@Gusfmm: If you read my original post more carefully - if at all (and what I've said since in the latest threads), most of the points you raised are already addressed. As far as the 'time for development' for a Sibelius/Finale competent program, it's possible that you are right, but I never said this would happen overnight. Finally, there is no insurmountable problem with the output of such a sequencer as discussed - again, read previous posts carefully; the DAW will be reading all articulations, expressions, dynamics, tempi, etc. from the written page - yes, it does pressupose that one won't just write notes, but a detailed full score - and interpret them using default settings for each value (like Notion SLE does), determined by VSL. It goes without saying that users will tamper with those settings and make their final mixes on the actual DAW in MIDI, but my point is that at the composition and the orchestration stages, the perceived feedback will be far better than Finale's, Sibelius' or anybody's. That alone will be a tremendous help and time-saver, not to mention the advantages of an integrated system that grows commensurately.

 Tons of people use VEP with other libraries. In fact, it seems to almost be a common denominator in professional set-ups. So many other libraries that run on Kontakt benefit from VEP's hosting capabilities. Many report using it perfectly with the recent Play 3... So how would an exclusive VSL notation facility help people utilize their other libraries?

.

On the other thought, I never spoke in terms of "integrating" anything, that's a huge term in itself, but rather providing more detailed soundsets (in the case of Sibelius) and maybe even predetermined matrixes to go along with, in the specific case of the VSL libraries.

.

Question- Are you all using the existing VSL-provided Sibelius soundset templates and the house style files? Are you uncomfortable with them? Or are they not up to what you consider a reasonable orchestral representation of your notation? I'm a Finale person, but after reading the available documentation on Sibelius here on VSL, I personally get the impression that a good deal of notation can be properly handled by the use of these templates. Please correct me if I'm mistaken.

I thought it was clear. In this hypothetical scenario of a VSL all inclusive DAW, the Notator (say), through VE PRO would trigger sounds from your other libraries as you assign them. Obviously, VSL's interpretational presets would be limited to VSL's own instruments and any other library's would play through some MIDI allocation I would imagine, I am not a professional programmer. This would only be a problem - if at all - with the manuscript side of things, not the sequencing, automating, mixing, etc. However, at the composition/orchestration stages, would you really need access to all your libraries? Wouldn't the VSL's sounds be enough? I mean you would buy the VSL DAW if you owned enough of their library, otherwise you would stay with Finale and ProTools if you only owned VSL's Flutes.

 Far from clear as you can see. I'm not certain how others go about composing, but why would you not need to have all your tools in your toolbox available for use at the most important moment in the process, when you are creating, and then orchestrating? On the other hand, if this were to be exclusively fine-tuned facility for VSL libraries, then in order for someone to incorporate other libraries and sounds you would still need to resort to Sibelius or Finale, or your (real) DAW software to continue composing?

.

My previous question remains unanswered. What is it that you'd want that Sibelius' capabilities, and the VSL-Sibelius soundset and house style files don't currently do?

.

Hate sounding like a party-crasher, not my intention, just offering my opinion.

Hey Gusfmm,

Maybe I'm getting it totally wrong..but are you suggesting that Sibelius and Finale work with VSL library without problems ?

I mean the hairpins are doing what they have to do, the cc11 from Finale is acting perfectly and so on..Have you followed how many times users from Finale complained to Andi about the hairpins and HP messing the sound of samples ? Or how about the dynamics limitation? Is not that I have something with Finale or Sibeliius ( I own both and Notion also) but if it can be done something better why not...ohh..and by the way, how about  the lack of midi controll...somehow Notion started this idea notation + midi control ..but still, it requiers more work and their team looks like is not so willing to rush things.

And by the way, the most important process ( the creation itself) comes differently to every composer. Some rely on inspiration and cut the unwanted things after, some (more into classical aproach) on techniques such as counterpoint , motivic development and so on...and of course a third category which probably are the best can combine everything on the fly. I can not see why you are not convinced that such a tool would be a benefit for every composer from the categories mentioned above.

 Exactly like you, I'm not sustaining a party for the sake of it , just adding my opinion..

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.