Make Midi Sound Real

[clearlessmusic]

Hi all,

I was listening to Phoenix's piece in the Gypsy Demo section entitled Pictures in an Exhibition, or something similar to that, and after my recent purchase of the Gypsy library I'm astonished at the realism Phoenix has created using the same library.

I'm still very new at converting my music from manuscript to computer so if there's any way that anyone can help me understand how to create a solo part, e.g on the violin, that sounds as if a person actually played it or even be able to show me the midi part and therefore i can see for myself how it is done. Any help would greatly appreciate it?

Thank you

[johncarter]

I think the main thing is "stacking" articulations ( not sure of the term, i'm not native english ;) )

That is to say, use as many different articulations as possible.

Let's say if you have a 16 notes theme, play the first 2 notes with a sforzando attack, the 3 following with a marcato.. then one note with a crescendo articulation... then 4 notes with a soft attack and low velocity .. etc
One simple melody with a solo violin could end up with 4 or 5 midi tracks

[clearlessmusic]

ok thanks for the advice.

So for the violin, for example, would it be common practice to first play the melody and then add the key switches later or do people play the melody and key switches at the same time?

[persentio]

You have manuscripts for a start! That's great! Now to begin with, you should have some articulations in your manuscripts right? Input all your score's notes first via MIDI data (Which pops another question; what DAW or notation software are you using? And do you have a MIDI keyboard?).

Next, instruments like Gypsy's Violin have a 'master' instrument patch which contains all the different articulations available for a realisitc performance. Articulation switching is done by "Keyswitches"; namely you use certain note ranges which are not playable on the instrument patch (usually extremely low octaves from the C0 - C1 range) to send a message to PLAY to let it know you want that particular articulation to be active in place of the previous one if any so that the following notes played will sound different.

You first have to figure out which note activates what articulation. Next, input the notes the same way you did for your 'normal' notes; except that this time you have to make sure the keyswitch notes STARTS AFTER the last note that you don't want the same articulation to play, and make sure the keyswitch note ENDS BEFORE the next actual note is played.

With this in mind, now you can input the keyswitch data which corresponds to where all your different articulations are required in your manuscript. You should now have a simple (but I dare not say realistic because you probably have to tweak each note's velocity or expression controls for that to happen; or have a MIDI keyboard to perform in real time so it makes it much easier for you too.) performance of the Violin containing different articulations and sounding fairly decent for a virtual performance.

Hope it helps to get you started. There's lots of things to get your head wrapped around on to come up with a realistic performance which comes only with experience and understanding of your VIs.

[clearlessmusic]

You have manuscripts for a start! That's great! Now to begin with, you should have some articulations in your manuscripts right? Input all your score's notes first via MIDI data (Which pops another question; what DAW or notation software are you using? And do you have a MIDI keyboard?).

Next, instruments like Gypsy's Violin have a 'master' instrument patch which contains all the different articulations available for a realisitc performance. Articulation switching is done by "Keyswitches"; namely you use certain note ranges which are not playable on the instrument patch (usually extremely low octaves from the C0 - C1 range) to send a message to PLAY to let it know you want that particular articulation to be active in place of the previous one if any so that the following notes played will sound different.

You first have to figure out which note activates what articulation. Next, input the notes the same way you did for your 'normal' notes; except that this time you have to make sure the keyswitch notes STARTS AFTER the last note that you don't want the same articulation to play, and make sure the keyswitch note ENDS BEFORE the next actual note is played.

With this in mind, now you can input the keyswitch data which corresponds to where all your different articulations are required in your manuscript. You should now have a simple (but I dare not say realistic because you probably have to tweak each note's velocity or expression controls for that to happen; or have a MIDI keyboard to perform in real time so it makes it much easier for you too.) performance of the Violin containing different articulations and sounding fairly decent for a virtual performance.

Hope it helps to get you started. There's lots of things to get your head wrapped around on to come up with a realistic performance which comes only with experience and understanding of your VIs.


thank you so much, after a little more time with my V.I i seem to have found a way that works but i was hoping for a quick way :p

thank you for all your help.

[Dannthr]

You have to treat your virtual instruments like actual live players with personality.

[OneThrow]

You should be able to get your instruments to sound "realistic". But to get them to sound like what's in your imagination .... now that's a whole new ball game. ;)

EDIT

If you browse down the general discussion topic you should find a couple of links to midi examples, but I'm not sure which threads.

[bobbyem]

MIDI IS REAL!!!!

[A.Leung]

To make MIDI 'real' convert to AUDIO. ;)

[AlCapps]

To make MIDI 'real' convert to AUDIO. ;)

To make AUDIO "real" play it LIVE.

[OneThrow]

To make AUDIO "real" play it LIVE.

To make LIVE "real convert to MIDI

[likecmposr]

And your ALL right back where yall started!

[thrinithan]

To make LIVE "real convert to MIDI

Wow... So when LIVE is converted to MIDI, we can actually edit reality in the piano roll :p

[nikolas]

To make LIVE popular make it into an MP3.

[A.Leung]

LOL! Very clever. Just when I thought we came full circle!

[OneThrow]

To make the MP3 collectable turn it into vinyl.

[chest]

To make MIDI 'real' convert to AUDIO. ;)To make AUDIO "real" play it LIVE.
To make LIVE real, don't turn amplifiers up so loud that the audience will wear ear plugs.

[Vincent Bergbahn]

To make LIVE real, don't turn amplifiers up so loud that the audience will wear ear plugs.

After all of that....Have real musicians perform it.:D

[MPDmike]

The good thing about MIDI is that you can keep going back to tweak it until it is just the way you want it to sound.

[rimskykorsakov]

After all of that....Have real musicians perform it.:D

... and then overdub the live performance with samples to make it sound more REAL ... (this is actually a quote of a director ... )

[OneThrow]

... and then overdub the live performance with samples to make it sound more REAL ... (this is actually a quote of a director ... )


.......make sure you sync it, quantize it and humanize it to make it sound even more REAL......

[bobbyem]

The question for me is, can you live with midi and still have a life? :D

[A.Leung]

the answer to that is NO. Here it is a beautiful Saturday afternoon in Hollywood and I find myself surrounded by midi!

[OneThrow]

the answer to that is NO. Here it is a beautiful Saturday afternoon in Hollywood and I find myself surrounded by midi!

To make MIDI 'real' convert to AUDIO. ;)

:p

[DavidTanner]

Hey Ive really liked the comments in this thread so far. I was wondering if anyone has more advice? Im new to creating this kinda music and Im im so used to doing loop based music and verse chorus verse etc its hard to take in. I was listening to the accending demo on the Colosus Vst (which I have bought).

How has he managed to get the background strings behind the brass to creep in like that near the begining? Im not sure if its because the root, 3rd and 5th all seem to come in a bit after each other at a higher velocity or if its automated louder to give the feeling of Vibrato?

Im really struggling in my compositions, everything seems to just come in; in chuncks. Even at lower velocitys its limited to that velcoity untill the next note...obviously need to get creative with automation

What do you usually do? Play it first and then go into it and edit the parameters or do you play it that way?:confused:

[Robbie_2327]

Hey Ive really liked the comments in this thread so far. I was wondering if anyone has more advice? Im new to creating this kinda music and Im im so used to doing loop based music and verse chorus verse etc its hard to take in. I was listening to the accending demo on the Colosus Vst (which I have bought).

How has he managed to get the background strings behind the brass to creep in like that near the begining? Im not sure if its because the root, 3rd and 5th all seem to come in a bit after each other at a higher velocity or if its automated louder to give the feeling of Vibrato?

Im really struggling in my compositions, everything seems to just come in; in chuncks. Even at lower velocitys its limited to that velcoity untill the next note...obviously need to get creative with automation

What do you usually do? Play it first and then go into it and edit the parameters or do you play it that way?:confused:

Personally I try to play it on my keyboard to get it sound how I want as closely as possible. Then I'll go in and tweak anything that isn't quite right (velocities, wrong notes, etc)

As far as your first question, I'm not familiar with that demo, however I've found that I need to think linearly to escape that 'chuck' sound. In other words, a common mistake in orchestral writting IMO is to have the instrumentation follow as you said a verse chorus pattern. Orchestral music is constructed linearly not vertically (as you look at the page). A line or theme does not have to exist soley in one instrument or family. It can start with one instrument and then switch or be doubled by another. I hope this makes sense...

[PNS]

Yeah, I know; read the manual...just looking for a quick answer:

In my sig is my new DAW; I'm (almost) totally new to VI's and such; am I to understand that I can input data (play a VI, for example, Gypsy), and add or change the articulations via midi AFTER I have it in Logic?...can someone give me a short explanation on how this is accomplished?...TIA

[A.Leung]

Yes you can. You have several options for doing this. You should pick a window you are most comfortable with to make the edits. Your choices are Event List window, Matrix window, or score window. In these windows you can add notes themselves and controller information as well.

[PNS]

Thanks Allan...would you mind looking at this thread?...I'm not getting any responses
http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=15523

[Xplora]

To the threadstarter, I'm really not the best person to explain this, but I think the best thing to realise is that you have some ENORMOUS horsepower in terms of orchestration and arrangement once you play around with Symphonic Orchestras. Absolutely mindblowing power. Nick and Doug are professionals who have done this for decades - I think it's a bit rich to even begin to imagine that you'll be able to replicate their efforts within a year or 5 using their programs. I know I can't really play keyboards, I don't marvel at how a pianist can play "so well" because they've practiced for years. Focus on developing your skills, listening to the articulations and figuring out how to apply it to your music. Long Exp is very different to Short Staccato RR. Keep listening to figure out what is the best representation of the music in your head. and keep working on your midi as you figure out the best way forward.

[Spinning poo machine]

I'm going to agree with the thread starter here. There is a huge amount of potential for these libaries, as the demos and many of the users on this forum show, but there's a pretty big learning curve to get there.

For example, in many articulations in the Symphonic Orchestra, you will find a certain note whose maximum velocity does not come even close to matching the maximum velocities of the notes around it. Or you may hear a note or two whose maximum velocity is BLARINGLY loud. Yet you don't hear a hint of this in any of the demos. How do you get around that? I can understand how to fix the latter problem, but how do you make the weak notes louder or fiercer (as just "making them louder" will not replace a more vicious attack)?

That's probably my biggest problem at the moment. But also, what is a good mixing/mastering plug in to use? Is having one necessary to getting a good sound?

[V o n h ö g e n]

what is a good mixing/mastering plug in to use? Is having one necessary to getting a good sound?

As far as mixing is concerned, you only need a pair of excellent ears. ;)

Mastering however, is a very different and specialized task that could better be left to the expert. With some patience and dedication, you will be able to deliver a great mix, but poor mastering could then easily ruin the same mix completely!

Leave the mastering to a professional studio and concentrate on your mix, I would say.
My 2 cents...

- Jerome Vonhögen

[AlCapps]

I'm going to agree with the thread starter here. There is a huge amount of potential for these libaries, as the demos and many of the users on this forum show, but there's a pretty big learning curve to get there.

For example, in many articulations in the Symphonic Orchestra, you will find a certain note whose maximum velocity does not come even close to matching the maximum velocities of the notes around it. Or you may hear a note or two whose maximum velocity is BLARINGLY loud. Yet you don't hear a hint of this in any of the demos.

That's probably my biggest problem at the moment.

Hey Poo,

If this is your biggest problem, then you are in really good shape!:)

[Spinning poo machine]

As far as mixing is concerned, you only need a pair of excellent ears. ;)

Mastering however, is a very different and specialized task that could better be left to the expert. With some patience and dedication, you will be able to deliver a great mix, but poor mastering could then easily ruin the same mix completely!

Leave the mastering to a professional studio and concentrate on your mix, I would say.
My 2 cents...

Uh-huh... So what's "mixing?" No one starting fresh out the oven into this MIDI world is familiar with these all of these idioms, if you know what I mean. Yes, I'm a noob, I said it for you.

Does mixing include using software to manipulate and carve out frequencies? Sorry, I'm just throwing darts in the dark here...

Hey Poo,

If this is your biggest problem, then you are in really good shape!:)

Um... Cool? Thanks, I guess. But how can it be fixed? I've had this problem before with a different library in the past... and, well, it's still here!

[A.Leung]

Uh-huh... So what's "mixing?"

http://homerecording.about.com/od/mixingyourmusic/Mixing_Your_Music_Achieving_A_Professional_Mix_At_ Home.htm

[Spinning poo machine]

Hm... One of the links was pretty helpful, especially about EQ. Thanks Allan, you're the man!

[Spinning poo machine]

Come on, will someone please help me with this velocity problem I'm having? I know it's something basic, so how is it fixed? Give me a break, I have to start somewhere.

[A.Leung]

i could help you if you were on Logic, using Transform function to iron out Velocity values. But your a Cubase guy I think?

[Dannthr]

If it's too loud, lower the velocity of the note.

If it's too quiet, raise the velocity of the note.

If velocity doesn't work, use CC11 or CC7.

[paulwr]

Come on, will someone please help me with this velocity problem I'm having? I know it's something basic, so how is it fixed? Give me a break, I have to start somewhere.

In Cubase, go to the MIDI pulldown, then Logical Editor and you can create a saved process that will adjust the velocity of any note(s) you want. Very handy editor to use for a number of things.

If you are using Kontakt for playing the SO library, you can possibly fix either the volume or velocity of the instrument in there...... and if you use Play for SO, I guess wait for the full version that will be coming out to do that.

In getting a great sounding midi mock-up, these occasional out of balance note volumes are not major obstacles. Composition, orchestration, and mixing are going to get you where you want to be, and you can fix any offending note volume balance issues pretty easily.

-Paul

[Dannthr]

Yep

[Spinning poo machine]

i could help you if you were on Logic, using Transform function to iron out Velocity values. But your a Cubase guy I think?

Yeah, I'm using Cubase and Reaper, but thanks anyway.

If it's too loud, lower the velocity of the note.

If it's too quiet, raise the velocity of the note.

If velocity doesn't work, use CC11 or CC7.

If it's too strong, then it can be fixed by obviously lowering it down, as you said. However, if the maximum velocity is too weak, then it's too weak--you can't go above maximum velocity. How do you fix that? Volume envelopes could help a little but the wimpy note is just gonna sound like a wimpy note with a volume envelope boosting its volume.

This also applies to the rare string scratches. Actually, adjusting velocity for the one I've stumbled upon (an F in one of the slow 10 Cellos patches, I'll have to check which one it is later) has had no apparent effect on the scratch, but I'm guessing you guys have a workaround for that, as well. The only thing I could think of to remedy these two problems would be to make another track with the same instrument and in this case (for the F scratch) put an F# where the F should go and lower the F# down to an F with the pitch bend envelope or even with the pitch bend in Kompakt.

And where's CC11 or CC7? I've heard other guys on this forum allude to that but all I know about is DFX. And thanks for the response, Dannthr.

In Cubase, go to the MIDI pulldown, then Logical Editor and you can create a saved process that will adjust the velocity of any note(s) you want. Very handy editor to use for a number of things.

If you are using Kontakt for playing the SO library, you can possibly fix either the volume or velocity of the instrument in there...... and if you use Play for SO, I guess wait for the full version that will be coming out to do that.

In getting a great sounding midi mock-up, these occasional out of balance note volumes are not major obstacles. Composition, orchestration, and mixing are going to get you where you want to be, and you can fix any offending note volume balance issues pretty easily.

-Paul

Thanks, I'll give that a shot. I guess the main thing I have to do is just mess around with settings and stuff until something that sounds good comes out.

[Enrique]

CC's = Continuous Controllers, CC7 is volume, CC11 is expression -- as far as where they are in Cubase, I'm a Sonar user so i don't know, but if you assign a knob or slider to CC7 or CC11 and record, the data will also be recorded. DXF patches use CC1 (usually assigned to mod wheel).

CC7 controls volume in most synths.

in EWQLSO, CC11 has the same function of a volume envelope, essentially what CC7 for another synth would do, and it's MIDI data that can be used in a MIDI track. For best results use a combination of CC11 and CC1 --

Best to find a list of common CC's (for anyone trying to get anywhere with MIDI) and also make sure to understand the distinction between volume (as in dB, a relative value, not MIDI) and velocity (as in 0-127, an absolute value, MIDI), though judging from your previous posts, I think you already know about this.

[Spinning poo machine]

Oh, they're in the sequencer... I thought I remembered seeing something like those somewhere. Thanks!

[Dannthr]

They are a standard function of the MIDI protocol, any retail sequencer will be able to manage these.

[michaelshumway]

I posted a related question here http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=16320

[A.Leung]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was a good article in Virtual Instruments magazine that discussed realistic crescendos. The only thing I recalled the article lacked was a discussion of how the EQ of instruments change during sonic crescendos. (We always have an automated eq instantiated to increase higher frequencies during a crescendo part)

Heres the article as adapted for HARMONY CENTRAL:


http://www.harmony-central.com/articles/virtual_instruments/fertile_crescendo/

[Spinning poo machine]

I posted a related question here http://www.soundsonline-forums.com/showthread.php?t=16320

Yeah, I saw that thread after you posted this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was a good article in Virtual Instruments magazine that discussed realistic crescendos. The only thing I recalled the article lacked was a discussion of how the EQ of instruments change during sonic crescendos. (We always have an automated eq instantiated to increase higher frequencies during a crescendo part)

Heres the article as adapted for HARMONY CENTRAL:


http://www.harmony-central.com/articles/virtual_instruments/fertile_crescendo/

I remember seeing that in another thread somewhere... Thanks for posting it, I've read it twice, and it was pretty juicy.

[Moneta]

Another good way create a bigger sound is through the use of orchestration. The way you construct your chords and the intervals you create within them will in turn effect the intensity of your crescendo's. While CC11 and CC7 and end eq'ing will all help a crescendo, you need to have a voicing that sounds big as well.

[Spinning poo machine]

Another good way create a bigger sound is through the use of orchestration. The way you construct your chords and the intervals you create within them will in turn effect the intensity of your crescendo's. While CC11 and CC7 and end eq'ing will all help a crescendo, you need to have a voicing that sounds big as well.

I'm aware of this, and while it's VERY true, sometimes it just seems like when saying this, people forget about the fact that in your head (and obviously in all sorts of orchestra-based music) you just don't hear a full orchestra playing at once all the time. Adding instruments to strengthen a crescendo in that case would be completely ignoring your original intentions at best and completely ruining the message of a song at worst, at least that's what I think. While doing things you didn't originally intend to do can lead to some cool ideas sometimes, adding instruments just for the sake of making a MIDI crescendo louder is... weird songwriting, I don't know what else to call it. As I said, it can be good and effective, but it's just not a universal solution.

[fourteentoone]

I have to agree with the messages about orchestration. It doesn't matter how good your equipment is, you need to know how an orchestra works; how to voice instruments well; good voice-leading; putting the instrments in the ranges where they sound best. It's all bread and butter stuff, and if you don't know it, then your music just isn't going to sound real.

The best orchestration books are written by Samuel Adler and Walter Piston. If you don't know what you're doing after reading those books AND DOING THE EXERCISES, then something has gone seriously wrong. Those books have most of the tools necessary to get you started, and then it's down to your own creativity, and how to use each instrument in a good way.

Having said that, even if you have a great knowledge of orchestration, you will have to remember you're writing with a library of samples, and not a real orchestra, so you will run into problems as well.

I don't think my stuff sounds particularly 'realistic', I'm always looking to improve, but I've reached a level now where the improvements are starting to become incremental, as oppsoed to exponential. The real thing I need to improve is my ear for mixing, which is still pretty poor.

[lacibe]

The best orchestration books are written by Samuel Adler and Walter Piston. If you don't know what you're doing after reading those books AND DOING THE EXERCISES, then something has gone seriously wrong. Those books have most of the tools necessary to get you started, and then it's down to your own creativity, and how to use each instrument in a good way.

Hi fourteentoon,

I am sorry to have jumped into the middle of this thread without reading it through, but are these books about midi orchestration or orchestration in general?
I would be interested in a good book about midi orchestration...:cool:

laci

[Moneta]

Spinning Poo,

I agree that you must stay true to what is in your head and not to add things for the sake of adding them. I was simply stating that proper orchestration will help you get your idea across more effectively while maintaining the sound that you are looking for.

[fourteentoone]

Ideally, you should get both sets of books. I believe the book you are interested in is

The Guide to Midi Orchestration by Paul Gilreath (please correct me if this is wrong).

I've never picked it up, and I probably should, but it's such a weighty tome, and it's not available here in Japan.

That, combined with a thorough knowledge of the Adler and/or Piston would set you up extremely well. I find the Rimsky-Korsakov book quite good, but it is a little flimsy compared to the Adler.

[Spinning poo machine]

Spinning Poo,

I agree that you must stay true to what is in your head and not to add things for the sake of adding them. I was simply stating that proper orchestration will help you get your idea across more effectively while maintaining the sound that you are looking for.

Ok, but what is proper orchestration for a piece for solo violin? This is all subjective. Besides, whether you're listening to a solo clarinet increasing volume/intensity or a full 80-piece orchestra increasing volume/intensity in real life, it's still going to sound real. (Duh.) That is why I just don't get the whole proper orchestration concept we have going through the rounds here--adding instruments just does not make your music sound more realistic or whatever, all it can do is make it sound bigger, which has nothing to do with adding realism to a piece.

Oh, and by the way, I know you don't mean it this way, but telling someone to use "proper orchrestration" to make a crescendo sound more realistic can come across as a touch arrogant, asserting somewhat that that person doesn't know what proper orchestration is. :o

[Moneta]

Proper may have been poor word choice as ultimately there is no proper way to do art. :)

However there different techniques that can be used to create a crescendo and orchestration is one of them. When trying to make a crescendo sound louder/bigger increasing only the volume of the instruments doesnt always work. Using volume can also make something sound "unrealistic" if stretched beyond the bounds of what a given instrument can do. Also orchestration doesnt necessarily mean just adding instruments, it has do with the arrangement of the voices you are using with the instruments that you have chosen to create the crescendo. So in that case when dealing with an orchestra using orchestration applies but definetly doesnt with solo instruments.

[fourteentoone]

Not sure how the orchestration debate moved onto instrumentation but never mind..

Instrumentation is slightly different from orchestration. Orchestration is the art of writing your idea and expanding it for the orchestra in an effective and convincing way, and also in the way that you want to convey your original idea. Instrumentation is simply the process of deciding what instruments you are gonig to use, which is something that should really be done before writing each piece, (for me anyway) because then you can place some kind of boundaries on your writing. Some songs I've written have gone on to ahve an entire symphony orchestra and about 50 synths, and 100 Stormdrum instances (slight exaggeration). Those are always the tracks that never get finished. They sound great, but never get finished.

Effective crescendos with the orchestra are achieved by how you blend the instruments, having the correct spacing between each instrumental part, and good use of the modwheel and err... good samples!

Or if you have Symphobia, just pressing one key will do the trick.............:):rolleyes:

Having said that, if you are doing a piece for solo violin with a sample library, then I honestly have no idea. To be honest you're very limited when doing anything soloistic with samples, so unless you've got a library of pre-recorded phrases, it's going to be very difficult to achieve. I'm yet to hear a remotely convincing piece of sampled solo violin, but then.... I'm lucky that I know a ton of great violinists, so it's never been an issue!!!

[paulwr]

Ok, but what is proper orchestration for a piece..... This is all subjective. :o

True, it is all subjective. But you'll get a lot of agreement on great orchestration when you hear it.

Orchestration is just how you use the instruments to get the job done. Listen to some great classical orchestral music, or some of your favorite movie music....... maybe take some John Williams cues and study them. Notice how different instruments are coming in and out. Notice how the instruments are combined at different points. Notice how a single musical idea or line can actually shared by more than one instrument, such as the Contrabass section starting a line, trading over to some higher strings, the woods and finally a piccolo finishing it off with an exclamation point!!

Just fantastic, all the possibilities. To me, this is what 'orchestration' is.

-Paul

[fourteentoone]

Paul sums it up in a nutshell.... except instead of studying John Williams, go back further and study Ravel, who in my eyes, is God!

[A.Leung]

True, it is all subjective. But you'll get a lot of agreement on great orchestration when you hear it.

And..proper orchestration in the MIDI world can many times be different than proper orchestration in the LIVE world, hence Paul Gilreath's indispensable book. Get it.

Read it.

Youll read it again and again....

[Bart Klepka]

True, it is all subjective. But you'll get a lot of agreement on great orchestration when you hear it.

Great? In reference to John Williams' works (which I adore!), 'intricate' or 'complex' would be more objective adjectives to use. To me 'great' sounds like a purely subjective expression :) While it's sometimes hard to believe, not everybody appreciates John's craft.

Sorry.. just playing devils advocate here.

I would describe many Thomas Newman film scores as more simple in terms of orchestration, but on the same level of greatness as many of Williams' works (my subjective opinion! :D).

[Edx]

Hi all,

I was listening to Phoenix's piece in the Gypsy Demo section entitled Pictures in an Exhibition, or something similar to that, and after my recent purchase of the Gypsy library I'm astonished at the realism Phoenix has created using the same library.

I'm still very new at converting my music from manuscript to computer so if there's any way that anyone can help me understand how to create a solo part, e.g on the violin, that sounds as if a person actually played it or even be able to show me the midi part and therefore i can see for myself how it is done. Any help would greatly appreciate it?

Thank you

Im sure someone else has already said this already but see the bolded part in your post above. This is probably the main reason why you find it hard to create realism or get the same results with your music compared to the demos. With samples, especially ones like this, you get a far better end product when you WRITE to the samples strengths. This is letting your samples dictate your compositon of course but if the end result is to be heard WITH samples then whats the point in a complicated well written violin part - that also sounds terrible because your samples couldnt cope with it. If however you are only trying to demo the sound to a client before getting a real player/s in, then this factor is reduced and you only need it to be real ENOUGH to SELL the idea to the client. Back to this demo you heard. The reason therefore that this demo worked so well for you, is becuase Nick undoubtably wrote this track TO THE SAMPLES, in other words he did not score it out then figure out how to make that work with Gypsy.

[Bart Klepka]

Im sure someone else has already said this already but see the bolded part in your post above. This is probably the main reason why you find it hard to create realism or get the same results with your music compared to the demos. With samples, especially ones like this, you get a far better end product when you WRITE to the samples strengths. This is letting your samples dictate your compositon of course but if the end result is to be heard WITH samples then whats the point in a complicated well written violin part - that also sounds terrible because your samples couldnt cope with it. If however you are only trying to demo the sound to a client before getting a real player/s in, then this factor is reduced and you only need it to be real ENOUGH to SELL the idea to the client. Back to this demo you heard. The reason therefore that this demo worked so well for you, is becuase Nick undoubtably wrote this track TO THE SAMPLES, in other words he did not score it out then figure out how to make that work with Gypsy.

Spot on.

If you're using sample libraries to mock up pieces that you plan on having played live, then you probably don't have to worry about the details. If however you're using the sample libraries to cut out the live aspect (decision based on budget I'd assume) of the performance all together, then you are in for a bit of a journey / learning curve. As Ed mentioned you are forced to write your music based around your sample libraries articulations and characteristics. It really is an art-form in itself. Sample-based-composition.. virtual-sample-orchestration.. whatever one might want to call it.

Yes you still get to utilize all that wonderful music theory you've spent years or decades learning, but you'll soon find yourself implementing unconventional arranging methods to make areas of your music sound more 'natural'. Extensively EQ'ing various sections of your 'orchestra', layering multiple articulations of any one instrument to get that 'defined' sound you heard on the last Zimmer soundtrack (haha), possibly even right down to 'humanizing' every note in your score (volume, velocity, attack, release etc) because in essence, you are not just composing, you are now also technically 'programming' the final performance of your virtual orchestra.

At first it may seem a little daunting (as are most things when you first start off), but the more you practice and get to know your musicians (aka your sample library :P), creating a believable performance will become easier and quicker. And don't forget you have free access to the The Music Cafe, Midi Techniques and Helpful Hints sections of this forum... ;)

[fourteentoone]

I bought Symphobia last month, and I love it as a tool for doing mockups, but it is exactly that, a tool for mockups. If you write using the samples strengths, then you get great results. Symphobia saves me a lot of time, especially with the trailer music. I can't really do intricate stuff with it, but for ambient sequences, or cues which are mainly underscore/pads, it is an absolute godsend. It saves an awful lot of time.

I am thinking of getting the Platinum Pro set, but I think I am covered with Symphobia + VSL for now. Eastwest's supporting cast of products are still outstanding, and they are the priorities to go into my collection,.

[paulwr]

Great? In reference to John Williams' works (which I adore!), 'intricate' or 'complex' would be more objective adjectives to use. To me 'great' sounds like a purely subjective expression :) While it's sometimes hard to believe, not everybody appreciates John's craft.

Sorry.. just playing devils advocate here.

I would describe many Thomas Newman film scores as more simple in terms of orchestration, but on the same level of greatness as many of Williams' works (my subjective opinion! :D).

I certainly don't mean to imply simple can't be great. I've done a couple of cues lately that were requested to be 'Newman-ish'. I loved studying his Shawshank Redemption and Road to Perdition. I have a word I like to use for that type of approach, or any approach based on simplicity that takes a LOT of thought to make it supremely effective. I refer to it as "Simplexity".

-Paul

[Bart Klepka]

I certainly don't mean to imply simple can't be great. I've done a couple of cues lately that were requested to be 'Newman-ish'. I loved studying his Shawshank Redemption and Road to Perdition. I have a word I like to use for that type of approach, or any approach based on simplicity that takes a LOT of thought to make it supremely effective. I refer to it as "Simplexity".

-Paul

Simplexity.. I like it! Yes I love what Newman has been able to pull off with little more than a piano and some strings. ;)

[A.Leung]

I would describe many Thomas Newman film scores as more simple in terms of orchestration, but on the same level of greatness as many of Williams' works (my subjective opinion! :D).

Yes but Thomas Newman is one of those rare composers who knows that part of his 'signature' is NOT JUST the way he composes and arranges his pieces. Its also just as much in the way they are RECORDED.

[mirrored]

Extensively EQ'ing various sections of your 'orchestra', layering multiple articulations of any one instrument to get that 'defined' sound you heard on the last Zimmer soundtrack (haha), possibly even right down to 'humanizing' every note in your score (volume, velocity, attack, release etc) because in essence, you are not just composing, you are now also technically 'programming' the final performance of your virtual orchestra.

For me it's even like "sculpting" the performance of virtual orchestra. ;)

[Bart Klepka]

Yes but Thomas Newman is one of those rare composers who knows that part of his 'signature' is NOT JUST the way he composes and arranges his pieces. Its also just as much in the way they are RECORDED.

Interesting point, is that an observation or is there footage or writing that delves into his techniques? To me it seems he likes to isolate instruments and bring them gently to the foreground (softly hit piano keys, mellow string crescendo + decrescendo formula, gentle and haunting music box / vibraphone melodies etc). Whether that's more a result from mic'ing techniques or heavy mixing (possibly a good dose of both?), I really can't be sure.

[Spinning poo machine]

True, it is all subjective. But you'll get a lot of agreement on great orchestration when you hear it.

Orchestration is just how you use the instruments to get the job done. Listen to some great classical orchestral music, or some of your favorite movie music....... maybe take some John Williams cues and study them. Notice how different instruments are coming in and out. Notice how the instruments are combined at different points. Notice how a single musical idea or line can actually shared by more than one instrument, such as the Contrabass section starting a line, trading over to some higher strings, the woods and finally a piccolo finishing it off with an exclamation point!!

Just fantastic, all the possibilities. To me, this is what 'orchestration' is.

-Paul

Once again, this will not by itself make your piece sound "more real." Again, all it may do is make it sound bigger or add interest for a listener, which, again, has absolutely nothing to do with sounding realistic in the sense I'm speaking of. It's like you are completely sidestepping the core issue. Some of the samples sound just excellent right out of the box, while others just don't. THAT is the issue I'm facing. Putting a fake-sounding violin section sample into, say, one of John William's pieces is not going to sound real just because the piece (to you) is properly orchestrated.

I have heard many user-posted songs in this forum where a near-full orchestra was playing, and it sounded very good, but then a higher string section sample came in and it instantly lost all believability. THIS is the problem, and orchestration, instrumentation, or whatever other pseudo-solution we care to throw at it is not going to fix it.

I just don't know how many times I have to reword the same question.

[paulwr]

Correct that some samples just seem to 'give away' that a piece is not real orchestra. So you just keep getting better and better and faking it and actually you wind up playing to the strengths of your soundware and avoiding the weakness'. You get very good drawing your dynamic curves AND as much as you resist, you DO have to pay attention to your orchestration......... but high quality midi cues take a lot of musical and technical expertise. If you lack at either, it will usually show up somewhere in your piece, if not, all through it.

Year by year sampling and playback systems bring us closer to the realism we all crave. In the meantime, with most all of the film composers showing midi mockups before committing to orchestra, we have a bit of a sad thing happening. Stuff gets approved, and we have these fantastic studio orchestras TRYING TO EMULATE MIDI MOCKUPS!! How strange is that?

-Paul

[michaelshumway]

Once again, this will not by itself make your piece sound "more real." Again, all it may do is make it sound bigger or add interest for a listener, which, again, has absolutely nothing to do with sounding realistic in the sense I'm speaking of. It's like you are completely sidestepping the core issue. Some of the samples sound just excellent right out of the box, while others just don't. THAT is the issue I'm facing. Putting a fake-sounding violin section sample into, say, one of John William's pieces is not going to sound real just because the piece (to you) is properly orchestrated.

I have heard many user-posted songs in this forum where a near-full orchestra was playing, and it sounded very good, but then a higher string section sample came in and it instantly lost all believability. THIS is the problem, and orchestration, instrumentation, or whatever other pseudo-solution we care to throw at it is not going to fix it.

I just don't know how many times I have to reword the same question.

Very true. You could have a piece that was orchestrated "horribly" and just a down right piece of poop and it could still sound great (real). Composition has nothing to realism.