Here is a video of new features in Dorico 3.5 about improvments in Expression Maps and Play Mode:
Will it help in creating VSL expression maps?
178,802 users have contributed to 42,061 threads and 253,918 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 2 new thread(s), 8 new post(s) and 74 new user(s).
The improvement made is FABULOUS
Depending of note lenght Dorico is selecting an articulation automatically !
Is there now a chance to have VSL expression Maps compatible to Dorico ?
There are already a few released/in progress non-official EM 3.5 for VSL products on the Dorico Forum, like in these kind of threads:
Also, Andi stated that EM 3.5 for VSL are coming for SYNCHRON-ized Special Editions hopefully this summer:
in this thread https://www.steinberg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=246&t=189278 I've recently added my Expression Maps for all the Synchronised Solo Strings. These include use of the Dorico 3.5 specific NoteLength conditions. Despite my complaints there about missing articulations in the new instruments (seriously, how can you not even include trills!), I'm in general pretty happy I upgraded my VI version.
there are so called performance trills which are not of course the half or whole note trills available in the original instruments which is what I want. I can find neither in the sample content list nor the instrument itself "real" trills but if I've missed something, I will be happily corrected by someone from VSL.
I do understand that the performance trills could work fine in the live environment but in Dorico, it would presumably be necessary to write out the trill in full and then hide it and replace it with a non-playing normal trill which can be done, I think somehow, if very fiddly. Perhaps I'll investigate this, though. Certainly the artificial trills in Dorico are invariably horrible so that's out the question.
For example, you pick the preset "Violin 1 Full" (not the basic one), then in the tree: "D - Phrases" → "G - Halftone Trill" or "G# - Wholetone Trill"
Don't you see those patches ?
Thank you for your expression maps by the way, I will use them 👍
hope you find the maps useful. I'm sure you'll find things you want to change to your own ways of using the solo strings but I find they've worked quite well for me.
indeed! Obviously there's been a little confusion here for which I also apologise. The comparison I meant was between the original solo strings and the new version with extra violin 2 and cello 2 and not the difference between the VI and Synchron versions. I can see in retrospect that what I wrote could have been interpreted more than one way!
incidentally, there is another new feature with Dorico 3.5 Expression Maps which I feel has the potential to be very useful for the Synchron player. You now have the ability in the use Secondary Dynamic feature to scale the values proportionately to the primary. Assuming we're using VelXF as the primary then we have the ability to modify this with a "pure volume" CC11 (Expression) value. Previously this was impracticable as the contrasts with an exact match of the primary were too great and uneven but now we have a genuine answer to the justifiable complaint that the minimum dynamic was too loud. Set a min. of somewhere in the 60-70 range and maximum a little below 127 probably -- I'm still testing so this is only an initial suggestion -- and you will be able to get a wider dynamic range than before but remain musical. Sure, this won't fade completely to silence but most people won't need that very often and when it is required, simply insert a manual CC11 hairpin to zero as has been previously suggested.
For sure Dorico's expression map engine is totally superior to Cubase in several ways. Steinberg really hasn't paid any attention to developing expression map feature in Cubase for quite some time, while the Dorico team is much more engaged and this is really important part of Dorico. I hope that their changes will make it back over to Cubase someday too...
I'm still no the fence about whether to use Dorico for mockup purposes, I have a lot more to learn about it. The general crux of the matter is that with Cubase (or any DAW)...you put whatever midi events you want on tracks, in any form you want to get exactly the performance you want. The midi comes first, and is exactly what you want...and if you choose to render a score from that, Cubase will attempt to make the score look reasonable regardless of how notes are nudged around, etc... with some results better then others.
Whereas with Dorico the score comes first, and then Dorico makes guesses or the user manually and tweak the underlying midi to sound how you want, but I think probably somewhat more limited then is the case with Cubase where you make the midi be exactly what you want, vs in Dorico you start with the score and try to massage Dorico into performing that score how you want...with rules..which might work great in some cases and might not in others.
Two completely different approaches to handling midi tracks...and its not clear to me yet whether Dorico is going to be flexible enough to manage any task that needs absolute midi control after starting out as score first.
I love the idea of composing on staves though......and for sure Dorico's expression maps are leaps better then cubase, for the time being...better then all other DAW's too!