Re: MakeMusic Finale 2003 and TASCAM GigaStudio 96 (and Steinberg Cubase SX)

Discussion in 'comp.music.midi' started by David Cole, Aug 23, 2003.

  1. David Cole

    David Cole Guest

    Ok, thanks, guys. So, from what I gather, Finale is to be used mostly
    just for the scores, but once the score is written, output to midi and
    input to Cubase (or Cakewalk? FruityLoops?) which can be used to mix
    and modify the music to be more realistic and can use GigaStudio to
    supply the realisic sounds.

    Is this correct? From its website, Cubase SX sounds like a great
    product. How does it compare to Cakewalk or FruityLoops or something
    else? Price is an issue, but I'm more interested in quality.

    Thanks so much for your help.

    David Cole
    www.davidcole.net


    slidge@slidge.com wrote in message news:<obw1b.240$Zr2.9386@iad-read.news.verio.net>...
    > > Note that output from Finale will always be rigid and quantised - it's a
    > > scorewriter, not a performance synthesiser. Unless you're into lots of
    > > micro-editing, the way to get a realistic-sounding performance continues
    > > to be playing music in from a keyboard or other controller. Buying the
    > > best sample sets available won't change this.

    >
    > What I normally do (to get a better feel for the piece) is to notate it
    > in Finale, export it to MIDI, load it into Cubase and run it through the
    > Edirol HQ Orchestra VSTi. I have a lot of note articulations for this
    > express purpose (ie, program changes to spiccato strings or pizz). The
    > end result is an almost passable approximation of what I'm going to end
    > up with when it is performed for real.
  2. >Ok, thanks, guys. So, from what I gather, Finale is to be used mostly
    >just for the scores, but once the score is written, output to midi and
    >input to Cubase (or Cakewalk? FruityLoops?) which can be used to mix
    >and modify the music to be more realistic and can use GigaStudio to
    >supply the realisic sounds.


    Output as midi, then tweak in a sequencer if you want to do MUCH
    microediting. For a more musical result, print from Finale, then
    PLAY the music into the sequencer.

    As a rule, it's only people who COULD play the music into a sequencer
    who know what editing to do in order to achieve realism. And playing
    it in is much quicker and easier.


    >Is this correct? From its website, Cubase SX sounds like a great
    >product. How does it compare to Cakewalk or FruityLoops or something
    >else? Price is an issue, but I'm more interested in quality.



    Cubase is a fully-featured midi and audio sequencer. Cakewalk is a
    budget version. Fruity Loops is an audio loop manipulation program,
    not at all what you need.

    CubaseFAQ page www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm

Share This Page