# I don't get it.



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

This is not directed at any specific people here and is not new but something I have been wondering about a long time.

I read people here criticize new libraries, not just EW ones, and really wail on them for issues that on a scale of 1-10a re probably realistically a 3 or 4. Then I visit their website or soundcloud page and listen and I hear flaws in their work that on a scale of 1-10. most professional composers would probably evaluate as an 8 or 9. 

Why are they so unforgiving of perceived flaws in the work of the developers and so tolerant of their own flaws, which make their compositions not potentially really good even if the tools were perfect?

I just don't get it.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 7, 2014)

Well, if their clients pay for the music and are happy with it, you better ask the clients...


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 7, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Well, if their clients pay for the music and are happy with it, you better ask the clients...



:-D

But yes, I see you, Jay. I wanted to ask this question once before, but haven't dared. (for well known reasons o/~ )

o-[][]-o


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 7, 2014)

Jay,
For the first time ever we agree _-) 
Of course and not forgetting, you once said your ears were not what they used to be.
Mine neither.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

rayinstirling @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Jay,
> For the first time ever we agree _-)
> Of course and not forgetting, you once said your ears were not what they used to be.
> Mine neither.



I have some high frequency loss in my right ear but I still know poor composition and orchestration when I hear it


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> I have some high frequency loss in my right ear but I still know poor composition and orchestration when I hear it



Huh?


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> I have some high frequency loss in my right ear but I still know poor composition and orchestration when I hear it



But good composition and orchestration don't necessarily need great skills in vsti manipulation. I thought it was poor use of the tools you were highlighting?


----------



## uselessmind (Mar 7, 2014)

To me it is quite simple.

The music i create is at best not totally horrible.
I can't paint at all and i can't cook all that good.
Neither am i a good restaurant critic or art critic.
And i probably don't know bad composition or orchestration when i hear it.

When i do things i try to do them well and to be critical of the results.
But i am limited by my skills, experience etc.

Yet despite all this i still realize if a brush or canvas is damaged, an apple is rotten or if an audiosample is out of tune or has some unwanted noises or if a script doesn't work properly.

Just because someone is unable to assess the quality of one thing doesn't mean that they can't assess the quality ot another thing.
And it certainly doesn't mean they must be more tolerant of their own flaws.


----------



## Resoded (Mar 7, 2014)

Because they are customers, and some customers want perfect products?


----------



## Folmann (Mar 7, 2014)

Important subject. It sorta reminds me about people buying running shoes and expecting the purchase itself will make them great runners. 

One of the frequent issues I see is that people expect to sound awesome when they buy a sample product, but don't invest the time it takes to understand how to use it. 

I sometimes think that sample developers are like paint stores. We provide colors, textures and brushes, however its not really our job to train the painter and if the painter doesn't have the adequate knowledge in how to paint - its hard to fault the paint store for the miseries that lies ahead. But of course the paint store needs to mix the colors correctly and deliver products that work - thats important too.

I think its a great time to be a composer. Its not like there is only one choice of orchestral libraries or a couple of choices for pianos. The market has expanded so much - allowing composers/producers to pick and choose what fits their style, philosophy and compositional palette.

And there is the crux of it ... Technology is no longer a hinderance like it used to be, but knowledge and innovation are the mountains we must all climb.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> This is not directed at any specific people here and is not new but something I have been wondering about a long time.
> 
> I read people here criticize new libraries, not just EW ones, and really wail on them for issues that on a scale of 1-10a re probably realistically a 3 or 4. Then I visit their website or soundcloud page and listen and I hear flaws in their work that on a scale of 1-10. most professional composers would probably evaluate as an 8 or 9.
> 
> ...



So in other words, the unskilled among us (who pay the same for a sample library as do the most skilled among us) are not permitted to criticize the product? Is that what we're saying here?

So Jay, in applying the same principal, because you are not a professional Nascar driver, you should not complain if the brakes on your new car do not work.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 7, 2014)

I joined this site about 3 years ago.

There seems to be more amateurs now or people with mid level skills.
When I first started perusing this site, it seemed like mostly high level pros.

I think if the traffic has increased substantially over the past 3 years,
than what I'm sensing may be true.

k


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

Tone Deaf @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:
> 
> 
> > This is not directed at any specific people here and is not new but something I have been wondering about a long time.
> ...



1. I believe in holding others only to standards I am willing to hold myself to.

2. No, but it DOES mean that if I buy a NASCAR and I am not skilled with it, I should not complain about the handling and gear shifting.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

Resoded @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Because they are customers, and some customers want perfect products?



No such thing as a perfect sample library. Not one, Nada, Zippo.
No such thing as a perfect user either


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 7, 2014)

I've got to say. The only negative comments I ever make about sample libraries are based on me simply not liking the sound of them. As far as manipulation of them is concerned. That's entirely down to the user. The endless diarrhea about legato etc. has me bored to tears. Does it sound musical? That's all that matters to me.


----------



## G.E. (Mar 7, 2014)

I think it's completely irrelevant how skilled the composers are.If their music is bad,only their clients have a right to complain.Everyone pays the same amount of money and if the product is not working properly then the composer(the client) has a right to complain alsf course,some complaints are very unreasonable but others are valid.
I don't think anyone ever bought Hans Zimmer Percussion and complained that the library doesn't make him sound like Hans Zimmer.

I personally have never complained because I didn't have a reason so far.And even if I do find a problem,I can be reasonable and have confidence that the developers are working on an update to fix it as soon as they can.Having a background in programming myself,I can respect that.Then again,some developers haven't fixed some of their major problems even after 10 years.


----------



## gsilbers (Mar 7, 2014)

Resoded @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Because they are customers, and some customers want perfect products?



i kinda agree with this. if you pay for a pink ferrari but you want to use it only for sundays to go tot the mall next door... then so be it, but that ferrari better not taking huge loading times :mrgreen: 

and yes, our stuff sucks compare to what can be done with the same library in the hands of someone else. yet, paying for a product should the main point. not what can be done afterwards. for after, good we have social media and reviews. that way folks can stay away or make other buy it. anyone can advertise thier product is amazing but 
with independent reviews it helps. then also checking those guys music help to see if they are all bull or not. or maybe those guys are all into programming and checking out , comparing and doing in depth analizis/shootouts and not into making great music.


----------



## G.E. (Mar 7, 2014)

> but that ferrari better not taking huge loading times



That wasn't very subtle :lol:


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

I am not talking about things not working. Of course, every customer has the right to complain about that, skilled or unskilled. I am talking about criticisms of the workflow and the implementation. 

To use the race car analogy again, if you are a lousy driver, it is hubris to tell the company that makes the car that the suspension should be different, handling should be different, etc.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Mar 7, 2014)

Folmann @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Important subject. It sorta reminds me about people buying running shoes and expecting the purchase itself will make them great runners.



In many fields, not just music, people are expecting the technology to do for them what they are unwilling to develop within themselves. And when some discover they actually have to know something to get real results, they get angry, because they expected the software to do it for them.

A way to end this is when devs do demos, explain how you got to the end results. Not just telling us the patches used and releasing the midi files like Jay Bacal, but going to the next step and showing how you actually mixed it - from EQ to verb, naming and showing the tools you used.

Do this, and I foresee you'll quickly begin setting expectations where they need to be.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

I will disagree somewhat with my friend Peter. I don't think the developers are obligated to spoon feed the customers. There is SUPPOSED to be some hard work involved in learning how to use tools.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Mar 7, 2014)

> And i probably don't know bad composition or orchestration when i hear it.



Then you might want to listen to music that's well orchestrated. Here's a start.

ELMER BERNSTEIN
To Kill a Mockingbird

HUGO FRIEDHOFER
The Best Years of Our Lives

JERRY GOLDSMITH
The Salamander
QB VII
Secret of NIMH
The Blue Max
Air Force One

ALEX NORTH
Cheyenne Autumn
Spartacus

MIKLOS ROZSA
El Cid
Ivanhoe
Quo Vadis

JOHN WILLIAMS
Stanley and Iris
Memoirs of a Geisha
ET
Far And Away
Raiders of the Lost Ark (Herb Spencer)

CONCERT
Bizet
Debussy
Holst
Mahler
Rachmaninoff (Isle of The Dead)
Ravel
Stravinsky
Tchaikovsky
Vaughan Williams

Out of all these, you can focus on Bizet and Ravel and learn scads.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> I will disagree somewhat with my friend Peter. I don't think the developers are obligated to spoon feed the customers. There is SUPPOSED to be some hard work involved in learning how to use tools.



No, we're in agreement. I'm just pointing out the needful requirement of developers to show the design philosophy behind their tools and how to use them. Part of using them involves operations of the VI, and how they did the final mix for the promo demos.


----------



## G.E. (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> I will disagree somewhat with my friend Peter. I don't think the developers are obligated to spoon feed the customers. There is SUPPOSED to be some hard work involved in learning how to use tools.



I agree with this.Devs don't have any other responsibilities aside from delivering the product which they advertised.

Though making that extra effort would definitely gain the appreciation and loyalty of their customers. I've always admired companies that go the extra mile.

I've always thought it would be a good idea if devs made the midi files from their demos publicly available,showing people how they can achieve those results.And it would be a small effort on their part.(Unless they have copyright issues)


----------



## jleckie (Mar 7, 2014)

Personally- I think people just like to see themselves talk...


----------



## Carles (Mar 7, 2014)

Jay, I think there are two points to cover here. Something similar happen in the VFX industry/CG artists.

1. See for a moment the thing up down, so invert the origin of the bad critic and the consequence.

The facade is that a guy who can speaks like a master start bashing a library for certain reasons.
These reasons are not actually the origin of the critic but just the vehicle to spit out his frustration (minor technical details and so on). 

Behind the scenes, what happens is that X guy (usually a freaky of sample libraries in this case) has no actual skills to add any expression to his music, and barely mixing abilities but is well informed about all sample libraries universe (as a good freaky).

So, this guy (who is perfectly updated about the latest products in the market) gets a shinny last gen library based on the reviews and the demos (demos done by expert/skilled people).
Then loads the flashing new library in his template and using the same crappy midi data expects that the library will beehives like live musicians, so to have the ability to guess any given character and do a perfectly expressed and full of humanization performance.

But obviously that won't happen. As Folmann says people is not so aware that these are just brushes, canvases and colors?
Cannot be a more clear message by coming from a developer who cares about to embed part of this expression/humanization in the samples to make the work easier (being specially advantageous to those unable to add any expression) so, X guy, to take out the annoying guilt/regret feeling (since a good $500 have been trashed because of his faulty expectations) then it uses all the collected info against the product in a frustrating attempt to feel himself better.

Indeed, if you buy Hollywood Strings you're acquiring a set of canvas and brushes but it doesn't mean that you "automagically" got the T. Bergersen skills included as a part of the package :D

If all time used in bashing a product will be used on learning how to do a proper mockup it would be much better for both, developers and users.

However, I find highly convenient to talk about supposedly faulty functionality (as there are some many software-hardware-user combinations) to determine if indeed a product is faulty or not and if it is, the developer can from these threads to collect lots of different configurations/experiences in order to figure out how to fix the issue.


2. This a related curious phenomena too. Often in VFX/CG you can see how after a movie release, in a given community someone who has great reputation says
1. "in that -CG character-, the -moon of the nail- of the pinky finger is slightly too big".
2. Then, a guy who's unable to realize about such a thing but admires the reputed one says "oh yeah, what a big mistake" that -nail- could looks better.
3. Next reader, (to demonstrate that he also has the ability to realize about such a tiny details) says, "indeed, that's ruining the scene. That -finger- is totally incorrect".
4. Next one (also to demonstrate his "advanced skills") says, how can the supervisor of -X Studios- not see such a wrong -hand-.
5. Next, (in another topic) "...yeah, something similar to what happened to -X Studios- with the wrong -arm- of -X character-.
6. Next, (someone who would kill to reach any major studios but knows that never will do such a thing even living 10 lives) says, "I'd never work for X- Studios, see what a terrible work they did on -X character-.
7. Next, -X character sucks as much as X- Studios sucks, Y- Studios does much better job.
8. And so on...

At the end it happens that apparently a fully incompetent beginner knows better about VFX than a whole Senior VFX supervisors team working together :D

Just apply the 8 points above to sample libraries and you'll see how well it fits this top :D

The true is that there are so many libraries in the market and many of them are just excellent, no matter if very recent or 10 years old, you always will find outstanding material out there for one or another reason, as well as you won´t find any library 100% perfect, ever.

In all cases, is way more important who's using the libraries and/or the effort behind a mockup than the libraries themselves, but some people still didn't get it.

Cheers,
Carles


----------



## The Darris (Mar 7, 2014)

I try to only voice my complaints when it is something that is a functionality issue. Other than that, if it is a quality of the library I don't like, I may state my opinion as to why and leave it at that. Developers are creating content for us to use in an artistic way. I liked the paint analogy that was state before. If the painting looks like shit, it probably isn't due to the colors, but who ever mixed them and applied them to the canvas.


----------



## Hannes_F (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Why are they so unforgiving of perceived flaws in the work of the developers and so tolerant of their own flaws



Just to make you mad. Yes, you :lol:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Mar 7, 2014)

What if you know your music sucks but still hate a sample library?


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Mar 7, 2014)

Dunning-Kruger effect?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2 ... ger_effect


----------



## jleckie (Mar 7, 2014)

:lol: :lol:


Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> What if you know your music sucks but still hate a sample library?


----------



## midi_controller (Mar 7, 2014)

Roger Ebert wasn't a great film maker. The stuff he worked on had it's flaws, most certainly, and probably will not be included in any "Best-Of" lists. Yet, he was a critic, and a well respected one. Shall we disregard his critiques simply because his work was flawed?

Of course, I'm not sure what you are referencing here. Are we talking about constructive criticism, where people are actually pointing out the exact flaws that they find, and in certain cases even may give solutions to said problems, or are we talking about people who just say that something sucks? I'll admit, I've not seem much of the latter, but I don't tend to read every thread so I could have missed something.

Seeing as sampling is still very much in it's infancy, I'd say that constructive criticism is not only good, but absolutely critical at this point. Sample libraries, as they are right now, are _very_ flawed. Not one, not a few, but _all_ of them. We need to recognize where the problems are, and we need people to come up with solutions. Not just developers, because as we have seen over and over, developers are human and will miss things that others might stumble upon within seconds of using a library. They also tend to design for their own workflow, and can often miss aspects that would make their library more accessible to a larger customer base. They need help to know where to allocate resources, what to spend the most time with. All of this is crucial to the development and progression of the sampling industry, to make better products for all of us, and hopefully end up with better music for not only ourselves, but our clients and most importantly, our audiences to listen to. 

Sampling will never outlive it's flaws, because there is not a single one of us that uses mock-ups as a baseline of what we want our libraries to be able to do. It will always be a constant struggle between what we know is possible, what sampling is currently capable of, and what developers are capable of delivering.

Some may express their frustrations in a non-helpful way, no doubt. This forum is usually pretty good about having someone call out those that choose to be hateful with this kind of thing, so I wouldn't worry about that.

But the one thing that I will say is that just because someone isn't very good at writing music, that is absolutely no reason to ignore the problems that they may have found. One has nothing to do with the other.

If anything, I wish there was a bit more harsh criticism going around. There is a bit of fan-boy mentality building here concerning certain developers, and it makes me a little uncomfortable. Please, everyone, if you see a problem, do not hesitate to bring it up!


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

Troels pretty much said it all, and Marc's link got the rest of it so I will not make redundant comments.

Bottom line is if you are willing to accept glaring flaws in your skills ( or worse, intentionally keep yourself unaware of them) maybe, just maybe you should be cautious about being overly critical of libraries that are mostly good, if flawed, work.

This is why I focus on praising what I like rather than criticizing what I do not.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Mar 7, 2014)

My interpretation was that this topic was more about character (the word hubris was used), versus competence. (no one on vi-control has ever been rude to me when I have honestly asked for help)

It is easy to criticize this or that sample library... but there is a certain amount of respect that (I think) is owed to the hard work that people put in to making these libraries.

I am new to this industry, but I have come to accept that it is the Wild West. Getting a full orchestra on your computer (in whatever state) is still a helluva lot cheaper than hiring the local phil for an hour or two (only to realize your orchestration sucks?).

Treating these sample developers like they are Wal-Mart is not the right approach. The industry is just too new for that.

Once you realize it is the Wild West, you buy products with less expectation... You even look at the developers with less expectation... You already know that 50% of the shit you buy you will never use... Maybe because it only works 75% of the time (not bad for Wild West), or maybe because they are amazing samples, but the scripting doesn't suit your workflow... 

So what to do? Maybe buy less products? Or find money to hire the phil? Or maybe just don't bitch at the developers so much?

I dunno... I am frustrated by this industry too, but I don't find myself lashing out of the devs too much. It's just a new industry... new tools, evolving algorithms, new tech and new platforms. *And everyone expects it will work like an iOS app!*

It will all be so much more stable in about 30 years :-D


----------



## Ed (Mar 7, 2014)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> What if you know your music sucks but still hate a sample library?



I was going to say that too


----------



## mac4d (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> This is not directed at any specific people here and is not new but something I have been wondering about a long time.
> 
> I read people here criticize new libraries, not just EW ones, and really wail on them for issues that on a scale of 1-10a re probably realistically a 3 or 4. Then I visit their website or soundcloud page and listen and I hear flaws in their work that on a scale of 1-10. most professional composers would probably evaluate as an 8 or 9.


Can't comment on whether your scale system is right without some specific examples.

If you had to pay $400 plus to listen to a soundcloud piece that has flaws, you'd probably complain too. :mrgreen: 



EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> Why are they so unforgiving of perceived flaws in the work of the developers and so tolerant of their own flaws, which make their compositions not potentially really good even if the tools were perfect?
> 
> I just don't get it.


Just cause they post flawed stuff on soundcloud doesn't mean they're tolerant of their own flaws. They just don't need to berate themselves online, they can tell themselves off in their own head.


----------



## midi_controller (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> No such thing as a perfect sample library. Not one, Nada, Zippo.
> No such thing as a perfect user either



I don't think your music is good enough to make that statement. 

(Just to note, I've never heard Jay's music. It could be awesome, I'm just making a point!)

Where does one draw the line? When you do nothing but praise, how will the developers know where the problems are? Do you honestly think that it is alright to question someone's musical skills when they are simply making a critique?

But again, I'm not clear on the context. If we are talking about someone who says that a sample library sounds lifeless, and in their music it's totally clear that they don't know what the modwheel is, I'm with you man. If someone criticizes a library because it's set up in such a way that it doesn't fit their workflow, and they can't change it, I don't care how good or bad their music is, that is a perfectly valid critique.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 7, 2014)

Read Troels post. The point is they criticize the workflow because they don't want to put in the times it takes to use it the way it is designed to work. They want it to be "intuitive" which is a euphamism for easy or they criticize it for things that emulate the way the real instruments work because they are ignorant of the way they work,


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 7, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Read Troels post. The point is they criticize the workflow because they don't want to put in the times it takes to use it the way it is designed to work. They want it to be "intuitive" which is a euphamism for easy or they criticize it for things that emulate the way the real instruments work because they are ignorant of the way they work,



SCENARIO A. A new, inexperienced composer John Doe hears a demo of BRILLIANT ORCHESTRA (TM) by DEVELOPER (TM). He buys it in a 70% off sale at a bargain price too cheap to ignore, dreaming of instant brilliance, but discovers that it makes his computer randomly crash. He checked the minimum specs, and his system meets that - just - but its kinda old. He then goes online to find it crashes on many other peoples systems too, and finds DEVELOPER recommends he buys a better system at the top end of their suggested specs which he can't afford. He struggles through and produces mediocre results in the eyes of the world. And he complains about BO and DEVELOPER on the forums.

SCENARIO B. A different new, inexperienced composer John Ray hears a demo of BRILLIANT ORCHESTRA (TM) by DEVELOPER (TM). He too buys it in the 70% off sale dreaming of instant brilliance. He has a powerful computer of a different type to John Doe and it doesn't crash. It does however take a very long time to load, uses lots of system resources and he finds it very confusing to use, with thousands of subtly different patches. He struggles through and produces mediocre results in the eyes of the world.

He then hears about EASY AND BRILLIANT ORCHESTRA (TM) by ANOTHER DEVELOPER (TM). Priced about the same, seemingly regularly used by the professionals but he sees it uses a fraction of system resources and only has a fraction of the patches which use simple ways to correctly switch between lots of different modes, sometimes without the user just playing and not doing anything else at all. He hears that people say it "just works". He then figures, "well if EBO can do it, why can't BO?" And he complains on the forums.

Experienced and wise DEVELOPER employee John Me reads their complaints, listens to both John Doe and John Ray's faltering compositions on Soundcloud and shakes his head sadly. 

My question for the panel - are either John Doe or John Ray being unreasonable?


----------



## midi_controller (Mar 7, 2014)

Ah, I think I see what you are saying now. Still haven't seen much of that though, at least not here.

If the sampling industry moves the way I hope it will, expect to see a lot more of that though. We need to start getting more complex with our libraries, move away from crossfades, things of that nature. If that happens, there will probably be a lot more people who get upset about the change in direction because they don't understand that these things are better in the long run, even if they take longer to learn.


----------



## kmlandre (Mar 7, 2014)

Peter Alexander @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> > And i probably don't know bad composition or orchestration when i hear it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for the tip Peter! I'd never heard this piece before - it's great! :D 

Kurt M. Landre'
https://www.SoundCloud.com/kmlandre


----------



## bbunker (Mar 8, 2014)

I don't like where the idea in this thread would take us.

So, if I call up Brooks tomorrow to complain about my running shoe, will the first question be what my 5k time is? because I would be pretty disgruntled with them in that case.

If I call Fender tomorrow to complain about the bad wiring on my Telecaster, will they ask to hear a demo of my playing in various styles?

If I call the farmer's market to see if the eggs are locally sourced, or what grain the hens are eating, will they ask for a sample of my soufflé first?

It just rubs me completely the wrong way going down this road. If someone's inexperience actually makes them unable to assess whether something is good or not, that's a valid answer to a complaint, but even the worst orchestrators (this may be becoming autobiographical here) deserve to have their concerns heard, don't they?


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 8, 2014)

Here is an example of irrelevant nonsense:

John Doe in reply to a thread about a particular sample library,
" I wouldn't buy this library because people say it can't do this or that, blah blah"

Unless Mr Doe has personal experience in trying to do this or that with the library in question..........................he should keep it shut because his opinion is simply heresay.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 8, 2014)

rayinstirling @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Here is an example of irrelevant nonsense:
> 
> John Doe in reply to a thread about a particular sample library,
> " I wouldn't buy this library because people say it can't do this or that, blah blah"
> ...


Agreed, but the problem being alluded to is that Mr Doe says "it can't do this", the developer says "it can" and points to a demo that supposedly proves it, Mr Doe says, "how do you do that then?" and developer say "not telling, 'cos it's a trade secret". In my opinion that is just not acceptable.

It's all very well to use car and driving analogies, but not only can one can get driving lessons, but all car driving is based on the same principles, whereas sample libraries have many, different ways of doing things.

I think that any developer who puts up a demo to sell their product should also put up a tutorial to show how and why this demo sounds good. If it takes a trade secret for a product to sound good, then it's not a good product, IMO.

D


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 8, 2014)

Carles @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> If all time used in bashing a product will be used on learning how to do a proper mockup it would be much better for both, developers and users.



This!


----------



## aaronnt1 (Mar 8, 2014)

Jay, it must get very frustrating to keep hearing criticisms of libraries that you represent and from my relatively short time as a member on this forum I think you’ve always handled those exchanges very admirably and I don’t always envy your position on here. 

Not sure if your post is talking about compositional flaws or flaws in the use of VST libraries, but if the former, one has to be a bit careful especially when you may not be aware of the context for the pieces (perhaps it was written for a specific scene or producers directions etc...), I mean perceived flaws are highly subjective and either a product of strict, rigid musical education or more likely based on one’s own preferences. I already know, for instance, that to some extent you and I probably have very different tastes in orchestral music after a very quick demo you posted recently where you said you preferred it to 90% of what is posted on this forum. So that could potentially translate into perceived flaws of other works. Unless you are referring to things like parallel 5th’s and 8th’s and voice leadings, which I still wouldn’t always agree with, flaws can’t really be called flaws, more, preferences or good practice.

Also, if you are talking about compositional flaws, then it doesn’t necessarily follow that a bad composer shouldn’t still be able to identify when a library isn’t giving them exactly what they want. But if you meant more along the lines of, ‘if a composer is so lazy that they don’t take enough effort with their compositions, then why worry about the quality of the samples?’, I guess I could agree with that.

Also, maybe it might be useful for the more senior / experienced composers to offer more constructive criticisms on composer’s cafe submissions, it’s a great way to learn and get alternative feedback. I recently posted two orchestral examples there and got nada back from anyone, even after more or less gleefully opening them up for constructive criticism on any aspect. I know it takes time to listen and write comments but it doesn’t take much to offer some constructive criticism especially if you can easily identify what you think are flaws. 

p.s. I know you said your post wasn’t directed at anyone in particular but I can’t help but feel that I have in some way inspired it, especially as you posted it up so soon after our exchange in the sample libraries section. For what it’s worth, I wasn’t criticising H Brass trumpet shorts, I think they’re mostly very good, but I didn’t think recommending users to shorten the releases was particularly good advice from the results you posted. I’m generally a massive fan of EastWest products (PLAY 4 not so much!) and have more often than not stuck up for them on here. And if you’ll afford me one moment of priggish self defence (in case I was in part repsonsible for your post), in the very least, I don’t think I can be called a lazy composer http://tinypic.com/r/2u47o09/8


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 8, 2014)

Daryl @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> I think that any developer who puts up a demo to sell their product should also put up a tutorial to show how and why this demo sounds good. If it takes a trade secret for a product to sound good, then it's not a good product, IMO.
> 
> D



Do you mean like this?: http://www.cinematicstrings.com/index.php/blogs


----------



## Saxer (Mar 8, 2014)

lot of reasons... mainly because it's the internet.

- no eye contact. it's so easy to offend someone because you can't see the reaction.
- language bareer. happens to me all the time. trying to write 'frindly, ironic or spontaneous' often ends emberassing.
- no 'pre-selection' of members. in real life you talk to people and weigh up their intention and skills.
- critic at one single piont is often misinterpreted as a complete judgement of the whole product.
- there will always be some windbags who just want to generate output. like me 

this makes communication harder. but nevertheless it's mostly helpful. there will always be a kind of annoying noize level. we have to deal with it.

for me the development of virtual instruments is a very exiting thing and still innovative. i'm very happy there are so many developers taking the risk and work to expand the range of possibilities. this wouldn't happen that much without this forum. let it flow.


----------



## Goran (Mar 8, 2014)

A part of the problem is (at least in my experience) that people often don't understand that having a Stradivari violin doesn't mean you'll play it like Paganini just because you have it. Sample-based orchestra music production is an art, and requires learning, practice and work just as any other. Many people expect that the newest library will somehow magically solve their lack of skill and experience in shaping a convincing performance or making a half-way decent sounding mix. It won't. Creating convincing sample-based orchestra music productions (and especially so in the high-end segment) requires work, concentration, and a critical mass of experience _with any library_.


----------



## germancomponist (Mar 8, 2014)

Saxer @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> - language bareer. happens to me all the time. trying to write 'frindly, ironic or spontaneous' often ends emberassing.



Yes. I can tell stories about this.... . Especially when it comes to ironic posts!


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 8, 2014)

rayinstirling @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Here is an example of irrelevant nonsense:
> 
> John Doe in reply to a thread about a particular sample library,
> " I wouldn't buy this library because people say it can't do this or that, blah blah"
> ...



That's a different John Doe to my guy - coincidence about the name, eh? 

The argument (not from you Ray) that buying a Stradivari violin doesn't make you Paganini is specious really. Of course its correct, but that's not the dynamic at work here, certainly not for a lot of cases anyway.

And good points have been made with regard to the subjectivity of the notion that you need to be a great composer in order to criticise a product. In another thread, someone expressed the opinion that the Oscar-winning Gravity score was just bunch of preset pads and it "was not even sound design". Presumably that person wouldn't consider Oscar-Winning Steven Price has a right to criticise Zebra if he so wanted.


----------



## rayinstirling (Mar 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> That's a different John Doe to my guy - coincidence about the name, eh?



Yes, there are a lot of them about in every walk of life :lol: 

These discussions tend to get polarized whereas in the real world there are always many shades of grey especially when the heading is "I don't get it".
'should have been.........I don't get enough!


----------



## AC986 (Mar 8, 2014)

Don't have that many sample libraries and the one's I am fortunate to have, I can't think of too many issues with them.

So I'm outta here!


----------



## TheUnfinished (Mar 8, 2014)

Perhaps we should introduce a caste system?

Or perhaps some method by which, when someone posts here, everyone else can accurately measure the height of their horse?


----------



## AC986 (Mar 8, 2014)

TheUnfinished @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Or perhaps some method by which, when someone posts here, everyone else can accurately measure the height of their horse?



That's a job for Hans. :| 

Get it? Get it? Hans. Get it?

Never mind. Please yourselves.

I'm here for the next 6 weeks. Or at least the next 3 consecutive fortnights! 

I'm outta here again!


----------



## Daryl (Mar 8, 2014)

rayinstirling @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Daryl @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> 
> 
> > I think that any developer who puts up a demo to sell their product should also put up a tutorial to show how and why this demo sounds good. If it takes a trade secret for a product to sound good, then it's not a good product, IMO.
> ...


That's exactly the sort of thing that should be the default for developers. Thanks for the link.

D


----------



## handz (Mar 8, 2014)

Did not read whole discussion, but, for the original question:

You dont have to be artist to crotize art. You dont need to be musician to critize music. And you dont need to be Super composer to critize libs. 

Im not a pro but i know a lot about orchestral music - know how it sounds live and listened thousands hours of it. If i hear library demo that sounds bad to me, why should I not say it. Many recent libs to me not offered what promised, just upgraded what was there before.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

OK, some here, like Goran, clearly understand what I am on about while others do not so one last post to clarify and then I will try to just let anyone else discuss who wants to.

1.I am _not_ talking about products where the flaws are "it does not work as the company sa ys it is supposed to." That is fair game for anyone who purchases it to criticize.

2. I am _not_ talking about people saying they don't like the sound of different products.

Let's use Guy's approach and call my user James Clark. James is not a trained guy but man, he just _knows_ that he is brimming with talent and needs to get his "art" out there to the world. Because that is urgent and because he maybe works a day job, he simply does not have the time to go through manuals and spend hours and hours practicing with this library that had demos that sound just like what he ants to achieve.

So he opens up his new library and tries to replicate a passage of the piece he loves and it is not going well. He writes this on a forum or contacts the developer and is told first of all, he chose the wrong patch for that kind of passage and he should use another. James does so, but complains about how the patch behaves. The developer explains how the patch was designed to behave in its goal of replicating what the real players do. 

James then complains, "but I don't like working like that and I don't want to work that way .I want it to work like this other library, although I prefer the sound of yours."

The developer says, "Well if you read about the patches in the manual and practice with it, you will get better with it."

James replies, "I don't have time and anyway, I shouldn't have to. You should change the way it works."

James then goes on forums and knocks the library and the developer.

So what am I saying? I am saying James should shut the fuck up until he spends the time necessary to know what he is doing.

And yes, I am also saying that if you know you are not very good at using samples (and maybe also not very good at composing and orchestrating) that should humble you and make you more reticent to comment. 

And this thing about paid critics criticizing things they cannot do as well is sophistry. They are paid to give their opinion usually because they are trained and experienced in the fields they critique and therefore were deemed to have sufficient knowledge to critique.
Roger Ebert e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Ebert


Ok, take it way, folks.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> OK, some here, like Goran, clearly understand what I am on about while others do not so one last post to clarify and then I will try to just let anyone else discuss who wants to.
> 
> 1.I am _not_ talking about products where the flaws are "it does not work as the company sa ys it is supposed to." That is fair game for anyone who purchases it to criticize.
> 
> ...



Ok, then within this rather extreme scenario that you've described, I completely understand where you're coming from. However, when you frame your initial post in the manner that you did, it smacked of elitism, and read as if only those that belong to the exalted inner circle of skilled composers are deemed worthy of making criticisms.

For my part, as an amateur (at least in terms of "composing" with virtual instruments), if a library does not function properly or according to how it was advertised, my first recourse would be to contact the developer. If not resolved, only then would I _consider_ venturing into a public forum to air my grievances.

Again, even as an amateur, my money spends as well as yours (perhaps even more, since I cannot write my purchases off as an expense), and I have every right to expect a library to work as it has been advertised. To your point, I have no misconceptions that any library is going to instantly transform me into a master. I'm intelligent enough to know the difference between a library not functioning properly, and "you're doing it wrong."

And because this isn't the first thread that has (at least initially) hinted at some elitism, let me leave you with this thought, as I believe it applies to music quite aptly...

The greatest among us are capable of failure, the least among us are capable of greatness.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

First of all, I don't think "elitist" is the dirty word it has become. John Williams is an"elite" film composer. That makes him better than you or me and makes his opinion more valuable. I know this flies in the face of the prevailing ethos, but I believe it and stand by it. 

As for "The greatest among us are capable of failure, the least among us are capable of greatness." the first half is very true, the latter, while possible, is unlikely.


----------



## Goran (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Let's use Guy's approach and call my user James Clark. James is not a trained guy but man, he just _knows_ that he is brimming with talent and needs to get his "art" out there to the world. Because that is urgent and because he maybe works a day job, he simply does not have the time to go through manuals and spend hours and hours practicing with this library that had demos that sound just like what he ants to achieve.
> 
> So he opens up his new library and tries to replicate a passage of the piece he loves and it is not going well. He writes this on a forum or contacts the developer and is told first of all, he chose the wrong patch for that kind of passage and he should use another. James does so, but complains about how the patch behaves. The developer explains how the patch was designed to behave in its goal of replicating what the real players do.
> 
> ...



This is exactly to the point imo. If one expects a music production_ tool_ to make _music_ for himself, then he doesn't understand that _tools_ (or instruments), however sophisticated and developed they may be, _don't make music_ - _humans do_. On the piano, on the violin, _and on the computer_. If you want a sample-based music production to be a musical performance imbued with the life of human musical logic and expression, _you'll have to shape it into such a performance_. An that requires _skill_, which has to be developed and practised. If you put together the very best patches and characteristics of the very best libaries and software together, they can't and won't do this for you and instead of you. An insight which James in Jay's example consistently fails to understand.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> First of all, I don't think "elitist" is the dirty word it has become. John Williams is an"elite" film composer. That makes him better than you or me and makes his opinion more valuable. I know this flies in the face of the prevailing ethos, but I believe it and stand by it.
> 
> As for "The greatest among us are capable of failure, the least among us are capable of greatness." the first half is very true, the latter, while possible, is unlikely.



Being among a small elite group that represents the cream of the crop for a given venture is one form of elitism. Carrying around a sense of entitlement as if you were part of that elite group (whether or not you really are) is the elitism to which I am referring.

For example, there's no question that Mr. Zimmer represents the elite with regard to composers, and yet I've never found any of his posts here to include an elitist attitude - he is always quite cordial, humble, and helpful. It always seems to be the "lesser elites" who purport to tell the rest of us how we should behave and what our rights are as amateurs.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

I certainly do not consider myself an "elite" composer. 

I do however believe that it is simply a fact that I have more knowledge, skills and experience than many who may or may not have more talent. 

If that makes me an"elitist" in your view or if you disagree with my self-assessment, that is fine, I can live with it.


----------



## G.E. (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> OK, some here, like Goran, clearly understand what I am on about while others do not so one last post to clarify and then I will try to just let anyone else discuss who wants to.
> 
> 1.I am _not_ talking about products where the flaws are "it does not work as the company sa ys it is supposed to." That is fair game for anyone who purchases it to criticize.
> 
> ...



In that case,James should definitely shut the hell up. :lol:
But the thing is,I don't see that scenario happening very often.At least not publicly.99.9% of the time,complaints are about points 1 and 2.


----------



## KEnK (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> ...The developer says, "Well if you read about the patches in the manual and practice with it, you will get better with it."
> 
> James replies, "I don't have time and anyway, I shouldn't have to. You should change the way it works."
> 
> ...


Here's the thing though- It is exactly because "John Doe" buys so many libraries that
the devs can afford to create them.
It's the amateur composer that is making possible the incredible tools we now have.

In spite of the occasional undeserved ranting of an uninformed "James",
the pros using these tools are indebted to the amateur, simply for being a customer base. 

k


----------



## uselessmind (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> James then goes on forums and knocks the library and the developer.
> 
> So what am I saying? I am saying James should shut the f#@k up until he spends the time necessary to know what he is doing.



How exactly does James knock the developer ?
If he would write something like "library xaz stinks" i don't care if its posted on some forum.

If he would explain how the lib works and doesn't work, what he wants and why the devs don't change it accordingly i sure would want him to post it.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 8, 2014)

Sounds like James Clark has tried something, found it hard, seen a less hard rival, and has thus complained about his product. Doesn't sound too outrageous to me.


----------



## marclawsonmusic (Mar 8, 2014)

TheUnfinished @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Perhaps we should introduce a caste system?
> 
> Or perhaps some method by which, when someone posts here, everyone else can accurately measure the height of their horse?



Nah, Matt, it's just about credibility.

When you say something about synths and sound design, I pay attention. Because you know what you are talking about. Your work speaks for itself.

When random Joe on the forums starts going off about synths, I don't pay as much attention.

Opinions are like assholes and elbows - everybody's got one. Some opinions just matter more than others.  I am OK with that.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Sounds like James Clark has tried something, found it hard, seen a less hard rival, and has thus complained about his product. Doesn't sound too outrageous to me.



Perfect. The fact that people so frequently complain about things being hard that are SUPPOSED to be hard does in fact outrage me. Hence this thread.


----------



## Guy Rowland (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like James Clark has tried something, found it hard, seen a less hard rival, and has thus complained about his product. Doesn't sound too outrageous to me.
> ...



Yes, I can see that you don't, in fact, get it.

James Clark is a novice. He needs all the help he can get, he's gonna sound rough at first. Product A is supposed to be hard - but in the shiny promotional material in the sale, he never noticed that bit. Product B is designed to be easier in use. Both are used equally by professionals. James Clark, would, in all likelihood, be happier and make faster progress with Product B, something of which he's acutely aware.

But you deny him his voice.

Personally, I think you're taking the work ethic too far. Some things have to be hard, most things require effort of some kind to get the best out of them. But it's a non sequitur to then jump to the conclusion that the harder something is, the better it must be, and anyone who struggles or - heavens - complains - deserves all the trouble they get.


----------



## AC986 (Mar 8, 2014)

Peter Alexander @ Fri Mar 07 said:


> HUGO FRIEDHOFER
> The Best Years of Our Lives




Yessssssss! Love the orchestration he did on Arsenic and Old Lace too.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> ...



True. I regularly steer some clients to certain libraries other than the Hollywood Series because while limited, they are easy to use and sound terrific and therefore are a better fit for that client's level.

My point is not that James should not be able to say he finds product A's workflow too difficult. (There was thread about LASS re: this recently) My point is he should not be telling the developer publicly that they should do it differently because HE finds it too hard. He should have the humility to understand that the lack of success with it is due more to HIM, than the developer's efforts.

But we live in a narcissistic era when everything is supposed to be about what "I want."


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Guy Rowland @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like James Clark has tried something, found it hard, seen a less hard rival, and has thus complained about his product. Doesn't sound too outrageous to me.
> ...



This is in part the elitism that I hinted at earlier. What is this "supposed to be hard" bullshit? Music is a human construct. We've placed our own "rules" around the science of sound to determine what we've deemed as pleasing combinations of sounds...and this definition even differs by cultures to some degree. Music and the creation of music doesn't have to be hard. And any given piece of music doesn't have to be complicated to have value.

There doesn't need to be some right of passage, or some gauntlet of acceptance that someone must complete in order to reach the point that what they do musically is acceptable. Categorizing music as "supposed to be hard" is exactly the "membership only" mentality that seems so snobbish.

Yes, there's absolutely value in working at something, I'll give you that. And in most cases, working hard at something pays off with the reward of greater skill (but not always). I would say that this applies more to performing than it does to composing. When it comes to composing/song-writing, you don't necessarily have to be a skilled master performer to craft a piece of music that people find pleasing to the ear. I could point to a huge chunk of pop/rock music where you'd find this to be the case.

I'd say a majority of the music created by folks who frequent this site involves three separate skills: composing, performing/keyboard skills, recording/engineering. Everyone has varying degrees of each. But you don't have to be a master of all three to create something of value. Nor do you need to be a master of all three in order to evaluate the tools.

I consider myself an amateur here because (a) I don't earn a living by making/creating music and (b) I'm relatively new to creating/recording music via combinations of ones and zeros (computer-based). At the same time, I've spent 33 years learning my way around a guitar neck, and am very comfortable with hardware-based recording. I'm not a complete novice. But at times, threads like this make me feel like a damned leper. No one checks my skill level when I click "add to cart." Why check it when I have an observation?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

Bullshit? 
You said you have spent 33 years at learning your way around a guitar. How many years hours of and practice before you were good? What makes you think learning to compose and/or use sample libraries well should require any less?

Read Gladwell's book "Outliers". Getting _really_ good at _anything_ requires on average 10,000 hours. 

I am starting to think that in the future I will use the term "elitist" as a badge of honor.


----------



## NYC Composer (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> [email protected]#t?
> You said you have spent 33 years at learning your way around a guitar. How many years hours of and practice before you were good? What makes you think learning to compose and/or use sample libraries well should require any less?
> 
> Read Gladwell's book "Outliers". Getting _really_ good at _anything_ requires on average 10,000 hours.
> ...



The problem will come when elitists who consider themselves more elite than you disdain your company and band together to sneer at your presumption. :wink:


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

NYC Composer @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:
> 
> 
> > [email protected]#t?
> ...



What makes you think that has not already happened?


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> Bullshit?
> You said you have spent 33 years at learning your way around a guitar. How many years hours of and practice before you were good? What makes you think learning to compose and/or use sample libraries well should require any less?
> 
> Read Gladwell's book "Outliers". Getting _really_ good at _anything_ requires on average 10,000 hours.
> ...



How many years before I was good? At what? Playing the guitar? Using it as a song-writing tool? Good? By whose definition? It's all very subjective. I'll never be as good as I'd like to be. If I am, that's a sign to take up a new hobby/aspiration.

Jay - let me be clear. I think you and I are very much on the same page that folks should learn to identify the difference between (1) this library doesn't do what it was advertised, and (2) I'm doing it wrong. If the latter, then shut the hell up and learn to do it right. I believe we are in agreement there.

But there's this underlying, "until you've reached a certain skill level, shut the hell up altogether" that seems to be _implied_ in some of what you're saying.

Earlier in the thread, we talked about Hans Zimmer being at one end of the composing skill continuum, and my vi composing rookie status being on the other, with you somewhere in the middle. Exactly where do I need to fall between where I am now, and where you are before my (and others like me) opinion starts to have any validity in your opinion? 

And as you think about your answer, let's bear in mind, that the way that most folks here create music (specifically the tools that they use) are all relatively new when you place them in musical historical context. In other words, sample libraries have been around what, ten, fifteen, twenty years tops?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

It is not all subjective. Whether or not you like their styles, Claption, Lukather, Van Halen, etc. are good guitarists, John Lennon was not a good guitarist who became a good guitarist after hours of hard work.

I don't mean to imply that until you've reached a certain skill level, shut the hell up altogether". 

I DO mean to say that the less one knows, the more reticent one should be to offer an opinion.

You will never see me e.g. post an opinion on the quality of a graphics design because I know little about it. I may say I like or don't like it, but I would never criticize the actual design choices beyond that. 

I don't talk about what I haven't studied. To me, that is just common sense.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> It is not all subjective. Whether or not you like their styles, Claption, Lukather, Van Halen, etc. are good guitarists, John Lennon was not a good guitarist who became a good guitarist after hours of hard work.
> 
> I don't mean to imply that until you've reached a certain skill level, shut the hell up altogether".
> 
> ...



Lennon didn't need to be a good guitarist, his strength was song-writing, which is a separate skill. And plenty of marginal guitarists have made incredible music.

I do take your point. If you know nothing about ______, then how can you have a valid opinion? But when you start to learn, how much knowledge about ________ do you need before you can start to have an opinion?

This forum exists because what people here have in common is _how_ they create music and the tools that they use. The rules and required skills have changed, and I think you might be from a generation removed from me which is why you might have some difficulty in seeing it.

I can take a 70 year old classically trained violinist, who may also have a great deal of experience in conducting and may have even composed brilliant pieces of work...I can sit him down in front of my/your/Hans' setup, and if he's completely computer illiterate, he's not going to be able to do shit with it.

Conversely, I can take a twenty-something year old skater punk who has spent most of his life playing video games, and maybe bashing away at a cheap Squier guitar...I can sit him down in front of a computer, and with the strength of his computer skills alone, with not a huge amount of time, he _may_ begin to crank out some really impressive pieces of music without spending decades learning to do so. (I've probably described a few of our members.)

My point is that the classic "dues payment" mentality is starting to shift, and the tools that are now available (DAWs, samples, soft-synths, etc) are starting to level the playing field, and the mastery of those tools require skills that aren't purely musical[/u]. I think some of the sense of elitism that I often pick up on here is in fact a defense mechanism to that fact.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

We may differ on what would constitute "some really impressive pieces of music".

RE: "But when you start to learn, how much knowledge about ________ do you need before you can start to have an opinion?"

Not much, but a self-disciplined person would require of himself/herself a greater level to publicly proclaim it.

Remember the old adage, and I paraphrase: It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove that you are a fool.


----------



## Astronaut FX (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> We probably differ on what would constitute "some really impressive pieces of music".



This statement alone illustrates what I've been trying to say. 

Without having _any clue_ as to what I would consider "impressive pieces of music" you claim that we probably differ in how we assess music simply because I expressed an open minded view that this could be accomplished without what you would categorize as the standard admission fee in terms of "paying dues."

Honestly, when you hear a piece for the first time, before you form an opinion, do you check to see how experienced the composer was? I'll bet you do. God forbid we categorize something as brilliant if you don't have the scars to prove it. Your whole world view would unravel at the thought.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

"Probably" was the wrong word, I should have said that we _may_ differ.

And no, I, I don't check, but I can usually make a good guess after I hear it


----------



## midi_controller (Mar 8, 2014)

EastWest Lurker @ Sat Mar 08 said:


> So he opens up his new library and tries to replicate a passage of the piece he loves and it is not going well. He writes this on a forum or contacts the developer and is told first of all, he chose the wrong patch for that kind of passage and he should use another. James does so, but complains about how the patch behaves. The developer explains how the patch was designed to behave in its goal of replicating what the real players do.
> 
> James then complains, "but I don't like working like that and I don't want to work that way .I want it to work like this other library, although I prefer the sound of yours."



Ah, shit, you lost me again. Using the wrong patch? Sure, that is user error. Requesting that a patch behaves differently? Perfectly reasonable. Every developer designs their patches to replicate what real players do, so I don't follow your logic unless someone wants the velocities inverted or something.

Workflow problems tend to lay at the feet of developers almost all of the time. The issue stems from the fact that everyone is trying to cater to those that want things simple and easy with nice fancy GUIs, and by making their patches and user interfaces simpler for one workflow, they make them 10x harder for others. Locked features, locked patches and even locked samplers completely hinder users from setting up things the way that works the best for them. Instead of being able to do this on their own, they are stuck with what the developer decided was the best course of action, and it just doesn't work for everyone. I'm not making exceptions here, I've seen almost every developer do this in one way or another.

Another thing that worries me is very few talk about how this is a bad thing. You'll hear people talking about how a library is "easy to use" when they don't realize they could setup all their other libraries in the exact same way in only a few minutes if the developers supplied patches that work for it. Funny thing is, those patches tend to be much easier to make, all things considered.


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Mar 8, 2014)

To answer Jay's question:

This is sort of a socio-economical issue...

"The more products are available on the market, the less the consumer will pay respect for the product itself, risking to feel entitled to kingly ask for "better" or instead, throw it off the window faster than a shooting star... 

Take what's happening with the abundance of phones and the world of machines in general and you'll get the picture...

There is as much responsibility for a developer to strive to create a "good" product, just as there needs to be a "responsible" consumer at the other recieving end...

...Of course, there will always a balance between "Perfect" & "Imperfect" for any product, sample libraries (obviously)...

...Yet in this case, the reality seems to be that the more accurate the library is, and sometimes the more ambition it has of reaching the level the original instrument(s), the more nitpicking...

...But why exactly the nitpicking?...

Again, Fast criticism is a projection of someone's human ethics level & work ethic in society in general... 

This scenario repeatedly reminds of that one episode in "The Animatrix"'s Wachowski movie where it's humans spitting & raging against the machine...

...A really good & true humble composer usually NEVER pays too much attention on the "pretended" flaws of the library and usually ALWAYS finds a way around it, by even giving himself & the listener the feeling the library was somehow destined for the composition itself...

Don't you like it when this feeling happens?  ... I'm actually quite the opposite where i sometimes really feels like i'm a complete hack and the quality of the software did it all...

Alex


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Mar 8, 2014)

Very intelligent and thoughtful post, Alex.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 9, 2014)

Suddenly this topic became relevant to me....! I was listening to a few demos this morning for a product (not saying which) and came to the conclusion that it was pretty mediocre, at best. Some of the official demos were OK, but some of them were just dreadful. Then, by accident I came across a demo by a user (on the developer's site), and it sounded really good. So, is the product mediocre? Or are the developers just not very good at using it?

This is exactly the situation that worries users. Is it possible for an average user to get close to what I heard in the last demo, by reading manuals and trying to work out what was done? If not, the developer shouldn't use the demo to promote their product, unless they divulge how it was done.

So the question is, can I learn to use the product to get as good a result as I heard, or will my average standard plunkings sound like some of the other official demos?

Oh, and I wish walkthroughs were done without reverb added (like Spitfire tends to do). Sometimes it is just the 10 year reverb decay that puts me off. :wink: 

D


----------



## midi_controller (Mar 9, 2014)

Daryl @ Sun Mar 09 said:


> This is exactly the situation that worries users. Is it possible for an average user to get close to what I heard in the last demo, by reading manuals and trying to work out what was done? If not, the developer shouldn't use the demo to promote their product, unless they divulge how it was done.



I disagree with this, because typically what I think sets apart good demos and bad ones is the music itself, the mix, and the production; none of which have anything to do with the library. Technically, I'm confused why so many people want to see tutorials and such because using any modern day library isn't very hard. 90% of them are set up in the exact same way (cross-faded sustains on the modwheel, similar articulations, ect.), and the other 10% you can figure out if you know how the instruments they represent are typically played.

Seeing a tutorial on how one mock-up was done will not teach you how to program your libraries, but critical listening of real musicians will. Seeing a tutorial on how one mock-up was mixed will only teach you one way to mix for that single mock up, not how to mix your own work.


----------



## peksi (Mar 9, 2014)

if you pay for something you can and should give constructive critics to make things better, regardless of your skills. but to just bad mouth only a negative thing.

but constructive criticism is a very subjective thing. what others see it constructive is seen as badmouthing by others.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 10, 2014)

midi_controller @ Sun Mar 09 said:


> I disagree with this, because typically what I think sets apart good demos and bad ones is the music itself, the mix, and the production; none of which have anything to do with the library.


I think you misunderstand me. The music is important, but the mix is irrelevant. The production is irrelevant. Neither of those even come into play if you can't create a good performance. That is what I'm talking about. Without a good performance nothing works. Sure, mixing comes in at some point, but it is way further down the line.

D


----------

