I though it would be a nice idea to try out the Soft Imperial piano as a quick way of checking there would be no problem running my present eLicenser libraries together with a single new iLok one. A mistake! When I installed this library using the Vienna Assistant, it also installed a new iLok version of the Synchron player which seemingly overwrote my old one and as a result, my entire Synchron collection was no longer available. I only managed to recover after uninstalling the Synchron player and reinstalling the old one (v1.1.2063) for eLicenser.

I have no idea how it is possible to try out this piano or any other free instrument without trashing my existing installation. I have no time or desire to convert my libraries to iLok at this stage. Any suggestions? I'm also unclear whether this piano should be accessed through the iLok Synchron player or whether there is possibly an iLok Synchron piano corresponding to the eLicenser Vienna Synchron pianos, though I see no sign of such a thing

UPDATE Reading further, it seems that it is impossible to mix Synchron eLicenser and Synchron iLok libraries. If this is the case, then I clearly cannot try out or purchase any new libraries until conversion. 

shame -- I had feared as much!

I'd like to be able to use a Cubase/Dorico fx reverb plug-n like REVerence in VEPro. I have added the folder location to the search path but nothing shows up. Are these simply unsupported in VEPro and have to be run only from within Steinberg products or have I missed something fundamental here?

many thanks, David

I don't have the full sax library, only the SE vol2 in both formats and find that very good for what it is but agree here that a synchronized version would be very welcome and would likely get more support than you might think.

I find articulation management and Expression Maps far easier and more powerful in Dorico than Cubase. I don't use Cubase much any more other than for a handful of audio management features etc.

I replied in more detail on the Dorico forum but in brief, it's certainly advisable to also use (cheap crossgrade if necessary) the Synchonized versions of the muted brass. Then there is an easy fix of creating a new mute instrument for your trombone player in Dorico setup and simply switch to it when required as the articulations are the same as far as I can see and so no additional mute-specific articulations are required at all in the relevant Expression Maps.

Exactly what I though had probably happened. As the SE only supports artificial harmonics, it is natural to want the EM entry to show that but as the "o" which actually does the double duty of natural and artificial harmonics uses the natural harmonics 1 p.t, you need to use that in the EM even though the VSL isn't supplying one in the first place . Of course a new playing technique could be created to match the EM but this seems the more complicated of the options and Andi's plan should certainly put this one to bed.

David

the harmonics don't work as they have been incorrectly mapped. The "o"for harmonics requires an entry "natural harmonic 1" but in the supplied Expression Map they are set to "artificial harmonics". These lines must be edited to match the Dorico assigned articulation. I've explained in a little more detail on the Dorico forum.

Originally Posted by: andi

Hello!

Please log in to your computer with your user account. Then run the VSL-for-Dorico installer. There's no need to run it as an administrator. After that the Playback Templates and Expression Maps for the SYNCHRON-ized Special Editions should be available for you in Dorico.

Best regards,
Andi

I agree entirely -- there is no prompt or need to run as Admin. it must be something system-specific with the user.

These days I'm mostly a user of the Synchron-ized libraries (apart from anything else, they're easier to programme in Dorico, I think) so haven't purchased anything as yet but I know that many still swear by the VI versions and it's obvious this is a labour of love.

I've spent some time looking at this today and it's obvious a lot of work has gone into it. I urge Dorico VIPro users to investigate as the alternatives are not that numerous to the best of my knowledge.

portamento in general works perfectly OK with Dorico. I find the best way seems to be to create a new custom playing technique called "portamento" (which makes it easier to distinguish from those built in to the software) and add it to the Expression Map.  You then also put a port slide in the score but you must disable the playback, otherwise it will override the VSL switch. In the score then hide one or the other as preferred.

It may be that John's suggestion also works but one other often critical step is to assign a "playback start offset" in the order of -10 to the note in question. This ensures that the port starts on the correct note. Several people on the Dorico forum have confirmed my suggestion works when they had otherwise had some problems.

A final point is that if you use the VSL SE template, you not only can but probably should be editing it to match your own musical preferences Simply adding a line assigning a keyswitch to portamento won't break anything -- if you make a mistake, just modify or even delete the line in question and nothing will get broken. Of course it's always best to export the original EM as a back-up just to be sure.

David

While trying to decide whether to switch to Dorico, one consideration was whether VSL would support VI and Synchon-ized libraries with Expression Maps and templates. I began to realise that it's much easier to do your own in Dorico than in Sibelius as well as being in many ways more powerful feature-wise since v3.5. That doesn't mean it's not appreciated what the VSL team are doing in bringing out their first Dorico maps and many will certainly find it a very useful starting point. Ultimately, though, individuals should take responsibility for their own programming to suit their own needs and nature of music being composed. I did use the Cubase maps initially for VI and the basics are in place but need some modifying, especially with the new features in recent months in Dorico.

I'm not sure what criteria will be used to judge the reception of the S-ized SE playback config. Every competent expression map for this library has value and a newcomer would be well advised to study several if available to see what most meets his/her way of using the library. Obviously  something from VSL will have special authority but that doesn't have to mean it's the right approach for everyone.

On the "politics" of VI v Synchron, I will stay clear!

Originally Posted by: andi

Hello Gyprock!

Trills are included in the Special Edition PLUS expression maps for strings and wind instruments. They are working fine here. It's true that if you have other commands earlier in the score, they may not work together and it may be necessary to add an "ord." command before the new command.

Best regards,
Andi

perhaps just to clarify that vol5 Dimension Strings don't include trills, (though I've borrowed them from elsewhere in my own setup). However the trills seem to work otherwise fine for me

Originally Posted by: andi

We thought about using Vienna Ensemble or VE Pro too in the playback templates. This would have the drawback that some instruments would be loaded even though they are not included in the score. Furthermore not all users have Vienna Ensemble installed. So these users would get an error message about the missing plugin. That's why we have decided to go with Synchron Player without Vienna Ensemble (Pro). If you want to, you can make your own playback templates with Vienna Ensemble (Pro) and our expression maps.

Best regards,
Andi

thanks for this clarification, Andi. I find it annoying to use single instrument instances as it's harder to edit or get an overview but on the other hand, uisng VE not only are instruments loaded which are not necessarily in the score, I frequently seem to get extra instances added by Dorico and other odd behaviour (such as refusal to save endpoints) so your choice is understandable even without the consideration that some users may not be using VE (Pro)

Originally Posted by: Marcabru

Strings: some odd things here, thanks to Dimension Strings. This score has solo violin/viola/cello, but no divisi (so far). What's loaded is Dimension violin 1 player 1 for the solo -- I would have expected Solo Strings violin 1+ -- and then both section violins load with group 1 enabled, rather than the full ensemble. No solo double bass, but it loaded with only player 1 enabled.

There's no support in the Expression Maps for string divisions so there would be no point putting them in the score. Arguably, there should be entries for all the different solo players as well but that was a step too far for me.

I also prefer CC2 +CC11 but with the secondary scaled, otherwise the dynamic range is far too high. The chosen method seems to work OK for the demos, though.  The comment on the horns is interesting as there are a lot of ways you could call this including allocating an ensemble to one part (and then just mute the others in the score)

as well as Gil's suggestion, you can try out my latest (and a previous version) here https://www.steinberg.ne...c.php?p=1018457#p1018457

In theory, all the maps are supposed by collected by the Dorico board into one single sticky (which you may well have seen) but it is far from complete so you need to hunt around a bit. I repeat my caution that the Solo Strings are too complex for any single map to provide all the answers to everyone and most will want to modify a few things at least according to taste. Mine are based on the "Basic" template but with modifications and are designed primarily for the classical string quartet/quintet/sextet.

For VI there are to my knowledge, only the Cubase maps, though I could be wrong. VSL are not going to support VI maps from what I understand.

I welcome these templates as well and am enjoying studying the Expression Maps.  With the Dimension strings, perhaps because I first created my own maps before Dorico 3.5, I missed your trick of using a con sord as an add-on which actually simplifies things rather. In fact, it's puzzling why you didn't simply include additional odd-ons for all the player divisions as that's just a few minutes work and seems to work flawlessly. Of course the corresponding p.t's would also need to be generated which is a few more! Incidentally, when in con sord mode, any p.t when cancelled must have the con sord reapplied as ord specifically exits mute mode (A0). Obviously pizz comes into this category, as does detache. Articulations (marked with symbols) work differently as I'm sure you know.

On the Synchronized orchestra vol 1 and 2, I've found some odd dynamics with my own pieces (compared to my own maps) but there are various possible reasons for that and I'm now off to listen to your demo tracks -- thanks for making the scores available which will be very helpful.

yes, Gil, and I will enjoy comparing it to my own Expression Maps for this library.

Overture was the first with full VST playback support to my knowledge and for that reason I was happy to support it for a time. As you say, the bugs and instability are probably the biggest issue these days. And of course Notion was always known for its innovative (at the time) playback features -- just thought it would worth mentioning the relatively weak typesetting for someone considering an all-in-one.

I'd also thought of recommending Dorico Elements to be competitive on price but then you basically can't write anything for full orchestra due to the 12 player limit and playback customisation is reduced. On price -- well to get decent playback you have to invest in decent VST libraries such as VSL so the extra for the notation software might not be the first consideration unless you've already got all the libraries you want. But naturally one must take everything into account.

I don't think Notion ever claimed to match the big guns on notation features although I realise it has some strengths of its own. Overture I was a fan and user of quite a while back but v. 5, quite apart from taking forever to see the light of day, still appears to be more or less as buggy as when I tried it out. I like the concept and the interface in many ways but it doesn't have a fraction of the features of Dorico.  But no need to take my word for it, simply try it out if you haven't already.

why on earth would you want to crowdfund something like this when a few people have already created maps and have made them available for free download on the Dorico forum.  Of course the natural answer is that you want the highest quality. The problem is that many of the libraries are so complex that everyone will use them in different ways. I'm perfectly happy with my own sy-ed solo strings maps and if I used anyone else's would certainly have to adjust them to my own tastes. Likewise, I would expect anyone using mine to also make  adjustments to suit their own requirements as this is a complex library which can be configured in many different ways. That's not to say that a library with strong input and quality-checking by VSL wouldn't be valuable -- of course it would.

Having said that, I'm interested what the "official" VSL maps for the rather simpler Synchron-ized SE will be like when they are released, (maybe next Wednesday along with the video). I do hope they support all the latest features in Dorico as that will make it easier to see if I might have missed a trick or two when designing my own. And I'm sure they will be invaluable for those who don't have the time or inclination to go down that road.

Dorico Pro 3.5 is already the best notation software for getting the most out of VSL and each update only increases the gap. The Expression Maps and Play window give you a great deal of scope for adjusting and automating how the libraries work. I would never return to Sibelius after switching. If you have latency issues, I suggest you post to the Dorico forum with exact details of your setup as it's very likely you'll get a solution. The response from the team is exceptional and there are plenty of users who chip in with useful tips as well.

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.

David

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!