# DAWs/ score editors/ libraries/ digital tools



## csolomonholmes

I've been seriously thinking about developing a new DAW for orchestral composition. I have been very frustrated lately because I cannot find a way to quickly generate musical ideas. Either the tools don't exist or don't know where to find them. I'm not conventional by any means in my approach. I don't want digital recreations of traditional methods. 

What are your experiences with DAWs/score editors? Success? Failure? What do you find lacking? What features would you use that don't yet exist? Please, could really use some insight into what others experience.

Also - If an online system existed that would allow you to collaborate with others in writing for the orchestra, would you even participate? Personally, I'd rather compose alone but I cannot speak for anyone else.


----------



## Celloissimo

I'm confused: how will a new DAW help you find inspiration? You're going to be writing music on staff paper whether you're using Sibelius, Finale, Noteflight, Musescore....etc.


----------



## PetrB

There are already a number of desktop recorders which take both midi and direct audio input, and there are also numerous softwares / technology to transcribe what has been recorded either to score. Some of the higher end score programs allow for 'free notation,' or after the fact of recording pressing a key to 'tell' the program where you want the bar-lines if you were playing in free or flex time, and they offer yet another option for spatial notation outside the parameters of bar-lines or meter being required at all.

I really can not imagine what could exist outside of those already existent capacities you would want.

Of course, live play and record or being a fluent keyboardist for midi inputting saves oceans of time from hand-drawing events onto a graph or using combinations of alpha-numeric code to type the music in.


----------



## Jaks

You probably have to wait for the AI to develop a bit more. I am not sure how you want to "develop" a DAW. Make one by yourself? It will take time.
Tell us what is the most problematic in your approach.

Frankly, if you really wish to quickly generate ideas, use pencil and paper. Ravel, Stravinsky, Thaikovsky did it, why not you?


----------



## PetrB

Jaks said:


> You probably have to wait for the AI to develop a bit more. I am not sure how you want to "develop" a DAW. Make one by yourself? It will take time.
> Tell us what is the most problematic in your approach.
> 
> Frankly, if you really wish to quickly generate ideas, use pencil and paper. Ravel, Stravinsky, Thaikovsky did it, why not you?


... of course that means becoming fluent in musical notation, lol.


----------



## juergen

csolomonholmes said:


> I've been seriously thinking about developing a new DAW for orchestral composition. I have been very frustrated lately because I cannot find a way to quickly generate musical ideas. Either the tools don't exist or don't know where to find them.


Perhaps that would be something for you: Synfire Pro

http://www.cognitone.com/products/mps/intro/page.stml

But it is not that cheap.


----------



## Kopachris

juergen said:


> Perhaps that would be something for you: Synfire Pro
> 
> http://www.cognitone.com/products/mps/intro/page.stml
> 
> But it is not that cheap.


Ooooohh... It even exports to LilyPond! 

€996, though.


----------



## juergen

Kopachris said:


> €996, though.


That's the price when the software is delivered in a box with a printed manual. The download version (which is the same software) is 779€. Yes I know, still a lot of money. But it's an absolutely stunning software, that's for sure. Moreover, it is currently the only one of its kind that is available. At least as long as David Cope does not publish his software "Emily Howell": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Howell


----------



## PetrB

Kopachris said:


> Ooooohh... It even exports to LilyPond!
> 
> €996, though.


Isn't there a professional version of Protools coming in somewhere around $10,000, a set of Vienna orchestral samples also running to market at ca. 10K?


----------



## juergen

PetrB said:


> Isn't there a professional version of Protools coming in somewhere around $10,000, a set of Vienna orchestral samples also running to market at ca. 10K?


True. It's incredible how much money you can spend on sounds. Almost as much as for a Steinway. But hey, a Steinway has only one sound but the Vienna samples are hundreds of sounds. Seen in that light, the Vienna orchestral samples are quite a good deal.


----------



## PetrB

juergen said:


> Perhaps that would be something for you: Synfire Pro
> 
> http://www.cognitone.com/products/mps/intro/page.stml
> 
> But it is not that cheap.


Having looked through their examples, it seems all those sophisticated software functions are a base-line only program, doing what anyone who has actually learned to compose has figured out for themselves.

An interesting question of a personal and ethical nature then pops up -- if you are that reliant upon a software to generate ideas and variants for your music -- if used extensively in building up a piece, when the piece is done can you really think of it / call it "yours?"


----------



## Ian Moore

If you are interested in producing an orchestral VST have a look at 'Sonatina Symphony Orchestra'. It is probably closed down, now, but the files are still available. It was an ambitious project to create a free 'open source' sound set for midi using sfz format. If you compare it to a commercially produced VST like 'Vienna Symphony', it is really basic. But someone with a lot of time on their hands and a lot of determination could make this free open source orchestral VST into someone special.

Sonatina Symphony Orchestra


----------



## PetrB

Ian Moore said:


> If you are interested in producing an orchestral VST have a look at 'Sonatina Symphony Orchestra'. It is probably closed down, now, but the files are still available. It was an ambitious project to create a free 'open source' sound set for midi using sfz format. If you compare it to a commercially produced VST like 'Vienna Symphony', it is really basic. But someone with a lot of time on their hands and a lot of determination could make this free open source orchestral VST into someone special.
> 
> Sonatina Symphony Orchestra


Why are they _all_ given such effin' dreadfully cheesy-sounding _names,_ I wonder?


----------



## juergen

PetrB said:


> An interesting question of a personal and ethical nature then pops up -- if you are that reliant upon a software to generate ideas and variants for your music -- if used extensively in building up a piece, when the piece is done can you really think of it / call it "yours?"


If an architect uses a computer aided design program that comes with a library of predefined models and he uses these models as a basis for the design of his buildings, is this then his own work? Well, I guess the question is purely academic. His clients will not care.

But actually that comparison is not exact. The software I have mentioned above does not come with a library of musical building blocks. It only provides you with features to build up such a library. You can build up librarys of phrases, harmonic progressions, rhyhthms, whatever, and combine all that in your piece.

In my personal workflow the main role of the software is to give me an orientation in the jungle of the harmonic space when things get complicated. For example: What palette of chords can be built up on, say, an enigmatic scale and what chords of that harmonic space are how closely related to the chords of a certain ordinary major/minor key and how can I use these relations effectively to "modulate" between these different harmonic spaces? For things like this, it can be a very big help.

But I admit that I let the software also calculate voice leadings. This is simply much more effective than if I would do it by hand. Ultimately, it is also of great advantage for the creativity if you can try out different harmonic progressions quickly including the matching voice leadings without laborious manual pushing of the notes in a score editor.

Of course, with this way of working, I relinquish a certain amount of control over the details of the music to the software. But for me, it's only the final result that matters. And I think, for this old-fashioned romantic ideas about how a composer should work, there no more room these days.


----------



## Ian Moore

It is the sampling of the library that counts and the way in which the software implements the sounds. The quality of the 'Vienna Symphony' sampling is second to none. The software employed is amazing.


----------



## millionrainbows

I use Logic, and modules I found used at pawnshops. You could get a separate hard drive and use gigasampler. I've heard good things about Finale, as a notation program. The *score* section of Logic is not as intuitive, but I'll take it.

There was a big review of all the major systems in Keyboard Magazine. Those Hollywood soundtrack guys use different ones for different results. You can get a free sample download of the Vienna thing.

One thing, you'll need a lot of processing power.


----------

