When it comes to volume control on musescore, click on the "properties" tab, then select a note and then click on "playback". This way you can assign a specific volume number to certain notes, allowing you to fine tune the volume beyond just using the dynamic markings.
There is also crescendo/diminuendo hairpins you can connect dinamics to, slowly lowering or raising the volume with each note. However, your method sounds a lot more exact while hairpins are kinda a hope and pray is not too loud/too quiet
I love how your view on things differs totally from mine, with me coming from the sheet music world. You say that regarding dynamics, you would just draw the graph to automate the volume, while I'm thinking "This would be horrendous for me. Just put it those tiny dynamic symbols!" 😀
On top of BBC not having round robins, it also doesn't have any dynamics or velocity layers, which pretty much means there's only a single sample per note for everything. It does seem to be a bit more quanity over quality, but it's still a great free vsts for people starting to get into it, even though it can be really limiting.
One thing I will add is that, if the granularity of MuseScore is referring specifically to volume swells, the easiest route is to write in crescendos and decrescendos.
Great comparison. I notice you've composed this in a DAW centric way, but what excites me aboit musescore is the possibility of mixed articulations in a single bar, very quickly and easily. And being able to copy those articulations to other instruments! Doing something like that in a DAW would take ages!
For what it's worth, articulation sets exist and try to help solve this problem. Babylonwaves is a company that makes some. Might be worth a look? Hope this helps! 😊
You can export DAW projects into midi and then import midi files to Musescore if you want sheet music. (Assuming you really want to use Musescore for sheet music)
@@Juho- I've done that. There's inevitably a lot of cleanup - getting the rhythms to show right, allocating split parts - and then you have to add key signatures, time signatures, dynamics, articulation, lyrics, staff text, repeat signs... Basically everything but the notes! Much easier to start in MuseScore (if you want sheet music ) in the first place!
As someone who's composed using both approaches, I appreciate the level of control you can get with DAWs and VST instruments (which is helpful if the audio itself is the final product, and can also be useful for individual tracks that you can composite over the sound from MuseScore), but I find composing in notation to be far more efficient because you get results without needing to worry about adding in keyswitches or dealing with MIDI clips or tracks. Plus, I am a violist in a community orchestra and tend to write with actual orchestra musicians in mind.
I've used MuseScore since its infancy. The new update is phenomenal. In order to get a "real" orchestral sound on early MuseScore a lot of tweaking had to be done. Now the new sampled orchestral sounds - in the strings, winds, horns, timpany, etc...sound rich, and they seem to follow the dynamic marks with a bit more expression. Single violins sound beautiful - as if a human virtuoso is playing them. I recently copied Beethoven's Violin Concerto (1st movement) into MuseScore, and it sounds quite amazing. I feel confident that I can create my own compositions with a lot of expression and finesse that I could not get on any other software. I highly recommend MuseScore.
@@EoinBlunnie A lot of thought went into creating these sounds. The person responsible, would you believe, had a TH-cam channel in which he evaluated music software. He made several comparison videos between MuseScore and other high priced notation software like Sibelius and Finale, concluding that MuseScore provided the best user-friendly platform for writing music. So he joined MuseScore, and became the CEO. Then he set on a journey to rework MuseScore, and the new release is the result of several years work. I am not involved in MuseScores business. I just have used the software for a very long time - since it’s infancy. Probably around 2008 or 2009. It’s come a long way since then.
@@Open2Reason MuseScore doesnt have an official CEO, its a Lead Developer and Designer, and from the sound of it you are referring to Tantacrul and No, he i not the person responsible completely if thats who your referring to, he helped but wasnt the only one, nor become a CEO of MuseScore. If your talking about someone else though please specify because Your Information Seems Wildly Inaccurate.
Wow! I am SO glad i happened to see this. I am really bad at DAWs, and had a productive period around 12 years ago with Notarion Composer and Edirol Orchestral (a Roland sound library) but have since got Native Instruments sound in Komplete 11 Ultimate and didnt know i could trigger them with Musescore now. This changes everything, so thanks so much!
Thanks for this comparison, really appreciate your thoughts. I had sort of dismissed the musescore libraries without really listening. Now I will go back and give them a try.
I'm really glad you made this video. I just finished a piece I wrote in MuseScore then exported the midi into FL Studio, but Discover just didn't sound as good. I wound up going back and exporting the individual instruments (dry) as wavs out of Muse and imported them into FL for final EQ/Comp/Reverb tweaks. Personally, I wound up not needing a lot of volume automation--though I did have to go in with Edison and massage a couple places where there was a sudden dynamic drop. I'm not sure I'd do it the same way next time, but the Muse sound (to me) was so much better that I'll heavily consider it.
Thank you for this review and comparison. With regards to granularity in MuseScore, as mentioned by Orb you can set a specific velocity value on a per-note level using the Properties Panel. As that gets extremely tedious there is work ongoing to include a volume/automation lane feature in a future version as well. And some background about the new sounds. "Technically" they're not built-in to MuseScore; Muse Sounds are closed source (but provided at no monetary cost) and use an open API to interpret the score by MuseScore. While the API documentation has not (yet?) been released, it is available in the source code of MuseScore. So in theory, other applications could implement the same API to drive the MuseSampler audio playback engine that plays back those Muse Sounds.
While I know people singing praise for MuseScore as notation software, I am much more comfortable working with DAW (both piano roll and trackers). Not to mention in DAW, I can mix it with other instruments like modern instruments (e.g. drums, synth, guitars) and world music instruments (e.g. gamelan) easier than MS. I hope Muse Sounds will be available as standalone VST.
You can always export the MuseScore files as a WAV and then insert them just like you would a live instrument into a DAW, which is what I've been doing. It's hard to work it as a VST because it isn't responding to MIDI at all.
@@williamcaine5446 MIDI is under the hood of all scorewriting software's playback and MS is no exception. They all face problems and deal with them in different ways. MuseSounds are designed to work specifically with MS's way of doing things so it's best to regard them as a modular playback engine specifically for MS rather than a VSTi. In fact I don't think they're even in VSTi format.
I use musescore to compose my orchestration, but then I export each instrument line separately as WAVs, which I then import into my DAW, where I can combine them with anything I want and mix them in any way I want. (Maybe this is not ideal for some reason, but it is working for me--and essential since I also mix in vocals and live guitar as well as midi tracks)
I use dynamics in Musescore scoring to adjust dynamics. Then I output to an mpo3 and toss it into audacity to process the audio file - make adjustments to sound and volume levels or ptentially extend the tempo to fit the video I intend to incorporate it into. Then I output to a new MP3. It ends up working out fine.
The most amazing part is that the play function of Musescore is a "quality of life" feature, not its main focus... The main focus is the music engraving and score production, the play function is there to helping the composer, not to produce an audio file for final use. The fact that it is better then dedicated software (even paid ones) is baffling...
I guess the best approach to Musescore as someone with no or limited knowledge of Music notation would be to finalise the piece of Music we need in a daw of choice and then to export midi to sheet music and use it in Musescore. Once you're comfortable with it, you can export it as audio and then import it back into your daw project. Yes, it's a lot of hassle, but it might be worth it and it gives you the experience of working with recordings like huge composers do. Here's a video on how to export audio in Musescore: th-cam.com/video/AlWlEuOhoA0/w-d-xo.html
Learning how to write is much much more gratifying. Not that I'm good at it, but since I switched from DAW to MS, I'm never going back. Writing on staff s basically the same as using a piano roll with more articulations and nuance options, it only takes a few hours to get used to it. Plus, your work will be ready to be played by and orchestra. (My work was never played by any orchestra, but still.... It's ready)
Downloaded Musescore. Thanks. I've been using Rosegarden up to this point, because I know how to use it. I tried Musescore when it first came out and thought I'd wait for it to mature. Musescore3 has one massive advantage for me - it runs natively on Linux, I don't feel sad that I can't use BBCSO any more. Your caveats are actually bonuses for me - I've been praying for a score editor that works like this. GRMA!
Your demonstration of BBCSO and Muse Sounds were amazing! I actually enjoy using Muse Sounds myself, and in my honest opinion, it's a lot better than BBCSOD. What Instrument sample libraries did you use in the original track?
Thank you - I think I'd be inclined to agree! The original track uses the free spiccato demo from Pacific Strings - sounds awesome and well worth a look if you have the full version of kontakt 👀
@@EoinBlunnie I tried to click on the link for the demos of Specific Strings, but the pages literally gave me a 404 not found message for some reason. Has the free period limit expired? I still at least have the solo violin and specific cello libraries from Performance Samples though. Not to mention that there are a couple free orchestra libraries that are compatible already with the Free Kontakt player I currently have. In my opinion, I'll just stick with the free realistic Muse Sounds library because I honestly think it sounds great already.
Musescore tempo modulation is subpar. Instead of being a gradual change, it is set intervals with a certain ending tempo. If you want to slow down from 180 to 80 bpm with a rall marking it will go down to something like 172, 164, 143, and then 132. It would never get down to that 80 tempo even if you stretch it out, since that also stretches out the intervals. So that's an obvious flaw with musescore.
Never heard of BBCSO but i have been using programs like Finale and Sibelius for years and musescore blows everything i have used out of the water for sheet music preparation
BBCSO stands for British Broadcasting Cooperation(BBC) Symphony Orchestra, its one of the leading UK(United Kingdom) Orchestras, and Basically in this situation the BBCSO 'Discover' is just one of the best audio samples/sound libraries and stuff you can get for DAWS(Digital Audio Workstations).
Marking a note staccato in a score (hotkey) is 100x easier and quicker than doing it in a DAW (keyswitch, and back, or switching to another MIDI channel in your template). And it means you can try out different articulations painlessly, and all the notes for the instrument remain in the same part.
musescore is (originally) a music notation program. In which you write music that musicians (possibly led by a conductor) perform. They have all learned to read music and how to play it. Someone who uses a DAW usually doesn't. And this music is often used for one project. Where often no real musicians are involved. But samples. So comparing a DAW and a notation program is not fair.
MuseScore hands down. The articulations sound artificial in the BBC whereas in MuseScore they sound a good bit better. Doesn't quite have that "organ" sound that so many sampled sounds tend to have and which BBC suffers from. I bought a LinnStrument a few months back and have fallen in love with it. It is great for emulating "single note" instruments. When I sit at a keyboard, my hands tend to fall into familiar places that lend themselves to sounding more like a piano or organ so sadly just doesn't sound real. Probably my fault there lol! But the LinnStrument makes me think more like a violinist etc. Tho I am certainly going to try MuseScore since I do read and write music, I try not to let that get in the way of my playing lol! Thanks for the video. I wasn't aware of MuseScore and will definitely try it.
That was a real eye opener for me. I'm hoping there's some sort of input output option that could be used with reaper. Muses ore was SO much better. On the other hand, if it would take a day or two to master musescore that I could spend actually making music I'm probably better supplementing bbcso discovery with stuff from labs and decent sampler.
Oh 100%. MuseSounds were basically taken from David William Hearn’s sessions he’d intended to create a bespoke Staffpad library for but when Ultimately GTR (MuseScore) acquired Staffpad, these sounds were ported over to it. They work very well especially in the legatos where the note transitions are excellent by and large. Dynamics in the brass are limited but I can’t see BBCsO discovery being better in this regard.
I like the sounds, but for some reason reason whenever I input tremolo the audio doesn’t play back the note with tremolo, and when playing parts of my composition that go fast, different instruments (Such as violin and Cello) don’t sound in time with the tempo. I changed the sounds to MS Basic and it worked, but I was just wondering if anybody else had this problem or any solutions for it?
Yes! I have the exact same problem . . . the violin & cello sounds, while improved greatly beyond older versions of MS, just don't seem capable of rapid movement. Sometimes grace notes in swift passages don't even sound. Hopefully they'll improve this. And achieving smooth dynamic changes can be tough. If an instrument is drowned out by others, I'll add an ff, and then it can overpower the rest. Using hairpins is really tricky; sometimes notes are too soft or loud. It's difficult to control. Still it's free, and wonderful! despite its flaws ;-)
So how did you deal with the cimbalom? Cliff hanger answer! In your example the MuseScore 4 with Muse Sounds does sound better, but that isn't always the case. As you mention at the end of the video, why not use notation software as well as DAWs? Definitely can work, though if some technical issues can be overcome, MU4 may be very capable of using many of the VST effects without having to export a score in some way to a DAW. A big advantage of MU4 is that it does work with notation - so that real instrumentalists can play the music, and they might [often can and do] be able to get something which sounds way better than any DAW+sample library.
im here to see MUSESCORE ... i already own the BBCSO(pro)... one thing in general I don't like. is I want to write from the sheet music and i'm using garageband which makes it super ridiculously impossible. if i could compose through MUSESCORE and then import the MIDI tracks to garageband and program them with the BBCSO(pro) patches ... would be a better workflow for me.
Okay i just tried Musescore and it sucks! There’s no expression control on some woodwinds. There’s the modulation control but no expression so the volume has to stay high. I have to use the automation feature on my DAW. But like wth? And then it doesn’t offer all the mic positionings that it would offer if I bought it outright. So I think it sucks ass.
How do you know what to write into musescore? Do you keep another program open with some other orchestral patch loaded? I haven't figured out how to play inside musescore (for improvisation) without musescore notating what I play. Is there a way to turn off input notation and just hear the sounds in musescore? Oh and the Super Mario 64 reference is funny.
I think this is a false comparison. MUSESCORE was and is meant to be a 'notator'...NOT a soft Daw. Even tho' has upgraded sound fonts, I only use it for notation, eg, cleaning up my music mss and making them legible and presentable. 😃
I know this video post is older, but my comment is for those curious of NotePerformer who is not yet convinced. Follow the link here and discover the magic of NotePerformer. I cannot recall any VST sounding like a recording like this. The music in the linked video was produced by Dorico 5.1 Pro driving NotePerformer 4.5.0. (NO affiliation) The music performance can still be tweaked using Dorico's MIDI lanes, but the listener will definitely hear how NotePerformer is not this 'in-between', medium quality VST as some claims. NotePerformer has a lot of power, if one knows how to use its magic! 🙂 th-cam.com/video/QfHQ5ZM4BaE/w-d-xo.html
What did you use for the guitar sound on Muesescore 4? I have a song I'm writing on it and I've been stuck with the MS Basic sound font, where the guitar sounds like a harpsichord, and I'm desperate for a new guitar sound
I had to cheat and use Spitfire Originals Cimbalom for that one! Probably your best bet is to use a free acoustic guitar VST and then hook it into MuseScore - something like Ample Guitar M Lite might work for you!
Soundfont: "Timbers of Heaven" has some good ones. I also just got QuietMusic"Classic GTr Lite" and it is pretty nice sounding as well. They had a promo to get it for free that I think is still going on.
The title of this video doesn't make a lot of sense. MuseScore is a music notation editor, BBSCO is a sample library. You are comparing Apples and Broccoli. MuseScore may have some built-in libraries but that is for convenience and certainly doesn't define the application. Music notation created in MuseScore can subsequently be used both by score reading instrument musicians or used in a DAW with sample libraries and synths to create music although in the latter case there isn't really any reason to use traditional notation unless it is to be used by a live musician.
I prefer musescore 4 but that’s partly because it’s the great samples and their integration in the notation software including easy dynamics and articulation settings. Also BBCSO discover does not have legatos.
MuseScore is a notation software that has some DAW elements. It is NOT a DAW if comparing it to FL Studio or Ableton Live. As a user of MuseScore and previously Cakewalk, they are not the same thing. Music notation and a workstation for audio may both make music, but trying to use it in unintended purposes isn't going to produce good results. If you like using a DAW, continue using a DAW, but music notation software definitely needed a relearning of software.
1) I will give MuseScore a try. I reminds me of a program I used to use called Harmony Assistant that was all written in sheet music. 2) How did you make the Cimbalom-like sound? I LOVE how it sounded.
You really disadvantaged Musescore, you wrote notes on the violas that they can't play. You didn't even write anything for the tam-tam... But anyways, it is a great video, and great comparison. Musescore won hands down haha
-MuseSound library (built-in soundfont and playback system) also comes in VST format. Though, without any playback pre-computation for improved dynamic etc- Nvm, I was wrong.
Well the realistic sounding orchestra uses a completely different approach than midi, with which it can look ahead of the currently played part. So even if the samples are usable outside musescore, they wouldn't sound as realistic in any midi context.
There are plenty of Dynamic Markings haha, Not just 6 or 7, Trust me. You could even get 5 f's But thats rare. In Fact Sheet Music Allows for More Dynamic Volumes typically
@@AdamConwayIE Still, if you're writing for an instrument, you have to at least know what's possible. It is key in making them sound realistic. For example you wouldn't write a groove where the player hit more than two drum part simultaneously with their hands (they have two hand after all). But if you just want orchestra sound as an effect then whatever lol.
He probably did that to compensate for the viola players hitting the wrong note. 555 คุณเล่นกับออร์เคสตราใดบ้างครับ ผมเคยร่วมงานกับอจารย์สมเถา และเคยรู้จักอาจารย์บรูสครับ
That's not the purpose of the software... it's just a different workload. It works for some, and for others not so much. Just stick with what works for you don't just say it's bad cause you're not used to it.
![How to Write Music for Orchestra [with the FREE BBC SO Discover]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EPYnmtylUVM/mqdefault.jpg)
![How to Write Music for Orchestra [with the FREE BBC SO Discover]](/img/tr.png)
When it comes to volume control on musescore, click on the "properties" tab, then select a note and then click on "playback". This way you can assign a specific volume number to certain notes, allowing you to fine tune the volume beyond just using the dynamic markings.
Good shout!
I don't think this even makes a difference
does not work when using the new MuseScore 4 sounds
It does, I'm not sure what you're doing wrong but it might be instrument specific or something
There is also crescendo/diminuendo hairpins you can connect dinamics to, slowly lowering or raising the volume with each note. However, your method sounds a lot more exact while hairpins are kinda a hope and pray is not too loud/too quiet
MuseScore 4's Musesounds are really good. And I prefer writing in notation than piano roll.
And I like vanilla ice cream.
@@johnhill762 I prefer blue pencil cases
@@johnhill762 i think the 3rd base plate from the 2010 world series game 1 from the 7-9th inning tops vanilla ice cream
@@SoonerStateSirens1 I too like vanilla ice cream
why not have both, like in musescore 3?
I love how your view on things differs totally from mine, with me coming from the sheet music world.
You say that regarding dynamics, you would just draw the graph to automate the volume, while I'm thinking "This would be horrendous for me. Just put it those tiny dynamic symbols!" 😀
On top of BBC not having round robins, it also doesn't have any dynamics or velocity layers, which pretty much means there's only a single sample per note for everything. It does seem to be a bit more quanity over quality, but it's still a great free vsts for people starting to get into it, even though it can be really limiting.
One thing I will add is that, if the granularity of MuseScore is referring specifically to volume swells, the easiest route is to write in crescendos and decrescendos.
Great comparison. I notice you've composed this in a DAW centric way, but what excites me aboit musescore is the possibility of mixed articulations in a single bar, very quickly and easily. And being able to copy those articulations to other instruments! Doing something like that in a DAW would take ages!
This is *the* thing that makes me prefer Musescore. I don't want a different voice for each articulation style.
For what it's worth, articulation sets exist and try to help solve this problem. Babylonwaves is a company that makes some. Might be worth a look? Hope this helps! 😊
key switches?
Of course, if you want your music to be played by real people, then Musescore beats any DAW hands down - because that's what it's for!
You can export DAW projects into midi and then import midi files to Musescore if you want sheet music. (Assuming you really want to use Musescore for sheet music)
@@Juho- I've done that. There's inevitably a lot of cleanup - getting the rhythms to show right, allocating split parts - and then you have to add key signatures, time signatures, dynamics, articulation, lyrics, staff text, repeat signs... Basically everything but the notes!
Much easier to start in MuseScore (if you want sheet music ) in the first place!
As someone who's composed using both approaches, I appreciate the level of control you can get with DAWs and VST instruments (which is helpful if the audio itself is the final product, and can also be useful for individual tracks that you can composite over the sound from MuseScore), but I find composing in notation to be far more efficient because you get results without needing to worry about adding in keyswitches or dealing with MIDI clips or tracks. Plus, I am a violist in a community orchestra and tend to write with actual orchestra musicians in mind.
I've used MuseScore since its infancy. The new update is phenomenal. In order to get a "real" orchestral sound on early MuseScore a lot of tweaking had to be done. Now the new sampled orchestral sounds - in the strings, winds, horns, timpany, etc...sound rich, and they seem to follow the dynamic marks with a bit more expression. Single violins sound beautiful - as if a human virtuoso is playing them. I recently copied Beethoven's Violin Concerto (1st movement) into MuseScore, and it sounds quite amazing. I feel confident that I can create my own compositions with a lot of expression and finesse that I could not get on any other software. I highly recommend MuseScore.
Agreed! I was blown away by the quality of the solo violin sounds
@@EoinBlunnie A lot of thought went into creating these sounds.
The person responsible, would you believe, had a TH-cam channel in which he evaluated music software. He made several comparison videos between MuseScore and other high priced notation software like Sibelius and Finale, concluding that MuseScore provided the best user-friendly platform for writing music.
So he joined MuseScore, and became the CEO. Then he set on a journey to rework MuseScore, and the new release is the result of several years work.
I am not involved in MuseScores business. I just have used the software for a very long time - since it’s infancy. Probably around 2008 or 2009.
It’s come a long way since then.
@@Open2Reason MuseScore doesnt have an official CEO, its a Lead Developer and Designer, and from the sound of it you are referring to Tantacrul and No, he i not the person responsible completely if thats who your referring to, he helped but wasnt the only one, nor become a CEO of MuseScore. If your talking about someone else though please specify because Your Information Seems Wildly Inaccurate.
@@jrtspace7945 I stand corrected. I spoke out of ignorance.
@@Open2Reason Haha we all do sometimes!
Wow! I am SO glad i happened to see this. I am really bad at DAWs, and had a productive period around 12 years ago with Notarion Composer and Edirol Orchestral (a Roland sound library) but have since got Native Instruments sound in Komplete 11 Ultimate and didnt know i could trigger them with Musescore now. This changes everything, so thanks so much!
To make the last part short: With a DAW you can design music, with MuseScore you actually have to write it.
Thanks for this comparison, really appreciate your thoughts. I had sort of dismissed the musescore libraries without really listening. Now I will go back and give them a try.
Wow, that sounded great on Musescore....and you get a score.
As someone who thinks of music in terms of scoring, that's a big plus.
I'm really glad you made this video. I just finished a piece I wrote in MuseScore then exported the midi into FL Studio, but Discover just didn't sound as good. I wound up going back and exporting the individual instruments (dry) as wavs out of Muse and imported them into FL for final EQ/Comp/Reverb tweaks.
Personally, I wound up not needing a lot of volume automation--though I did have to go in with Edison and massage a couple places where there was a sudden dynamic drop.
I'm not sure I'd do it the same way next time, but the Muse sound (to me) was so much better that I'll heavily consider it.
Thank you for this review and comparison.
With regards to granularity in MuseScore, as mentioned by Orb you can set a specific velocity value on a per-note level using the Properties Panel. As that gets extremely tedious there is work ongoing to include a volume/automation lane feature in a future version as well.
And some background about the new sounds. "Technically" they're not built-in to MuseScore; Muse Sounds are closed source (but provided at no monetary cost) and use an open API to interpret the score by MuseScore. While the API documentation has not (yet?) been released, it is available in the source code of MuseScore. So in theory, other applications could implement the same API to drive the MuseSampler audio playback engine that plays back those Muse Sounds.
Fascinating, the Musescore version sounds a lot better! Definitely using that.
I'd say that musescore sounds more realistic thanks to their orchestral sounds from musehub (including the metronome).
While I know people singing praise for MuseScore as notation software, I am much more comfortable working with DAW (both piano roll and trackers). Not to mention in DAW, I can mix it with other instruments like modern instruments (e.g. drums, synth, guitars) and world music instruments (e.g. gamelan) easier than MS.
I hope Muse Sounds will be available as standalone VST.
You can always export the MuseScore files as a WAV and then insert them just like you would a live instrument into a DAW, which is what I've been doing.
It's hard to work it as a VST because it isn't responding to MIDI at all.
@@williamcaine5446 MIDI is under the hood of all scorewriting software's playback and MS is no exception. They all face problems and deal with them in different ways. MuseSounds are designed to work specifically with MS's way of doing things so it's best to regard them as a modular playback engine specifically for MS rather than a VSTi. In fact I don't think they're even in VSTi format.
I use musescore to compose my orchestration, but then I export each instrument line separately as WAVs, which I then import into my DAW, where I can combine them with anything I want and mix them in any way I want. (Maybe this is not ideal for some reason, but it is working for me--and essential since I also mix in vocals and live guitar as well as midi tracks)
I use dynamics in Musescore scoring to adjust dynamics. Then I output to an mpo3 and toss it into audacity to process the audio file - make adjustments to sound and volume levels or ptentially extend the tempo to fit the video I intend to incorporate it into. Then I output to a new MP3. It ends up working out fine.
The most amazing part is that the play function of Musescore is a "quality of life" feature, not its main focus... The main focus is the music engraving and score production, the play function is there to helping the composer, not to produce an audio file for final use.
The fact that it is better then dedicated software (even paid ones) is baffling...
I guess the best approach to Musescore as someone with no or limited knowledge of Music notation would be to finalise the piece of Music we need in a daw of choice and then to export midi to sheet music and use it in Musescore. Once you're comfortable with it, you can export it as audio and then import it back into your daw project.
Yes, it's a lot of hassle, but it might be worth it and it gives you the experience of working with recordings like huge composers do.
Here's a video on how to export audio in Musescore: th-cam.com/video/AlWlEuOhoA0/w-d-xo.html
Learning how to write is much much more gratifying.
Not that I'm good at it, but since I switched from DAW to MS, I'm never going back.
Writing on staff s basically the same as using a piano roll with more articulations and nuance options, it only takes a few hours to get used to it.
Plus, your work will be ready to be played by and orchestra. (My work was never played by any orchestra, but still.... It's ready)
That is exactly what I was thinking and about to ask, nice one
Whether by DAW or sheet music composition software, I soundly approve of the purpose of the composition depicted in this video.
Downloaded Musescore. Thanks. I've been using Rosegarden up to this point, because I know how to use it. I tried Musescore when it first came out and thought I'd wait for it to mature. Musescore3 has one massive advantage for me - it runs natively on Linux, I don't feel sad that I can't use BBCSO any more. Your caveats are actually bonuses for me - I've been praying for a score editor that works like this. GRMA!
MuseScore 4 Also Runs natively on linux
@@jrtspace7945 indeed it does! I do wish it was Jack-aware though
what about the difference in filesizes though? (~320Mb for BBC Symphony against MuseSounds' +15GB)
Your demonstration of BBCSO and Muse Sounds were amazing! I actually enjoy using Muse Sounds myself, and in my honest opinion, it's a lot better than BBCSOD.
What Instrument sample libraries did you use in the original track?
Thank you - I think I'd be inclined to agree!
The original track uses the free spiccato demo from Pacific Strings - sounds awesome and well worth a look if you have the full version of kontakt 👀
@@EoinBlunnie I tried to click on the link for the demos of Specific Strings, but the pages literally gave me a 404 not found message for some reason. Has the free period limit expired? I still at least have the solo violin and specific cello libraries from Performance Samples though. Not to mention that there are a couple free orchestra libraries that are compatible already with the Free Kontakt player I currently have. In my opinion, I'll just stick with the free realistic Muse Sounds library because I honestly think it sounds great already.
Musescore tempo modulation is subpar. Instead of being a gradual change, it is set intervals with a certain ending tempo. If you want to slow down from 180 to 80 bpm with a rall marking it will go down to something like 172, 164, 143, and then 132. It would never get down to that 80 tempo even if you stretch it out, since that also stretches out the intervals. So that's an obvious flaw with musescore.
How would you do this in a typical DAW?
Never heard of BBCSO but i have been using programs like Finale and Sibelius for years and musescore blows everything i have used out of the water for sheet music preparation
BBCSO stands for British Broadcasting Cooperation(BBC) Symphony Orchestra, its one of the leading UK(United Kingdom) Orchestras, and Basically in this situation the BBCSO 'Discover' is just one of the best audio samples/sound libraries and stuff you can get for DAWS(Digital Audio Workstations).
Marking a note staccato in a score (hotkey) is 100x easier and quicker than doing it in a DAW (keyswitch, and back, or switching to another MIDI channel in your template). And it means you can try out different articulations painlessly, and all the notes for the instrument remain in the same part.
Thanks for the comparison
I’m incredible when it comes to writing on sheet music, so I love MuseScore 4, it’s my favorite Orchestral Software!
bruh omg musecore is ridicously good, i gotta check it out, tthanks for this video
musescore is (originally) a music notation program. In which you write music that musicians (possibly led by a conductor) perform. They have all learned to read music and how to play it. Someone who uses a DAW usually doesn't. And this music is often used for one project. Where often no real musicians are involved. But samples. So comparing a DAW and a notation program is not fair.
MuseScore hands down. The articulations sound artificial in the BBC whereas in MuseScore they sound a good bit better. Doesn't quite have that "organ" sound that so many sampled sounds tend to have and which BBC suffers from. I bought a LinnStrument a few months back and have fallen in love with it. It is great for emulating "single note" instruments. When I sit at a keyboard, my hands tend to fall into familiar places that lend themselves to sounding more like a piano or organ so sadly just doesn't sound real. Probably my fault there lol! But the LinnStrument makes me think more like a violinist etc. Tho I am certainly going to try MuseScore since I do read and write music, I try not to let that get in the way of my playing lol! Thanks for the video. I wasn't aware of MuseScore and will definitely try it.
That was a real eye opener for me. I'm hoping there's some sort of input output option that could be used with reaper. Muses ore was SO much better. On the other hand, if it would take a day or two to master musescore that I could spend actually making music I'm probably better supplementing bbcso discovery with stuff from labs and decent sampler.
Agreed! I wish they'd adapt the MuseScore sounds so that they could be used in a DAW - but maybe some day!
@@EoinBlunnie I’m 90% sure there is a plan for that
Oh 100%. MuseSounds were basically taken from David William Hearn’s sessions he’d intended to create a bespoke Staffpad library for but when Ultimately GTR (MuseScore) acquired Staffpad, these sounds were ported over to it. They work very well especially in the legatos where the note transitions are excellent by and large. Dynamics in the brass are limited but I can’t see BBCsO discovery being better in this regard.
I like the sounds, but for some reason reason whenever I input tremolo the audio doesn’t play back the note with tremolo, and when playing parts of my composition that go fast, different instruments (Such as violin and Cello) don’t sound in time with the tempo. I changed the sounds to MS Basic and it worked, but I was just wondering if anybody else had this problem or any solutions for it?
Yes! I have the exact same problem . . . the violin & cello sounds, while improved greatly beyond older versions of MS, just don't seem capable of rapid movement. Sometimes grace notes in swift passages don't even sound. Hopefully they'll improve this. And achieving smooth dynamic changes can be tough. If an instrument is drowned out by others, I'll add an ff, and then it can overpower the rest. Using hairpins is really tricky; sometimes notes are too soft or loud. It's difficult to control. Still it's free, and wonderful! despite its flaws ;-)
So how did you deal with the cimbalom? Cliff hanger answer!
In your example the MuseScore 4 with Muse Sounds does sound better, but that isn't always the case. As you mention at the end of the video, why not use notation software as well as DAWs? Definitely can work, though if some technical issues can be overcome, MU4 may be very capable of using many of the VST effects without having to export a score in some way to a DAW.
A big advantage of MU4 is that it does work with notation - so that real instrumentalists can play the music, and they might [often can and do] be able to get something which sounds way better than any DAW+sample library.
Is there any Shure SM58 left in the world that isn't dented?
There are red notes in the viola part, that means it’s not possible to play those on the instrument.
im here to see MUSESCORE ... i already own the BBCSO(pro)... one thing in general I don't like. is I want to write from the sheet music and i'm using garageband which makes it super ridiculously impossible. if i could compose through MUSESCORE and then import the MIDI tracks to garageband and program them with the BBCSO(pro) patches ... would be a better workflow for me.
MuseScore exports to multi-channel MIDI with instruments set up correctly
Okay i just tried Musescore and it sucks! There’s no expression control on some woodwinds. There’s the modulation control but no expression so the volume has to stay high. I have to use the automation feature on my DAW. But like wth? And then it doesn’t offer all the mic positionings that it would offer if I bought it outright. So I think it sucks ass.
How do you know what to write into musescore? Do you keep another program open with some other orchestral patch loaded? I haven't figured out how to play inside musescore (for improvisation) without musescore notating what I play. Is there a way to turn off input notation and just hear the sounds in musescore? Oh and the Super Mario 64 reference is funny.
To be honest, I wrote the track in my DAW first and then exported the midi to MuseScore - so I'm not sure! Sounds like it should be possible, though
Musehub is sounding pretty good, and I don’t need to program keyswitches.
Can you give me a link to that cimbalom sample?
It's the "Originals Cimbalom" from Spitfire Audio!
@@EoinBlunnie Thank you so much😊
I think this is a false comparison. MUSESCORE was and is meant to be a 'notator'...NOT a soft Daw. Even tho' has upgraded sound fonts, I only use it for notation, eg, cleaning up my music mss and making them legible and presentable. 😃
I know this video post is older, but my comment is for those curious of NotePerformer who is not yet convinced. Follow the link here and discover the magic of NotePerformer. I cannot recall any VST sounding like a recording like this. The music in the linked video was produced by Dorico 5.1 Pro driving NotePerformer 4.5.0. (NO affiliation) The music performance can still be tweaked using Dorico's MIDI lanes, but the listener will definitely hear how NotePerformer is not this 'in-between', medium quality VST as some claims. NotePerformer has a lot of power, if one knows how to use its magic! 🙂
th-cam.com/video/QfHQ5ZM4BaE/w-d-xo.html
What did you use for the guitar sound on Muesescore 4? I have a song I'm writing on it and I've been stuck with the MS Basic sound font, where the guitar sounds like a harpsichord, and I'm desperate for a new guitar sound
I had to cheat and use Spitfire Originals Cimbalom for that one! Probably your best bet is to use a free acoustic guitar VST and then hook it into MuseScore - something like Ample Guitar M Lite might work for you!
Soundfont: "Timbers of Heaven" has some good ones. I also just got QuietMusic"Classic GTr Lite" and it is pretty nice sounding as well. They had a promo to get it for free that I think is still going on.
The title of this video doesn't make a lot of sense. MuseScore is a music notation editor, BBSCO is a sample library. You are comparing Apples and Broccoli. MuseScore may have some built-in libraries but that is for convenience and certainly doesn't define the application. Music notation created in MuseScore can subsequently be used both by score reading instrument musicians or used in a DAW with sample libraries and synths to create music although in the latter case there isn't really any reason to use traditional notation unless it is to be used by a live musician.
Um
What is the DAW?
Reaper! (I’m using a theme to make it look like Logic)
@@EoinBlunnie how to use vst on reaper? Are the vst instruments like kontakt and spitfire should add manually ?
I prefer musescore 4 but that’s partly because it’s the great samples and their integration in the notation software including easy dynamics and articulation settings. Also BBCSO discover does not have legatos.
Musescore 4 sounds better than a lot of my expensive libraries, spitfire ain't got no chance
Like for calling reaper the best daw lol
The difference is Musescore allows you to write music for other people to recreate, where as with a DAW that's not a goal.
short answer: yes, a lot
using Muse Score as a daw makes you notate everything badly. The score will be overnotated because you are never enough satisfied with the playback.
MuseScore is a notation software that has some DAW elements. It is NOT a DAW if comparing it to FL Studio or Ableton Live. As a user of MuseScore and previously Cakewalk, they are not the same thing. Music notation and a workstation for audio may both make music, but trying to use it in unintended purposes isn't going to produce good results. If you like using a DAW, continue using a DAW, but music notation software definitely needed a relearning of software.
@@AlphaWhoo It is basically the premise of what i said
1) I will give MuseScore a try. I reminds me of a program I used to use called Harmony Assistant that was all written in sheet music.
2) How did you make the Cimbalom-like sound? I LOVE how it sounded.
I had to cheat a bit with the Cimbalom - it's the Originals Cimbalom from Spitfire ;)
@@EoinBlunnie The hammered dulcimer in Spitfire LABS is pretty good too.
You really disadvantaged Musescore, you wrote notes on the violas that they can't play. You didn't even write anything for the tam-tam... But anyways, it is a great video, and great comparison. Musescore won hands down haha
If MuseScore is open source, wouldn't that apply to the libraries? Couldn't we just take the samples and make some dope sfz out of them?
-MuseSound library (built-in soundfont and playback system) also comes in VST format. Though, without any playback pre-computation for improved dynamic etc- Nvm, I was wrong.
Well the realistic sounding orchestra uses a completely different approach than midi, with which it can look ahead of the currently played part. So even if the samples are usable outside musescore, they wouldn't sound as realistic in any midi context.
@@5FeetUnder__ that makes a lot of sense actually. But professional Kontakt libraries use MIDI and they work quite well.
i wish musesounds could be incorperated in DAWS so i can get best of both worlds
There are plenty of Dynamic Markings haha, Not just 6 or 7, Trust me. You could even get 5 f's But thats rare. In Fact Sheet Music Allows for More Dynamic Volumes typically
ppp to fff... what's the deal?
Sorry, but I couldn't stop laughing.
Your Viola line is simple impossible
this is true
Don't start every edit cut by saying the word, "so." Please! This is a big problem with TH-cam video makers.
You wrote low G and Ab on viola. Cringe.
No viola in the world can play that note.
computer
no one plays viola anyways
@@AdamConwayIE Still, if you're writing for an instrument, you have to at least know what's possible. It is key in making them sound realistic. For example you wouldn't write a groove where the player hit more than two drum part simultaneously with their hands (they have two hand after all).
But if you just want orchestra sound as an effect then whatever lol.
@@NarendraU23 computer
He probably did that to compensate for the viola players hitting the wrong note. 555 คุณเล่นกับออร์เคสตราใดบ้างครับ ผมเคยร่วมงานกับอจารย์สมเถา และเคยรู้จักอาจารย์บรูสครับ
Muse score does not allow us to freely play the keyboard using the instruments before writing, it is ridiculous
That's not the purpose of the software... it's just a different workload. It works for some, and for others not so much. Just stick with what works for you don't just say it's bad cause you're not used to it.
I simply imagine the sound in my head before writing it. Maybe I'm just built different tho
No different to a traditional composer who might only compose on the piano, and hear the intended instrument in their head.
Man, you lost me with your dance... Discover is better for me.
Musescore 4 is complete crap!