Dorico sample.

Recommendations concerning notation and publishing software in a non-partisan environment.
Post Reply
NicholasG
Posts: 28
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:31
Location: Hyde Park, NY

Dorico sample.

Post by NicholasG » 19 Dec 2016, 13:15

This sample is mostly raw without any adjustments (except the slurs in the LH 1st measure). Once I learned the short cuts, the process went pretty quickly. I have to say, that for an application in its infancy, i'm pretty impressed. I know it has a long way to go, but I think, since Dorico doesn't have to re-invent the wheel, it'll get there quicker than many suspect. I found the developers and forum participants on Steinberg's forum were extremely helpful and enthusiastic. This, to me, is a good sign. I've used Steinberg's Cubase for many years now and I have to say that I am very impressed with their commitment to quality.
Attachments
Doreco Sample.pdf
(59.67 KiB) Downloaded 237 times
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013)
1 TB Flash Processor 2.6 GHz Core i7, 16 GB Ram, 4 TB external HD
Logic Pro X 10.2, Cubase 9
Final 25.2, Sibelius 8.5
UR 44, M1, Keystation 88
Adobe CC

User avatar
T Earl
Posts: 16
Joined: 31 Oct 2016, 13:49

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by T Earl » 19 Dec 2016, 15:14

Looking lovely! Well done! :)

I'm currently typesetting a piano duet of Gershwin's An American in Paris... It's over 670 bars and I am producing it all in Dorico. Some of the things, such as pedal lines etc. I'm just having to leave out for now, and will add them as soon as they appear in the software!
"Take an object. Do something to it. Do something else to it." - Jasper Johns

User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 1231
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by John Ruggero » 19 Dec 2016, 19:13

I commented briefly on this example at MM Forum, but will expand my comments here.

Given this default output, I would make the following adjustments:

1. Reposition and reshape every slur with the exception of the one between m. 5 and 6
2. Adjust the shape (thickness?) of several of the medium ties.
3. Move all accidentals away from the note heads.
4. Give all 16th notes more breathing room. They are smothering each other and the accidentals.
5. Reduce the size of "Con pedale" and "sempre legato".
6. Move "cantando" away from the bar line.
7. Center the mp in m. 1 between the staves.
8. Reduce the thickness of the bar lines.
9. Move the dotted quarter rest in m. 8 down closer to the lower staff.
10 Move the composer name lower.
11. Reduce the distance between the staves of systems 2 and 3.

I would also make some changes that are more a question of style:

1. Lengthen the stems on several of the first notes of the 6-note left hand groups.
2. Change several beam angles in both hands.
3. Use a font with more substantial note heads. There is too much white space on the page so that it leaves one feeling empty.

In addition, I find the starting position dashed line for the 8va unattractive and prefer that it come from the middle of the 8va, not from above the symbol.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2,
Finale 2014d with GPO 4, JW Plug-ins, SmartScore X Pro, Adobe InDesign CS4,
Inkscape .48.5 and .91, FontForge 20150526
http://www.cantilenapress.com

NicholasG
Posts: 28
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 13:31
Location: Hyde Park, NY

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by NicholasG » 20 Dec 2016, 02:15

Thanks for your thorough analysis John. Much appreciated.
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Late 2013)
1 TB Flash Processor 2.6 GHz Core i7, 16 GB Ram, 4 TB external HD
Logic Pro X 10.2, Cubase 9
Final 25.2, Sibelius 8.5
UR 44, M1, Keystation 88
Adobe CC

User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 1231
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by John Ruggero » 20 Dec 2016, 04:05

You are most welomce, NicholasG. I think that posting this file has begun an excellent discussion. Thank you for doing it.

I omitted a comment here about the distance of the brace from the left bar line but do agree with the general assessment as discussed at MM.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2,
Finale 2014d with GPO 4, JW Plug-ins, SmartScore X Pro, Adobe InDesign CS4,
Inkscape .48.5 and .91, FontForge 20150526
http://www.cantilenapress.com

User avatar
tisimst
Posts: 292
Joined: 08 Oct 2015, 17:57
Location: UT, USA
Contact:

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by tisimst » 20 Dec 2016, 15:51

One thing I think is important to get from this is that we're looking at the starting point for making tweaks/edits. There's no question that there will be plenty of opportunities to fine-tune Dorico's output, both globally and locally, but how much editing time has Dorico saved you by getting you to this baseline output?
Music Typeface Designer & Engraver - LilyPond | Sibelius | Finale | MuseScore | Dorico | SMuFL | Inkscape | FontForge
http://www.musictypefoundry.com

User avatar
John Ruggero
Posts: 1231
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 14:25
Location: Raleigh, NC USA

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by John Ruggero » 20 Dec 2016, 18:42

I hope that someone will post a Finale version. My feeling in engraving the first two measures in Finale and posting at MM, was that the Dorico would have cost me time rather than saved it. Editing was negligible in Finale using my template.
Mac mini (OS 10.8.5) with dual monitors, Kurzweil Mark 5 with M-Audio Midisport 2 x 2,
Finale 2014d with GPO 4, JW Plug-ins, SmartScore X Pro, Adobe InDesign CS4,
Inkscape .48.5 and .91, FontForge 20150526
http://www.cantilenapress.com

User avatar
tisimst
Posts: 292
Joined: 08 Oct 2015, 17:57
Location: UT, USA
Contact:

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by tisimst » 20 Dec 2016, 18:44

From NicholasG: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=257
Music Typeface Designer & Engraver - LilyPond | Sibelius | Finale | MuseScore | Dorico | SMuFL | Inkscape | FontForge
http://www.musictypefoundry.com

User avatar
OCTO
Posts: 1018
Joined: 05 Oct 2015, 06:52
Location: Sweden

Re: Dorico sample.

Post by OCTO » 23 Dec 2016, 20:44

For my eyes, Dorico default-output looks very unbalanced. Not sure exactly why, but there is the font issue. Bravura is terribly unbalanced font, and also the combination of fonts are far from perfect. The half note-head has less power than the black note-head, for example.

Furthermore, there is tendency to do more than needed. Why does, for instance, the first flat symbol covering the ledger line - if it already does why in that percentage? I understand when you have dense music you need to, but here it is more difficult to read the C-flat note since more than needed of the left ledger extension is missing. The note-head is almost dropping down... And it is used in all cases. Henle does it, but it does it with purpose, and with balance.

The slurs are also the issue. So far, Sibelius can get automatically the best balanced slurs (non-default), because it can both lift and stretch. Finale cannot. Not entirely sure how Dorico does it, but the issues shown in the file reminds me of Finale.

Other things already discussed here, particularly by John R, I can add on the list.

I think that for Daniel and the team would be better to discuss many notation issues on this forum (or any other non-dorico forum) where more eyes are opened, and users are not exclusively dorico-users, therefore looking from different angles.
Freelance Composer. Self-Publisher.
Finale 25 • Sibelius 8 • MuseScore 2 • Logic Pro X • Ableton Live 9 • Digital Performer 9 /// OS X El Capitan, (side system: Debian 9, Windows 7)

Post Reply