Why DP for orchestral scoring?

[minimoog]

Hello Guys,

I often read that for orchestral scoring, and scoring to film
"DP is it"...

While I don't do the later,..I do orchestral stuff and I'm curious about this in general.

Guys who do orchestral work, scores etc,...I would love to hear your views as to why DP is far better than another DAW for this type work.

care to share your view?

Thanks guys.

[minimoog]

ooops,..

James I just realized this might not be the place to ask this question.

If that is the case,..I apologize.

[dewdman42]

DP does have the best tools for film scoring of anything out there, but I can't think of any reason that would make it superior for orchestral composing and production.

[minimoog]

well,...I guess I'm asking cause,...I don't understand why either...?

[dewdman42]

Dp has an number of tools related to calculating hit points that no other product has. It just works.

[Frodo]

First and foremost, I find DP a lot easier and faster to navigate for what I need to do than other DAWs.

In general, working with a virtual orchestra is no different from working with any body of virtual instruments. A lot of times, there will be more orchestral tracks to negotiate. Other than that the basic approach from a technical point of view feels about the same to me. Musically, the process may be very different, though.

Film scoring--- true: DP offers a lot of nice annotations for hit points, punches, streamers, QT sync, which have simplified setting music to film/video--- orchestral or otherwise.

For just mocking up a piece of music for full orchestra without film, I've enjoyed using QuickScribe for doing basic note editing on non-adjacent tracks. That's probably the biggest difference I've found between doing an orchestral work and a pop/rock/R&B sort of project. No matter what the project is, the GE, SE and other editors in use work as they should.

What levels the playing field between DAWs is the relative savvy, affordability, compatibility, and integrity of the VIs in use. Regardless of DAW, one must still delve in deep with the features of any VI to get the most out of it. I think that's what slows me down the most, but that's not a DP issue. But for what DP does, it's just faster at it, imvho.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

I actually find it faster to score for orch in Finale from scratch if going to print. As far as why DP is any better than any other DAW for orch, I also see no reason to claim that. What's important is how it works for you as the end user. That is what makes it better or worse.

[minimoog]

thanks for the input guys,..you know... I didn't really see the relevance of musical idiom or style...how that should make any difference,..

[Frodo]

thanks for the input guys,..you know... I didn't really see the relevance of musical idiom or style...how that should make any difference,..

It could make a difference in your workflow eventually, but that can also raise additional questions where scoring in DP is concerned.

[Mr_Clifford]

The ability (or lack of it) to orchestrate well is going to make much more difference than what DAW you use.

In terms of writing for a real orchestra, I'm with MLC in that I prefer to go straight into a dedicated scoring program (Finale, Sibelius, both good).

As others have said, DP is really good for writing to picture because of the excellent tools for calculating and manipulating tempo, as well as the ability to have multiple sequences in the same project for different cues (I can't believe the other programs don't offer that - absolute deal killer in my book).