# Things you should know but you don't!



## The_Controllers (Jan 7, 2010)

Although composing comes naturally to me as I'm sure it does to most of you, I'm quite an amateur at Orchestration, so I decided to create this thread for the simplest questions that we should know, but we don't.

My first question: What is the difference between MIDI orchestration and orchestration. Can one be applied to another?

Amour


----------



## mf (Jan 7, 2010)

The_Controllers @ Thu Jan 07 said:


> learning the _sound _ of the instrument can come from both reading orchestration books (which I am) and understanding what they are, to say selecting different articulations on a sample library and hearing how they sound?


learning the _sound _ of the instrument can come from both reading orchestration books (which I am) and understanding what they are, to say selecting different articulations on a sample library and hearing how they sound.

Listen, study, practice.

Milk and plums


----------



## gsilbers (Jan 7, 2010)

Doesn't media venture /Hans zimmer 
pan the orch differencry? 
I think they pan the bass in the middle and use European orch panning/inst placing.
The engineers mix
using predelays instead of panning.


----------



## The_Controllers (Jan 8, 2010)

gsilbers @ Thu Jan 07 said:


> Doesn't media venture /Hans zimmer
> pan the orch differencry?
> I think they pan the bass in the middle and use European orch panning/inst placing.
> The engineers mix
> using predelays instead of panning.



Do you mean the seating arrangements?


----------



## zareone (Jan 8, 2010)

gsilbers @ Thu Jan 07 said:


> The engineers mix
> using predelays instead of panning.



Like the Haas trick? Mono track duplicated, both channels panned to the extremes and one of them delayed 1-35 ms. 

Maybe it works too with a setero track, delaying one of the channels a bit.

I suppose if the recordings have much early reflections, this delay would alter them in an unnatural way, am I wrong?


----------



## bryla (Jan 8, 2010)

I know Meyerson uses this trick


----------



## JohnG (Jan 8, 2010)

The_Controllers @ 8th January 2010 said:


> gsilbers @ Thu Jan 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't media venture /Hans zimmer
> ...



I think he does mean the seating arrangements. 

I have heard them described as "festival seating" and other terms as well. There is nothing sacred about violins on the left (audience perspective). I find it easier to hear how extreme the panning gets when listening through headphones.

And on the subject of orchestration, I agree with Jose -- start by trying to learn the real thing. I would recommend a book that has CDs, however, so you can really hear what they're writing about. I prefer Sam Adler's book, but there are other very good ones.


----------



## The_Controllers (Jan 8, 2010)

Major thanks for all the helpful notes. I've written them down in my notebook and started one by one. 

I own the Walter Piston book on Orchestration, but I've just reserved the Adler book (3rd ed. I think), CD and workbook from my university's library.

Thanks again!


----------



## synthetic (Jan 8, 2010)

There's a great cheat sheet by D.J. Prescott that lists instrument ranges, characteristics, natural harmonics, shakes to avoid, etc. He posted it on the VSL forum. You may be able to Google it. It's a very cool resource, especially if you can print it to large format paper.


----------



## Nickie Fønshauge (Jan 9, 2010)

synthetic @ 8th January 2010 said:


> There's a great cheat sheet by D.J. Prescott that lists instrument ranges, characteristics, natural harmonics, shakes to avoid, etc. He posted it on the VSL forum. You may be able to Google it. It's a very cool resource, especially if you can print it to large format paper.


You mean http://www.elvenmusic.com/public/Instrument-Reference-Chart-v4.zip (this one)?


----------



## Frederick Russ (Jan 9, 2010)

The_Controllers @ Thu Jan 07 said:


> What is the difference between MIDI orchestration and orchestration.



The obvious: MIDI. The less obvious: intention. A midi orchestration may not necessarily carry all the expression markers that an orchestration intended for live players needs to have. The midi expression may still exist but within a midi editor instead - usually unseen on the notation editor (unless you want to add those in for printing purposes).

Like Nikolas mentions, there are some things samples have difficulty emulating. A successful midi orchestration - some intended just for midi - will many times be "written into and for the samples" rather than written freely as an extension of creative freedom to be realized later in a live orchestral session with world class players. Since these players don't do it for free and many composers lack the resources to record every idea they have, better to work it out in midi first (unless you're one of the gifted few that can sit for hours at a desk with nothing more than pen, notation paper and your imagination).

Midi Orchestration can be fine-tuned for Orchestration for live players. One of the things necessary is to transpose for the necessary parts for the instruments that require it and to generally check your score against how actual players will be reading them. Do allow rests so wind players can breathe. Standard notational expression and dynamic markings need to be added everywhere you're riding xfade or cc11 expression curves - at least as side notes to the conductor but better to have those in the charts the players will have in front of them. These can be fine-tuned as the orchestra goes through the parts so they are playing as the composer originally intended.

Your samples will never balk or complain about poor orchestration techniques or writing beyond the limits of the instrument itself. They'll never tire after a 16 hour day. Midi Orchestration is very similar to the smoke and mirrors of Hollywood, pretending to be real when they are not. If samples can however be manipulated to be an extension of the emotions of the composer successfully, the end result becomes greater than the sum of the parts. Only a small handful of digital symphonist orchestrators in the world have gotten to that level but when they do - pure magic.


----------



## mf (Jan 9, 2010)

Frederick Russ @ Sat Jan 09 said:


> Your samples will never balk or complain about poor orchestration techniques or writing beyond the limits of the instrument itself. They'll never tire after a 16 hour day. Midi Orchestration is very similar to the smoke and mirrors of Hollywood, pretending to be real when they are not.


So, this is what midi scores are, I one word: CGI. 

I always felt that sample libraries midi mockups have the same "plastic puppet" feel as CGIs - however "real" they may look when they stand still, the moment they move they give away they're fake. That's the main problem with both CGIs and midi mockups: they're both based on natural OBJECTS (real bodies, and real sounds respectively) rather than on natural MOVES (bodily and musical gestures). They both simply don't know how to move in a natural manner. Why? First, because their relation with gravity and light (and acoustic environment) is corrupted; and second, because animators (and mockupers) really suck at acting (and playing real instruments).

Maybe we should coin our own term: CGM, where M stands for mockup (while everyone will think is for Music :wink: ).


----------



## nikolas (Jan 9, 2010)

I am actually of the group that believes that knowing orchestration will also help you wield more realistic results with samples. Not perfect, but more realistic at least! 

You see I have this theory that 1 single person cannot be able to mockup 'perfectly' all instruments. I'm close to ready to bet that if we gathered a full team of different performers, all with the abilities of JBacal, but each dealing ONLY with their instruments, the resulting mockup would be trully magnificent!

Cause this is always part of the problem: An orchestra is an organisation of 50-80-130 people, all experts to their insturments, and the conductor. With samples you get 1 person, who CANNOT be expert to all instruments! If we had 12 people, all working on the same mockup, each one to their own area of expertise, then who knows... 

On the opposite to what mf mentions, I don't suck at playing piano, nor does Guy, and most probably piet as well! But I'm up for calling it CGM! :D


----------



## mf (Jan 9, 2010)

"I don't suck at playing piano"

I won't dispute that, but how about playing the horn? flute? cello? oboe, trombone, and the rest of them?

Is your point that instrument players should gather to make a mockup together? Wouldn't their time be better spent on playing their instruments and make a live recording?


----------



## nikolas (Jan 10, 2010)

My point is that perhaps it's not only the shortcomings of the samples, but also those of those who use it, compared to an orchestra...


----------



## José Herring (Jan 10, 2010)

I feel that you guys are starting to argue hypothetically. 

Take this simple movement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdfNT-3k

This variety of expression, articulation is impossible to get with midi and samples no matter how much you tweak under the hood. It's best to separate out the two mediums. If you're writing for real instruments then write for real instruments. If you're writing for midi then realize you're writing for midi and get the most from that medium. Save yourself a lot of heartache. Believe me. You couldn't record enough samples or tweak enough to get a piece or performance like the one above even done by a lesser orchestra.

Jose

edit. Also found the whole piece for further comparison. The variety of expression inherent in an orchestra is too great for midi to handle. Not to mention that the protocol wasn't intended to handle it either.

Jose


----------



## mf (Jan 10, 2010)

josejherring @ Sun Jan 10 said:


> The variety of expression inherent in an orchestra is too great for midi to handle. Not to mention that the protocol wasn't intended to handle it either.


Two unbeatable points. Yes, music is supposed to be aesthetically expressive (a continuum), while the midi protocol is supposed to be just functional in handling discrete data (a _discontinuum_).

But who wants expressive music, when inexpressive music is so cheap and you can get away with it?


----------



## Ed (Jan 10, 2010)

Samples only have as much expression and varying sounds as has they have been programmed to have.

A violin can make tons of different sounds, which is why the variety of effects you can get out of it are essentially endless. With samples you have sample those FX, it will be a long time coming before we have a synth replica of something like a violin that can also create the same fx as a normal violin.


----------



## mf (Jan 10, 2010)

It's not about the sounds but what's in between them, how they connect to each other to create one coherent movement. There's no isolated sounds, actually. It's all about making continuous acoustic/musical gestures. Players don't manipulate isolated sounds (samples); they make gestures, they action directly upon physical matter (strings, air) making it continuously move, and continuously changing the way it moves. That's how expression is achieved. When you don't feel an actual body moòz¦   ¾lz¦   ¾mz¦   ¾nz¦   ¾oz¦   ¾pz¦   ¾qz¦   ¾rz¦   ¾sz¦   ¾tz¦   ¾uz¦   ¾vz¦   ¾wz¦   ¾xz¦   ¾yz¦   ¾zz¦   ¾{z¦   ¾|z¦   ¾}z¦   ¾~z¦   ¾z¦   ¾€z¦   ¾z¦   ¾‚z¦   ¾ƒz¦   ¾„z¦   ¾…z¦   ¾†z¦   ¾‡z¦   ¾ˆz¦   ¾‰z¦   ¾Šz¦   ¾‹z¦   ¾Œz¦   ¾z¦   ¾Žz¦   ¾z¦   ¾z¦   ¾‘z¦   ¾’z¦   ¾“z¦   ¾”z¦   ¾•z¦   ¾–z¦   ¾—z¦   ¾˜z¦   ¾™z¦   ¾šz¦   ¾›z¦   ¾œz¦   ¾z¦   ¾žz¦   ¾Ÿz¦   ¾ z¦   ¾¡z¦   ¾¢z¦   ¾£z


----------

