@JWL said:
Dunno. I'd say if you're on PC, stay with PC. If you're on a Mac, stay with Mac. The pros and cons on each abound.
I agree. The snag comes if you are a PC Logic user; you're scr*wed if you do and scr*wed if you don't.
DG
-
As for notation-- no DAW cuts it in this area, and having used them all I got on the Finale bandwagon quite early on. I would never place anything printed out from a DAW in front of professional musicians. Maybe that's just me.
Yes Its just you. JWL You're a perfectionist and plenty of energy to boot, obviously.
Must be nice. thanks for the info by the way. Its is very helpfull.
I'm getting ready to publish 2 books with logic's score. Have I used the notation programs, they would have control over final say so & any lengthy piece. I don't like that. The ease of factor is essencial. But I can see your point JWL, you want to please your clients.
I usually have to kiss everyone's ass to eventually let them know the real world.
Exsuse the foul language, its just an expression of use. Do people know how much time and money is spent here. As Alex stated it correctly. Clients that are new, have no Idea. there is the story of the director who wanted a clarinet part in his score so he told the composer that he wanted that thing that is played by soft ect... He had no idea what a clarinet is. on and on ..there's stories that make one laugh. I'm afraid I have also contributed to the laughter factor also. So and so......
Hey Alex : my logic score page brings me a beer, when I press control/ shift/Command.
-
Thanks again everyone for the advice.
While all this brain power is flying around, I thought I might plug my question from another thread:
I had 3 instances of VI running, crashed the ASIO, and since, no VST VI anymore, even though its in the folder. Logic just doesn't 'see' it. ??
My system is almost famous by now, but just FYI: 2.4Ghz PC, Logic 5.5, 1GB... BTW, I just bought 2GB of ram for my laptop (designed to take 1, Crucial Memory says, hey, why not try it?).
Right now, I'm leaning towards Cubase - if I get frustrated, I'm just going to plunk down 1g and get a mini-tower with a 2.8GHZ pentium-D and 2GB ram.
Anyone got comments on how good the scoring is in Cubase? We've heard a lot about Logic...
Best regards,
Eric
-
RK dear fellow!
I'm shocked at this! Logic, good in the score department? When you can't even play in the notes, unless you're in the arrange window? Where correcting the odd mistake calls for restructuring a bar, semiquaver by semiquaver?
If anyone is interested, it is perfectly possible to get Logic to emulate note input a la Finale or Sibelius, with a combination of the onscreen Keyboard, the score window and some keyboard shortcuts.
Regards
David Hage
-
I'm still leaning back to a PC farm, sample libraries, and Cubase, when i return to Europe and invest in a bigger setup (yet another one!). At least there i can manipulate the score a little easier, and if i'm going to spend a lot of money buying new samples, i'm fairly convinced the difference in performance between MAC vs PC is not worth the hype or difference in price.
Shame really, because EXS, pound for pound, is the bright spot in the Emagic/Inteligapple/VI scenario. A simple sample player/editor that handles resource well.
It is a bit ironic that we're discussing a basic task, inputting, we're almost agreed on the general pittance that is available for those who prefer the notes in front of them, with equipment running into the thousands of dollars, programs just as comparatively expensive, with multi level complexity that are trained to market themselves as sit up and do as told, and valuable time spent doing all this with stuff that simply doesn't cut it.
I find that wistfully amusing......[*-)]
Alex.
-
@hermitage59 said:
I'm still leaning back to a PC farm, sample libraries, and Cubase, when i return to Europe and invest in a bigger setup (yet another one!). At least there i can manipulate the score a little easier, and if i'm going to spend a lot of money buying new samples, i'm fairly convinced the difference in performance between MAC vs PC is not worth the hype or difference in price.
Shame really, because EXS, pound for pound, is the bright spot in the Emagic/Inteligapple/VI scenario. A simple sample player/editor that handles resource well.
Alex.
I think that if you intend to make a go of the whole Vienna VI thing then it won't really matter what you get, as (assuming that the current Mac problems disappear) both Mac and PC will work well.
I'm in a holding pattern until Vista, so my "farm" is likely to be increased by another PC in the near future. However, as it is all running via FX-Teleport I have no soundcards or MIDI interfaces/cables to worry about, and it should cost round about £400. Not bad for a machine that will handle 2.8Gb of samples [H]
DG
-
Yes Its just you. JWL You're a perfectionist and plenty of energy to boot, obviously.
Must be nice. thanks for the info by the way. Its is very helpfull.
I'll take these as positives... I think...
Don't know how helpful I've been if you think I'm swimming alone in this regard, but good luck on your book.
-
Yes Its just you. JWL You're a perfectionist and plenty of energy to boot, obviously.
Must be nice. thanks for the info by the way. Its is very helpfull.
I'll take these as positives... I think...
Don't know how helpful I've been if you think I'm swimming alone in this regard, but good luck on your book.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, "Sequencer notation is CR*P!!!"
DG
-
@hermitage59 said:
I'm still leaning back to a PC farm, sample libraries, and Cubase, when i return to Europe and invest in a bigger setup (yet another one!). At least there i can manipulate the score a little easier, and if i'm going to spend a lot of money buying new samples, i'm fairly convinced the difference in performance between MAC vs PC is not worth the hype or difference in price.
Shame really, because EXS, pound for pound, is the bright spot in the Emagic/Inteligapple/VI scenario. A simple sample player/editor that handles resource well.
Alex.
I think that if you intend to make a go of the whole Vienna VI thing then it won't really matter what you get, as (assuming that the current Mac problems disappear) both Mac and PC will work well.
I'm in a holding pattern until Vista, so my "farm" is likely to be increased by another PC in the near future. However, as it is all running via FX-Teleport I have no soundcards or MIDI interfaces/cables to worry about, and it should cost round about £400. Not bad for a machine that will handle 2.8Gb of samples [H]
DG
And it's partly your success with FX teleport and the favourable comments you made about it that has got me thinking, Daryl.
Your end result is scarcely different in terms of output and RAM usage to a setup with more expensive kit (Mac), and as i've used Cubase, Logic, and Sibelius fairly regularly, the learning curve isn't as big an issue. I agree with the holding on for Vista, something i'd do anyway while i'm still here, and of course there's the potential of MIR.
I have an OT question at this point. Are you using Cubase in conjunction with Nuendo and Gigastudio, or do you have something else?
Alex.
-
@hermitage59 said:
I have an OT question at this point. Are you using Cubase in conjunction with Nuendo and Gigastudio, or do you have something else?
Alex.
I use Nuendo, GS3 and K2 (pause for spitting). I will probably be retiring GS for the VST version at some point, as it doesn't really like to play with Vienna VI on the same PC. I don't use Cubase or ProTools any more, as Nuendo covers all of that ground and more.
DG
-
@hermitage59 said:
I have an OT question at this point. Are you using Cubase in conjunction with Nuendo and Gigastudio, or do you have something else?
Alex.
I use Nuendo, GS3 and K2 (pause for spitting). I will probably be retiring GS for the VST version at some point, as it doesn't really like to play with Vienna VI on the same PC. I don't use Cubase or ProTools any more, as Nuendo covers all of that ground and more.
DG
Daryl,
I didn't know Nuendo covered all the Cubase workings as well. Anyway, I've just downloaded the manual and presentation PDF, so i'll have a browse.
Thanks for the info,
Alex.
-
Yes Its just you. JWL You're a perfectionist and plenty of energy to boot, obviously.
Must be nice. thanks for the info by the way. Its is very helpfull.
I'll take these as positives... I think...
Don't know how helpful I've been if you think I'm swimming alone in this regard, but good luck on your book.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, "Sequencer notation is CR*P!!!"
DG
JWL
Yes of-course I meant it as a compliment.
And DG, is cubases notation that bad !! I had no Idea.
-
I skimmed this thread and didn't see anyone mention that there's no such thing as IRQ on a Mac, nor is there BIOS. Intel Macs have the next thing after BIOS, whatever it's called, but as far as I know you don't have to use it (anymore than you have to use the terminal and fool around with Unix nonsense).
-
And DG, is cubases notation that bad !! I had no Idea.
Try sending the output to a Publisher and you'll soon find out [[:|]]
DG
My publisher wants more, more , more, Its more money for him.
I'm sorry to hear that its different with your DAW.
Correct me if I'm wrong DG, But arn't most conductors or concert scores in hollywood are non transcribed ? and a copiest is almost always used who writes orchestra parts by hand ? If thats the case then its just a luxury to hire a copiest who loves what he does. And saves alot of printing time. Notation programs have to be mastered or else they are just an agony. After all its just notes in uniform distributed on paper, made clear to see. Providing one has complete control over with ease.
As far as what nick just posted, I have no Idea what you guys are talking about.
I'm just, have my system working and then off to work i go. By the way that took years to get. So the old saying if it works , don't fix it. Is worth alot.
How's that DG , I hope I'm not ticking you off. Are you still a happy person ?
Thats more important to me. If not just say so , I'll swash buckle my face for you.
By the way DG, I want you to know that I anaiyzed and dissected your piano compositions and picked up a few pointers from them. Had Bach or Mozart or Carmen written your compositions, they would no doubt be in their top masterpieces, and I don't see the time of day how you can write that prolificly and yet not orchestrate them by now. Maybe one needs a MAC to fulfill ones habitats.
To MAc or not to MAC. I believe that qoute came from a chap in your neigborhood.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong DG, But arn't most conductors or concert scores in hollywood are non transcribed ? and a copiest is almost always used who writes orchestra parts by hand ? If thats the case then its just a luxury to hire a copiest who loves what he does. And saves alot of printing time. Notation programs have to be mastered or else they are just an agony. After all its just notes in uniform distributed on paper, made clear to see. Providing one has complete control over with ease.
It really depends of what composers we're talking about. Most things are transcribed into a notation program for preparing the musicians' parts. The benefits of this are that it is very easy to make drastic changes if necessary. I have seen a bevy of copyists with their laptops sitting around at sessions just waiting for the first big re-write. I don't know of any orchestral composer whose music is not computer transcribed these days.
However, the music preparation team can receive their "dots" in various ways.
1) It can come directly from the composer in pencil manuscript (very rare nowadays).
2) Directly from the composer in sequencer notation. This is used as a guide and the copyists will re-input it (maybe from the MIDI file) into a dedicated notation program.
3) Directly from the composer in Finale or Sibelius. The copyists will tidy up the scores and then extract and print the parts.
4) A pencil score from the orchestrator
5) A Sibelius or Finale score form the orchestrator.
DG