TL;DR: It's not about having another DAW. This functionality is also important for workflows that have nothing to do with producing.
Yes, some of that new stuff looks a lot like a DAW, and for DAW users the first priority should be to integrate the notation software with existing DAWs. However, this is different: when you don't write notation for the sake of controlling virtual instruments, but for performers on live instruments, it's still very useful to be able to ‘preview’ scores and parts thereof through soft-synths. You don't need production-quality sounds, but you do need a faithful reproduction of the notation — something that understands ‘pizzicato’ etc. To that end, software such as Sibelius has suitable synths already integrated, which can often spare you the hassle of cobbling the scoring program together with a DAW.
This is also relevant for collaboration. A couple of years ago I gave MuseScore another go because I wanted to facilitate collaborating with a Linux user. The program itself looked promising enough, but I also needed playback functionality (neither of us can play all the required instruments) and getting something cross-platform to work was such a nightmare I gave up after a day of fiddling with soft synths. It had gotten to the point where I was running Linux in a VM and tried to hook together the Jack in the VM with the Jack on the host system. I found software that was able to do this, but only for MIDI, and another program that could do it, but only for audio. It was way too janky. We resorted to just synching MusicXML and doing playback completely separately.
(Meanwhile, there now is a Linux version of Reaper on the horizon, but no idea if its notation component has gotten any good yet. Anyway, it's neither free nor Free, so the idea of telling everyone in a band/ensemble to get that isn't as attractive.)
From that perspective, the potential of MuseScore 4 is obvious. I'll be keeping an eye on it.
Having used both MuseScore and Reaper in my workflow, I initially agree that scoring and DAWs are two different things, and that I could simply export MIDI files from the notation software then take let the DAW do the rest.
But I see the point of how good playback can affect the composition process, something notation software is not known for. Although I believe instrument quality should not be a cover up for bad compositions, there are undeniable instances where otherwise good compositions sound bland or uninspiring when played by the "lightweight" sounds bundled with notation software (as they are not DAWs). At times, after hearing it sound right within the DAW, with my favorite plugins and sound libraries, I am inspired to tweak the composition a bit, via the piano roll.
In such scenario, if playback could be improved, it would be nice if a DAW can be removed from the compose-listen-tweak loop. At the very least, have realistic instruments and realistic (humanized) playing, even before moving work into the DAW.
Comments
TL;DR: It's not about having another DAW. This functionality is also important for workflows that have nothing to do with producing.
Yes, some of that new stuff looks a lot like a DAW, and for DAW users the first priority should be to integrate the notation software with existing DAWs. However, this is different: when you don't write notation for the sake of controlling virtual instruments, but for performers on live instruments, it's still very useful to be able to ‘preview’ scores and parts thereof through soft-synths. You don't need production-quality sounds, but you do need a faithful reproduction of the notation — something that understands ‘pizzicato’ etc. To that end, software such as Sibelius has suitable synths already integrated, which can often spare you the hassle of cobbling the scoring program together with a DAW.
This is also relevant for collaboration. A couple of years ago I gave MuseScore another go because I wanted to facilitate collaborating with a Linux user. The program itself looked promising enough, but I also needed playback functionality (neither of us can play all the required instruments) and getting something cross-platform to work was such a nightmare I gave up after a day of fiddling with soft synths. It had gotten to the point where I was running Linux in a VM and tried to hook together the Jack in the VM with the Jack on the host system. I found software that was able to do this, but only for MIDI, and another program that could do it, but only for audio. It was way too janky. We resorted to just synching MusicXML and doing playback completely separately.
(Meanwhile, there now is a Linux version of Reaper on the horizon, but no idea if its notation component has gotten any good yet. Anyway, it's neither free nor Free, so the idea of telling everyone in a band/ensemble to get that isn't as attractive.)
From that perspective, the potential of MuseScore 4 is obvious. I'll be keeping an eye on it.
Having used both MuseScore and Reaper in my workflow, I initially agree that scoring and DAWs are two different things, and that I could simply export MIDI files from the notation software then take let the DAW do the rest.
But I see the point of how good playback can affect the composition process, something notation software is not known for. Although I believe instrument quality should not be a cover up for bad compositions, there are undeniable instances where otherwise good compositions sound bland or uninspiring when played by the "lightweight" sounds bundled with notation software (as they are not DAWs). At times, after hearing it sound right within the DAW, with my favorite plugins and sound libraries, I am inspired to tweak the composition a bit, via the piano roll.
In such scenario, if playback could be improved, it would be nice if a DAW can be removed from the compose-listen-tweak loop. At the very least, have realistic instruments and realistic (humanized) playing, even before moving work into the DAW.
It exists. It's called NotePerformer.
https://www.noteperformer.com/