Staff View

[Jerry Gerber]

Also keep in mind that when you export Cakewalk notation to a program like Sibelius or Finale, it's best to export as a .mid type 1 file, not XML.

First of all, if your piece has more than 23 staves you won't be able to export all of the music as XML.   Also, if you export as XML the graphic inaccuracies will be exported too, so you'll have to edit them in your notation program.  With a MIDI file export,  the MIDI data will export accurately.  You'll still have to do some editing, but there's less chance of errors cropping up than with XML.   

In perfect conditions, I'd use XML upon export, but we don't have that so I prefer to use MIDI to maintain better rhythmic accuracy.

Jerry

 

[Jerry Gerber]

On 6/16/2020 at 5:44 PM, msmcleod said:

In the next release, the staff view will respect the global snap setting for note positioning. The note duration settings will remain unchanged.

In other words,  you'll be able to independently set the note duration and the snap positioning. 

Dear msmcleod,

Any chance you know when this new version with the snap function fixed will be available?

Thanks,

Jerry

[jackson white]

On 6/17/2020 at 6:32 PM, jsg said:

the notation editor in a DAW is primarily about MIDI sequencing and editing.  It's not a scoring program, which is essentially a graphics program.  To prepare a score with parts for performance is not a recording function, it's a publishing tool.  ... I do all my MIDI work in Sonar.  I wouldn't expect, or even want, a DAW to be a publishing tool, better in my opinion to have the DAW for the creation and production of music

Couldn't have said it better. 

NB The ability to document guitar voicings using the fretboard display is a most useful feature. 

 

 

[InstrEd]

On 6/21/2020 at 12:30 AM, jsg said:

Dear msmcleod,

Any chance you know when this new version with the snap function fixed will be available?

Thanks,

Jerry

More so msmcleod get in touch with Jerry and let him get an early copy so he can test it and give you feedback.

[winkpain]

Staff View is hardly even a nod to composers who are accustomed to and prefer working in traditional notation and/or need to provided printed sheets for instrumentalists. Cakewalk is simply not the place to attempt it.

But chiming in here with the note for Sibelius users (like myself) who want to also have the ability to work with all the wonderful CW tools and workflows:

Remember, it can be Rewired into a Cakewalk project fairly functionally. I do this whenever working on scores (much, much preferable to work in Sib. for composing in "dot and line") with soundtracks/sound design that want to include synchronized  audio elements worked on in CW. I just think of the Rewired Sibelius instance as my Staff editor in this case, and of the audio output of Sib. as a 2-track mix within CW .  Of course, you do not get to edit the sounds of the instrument tracks (staves) individually in CW with any of the controls or tools available in the box there, but if happy working completely in Sibelius for those tracks and then working with additional audio extensively in CW, it keeps everything synced up and is great for the work-in-progress part of your workflow.

 

 

[User 905133]

On 6/25/2020 at 3:07 PM, winkpain said:

Staff View is hardly even a nod to composers who are accustomed to and prefer working in traditional notation and/or need to provided printed sheets for instrumentalists. Cakewalk is simply not the place to attempt it.

As I understand (as a user since the MS-DOS versions), when the Staff View was introduced, it was never intended to compete with $500+ full-featured staff editing software. It still doesn't compete because as some have noted (implicitly and/or explicitly), the markets that use music/staff notation have not been vigorously pursued.  (Some people have phrased this idea as: the staff view has been neglected over the decades while other aspects of Cakewalk have been pursued.)

JMO: This does not mean that Cakewalk's Staff View and Staff Printing capabilities couldn't pursue markets that use staff notation.  Of course, being free software might be an issue--I am not sure.  Pre-COVID, schools in the US still used staff notation.  Not sure if the educational use of music notation has dried up.

That being said, except for tweaks that seem to favor digital audio manipulation that messed up the use of the staff view, it still does (almost) as much as was originally intended (as I understand it).

 

Edited July 3, 2020 by User 905133
to fix a typo. "." location changed

[winkpain]

39 minutes ago, User 905133 said:

As I understand (as a user since the MS-DOS versions), when the Staff View was introduced, it was never intended to compete with $500+ full-featured staff editing software. It still doesn't compete because as some have noted (implicitly and/or explicitly), the markets that use music/staff notation have not been vigorously pursued.  (Some people have phased this idea as: the staff view has been neglected over the decades while other aspects of Cakewalk have been pursued.)

JMO: This does not mean that Cakewalk's Staff View and Staff Printing capabilities couldn't pursue markets that use staff notation.  Of course, being free software might be an issue--I am not sure.  Pre-COVID, schools in the US still used staff notation.  Not sure if the educational use of music notation has dried up.

That being said, except for tweaks that seem to favor digital audio manipulation that messed up the use of the staff view, it still does (almost) as much as was originally intended (as I understand it).

 

Agreed.

CW, nor any other DAW, is the right tool for the particular job of writing (certainly not publishing) music notation properly, and I don't expect it to be. That's why I shared my Rewire/Sibelius "workaround". It provides the best of both worlds in a way.

However, I also agree that it will be a grand day if/when the fantastic folks at CbB have the time to upgrade the Staff View, since there are certainly enough of us who like to work with notation in DAW composition (as this and other threads bear out), or at least like to have it as a viable, full-functioning option.

I am deeply and continually impressed over this last year with CbB's staff and their unflagging attention to this product and its broad base of constituent users, and I know you can't please everyone, but I highly doubt it is true that, as I read elsewhere here by someone seeming to say "why bother" fixing Staff View when they said there are "easily 100 or more" times as many people who don't use Staff View as those who do. I wonder where they got their data from! And since it remains as part of the program, it seems worthy as any of the other tools for upgrade consideration. 

As this is the Feedback Loop, that is my feedback.

But as I say, I'm quite happy working with the Rewire option when needed.

[Jerry Gerber]

35 minutes ago, winkpain said:

Agreed.

CW, nor any other DAW, is the right tool for the particular job of writing (certainly not publishing) music notation properly, and I don't expect it to be. That's why I shared my Rewire/Sibelius "workaround". It provides the best of both worlds in a way.

However, I also agree that it will be a grand day if/when the fantastic folks at CbB have the time to upgrade the Staff View, since there are certainly enough of us who like to work with notation in DAW composition (as this and other threads bear out), or at least like to have it as a viable, full-functioning option.

I am deeply and continually impressed over this last year with CbB's staff and their unflagging attention to this product and its broad base of constituent users, and I know you can't please everyone, but I highly doubt it is true that, as I read elsewhere here by someone seeming to say "why bother" fixing Staff View when they said there are "easily 100 or more" times as many people who don't use Staff View as those who do. I wonder where they got their data from! And since it remains as part of the program, it seems worthy as any of the other tools for upgrade consideration. 

As this is the Feedback Loop, that is my feedback.

But as I say, I'm quite happy working with the Rewire option when needed.

I've produced 10 symphonies, many short works, songs and 14 albums using the CW staff view.  It works for composition if you are composing in and for the electronic medium. I've used Sibelius for my scores for 15 years or so and will continue to.  The staff view is for MIDI input and editing, and of course, composition. It's not for publishing, preparing final scores or parts or for presenting written music to players for rehearsal, recording or performance.  Once you understand the difference, it's not hard to exploit the staff view for composing.  You can hear numerous recordings I've made in the "Songs" section of this forum and I think you'll agree that for complex arrangements and orchestration the staff view works quite well.  It just needs a few tweaks and bug fixes as we discussed above.

Jerry

Edited June 25, 2020 by jsg

[winkpain]

Agreed, agreed. Happy to join in the conciliatory mood here. Yes, we all continue to agree that Staff View is what it is and isn't what it isn't, 'tho tweaks and fixes would be appreciated.

[Jerry Gerber]

I forgot to tell you all about the workaround I discovered in the staff view when the snap function gets stuck on 1/32 notes.

Here it is:  Revert the screen set you're using to its saved version. 

This will, at least temporarily, fix the snap so that it can be used with larger note values...

Jerry

[InstrEd]

On 6/25/2020 at 5:53 PM, jsg said:

It just needs a few tweaks and bug fixes as we discussed above.

Amen to that Jerry. 

[Trensharo]

On 6/25/2020 at 6:53 PM, jsg said:

I've produced 10 symphonies, many short works, songs and 14 albums using the CW staff view.  It works for composition if you are composing in and for the electronic medium. I've used Sibelius for my scores for 15 years or so and will continue to.  The staff view is for MIDI input and editing, and of course, composition. It's not for publishing, preparing final scores or parts or for presenting written music to players for rehearsal, recording or performance.  Once you understand the difference, it's not hard to exploit the staff view for composing.  You can hear numerous recordings I've made in the "Songs" section of this forum and I think you'll agree that for complex arrangements and orchestration the staff view works quite well.  It just needs a few tweaks and bug fixes as we discussed above.

Jerry

The Staff View has lots of issues, and I could never use it for composition.  It's one of the main reasons why I started looking into other DAWs.  It's barely usable, AFAIC.

The issue is not people misunderstanding what the Staff View is for. It's the fact that it's actually quite bad.  Issues with the Staff View, and people asking for improvements, date back a decade or more.

The fact that someone was able to trudge along in it to produce a lot of music doesn't alter the reality of the situation.  That's great to hear, but it's not going to make me want to use it.  I've already been there, and I'm not revisiting any time soon.

Cakewalk's Staff View makes REAPER's Notation Editor look like Sibelius | Ultimate.  It's that bad in comparison, and the gulf was that wide the second REAPER added this feature, when SONAR had it for like 10+ years.

It needs improvement, IMHO.

On 6/25/2020 at 5:12 PM, User 905133 said:

As I understand (as a user since the MS-DOS versions), when the Staff View was introduced, it was never intended to compete with $500+ full-featured staff editing software.

Literally no one is asking for this.  People are seeing what's in other DAWs and comparing to that.

1. Cubase
2. Digital Performer
3. Logic Pro X
4. Pro Tools
5. Samplitude Pro
6. REAPER

etc. all have better Staff View/Notation Editors than Cakewalk.  Even MixCraft has better notation editing than Cakewalk.

This isn't a situation of misguided expectations.  This component is just not that good, and it's been this way for a long time.

I am not sure what they're going to do to improve it, or if they even care to improve it, because that market is already dominated by Cubase Pro and Logic Pro X, anyways.  How much do they stand to gain from investing in improving Staff View?

Edited July 8, 2020 by Trensharo

[Jerry Gerber]

12 hours ago, Trensharo said:

The Staff View has lots of issues, and I could never use it for composition.  It's one of the main reasons why I started looking into other DAWs.  It's barely usable, AFAIC.

The issue is not people misunderstanding what the Staff View is for. It's the fact that it's actually quite bad.  Issues with the Staff View, and people asking for improvements, date back a decade or more.

The fact that someone was able to trudge along in it to produce a lot of music doesn't alter the reality of the situation.  That's great to hear, but it's not going to make me want to use it.  I've already been there, and I'm not revisiting any time soon.

Cakewalk's Staff View makes REAPER's Notation Editor look like Sibelius | Ultimate.  It's that bad in comparison, and the gulf was that wide the second REAPER added this feature, when SONAR had it for like 10+ years.

It needs improvement, IMHO.

Literally no one is asking for this.  People are seeing what's in other DAWs and comparing to that.

1. Cubase
2. Digital Performer
3. Logic Pro X
4. Pro Tools
5. Samplitude Pro
6. REAPER

etc. all have better Staff View/Notation Editors than Cakewalk.  Even MixCraft has better notation editing than Cakewalk.

This isn't a situation of misguided expectations.  This component is just not that good, and it's been this way for a long time.

I am not sure what they're going to do to improve it, or if they even care to improve it, because that market is already dominated by Cubase Pro and Logic Pro X, anyways.  How much do they stand to gain from investing in improving Staff View?

Just because you haven't learned to use it is no reason to project and say it's unusable.  It's unusable FOR YOU.    I don't like spinach, that's a subjective truth.  But I cannot say that spinach is objectively bad, I can only say I don't like it.    I used Digital Performer's QuickScribe for 18 months, every day.  It's not any better than Cakewalk; it has a few features that are better, but Cakewalk has features that are better for composition for me.    How could a classically-trained composer who has produced 14 albums and over 750 soundtrack cues work in the staff view if it's "unusable"?  Maybe I know something you don't?  Try to recognize the difference between a subjective evaluation, which you're certainly entitled to, and a overgeneralized sweeping statement that doesn't take into account the experience of others.

 

 

[Bapu]

On 6/16/2020 at 4:11 PM, InstrEd said:

  Maybe if Studio One Version 5 gets one Cakewalk will update the staff view.

The race is on?

Composers and arrangers will appreciate Studio One 5’s new dedicated Score View for the Note Editor. Based on PreSonus’ Notion music composition and notation software, the new Score View is available on its own or as a companion side-by-side view with the Piano and Drum views, allowing users to enter, view, and edit notes in standard music notation.

The Score View is available per track, so you can edit note data in Score View on one track while using Piano or Drum View on other tracks. Any number of tracks can be viewed simultaneously, so you can work on just one melody line or on chords over an entire orchestral section at once. Notes can be entered manually, in real-time or step recording modes. A basic set of musical symbols is provided, and the symbols directly control playback, allowing you to add tremolos, crescendos, and more and hear it all in real time.

[InstrEd]

Thanks Ed. One of the missing pieces in my mind Studio One now has. Really should help them in the educational market going forward. Nice job Presonus!

[Tobias]

18 hours ago, jsg said:

Just because you haven't learned to use it is no reason to project and say it's unusable.  It's unusable FOR YOU.    I don't like spinach, that's a subjective truth.  But I cannot say that spinach is objectively bad, I can only say I don't like it.    I used Digital Performer's QuickScribe for 18 months, every day.  It's not any better than Cakewalk; it has a few features that are better, but Cakewalk has features that are better for composition for me.    How could a classically-trained composer who has produced 14 albums and over 750 soundtrack cues work in the staff view if it's "unusable"?  Maybe I know something you don't?  Try to recognize the difference between a subjective evaluation, which you're certainly entitled to, and a overgeneralized sweeping statement that doesn't take into account the experience of others.

 

 

You make valid points, but I feel I must point out that you are dead wrong about spinach. Spinach is objectively horrible! 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Tobias

[InstrEd]

 

2 hours ago, Tobias said:

You make valid points, but I feel I must point out that you are dead wrong about spinach. Spinach is objectively horrible! 

Not even on my pizza?

[Jerry Gerber]

4 hours ago, Tobias said:

You make valid points, but I feel I must point out that you are dead wrong about spinach. Spinach is objectively horrible! 

I'm drafting legislation now to make eating it punishable by no more than 60 days in jail and/or a $500 fine.  That'll take care of it!

 

[Jerry Gerber]

I downloaded Reaper a few years ago and tried it for a week and found it counter-intuitive.  Powerful and comprehensive, yes, but in my 32 years of using software, music and otherwise, I have found the best software is designed so well that even without reading the manual (which I always do) you can start to work in it right away.  A software program's power and capabilities must be matched by an elegant simplicity in terms of actually using it (reminds me of a comment a musician one said about Mozart's music:  So simple a child can enjoy it and so sophisticated it will appeal to most learned musician).  I didn't find this with Reaper.  But, once again, to each his own, everyone is going to have a different reaction to an app in regard to whether it fits their requirements or not. 

I also looked at Studio One recently.  No event list?  Every DAW has an event list, an absolute must for keeping track of program changes, cc changes and other types of MIDI events.

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by jsg

[jieva]

On 7/8/2020 at 8:18 PM, jsg said:

Just because you haven't learned to use it is no reason to project and say it's unusable.  It's unusable FOR YOU.    I don't like spinach, that's a subjective truth.  But I cannot say that spinach is objectively bad, I can only say I don't like it.    I used Digital Performer's QuickScribe for 18 months, every day.  It's not any better than Cakewalk; it has a few features that are better, but Cakewalk has features that are better for composition for me.    How could a classically-trained composer who has produced 14 albums and over 750 soundtrack cues work in the staff view if it's "unusable"?  Maybe I know something you don't?  Try to recognize the difference between a subjective evaluation, which you're certainly entitled to, and a overgeneralized sweeping statement that doesn't take into account the experience of others.

 

 

I too am a classical musician and really like using Staff view for composing.  Some Instruments I play virtually using a keyboard, some I record directly as audio and some I notate.  I can't do that in a Publishing tool like Sibelius but I do use it to print scores and parts if need be.  A previous post saying that staff view is unusable is not my experience and I can live with its limitations for my use and I will be quite happy when the snap function returns and the ctrl+right click is restored back to just right click.

Another reason that I like Staff View is that I can see more easily the "shape" of the phrases if that makes sense and for multiple parts can see where the melody, harmony and counterpoint move in relation to each other.  I find that really hard in Piano Roll.

Reaper notation is not Sibelius compared to Cakewalk for me.  I use both and find the reaper notation a bit more cumbersome to work with on the whole, however, it's snap functions are perfect!