Feature Request - Add ability to control vertical height of track in Staff View

[Konstantin Paradizov]

Some tracks have notes way below the staff or above the staff. When viewing those in Staff View along with other tracks, it would be great to be able to spread out the tracks vertically to avoid overlaps and problems with editing notes that are too close to another track. Just like we have a horizontal zoom control, it would be great to have an additional one that moves the tracks apart vertically. 

Alternatively, please give the ability to change default track space height in the Layout view for the staff view tracks. 

Right now, this problem of going outside the staff is especially painful when dealing with Key Switch tracks that require notes in low octaves below what 8va Bass Clef normally shows. When those tracks appear between normal tracks and are shown together, the overlaps of notes between tracks are not great.

[hadada]

You mean this bug? You can right-click to move them or ctrl+ right-click to copy them(Need to be put on the notes.). Or you can go to the event list, which has all the parameters you want to adjust.

You can also press 8 on the keypad to move them, there are also bugs in Nudging it to left and right. Sometimes chords and expression can only be moved once.

Edited January 24, 2023 by hadada

[hadada]

If just the keyswitch problem, why not create a midi track to store them, or to use articulation maps.

[murat k.]

He is just talking about this thing:

The space between the tracks can be dynamic as regards to the highest or lowest note in the track. 

Edited January 24, 2023 by murat k.

[murat k.]

4 hours ago, hadada said:

If just the keyswitch problem, why not create a midi track to store them, or to use articulation maps.

Also he said that he is not using PRV and already requested Articulation Maps for the Staff View.

Using Articulation Maps for keyswitch is a good advice though.

Edited January 24, 2023 by murat k.

[hadada]

7 hours ago, murat k. said:

He is just talking about this thing:

The space between the tracks can be dynamic as regards to the highest or lowest note in the track. 

I wouldn't write something like this, which is hard to read. And changing the clef should solve it. but, if the notes you edit are too close to other tracks, there will be some bugs like gif 1, which will make it difficult to select and edit. not only the marks,even the notes will be affected.So I don't recommend using staff to edit notes.

Why not edit notes like this：

[murat k.]

6 hours ago, hadada said:

I wouldn't write something like this, which is hard to read. And changing the clef should solve it.

When you work at a wide range it will not solve it. If this thing only needed for key switches, Articulation Maps in Staff View can help him, but not solve the issue.

The issue can also be resolved by adding extra staff depending on the pitch range of your work like this:

Also, this topic is about improving Staff View. I think the best help would be supporting his idea without leaving the concept.

[Konstantin Paradizov]

Hi @hadada, Murat K got it right. There are times when you are forced to write very low notes or very high notes just because a VST instrument works like that. This goes for key switches and sometimes other commands or notes (if your VST instrument is transposed for some reason). 

So, having a note from one staff overlap the space of another staff creates a problem. After it overlaps like that, it's hard to use a mouse to click on the note and edit it because the editor thinks you are clicking on another staff. 

My suggestion was to allow users to move the staff tracks apart to create more space when necessary. That way all those additional ledger lines would not overlap other tracks.

I am studying different software packages just to see what's out there and I see that every single one is not perfect in terms of how notes are entered and what the program can do. I have classical musical education, yet I play guitar and work with tabs besides scoring orchestra. If I work on some soundtrack project, then the software choices get reduced to DAW type right away because you want to be able to have the ultimate power of notation software with the ability to just play an instrument and record it together with VST-based music. But then you get into how much DAW score editors lack dynamics and articulation... If you use notation software like Dorico, Finale or MuseScore - they can't do what Sonar/Bandlab or Cubase do with allowing you that combination of real instrument recordings and scored VST instrument music.

I always thought the Piano Roll was something for people who didn't really know how to read classical notation. 

When you think of modern film music or game soundtracks, you keep coming back to wanting to make DAW score editors better instead of switching to notation software and wishing they could do everything a good DAW does... there is no perfect package.

I have used Sonar for many years and grew accustomed to its concept of a ruler in staff view. You don't have to deal with entering rests. Just enter notes where you want them. Dorico tries to do this, although it doesn't work as well as Bandlab on high resolution monitor and the responsiveness to the clicks seems to be affected by strange delays. Bandlab's staff editor performs well and looks crisp but lacks thorough staff spacing, dynamics and articulation support.

If you listen to Hans Zimmer interviews, he starts everything in Cubase. Scoring his music properly comes secondary. If you listen to Alan Silvestri's interviews, he starts his work in a DAW (Cubase) and then goes over to Dorico to work on proper sheet music for the orchestra. Wouldn't it be nice if DAW software had a powerful score editor? I may be dreaming here. But then, could we start with small steps and gradually build it up to be at least decent? Bandlab has a great start with the ruler/grid mode where composers don't have to worry about entering rests. Nice! So, let's make it even better.

I am teaching my son to use Bandlab as a composer. Unfortunately, he is also learning how much DAW score editors lack in features. Maybe we can do something here for the future generations to not have to deal with the headache of having multiple software packages for the same project and less than perfect Export/Import steps.

Imagine this scenario -- you buy an expensive VST library that has Hans Zimmer's samples of strings. You want it to sound great (that's why you bought it in the first place)! But you also want it to look right in the sheet music. I understand that some VST instruments play entire phrases and you cannot get those to look right in the sheet music until you re-enter those note by note. I get it. But, if those are single notes, wouldn't it be great to at least not have to spend time trying to figure out what each key-switch track under each normal track is doing? Those are impossible to read when there is a lot of them. The composer then has to do something else to mark up the score or has to remember what articulation was placed in each spot, or keep clicking on each key-switch note, struggling to click it because it overlaps some other track, to then look up what it does... This is where a lot of musicians would switch to Dorico as the next closest relative with the ruler/grid concept. But Dorico is no DAW and you end up switching back and forth instead of writing music.

I'd love to hear all of your thoughts on this

Thank you

 

 

[Glenn Stanton]

would be nice if something like ARA existed for MIDI and could connect to Muse Score... usually i'll do my composition in Muse Score, export as MIDI, and then import into CW. but then adding the key switches etc if not using articulation maps is a hassle.

Edited February 6, 2023 by fossile

[msmcleod]

As others have mentioned... don't use MIDI notes for key switches or commands - use articulations instead. Articulations won't appear as notes in the staff view.

There's an outstanding task to associate articulations with staff view articulations, although I can't say how soon it'll get scheduled.

This won't allow you to edit articulations in the staff view, but will at least show you them.

[Konstantin Paradizov]

2 hours ago, fossile said:

would be nice if something like ARA existed for MIDI and could connect to Muse Score... usually i'll do my composition in Muse Score, export as MIDI, and then import into CW. but then adding the key switches etc if not using articulation maps is a hassle.

I did that with my son's composition in Note Flight. You export orchestra music as MIDI, but then when you import it into Cakewalk, not only playing techniques have to be fixed with key switches, but also the dynamics may be very different from the original editor's interpretation of "forte", "piano", "pianissimo", etc. When those symbols are applied and then exported as MIDI, that first software package decides what the actual MIDI note volume will be. When I import it into Bandlab, I then have to scrub every note that sounds too soft or is inaudible because the pro grade VST instrument disagrees with that volume. 

I imagine this would always be a problem across different VST instrument makers when you import something where dynamics are applied to each note already. It seems that the only way to do this once is to start out by writing the whole thing in the same piece of software. And we are back to Bandlab's Staff View capabilities  

1 hour ago, msmcleod said:

As others have mentioned... don't use MIDI notes for key switches or commands - use articulations instead. Articulations won't appear as notes in the staff view.

There's an outstanding task to associate articulations with staff view articulations, although I can't say how soon it'll get scheduled.

This won't allow you to edit articulations in the staff view, but will at least show you them.

Articulations in Piano Roll look very interesting in terms of how easy they are to edit. Now, the challenge is to add those to Staff View on a "per track" basis, so I can scroll the score with multiple staves and see those articulations next to each track. That would be great! 

By the way, I noticed that Bandlab articulations are more efficient than classical notation dynamics markings in situations when you need to start a certain articulation segment just before the note is played and not right with the note. Having that degree of control is very nice. It's easy to edit and it works correctly. Now we just want to see it in the right place next to each track in a big score.

Thank you!

[Byron Dickens]

On 1/24/2023 at 6:33 PM, hadada said:

I wouldn't write something like this, which is hard to read.

^^^^^^ This for starters.

 

As far as improving the Staff View: if it was that easy, don't you think the Bakers would have done it by now?

There must be some technical reason - beyond laziness or disinterest - why it hasn't been done.

I suspect it has to do with the fundamental difference in how DAWs and notation handle things. Music notation is merely a guide - a roadmap for the performer whereas a DAW is built on the paradigm of a tape recorder which captures and then reproduces a specific performance.

Notation can not convey all the subtle intricacies of performance and interpretation that a musician brings to a piece but a recording can.

A strict rendering of notation produces a stiff and lifeless result and an attempt to precisely notate every aspect of a performance results in an extremely messy score that is nearly impossible to read.

 

My preferred solution is to use each application for it's intended purpose, based on it's strengths, instead of fighting with things.  I ultimately find life much easier that way.

Edited February 6, 2023 by Byron Dickens

[murat k.]

It seems that some other DAWs already found a way to deal with the issue. This image is from Studio One:

Also it has a Dark Theme which is good for eye health:

The DAWs of today are not focusing a specific task. They are leading a way to do many things together. And I don't want Cakewalk to lag behind that.

[hadada]

5 hours ago, Byron Dickens said:

^^^^^^ This for starters.

 

As far as improving the Staff View: if it was that easy, don't you think the Bakers would have done it by now?

There must be some technical reason - beyond laziness or disinterest - why it hasn't been done.

I suspect it has to do with the fundamental difference in how DAWs and notation handle things. Music notation is merely a guide - a roadmap for the performer whereas a DAW is built on the paradigm of a tape recorder which captures and then reproduces a specific performance.

Notation can not convey all the subtle intricacies of performance and interpretation that a musician brings to a piece but a recording can.

A strict rendering of notation produces a stiff and lifeless result and an attempt to precisely notate every aspect of a performance results in an extremely messy score that is nearly impossible to read.

 

My preferred solution is to use each application for it's intended purpose, based on it's strengths, instead of fighting with things.  I ultimately find life much easier that way.

I think it's because the staff view needs too much improvement, it has no slur, no glissando, no appoggiatura, no tremolo, can't write transposed instruments, and it's engraving is terrible, when there are many notes in one bar it will become super wide. To be honest, if I want to convert the project into a staff, I would directly import the midi file into musescore to make changes. In fact, it would be much easier to mark on musescore if they had a marker track like this.marker track

I think one of the disadvantages of using daw to compose music is that it is not intuitive. If this can be improved, it should be enough.

[hadada]

5 hours ago, murat k. said:

It seems that some other DAWs already found a way to deal with the issue. This image is from Studio One:

Also it has a Dark Theme which is good for eye health:

The DAWs of today are not focusing a specific task. They are leading a way to do many things together. And I don't want Cakewalk to lag behind that.

cakewalk has it too：

I also used to think that the dark theme is good for the eyes, but in fact it will only make your myopia worse, all animals that live in the dark are blind during the day. And I've seen a lot of research papers saying this. What really helps the eyes are the UV rays, open the windows to let the sun in, put the computer sideways, and use a white theme. Therefore, I don't think cakewalk should turn everything black.

Edited February 7, 2023 by hadada

[hadada]

15 hours ago, Konstantin Paradizov said:

Hi @hadada, Murat K got it right. There are times when you are forced to write very low notes or very high notes just because a VST instrument works like that. This goes for key switches and sometimes other commands or notes (if your VST instrument is transposed for some reason). 

So, having a note from one staff overlap the space of another staff creates a problem. After it overlaps like that, it's hard to use a mouse to click on the note and edit it because the editor thinks you are clicking on another staff. 

My suggestion was to allow users to move the staff tracks apart to create more space when necessary. That way all those additional ledger lines would not overlap other tracks.

I am studying different software packages just to see what's out there and I see that every single one is not perfect in terms of how notes are entered and what the program can do. I have classical musical education, yet I play guitar and work with tabs besides scoring orchestra. If I work on some soundtrack project, then the software choices get reduced to DAW type right away because you want to be able to have the ultimate power of notation software with the ability to just play an instrument and record it together with VST-based music. But then you get into how much DAW score editors lack dynamics and articulation... If you use notation software like Dorico, Finale or MuseScore - they can't do what Sonar/Bandlab or Cubase do with allowing you that combination of real instrument recordings and scored VST instrument music.

I always thought the Piano Roll was something for people who didn't really know how to read classical notation. 

When you think of modern film music or game soundtracks, you keep coming back to wanting to make DAW score editors better instead of switching to notation software and wishing they could do everything a good DAW does... there is no perfect package.

I have used Sonar for many years and grew accustomed to its concept of a ruler in staff view. You don't have to deal with entering rests. Just enter notes where you want them. Dorico tries to do this, although it doesn't work as well as Bandlab on high resolution monitor and the responsiveness to the clicks seems to be affected by strange delays. Bandlab's staff editor performs well and looks crisp but lacks thorough staff spacing, dynamics and articulation support.

If you listen to Hans Zimmer interviews, he starts everything in Cubase. Scoring his music properly comes secondary. If you listen to Alan Silvestri's interviews, he starts his work in a DAW (Cubase) and then goes over to Dorico to work on proper sheet music for the orchestra. Wouldn't it be nice if DAW software had a powerful score editor? I may be dreaming here. But then, could we start with small steps and gradually build it up to be at least decent? Bandlab has a great start with the ruler/grid mode where composers don't have to worry about entering rests. Nice! So, let's make it even better.

I am teaching my son to use Bandlab as a composer. Unfortunately, he is also learning how much DAW score editors lack in features. Maybe we can do something here for the future generations to not have to deal with the headache of having multiple software packages for the same project and less than perfect Export/Import steps.

Imagine this scenario -- you buy an expensive VST library that has Hans Zimmer's samples of strings. You want it to sound great (that's why you bought it in the first place)! But you also want it to look right in the sheet music. I understand that some VST instruments play entire phrases and you cannot get those to look right in the sheet music until you re-enter those note by note. I get it. But, if those are single notes, wouldn't it be great to at least not have to spend time trying to figure out what each key-switch track under each normal track is doing? Those are impossible to read when there is a lot of them. The composer then has to do something else to mark up the score or has to remember what articulation was placed in each spot, or keep clicking on each key-switch note, struggling to click it because it overlaps some other track, to then look up what it does... This is where a lot of musicians would switch to Dorico as the next closest relative with the ruler/grid concept. But Dorico is no DAW and you end up switching back and forth instead of writing music.

I'd love to hear all of your thoughts on this

Thank you

 

 

I will double the Legato with a long articulation, So the LONG will display correctly in staff view, I think this is the most common way to do. if you mean this:marker track, I've already posted a request.

Most musicians who write orchestral music are splitting different articulation to different tracks for better mix, only when they want to write some complex stuff they will do different articulation on one track. but sometimes you want to let the real instruments play your score, that's when the staff works.

I don't think you should underestimate the piano roll. It's much faster than you are editing in the staff view. You really should learn its tricks.

two videos for you:

Multitrack

pianoroll

Maybe Cakewalk cooperates with other notation software can solve your problem, But I don't think it's necessary to improve the staff view when its other important features are not perfect yet.

Edited February 7, 2023 by hadada

[murat k.]

6 hours ago, hadada said:

cakewalk has it too：

 

Thanks for the information. If Studio One  is doing the thing with the same way with the Cakewalk it doesn't seem helping the issue. It needs to be dynamically creating staff when you add notes as I stated earlier.

6 hours ago, hadada said:

I also used to think that the dark theme is good for the eyes, but in fact it will only make your myopia worse, all animals that live in the dark are blind during the day. And I've seen a lot of research papers saying this. What really helps the eyes are the UV rays, open the windows to let the sun in, put the computer sideways, and use a white theme. Therefore, I don't think cakewalk should turn everything black.

Dark Theme is a needed feature. With the white screen my eyes are bleeding. You can do a photon ray bombardment your eyes anytime by the way.

7 hours ago, hadada said:

I don't think you should underestimate the piano roll. It's much faster than you are editing in the staff view.

And as I stated earlier this topic is about improving the Staff View, PRV is out of topic.

6 hours ago, hadada said:

Maybe Cakewalk cooperates with other notation software can solve your problem,

And he also mentioned that he doesn't want to have to use another software. 

[hadada]

11 minutes ago, murat k. said:

Dark Theme is a needed feature. With the white screen my eyes are bleeding. You can do a photon ray bombardment your eyes anytime by the way.

 

That's because you're used to the dark environment, and of course you can't stand looking at the light. I'm not saying that you should stare at the sun. Activities beneath the sun can indeed inhibit the growth of the eye axis. Television usually reminds you to watch at a certain distance and ensure sufficient indoor light.  even Bach goes blind just because he is overstressing his vision in poor illumination. If you don't like what I say, forget it. I'm just stating what I know.

[murat k.]

12 minutes ago, hadada said:

I'm not saying that you should stare at the sun.

You say it without knowing it actually. White screen and sun is almost the same thing for eyes. When the retina’s light-sensing cells become over-stimulated from looking at a bright light, they release massive amounts of signaling chemicals, injuring the back of the eye as a result. I'm just stating what I know.

[hadada]

2 minutes ago, murat k. said:

You say it without knowing it actually. White screen and sun is almost the same thing for eyes. When the retina’s light-sensing cells become over-stimulated from looking at a bright light, they release massive amounts of signaling chemicals, injuring the back of the eye as a result. I'm just stating what I know.

You're right. but If you don't watch a white screen in the dark, it won't stimulate your eyes. You can turn on the light in your room, or use the night mode. I work during the day, so I always use the white theme. And my eyes never hurt after that.