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

Thank you Andi for the fast update in this matter. 

All best,

Bogdan

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

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.

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

@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

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. 

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

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

@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

Based on some posts in this forum, I've decided I'm going to take a closer look at Notion 6.

1) I've already found that they have better support for artic-maps for certain 3rd party VIs, and thanks to Andi's research ^^, this currently includes VSL Special Editions 1-4. Would love to see them support VSL's full VIs, even if one-by-one!

2) I've felt that, in any notation program, the quality of sound of the VIs and expressive potential and realism of the instruments can actually inspire the creative process and the desire to compose, and can influence the direction and orchestration of a work. Perhaps some other notation programs have underestimated this??

This personal experience I found echoed elsewhere, e.g. in a quote by J.J. Abrams (Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Star Trek, Lost) "If you're lucky, the tools themselves will inspire you..." . NB: He was speaking of composing with VIs, software, ..compositional 'tools generically'  (I presume) and, to be fair, not specifically about VSL. Nonethless I feel the principle applies more broadly to top-of-class VIs in most compositional work, especially within notation software and in writing for orchestral instruments.

4) Presonus (who make Notion) also make a powerful DAW: Studio One which is Rewired to Notion 6. Whilst it may not be a perfect dovetailing of the two yet, at least they're trying to support and streamline composers' workflows, as well as offering (?increasing) support for sophisticated 3rd party orchestral VIs for Notion (through their own time and investment), such as those made by VSL.

5) Even if a program might lack some features of other notation programs, yet if they devote their own in-house dev-time to support high-quality 3rd party VIs more than their competition, then imho they might win over more interest. And customers? Especially if they also escalate the sophistication and competitiveness of their notation software. If they do offer more in-program support for 3rd party VI artics & samples, then perhaps VSL might reciprocate this support in their VIs?? ..A win-win..

Feedback/experience/suggestions from others would be most welcome.. 

Cheers,
A

I sugest you also check out Overture. It's the only one that has truly DAW like palyback control.

Hi Bill,

Thanks for that lead! Apols it's taken me a little while to reply.

Yes I've looked up the Overture notation website (sonicscores.com) and see it's already at version 5 and has, as you say, got quite sophisticated integration of notation and daw features! Plus, the price is much more affordable compared with many other competing notation programs. I may try it out, and thanks again for the suggestion. Hopefully their support for 3rd party VIs like VSLis good, or that they're actively working on it..
Cheers, 
A

@Ariam said:

Based on some posts in this forum, I've decided I'm going to take a closer look at Notion 6.

I have decided to go in the same direction. I just purchased Notion 6 and Studio One 4. I have invested a lot of money into my VSL libraries and I want to get the best bang for the buck. I have put a lot of time into learning Logic Pro X as well as VEP 6. I too tried to avoid a DAW and tried to get my recordings from Finale. However, I am convinced now that the folks at Makemusic are only interested in Garritan. 

Yes, learning yet another DAW and notation program is going to take the time that I don't want to invest. However, I do like to way Notion 6 works with Studio One. So, once I finish up the current stuff that I am working on, I will have to work toward that goal.

Jonathan

@Ariam said:

Based on some posts in this forum, I've decided I'm going to take a closer look at Notion 6.

I have decided to go in the same direction. I just purchased Notion 6 and Studio One 4. I have invested a lot of money into my VSL libraries and I want to get the best bang for the buck. I have put a lot of time into learning Logic Pro X as well as VEP 6. I too tried to avoid a DAW and tried to get my recordings from Finale. However, I am convinced now that the folks at Makemusic are only interested in Garritan. 

Yes, learning yet another DAW and notation program is going to take the time that I don't want to invest. However, I do like to way Notion 6 works with Studio One. So, once I finish up the current stuff that I am working on, I will have to work toward that goal.

Jonathan

I'm a big fan of Overture. It's the best marrage of notation and DAW that I've seen.