These are some of my points and other points made in sibelius thread;
just keep in mind that most of it came from a desire to have a VSL notation editor with automatic setup and playback results, etc- BUT there are other aspects of a DAW that could possibly relate to this so I think any thoughts on it are great.

• VE Pro is currently a VST host, mixer, LAN tool, and more- If
  sequencing, a piano roll, and notation editor were added it could simply work as an upgrade to VE Pro.
  

• Other DAW's aren't designed with the complexity of VSL's
  wide-ranging patches and with VSL playback in mind; so if VSL made a DAW
  or added sequencer/notation features to VE Pro, the amount of work to get things setup or playing right could be greatly reduced.

• Auto-divisi playback with auto-divisi notation. No setup required- you simply load a trumpet part in your score and when you play 2 notes your patches divide... Nothing new, but if you put "solo" in your score, only the first solo trumpet is played.
  This way you can have auto-divisi and maintain one or two trumpet staves
  in your score with the playback working automatically as real performers would.
  

• Many of the users also suggested things like loading articulations as
  needed, when you add a stacatto in the score, it adds the patches and the matrices automatically, and so on.

• Things like slurs or crossfading from sustain to tremolo could take no extra 'midi programming' but the notation could be read and it be played accordingly.

The main point is that with these feature ideas and others, a
VSL tailored notation editor could create a comfortable enviornment for
composition that currently hasn't been very successful in other
DAW's or notation programs. Other DAW features that aren't even notation
related might be useful as well. But like I said, this came from a
notation forum. We all wanted to start a specific thread to this and I
feel it's most appropriate in both forums, but it's regarding VE Pro or a new program that would still likely fit better in this thread.

-Sean

Thanks... I love the title too, lol

I thought of something else. MIDI is an old protocol and its days are numbered. MMA HD was announced and it still isn't anywhere near being mainstream. I don't exactly know if VSL has faced limitations because of the amount of data that can be sent to VSL software via midi transfer... BUT if there have been challenges there... I imagine a VSL DAW could easily avoid those problems altogether. ??? Just a thought.

-Sean

I am not sure if I like this idea ...

VSL proved to be able to produce excellent samples, and marvelous software ... but ...

putting also sequencing / notation into their hand could mean

 * Reduced Featureset for "common" sequencers
 * Problems in adding additional libraries
 * Less sales, because some products are "quasi standards" so VSL might be lessl likely to be purchased if not 100% running there
 * Less time for VSL Developers in doing the things we all love ;)

rgds

Gabriel

Hello gabriel 81,

  Thanks for participating in this thread. I don't want to start a debate because actually there is no reason for that. What we're sugesting is making something additional, not completely transforming what is already great and very apreciated. So, many of your concerns which are totally justified, actually are not interfering with this idea. Just think of an extra feature more inclined to the notation/sequencing area. Since we all fabulate of this time , let's think that VSL is smart enough to hire someone oriented to this segment avoiding the curent developers for beign stopped in processing "the things we love". In the mean time I've seen isocrefilm responded more punctualy to your post. 

Best

B

 I think you need to ask yourself what exactly are you looking for and trying to accomplish when you speak of a "VSL DAW" or whatever notation variant you may have already high-level suggested in previous posts. So,

a) A "DAW" digital audio production. Not sure VSL would ever consider going there.

b) An integrated full blown "Notation" package, to the extent of competing with Sibelius or Finale, not a trivial enterprise to embark on. It has taken years and years for these two packages to evolve and reach the point they are at. And we end-users are still far from content about them.

.

Having said that, I gather from reading what you guys have said to this point that one of the key 'features' you'd love to see on such implementation is an automatic matrix creation where the right articulations are assigned depending on the entered notation. I have a very hard time trying to figure out how you'd ever accomplish that in an touchless/effortless manner, without some human intervention. In my experience, every single composition requires certain degree of matrix customization. Do you want simple sustain samples, or do you want a detache/sustain? Do you want stronger vibrato on certain parts or certain others just the plain sustain sample? Do you prefer repetition samples or regular legato? At 92bpm, is the attack too quick or too long? Does the portamento articulation require stretching? Even if the stretching is done somewhat automatically, are you happy with the way it sounds or need to fine-tune it? And so on...

.

Some of the automation built into Sibelius and Finale often times is more of a hassle than a time-saver. For instance, magnetic layout. Sometimes I find myself spending more time fixing the 'automatic' errors than if it was turned off. I foresee a similar situation with the above.

.

I think most if not all of us "electronic composers" sympathize with you re- your first sentence. I think you get a reasonable level of quality by using VIP to create some basic articulations and using that as a general framework. The 'art' of accomplishing a more realistic mock-up is in going deeper into your programming. Time consumming? Heck yeah. But you have full control.

.

I beg to differ with your second statement. In fact, so many of us nowadays use multiple libraries, not only VSL, because other competitors have certainly reached a high-quality level, and their libraries exhibit different tonal characteristics that maybe more suitable for certain compositions. Just like the Vienna Philharmonic sounds different to the San Francisco Symphonic to the London Symphonic orchestras. If this were a VSL-exclusive tool, how do we deal with the rest of our libraries? To me this is something for the Sibelius and the Finales to continue working on with the library companies like VSL, to offer better out-of-the-box templates included in their products. But it's up to you to work and customize your matrixes, as you deem necessary. In the end, keep in mind pro-commercial composers don't look forward to creating a perfect final product using a sample library, they still want the human feel and touch a real conductor and a full flesh orchestra add to their composition.

@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.

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.

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..

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

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..