Virtual Orchestra Test

The forum for petitions, theoretical discussion, gripes, or other off topic discussion.

Moderator: James Steele

Forum rules
The forum for petitions, theoretical discussion, gripes, or other matters outside deemed outside the scope of helping users make optimal use of MOTU hardware and software. Posts in other forums may be moved here at the moderators discretion. No politics or religion!!
User avatar
blue
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Los Angeles

Post by blue »

monkey man wrote:Thanks for that, blue.

It's certainly "strident".
Many elements of typical Star Wars (especially later episodes) battle preparation/instigation scenes seem to be present.

I only heard it on the Mac speaker, but was struck by how close the brass was placed to the listener.
It makes for great impact and "bite", but I've a feeling the traditional placement of the brass section to the rear would have been in part at least to tame this "harshness" or overpowering nature of the section somewhat.

Hearing this stuff always makes me hanker for MSI all the more.
The bog-standard mud in my ROMpler (Roland) is actually a deterrent to any sort of experimentation at all, I'm afraid.
I know MSI isn't the bee's knees, but it'll float my boat considering the muck that's presented itself thus far in all the ROMplers I've owned.

I look forward to more from this "wunderkind".
Does he do melody well, I wonder? :?
I think the brass sounds incredible, very much in the Star Wars vein. It's clear that is the sound he was going for, and he is an unabashed John Williams disciple.

As for writing "melody," well he can do that too. But the point of the link was to show what can be accomplished with samples. A piece like this, with it's huge dynamic range and breadth of articulations, is really difficult to pull off with samples. A slow, lyrical piece where solo lines are exposed is hard too, but in different ways.

Having great samples is only the first step towards realizing a good mockup. It takes tons of practice, patience and technique to make something useful and musical with them. You don't have to achieve "realism," but you do have to create something that hopefully isn't dull, lifeless and artificial. Knowing how to write music helps, but doesn't necessarily translate. Virtual orchestras are a different challenge altogether.
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

blue wrote: You don't have to achieve "realism," but you do have to create something that hopefully isn't dull, lifeless and artificial.
I'm really glad you said this, blue. It's a concept that has yet to be defined clearly, especially for those who create such tracks. Distinguishing between 'virtual realism' and just plain 'realism' are two entirely different things under the surface for all they may have in common. All too often, thoughts and theories on how to go about creating a sonic illusion get lost in the mire of the illusion itself in the minds of many users.

A track needs to get the point across to make a musical sale. There will forever be a tug of war where mixing virtual orchestras or real orchestras are concerned.

But the exact point you made above is the very issue that so many people refuse to discuss in full, preferring instead to argue the end game instead of the process of getting there. Ironically, until the process is more clearly and more universally understood, end game discussions will most likely prove relatively fruitless.
blue wrote: Knowing how to write music helps, but doesn't necessarily translate. Virtual orchestras are a different challenge altogether.
Indeed, indeed.

There are three issues at play here: If you eliminate virtual instruments and just deal with recordings of real orchestras, you'll find:

1. Great orchestras playing bad music
2. Bad orchestras playing great music
3. Good and bad mixes of good and bad orchestras playing good and bad music.

Factor in the vast array of virtual instruments and again you run the gamut from cheesy to acceptable in all areas-- emphasis on cheesy where $200 places an entire orchestra in the hands of many who know nothing about how instruments are played-- how strings are bowed, how winds and brass players breathe, the importance and definition of the word bisbigliando, what instrumentalist relies upon such terms-- and how all of that sound ought to be mixed and placed either in a virtual concert hall or a virtual soundstage.

Everyone has their own ideas about how the end result should sound, so all too easily one person's approach becomes another person's PITA.

Some aspects of this strike me as futile, yet there is a glimmer of hope in here somewhere: few of us have the resources to have a real symphony orchestra at our beckon call 24/7, and the more that gifted electronic musicians are willing to delve into the world of virtual orchestration with the better libraries out there, the more frequently we'll encounter encounter acceptable tracks.
Nicky wrote:I only heard it on the Mac speaker, but was struck by how close the brass was placed to the listener.
It makes for great impact and "bite", but I've a feeling the traditional placement of the brass section to the rear would have been in part at least to tame this "harshness" or overpowering nature of the section somewhat.
What is 'traditional', really? There are so many traditions, and there are clear differences in the way music for film is mixed and the way music for the sake of pure listening is mixed.

Composers for film often do not have the luxury of having two mix versions where their tracks (such as this particular one) will often compete with explosions, gun shots, tired skids, and screaming dialog voice overs in a film. Suddenly, that "closeness" in the brass loses its impact unless it is mixed "hot" or "in-your-face" the way it is.

Yeah, bud. I'd religiously avoid listening to tracks on a computer's built-in speakers unless I'm reading or doing monthly bookkeeping.

But I shouldn't wonder about some of this, though. It seems so easy to get into the shortcomings of virtual music-- where internet download quality plays a part-- and yet reconcile the need to have something similar on our own systems-- shortcomings and all.

While listening to the virtual tracks of others, one question I'm asking myself with increasing frequency is "can I do as good or better"?

Here is a tally of my personal take so far with the answers to this question:

60%: yes
30%: probably
10%: I don't t'ink so.

There are a handful of folks out there who are really kicking butt with this stuff. As usual, brilliance breaks off from the pack to forge its own trail.

Curiously and ironically, the downside to trail blazing is that there's no guarantee anyone will follow-- either because they are too busy finding their own ways or because a particular trailblazer has set the bar so high that its standard is not generally attainable.

Further to the process, the necessity to freeze/bounce has proven essential for technical functionality, but it has also made programmers succumb more to technical limitations during the process. For as essential as this method is, I find it to be a nagging musical distraction and am endeavoring to fashion a system that works a bit more according to my needs instead of it demanding *so much* that I always compromise key musical qualities for the sake of its limitations.

As long as virtual instruments remain a 'reality', I'm keeping a humble attitude and an open mind about what others are doing as I try to temper self-criticism.

Keep in mind that I'm among those who were stuck in the world of either GM or the shinola of abysmal synth patches for ages. It's from that low point that I continue to measure success rather than from the day that, say, MSI or EWQLSO or VSL first appeared on the market. All of this still has me silently rejoicing about the direction of the development and a promise, once unrequited, now appearing to be on the eve of fulfillment.

This continues to be a deeply fascinating subject as certain trailblazers continue to prove that increasingly better results than we often do not expect are indeed possible.
Last edited by Frodo on Mon May 14, 2007 6:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
blue
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Los Angeles

Post by blue »

Great post, Frodo. I think you nailed it.
Frodo wrote:While listening to the virtual tracks of others, one question I'm asking myself with increasing frequency is "can I do as good or better"?

Here is a tally of my personal take so far with the answers to this question:

60%: yes
30%: probably
10%: I don't t'ink so.
This is what I'm always thinking too, though I must admit my percentages are probably less favorable than yours. I chalk that up to several factors, the most important being the amount of time and preparation I put into my mockups. If I was doing nothing but orchestral music, I would probably be a lot better than I am. As it stands, I do more electronic, hybrid and groove oriented stuff these days, so my workflow reflects that kind of music.

The people who are really good at this tend to have elaborate and stable setups and templates that allow them to create without the process getting in the way. The guy who did the mockup I linked to is such a character.

Here's a thread on another forum regarding his piece. He has a very interesting reply on the 4th page. His user name is Thomas J

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... &start=105
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

blue wrote:.... though I must admit my percentages are probably less favorable than yours. I chalk that up to several factors, the most important being the amount of time and preparation I put into my mockups. If I was doing nothing but orchestral music, I would probably be a lot better than I am. As it stands, I do more electronic, hybrid and groove oriented stuff these days, so my workflow reflects that kind of music.

The people who are really good at this tend to have elaborate and stable setups and templates that allow them to create without the process getting in the way. The guy who did the mockup I linked to is such a character.
Please don't make more of my numbers than they deserve. It only means that I've heard a lot of bad tracks! For many of the shortcomings I do hold the programmer responsible. In other cases it's the limitations of the software. Yet, I'm a long way from having the kind of setup that will enable more successful virtual demos. I finally got a second computer (and already want at least two more!!), but my next hardware investment must be with a variety of input controllers.
blue wrote:.
Here's a thread on another forum regarding his piece. He has a very interesting reply on the 4th page. His user name is Thomas J

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... &start=105

I'm going to check it out in a bit when I can give it the attention it deserves. Thanks for the info.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
Shooshie
Posts: 19820
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Post by Shooshie »

blue wrote:Great post, Frodo. I think you nailed it.
Frodo wrote:While listening to the virtual tracks of others, one question I'm asking myself with increasing frequency is "can I do as good or better"?

Here is a tally of my personal take so far with the answers to this question:

60%: yes
30%: probably
10%: I don't t'ink so.
This is what I'm always thinking too, though I must admit my percentages are probably less favorable than yours. I chalk that up to several factors, the most important being the amount of time and preparation I put into my mockups. If I was doing nothing but orchestral music, I would probably be a lot better than I am. As it stands, I do more electronic, hybrid and groove oriented stuff these days, so my workflow reflects that kind of music.

The people who are really good at this tend to have elaborate and stable setups and templates that allow them to create without the process getting in the way. The guy who did the mockup I linked to is such a character.

Here's a thread on another forum regarding his piece. He has a very interesting reply on the 4th page. His user name is Thomas J

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... &start=105
Can you tell me what the PP library is, to which they keep referring? Arghhh.... I'm going to be gone for two weeks. I'll just bookmark this page for when I get back. Thanks,

Shooshie
|l| OS X 10.12.6 |l| DP 10.0 |l| 2.4 GHz 12-Core MacPro Mid-2012 |l| 40GB RAM |l| Mach5.3 |l| Waves 9.x |l| Altiverb |l| Ivory 2 New York Steinway |l| Wallander WIVI 2.30 Winds, Brass, Saxes |l| Garritan Aria |l| VSL 5.3.1 and VSL Pro 2.3.1 |l| Yamaha WX-5 MIDI Wind Controller |l| Roland FC-300 |l|
User avatar
blue
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Los Angeles

Post by blue »

The PP library is the private library I referred to in my earlier post. I don't know what the initials stand for, but a few composers pooled their resources and tailored the library to their own tastes. These are ambitious folks, and I think the results are clear.
User avatar
Shooshie
Posts: 19820
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Post by Shooshie »

Since we're discussing composition and arranging with VI's, and the technical facility it takes to handle these things, I thought I'd make an admission: One reason I rarely post anything here is because of the divide between what I am capable of doing skill-wise vs. what I am able to do with the tools I have. I've been "making-do" for about 20 years, but I cannot afford Vienna or East/West, nor can I afford a series of computers on which to run them. In short, I put as much as I can into what I've got, but it still sucks to my ears. Once you've run out of options, you're out of options. (Until you get more money, of course, with which you can BUY yourself more options)

I AM learning how to get the most out of what's out there at my budget-level, as I've always done. But I had been making serious progress with Mach Five, in combination with MOTU SI and many old sample libraries. That seems to be the magic formula. Each library may have ONE SINGLE INSTRUMENT that's all you want it to be, or can be made so with some tweaking. You throw out the rest and take that instrument. That's what makes MachFive a great tool. You can develop a very customized VI library, so that every instrument can be from a different library, yet you can balance each one and massage it until it sounds like it's in the same family that you're creating. I've got a long way to go before I get the orchestra I'm seeking, but I'd been making progress... until I switched to the Intel-Mac.

Now, I'm hamstrung again, waiting on MachFive2 for Intel compatibility, and waiting on some other things as well. I could stand to stumble on to about $10,000 in cash right now, that doesn't get reported to the IRS or my daughter's college, either of which would be happy to take about half of it. That much would probably put me where I want to be for now, as far as software and hardware are concerned.

Meanwhile, I hope to go back and update some old files involving Bach flute sonatas and violin partitas. I think I've got enough stuff to make those happen as I want them to. I hesitate to do any serious new stuff, because I'd only have to start over and re-do it when I finally get the instruments I want, which play as I want them to.

So, forgive the dearth of musical posts from yours-truly. Trust me; they would not inspire you at this point. At some time in the next year or so, I hope to change that. You guys inspire me to keep plugging away. I could not have stayed with it without the examples you set, to keep experimenting, keep trying things. This is a very, very difficult business in which to work if you don't happen to have a lot of capital. But I keep hearing things by some of you, or by way of your links, which tell me it can be done. I'm not a quitter. I usually come out on top of what I set out to do. Just give me some time... :)

Shooshie
|l| OS X 10.12.6 |l| DP 10.0 |l| 2.4 GHz 12-Core MacPro Mid-2012 |l| 40GB RAM |l| Mach5.3 |l| Waves 9.x |l| Altiverb |l| Ivory 2 New York Steinway |l| Wallander WIVI 2.30 Winds, Brass, Saxes |l| Garritan Aria |l| VSL 5.3.1 and VSL Pro 2.3.1 |l| Yamaha WX-5 MIDI Wind Controller |l| Roland FC-300 |l|
User avatar
Shooshie
Posts: 19820
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Dallas
Contact:

Post by Shooshie »

blue wrote:The PP library is the private library I referred to in my earlier post. I don't know what the initials stand for, but a few composers pooled their resources and tailored the library to their own tastes. These are ambitious folks, and I think the results are clear.
Ahhh... so it wasn't just the effort of one person that created that library. Very interesting.

Say... in two weeks, when I return, we should talk about doing such a thing ourselves.

Shooshie
|l| OS X 10.12.6 |l| DP 10.0 |l| 2.4 GHz 12-Core MacPro Mid-2012 |l| 40GB RAM |l| Mach5.3 |l| Waves 9.x |l| Altiverb |l| Ivory 2 New York Steinway |l| Wallander WIVI 2.30 Winds, Brass, Saxes |l| Garritan Aria |l| VSL 5.3.1 and VSL Pro 2.3.1 |l| Yamaha WX-5 MIDI Wind Controller |l| Roland FC-300 |l|
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

Shooshie wrote: Can you tell me what the PP library is, to which they keep referring? Arghhh.... I'm going to be gone for two weeks. I'll just bookmark this page for when I get back. Thanks,

Shooshie
PP stands for Project Prague. It's a non-public library in development done in Prague, of course, by some power hitters in VI world. Maarten Sprujit, Craig Sharmat, and Simon Ravn-- names the pop up all the time in various places where virtual instruments are 'at play'. Maarten (I believe) did some work for VSL and then disappeared. Later, his tutorial of Altiverb appeared on AudioEase's site, but seems to me he's been doing some serious orchestral sampling on the side.
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

Shooshie wrote: Say... in two weeks, when I return, we should talk about doing such a thing ourselves.

Shooshie
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

You know, after hearing what can be done in the right hands with the right tools, I'd sort of gotten seriously depressed and decided to either just swat away with what I've got as best as I could or give up trying entirely.

I'm feeling a lot better about my tools than I am about my hands right at the moment with thousands of hours of trial error ahead of me (should I choose to accept it).

Someone mentioned that Thomas used a template of over 800 tracks to do that demo. Without seeing the PP interface and what it requires, it's hard to get a sense of the magnitude of such a template. The more I learn, the less I know.

Three months ago, I might have suggested such a collaboration myself. Shoosh, by the time you get back I hope to be out of my personal creative funk and will give your idea a fresh "chew".
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

Hey--

It just so happens that Thomas has at least two articles running in Virtual Instruments Magazine (current issue and previous?) about the art of sequencing with samples.

http://www.virtualinstrumentsmag.com/issue/issue.html
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
Frodo
Posts: 15597
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: The Shire

Post by Frodo »

You snoop around long enough and there's not telling what you might find...


Here's a link to a page that has part of the score to Mojo Madness on it along with some other interesting files, particularly a PDF of the MIDI Import files. Interest to see:

http://www.virtualinstrumentsmag.com/download.html

Scroll down to June/July, "From Sketch To Score".
6,1 MacPro, 96GB RAM, macOS Monterey 12.7, macOS 10.14, DP9.52
User avatar
monkey man
Posts: 13977
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Post by monkey man »

Shooshie wrote:...I could stand to stumble on to about $10,000 in cash right now...That much would probably put me where I want to be for now, as far as software and hardware are concerned.

So, forgive the dearth of musical posts from yours-truly. Trust me; they would not inspire you at this point. At some time in the next year or so, I hope to change that. You guys inspire me to keep plugging away. I could not have stayed with it without the examples you set, to keep experimenting, keep trying things. This is a very, very difficult business in which to work if you don't happen to have a lot of capital. But I keep hearing things by some of you, or by way of your links, which tell me it can be done. I'm not a quitter. I usually come out on top of what I set out to do. Just give me some time... :)
Shooshie
I could have written all of this; I can very much relate to your situation, Shoosh.
Shooshie wrote:...I hesitate to do any serious new stuff, because I'd only have to start over and re-do it when I finally get the instruments I want, which play as I want them to.
Wrestling with this one has no doubt cost me much in urealised art, lost opportunities and trade skill development.
I loathe the thought of having to constantly rework stuff because of obvious shortcomings.
As you seem to have done, I've held back too, albeit for quite some time due to impossible-to-overcome fiscal challenges.

When all's said and done, I'm edging ever closer to biting the bullet and making do with what I have, as starving the spirit in this way seems more painful than reworking all that material, templates and the like.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Shoosh.
Nicky

Frodo, thank you for your reply and for sharing your thoughts and fears (!) regarding this virtualization conundrum.
I'm certain many would have gained insight from your posts.

Mac 2012 12C Cheese Grater, OSX 10.13.6
MOTU DP8.07, MachFive 3.2.1, MIDI Express XT, 24I/O
Novation, Yamaha & Roland Synths, Guitar & Bass, Kemper Rack

Pretend I've placed your favourite quote here
logo80
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by logo80 »

:?
I had no doubt, maybe cos I always listen to classical music, but even if the quality of the files was awful... I found the fake. I think that we're still far from a good "programmed" orchestra...
User avatar
blue
Posts: 1906
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:01 pm
Primary DAW OS: MacOS
Location: Los Angeles

Post by blue »

Frodo wrote:You snoop around long enough and there's not telling what you might find...


Here's a link to a page that has part of the score to Mojo Madness on it along with some other interesting files, particularly a PDF of the MIDI Import files. Interest to see:

http://www.virtualinstrumentsmag.com/download.html

Scroll down to June/July, "From Sketch To Score".
That's the funny part. That particular article was about how to translate a MIDI file into a legible score, not how to make a mockup sound believable. The piece was written to demonstrate that process.
Post Reply