# My first mockup (after trashing BBCSO Core I went back to it)



## mgaewsj (Aug 28, 2021)

After initially denigrating and trashing BBCSO Core (check this thread: BBCSO disappointment) I took a break and then started again from scratch. Here is my first attempt to use it to create a mockup of a composition of mine (also a first attempt at orchestral music).




Please don’t destroy me  I am a novice. I am an avid reader of this fantastic forum and I am learning so much. I am pretty aware of the long journey in front of me to achieve some kind of decency.

I tried as much as possible to use only BBCSO (Discover & Core) and I sticked to that plan but with an exception: I could not stand the BBCSO Core oboe so I used a patch from my MODX.

Am I happy about the result? Not too much, but this is probably the best I could achieve with my current skills.

In particular I am not fond of the strings harshness and poor legatos in exposed passages, I also don’t like an overall coarseness/grossness. I guess most of these problems come from my limited skills, but my feeling is that BBCSO, at least the Core version, is not suited for this kind of lines (I am perfectly aware that I should buy some chamber or, better, solo strings).

Oh, I only used legato, long and pizzicato articulations, I guess I should learn to use many more arts.

I am (just) a bit happier about the composition. I tried to develop the initial theme both in terms of melody and harmony. Nothing special but at least the result is not too boring and static, I hope.

Back to my criticism of BBCSO: as I already stated in my rant post, I spent an unreasonable amount of time trying to fix inconsistencies and imperfections in the library and I had to do it again and again in this case too. I understand now that each library as its own issues, but frankly the viola pizzicato timing, just to highlight one of the most evident offenders, is completely insane to deal with.

I hope to get some feedback (hopefully not too harsh 😨)


----------



## mybadmemory (Aug 28, 2021)

Hi mgaewsj, and welcome to the forum! I quite like your composition, but I’m curious what you did to BBCSO Core here cause it doesn’t really sound like it usually does!

1. Patches. You said you’re using both Discover and Core, why not use all Core? Discover is a VERY stripped down version of the library, with much lower quality, so I would start with making sure to use Core on everything! Including the oboe, which should sound much better than the one from your MODX.

2. Programming. My main feedback would be to spend more time on dynamics, both for individual lines and for the piece as a whole. Learn to use and change between different articulations when needed, how the legato patches work and respond to velocity and overlapping notes, how to program CC’s like modulation in arcs for dynamics for each phrase. 

3. Mixing. First, again make sure you’re using Core and not Discover, cause the difference in sound is big. Secondly I would turn off the internal reverb if you have it on. And thirdly, are you doing anything mixing wise to change the sound? If you are I would turn that off and work more on the arrangement and midi programming first, cause Core is quite capable of sounding great without much mixing at all, if programmed right!

Again, I quite like the piece, but the sound and programming needs some more work for it to come alive.


----------



## dcoscina (Aug 28, 2021)

- for that low string part, did you use mod wheel at all? Was this the performance legato cello or basses? Doubling with bassoon or contrabassoon would help bring out that line because as it is, it's a bit muddy, lacking the definition the piece requires. It's not a bad piece of music and the beginning reminds me of John Barry stuff (which is good btw). It just needs a bit more finessing.


----------



## José Herring (Aug 28, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> After initially denigrating and trashing BBCSO Core (check this thread: BBCSO disappointment) I took a break and then started again from scratch. Here is my first attempt to use it to create a mockup of a composition of mine (also a first attempt at orchestral music).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To help you do you think that you could post the midi file for your composition? Just the string parts though. I have a feeling that it's not the library but rather a fundamental lack of understanding of how sample libraries work in general. 

I'm not saying your composition is bad. I like it. But your ability to realize your idea is lacking. If you don't feel comfortable posting your midi file that is find. Even screen shots of your Key editor and cc1 expression lanes for Vln, Vla, and Cello would give me enough information to go on.


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

thanks a lot for your feedbacks and apologies for the late reply, but I live in Europe and it's morning right now 

I am attaching an mp3 file and the related midi file of the first 80 seconds.
Here I am using only BBCSO Core (oboe included, even if I am still far from excited by it...)
Everything else is more or less the same as in the original mockup, I just adjusted some timing and some CC#1 and CC#11 to account for differences between Discover and Core. no reverb or other processing, I only increased the gain by +4.5db for flautando basses.

I admit it sounds better, even if still far from ideal.
Perhaps some of you can have a look at the midi file to understand what's wrong?

I am also attaching a picture of my Studio One project, so you can better understand which instruments are used in these first 80 seconds. As you can see I do use CC#1 and CC#11 to make the sounds a bit more dynamic, probably not enough or simply in a wrong way.

btw these first 80 seconds are the easy part of the mockup, things get complicated (and sound awful) later.

more detailed answers:

- Patches
why didn't I use only Core? well, initially some passages sounded a bit better to me (I was wrong). Anyway I have been using Discover only at the beginning and at the end, everything else, included the violas and violins passages that sound so bad, is BBCSO Core

- Programming
Definitely I need to study and experiment more. Still I tried to use CC#1 and CC#11 as explained above. I am still disappointed by the inconsistencies of the library. For instance in the midi file I am attaching, the second time the theme is played by violins one octave higher, but legato is inconsistent with previous instance and works differently: the same midi data sound right in the lower octave but do not sound too ok in the upper one. oh well

- Mixing
In the original mockup I only used some EQ on the strings and just a bit of Soothe2 in the master bus. Removing those does not change the result in a radical way. So I guess there is something else that causing the poor result. Anyway the attached mp3 is completely clean. btw there is no Reverb in the original mockup either (except for the oboe)

- Low string part
It's played by Cellis from Discover, in the attached mp3 I replaced them with Core Cellis. I'll try to double it with bassoon (that idea would have never come to my mind , thnx)

- Lack of understanding of how sample libraries work
I guess you are right . I hope to improve with some help, and you are already providing a lot!


----------



## mybadmemory (Aug 29, 2021)

It already sounds miles better just by going from discover to core. Now you get the real legato transitions! I would highly advice not to use Discover at all. That entire library is only 200mb as opposed to Cores almost 30gb.

With Discover all of dynamic layers are gone. All of the round robins. All of the legato transitions. Many of the sampled notes are removed and pitch shifted instead. And the overall quality is lowered. The difference is huge really.

Now with core instead the overall sound quality doesn’t seem to be much of an issue anymore! The rest is simply working on arrangement and programming to improve things further. And I’d leave all mixing (even volume levels) blank as a start, and balance the piece using dynamics (modulation, and velocities) instead.

Make sure all your legato transitions overlap so the legato is actually triggered (again, you get those only with core, not in Discover). And try to shape the dynamics like arcs sweeping into and out of each phrase. Your phrase endings especially often sound somewhat abrupt.


----------



## mybadmemory (Aug 29, 2021)

Look at the way I shaped the modulation data in this mock-up (also using BBCSO Core). How it often starts from near zero, swells in a smooth curve, and then back down to almost nothing again at the end of a phrase. Sorry for the low res screenshot but it was the only thing I had available (out and about with only my phone).


----------



## Ivan M. (Aug 29, 2021)

To me your composition is great. The atmosphere and the way it moves is fantastic. Compositionally, this is probably better than 50% of film music.

What it lacks is a clear form, a clear distinction between sections, it just flows. This is just personal taste, maybe that's what you want. Romantic period has this style of constantly flowing melodies.

You just need to work on the production a bit, and how to best utilise your libraries. Just massage those notes a bit better, they don't quite connect, it just takes practice. (Not sure how helpful the library is, I'm not familiar with it or it's limitations).

Well done! Looking forward to hear more of your music


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> Look at the way I shaped the modulation data in this mock-up (also using BBCSO Core). How it often starts from near zero, swells in a smooth curve, and then back down to almost nothing again at the end of a phrase. Sorry for the low res screenshot but it was the only thing I had available (out and about with only my phone).


wow, it's a fantastic mockup, it sounds wonderful!

And thanks for the screenshot. If I get it right it's the strings part at 0:53 in your mockup, am I right?


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> It already sounds miles better just by going from discover to core. Now you get the real legato transitions! I would highly advice not to use Discover at all. That entire library is only 200mb as opposed to Cores almost 30gb.
> 
> With Discover all of dynamic layers are gone. All of the round robins. All of the legato transitions. Many of the sampled notes are removed and pitch shifted instead. And the overall quality is lowered. The difference is huge really.
> 
> ...


thanks!
a lot of learning and work to do, for sure I will try to redo the central part (much tougher I am afraid)


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

Ivan M. said:


> To me your composition is great. The atmosphere and the way it moves is fantastic. Compositionally, this is probably better than 50% of film music.
> 
> What it lacks is a clear form, a clear distinction between sections, it just flows. This is just personal taste, maybe that's what you want. Romantic period has this style of constantly flowing melodies.
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot.

Yes, in part I went instinctively for flowing melodies, but perhaps it was more an emerging result than a plan!
May I ask if you could point to some examples of clear distinction between sections  ?


----------



## mybadmemory (Aug 29, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> wow, it's a fantastic mockup, it sounds wonderful!
> 
> And thanks for the screenshot. If I get it right it's the strings part at 0:53 in your mockup, am I right?


Thanks! It’s all BBCSO core right out of the box, except the piano. If you look at the last page of the thread I posted a video where you can follow along with the sequences and audio.


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> Thanks! It’s all BBCSO core right out of the box, except the piano. If you look at the last page of the thread I posted a video where you can follow along with the sequences and audio.


great, perhaps I will try to "copy" it as an exercise!


----------



## Ivan M. (Aug 29, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> May I ask if you could point to some examples of clear distinction between sections  ?


Pop music  https://joshuarosspiano.com/musical-forms/


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 29, 2021)

Ivan M. said:


> Pop music  https://joshuarosspiano.com/musical-forms/


oh ok, now I understand what you meant, you are referring to the piece/song structure. Gotcha


----------



## José Herring (Aug 29, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> thanks a lot for your feedbacks and apologies for the late reply, but I live in Europe and it's morning right now
> 
> I am attaching an mp3 file and the related midi file of the first 80 seconds.
> Here I am using only BBCSO Core (oboe included, even if I am still far from excited by it...)
> ...


It's beautiful. I will check out the midi and see if I can help you out there with the programming. 

Also, are you using any reverb at all? I know that BBCSO is as reverberant as any library already but its still samples and in order to mask the transitions a bit you need a bit of hall verb to glue it all together.


----------



## José Herring (Aug 29, 2021)

Okay so I did a midi rendition of your piece using BBCSO. If you like it I can tell you what I found in your original midi that is holding you back and what I did to try and improve your programming and mixing. If you don't like what I did to your music then not a problem.

But, I think it's a good piece of music that just needs a better performance. BBCSO is fine. Couple of problems in the library but don't they all have a couple of problems.

I took a few liberties with the orchestation because I started out my professional career as an orchestrator and I can never quite resist the urge when dealing with somebody else's music to add a little of my own signature 

First file is with no mastering. The second file has a little.


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Okay so I did a midi rendition of your piece using BBCSO. If you like it I can tell you what I found in your original midi that is holding you back and what I did to try and improve your programming and mixing. If you don't like what I did to your music then not a problem.
> 
> But, I think it's a good piece of music that just needs a better performance. BBCSO is find. Couple of problems in the library but don't they all have a couple of problems.
> 
> ...


wow! that's wonderful 🙏🏼.
It's almost a different piece of music, wow.

I especially like the build up and the "fullness" when the theme is played for the second time.
And in general much more dynamics!

Also, if I understand correctly you used tremolo for violins 2 and the volume of percussions is much higher.

Now, would it be too much to ask for the midi file  . It would be a great learning opportunity for me!

EDIT: my wife bursted into tears when she listened to your rendition...


----------



## José Herring (Aug 30, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> wow! that's wonderful 🙏🏼.
> It's almost a different piece of music, wow.
> 
> I especially like the build up and the "fullness" when the theme is played for the second time.
> ...


Sure. But I want to experiment with adding a little vibrato to the strings to give them more expression. Then I can send you the midi.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 30, 2021)

That’s just a REALLY nice thing to do José. Things like this remind me this is a cool forum.


----------



## José Herring (Aug 30, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> wow! that's wonderful 🙏🏼.
> It's almost a different piece of music, wow.
> 
> I especially like the build up and the "fullness" when the theme is played for the second time.
> ...


Awe. Just tell her I just brought out the music that was already there. I could hear it was a good piece of music when I first heard it. It just needed more musical programming. Once you look at the midi file I can tell you what I did and what to watch out for with BBCSO. It's got some quirks. 

I also just did a rendition with vibrato but it made the violins more jumpy. I'd have to spend too much time to smooth them out but it would be worth doing if you wanted to make the vibrato smoother.

Attached is also the midi file. Again look it over and let me know if you have any questions. BBCSO is a great library but like all libraries you have to learn how to get what you want from it.


----------



## doctoremmet (Aug 30, 2021)

Oh - and @mgaewsj ? Great mockup!


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Sure. But I want to experiment with adding a little vibrato to the strings to give them more expression. Then I can send you the midi.


ok!


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Awe. Just tell her I just brought out the music that was already there. I could hear it was a good piece of music when I first heard it. It just needed more musical programming. Once you look at the midi file I can tell you what I did and what to watch out for with BBCSO. It's got some quirks.
> 
> I also just did a rendition with vibrato but it made the violins more jumpy. I'd have to spend too much time to smooth them out but it would be worth doing if you wanted to make the vibrato smoother.
> 
> Attached is also the midi file. Again look it over and let me know if you have any questions. BBCSO is a great library but like all libraries you have to learn how to get what you want from it.


hope to find some time in the afternoon to look at it!
you are so kind (and talented!)


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

doctoremmet said:


> Oh - and @mgaewsj ? Great mockup!


thanks a lot!

my name is Gaetano (mgaewsj: there's a history behind that nick )


----------



## mybadmemory (Aug 30, 2021)

Sounds fabulous @José Herring, such a nice thing to do! These tweaks clearly shows both what a great composition it originally was, how important good programming is, and how nice BBCSO actually sounds.


----------



## Toecutter (Aug 30, 2021)

Mockups can be tricky (Jose ) so don't feel discouraged if you don't get it right the first (hundred lol) tries, keep grinding! Imo you aced the part most people struggle: coming up with a solid musical statement! Really liked your theme Gaetano, good job


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

Toecutter said:


> Mockups can be tricky (Jose ) so don't feel discouraged if you don't get it right the first (hundred lol) tries, keep grinding! Imo you aced the part most people struggle: coming up with a solid musical statement! Really liked your theme Gaetano, good job


thanks a lot.

There is so many wonderful people in this forum. It's a special place to be 🙏🏼.

and Jose is my hero now !

The way he rendered my theme is a great motivation to learn and try.
Obviously I know I will never reach that level, but I hope to significantly improve my renditions!


----------



## SupremeFist (Aug 30, 2021)

It's a beautiful theme, Gaetano; the programming will come with practice. (I hope — I'm nowhere near as good as José. )


----------



## José Herring (Aug 30, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> thanks a lot.
> 
> There is so many wonderful people in this forum. It's a special place to be 🙏🏼.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't say that. I struggle like crazy to get in 1/10th of what I hear in my head into a mockup. Many people on this forum can attest that when I started I wasn't very good at doing mockups. 

I got a lot of help from people like Craig Sharmat and John Graham over the years as well as some others that aren't a part of this forum.

In the past year I finally got to the point where I can listen to my mockups and not cringe. That took a long time and many library purchases


----------



## mgaewsj (Aug 30, 2021)

José Herring said:


> I wouldn't say that. I struggle like crazy to get in 1/10th of what I hear in my head into a mockup. Many people on this forum can attest that when I started I wasn't very good at doing mockups.
> 
> I got a lot of help from people like Craig Sharmat and John Graham over the years as well as some others that aren't a part of this forum.
> 
> In the past year I finally got to the point where I can listen to my mockups and not cringe. That took a long time and many library purchases


so great to hear that helping each other is happening frequently here!

about library purchases: I guess I should try to resist the temptation to buy too many of them.
I was thinking that BBCSO was to blame for my poor rendition.
Instead, as you brilliantly proved, I was the culprit, not the library


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 4, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Okay so I did a midi rendition of your piece using BBCSO. If you like it I can tell you what I found in your original midi that is holding you back and what I did to try and improve your programming and mixing. If you don't like what I did to your music then not a problem.
> 
> But, I think it's a good piece of music that just needs a better performance. BBCSO is fine. Couple of problems in the library but don't they all have a couple of problems.
> 
> ...



Hi José,

I finally found some time to start looking into your midi file and I would like to ask a few questions if possible  (no hurry, whenever you have time available) as I am not able to replicate the sound of your mp3.

In general volumes are really low and relative gains don’t seem to match your mp3 file. I had to modify some instruments gains to make them sound somewhat similar to your mp3, as you can see here







in particular violins 1 and 2 would sound much lower without these changes, while trombones (I am assuming you too are using a3 trombones) would sound too loud (in you rendition they are barely audible).

I noticed you are using Control 14 for violins 1. What is is for? For sure with just CC#1 and #11 I am not able to replicate the dynamics of your rendition, especially the second time the theme is played.
I also had to lower velocities for notes at the beginning of bars 20, 22 and 24 as the attack was too abrupt.

For Violins 2 I used the Long sul Tasto art (Tremolo did not match your mp3 dynamics)

For Basses in this case I always used the legato articulation, while originally I used flautando during the first theme and it was definitely too low volume.

Timpani had much more lower frequency content in your mp3, are you using the Hits Damped Soft art? (I tried to use that)

Oh, you changed the Tempo from 75 to 77 

Anyway I am attaching the mp3 of my attempt, it's definitely lacking the "vibe" and dynamics of yours


----------



## José Herring (Sep 4, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> Hi José,
> 
> I finally found some time to start looking into your midi file and I would like to ask a few questions if possible  (no hurry, whenever you have time available) as I am not able to replicate the sound of your mp3.
> 
> ...


Not too far off. I will explain as much as I can.

I use Cubase and perhaps the gain structure is different that what you are using. Is it Reaper? But that shouldn't matter too much. The important thing is that you balance out your ensemble. I balance from the lead line. The violins are correctly placed register wise. You did a good job with that. All other lines are relative importance. The cello line should be heard just below the violins to give it motion. Bass just below that to give it weight. All the rest just supporting the harmony to make it fuller sounding.

I used the solo Tbone patch because 2 bones will balance better with strings that a a3 patch playing two notes. So I use the solo patch.

The general Rimsky Korsakov style of orchestral balance is that around mp-mf all the instruments can play somewhat balanced. Beyond that the brass dominate in the F and above. Below that the strings and woodwinds can play way softer with strings playing softer than woodwinds. Sooooo... If you have tbones holding down the harmony you'd have to have them playing no louder than mp. You can do that with CC1 and CC11. BBCSO needs both to be expressive.

I tend to mix on the low side so that I can bring it up in mastering. Violins in your piece kind of go from p to mf in range for expressive swells. The bigger part in the recapitulation is just fuller. It's not really that much louder. What I don't hear in your rendition is the Vlc doubling the vlins and octave lower. It can be louder because it's lower. It will make it sound fuller.

The basses in your rendition sound disjointed and too loud. I can't think of a good reason why basses would be Flautando but I'm not saying it is wrong. So I used the sustain patch or maybe I used the con sordino. I don't know but will look that up later.

Violin 2 I used the tremelo CS patch so that it wouldn't overpower the tender oboe solo and so that the oboist could have more expressive freedom. I also used that patch so that it would sound more mysterious and have dramatic weight. That's the arranger coming out of me.

I used the soft mallets for the timpani. Blends better than the hard felt mallets.

I only changed the tempo because my template defaults to 77bmp. Sounded close enough so I didn't notice the tempo difference.

CC14 for strings in BBCSO is for controlling Vibrato. You can make the line more expressive by starting with very little vibrato bring it up as the phrase goes to the peak and then back down as it goes down. Your piece as the type of lines that could benefit from that.

I did an old video many years ago about orchestral balances. It's got some fairly dated information now. I'm also not a screen cast type person so my voice is low and I sound really really bored. I'm pretty sure I was bored. And the video is too long.... but there's a few useful pieces of information in there yet.

Lastly when I mock up I think of a real orchestra. I think of it from the conductors perspective. I think if I had real players how would they play it. It's not important that your redentions matches any other. What is important is that you have some sort of musical communication going on and that you know how to balance out your ideas so that the main idea can get heard and is the most expressive and that the supporting parts support it.

Edit: One last thing. I'm way better now than I was in that video. But that was the start of me thinking in terms of balance and spacing in orchestra mockups.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 5, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Not too far off. I will explain as much as I can.
> 
> I use Cubase and perhaps the gain structure is different that what you are using. Is it Reaper? But that shouldn't matter too much. The important thing is that you balance out your ensemble. I balance from the lead line. The violins are correctly placed register wise. You did a good job with that. All other lines are relative importance. The cello line should be heard just below the violins to give it motion. Bass just below that to give it weight. All the rest just supporting the harmony to make it fuller sounding.
> 
> ...



wow José, so many valuable info and tips!
I will never thank you enough 🙏🏼.

I am using Studio One btw.
One note about CC14. I tried it and it did not have any effect, so I checked the Spitfire doc and it turns out that it's CC21 to control vibrato (https://spitfireaudio.zendesk.com/h...ence-between-Dynamics-Vibrato-and-Expression-). Perhaps you re-mapped it?

Anyway, now I have lot of new things to study and try.
I understand you are much better now 
Back at work!


----------



## José Herring (Sep 5, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> wow José, so many valuable info and tips!
> I will never thank you enough 🙏🏼.
> 
> I am using Studio One btw.
> ...


Oh yeah. Right click on the little wheel thingy on the Spitfire Player and it will do a midi learn type feature. my 1st knob defaults to CC14. I forgot about that. I do it so often it's automatic now.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 19, 2021)

so during the weekend I've tried to apply *some* of the many hints I got and here is the result.
I think it sounds better than the original (but doing worse would have been very difficult )
Still lots to learn and study for sure .
But I hope it's at least a step in the right direction.

Only plain BBCSO Core this time, no EQ, no reverb, no compression.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 19, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> so during the weekend I've tried to apply *some* of the many hints I got and here is the result.
> I think it sounds better than the original (but doing worse would have been very difficult )
> Still lots to learn and study for sure .
> But I hope it's at least a step in the right direction.
> ...


Much improved for sure. Generally I think the 1st violins could come down just a little bit. And the timpani could be just a bit softer too. Honestly in my little rendition I didn't pay much attention to the timpani so even I had them probably too loud. Add some hall verb and that would be it. 

Programming is much improved. Just keep practicing and listening to real players and trying to mimic their phrasing habits with your CC1 and CC11.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 20, 2021)

yes! you are right about violins and timpani in particular. I got used to that loudness and never questioned it again.

I have a long list of videos to watch to learn and practice. It would probably take more than a lifetime to watch all of them .
btw I am finding Alex Heppelman's Orchestration videos very helpful as a starting point. 
I am also following the Orchestration Recipes courses.

Speaking of loudness I have a (yet another!) question: I kept all the volumes low, no gain on any track, so the .mp3 final volume is quite low. But now I would like to bring the level on par with the typical soundcloud standard.

Now I could either:
1. increase the level on the Master Channel till VUMeter peaks around 0db
2. normalize the .wav/.mp3 file 
3. use a limiter

Not sure if 1. and 2. are equivalent.
I understand 3. could be a better alternative. Am I wrong?


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 22, 2021)

Great composition. Tender, gentle…

I really, really like the strings in BBCSO.


----------



## Henrik B. Jensen (Sep 22, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> After initially denigrating and trashing BBCSO Core (check this thread: BBCSO disappointment) I took a break and then started again from scratch. Here is my first attempt to use it to create a mockup of a composition of mine (also a first attempt at orchestral music).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hey, you’re the guy with the BBCSO disappointment thread! I didn’t realize until just now, where I‘m looking at older threads about BBCSO to find out about user experiences before potentially purchasing it.

Already I was happy to see the helpfulness from others in this thread (ain’t VI Control great), but knowing now that you’ve actually been deeply disappointed with BBCSO, it just feels great to see people are helping you to get to know and thus assumingly also like the library.

What’s your opinion on hands-on working with the library today, if I may ask? Is it still a frustrating experience even though you’ve gotten to learn it better with the help from here etc.?


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 22, 2021)

Henrik B. Jensen said:


> Hey, you’re the guy with the BBCSO disappointment thread! I didn’t realize until just now, where I‘m looking at older threads about BBCSO to find out about user experiences before potentially purchasing it.
> 
> Already I was happy to see the helpfulness from others in this thread (ain’t VI Control great), but knowing now that you’ve actually been deeply disappointed with BBCSO, it just feels great to see people are helping you to get to know and thus assumingly also like the library.
> 
> What’s your opinion on hands-on working with the library today, if I may ask? Is it still a frustrating experience even though you’ve gotten to learn it better with the help from here etc.?


Hi Henrik and first of all thanks .

And yes, thanks to the wonderful help I received here I have been able to understand and like BBCSO Core much more as you can guess.

I was the main culprit, I was simply too inexperienced (and still I am) but at least I am starting to learn.

Now, BBCSO: I mostly like it in terms of sound. There are some instruments I like less (oboe and violas come to mind) but overall I can say that I am definitely not regretting having bought it.
I know its limitations (one mic first of all, brass not good at fanfaresque/epic stuff etc.) and I am ok with that.

Still I think that the amount of time I spent to tweak timings, timbre and legato oddities is too much. Too much. I am sure part of it is inexperience but some facts are undeniable.

I am starting to test a few other libraries now (i.e. Cinebrass) but I am not yet able to make any comparison. I will post here when I'll have some feedback to share


----------



## José Herring (Sep 24, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> Hi Henrik and first of all thanks .
> 
> And yes, thanks to the wonderful help I received here I have been able to understand and like BBCSO Core much more as you can guess.
> 
> ...


Cinebrass makes a good pairing with BBCSO. Cinebrass has its quirks though and it took me months to figure out how to redo the patches so that I could use it. Some people take to it though like a duck takes to water so it's all in what you're use to. 

Never really noticed a problem with BBCSO violas. I'm using them for an inner line for a piece I'm doing that ended up being 99% BBCSO core. I'll switch it out with other violas and see if maybe I just got use to it. 

Yeah, the Oboe is bit problematic and takes a lot of effort. Shame because the tone is good. Because of that though you can make it work.

Any library you try will have it's horrible downfall at some point. I'm a big Hollywood Orchestra/Opus fan and have used the library so much that I can get anything out of it practically yet there are those who won't even touch it.

So as you look out through life at the vastness of choices these days, try and find the library that speaks to you the most. Its sound, its musicality and its playability are the chief factors. Every library has to sacrifice at least one of those things. The best sounding libraries can be fairly unplayable. The most playable libraries generally sound fairly bad and need a lot of engineering to get them to sound good. The most musical libraries generally work for a specific purpose and have a hard time doing others. 

This is why it's good to have a few choices. I generally tend to go middle of the road. Not too wet, not too performance oriented and not too large of a room but the samples recorded in really good studio, with good expressive players and the patches programmed well. I tend to like midway between the bone dry VSL silent stage and the overly wet Air studios sound. That usually gives me the most flexibility. BBCSO just being an exception in that while not being very playable per se ends up sounding so damn good when you put the time into it. 

Another library to look out for is Abby Road. That's my kind of room and looking forward to see what they do with that library. So far it's sounding good but limited of course.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 25, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Cinebrass makes a good pairing with BBCSO. Cinebrass has its quirks though and it took me months to figure out how to redo the patches so that I could use it. Some people take to it though like a duck takes to water so it's all in what you're use to.
> 
> Never really noticed a problem with BBCSO violas. I'm using them for an inner line for a piece I'm doing that ended up being 99% BBCSO core. I'll switch it out with other violas and see if maybe I just got use to it.
> 
> ...


thanks José.
Great thoughts as usual 🙏.

Regarding Cinebrass, I am already baffled 😲😒.
I have been trying to use Horn Legato and True Legato PRO but I am finding big inconsistencies.
For instance the transitions between C3 and D3 and between D3 and E3 are ugly.
I wrote to support and they suggested me to tweak the Speed and Intensity knobs, but while that helps to reduce the problem, it doesn't completely solve it. Furthermore that tweak is applied to the whole patch while the problem is specific to those transitions. Oh well.

About BBCSO violas: I like the sound when modulation (CC#1) is up to 50%-60%. Then going further up the sound becomes too harsh and gross, at least to my ears .
And then there are those terrible inconsistencies in the shorts timing. I spent hours trying fix them.

I understand we need to live with each library quirks, damnit .

A note about your AAROF suggestion: BBCSO Core has been my first orchestral library. I have been very tempted to go for AAROF instead but then I chose BBCSO.
Being a newbie I listened and read a lot and I understood that something like AAROF or even Albion would have been easier to start with as I did not have to bother with each instrument.
However most of the orchestration courses and videos where focusing on single orchestral instruments and my understanding was that what I would loose in immediacy and simplicity I would gain in flexibility and realism. 
To be honest I don't regret having chosen the hard path 
btw I doubt I would have been able to do my mockup using just AAROF.
So in this moment I am not too interested in libraries like AAROF or Albion (well, Tundra or Solstice are different beasts obviously) but more in completing/complementing BBCSO Core with other "standard" Brass, Winds and Strings libraries (Choir too!).
But it's very difficult to choose. Too many options and too much money needed .

Black Friday is coming though!


----------



## mybadmemory (Sep 25, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> thanks José.
> Great thoughts as usual 🙏.
> 
> Regarding Cinebrass, I am already baffled 😲😒.
> ...


Every library you ever buy will come with quirks, inconsistencies and annoyances in certain places. The hunt for a flawless one is never ending. BBC is as great as any other. I’d even argue it’s one of the best.

It’s easy to get mentally stuck in a mindset of only seeing issues when you initially try things out, that either won’t even be a problem in actual use, or can quite easily be worked around with a more solutions oriented mindset. As an example: If a certain interval sounds bad, just transpose the entire piece a semi tone up/down. 

When I started out I totally obsessed about any inconsistencies I found (there are multiple old threads by me on that) and started buying more libraries than I really needed. When I stopped worrying about it and started writing music instead, those inconstancies never proved to be much of a problem.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 25, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> Every library you ever buy will come with quirks, inconsistencies and annoyances in certain places. The hunt for a flawless one is never ending. BBC is as great as any other. I’d even argue it’s one of the best.
> 
> It’s easy to get mentally stuck in a mindset of only seeing issues when you initially try things out, that either won’t even be a problem in actual use, or can quite easily be worked around with a more solutions oriented mindset. As an example: If a certain interval sounds bad, just transpose the entire piece a semi tone up/down.
> 
> When I started out I totally obsessed about any inconsistencies I found (there are multiple old threads by me on that) and started buying more libraries than I really needed. When I stopped worrying about it and started writing music instead, those inconstancies never proved to be much of a problem.


thanks for these thoughts!

Yeah I should definitely try to focus more on making music and less on finding quirks.

And thanks for the transposing tip!


----------



## mybadmemory (Sep 25, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> thanks for these thoughts!
> 
> Yeah I should definitely try to focus more on making music and less on finding quirks.
> 
> And thanks for the transposing tip!



And regarding the inconsistent shorts. It helps greatly when you realize that they are actually quite consistent between round robins (at least most of the time). The main thing contributing to the feeling of inconsistency is the fact that higher velocities have a longer delay than short velocities (by design according to Spitfire).

If this is a good choice or not is debatable, but that’s how it is. When programming or quantizing it easily becomes frustrating, but when played/performed it’s quite easy to adjust to. And when you know it, it’s easier to adjust to get right even if you program / quantize it.


----------



## Kent (Sep 25, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> higher velocities have a longer delay than short velocities (by design according to Spitfire)


Interesting — where did you see this?


----------



## mybadmemory (Sep 25, 2021)

kmaster said:


> Interesting — where did you see this?


I first realized it by myself while investigating. I noticed that, what initially appeared as very random was in fact pretty consistent within round robins of the same velocity, and that the inconsistencies only appeared while varying between different velocities. 

Upon further investigation I realized that the lower velocities all use a shorter delay and the higher ones a longer one. I then stumbled upon a video where Christian Henson talked about the art of sample cutting and touched upon the subject of a harder attack needing more initial inertia and therefore also a longer pre-delay. 

I then asked in the comment section of a few different Spitfire/CH videos, if this (longer delay for higher velocities) was the case, and got confirmation that this is usually how they approach it. Regardless of what one thinks about it, it certainly makes it easier to work with once learned.


----------



## SupremeFist (Sep 25, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> I first realized it by myself while investigating. I noticed that, what initially appeared as very random was in fact pretty consistent within round robins of the same velocity, and that the inconsistencies only appeared while varying between different velocities.
> 
> Upon further investigation I realized that the lower velocities all use a shorter delay and the higher ones a longer one. I then stumbled upon a video where Christian Henson talked about the art of sample cutting and touched upon the subject of a harder attack needing more initial inertia and therefore also a longer pre-delay.
> 
> I then asked in the comment section of a few different Spitfire/CH videos, if this (longer delay for higher velocities) was the case, and got confirmation that this is usually how they approach it. Regardless of what one thinks about it, it certainly makes it easier to work with once learned.


That is really useful information, thank you! To be filed along with all the other really useful information that is not in the frakking manual.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 25, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> thanks José.
> Great thoughts as usual 🙏.
> 
> Regarding Cinebrass, I am already baffled 😲😒.
> ...


I generally try and stay away from legato samples in brass if I can avoid it. But of course sometimes you can't. 

Cinebrass in particular only has one or two good legato patches. The solo mf trumpet and the solo mf horn. 

As far as Cinebrass I got a lot from just copying John Powell's template. I figured that he and his team have probably scoured the entire library and have come up with the patches that are most usable. So I as best I could just use those patches. There are some errors in his template naming, but in general when I tried other patches than what he has in his template they sucked wind.

For Cinebrass I had to use Kontakt's bank features and loaded up the sustains and the three different short articulations individually into a Kontakt bank and used a keyswitch script. It's working out well but some use it as programmed and have a good time with it. 

AROOF is an incomplete library at the moment and it's not sure what direction they are going to take it in. Spitfire seem to allude to the fact that they are doing a modular style sampling project but then they say that they aren't doing solo instruments. Thus far what they have is limited but sounds really good. I'd be happy if they did a BBCSO style sampling project with AROOF without the solo instruments and more ensemble combinations. 

Here's John Powell's template if it will help.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 25, 2021)

mybadmemory said:


> I first realized it by myself while investigating. I noticed that, what initially appeared as very random was in fact pretty consistent within round robins of the same velocity, and that the inconsistencies only appeared while varying between different velocities.
> 
> Upon further investigation I realized that the lower velocities all use a shorter delay and the higher ones a longer one. I then stumbled upon a video where Christian Henson talked about the art of sample cutting and touched upon the subject of a harder attack needing more initial inertia and therefore also a longer pre-delay.
> 
> I then asked in the comment section of a few different Spitfire/CH videos, if this (longer delay for higher velocities) was the case, and got confirmation that this is usually how they approach it. Regardless of what one thinks about it, it certainly makes it easier to work with once learned.


That is some useful info. Thanks for that.


----------



## mgaewsj (Sep 25, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Here's John Powell's template if it will help.


wow, thanks!


----------



## TintoL (Nov 24, 2021)

mgaewsj said:


> so during the weekend I've tried to apply *some* of the many hints I got and here is the result.
> I think it sounds better than the original (but doing worse would have been very difficult )
> Still lots to learn and study for sure .
> But I hope it's at least a step in the right direction.
> ...


The improvement is huge...

nice....


----------



## TintoL (Nov 24, 2021)

José Herring said:


> Not too far off. I will explain as much as I can.
> 
> I use Cubase and perhaps the gain structure is different that what you are using. Is it Reaper? But that shouldn't matter too much. The important thing is that you balance out your ensemble. I balance from the lead line. The violins are correctly placed register wise. You did a good job with that. All other lines are relative importance. The cello line should be heard just below the violins to give it motion. Bass just below that to give it weight. All the rest just supporting the harmony to make it fuller sounding.
> 
> ...



Thanks for the master class. Really. 

Super valuable information.


----------

