so used to Finale.

Thanks again in advance, cheers, A

[andi]

Hello Ariam!

The Notion team has prepared playback rules for our Special Edition and Special Edition PLUS volumes. So these libraries are comfortable to use with Notion. There are no such rules for our Instrument collections and Single instruments though.

Best,
Andi

[Bill]

I belive the issues with custom text have been fixed.

[bogdan]

Hi Andi,

Could you please confirm what Bill stated regarding the custom text? 

It would be a great time saver, if it really works !!

Thnak you you,

Bogdan

[Ariam]

Thanks Andi, Bill..

Firstly thanks Andi for the heads-up on Notion :)

I'll explore Notion 6 some more. I don't have all the Plus versions of VSL Special Edition 1, but it's great that they've supported that. Hopefully they might extend their VSL articulation support for the other Special Editions, as well as single VIs! I feel sure that more VSL library support for Notion as well as Studio One 4 would attract a lot more attention to their stable.

And Bill, thanks for mentioning that Finale's text editor for new articulations is working well. As a Finale user I'll definitely check that out some more..

Thanks again, A

[andi]

Hello!

I checked Human Playback and custom text in Finale 25.5 once again and unfortunately must say that it still seems unsuitable for our collections. For lots of articulation changes we would need three actions (keyswitches, CC). Finale only offers two, because the third one is for dynamic only. I did my tests with Synchron Strings where the third action that would be needed is for vibrato level. Having extra custom text commands for vibrato didn't work either, because the following standard articulations like staccato or legato didn't work after the custom text anymore. Furthermore hanging notes were produced when the playback was stopped. Another thing I have tried is assigning CC-parameters to the vibrato expressions directly in the Expression Designer (instead of Human Playback). This didn't work either, because Finale changed the CC value for CC1 (vibrato level) AND CC11 (Expression), which was not set in the Expression Designer and is not wanted at all.

I still think using the keyswitch dump file for changing articulations in Finale is a good way to go, because you can always decide yourself which articulation suits best to a note or phrase.

Best regards,
Andi

[bogdan]

Thank you Andi for the fast update in this matter. 

All best,

Bogdan

[Ariam]

Hi Andi,

Thanks so much for going to considerable lengths in checking out VSL articulation compatibility and various options to try and implement these in Finale.
..much appreciated(!) because I'd really like to use the full VIs (including Synchron) in a notation program (with artics and appropriate patches automatically loaded), and without the unexpected problems and limitations you described ! 

Seems I may have to wait (not too long hopefully) for Dorico,  Notion, Finale, etc to implement deeper/better support for VSL libraries and VIs to work better and more seamlessly with VSL's sophisticated artics/patches, and without having to set up our own maps, artic libraries, etc.
In the meantime, would you suggest that, if starting a composition in a notation program, to then export it and move it across as an xml or MIDI file to a DAW, then add articulation, expression, etc there ? It is just so time-consuming, ugh, and a steep learning curve at first (for me anyhow) ,.. especially for orchestral or larger ensembles..

Thanks again Andi for all your helpful research on this :)
Cheers,
A

[Bill]

Thanks Andi, I hadn't tested in depth.

I would say though that the two actions allowed by HP are fine for controling the VI librarys, the the dump file used for matrix changes or A/B changes.

[andi]

Hello Bill!

As mentioned earlier, our Instrument collections and Single instruments include lots of articulations that can't be triggered with the Human Playback system, and custom text doesn't seem to be an option. Furthermore making such HP files for all our libraries would be very time consuming. Please understand that we can't spend that much time on something that wouldn't work to a satisfying degree anyway.

Best,
Andi

[Acclarion]

@Ariam said:

In the meantime, would you suggest that, if starting a composition in a notation program,to then export it and move it across as an xml or MIDI file to a DAW,[i]then[/i] add articulation, expression, etcthere ? It is just so time-consuming, ugh, and a steep learning curve at first (for me anyhow) ,.. especially for orchestral or larger ensembles.. A

Hi Ariam, I started out with a very similar desire to avoid the daw...it simply is a necessary part of creating the best quality performances from your scores, possible. Case in point: I just completed a clarinet concerto (it's linked a few posts down in the compositions subforum if you'd like to hear it). The composition took four days to complete in Finale...just a bare bones score, sans artics, dynamics, etc. I imported it in to Cubase, and spent literally 2 weeks shaping a midi performance. Now, I'm back in Finale to complete th score with dynamics, articulations, tempi, etc. This new approach for me lets me craft a performance in Cubase, free of the limitations of prescribed notation indications, were I to put them in the score first. Doing it that way (as in entering markings in the score prior to exporting to Cubase), often I would end up changing dynamics, or articulation markings during the mockup phase and then have to go back to Finale to reflect these changes. Now, at least, I get the score done in one go, which accurately reflects the performance I've done in Cubase. Basically, the composing always is far quicker than the production, and for large orchestral scores, shaping three or four cc lanes of data, velocities, etc. times 25+ parts for a twenty to forty minute work is absolutely a daunting task...but the end results will always bring greater satisfaction than a rudimentary playback from finale. Hope you find a workflow that suits your needs and is as efficient and painless as possible! Cheers, Dave

[shnootre]

Interesting discussion. 

It strikes me as too bad that Finale really seems to have very little interest in optimizing their program for use with non-Garritan libraries. I bought Dorico this year, but am still using Finale as Dorico (2.0) still has some major issues for me (no swing feel; limited control of velocity, even though they have a piano-roll editor). 

In Finale, I've managed to have a lot of success using keyboard maestro (I'm sure any other keyboard shortcut prog. would work) in combination with the midi tool. I have various macros programmed to adjust velocity, y axis, slot crossfade etc. It can be pretty quick when it's working - unfortunately their visual feedback (Finale's) is archaic, so it's time consuming to see what's already been entered. 

It is a real bummer that the custom text triggering doesn't work better than it does. I do find that VI Pro makes good HP playback possible, and I've never used the VSL Finale matrices. I make my own (I mostly don't use the SE libraries anymore either), but it doesn require a lot of hands-on tweaking, some of which can be done relatively quickly on the fly. For instance, I usually have a layer of the matrix dedicated to the various performance repeat patches (legato, staccato, etc.). If I have 4 instruments playing a bunch of repeated notes, I can highlight all the notes, and with little more than a push of a button move their instruments to the appropriate level on the Y matrix. I find the repeated note patches make a huge difference in realistic playback. 

[Ariam]

Hi Dave,
Many thanks for sharing your approach to composing and production. Much appreciated!

As I understand it then, you're essentially using Finale (for intial composition-notation) > then moving this (sans artics) to DAW (Cubase) for artics/expression added via CC lanes etc, > then importing back again to Finale to add notated expression/artics as implemented in Cubase. I think I'll try similar, ..which means (for me) back to the J-curve and the time-consuming process of learning and streamlining/optimising this methodology.
(Btw I'll try and find time to go and check out your new clarinet concerto!)

Thanks so much again for your very helpful tips and insights..

Cheers, A

[Ariam]

Hi Daniel,

@shnootre said:

It strikes me as too bad that Finale really seems to have very little interest in optimizing their program for use with non-Garritan libraries. I bought Dorico this year, but am still using Finale as Dorico (2.0) still has some major issues for me (no swing feel; limited control of velocity, even though they have a piano-roll editor).

Yes I agree it's a pity Finale doesn't seem to be investing more support for 3rd party VIs, other than Garritan. (Unless they're working behind the scenes on this? I certainly hope so.) 
It seems to be such a logical step to me that Finale offer far better and seamless support for VSL's VIs and libraries, especially given that many of their users (including me) are writing for orchestral instruments, and that their notation software (Finale) is very sophisticated and a traditional notation program aimed at professional composers scoring for small or large ensembles for these very kinds of instruments! I feel VSL have the sophisticated VIs to match the sophistication of Finale's composing/notation program. How ironic that they have (to date) apparently left the workload to VSL to make a move in this direction, with VSL at least providing a library keyswitch and CC dump for Finale. 

Finale is such a powerful notation program and I would like to continue to use it for similar reasons to the ones you mentioned. Thanks also for your tips re implementation of your own matrices, and the 3rd party short-cut software (which I think is only available for Mac, but will check again).

Also I agree that the Human Performance algorithms (swing etc) in Finale surpass Dorico 2.0 at this stage. Yet to be fair to Dorico, Finale has been around a lot longer and has had much more time to develop the software over many iterations. But I do like Dorico's interface, "workflow" and their inclusion of a piano-roll editor, even though it still seems a little rudimentary, and certainly not 'a Cubase within their notation program'. On this point it would be great to have a super-quick workflow: interchanging instantly (via a keystroke, say) between Dorico and Cubase, and having artics automatically updated in Dorico that reflect CC channel changes made in Cubase (and vice versa)  while working on the same composition file and without needing to go through the hassle of xml or MIDI imports/exports! I dream on .. yet one day maybe  ??

Cheers and many thanks,
A

[Acclarion]

@Ariam said:

Hi Dave,
Many thanks for sharing your approach to composing and production. Much appreciated!

As I understand it then, you're essentially using Finale (for intial composition-notation) > then moving this (sans artics) to DAW (Cubase) for artics/expression added via CC lanes etc, > then importing back again to Finale to add notated expression/artics as implemented in Cubase. I think I'll try similar, ..which means (for me) back to the J-curve and the time-consuming process of learning and streamlining/optimising this methodology.
(Btw I'll try and find time to go and check out your new clarinet concerto!)

Thanks so much again for your very helpful tips and insights..

Cheers, A

Yes, that's exactly the workflow I'm currently exploring.  Daniel's ideas, and your own desire to see greater integration between notation software and DAW would be most welcome for those of us that have to go back and forth between two programs that don't play nicely together.  You're absolutely right in wanting to make the process more efficient.  Time will tell if developers can incorporate these ideas in to their products.

Cheers!
Dave