Orchestra piece in vst

[AndrevHaren]

I wrote a piece for orchestra and would like to make a good recording of it. How do I do this? What software and vst are you using toget a realistisic recording? My score is written for full orcehstra and a singing voice.

André

[nickysnd]

I think, by posting in this forum, you are showing that you already do know the answer, don't you? If you don't, then I think you can still make a wild guess... :)

[AndrevHaren]

I know ofcourse about vst like the Garritan OP, but it keeps on sounding fake. I would like to have something real without hiring a realorcehstra. Is this possible? Or wil it stay always a kind of recording?

[Quoid]

If you have no experience with MIDI orchestration, you will not be able to attain a convincing MIDI orchestral mock-up for a while. I would suggest hiring someone with experience if you truly want a convincing MIDI orchestration for the piece in question.

If you are looking to learn how do create MIDI orchestrations and do not mind that at first your projects will sound "fake;" well, soundsonline can provide with some of the most necessary tools for that goal.

Cheers.

[nickysnd]

I know ofcourse about vst like the Garritan OP, but it keeps on sounding fake. I would like to have something real without hiring a realorcehstra. Is this possible? Or wil it stay always a kind of recording?
No, the right guess would have been EWQLSO. :)

[Jeff Hayat]

If you have no experience with MIDI orchestration, you will not be able to attain a convincing MIDI orchestral mock-up for a while.

Correct. Now, let me add to that.

If you have alot experience with MIDI orchestration, you will not be able to attain a realistisic MIDI orchestral mock-up. Ever. Convincing, yes. Realistic, no - depending, of course on your definition and expectations of "realistisic".

Cheers.

[Jeff Hayat]

No, the right guess would have been EWQLSO. :)

What about the left guess? :p

[nickysnd]

What about the left guess? :p
'Twas already made:
I know ofcourse about vst like the Garritan OP, :D

[luima]

Hi, if it can help you:

Since I use EWQLSO Platinum XP Bundle Edition (Close, Far and Surround mics), in all of the forums I post my pieces, the most of the feedback says always that the sound is almost like a real orchestra recorded in a studio.

You have also many other options:

I don´t advice you GPO it will sound fake.

If you have the money enough and the time to spent a long learning curve you can go for VSL CUbe. Lot of people says that this one is, the more close aproach to a real Symphonic Orchestra sound "if you know how to do it" but it can take you several years to make a real good sound.

The best and quickest option if you have just a couple of pieces to orchestrate an some amount of money to invest is to find a real orchestra and pay for the rehearsal, the iperformance, the recording and the mixing and mastering in an studio. (Not everything sounds good with only some mics on the hall). So you can make your numbers and take a decision.

For the soloist voice you don´t have any other option than a real singer. There is not convincing VST for soloist singers, but you can replace the soloist for a choir like "EWQLSC", there is also a long learning curve but the results are quite believable.



So you decide.

Good Luck
Luis

[jeremyopio]

(sorry this post is so long i feel passionate about this)
I posted a thread on the subject of realism a while back, once again Riff Wraith claims to know we will never achieve the goal of realism using sound libraries. (see definitions of realism below) That is an opinionated, unfounded and unverifiable claim. Currently with what's available, you can get major realism as long as you are running quad core or multiple computers.
Different combinations of EWQLSO and Vienna Symphonic, combined, make it possible to layer micing positions that lead to striking and impressive levels of detail to create very realistic results.
that said, there has to be an artful balance of technical knowledge, cpu power, abstract logic and musical technique, among other things to get those results.

Also it should be noted that in the thread regarding realism previously, allot of attention was paid to the idea of convincing vs realistic, but i still think realism is a good word implying a digital creative using his computer to emulate a Real Orchestra. We haven't even scratched the surface
of what's possible in regards to creating music using computers. It's still in it's baby stages and i don't think anyone is doing anyone else a service by saying that it's not possible to achieve a realistic emulation, "EVER", especially if that is their goal. It's an unfair assessment and a limiting belief. Right now, what you can do with EWQLSO alone will fool the majority of people in to believing it's the real thing, mainly because people tend to be more visually and kinesthetically oriented in their perception and they do not listen with the attentiveness that say, a classical music connoisseur or a musician would have. The nuances that gives a live orchestra it's sound and put that sound onto a recording, can and will be emulated with more detail and technical superiority as more technology emerges and different people get involved in that process, thanks to Nick and Doug and everyone else who worked on EWQLSO, we currently have an orchestral library that rocks the world and i am dedicated to using their products because they are the coolest things i have ever used!

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
(1) re·al·ism /ˈriəˌlɪzəm/ Pronunciation
1. interest in or concern for the actual or real, as distinguished from the abstract, speculative, etc.
2. the tendency to view or represent things as they really are.
3. Fine Arts.
a. treatment of forms, colors, space, etc., in such a manner as to emphasize their correspondence to actuality or to ordinary visual experience. Compare idealism (def. 4), naturalism (def. 2).
b. (usually initial capital letter) a style of painting and sculpture developed about the mid-19th century in which figures and scenes are depicted as they are experienced or might be experienced in everyday life.

(2) A style of painting which depicts subject matter (form, color, space) as it appears in actuality or ordinary visual experience without distortion or stylization.
www.progressiveart.com/art_terms.htm

(3) A very general style in which the artwork accurately depicts nature. The term originated in 19 th century France, specifically with the painter Gustave Courbet. The style was popular through the 1950’s, when it was almost eliminated from critical consideration. It resurfaced in the 1960’s with Pop Art and the "new realism."
art.abbottpages.com/glossary.html

(4) A STYLE of art in which the subject is portrayed as closely as possible to the way the human eye sees it.
www.artsmia.org/art_in_america/glossary.html

[Jeff Hayat]

....once again Riff Wraith claims to know we will never achieve the goal of realism using sound libraries. (see definitions of realism below) That is an opinionated, unfounded and unverifiable claim.


Not opinionated at all, nor unfounded. Unverifiable? Hardly. Find one MIDI mock-up of ANY library - a mock-up that uses NO real live players playing real instruments - that sounds as good as a real live orchestra. Find one.

. Currently with what's available, you can get major realism as long as you are running quad core or multiple computers.


There is so much that I can say here - but I will be nice. So, according to you, you can acheive realism as long as you have a powerful enough computer. Hmmm - that is an interesting way to look at it. Completely innacurate, but interesting nonetheless. Because of course computer speed and power makes things more realistic. Right.

Look - I am not saying that a good lib, such as EW, when put in the hands of a talented indivdual who a) knows how to properly utilize the lib and b) knows what a real orchestra to sound like) can't sound really good and close to a real orchestra.

Maybe I am looking at the word "real" incorrectly here. If you think anyone can get an orchestral lib to sound realistic (realistic = close to the real thing), then yes of course. If you think anyone can get an orchestral lib to sound realistic (realistic = the equivalent of the real thing), then no absolutely not.

Cheers.

[jeremyopio]

Look wraith, read my post again, i in no way implied that all you need to be "realistic" is allot of cpu power, but when you have the luxury of layering infinitely, the amount of banks from say the EWQLSO and Vienna Symphonic Library together, adding the skill and talent you just mentioned, with lots of computers or a quad core processor, you have some real power there. That power has barely been explored due to the limitations of computers. The reason sound library technology develops much slower than say visual graphics, has allot to do with the size of the files and the rate at which technology companies develop computer storage and processor power and the price of these things.
Adobe for example is light years ahead of the best sound library companies because a person can load up photoshop on at least 80% of computers. could you say the same for EWQLSO, no way, most computers don't even have the drive space, let alone processing power to run that thing at all.
That is relevant because photoshop in the right hands is super realistic, and i don't mean by taking photo's i mean in terms of creativity.
Adobe pushes forward because they have so much user feedback and such a large team of people developing it over many more years, and the results are beyond real.
If sound libraries had the accessibility, user feedback, larger development teams, enormous budgets, wide reaching usage and time to grow as graphics programs do we would live in a very different audio virtual world and the limitations you swear by wouldn't exist.


I am critical of you giving advice to curious people, including myself based on your hunches, yes when you say "you will not be able to attain a realistisic MIDI orchestral mock-up. Ever." that is unverifiable because you can't verify "ever" and the advice your giving isn't going to mean much if computer technology and storage technology reach a highly affordable plateau and sound libraries will get more developmental attention, money, huge corporate access and massive distribution along with user feedback to develop.
You have to give credit to soundsonline
we haven't even heard EW piano's yet, but i am willing to bet they covered more possible playing variables than any other piano library before it, and logic would have it something this big has to be this big for a reason, because they are including more ultra realistic playability. These guys seem to be learning more and more about the sampling processes they are pioneering and giving advice to people on their forum isn't appropriate if you hinder peoples sense of possibility.

[nickysnd]

giving advice to people on their forum isn't appropriate if you hinder peoples sense of possibility.
I didn't see anyone trying to "hinder peoples sense of possibility." But the way you put it is very suggestive for this topic of realistic performance. We are dealing here with a funny thing: electronic performances that aim to be taken as acoustic performance. That is very new. Until now, it was very clear-cut - synths-performances, and acoustic-performances (for the sake of clarity, let's leave out the mixtures between them). Now, people are presented music that has acoustic sounds in it, yet played in a manner that sounds keyboardistic (in the lack of a better term).

The samples in a library, taken separately, may sound real. But the playing itself - on keyboards, also midi/audio edited - gives a feeling of "awkwardness." Until recently, people have had only acoustic interpretations (on material instruments) vs. electronic interpretations (with electrically generated sounds). Now audiences are confronted with this new situation of listening to acoustic sounds, yet keyboardistically/computeristically played. I can't speak for others, but observing how I hear acoustic recordings vs. sample renderings, the difference is always very clear to me. Well, that is - excepting pieces that are sample-played exclusively with percussive and keyboard-based "instruments."

So I think the main question is: How comes that I am able to tell the difference? My answer is: by over-imposing, layering in my mind, the real-performance feeling and this new sample-performance feeling. Those two feelings, they don't match. This is the word - they simply don't match. That is why I cannot call a sample-performance - realistic. Mock-up is a far better term. Or, if you want, it is a more realistic term. ;)

If that is the way that works for me, I have reasons to believe that it works in the same way also for other people. You can't really fool people into believing that your sample-performance is a real-instruments-performance. That is - you can't, without their consent, because people can be gentle enough to suspend their disbelief, and to accept your performance as a convincing one. I think that, once you achieve THAT from your audience, the real vs. mock-up issue looses its meaning. After all, what we aim at is to get our music appreciated, and not to achieve perfection in imitating bird songs, ocean waves, clarinet trills, cello glissandos, etc. Audiences are interested in liking a piece, and not in splitting hairs on whether or not that piece is played on computers.

0.02

[jeremyopio]

Piano's are in the Percussion Family, "Keyboardisitic" midi performances played with an interface used for a percussive style of playing, might not be the best way to play 18 violins.
I know that allot of people including myself are frustrated that there is no elegant string based midi controller yet, but what would it be like if we had a bow style interface that sensed all sorts of pressure nuances?

and as far as limiting a sense of possibility, the guy who started this thread was a novice who was looking for solid advice about orchestral libraries, and he is being told, like i was in my thread awhile back, that you'll never be able to do certain things. I think that's imposing, that's why i challenged riff wraith, if i took him at his word, as an open and impressionable beginner and my goal was to work towards creating the most realistic mock ups, i think i might be discouraged hearing "you will not be able to attain a realistisic MIDI orchestral mock-up. Ever."
I think good advice, should be based on facts, and there is nothing factual about that. It reminds me of this kind of logic

"Forget it. No Civil War picture ever made a nickel."

- MGM executive, advising against investing in Gone With The Wind.

"Very interesting, Whittle, my boy, but it will never work."

- Professor of Aeronautical Engineering at Cambridge, shown Frank Whittle's plan for the jet engine.

"The atom bomb will never go off - and I speak as an expert in explosives."

- U.S. Admiral William Leahy in 1945.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."

- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, US Office of Patents, 1899.

"There will never be a bigger plane built."

- A Boeing engineer, after the first flight of the 247, a twin engine plane that carried ten people.

"Airplanes are interesting toys, but they are of no military value whatsoever."

- Marechal Ferdinand Fock, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre

"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon."

- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria, 1873.

"The abolishment of pain in surgery is a chimera. It is absurd to go on seeking it. [...] Knife and pain are two words in surgery that must forever be associated in the consciousness of the patient."

- Dr. Alfred Velpeau, French surgeon, 1839

"Once everyone has their own home, no one will ever want to work again, they will have attained everything they will ever need"
- consult to an early president

[Jeff Hayat]

Piano's are in the Percussion Family,

Right. But a piano is not only percussion; it is a string instrument as well. Now go read your "18 violins" comment.

"An orchestral MIDI mock up using only samples will never sound as real as a real orchestra."

- Jeffrey Hayat, 2007

[Jeff Hayat]

the guy who started this thread was a novice who was looking for solid advice about orchestral libraries, and he is being told, like i was in my thread awhile back, that you'll never be able to do certain things. I think that's imposing, that's why i challenged riff wraith, if i took him at his word, as an open and impressionable beginner and my goal was to work towards creating the most realistic mock ups, i think i might be discouraged hearing "you will not be able to attain a realistisic MIDI orchestral mock-up. Ever."


First off, that is not all I said. If you are going to quote me, at least have the decency to quote the entire post, assuming it is relevent to what you are trying to say. I did in fact say it was possible to generate a convincing mock-up, didn't I?

Secondly, isn't it better to be a realist when answering someone's inquiry? I was raised where unless faced with a situation of life and death, honesty is the best policy. If I were a beginner, I would not want someone to sugar coat everything for me, and distort the possibilities - I'd want the truth. And I gave the truth, be it one you wish to agree with or not.

Cheers.

[nickysnd]

"An orchestral MIDI mock up using only samples will never sound as real as a real orchestra."

- Jeffrey Hayat, 2007
:D

The future is almost like a religious zone, a very sensible one. No one knows one thing about it, everyone has his own beliefs about it. Let's not fight over beliefs. I think the present is a more safe ground, and more practical. And the present plainly shows that now, mock-ups and real playing do sound different. That is a fact, it cannot be doubted.

Starting from this fact, I don't find realistic to aim at perfect imitation of real orchestra. Sample libraries are here to stay, they have their own feeling, they have massively entered into computer games, even into films. So, why is that desirable, what is to be achieved from perfect imitation? More money? Do you want to send musicians out of work by selling to producers identical products at half of the musicians wages? I personally don't aim at that. Fact is, right now, perfect imitation is impossible. It is not my job to make it possible, and I don't think that it is worth trying.

More on the topic, my .02 advice to the OP: don't look for perfect imitation - don't hunt this chimaera. Instead - train yourself, improve your skills by trying to get the sound of others, but turn it into your own sound. Make your piece sound as good as possible to your ears. Then - hope for the best and come what may. :)

[Quoid]

I think a better term is convincing. The most one can hope for is to produce a convincing mock up, and the basic fact I personally was trying to let the OP know, was not that he will never produce anything convincing, but creating a convincing mock up is more than just the samples you are using, it is your MIDI orchestration skills. Not trying to push him away but let him know that there is no sample library that will produce a convincing piece straight out of the box when the user has 0 exp.(not saying he does have 0 exp. just trying to put that fact forward.) There are many things you will do during your midi orchestration that one would never do writing out music for a live orchestra. But in short, Riff is right, there is no substitute for a live orchestra.

thats my two cents.

PS- I am not sure that the future is really in HUGE multi-sampled instrument libraries.
http://www.wallanderinstruments.com/

[jeremyopio]

Nicky has already made a very eloquent point about convincing vs realistic in a previous forum, what i am specifically talking about is accurate emulation. I am not saying we currently have the ability to out do an orchestra, i go to the BSO in Baltimore allot, what they do, i couldn't begin to touch with a sound library and a keyboard, we all know what the limitations are. But i was trying to draw correlations about saying absolutes about the future, especially with a field in it's infancy, "ultra realistic" sound libraries are still pretty new, did you see that list of quotes of people making predictive claims that turned out to be bogus? It's a few posts back, if those people were right we would never have a jet engine or the atom bomb. i kind of wish the guy was right about the atom bomb.
Did you know they closed the field of optics at one point, they said there is no more to learn, they closed it. Ofcourse they had to reopen it once they found more information about the eyes. I am just saying don't be closed off, i have nothing against mr. wraith, i think he is right about the state of sound libraries right now, i disagree with his take on the future. i think that's ok right? i am not calling anyone names or anything.
Why be so certain anyway, we can't truly know the future until it arrives, however, if you are a hypersensitive empath with xmen powers, then maybe i will believe you