# Hans' New Samples



## José Herring (May 3, 2009)

I got a chance to hear a trailer done by Hans and 2 of his composers. I wanted to open a discussion about his approach. Lately I've been editing my samples to more closely align them with this approach. So if anybody has any opinions or input that would be cool!

First, at no time in hearing this trailer did I say, "wow sounds just like the real thing", not to diminish the quality of the sample or the mockup or composition. On the contrary they sounded pretty damn awesome.

As far as I could tell all the of the samples used had the attacks truncated. In other works each sample was triggered after the attack phase of the instrument. What resulted is that the samples where really connected and always had a full sound. You didn't have to wait for the attack to complete to get to the heart of each note.

Also, they are clean. Really, really clean. I don't know what noise reduction they used but they are squeeky clean yet the timbre of the sample remained fairly well intact. 

And, the samples are nonvibrato. My guess is this will make it easier to blend with live players as the samples themselves are kind of neutral in sonic character.

What i heard completely changed my way of thinking about samples. The results give Mr. Zimmer the ability to really create expressive sounding final compositions like I've never heard before. Like I said at no time during this trailer was I thinking that this sounded like the real thing, but the final results were powerful and expressive and get really high marks sonically. Not to mention that he and his guys did a really good job on the trailer.

The sound is huge. I mean really huge. And, lots of dynamic layers. By ear I would guess that he had ppp,pp,p,mp,mf,f,ff,fff layers. 

Finally, I'm thinking that these samples are going to be his sound and that live players will be used to add more variety of expression, while the basic pallet of his sound will be these samples.

Thoughts?


----------



## Ashermusic (May 3, 2009)

Well, you probably know what I think, given my numerous posts about "don't worry if it sounds real, worry if it sounds good."

As for the specific technique you describe, I do not know, I have not tried it. I mostly just choose stuff I like. But Hans et al have been doing this a long time and have tremendous experience and financial resources as a result. It would not surprise me that they would get it right in this area.


----------



## IvanP (May 3, 2009)

U don't have a link or more info on the trailer, do you?


----------



## interoctave (May 3, 2009)

It's difficult to say exactly what Hans did, but given the resources he has (including a staff to sample the instruments, programmers to tweak them, etc.), it could be as you described and/or any number of other methods.

As far as "huge" sound is concerned, I know that he uses a technique that lead guitarists in a recording studio often use. He will take something such as a string section, feed it to an amp in a very live room, mic it, and bring it back to the board. Unconventional (for orchestral instruments), but very effective.

Having been asked to do "Zimmer-like" cues from time-to-time, it would be great to have samples as you've described. When you're doing tons of sixteenth notes, syncopated between cellos, violas, and violins, having a super-fast attack would come in very handy indeed.

I'd be interested to know what trailer you heard and how you were able to hear it. (Unless, of course, you could tell me but then you'd have to kill me afterward.)  

So, those are some of my initial thoughts (and I do hope the argument about "sounds real or not" will not creep into this particular thread. Jay Asher's comment about that is dead on.)

- R. Safir


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 3, 2009)

interoctave @ 3/5/2009 said:


> He will take something such as a string section, feed it to an amp in a very live room, mic it, and bring it back to the board. Unconventional (for orchestral instruments), but very effective.



Note to self: gotta try that with Speakerphone... :wink:


----------



## tripit (May 3, 2009)

interoctave @ Sun May 03 said:


> As far as "huge" sound is concerned, I know that he uses a technique that lead guitarists in a recording studio often use. He will take something such as a string section, feed it to an amp in a very live room, mic it, and bring it back to the board. Unconventional (for orchestral instruments), but very effective.
> 
> 
> 
> - R. Safir



Jerry Goldsmith did this with the strings in Basic Instinct score. He re-amped them through speakers in a room and recorded that.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2009)

PolarBear @ Mon May 04 said:


> Want us to shoot in the dark? Trailer! :D
> 
> One thing about attacks: this is a reason for the 0sus patches of VSL...



...and a reason for Peter Siedlaczek`s String-Essentials 2. 

I never have heared such attacks in a lib. o/~


----------



## gsilbers (May 3, 2009)

interesting thread. 

maybe i am a little confused but the ones that i heard sounded pretty good. i heard the ones that his colleagues have (not available commercially) . but i also heard from someone else that he has a 192k version in surround (7.1?) but its still being edited (all or some). are these the same or new NEW ones? 

supp there is a group or team in germany editing his strings. or maybe thats old news.


----------



## spectrum (May 3, 2009)

Adelmo @ Sun May 03 said:


> I know for a fact that Hans deal with the LSO is that he can't use his samples for any commercial use!!!


That's not exactly how the deal works. It's more like that he pays the LSO whenever they use the samples in a final production. Of course Hans and crew use the LSO samples in their productions. The LSO are also often hired to play too....and the samples are blended with the live musicians.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2009)

...so no editing on this LSO lib here in Germany :D


----------



## spectrum (May 3, 2009)

josejherring @ Sun May 03 said:


> Also, they are clean. Really, really clean. I don't know what noise reduction they used but they are squeeky clean yet the timbre of the sample remained fairly well intact.
> 
> And, the samples are nonvibrato. My guess is this will make it easier to blend with live players as the samples themselves are kind of neutral in sonic character.
> 
> Thoughts?


From my experience, Hans personal samples are usually the polar opposite of this approach. He likes them to have a lot òøM   ŸH×øM   ŸHØøM   ŸHÙøM   ŸHÚøM   ŸHÛøM   ŸHÜøM   ŸHÝøM   ŸHÞøM   ŸHßøM   ŸHàøM   ŸHáøM   ŸHâøM   ŸHãøM   ŸHäøM   ŸHåøM   ŸHæøM   ŸHçøM   ŸHèøM   ŸHéøM   ŸHêøM   ŸHëøM   ŸHìøM   ŸHíøM   ŸHîøM   ŸHïøM   ŸHðøM   ŸHñøM   ŸHòøM   ŸHóøM   ŸHôøM   ŸHõøM   ŸHöøM   ŸH÷øM   ŸHøøM   ŸHùøM   ŸHúøM   ŸHûøM   ŸHüøM   ŸHýøM   ŸHþøM   ŸHÿøM   ŸI øM


----------



## synergy543 (May 3, 2009)

Sounds like Hans should join vi-control and someone should tell Hans about SIPS. And even GPO has variable attacks.

If he shares his library shall we let him join? :roll:


----------



## Scott Cairns (May 3, 2009)

spectrum @ Mon May 04 said:


> The new stuff is likely just recorded insanely great, with the best rooms, mics and players money can buy.



I was thinking the same thing. If you're going to re-amp something into 'a room' it would need to be a great sounding room, a great sounding amp, and some high end gear to capture it all.

Cheers,

Scott.


----------



## José Herring (May 3, 2009)

synergy543 @ Sun May 03 said:


> Sounds like Hans should join vi-control and someone should tell Hans about SIPS.
> 
> If he shares his library shall we let him join? :roll:



Works well on some things but not on others. It also can put a pretty unnatural sounding glide on higher instruments. It also limits the playability of the patch. Truncating the attacks if done correctly really does make the patch sing. I've mentioned this before and people have sort of slapped my hand for it. But after doing it I won't go back to using samples with attacks.


----------



## synergy543 (May 3, 2009)

I agree with Eric, the attack is a pretty important part of any sound as its defined by what you hear in the first few milliseconds. I doubt Hans would cut all the attacks off unless just for legato passages. In Kontakt, you can also vary the start times you know? Often, I find I need to adjust the start times of most commercial sample libs as many tend to be very sloppy. That's why I hate libs you can't edit. With just a few seconds of editing, you can make an otherwise unplayable sample really sing.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 3, 2009)

Funny that Nick Ph. and Thomas J. are using an orchestra for their latest trailer libs and Hans is using samples


----------



## Blackster (May 4, 2009)

@Peter: yes, indeed  

But I guess the most important thing is to create your own handwriting what your sound is concerned. So both, 2 steps from hell and RC, are using live recordings and samples but definitively in a different balance. 

But however, both are sounding awesome!!


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

Folmann @ Sun May 03 said:


> Spectrum is 100% right about these matters. The LSO library was recorded with over 20 microphone positions, since 5.1 compositions are generally becoming standard now for new movies. The library has all the perfect imperfections you want in a custom library, so all the talk about noise reduction and so forth should be taken very lightly. The library does not contain true legato recordings, since they use live strings for these things.



Have you heard the library Troels? If so I'd be curious to find out what your thoughts were.

What I heard had no perceivable imperfections. Imo it even sounded better than the real thing. The horns were really pristine sounding to my ears. The strings very smooth and connected. And as far as I could tell in this trailer there were no real orchestral instruments.


----------



## germancomponist (May 4, 2009)

Is there a link to the trailer anywhere?


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

germancomponist @ Sun May 03 said:


> Is there a link to the trailer anywhere?



I didn't get info on what the trailer was for. Sounded pretty much like your standard epic action trailer so it could have been for anything. I've been checking around the net but haven't spotted it yet. If I do, I'll provide the link.

Jose


----------



## david robinson (May 4, 2009)

josejherring @ Sun May 03 said:


> synergy543 @ Sun May 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds like Hans should join vi-control and someone should tell Hans about SIPS.
> ...



hi jose,
when you say "without attacks" do you actually edit the samples (or copies) themselves,
or simply adjust the attack time in the patches ADSR?
thanks,
DR9.


----------



## germancomponist (May 4, 2009)

I think the copies from the originals.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

I tried the strings-in-an-amp-in-a-room idea using Speakerphone and the results were... meh (best said while frowning and turning over your hands so that the palms face up): it sounds like what we do all the time with EQ and reverb ER/tails settings + added warmth from a little tube distortion. Great for achieving an older sound, but other than that, I'll skip it.


----------



## Blackster (May 4, 2009)

@Ned: Is it possible to provide us with a demo of what you've done? Would be great to hear your results. 

I am playing with that idea, too. But my results are poor. Do you use the guitar amp as an insert-effect? I also tried to use it as a send-effect and so the results were better although it was absolutely not the sound I was looking for. Anyway, I'm going to post a demo of that later, if you like to hear that. :?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

Like I said, I wasn't too impressed with the results. I don't have time to do some examples, but it's really easy to do: just use any amp sim, like Guitar Rig, Amplitube, etc, and your fave reverb.


----------



## dcoscina (May 4, 2009)

I wish Zimmer would do more electronic scores. I miss the days of Rain Man, Thelma and Louise, even Driving Miss Daisy (yeah, that clarinet was sampled- he revealed this in KEYBOARD magazine).


----------



## Waywyn (May 4, 2009)

Wasn't that strings through amp just an idea for PotC?
As far as I remember there was that one track which had kind of a metal-ish approach on that specific soundtrack (wasn't it PotC3?) ... so it is just like doubling cello with deep distorted guitars or generally get distortion and tube warmth as Ned already mentioned ...

Btw: Happy Star Wars day!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 4, 2009)

How disappointing. I thought this was Hans Adamson's new samples. Who cares about Zimmer's. 

By the way, Dietz at VSL has at least one really good sounding demo on their site that was "re-amped" in a room. The trick is to have a room that sounds good; I've tried that technique with results that really made me appreciate how good digital reverbs are (this was before Altiverb).


----------



## schatzus (May 4, 2009)

An amazing thread without the topic example...
Can somebody post the example you are all referring too?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

Nick,

Doesn't the choice of amp also have a lot to do with the sound? And I don't quite get how having only one sound source (amp cabinet) is better than a bunch of instruments spread out in a room. But maybe it's not about better, just different (more colours, tighter sound... I don't know).


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

david robinson @ Mon May 04 said:


> josejherring @ Sun May 03 said:
> 
> 
> > synergy543 @ Sun May 03 said:
> ...



I'm not sure how they did it. For me I'm just adjusting the start times of the sample and then easing back the attack of the envelope. Seems to be working great. I'll post some examples this weak as I'm about done and need to test the new template.

Jose


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

The attack portion of a sound is typically the richest, most interesting part. Of course, we all enjoy modulation in the latter life of a sound (vibrato, expression, etc), but our enhancements (playing) can't compete with the incredibly beautiful complexity of the chaos at the onset of a sound. Aside from its great value in experimenting with sounds (big fan of that), and imitating legato, I can't imagine anything being worth getting rid of attacks.


----------



## Pzy-Clone (May 4, 2009)

well, thats sounds rather un-techy and oldschool for a supposedly entire team of German sound editors...people have been cutting the attacks fo a long time, thats certaintly not some obscure secret.

However,with the new scripting stuff available, i dont see why they would record the LSO and need to cut the sample attacks?

Are you sure thats what you heard?
I mean, if VSl can record legatos, im sure Hans Zimmer and his team of mad sample scientists can do it too...?


----------



## david robinson (May 4, 2009)

jose,
thank you for the reply.
most appreciated.
DR9.


----------



## Niah (May 4, 2009)

Well I don't think that zimmer's intention for creating this library was to sound real but rather have this hyper sound that he loves.

I believe the biggest thing of this lib is that it's in 5.1 and probably has a very pristine and high quality sound.

But other than that he doesn't need to record legatos or anything like that but this was meant to be layer with real orchestras like the LSO.


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

Ned,

The problem with keeping the attacks on is two fold. First, the attack makes it almost impossible to make a connected line. Second, I find the percussive attacks to be quite uneven from sample to sample.

Pzy-Clone,

After much experimentation legato scripting has it's limitations. Works in some cases and not in others. Also, the VSL "true" legato, has similar limitations though I have heard it work extremely well.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 4, 2009)

Ned, I didn't read this thread too closely. What I'm talking about is playing the orchestra through two studio speakers - not a guitar amp - and sticking stereo mics at the other end of the room or hall to get natural reverb.

Are those guys running orchestral samples through a guitar amp? That's an interesting way of getting band-limited distortion, but I wonder how different it sounds from using an amp plug-in.

I (and lots of other people) have used the latter on drums a lot, especially snare drums.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

It can really spice up an unripe avocado as well.


----------



## MacQ (May 4, 2009)

Regarding scripting ... if you go by that Sound on Sound article, his custom player is about brute-force playback of samples, and not about complex scripting or coaxing playability out of recordings. He can get massive voice counts from a 64-bit system, but it's not gonna be super-nuanced. That said, when have his scores been super-nuanced?

Each guy has his own approach. But it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?

~Stu


----------



## synthetic (May 4, 2009)

I know they did the guitar amp reamp trick in Pirates 2, I'm not sure if it's something they do "all the time."


----------



## interoctave (May 4, 2009)

Regarding the re-amping technique, using a software plug-in doesn't really achieve the kind of sound we're talking about in Zimmer's tracks. I'm just as much an all-digital guy as the next (and, with loose reference to another thread on this forum, I got rid of my recording console a long time ago) - but using a really good, really live room, with top-notch amplification and mics, is what is needed to achieve this type of effect...not to mention the dozens and dozens of other factors that are used to make the sound "big."

I can't think of the "perfect" analogy to express this, but the closest one that comes to mind is that of the surgeon doing surgery on himself. A software plug-in can do a lot, but it can only go so far in adding a larger-than-life, epic sound to a digital recording. The "real" re-amping also offers a lot more control, a lot more "imperfection" that is characteristic of the analog world, and - last but not least - an effective technique that you won't find in 99% of the other orchestral recordings for film. Beyond Zimmer and Goldsmith, I don't think there are a lot of other composers (and studios) that go to this extent to enhance specific instrumental sections or stems.

- R. Safir


----------



## booboo (May 4, 2009)

MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> ...it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?



This is by far the most intelligent and astute comment on this thread, and it's worth repeating. Again, even....



MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> ...it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?


----------



## midphase (May 4, 2009)

"How disappointing. I thought this was Hans Adamson's new samples. Who cares about Zimmer's."

HA! I thought the exact same thing before reading the thread! Great minds...


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

Me too. Hans, do an old, beautiful cello! o/~


----------



## Ashermusic (May 4, 2009)

booboo @ Mon May 04 said:


> MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > ...it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?
> ...



Zimmer is a lot more than just that.


----------



## lux (May 4, 2009)

midphase @ Mon May 04 said:


> "How disappointing. I thought this was Hans Adamson's new samples. Who cares about Zimmer's."
> 
> HA! I thought the exact same thing before reading the thread! Great minds...



+1, was convinced it was Artvista new stuff


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> Regarding scripting ... if you go by that Sound on Sound article, his custom player is about brute-force playback of samples, and not about complex scripting or coaxing playability out of recordings. He can get massive voice counts from a 64-bit system, but it's not gonna be super-nuanced. That said, when have his scores been super-nuanced?
> 
> Each guy has his own approach. But it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?
> 
> ~Stu



This is what I thought before I actually saw him in his work environment. He does have an army of guys but believe me he's taught every single one of them what to do. He's just so busy that he couldn't possibly do it all himself. It would just be impossible.

Love him or hate him who really cares, but you got to respect the guy for taking film scoring and complete changing it to his way of working.

Jose


----------



## Waywyn (May 4, 2009)

MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> But it's interesting that Zimmer seems to be this controversial figure, when he's nothing more than a schmooze king that hums a good melody (and has a well-oiled machine supporting him). Why are we never talking about other guy's mock-ups and samples?
> 
> ~Stu



...


----------



## _taylor (May 4, 2009)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_Sound


----------



## Jack Weaver (May 4, 2009)

> · · · — — — · · ·



SOS?


----------



## dcoscina (May 4, 2009)

audun jemtland @ Mon May 04 said:


> dcoscina @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I find a lot of Zimmer's music wanting- whether its basic harmony, straight forward meter/rhythm patterns, or heavy-handed orchestrations that were obviously the result of MIDI entry into Cubase, it's just a mass of sound with a lot of doubling of the tonic or dominant with little of interest going on. Sometimes simple is good mind you but you would think that during his time in the Hollywood system, the guy would evolve a bit more. I think his earlier scores were more innovative and daring actually.
> ...



You do have a point. To an extent. I guess Williams or North styled scoring would probably get chucked in today's brain-dead films. A few strive for more- like There Will be Blood.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 4, 2009)

Folmann @ 4/5/2009 said:


> · · · — — — · · ·



LOL?


----------



## Pzy-Clone (May 4, 2009)

audun jemtland @ Mon May 04 said:


> dcoscina @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I find a lot of Zimmer's music wanting- whether its basic harmony, straight forward meter/rhythm patterns, or heavy-handed orchestrations that were obviously the result of MIDI entry into Cubase, it's just a mass of sound with a lot of doubling of the tonic or dominant with little of interest going on. Sometimes simple is good mind you but you would think that during his time in the Hollywood system, the guy would evolve a bit more. I think his earlier scores were more innovative and daring actually.
> ...




fancy ,stiff and lifeless you say?
I dont think we are talking about those kinds of movies here...

But i know, its a travesty...there no life left in the industry.
Its becouse of that blue pill you know, these days ANYONE can do it, anyone.!!!


----------



## Niah (May 4, 2009)

Pzy-Clone @ Mon May 04 said:


> [Its becouse of that blue pill you know, these days ANYONE can do it, anyone.!!!



Viagra?


----------



## Waywyn (May 4, 2009)

I think some people forget that music especially in movies is done to support a film and to entertain the viewer ... not to impress other composers ...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 4, 2009)

"Zimmer is a lot more than just that."

Heck, any old idiot can score 150 major films (or whatever number he's done).


----------



## Lex (May 4, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 04 said:


> "Zimmer is a lot more than just that."
> 
> Heck, any old idiot can score 150 major films (or whatever number he's done).



..exactly...its just that we r all too busy writing these very smart, complex and original compositions with our lil samples so that we can share them on our forum or place them in a shitty B tv movie, or traveling documentary...lol

aLex


----------



## lux (May 4, 2009)

iwhy there wasnt Hans at the Buggles reunion on that Prince concert?...just wondering


----------



## autopilot (May 4, 2009)

Wait a minute - Hans was in the Buggles??????

OMG !!!

Fires up Wikipedia


----------



## autopilot (May 4, 2009)

OMG! (I am not being sarcastic incidentally)

Video Killed is my favourite song in the whole world ever. 

I had no idea.

I like him even more now.


----------



## MacQ (May 4, 2009)

Hey, I'm not knocking the guy at all. He can schmooze like no one else. He has a GIFT with personal relationships and saying the right thing to producers/directors. That, I think, more than his music, has let him achieve such massive success.

Let's be honest, a lot of us are pretty introverted. We slave and toil with our "art", and have a healthy sense of skepticism about guys like Zimmer. But honestly, most directors don't care about talent (not a knock on Zimmer, I'm speaking generally). They only want a guy that they can work with comfortably, and can laugh with over a bottle of wine once the whole thing is wrapped. They'd rather hire their "buddy" than the "weird" one (even if the weird guy's music is 100% better).

You can't be an arrogant prick. It's the "nice" guys (however affected their "niceness" is) that get the gigs. And good for them. Personally I'd love to meet Zimmer so I can learn some things about product sales. The guy is a master!

~Stu


----------



## Niah (May 4, 2009)

MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> Hey, I'm not knocking the guy at all. He can schmooze like no one else. He has a GIFT with personal relationships and saying the right thing to producers/directors. That, I think, more than his music, has let him achieve such massive success.
> 
> Let's be honest, a lot of us are pretty introverted. We slave and toil with our "art", and have a healthy sense of skepticism about guys like Zimmer. But honestly, most directors don't care about talent (not a knock on Zimmer, I'm speaking generally). They only want a guy that they can work with comfortably, and can laugh with over a bottle of wine once the whole thing is wrapped. They'd rather hire their "buddy" than the "weird" one (even if the weird guy's music is 100% better).
> 
> ...



Well I think that your post speaks volumes about your frustation for not having much social skills.

All I can say to you is that in life or in any job all require some level or social skills and being able to interact and communicate with others. You can be the best at what you do but if you don't know how to do this, which is half the battle btw, you won't go far.

It is not a gift, it may be more natural for some people because of their experiences but it's something you learn at school and through out our lives and we can work on them.

Maybe you thought as a composer you wouldn't have to deal much with people but more so than with any job this is a collaboration, so directors do want talent but also someone that is open and easy to work with. Developing a bound and creating an environement of trust with directors is crucial here and in cases where this doesn't occur the work suffers.

oh and we are all introverts here? speak for yourself man  


hmm ok maybe I was until 6th grade.... :oops:


----------



## tripit (May 4, 2009)

Waywyn @ Mon May 04 said:


> I think some people forget that music especially in movies is done to support a film and to entertain the viewer ... not to impress other composers ...



Exactly. We work for the film, not for the pleasure of other composers. 


Zimmer is more popular with budding score composers because his style of music seems so easily attainable. Every new guy with half a rig thinks he can knock off Batman. Hey if Zimmer can do it.....But you don't see em vying to knock off the score to Atonement or some other much more complex score. Hence, you never hear as much about other composers in these forums. 

Zimmer is also not popular with other composers for the very same reason - but, that doesn't matter, because his music serves the film well enough.


----------



## tripit (May 4, 2009)

Niah @ Mon May 04 said:


> Developing a bound and creating an environement of trust with directors is crucial here and in cases where this doesn't occur the work suffers.



Actually...in cases where this doesn't occur you loose the gig, period.


----------



## chimuelo (May 4, 2009)

Well I happen to think the guys a genius w/ synthesizers as well as his contributions to Film and Music.
When I heard Gigastudio with Scope DSP cards I was shocked. 
Thanks to him sharing his discoveries that got him a Grammy back then, I invested heavily.
I just recently stopped using that same set up and it lasted 24/7 for 9 years.
And once again I have made a similar purchase of the Solaris & XITE-1 and I am sure they will last a decade also.
There's much more to MR. Zimmer than the discussion that this thread covers.
I hope he continues to bless the community with his knowledge and wisdom.

I happen to be lucky enough to have this MultiTimbral beast that was made for him to replace his hardware Waldorf Wave Synthesizer.
It was made for quality instead of resource consdierations so it needs 45 ADP DSP chips to be used as a 4 part 4 voice synth.....!!
With the new XITE-1 this is an incredibly powerful never seen before synth, as it is now more powerful than the original Wave. It also adds external Oscillators of every variety from CEM's to SSM's and really sick custom stuff.

So nothing but praise from me to this genius.
Even his ancient Guitar CD's for Gigastudio/Akai were deeply appreciated, and of course Eric Pershings great libraries too.
I made major coin back then thanks to these guys,
They inspired many fine new developers and performers.
Where would be any of us be w/o them ??


I use 3 x LCD screens to program this beast !!


----------



## dcoscina (May 4, 2009)

MacQ @ Mon May 04 said:


> You can't be an arrogant prick. It's the "nice" guys (however affected their "niceness" is) that get the gigs. And good for them. Personally I'd love to meet Zimmer so I can learn some things about product sales. The guy is a master!
> 
> ~Stu



Hmm, interesting. I just came up with an equation. 

Arrogant Prick = Bernard Herrmann = Brilliant composer whose music will be enjoyed and studied for generations< Nice guy shmoozer = Hans Zimmer = middle-of-the-road composer 

Sum Total: the death of film music as an artform

Just an observation


----------



## synthetic (May 4, 2009)

> Hmm, interesting. I just came up with an equation.
> 
> Arrogant Prick = Bernard Herrmann = Brilliant composer whose music will be enjoyed and studied for generations< Nice guy shmoozer = Hans Zimmer = middle-of-the-road composer
> 
> Sum Total: the death of film music as an artform



Yep, I guess they don't make them like they used to. Film music is in the crapper thanks to him. 

Give me a break. Maybe you should go teach somewhere with that ivory tower attitude. 

It's difficult to argue that Zimmer has influenced the last 10 years of film music. Agree or not, that's an accomplishment for any composer. I admire, respect and enjoy his music.


----------



## RiffWraith (May 4, 2009)

First off, this thread is getting way off topic; I think Jose is prolly wondering to himself, "WTF happened???" So, thanks to Jose for starting this topic to begin with. Secondly,



dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> < Nice guy shmoozer = Hans Zimmer = middle-of-the-road composer



That is one of the most arrogant, pretentious, nose-up-in-the-air statements I have heard about a professional - coming from someone who is not a pro. Middle of the road? Really? Can you do better? I would tend think that that would be a negative. It's ok not to like his approach, him or his music - but that's not what you said. You said he is a "middle-of-the-road composer" - that sounds like it is coming from someone who is more than a tad jealous.

When you acheive not only the success that Zimmer has, but when people start copying your style, then you can say what you will. But from where you are right now, I wouldn't talk.


----------



## synthetic (May 4, 2009)

I've never heard an established guy talk down about Zimmer. And no one else has brought more technology to the world of scoring!

Tell us more about the new library. Ignore the haters.


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 4, 2009)

He wasn't born with all his knowledge, he earned it... and used it well


----------



## interoctave (May 4, 2009)

Hans Zimmer is one of the most brilliant musical minds of the 20th and 21st Centuries. He has made an astronomical contribution to both the science and creativity involved in film scoring. He has been - and is - a game changer.

For some on this forum, I realize your hackles may be up and your jaws may be dropping, and certainly, this is just my opinion. But before you continue to cast stones and make judgements, I wonder if you've really listened. Is Batman the same as Rain Man? Is the driving Dark Night the same as Driving Miss Daisy? Yes, he can crank out an incredible action score, but doesn't he also do comedy? Doesn't he also do sensitivity? Didn't he come up with the infectious rhythms of The Lion King? Isn't this one guy, Hans Zimmer, behind the scores for Moonlighting, Crimson Tide, Twister, Thelma and Louise, Mission Impossible, Shrek, The Ring, Pirates of the Carribean, and dozens of others, including the lesser known - but _great _Power of One? 

Are you a versatile enough composer to score Frost/Nixon as well as The DaVinci Code?

I am always amazed that the "Hans Zimmer sucks" mentality manages to creep into a thread. Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the naysayers don't seem to have convincing, supportive arguments as to why Hans Zimmer is somehow inadequate. Why, because he's not Bernard Herrmann? He's not Jerry Goldsmith? You don't like the fact that he doesn't have a "traditional" music background? Does this make his scores any less effective?

I was motivated to write this because it's rare for someone to take this side of the argument, yet it is very fashionable to be in the "Hans Zimmer sucks" club.

It might not hurt for you to revisit his scores and listen with an open mind. His success may have some contribution from his schmoozing abilities, but you know what? That's a talent too.

And, when you have some spare time, try writing in all the styles of his scores, with fantastic mock-ups, and then go out and market your work with the same success he has had.

Maybe you _can _do it. If you òø½   ŸiÂø½   ŸiÃø½   ŸiÄø½   ŸiÅø½   ŸiÆø½   ŸiÇø½   ŸiÈø½   ŸiÉø½   ŸiÊø½   ŸiËø½   ŸiÌø½   ŸiÍø½   ŸiÎø½   ŸiÏø½   ŸiÐø½   ŸiÑø½   ŸiÒø½   ŸiÓø½   ŸiÔø½   ŸiÕø½   ŸiÖø½   Ÿi×ø½   ŸiØø½   ŸiÙø½   ŸiÚø½   ŸiÛø½   ŸiÜø½   ŸiÝø½   ŸiÞø½   Ÿißø½   Ÿiàø½   Ÿiáø½   Ÿiâø½


----------



## choc0thrax (May 4, 2009)

interoctave @ Mon May 04 said:


> I was motivated to write this because it's rare for someone to take this side of the argument, yet it is very fashionable to be in the "Hans Zimmer sucks" club.



Not rare at all. We actually have a member here (Ashermusic) whose sole purpose on the forum is to defend well known mediocre composers.

David why did you have to mention big macs, I so want one of those new big mac wraps.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 4, 2009)

> who exactly is the heir to the "Bernard Herrmann throne" anyway?




I'd have to say Elliot Goldenthal, in some ways at least.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 4, 2009)

Choc, Jay's position is that there are a lot of professionals here and the place to dis fellow professionals isn't in public.

I happen to feel less strongly about it than he does, but it's not like he's out of his mind to feel that way.

It's only when you get into politics that he's out of his mind - except for when he agrees with me.


----------



## dcoscina (May 4, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 04 said:


> > who exactly is the heir to the "Bernard Herrmann throne" anyway?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes. I would agree. And he's amazing at blending electronics with acoustics. HEAT comes to mind with the processed guitar and Kronos Quartet. I cannot wait to hear Public Enemies which is another collaboration with Mann. Amazing. 

As for Hans, I do not hate the man. I do not hate his music. I just do not personally find much worth in it as a musician who's always looking to improve his craft. Sorry but that is my opinion and I should not be slagged for it.


----------



## midphase (May 4, 2009)

I can only hope that some day you guys will be getting into these tiffs over whether I'm a genius or the demise of good music!


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 4, 2009)

Listen to the Spanglish score as an example that Hans has more variety that an a lot of people think.


----------



## gsilbers (May 4, 2009)

midphase @ Mon May 04 said:


> I can only hope that some day you guys will be getting into these tiffs over whether I'm a genius or the demise of good music!


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2009)

Well the thread has taken a bit of an odd turn, not unexpected but certainly not intended.
Not every composer is going to appeal to everyone. But, at the same time we have to realize that a large portion of our job is music made to order. Right now Hans is kind of the man. That being the case it's worth taking a look at what the heck the guy is doing to be so successful.

From about July to December of last year I was privy to an awful lot of inside info thanks to the kindness of two Remote Control composers. I've heard a lot of the demos that landed some of the biggest gigs of the past year. I heard the work that Steve Jablonsky did along with Sound Designer Clay Duncan to land the Transfomers gig. And, I must say that production wise that demo didn't sound all that much worse than the final amazing score.

So how can we compete when these guys are doing demos that sound better than other's final products. The only way we can compete is to figure out what they're doing that's so good.

It's not just about the notes. Notes are of course fine and fun but we trained people spend way too much time worrying about the notes. It's really about the final product.

We have so many amazing tools. To not use them to there full advantage is just a waste. 

Mr. Zimmer and his team are masters of this stuff. Absolute masters. And he has trained guys like Steve J. and Clay Duncan and James Dooley and these guys are every bit as good as he is in the use of these tools.

So you're faced with a choice. Poopoo it and turn the other way or face it and learn something.

The more you learn it the more it becomes really cool. I admit I was fighting the heck out of my samples. Today I just did a trailer piece and it was actually kind of fun to have the samples respond the way that I hear it. My samples aren't perfect. I don't even know if I've edited them right in any way and sometimes I get a bit lazy in the sequencing, but I must admit that hearing Hans samples and seeing another composer he's trained working with sound design and samples has opened up a whole new world and is making music fun again.

Learning the techniques isn't going to automatically make you Hans Zimmer. In truth why would you want to be. But, there's a skill level involved these days. it's no longer just about knowing your orchestration and counter point. You have to be able to make something sound profession right out of your own computer these days. There's no way around it. What leaves your studio has to sound as if it belongs in a final score.

So we need to get over the amaturish he's good or he's bad mentality and learn what he's doing and incorporate it into what we're doing.


----------



## interoctave (May 4, 2009)

I completely agree, Jose. And you touched upon another point that I was going to mention earlier (but forgot), and that is that Zimmer has opened the door for dozens of other composers - the ones at Remote Control and those that have "graduated" and gone out on their own. That's pretty admirable for someone of his talent and track record.

If we can get this particular thread back on track, I am always enthusiastic about learning new techniques and understanding what others (such as Zimmer) are doing to get "that sound."

- R. Safir

PS And Spectrum, thank you for your response to my post...


----------



## NYC Composer (May 4, 2009)

Zimmer did the music for one of my favorite movies, 'True Romance'.
All through the film I was kinda wondering about the pleasant but somewhat dippy tropical marimba/xylophone theme that ran through it...until I got to the end of the movie, at which point I thought 'genius-so simple'.

Sometimes little musical hooks can make a movie. Case in point- the two note theme from 'Jaws'.

I think we can admire Herrmann without slogging Zimmer. What about Vangelis? What wonderful music for Chariots of Fire and Bladerunner. He ain't Herrmann, but why should he be? How about Jonny Greenwood's score for 'There Will Be Blood'? I dunno if I love it or hate it, but it sure is arresting.

Hey, I have a film scorer you can hate- Martin Scorcese. He may have hired Herrmann for 'Taxi Driver', but mostly he scores films purely with licensed pop songs. Now THERE'S somebody to despise- he's taking bread out of film composer's mouths!


----------



## lux (May 4, 2009)

autopilot @ Mon May 04 said:


> Wait a minute - Hans was in the Buggles??????
> 
> OMG !!!
> 
> Fires up Wikipedia



yup.

Personally i dig Hans' synth based music, there was a time big blockbusters were accomplished with analog or semi analog or early digital synthetizers. And a few of the were great working in my book, like Scott's Black Rain.

I honestly think that the real reason there's always one" Hans Vs the World" thread every while on boardshas probably to do with how some of his works created a (often blind and deprived of every fantasy) standard into the industry. 

But we cant ascribe to Hans living in a cloning world. He is the one who's cloned. And its not his fault.


----------



## gsilbers (May 5, 2009)

josejherring @ Mon May 04 said:


> Well the thread has taken a bit of an odd turn, not unexpected but certainly not intended.
> Not every composer is going to appeal to everyone. But, at the same time we have to realize that a large portion of our job is music made to order. Right now Hans is kind of the man. That being the case it's worth taking a look at what the heck the guy is doing to be so successful.
> 
> From about July to December of last year I was privy to an awful lot of inside info thanks to the kindness of two Remote Control composers. I've heard a lot of the demos that landed some of the biggest gigs of the past year. I heard the work that Steve Jablonsky did along with Sound Designer Clay Duncan to land the Transfomers gig. And, I must say that production wise that demo didn't sound all that much worse than the final amazing score.
> ...




i agree


i heard those samples. well the ones his collegues use, 44.1 k verison . man , just one stacc chord sounded amazing and filled so much. also the rrooms and speakers help out. 

and also , to be fair. those guys mix and match samples as we do but have the added HZ ones. 

i wanna put this out there, maybe will just pass over but if you guys wanna listen to those samples id check out the score for scorpion king 2 from klau badelt, it was such a low budget crappy movie i believe it was mostly samples and small orch. the music itslef is still very good and have some real players but overdubs. also, there is not credits for music/engineer mixer/recordist/music editor etc in imdb. but that is just 
is just my ASSumption. 

jose if you know?


----------



## midphase (May 5, 2009)

I just want to make a point that a nobody with a killer sounding demo will never get the job over a somebody with a good demo (and a small army of agents).

I don't care how great your demo sounds....but even if it's the best fucking sounding music ever, it won't get you a $200mil film...no way no how.

I just think it's important to put in perspective how Jablownsky got the Transformers gig...I'm sure his demo sounded killer (as well it should), but let's be realistic here, that was probably the lesser factor for the producers of the film to consider. 

(not saying anything bad about Steve or RC...just sayin')


----------



## Waywyn (May 5, 2009)

I think Chimuelo, Interoctave and Niah brough up some good points here.

Most of the time guys who don't like certain composers or specificly Zimmer always and most of the time ONLY have the actual composition in mind.

I mean the composition itself of course is the core. Without it you won't hear anything obviously. BUT the actual composition also lives a lot through its sound and ideas related to sound ...

Lots of guys think, they use fairly good sounding synth and samples, so they can do the same.

Another funny thing: Most of us own all those percussions libs from EW SD2 to Tonehammer and back, but on all the forums around (sorry) I very very rarely hear good arranged percussion grooves and "soundwalls" as you can hear in Zimmer scores.

"Hmm, ... Zimmer scores ... a few rips here, some minor and major chords here ... an easy to whistle melody there" ... and just a few percussions here and there?

People have you tried to analyse all those percussion parts??
What's going on there? I think it would be really wrong to weight the actual orchestra more than percussions and synths used in a track.

I mean listen to "Minority Report". John Williams does an awesome job but who did those synth sounds in there??? I can not imagine that those picked sounds were absolutely ment to be.


The next point would be what Niah mentioned and this brings me to a phrase that one of my guitar teacher told me:
When it comes to be chosen for a job it is a basic requirement that you are good in what you do. But in the end what really counts is your character and how you come along with those people you work for!


Regarding Zimmers team, but wouldn't you guys enjoy it too working with others?
I am most of the time a control guy, I want to tweak and do everything myself, but one guy simply can't do it all as good as several people who focused on a certain category. I am convinced that lots of guys music here would sound 500% better if leaving certain things (I may reduce it to only two for this post: mixing and mastering) to other people.
I think everyone here would enjoy the situation to give away a few percusson ideas and get back a worked out audio file .... or hand out the MIDI to an orchestrator without even caring to write a c score or even the full one?

Besides all that, we always see Remote Control (lots of people) vs. other composers, but does it just LOOK LIKE THIS or do we really KNOW that most of them work alone??


----------



## midphase (May 5, 2009)

"check out the score for scorpion king 2 from klau badelt, it was such a low budget crappy movie i believe it was mostly samples and small orch."

I would think they recycled a lot of stuff from the original film? I'd guess it was still a $10mil movie, so they probably had some budget for some bells and whistles. I am probably totally wrong on this, but I would speculate that they recycled a lot of Klaus' music where they could (themes and such) and then got one of the assistants to fill in the gaps. I'm probably wrong.


----------



## Pedro Camacho (May 5, 2009)

Waywyn @ Mon May 04 said:


> I think some people forget that music especially in movies is done to support a film and to entertain the viewer ... not to impress other composers ...



Wise words


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

Jose I respect your post but I guess my real concern is not Zimmer's sound or musicality but the alarming proliferation of this specific sound all over the Hollywood map. Let's go back to the '90s when we had guys like JN Howard just starting out and having his own sound. And Tom Newman who had his own sound. And Elliot Goldenthal. And Gabriel Yared. And Danny Elfman. And Chris Young. And Hans Zimmer. All these guys were getting jobs in Hollywood and provided their own stylistic stamp. Now we have the same approach and sound that is rampant throughout the Hollywood blockbusters. For the smaller projects, I do concede that Zimmer does have a different sound like on films such as As Good As It Gets, although that STILL is over 10 years old (1997).

Why can't we marry high concept or ideals towards scoring with the pragmatism that the field demands? obviously some composers are able to like Alexandre Desplat or Dario Marionelli. Even Jonny Greenwood. It may take some bravery on the part of the director but I do also think it takes some tenacity on the part of the composer to introduce some good musical elements to these directors because they ARE NOT schooled in them. I wrote a passacaglia years ago and a director really dug it. In fact, he pushed me to develop it more so that creative relationship was a good one because he brought some ideas to the table just the way I did.

I dunno. This is a loaded topic. I certainly had an interesting chat with concert hall composer John Adams about it years ago. He does not care for film music partly because of the time contraints, partly because of some of the people the field attracts, and partly because a lot of the music just ain't that great. So, you might be able to invalidate my position on this because I'm a nobody compared to Heir Zimmer and co. but Adams is an established composer whom I suspect will long be remembered after the likes of Steve Jablonsky and the other underlings at Remote Control.


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

Pedro Camacho @ Tue May 05 said:


> Waywyn @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I think some people forget that music especially in movies is done to support a film and to entertain the viewer ... not to impress other composers ...
> ...



I disagree. It's called catering to the lowest common denominator. And it's a creative cop-out. 

Say I'm world class chef and I am cooking for some people raised on McDonalds. Should I just fry up a couple burgers because that is all they expect or should I push myself to introduce something far more delicious to their palettes? I think it's an insult to the viewers to expect them to like the most basic music just because it's popular. Introducing some more involved music will get a certain percentage of kids interesting in music rather than simply satiating their basic entertainment needs.


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

I see. So we should just do what we need to rather than push the envelope.

If I had done that, I would not be on the scoring project I'm not now because I'm working for a composer/conductor who actually gives a shit about film music.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 5, 2009)

I have said this before and I will one more time. To come on a public forum like this and trash a composer who has accomplished all that Zimmer has, whether you like his scores or not, is bad behavior. And if you are a person of little or no achievement yourself, it is doubly bad behavior.

Spend less time worrying about how good or not successful composers are and worry more about how good YOU are/are not.

I do not think it is a coincidence that the most successful composers who visit this forum do not engage in this behavior.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 5, 2009)

I believe it's not at all as black and white as is suggested. There are times when you can push the envelope only a little because the director is not adventurous. I think that some people forget that many directors (and even producers) have a LOT to say about the music, in fact, I can attest that some even get involved to the point of the individual notes. And if you can afford to say, "No way, man! I'm off this project because you're too involved", then you are either independently wealthy or don't have to pay your bills with your composition work alone. I think that some of us think that composers work in an artistic vacuum, and are responsible for every decision that goes into a score - sorry, not so.


----------



## Walra48 (May 5, 2009)

> And you don't really know, IMO, what it means to swallow your ego and just get the job-done-on-time-even-though-you-never-got-to-explore-new-ground-'cause-there's- barely-enough-time-to-enter-the-notes-and-get-the-stuff-to-the-mix-on-time until you've done it. It's a bit like 'seeing the light'



Well said Ned. This IS what it's about - (relative) grace under pressure.
Rarely do we get the chance for reflection - 10 to 15 years ago a composer would get
4 to 5 spotting sessions with a director for a 1 hour film - now you're lucky if you get one spotting session for a 13x60 series. To quote Hans himself - "The devil... is in the deadline".


----------



## Pzy-Clone (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> I see. So we should just do what we need to rather than push the envelope.
> 
> If I had done that, I would not be on the scoring project I'm not now because I'm working for a composer/conductor who actually gives a [email protected]#t about film music.



There is no "we" here.
You do what you want, as we all do.

Do you find the time to be pushing the envelope at the same time as being a world class chef? 

Thats all pretty impressive, but exuse me, now i have to go saute` my artichoke.


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

sorry, my chef thing was a metaphor. I spend most of my time composing.


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue May 05 said:


> I believe it's not at all as black and white as is suggested. There are times when you can push the envelope only a little because the director is not adventurous. I think that some people forget that many directors (and even producers) have a LOT to say about the music, in fact, I can attest that some even get involved to the point of the individual notes. And if you can afford to say, "No way, man! I'm off this project because you're too involved", then you are either independently wealthy or don't have to pay your bills with your composition work alone. I think that some of us think that composers work in an artistic vacuum, and are responsible for every decision that goes into a score - sorry, not so.



Ned, as always, good post. Yes, this whole topic is not cut and dried. I guess the only thing I will say is that guys writing 10 to 20 years ago still had tight deadlines but because they had more formal grounding in music allowed them to draw from a larger pool of music techniques and ideas. 

That's it from me on this topic. . At least for the time being. I have to work on a cue now.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 5, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue May 05 said:


> I believe it's not at all as black and white as is suggested. There are times when you can push the envelope only a little because the director is not adventurous. I think that some people forget that many directors (and even producers) have a LOT to say about the music, in fact, I can attest that some even get involved to the point of the individual notes. And if you can afford to say, "No way, man! I'm off this project because you're too involved", then you are either independently wealthy or don't have to pay your bills with your composition work alone. I think that some of us think that composers work in an artistic vacuum, and are responsible for every decision that goes into a score - sorry, not so.



Exatly so Ned.

Years ago, another composer,David Michael Frank, and I were hired to compose music a series for HBO that sadly only lasted 6 episodes called "Maximum Security."

It was a gritty show and we decided to take a bold approach using a great rhythm section (Alex Acuna, Harvey Mason, Abe Laboriel among others), synths, and tenor sax, the great Ernie Daniels. We did what was at the time a lot of unconventional stops and starts around the dialog. Since this was TV, the producer, not the director, was in charge and he loved the idea and seemed very excited at the picture mix.

We got called in by the VP of production and the executive producer who said, "Guys, this is exciting stuff, but what is with all the stops and starts? And where are the string pads, etc. ?"

The producer we were dealing with all of a sudden didn't love what we had done. So we were sent back in the studio to replace about 1/2 of it with more conventional scoring, string pads, et al.

The job is about pleasing the client and serving the picture primarily. "Pushing the envelope" can only be a tertiary goal at best.


----------



## Thonex (May 5, 2009)

Walra48 @ Tue May 05 said:


> > To quote Hans himself - "The devil... is in the deadline".




oooohhh.... I like that one. I'll have to remember that quote.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 5, 2009)

I find Hans a passionate, modest and sometimes even insecure man (if his next score will "work"). We should applaud people like him, even if we don't like his music.

I find it pretty arrogant to dismiss his music as middle-of-the-road.

Pirates called for Rollercoaster Rock-and-Roll with orchestra and he delivered that, very well.

On Gladiator he closely worked with Ridley and the editor and the result was a very well working, European sounding score.

His music for The Lion King is at moments so very good and lifting the visuals to a higher level... Again, many European (Mozart) influences.

Spanglish, As Good As It Gets, Matchstick Men - completely different scores. He can do that as well.

He is serving the director, the producer and the audience - in a commercial business. This is not about artistry but about craftmanship.

Because of his passions, his focus, him sharing jobs with fellow composers and training them, I think he is man that deserves more respect from wannabees like most of.

Ofcourse Williams, Goldenthal and JNH can make more subtle scores - but personally I have become a little fed up by the artistic overkill they sometimes introduce.

And remember that issue with The Da Vinci Code in the UK, where some parts of Zimmer's music were judged as too scary for younger people and they had to bring those parts down in the mix to get the rating the film company wanted. I find that pretty masterful from Zimmer.

My 2 cents,

Peter E


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

Peter, I respect your opinion though I do not share it.

Jay, David Frank was the same fellow from that '80s duo called The System correct? I had one of their albums.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> Peter, I respect your opinion though I do not share it.
> 
> Jay, David Frank was the same fellow from that '80s duo called The System correct? I had one of their albums.



No, this is my very good friend David Michael Frank, who did several Steven Seagal movies (yeah, I know) a bunch of TV movies and series, etc. He basically taught me the craft of putting music to picture back when I was primarily a songwriter.

http://www.davidmichaelfrank.com/


----------



## tfishbein82 (May 5, 2009)

Ashermusic said:


> David Michael Frank, who did several Steven Seagal movies (yeah, I know)


I can only wish I did several Steven Seagal movies.


----------



## Thonex (May 5, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue May 05 said:


> dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Peter, I respect your opinion though I do not share it.
> ...



I think I saw him recording an orchestral soundtrack at Ground Control (aka Enterprise, aka Evergreen Studios) back in the mid nineties. A movie I scored was being mixed in the big room and he had a session in the orchestral live room. I peeked in for a few minutes... I liked what I heard... a very "fugitive" sounding score if I remember.


----------



## gsilbers (May 5, 2009)

midphase @ Tue May 05 said:


> "check out the score for scorpion king 2 from klau badelt, it was such a low budget crappy movie i believe it was mostly samples and small orch."
> 
> I would think they recycled a lot of stuff from the original film? I'd guess it was still a $10mil movie, so they probably had some budget for some bells and whistles. I am probably totally wrong on this, but I would speculate that they recycled a lot of Klaus' music where they could (themes and such) and then got one of the assistants to fill in the gaps. I'm probably wrong.



hmm.. maybe. well, he did the music. not only listed in the credits but he was bichin because the buget was so low and the producers wanted soo much. i worked on the post side. thats how i know. 
maybe they used recording from the 1st... but they fitted so good!!! hmm
well, maybe not... nevermind... :roll: once i know better id post back


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> Peter, I respect your opinion though I do not share it.



No problem at all! Let's just agree to disagree!

But please do not forget that Hans is working in this very commercial jungle and in his way is adding his stuff to the blockbusters just like the other guys in post pro (overkill color corrections, green/blue screen stuff with computer-generated environments, over-the-top sound FX, dialogs at distances where normal people can't hear each other...)

It's all over the top, bluntly commercial, very often not artistic but mostly for delivering impact...

I think he contributes well to that stuff, but he has also proven it is not his only trick. He has made some really musical and touching stuff as well and I (again) commend him for his drive, passion, craftmanship and self-criticism.

It would be great if he would do some scores for low budget European movies (France, Italy, Germany). Maybe that would give hime some more esteem. Have you ever heard the score for Invincible? Nice Wagnerian stuff.


----------



## interoctave (May 5, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Tue May 05 said:


> I find Hans a passionate, modest and sometimes even insecure man (if his next score will "work"). We should applaud people like him, even if we don't like his music.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> Peter E



Well said, Peter. Please add another 4 cents from me to the pot.


----------



## Waywyn (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> I see. So we should just do what we need to rather than push the envelope.
> 
> If I had done that, I would not be on the scoring project I'm not now because I'm working for a composer/conductor who actually gives a shit about film music.



I had lots of producers/developers saying:
You are the man, just surprise us and do whatever you think is cool!
We totally trust you.

BUT I also had lots of producers/developers saying:
Okay, so we want the whole score to sound like a Zimmer thing. Big horns, easy melodies, easy structure, no fancy shit, no woodwind wiuiuiuiu nervy stuff, just straight easy listening music which doesn't sound boring ...


I also had lots of guys saying everything which is in between those extremes.
So I ask you, WHY there is just one way for you? Can't you work on a sophisticated and "pushing the envelope" project as the same as you can do on an easy melody whisteling plain major chord progression piece? No??

Funny, happens to me all the time.


Man, I really really seriously wish you good luck on all your projects for all times but I hope you never receive that call where a guy asks you to do simple plain and easy music without pushing the envelope.
If you are going to refuse a job like this because you think you would be mentally underchallenged, please forward them my number - I am still sadly in the state where I need money to make my living! ... and personally I just serve a project if I have to. I am just the composer along with lots of other people working on the same project.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 5, 2009)

Waywyn @ 5/5/2009 said:


> I had lots of producers/developers saying:
> You are the man, just surprise us and do whatever you think is cool!
> We totally trust you.



That's week one. Week two: "Ned, the _____ 's* not liking it. You know the temp track we said was just 'whatever'? Follow it to the letter"

* insert broadcaster, producer, director, post-production supervisor, etc.


----------



## Audun Jemtland (May 5, 2009)

spectrum @ Mon May 04 said:


> interoctave @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > And if you think about it.....who exactly is the heir to the "Bernard Herrmann throne" anyway?


Thomas J. Bergersen. aka the king
And if not now he will be...


----------



## MacQ (May 5, 2009)

I love this business. Doesn't reading this thread make you excited?

Music for anything other than creative expression, well ... it's gonna be a product. My background is in remixing pop records. I did a bunch of dance mixes for the majors in the early part of this decade. And that pounded the musical "arrogance" out of me pretty damn quick. When an A&R (or a producer, director, your client) tells you it sucks, and that they want to change it, it's crushing. I don't care who you are, it's happened to all of us. I've had projects that I was BURSTING with pride over, and that the client has said, "meh" to. On the flip-side, I've dashed out stuff in a few hours because I "couldn't be bothered", and the client has loved it. (Then there I am scrambling to polish what I thought was a poor track, prior to its release so that I don't get associated with crap. Haha, I'm sure we've all got stories like that.)

Some take it better than others. Some leave the game, and make music for themselves. Others are whores, and will slavishly follow the temp or specific instructions, and that will secure them the gig, and the chance at the next gig. But most working pros I know fall somewhere in the middle. They'll "compromise" their original vision, but that's not necessarily a dirty word. I think creative collaboration of any kind is a give and take. Only the best guys get to stray far from the temp track.

Recently I did a short film, and there was a fun action montage of a girl getting electrocuted by a dog collar (it was a comedy), and I'd written this fast paced fun big-band style cue. Director loved it, but it got axed in favour of mickey-mousing the scene with a simple clarinet, double-bass and jazz drums combo. But it worked for the scene, and for the larger focus of the picture in general. So, was it a loss for me? I suppose in some context, but the director was happy. And sometimes that's just as important a creative reward.

I guess what my point is here, is that we're all facilitators above all else. We're here to take the picture to the next level, and whatever that is ... well, it's what it is. The bashing is unproductive, and I'm certainly guilty of it myself, so I apologize.

Back on topic for a second ...

I love Zimmer's music. However it gets created, and whomever was involved, I just really enjoy it. I think it's the same way I *love* pop music. It imparts that feeling that you just can't deny. I can listen to Zimmer's scores as standalone works, not because I'm intrigued by his orchestration, but because it has themes that move me. So many scores lose focus of melody, in my opinion, in favour of complicated orchestration and scoring devices. And that probably works for the film, but beyond that it doesn't stand alone. I think that's why people (the public) love Zimmer. He's basically a songwriter first, and that resonates with people. I also think I envy his simplicity, as others do. We criticize because we think, "that's simple, I could do that!"

As for guys like John Williams ... it's like in a whole other world. People can only respect him. No one I've known has anything bad to say about his work. The guy knows it all, and is a master. Definitely not an "I could do that!" situation, for most.

So, in the end, I suggest we should all just keep pushing to be the best. It's like our pay rates ... if we all hold out for more, it helps the whole industry. Keep learning, keep chasing the gig, and enjoy it all the while. Making music for a living is a pretty sweet gig, after all. =o 

Oh, and Waywyn: "You hear armageddon tritones only because someone opens a suitcase .. come on." 

... funniest line of the whole thread. Thanks for that. Haha.

~Stu


----------



## Ashermusic (May 5, 2009)

audun jemtland @ Tue May 05 said:


> spectrum @ Mon May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > interoctave @ Mon May 04 said:
> ...



Well for him to ascend to THAT throne he will have to prove that not only can he write good sounding music but play picture masterfully for a large number of films, which once again folks, is film scorer's main task. I am not saying TJ cannot, but judging from his IMDB profile, he has not, at least yet, proven that he can.

You can write the best sounding music in the world but if it does not give the picture what it needs (and please the client) it is lovely toilet paper.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 5, 2009)

Opening the suitcase? Oh no!...


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 5, 2009)

I feel really happy for Fred's V.I. that a topic like this is self-controlling itself so well. We all have our own preferences and sometimes it may seem to get heated but so often we can just agree to disagree and respect each others opinions without hardly ever any ranting.

Thanks to you all and to Frederick!


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 5, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue May 05 said:


> audun jemtland @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > spectrum @ Mon May 04 said:
> ...



Check out http://www.twostepsfromhell.com (www.twostepsfromhell.com)

Thomas has chosen to work for trailer music for now - apparently not to get scoring gigs in Hollywood. Don't judge him on his IMDB credits. Listen and watch the stuff at their site (Nick Phoenix and Thomas Bergersen).


----------



## Ashermusic (May 5, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Tue May 05 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > audun jemtland @ Tue May 05 said:
> ...



I have, and it is nice work, but it is not the same thing as scoring a 90+ minute featur, which is what Herrmannn did.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 5, 2009)

True, but then again, Thomas is what? 14?

Just kidding... a bit... just think where he will be at by the time he's in his 40s. >8o =o


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 5, 2009)

Thomas is just doing what he is currently most passionate about. Why would he need to take the scoring route now?
I guess he's around 30 now, can't remember how old he was when we met online in the old IRC days.
TJ did composition and piano at the conservatorium and proved again and again his agility with creating impressive midi mockups.

For me he doesòùJ   ŸŒÕùJ   ŸŒÖùJ   ŸŒ×ùJ   ŸŒØùJ   ŸŒÙùJ   ŸŒÚùJ   ŸŒÛùJ   ŸŒÜùJ   ŸŒÝùJ   ŸŒÞùJ   ŸŒßùJ   Ÿ


----------



## dcoscina (May 5, 2009)

It's actually a sign of flattery that Zimmer's name generates this much controversy and discussion. If he were a nobody, no one would go on about him or his music. Williams, Goldsmith, all of the big composers have had people who were divided. Some people in classical circles abhor Williams' borrowing from classical music. Not as much for Goldsmith mind you. 

I just wish that whenever someone voices a critical position of Zimmer that the dialogue would not break down to the ubiquitous "oh he's envious". C'mon, that is really an intellectual cop-out. And in many cases, it simply ain't true.


----------



## _taylor (May 5, 2009)

# When Hans Zimmer looks in the mirror nothing appears. There can never be a second Hans Zimmer .

# Hans Zimmer does not sleep. He waits.

# If you spell Hans Zimmer in Scrabble, you win. Forever

# Hans Zimmer sheds his skin twice a year.

# Hans Zimmer once ate a whole cake before his friends could tell him there was a stripper in it.

# Hans Zimmer played Russian Roulette with a fully loaded gun, and won.

# Some people wear Superman pajamas. Superman wears Hans Zimmer pajamas.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 5, 2009)

Hans Zimmer doesn’t wear a watch, HE decides what time it is.

Hans Zimmer does not get frostbite. Hans Zimmer bites frost.

Hans Zimmer always knows the EXACT location of Carmen SanDiego.


----------



## bryla (May 5, 2009)

hmmm.... reminds me of a Chuck Norris thread that is going on on a different forum right now....


----------



## tripit (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> Jose I respect your post but I guess my real concern is not Zimmer's sound or musicality but the alarming proliferation of this specific sound all over the Hollywood map.



I think a big part of this, and something that hasn't been touched on, is how Remote Control (Venture before that) operate. They are and always have been, very aggressive at landing scores. Not just the big ones, they go after the little indie ones as well, which they try to land for the assistants and underlings. And from my own personal experience, Hans has and will step in on behalf of his guys in trying to land them starter films. And we're not talking just about bigger studio films here. I'm talking about small indie films - even ones with very little score budget. 

You got to remember that he has a lot of guys over there, and they all want the composer credit under their own names, not just under additional scoring. Hence, I think this one of the big reasons for the proliferation of Remote scores, and of course, we're hearing much more of that sound because of it. 

If Danny Elfman had a factory, we would probably hear a proliferation more in his style of scoring. It just so happens that Zimmer is the one who has taken scoring "industrial" I've come up against that machine several times. Won some, lost some, but it's very much there and I'm constantly (more so than you would think) hearing feedback from directors about having been actively courted by Remote control, or even Hans himself on behalf of landing his guys the gig.


----------



## tripit (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> I see. So we should just do what we need to rather than push the envelope.
> 
> If I had done that, I would not be on the scoring project I'm not now because I'm working for a composer/conductor who actually gives a [email protected]#t about film music.



Hold on there, who ever suggested that we shouldn't give it our best? That we shouldn't try to push the envelope when allowed? It should go without saying that is what most composers strive for. To suggest otherwise here is silly. 

If one is lucky enough to be able to turn down projects until they get that one that lets them do exactly what they want, then they are in a much more fortunate place than most of us. 

For most of us, just landing any gigs is a constant and highly competitive process. I've taken plenty of films where I had to do some battle for my wants. Most of the time it's a compromise between what I think would be the ultimate and what the director and producers want to hear. In some cases I've had what I thought was a great cue idea tossed in favor of something highly predictable and generic sounding. In other cases, I've had those different ideas accepted and applauded. 
There is no black and white, except that ultimately you are serving the film, the director and producers. The only grey is what they will allow you to do or not do.


----------



## Niah (May 5, 2009)

dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:


> Sum Total: the death of film music as an artform



I think that the issue is that you view film music as this separate genre of music or an art in itself.
I certainly do not agree with this notion, I mean in the grand scheme or things and considering all the other art forms that exist to express one's individual vision, film music is a craf at best, that is a part of Film - and it's Film that I believe to be an art form.

Of course one can say it lighty that there's a certain "art" to it sure, but in reality composers are hired not to express their own artistic vision but the director's.

With that said the films that we are talking here are definately not very artistic and they never intended to be anyway. More than that in the films we are talking here the producers and the studios have more say than the director's.

So holding hans zimmer has the responsible of the death of film music or whatever is way off since you are talking about a system that their only intention is to entertain and to make profit. Of course they are going to do anything to appeal to the new generation of movie-goers, which isn't really you I presume...  

So your posts just reminds me of these long talks about how music was great in old days, where the reality of it is that you simply do not belong to the target-audience anymore of radio, mtv or shopping mall popcorn movies.


----------



## tripit (May 5, 2009)

tmhuud @ Tue May 05 said:


> tripit @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > I had a film where the director wanted a really edgy, atonal and cold sounding score. So I did it. He loved it and signed off. Then the producer calls me and says, what is this? You need to change it, make it more like another popular film in that genre. So, reluctantly I do that and the producer says he is now happy. He tells me he'll deal with the director about the change. Then a week later, the director comes back and sees it, and says, what the hell happened to my score?
> ...



Yeah, that sounds like a pretty bad gig. The longer it goes it seems, the more likely they'll start changing their minds. Especially if you have someone who is constantly influenced by other films or people. 

I hate cue sheets too. Finally figured out a system, do them while I score is much better than waiting until the end.


----------



## cc64 (May 5, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Tue May 05 said:


> This is not about artistry but about craftmanship.
> Peter E



+100 on that Peter. Dead on. In french there are 2 very similar words: Artiste and Artisan (Craftsman) and i really see us in the latter category. Subtle difference but still...

Best,

Claude


----------



## NYC Composer (May 5, 2009)

cc64 @ Tue May 05 said:


> Peter Roos @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > This is not about artistry but about craftmanship.
> ...



During my years writing/producing music for commercials, I always called myself a 'craftsman'. The term seemed to confuse people.

The way I stayed true to myself in the 'jingle business' while still sublimating my ego was to write the piece I believed to be the best I could do. I always gave my best professional effort first. Then, when the powers that be wanted something else( which was often), if I couldn't gently dissuade them, I cheerfully did whatever they wanted done. It was their project I was serving, after all.

The art/commerce discussion has been going on forever. Beethoven/Bach. Really, it's a difficult set of issues that everyone has work out for themselves, preferably without passing judgment on the decisions made by others..

Nowadays, I'm more of an artist/songriter. I write what I like ( while targeting it somewhat, I suppose) and try to sell it as is. My taste seems to run towards pop forms, so it works out for me.


----------



## Peter Alexander (May 5, 2009)

tripit @ Tue May 05 said:


> dcoscina @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Jose I respect your post but I guess my real concern is not Zimmer's sound or musicality but the alarming proliferation of this specific sound all over the Hollywood map.
> ...



Hans is loyal to his crew. Good for him!


----------



## dcoscina (May 6, 2009)

Hey guys, just wanted to apologize to any and all of you guys busting your butts in the trenches. It is easier for me to have lofty ideals because my main source of income does not depend on writing music (although I would not mind if it did someday). Yeah, the film scoring biz is totally dependent on pleasing your boss just like any other job. It's easy for me to get caught up in comparing the quality of music that ends up in films today with what we had 30 years ago but that's not fair to anyone here. Based on some pieces posted in the composition section, there are guys with talent plus chops to spare. Truly inspiring music. so it really is not fair to gauge the level of musicianship on the end result for film because it had to go through directors and producers and focus groups' approval some or all of which may have goat's ears. 

I will say that based on all these conditions, it is harder and harder to have film scoring exist on two plains- one where the music enhances the narrative but also that has some musical logic to it where it can exist on its own. the second really has never been important except to film score fans. Whe Rosza, Herrmann, Korngold, North, Bernstein etc. were writing, they were doing the same thing Hansy and co. were doing today. However, the difference was that directors gave their composers more license and more directors had at least SOME understanding and respect for music. This compounded with the pure level of technique they had at their command (lots of compositional resources that could be called upon unconsciously) led to the Golden and Silver Age of film scoring. But the approach was basically the same as today. They had to score a film, they had limited time to do so, they had orchestrators and copyists, and conductors. They even had assistants. So I will get off my high horse now and eat a bit of crow. 

I tip my proverbial hat to you gents who are slugging it out carving a career for yourselves in this tough tough business.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 6, 2009)

=o =o o-[][]-o o-[][]-o 0oD 0oD o=< o=<


----------



## Lex (May 6, 2009)

dcoscina @ Wed May 06 said:


> Hey guys, just wanted to apologize to any and all of you guys busting your butts in the trenches. It is easier for me to have lofty ideals because my main source of income does not depend on writing music (although I would not mind if it did someday). Yeah, the film scoring biz is totally dependent on pleasing your boss just like any other job. It's easy for me to get caught up in comparing the quality of music that ends up in films today with what we had 30 years ago but that's not fair to anyone here. Based on some pieces posted in the composition section, there are guys with talent plus chops to spare. Truly inspiring music. so it really is not fair to gauge the level of musicianship on the end result for film because it had to go through directors and producers and focus groups' approval some or all of which may have goat's ears.
> 
> I will say that based on all these conditions, it is harder and harder to have film scoring exist on two plains- one where the music enhances the narrative but also that has some musical logic to it where it can exist on its own. the second really has never been important except to film score fans. Whe Rosza, Herrmann, Korngold, North, Bernstein etc. were writing, they were doing the same thing Hansy and co. were doing today. However, the difference was that directors gave their composers more license and more directors had at least SOME understanding and respect for music. This compounded with the pure level of technique they had at their command (lots of compositional resources that could be called upon unconsciously) led to the Golden and Silver Age of film scoring. But the approach was basically the same as today. They had to score a film, they had limited time to do so, they had orchestrators and copyists, and conductors. They even had assistants. So I will get off my high horse now and eat a bit of crow.
> 
> I tip my proverbial hat to you gents who are slugging it out carving a career for yourselves in this tough tough business.



..u suck dude.

aLex


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 6, 2009)

Lex,

In my opinion you are crossing a line and I have reported this post to the other moderators.

Don't do this on V.I.


----------



## Lex (May 6, 2009)

Peter Roos @ Wed May 06 said:


> Lex,
> 
> In my opinion you are crossing a line and I have reported this post to the other moderators.
> 
> Don't do this on V.I.



Peter,

In my opinion, you can report me to whoever you want. Just stating my opinion on the topic at hand, without using any profanity.

And don't tell me what to do on V.I. , 'cause its my forum as much as it is yours.

aLex


----------



## chimuelo (May 6, 2009)

This reminds me of why people like Mel Gibson, David Hasselhoff, Sly Stallone, and so many others took over the process themselves.
Brotha' Man Dcosina you should try the same avenue, especially since you have original ideas and think the genericism should be bypassed.
The Blair Witch Project had no budget compared to current movies, and it didn't even have music. Yet the big shots in Hollywood who spend like Congress were shocked at it's sucess.
Get together with some brilliant unknown talent where you control every aspect of the music...........Can't win if you don't go.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 6, 2009)

Lex @ 6/5/2009 said:


> Just stating my opinion on the topic at hand, without using any profanity.



The topic is not whether a member sucks or not. You're out of line, especially given the context of someone having the courage to apologize publicly. Your kind of post is a kind of barf on this community. Thanks.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (May 6, 2009)

Lex @ Wed May 06 said:


> Peter Roos @ Wed May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Lex,
> ...



A short rant like that is an opinion? I think it's an insult to a person who is trying to keep up the good spirit here.

And I don't like this kind of language, but maybe I'm just a naive non-US member.

And it's Frederick's forum, not yours, nor mine.


----------



## Lex (May 6, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Wed May 06 said:


> Lex @ 6/5/2009 said:
> 
> 
> > Just stating my opinion on the topic at hand, without using any profanity.
> ...



You'r right..its not...it turned in to weather or not Zimmer sucks? Right? For 5 pages straight....

But hey...thats ok...Zimmer isnt here so we can say whatever we want right?
But dear lord you could never say the same thing about a member who is present, and on top of that apologized (still not sure for what tough lol)...

Or was my lack of eloqunce the problem? Does tellin a simple neutral "IMHO u suck" hurts more the if I told him he is mediocre, middle of road composer who backtracked a complete artform?

aLex


----------



## Niah (May 6, 2009)

chimuelo @ Wed May 06 said:


> The Blair Witch Project had no budget compared to current movies, and it didn't even have music. Yet the big shots in Hollywood who spend like Congress were shocked at it's sucess.
> .



Well similar projects like the blair witch project had been tried, mostly on TV, but somehow the blair witch worked better than all of them before probably because of the marketing strategic that it was real. No matter how pathetic that sounds most people bought it.

The film really was a success, but what happened afterwards? I mean to the writers/directors and cast? Not much I'm afraid.

oh the movie didn't had alot of music, mostly underscoring but it did, byt composer Tony Cora.

very subtle but very effective with the picture:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUmmeMt-a3s&fmt=18


----------



## dinerdog (May 6, 2009)

*Re: Hans' New Samples - From The Trenches*

Here's a timely quote from Marc Shaiman on the status of composers in Hollywood:

*Where do composers rank in the pecking order of Hollywood?*

(Deep sigh.) I think music ranks high. Composers themselves are, I think, more and more treated as generic. There’s a little less respect for the individual things that a specific composer can bring. And more and more it’s, ‘Hire two guys, we’ll get it done faster.’ It’s not like the old days when composers had a trademark sound, like Max Steiner and Franz Waxman. There’s a specific sound to a Bette Davis movie, or Alfred Hitchcock. So when you go see a movie, you’re rarely surprised by what the music might be.


----------



## Niah (May 6, 2009)

*Re: Hans' New Samples - From The Trenches*



dinerdog @ Wed May 06 said:


> Here's a timely quote from Marc Shaiman on the status of composers in Hollywood:
> 
> *Where do composers rank in the pecking order of Hollywood?*
> 
> (Deep sigh.) I think music ranks high. Composers themselves are, I think, more and more treated as generic. There’s a little less respect for the individual things that a specific composer can bring. And more and more it’s, ‘Hire two guys, we’ll get it done faster.’ It’s not like the old days when composers had a trademark sound, like Max Steiner and Franz Waxman. There’s a specific sound to a Bette Davis movie, or Alfred Hitchcock. So when you go see a movie, you’re rarely surprised by what the music might be.



yea but the thing is that that still exists.

there is a sound to a coen brothers film which is provided by carter burwell same goes for a cronenberg film - howard shore ...christopher nolan -david julyan...sam mendes - thomas newman...Krzysztof Kieslowski - zbigniew preisner...and so on

these composers have made an outstanding contribution to the cinematic identity of these directors and films and they are far from generic if you ask me


----------



## midphase (May 6, 2009)

"The film really was a success, but what happened afterwards? I mean to the writers/directors and cast? Not much I'm afraid."

Hey there...thread lightly now!


----------



## dcoscina (May 6, 2009)

Ned and Peter, thanks for the support. If Lex thinks I suck well, I guess I do to him. Doesn't bother me. John Corigliano and Carter Burwell don't happen to think so and they are a little more established in the music community so I'll take their opinions a little more seriously. Or Gabriel Yared's. Or Bill Stromberg's. 

It's sad that I have to validate myself by dropping names but I guess I am doing so just to verify that I'm not too bothered by some unknown guys vitriol. It really doesn't mean much.

Mind you, this is probably the same thing Zimmer would say about me too.


----------



## artsoundz (May 6, 2009)

midphase @ Wed May 06 said:


> Hey there...thread lightly now!



good one.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 6, 2009)

dcoscina @ Wed May 06 said:


> Mind you, this is probably the same thing Zimmer would say about me too.



Which was my point. I applaud you for being intellectually honest enough to rethink your stand.


----------



## tripit (May 6, 2009)

Hey Dcoscina, 
You don't suck, even if you didn't change your stance. 
But, I greatly appreciate your ability to do so even more.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 6, 2009)

Audun,

With all due respect, I consider many directors and editors to be as qualified as the composer to judge the merit of a film/tv cue.


----------



## mikebarry (May 6, 2009)

Ned that is a good point, I find the music editor and especially the film editor to be supremely influential upon the director/producer. They help them talk through everything.


----------



## lux (May 6, 2009)

I personally find this defensive approach to a very established composer a bit laughable, in all honesty.

C'mon, lets be honest with ourselves, whats the problem in discussing publicy a billionaire composer? And without particular profanities or personal attacks. Men, being a billionaire composer probably means also being discussed every here and there. 

It happens to all music stars from hundreds years. A good percentage of them made a career out of being discussed.

Imho this conversation never seemed to lead to really offensive or personal attacks, most of the judgements expressed are related to music, so theyre respectable. 

Sometimes its all so weird here...c'mon


----------



## Waywyn (May 6, 2009)

audun jemtland @ Wed May 06 said:


> Musictronics @ Tue May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > MacQ @ Wed May 06 said:
> ...



Hey Audun,

but what do you do if a developer/director/producer has a very very strong imagination and basically wants to get HIS/HER idea to audio?
I did lots of jobs where the client simply wanted just his/her idea to be the music and nothing else. They create a product and sometimes everything is planned out to the last bit ....

So what do you do then? You tell them to f*ck off with the words "WE are the specialists and know what's best?" or you feel challenged and excited to bring his/her ideas into the movie/game/ad or whatever media ...

I still stay with my opinion that a composer, at least in his/her first years of working in the industry (don't mean just hobbywise) should really really dig a deep hole and bury ones ego ... if you had success with dozens of projects, won a few prizes and don't need to call clients because they call you, THEN it is time to rub your hands and say: "Okay dudes and dudettes (as Ned uses to say) ... lean back and I will knock off your socks because that's why you called me!""


----------



## Audun Jemtland (May 6, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Wed May 06 said:


> Audun,
> 
> With all due respect, I consider many directors and editors to be as qualified as the composer to judge the merit of a film/tv cue.


Yes I'm sure there's alot of qualified ones... But I meant in that case of the director telling you"-it's sucks and I really don't know why,but you should make something better than this crap" kind of a scenario.
I would assume the composer is the one with the better taste/qualification of what suits the media. Talking in consideration that the composer knows the craft.

One shoukd worh WITH the director,and not against eachother...but I think the musical talent got a more overview and qualification because that's the composers craft. Just like movies is the directors craft.


----------



## Audun Jemtland (May 6, 2009)

That's very true Waywyn...But the directors with such imagination and desire is easier to communicate with and yes..you should bury your ego.it doen't belong in this setting. That's why I personally like Hans Zimmer,because he seems to be a good communicator and a humble person(a fine balanced man)


----------



## midphase (May 6, 2009)

I think part of the issue here is that as low-level composers, we are generally having to appease the whims and desires of directors and producers without having a strong enough professional platform to stand on. 

Most of us imagine that as we gain more notoriety and work on bigger and better films (my guess is that a solid 2% of people around here will go on to be considerably more established composers within the next decade) that we'll be able to better influence the directives given to us, and put our foot down when the job requested falls well beneath what we feel could best serve the film while also retaining a modicum of artistic integrity.

So I think what gets people riled up in these discussions is: How come Zimmer...one of the most powerful composers in Hollywood (Williams, Elfman, and possibly Howard and Silvestri are the only others whom I would qualify as powerful) can't put his foot down and just push back these producers and directors who just want the "same ol' same ol'"? I don't know the answer to that question, I can only speculate...(so Hans...if you're reading this, just realize that I'm only speculating...so please don't send your guys to rough me up).

My guess is that Zimmer is first and foremost a workaholic who is driven by a desire to dominate and "corporatize" the film music industry on a level than nobody has ever attempted before. To him it's not really about the money (I would argue that if he spent $1mil a week for the rest of his life, he would still not run out by the time he passes away), but it's about brand and about involvement. Think of it a bit like Microsoft. I think MS has the full intention of making cool stuff that people want, but they are driven by a desire to grab all of the business that they can. Zimmer (I think) functions a bit the same way, his intentions are very motivated by creating cool music (which he does when he feels that he can get away with it), but ultimately he wants to grab all of the work that him and his other composers can get their hands on...because that's what it's prioritized. If that means creating an homogenous sound...sure. Creating scores on ridiculous deadlines.....bring it on! Using every trick in the book to get a hold of the prime scoring real-estate in the World...hell yeah! And ultimately avoid "rocking the boat" creatively...of course!

I don't think Zimmer should be faulted for this, it's his prerogative to run his business the way he sees fit, and if for various reasons we don't like it, we can sit here discussing something that we have truly no (remote) control over...or we can do what is well within our power and create music that we feel can not only push the artistic boundaries of creativity, but also service the film in its practical needs. 

In my opinion the fault lies not with Zimmer, but in the hordes of imitators who don't seem quite capable of looking beyond those compositional devices. They are the real problem, not Hans.

Ultimately, I believe that everything is cyclical (that's right guys...sooner or later Republicans will be back in power again), and at some point in the future, that sought after "Zimmer" sound will not be quite so much in demand, and studios will gravitate towards smaller boutique composers who have a more unique and unusual sound (like Johnny Greenwood for example). My guess is that we all have about 5-10 years before that happens in full force, so I say let's all start sharpening our compositional skills and create styles music that haven't been thought of yet...because the future will be here soon enough, and from the looks of it, only 2% of us will be ready for it!


----------



## dcoscina (May 6, 2009)

midphase, you just crystalized why the Zimmer bashing continues. Beautifully put. And I personally agree with your points. Nice post!


----------



## lux (May 6, 2009)

Kays said it. Nice post


----------



## tripit (May 6, 2009)

Some good points Midphase, but I don't think Zimmer is out to grab every film he can, but he does like to work a lot, and he even more, he doesn't like to work alone. He's not an introverted composer. He's a band guy. Likes interacting with other musicians and composers. I know how he feels, I came from years of being in bands. Composing is a lonely business. Hence Media Ventures and Remote Control. That's the whole reason those things came to be. I also think he genuinely looks after his guys. He wants them to succeed and be happy. As a group, they go after whatever they can get. 

I also think no matter who you are, Elfman, Zimmer what ever, you still need to serve the film and the industry. There are lot of egos and power grabbing in films, the least being the composers. We're at the bottom of that list. I don't think any of the big guys put their foot down too much. You have to pick your fights carefully as a composer, even for the big guys. Once in a while, you get film where doing the unexpected is allowed, but those are far and few between. 

You are right about the things changing. Things always change, although in film scoring it seems they change a lot slower than say pop music. But main street is common man, and as depressing as it is for artists, the average movie goer is pretty dim and unreceptive to anything close to pushing the envelope. The movie producers know this. They're in business, they're usually not trying to create great art. Hans Zimmer knows this too. It's the same reason why pop music is full of crap music. The few that break new ground like Radiohead or Sigur, aren't the biggest sellers. They serve a niche market compared to a Brittney or Hannah Montana. So, I don't think we'll ever see the likes of Greenwood style music dominating score music. It will be the likes of Beltrami, Giacchino and several of the Remote control guys that will eventually take place of the older more established guys, and they'll all carry on the tradition in like fashion.


----------



## bryla (May 6, 2009)

But still, the guy pushing the envelope is Desplat.


----------



## midphase (May 6, 2009)

Desplat, Burwell, Julyan, Brion, Golijov, Badalamenti, even Santaolalla. I think these are the guys whom we should all be more inspired by. They work on smaller less flashy films, but they "get it" 

You won't see these guys endorsing software or gear, their soundtracks are hard to find, and they don't show up as frequently in interviews and photos....but they are pushing the envelope, working within the system and yet still challenging it. These guys don't appear driven by big budgets (although they do work on big budgets when the opportunity presents itself), the seem more focused on the art. Best of all, their scores match the films amazingly well.

I guess you could call them B-listers....but my guess is that they would be perfectly fine with that. 

I aspire to do what they do....I guess I aspire to be a B-lister! (take that Kathy Griffin).


----------



## tripit (May 7, 2009)

bryla @ Wed May 06 said:


> But still, the guy pushing the envelope is Desplat.



I really like his work. He's very European sounding. I can't say though, that I think he's pushing the envelope all that much if at all, he tends to do what I would expect from the kinds of films he does. And not that that's a bad thing. 

Really when I sit here and think about it, the only recent score I can think of (in major release) that did something you wouldn't expect was Greenwood (although I kinda of expected an avant/radiohead approach from him) And that score was interesting, but I can't say that I was blown away with it or that I thought it was really great. The people I went to the movie with absolutely hated the score. They kept turning to me during the film and asking me why the score sucked so bad. I can't say I've ever gone to a film and had other people comment on the score during the film. Usually they don't even notice it. Like I said, common man goes to the movie. Common man doesn't like static drones that go on for ten minutes. 

I think all this pushing the envelope talk is kinda of moot anyway. It's all been done before, long before any of us were even born. We're all just rehashing it in one form or another. Just make it good. As Truman uses to like to say: The only thing that is new is the history you don't know.


----------



## tripit (May 7, 2009)

midphase @ Wed May 06 said:


> Desplat, Burwell, Julyan, Brion, Golijov, Badalamenti, even Santaolalla. I think these are the guys whom we should all be more inspired by. They work on smaller less flashy films, but they "get it"
> .



I'm into the guys as well. Although, not Brion. I can only take so much melltron retro pop. I like Dario a lot. He's got the goods.


----------



## germancomponist (May 7, 2009)

Oops, what`s wrong with Hans?

Hans has a lot of moves and I remember that 100000 people have already tried to copy him, so he must be something right. And his team spirit; I can only welcome. 

Gunther


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

germancomponist @ Thu May 07 said:


> Oops, what`s wrong with Hans?
> 
> Hans has a lot of moves and I remember that 100000 people have already tried to copy him, so he must be something right. And his team spirit; I can only welcome.
> 
> Gunther



I tell you the simple reason 

Zimmer's music can be gripped and understood by the "masses".

I think I don't hear any other licence track than the PotC theme that is literally floating the TV channels ... I can go out on the street whisteling Zimmers melodies and almost everybody would guess the movie right. Most of the people I found out, doesn't even know his name, but his music.

.. and this is imho the problem with lots of the composers. We learn so much regarding music theory that we raise our personal standards ... this is basically the same as with chemistry, astrophysics or any other genre you can think of. A specialist or a pro in his genre always wants to push the envelope. Now in film scoring it happens that you have to use your talent or profession to make music for something which doesn't necessarily needs to push the envelope or turn out into some superholy-blessed-awesome-lighting-out-of-the-ass soundtrack ... of course it's cool when that happens, but SOMETIMES, not always it JUST has to be music which can be understand and get a hold of the scene.

Try to ask a astrophysicist to explain you gravity or what a neutron star behaviour is like. They will start with throwing formulars, huge numbers of (10^50). Start talking about the Planck world and the Higgs particle etc. 
How do most people look at them? Yes, right ... kinda leaning the head to the side, knit their eyebrows etc. ... they simply cannot realize or have a hard time to understand that a normal mortal being can't get a grip of all those formulars ("But it's sooo easy, look ...") ....

... and if you apply all that to composers, it is in way kinda-ish the same. Lots of people throw around with theory, knowledge and raised standards so they think it is the most normal thing ... and sometimes, some people simply cannot understand when the music of a movie is just simply there to support a scene in a completely unspectacular manner. Sometimes it just has to be a simple three note pattern instead of sophisticated arpeggios, whirling through all keys.


----------



## ChrisAxia (May 7, 2009)

Very well put Alex and Kays. I always aspire to write memorable themes and often struggle, like many of you I'm sure. Just yesterday, my challenge was to replace the Gladiator theme (temp track) for the opening episode of a series I'm scoring, and it wasn't easy! I just hope the director likes what I have submitted...

With relatively simple chords etc, it is VERY hard not to plagiarise Zimmer's great themes when trying to achieve a similar 'feel'. Like great pop music, it often appears easy until you try and do the same! Hats off to Zimmer for constantly writing 'hits', even if they don't have the compositional 'sophistication' of a Williams score.

~Chris


----------



## germancomponist (May 7, 2009)

Well said, Alex!


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

midphase @ Thu May 07 said:


> Desplat, Burwell, Julyan, Brion, Golijov, Badalamenti, even Santaolalla. I think these are the guys whom we should all be more inspired by. They work on smaller less flashy films, but they "get it"
> 
> You won't see these guys endorsing software or gear, their soundtracks are hard to find, and they don't show up as frequently in interviews and photos....but they are pushing the envelope, working within the system and yet still challenging it. These guys don't appear driven by big budgets (although they do work on big budgets when the opportunity presents itself), the seem more focused on the art. Best of all, their scores match the films amazingly well.
> 
> ...



Hey Kays,

hell, I would be even totally cool with being a D or C-lister 
But apart from that, isn't this again a matter of how many bucks you have aside?

I mean I can NOT imagine that is has been always as their current situation, except they had a heritage thingy or having some money pool from something they did before.


----------



## lux (May 7, 2009)

Waywyn @ Thu May 07 said:


> germancomponist @ Thu May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Oops, what`s wrong with Hans?
> ...



masses hummed and whistled the star wars theme, pissed in their pants when you play the jaws them with your mouth while swimming together, kids started moving around their f**ing wands every celesta bell they hear. Everything for decades now. And its stuff from one of the most sophisticated and talentous orchestral composer of late 20th century.

So what are you talking about?


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

lux @ Thu May 07 said:


> Waywyn @ Thu May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > germancomponist @ Thu May 07 said:
> ...



LOL, I knew that this would have come :D

... but look whats happening here. JW did one of the most simplest things ever. Did he push the envelope on the Jaws theme? No, but I think it is just a briliant very easy to remember thing. The same goes for Psycho to mention another easy theme.

Another thing with the Star Wars theme in my opinion, I think it got famous and recognizeable because Star Wars is such a big and famous movie universe. If the theme would have been in another movie which wasn't that famous it would be of course still brilliant as it is and no less rewarded as a great theme by us ... but I am not sure if so many people would know and remember it.

By the way, do you know what SOME music professors say about JW?
They don't even consider him to be a worth mentioning composer when it comes to sophisticated writing, .. especially compared to the old "masters" .. whereas btw Mozart to me was simply a more or less cool pop guy during his period.


----------



## lux (May 7, 2009)

naw, i'm not convinced :D


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

lux @ Thu May 07 said:


> naw, i'm not convinced :D



bla, move your a** over here and I make you convinced o-[][]-o


----------



## lux (May 7, 2009)

haha, that would make me even less convinced probably :mrgreen:


----------



## lux (May 7, 2009)

no, seriously i'm personally against this "people like" reasonement in general. And you know what? I think i'm really "pop" in all my likings. I'm not elitist at all, i dont care much about forms.

Of course i mentioned JW as the most iconic guy in the whole movie music story, but really i could have mentioned a lot of others too. What i'm trying to mean is that you dont need to be just simple to be pleasant to people. So many great sellers had some nice and often sophisticated ideas/arrangement on back. 

What i'm trying to mean is that thats not necessary for us to play like poo to sell a few items. Thats not yet the time for that in my vision.


----------



## Angel (May 7, 2009)

You don't have to be simple but you have to sound simple.

JW wouldn't have created these great hits (starwars theme, potter-score, jp, indiana) without have a simple idea of a catchy melody.
Zimmer either.

Zimmer combines his simple melodies with a bombastic production.
JW combines his simple melodies with a sophisticated backing.

That's why Zimmer is the "mob-hitmaker" and JW is everybody's darling (exaggerating formulated)

And as a prove of my words take a look at this:
http://graphjam.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/song-chart-memes-computer-skills.jpg (http://graphjam.files.wordpress.com/200 ... skills.jpg)



Angel


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

lux @ Thu May 07 said:


> no, seriously i'm personally against this "people like" reasonement in general. And you know what? I think i'm really "pop" in all my likings. I'm not elitist at all, i dont care much about forms.
> 
> Of course i mentioned JW as the most iconic guy in the whole movie music story, but really i could have mentioned a lot of others too. What i'm trying to mean is that you dont need to be just simple to be pleasant to people. So many great sellers had some nice and often sophisticated ideas/arrangement on back.
> 
> What i'm trying to mean is that thats not necessary for us to play like poo to sell a few items. Thats not yet the time for that in my vision.



Yeh man, I hear ya and to get serious again, I just wanted to say that in your example of Jaws, JW simply writes easy. He doesn't put something into it which tries to push the envelope, it is just two notes - plain and simple

... but he can also write sophisticated. On the other hand everyone back then, on 70ies series especially, tried to push the envelopes as much as possible ... and in some cases (the suitcase example ) some guys seriously overdid it. It sometimes sounds like, pushing the envelope, putting in everything I learned and be even more sophisticated than everyone else. Like tryin to play the weirdest fusion stuff during a scene which simply shows a calm sea.

So I am asking again, is it really that bad or wrong that someone just prefers to go with what people want to hear from him? Besides that I remember an interview someone asked Hans if he is more a composer or a technician ... and he himself said, to be honest I think I am more the technician ... 

I mean it is the same with everything. Why can't Dream Theater play a simple love them without any oddmeter beat. Why can't Allan Holdsworth not play a ballad with note faster than 8th notes. Why didn't the Scorpions get a decent big band piece done.

If you see it from this category Zimmer is even more wide spread than any other composer out there since he is able to pull out a pop arrangement as good as a more or less complex orchestral piece


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

Angel @ Thu May 07 said:


> You don't have to be simple but you have to sound simple.
> 
> JW wouldn't have created these great hits (starwars theme, potter-score, jp, indiana) without have a simple idea of a catchy melody.
> Zimmer either.
> ...



Good points really. Leaving the ability of being able to write catchy hooklines outside of this and assume anyone of those guys can do it, in the end it is really the question:

Is writing complex orchestral patterns more worth than creating a "blow me away bombastic" production. Is the skill of theoretic knowledge more worth than knowing how to handle EQ's, Compressors and Synths?


----------



## Angel (May 7, 2009)

No, did I say that?


----------



## Lex (May 7, 2009)

dcoscina @ Wed May 06 said:


> Lex @ Wed May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Ned Bouhalassa @ Wed May 06 said:
> ...



I honestly cant see it as an insult. Its just an honest emotional reaction to everything you were saying in last days, from someone you dont know and whos opinion, as u stated, dont value at all anyhow..so whats the issue here?

I have great respect for Hans Zimmer, and more importantly I enjoy listening to his work. Sure, there r really bad uninspired scores he did, but honestly, hes doing what? 5-6 major scores a year? and even when its not that great, he at least knows how to score a scene...how many rejected scores did zimmer had in his career?

I get the feeling that a lot of people are frustrated simply because it doesnt make any sense that his scores work so well...palette of devices he is using is extremely limited, progressions r pretty much the same, harmony as simple as humanly possible, orchestration allways backed with fat synths...and yet it works, works so well..

From there it usually goes in to endless debate about his business skills, his people skills, how its cause he has an army of helpers, army of samplers, how its because a "common" man enjoys his childish themes that u can whistle,how he cuts his attacks short, how RC lands gigs cause they have cool demos, how they land gigs cause they have aggressive marketing...and blah blah blah blah...

The way I see it, these r the reasons why they can score ungodly amount of movies per year, but none of this would happen if Zimmer wasnt a brilliant, innovative composer and film maker to begin with. 

Personaly, I would allways rather listen to Zimmers stuff then anything Bernstein ever wrote...Do I recognize that Bernstein was a genius, that his scores r 100 times "smarter" then most current ones, that he was "pushing the boundaries"?? Sure I do...but it doesnt change the fact that for me, Zimmers music combined with the scene works 100 times better on emotional level...and, isnt that whats music about? emotions? 

And to finish, what will most see as ranting, the reason I told you u suck is exactly for your so called apologetic tone...i didnt react to all the stuff about Zimmers retardation of an artform, i mean think what you want, share if you want..

But then on top of that you post something where you look down on all of us who r trying to make a living by doing this. To me your apologetic post had a huge "they dont know any better, they r not riding on my high horse" tone, which sucks dude...hence my original "opinion"..

Zimmer ruleZ, Tyler Bates OWNS!

aLex


----------



## lux (May 7, 2009)

Waywyn @ Thu May 07 said:


> So I am asking again, is it really that bad or wrong that someone just prefers to go with what people want to hear from him? Besides that I remember an interview someone asked Hans if he is more a composer or a technician ... and he himself said, to be honest I think I am more the technician ...



no, i dont think its a problem. As much as it doesnt set the trend to leave off every attempt to be fun, at times sophisticated and to get our brain fried trying to figure out something cool to play. Thats the real meaning and fun of being a musician.

As Kays pointed out before, "corporatize" the film music world is susceptible to set that trend. In all honesty two mediaventures spinoff guys like John Powell and Harry Gregson Williams make me think positively, as i like their work. When it was their time to choose they pulled off cool scores like X3 or Chicken Run, or again Shrek. So i'm well hoping.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 7, 2009)

Williams writes simply when that is what the film dictates. He writes with greater complexity when that is what the film dictates. And that is why he is a great film composer.

If one is truly a film composer and not just a composer with artistic pretensions trying to write music for a film, that is the way it goes.


----------



## dcoscina (May 7, 2009)

Lex, I was not looking down on anyone here. My apology was genuine. If you cannot or will not accept that, I have nothing more to say.

Most everyone understood I was on the up-and-up. 

p.s. I still do not care for Zimmer's approach. I am entitled to have that stance as much as you are entitled to appreciate Zimmer's approach. I just will be reticent about it on this forum as I do not wish to disrespect those who do.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 7, 2009)

Alex's opinion is void due to the "Tyler Bates OWNS!" comment at the bottom of his post.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 7, 2009)

+1 for Tyler Bates, Jablonsky.


----------



## Angel (May 7, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Thu May 07 said:


> Williams writes simply when that is what the film dictates. He writes with greater complexity when that is what the film dictates. And that is why he is a great film composer..



I'm completely sure we will find enough points that will seperate the great composers from the good or average ones if we try to find them.
In this case I will agree


----------



## Waywyn (May 7, 2009)

Angel @ Thu May 07 said:


> Ashermusic @ Thu May 07 said:
> 
> 
> > Williams writes simply when that is what the film dictates. He writes with greater complexity when that is what the film dictates. And that is why he is a great film composer..
> ...




... which brings me to another point 

If someone here on the forum will become a, I will say famous guy, would we applaud him/her, tell him/her lots of success and major deals ... or also tell him after a few months that he is just copying others and not pushing the envelope?

I just want to say that it's also something different if someone actually "makes it to the top" or if we talk about someone who is already kinda there.

Besides that I really enjoyed watching "Alien Raiders". Kays did an excellent job on this movie, but in the end? Should I tell him he is not pushing the envelope etc? ... only because he was mostly doing "soundscapes" more than actual "score"? No, I think he still did an excellent job on this because it is the exact thing the movie needed.


----------



## midphase (May 7, 2009)

Thanks Alex.

I used to have a comeback line when someone would ask me to write a score that sounded like Williams....I used to say "no problem...just give me a movie that looks like Spielberg!" (I suppose for Zimmer you could change it to Michael Bay or Verbinski?).

The point is that, the quality and depth of the film has a lot to do with the levels of depth and complexity that the score can (comfortably) reach. I think this is why Let The Right One In is one of my favorite scores from last year, the movie was incredibly deep and complex!

At the level (please forgive my generalizations those of you who have moved well past this point in your careers) where most of us work, we are usually dealing with "genre" films which generally aspire to little more than to fulfill the basic requirements of what 90 minutes of a story arc should contain. So for a romance, that would be boy finds girl, boy loses girl, boy gets back with girl and everyone lives happily ever after. You won't find a romance with the complexity of say The English Patient at our level. Same with sci/fi, comedy, horror, etc etc. There are of course exceptions...but I'm talking about the main body of movies at this level (sub $10mil non-studio privately financed, relatively inexperienced director, blah blah blah).

The reason why I bring this up, is because once again, I think it's important to discern between composers who seek to be involved with movies of depth which will allow them to create interesting scores that match the intent of the film, and those who don't.

I believe this comes down to your own personal preference in films, if you're easily entertained by giant robots and big explosions, then you'll be perfectly at home with triadic harmonies and diatonic melodies which hover around the same 3 usual suspects. 

In conclusion, I have to ask if when we get into one of those 6-pager threads about the bland state of scores, are we not really bothered by the state of the World? Are we not really asking...is this what our planet has devolved into? Wal Mart mentality and McDonald's taste?

Once again, Zimmer is being vilified...but should we not be pointing the finger at ourselves (or at least at that one guy with the oversize popcorn bucket who keeps twitting during the film)?


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

Ok, now that you've gotten that all out of your system. My intention was to talk about samples and not really delve into the pro's and con's of Hans Zimmer, his music or his career choices. At this stage of the game it's really a moot point. He's here. He's big. End of story.

So, after about 4 weeks of editing I've finally gotten down to some usable patches. The approach of truncating the attacks has been pretty fruitful. Firstly, my patches now are more flexible tempo wise, more playable and more musical. Secondly, it's now possible to get that full hollywood string sound.

I first tried it on my SI strings. The results were good but the sections still sound a little small to me. That's not a bad thing for some uses but I still wasn't getting that full sound that I was after. The biggest shock came with my EW strings. I had all but given up on them. The attacks on the EW strings plus the editing on them make them all but unplayalbe. Getting a connection of notes at full volume was even more frustrating to me because the attacks at that volume are unbearable. Without the attacks the excellent recording quality of these strings really started to shine. The fullness and largeness of the sections come to light.

At first I tried it with the RT deleted. I liked the sound but it makes the endings of the notes sound a bit unnatural. Today I just edited a patch and kept the RT and the patch came off really good. So I'm going to try it with more patches.

Ron James has also suggested that SIPS works really well with truncated attacks. So I'll throw that in there too.

I did a short trailer piece with the new patches. Came out pretty good to me. Strings are a little harder to hear because of the loud percussion. So next I'm going to try a big "triumph of the spirit" type piece to see how they do.

best,

Jose


----------



## dcoscina (May 8, 2009)

can u let us hear a demo?


----------



## Hannes_F (May 8, 2009)

Jose, this is very interesting.

However here is something I really wonder as long as this thread exists: There was so much talk in the Kontakt scripting forum since many months about "shifting the beginning of the samples" and similar that I _thought _cutting the samples were much more còúê    úê    úê    úê    ú


----------



## synthetic (May 8, 2009)

Yeah, this thread was unbelievable. The worst this forum has seen in a long time.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 8, 2009)

It has been a truly harrowing thread, I was literally bedridden for days.


----------



## Hannes_F (May 8, 2009)

josejherring @ Fri May 08 said:


> But it just seems to me to make sense. I mean who wants to hear an attack on every note.
> 
> So for me it's a trade off. Of course you want to hear the attack on some notes. But the thing is that mostly, as you know, after the initial attack of a phrase string players try very hard to make the bowing unnoticeable. So my reasoning is that coming in at the middle of a sample is actually more natural than coming in at the beginning for every single note.



I think it makes very much sense and always have thought so. Using a natural note start is useful for single notes, the very first note of a phrase and maybe for an attacked note within a phrase. But certainly not for intermediate notes of a legato phrase.

Of course it is easy for me to do such a statement after Mr. Zimmer 8) :lol: but in all honesty I have thought like that since years.


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

What the heck. I decided to post it.

https://download.yousendit.com/U0d3UGhldzh0NjkzZUE9PQ

Short :45 library trailer. What I was able to get out of the samples was a fuller more connected sound. Which is what I was after. What I'm uncertain about is losing just a tad bit of the detail. But I'm not sure if that's the samples or my mixing chops.

Next, I'll do a more exposed type cue to see if it can handle that.

best,

Jose


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

I think the VSL strings would lend themselves nicely to this approach. I have a few of the patches that came with K2/3. I'll start chopping and see what I come up with.

best,

Jose


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 8, 2009)

Thanks for sharing your clip with use Jose. IMO, what you gain in terms of 'tightness' you lose in terms of timbre. The results sounds synthy to me due to the lack of attack.


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri May 08 said:


> Thanks for sharing your clip with use Jose. IMO, what you gain in terms of 'tightness' you lose in terms of timbre. The results sounds synthy to me due to the lack of attack.



Thanks for the feedback. 

I think that's a chance I'm willing to take at this time. When I was listening to Zimmer's samples at no time did I think it sounded like the real thing. It sounded like samples to me. But, the expressiveness was what impressed me. While I don't presume to think that anything I can do here is going to compete with Zimmer's private collection, atm I just can't work with samples with the full attack. I think my music sounded even more synthy when I was using the samples "out of the box". 

But, I will take your point into serious consideration.

best,

Jose


----------



## midphase (May 8, 2009)

Instead of literally chopping the heads of the samples off....could you obtain the same results by assigning velocity to sample start, and just assign the threshold as a mod-wheel variable? So essentially that would give you the best of both world (ie. fast attacks during fast movements, and the original attacks for slow passages)?

Wouldn't that give you the same results?


----------



## midphase (May 8, 2009)

PS.

For the record I agree with Jose...I have generally found the Zimmer stuff to sound very synthy even though I know it was the real thing. I don't know if it's because his mixes tend to overemphasize the high end sizzle or what....but IMHO that is part of the Zimmer sound.

For reference, listen to Backdraft or The Rock to hear what I'm talking about.


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

midphase @ Fri May 08 said:


> Instead of literally chopping the heads of the samples off....could you obtain the same results by assigning velocity to sample start, and just assign the threshold as a mod-wheel variable? So essentially that would give you the best of both world (ie. fast attacks during fast movements, and the original attacks for slow passages)?
> 
> Wouldn't that give you the same results?



I think the problem would be that once you adjust the start time back you have to also adjust the attack of the adsr back as well or you get a really nasty blip or a pop sound at the beginning of the sample playback.

What I did is do a few patches that have both the original attack and the cut attack and then used a keyswitch. But, to be honest it's taken me about 4 weeks to even figure out what to do or how to do it so I'm only about 1/2 way to setting up the keyswitches. Plus EW is complicated with the RT and all that stuff and my head got fuzzy trying to figure out what adsr belong to what group, ect... And, if you have the crossfade patches that's even more of a nightmare. But, I'm figuring it out.

Ideally I'd like to be able to freely go between the original patches and the cut patches. I think that would handle some of the definition problems that lead to a tad bit of synthyness here and there.

Jose


----------



## Ashermusic (May 8, 2009)

Jose, this probably won't deter you but I honestly think you are over-thinking all this. If the music is well composed, well orchestrated and well mixed, all of which I know you are capable of doing, then assuming you are using a combo of decent libraries, which I know you do, it will sound very good indeed.

Just my 42.4 cents (2 cents adjusted for inflation.)


----------



## José Herring (May 8, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri May 08 said:


> Jose, this probably won't deter you but I honestly think you are over-thinking all this. If the music is well composed, well orchestrated and well mixed, all of which I know you are capable of doing, then assuming you are using a combo of decent libraries, which I know you do, it will sound very good indeed.
> 
> Just my 42.4 cents (2 cents adjusted for inflation.)



Really nice of you to say. Thanks.

Jose


----------



## midphase (May 8, 2009)

"Jose, this probably won't deter you but I honestly think you are over-thinking all this."

But I do think he might be onto something (or Hans is, or both). I do have to admit that I find the current crop of string libraries to limit my melodic options since I tend to write more towards what I know the samples can handle.

I know exactly what he's talking about, that's why sometime those Kurzweil strings tend to have a more satisfying feel when played than all of the high end libraries. 

I tend to use the high end of the velocity range and sometime layer in some Marc. samples in there as well to give me a more responsive melody (other times I find myself needing to offset the whole phrase).

I hope that LASS addresses some of what we're talking about here.


----------



## Thonex (May 8, 2009)

midphase @ Fri May 08 said:


> I hope that LASS addresses some of what we're talking about here.



Being able to call up a patch and just play a legato melody without fighting the samples is what I was after when I set off to do LASS... among other things.

And yes Jose, dynamic envelopes and sample-start times can definitely help things sound more varied and real.

T


----------



## germancomponist (May 8, 2009)

Thonex @ Sat May 09 said:


> Being able to call up a patch and just play a legato melody without fighting the samples is what I was after when I set off to do LASS... among other things.
> 
> And yes Jose, dynamic envelopes and sample-start times can definitely help things sound more varied and real.
> 
> T



And this is so very easy to do in Kontakt. The oldest synthesizer have had this funktions too... . :mrgreen: 

Gunther


----------



## Waywyn (May 8, 2009)

Hey Jose,

thanks a lot for giving us the chance to listen to that piece.
As for me personally I think you would have to care about a lot of other things since the problem (again this is just my opinion) isn't really in the attack of the samples but in some arranging and general making use of samples etc.

... the string staccato figure from 00:21 sounds very synthish (not Zimmer but more GM) and has not a lot of power to me. Regardless the dynamic level, (even if played at pp or p) it would sound much more organic and would have more impact. I think this is what you have lost by recutting those patches and unfortunately it also has a kind of a machine gun approach. Also I don't hear any dynamic change in the sustained phrases. It seems to be all just played with the keyboard.

I seriously appreciate if people are after something, trying to tweak, alter and edit everything which is possible, but I was just asking myself why you simply, in terms of EWQLSO, didn't use the QLegato patches, since their attack is kinda chopped off anyway?


----------



## MacQ (May 9, 2009)

Hmm ...

Whatever happened to the VonRichter project from 2 years ago ... the one in the "Audio Impressions High Resolution" thread. He was making some pretty bold claims, and people were really excited. Did that pan out to anything?

~Stu


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

Thomas_J @ Sat May 09 said:


> Ashermusic @ Fri May 08 said:
> 
> 
> > Just my 42.4 cents (2 cents adjusted for inflation.)
> ...


Yes, but the 2 cent figure dates back to the 50's at least. On the east coast when I was growing up, if you wanted just seltzer water with nothing added you ordered "two cents plain."


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 9, 2009)

Hey Jose, i think that your example works pretty well and that its a good approach. I Can also imagine that it will be easier to use these instruments in a wider range of compositions. It is really good when you can make a string run using a simple 15 violin patch that doesn't have incosistent attack times in the original samples. It just plays fluidly, both for fast and slow.

I think though, that the best solution in this case would be an added feature in samplers that would allow you to have more Start Time indexes versus the current one Start time index (In kontakt for example)

So for example with some made up numbers:

Start time 1: 0400 samples - Attack portion
Start time 2: 4300 samples - Sustain/loop portion
Start time 3: 5003 samples - Sustain/Loop portion B
Start time 3: 7094 samples - Release portion

Then being able to trigger these start times with either a clever script or some mod cc controller and the start time would be set to the new Start Time index. It seems a more fluid approach this way than editing the samples themselves.

The "Start time" constant is pretty cool too, but its incosistent due to the samples and not always accurate. Hand made start times are much better.

Plus you can use it for things like a solo violin playing a long Up/Down/Up/Down sample and then the indexes could be at the start of each up down instead of having them in different RR groups for example, it could be done via scripting. There could also be a "release" index and the sample could have the natural release of the hall itself.

Sorry if i got a bit carried away. I just love all this stuff :- )

Cheers,
Theo.


----------



## José Herring (May 9, 2009)

Waywyn @ Fri May 08 said:


> Hey Jose,
> 
> thanks a lot for giving us the chance to listen to that piece.
> As for me personally I think you would have to care about a lot of other things since the problem (again this is just my opinion) isn't really in the attack of the samples but in some arranging and general making use of samples etc.
> ...



Hi Waywyn,

I was trying to run the short strings through an amp modeler that's where the synthy comes from.

I appreciate your perception but to me I think it's pretty dynamic and expressive.. And, maybe it's me but it really doesn't sound all that keyboard like to me.

I used some qlegato patches. The horns are qleg. But the qlegato strings don't seem to work well for me.

Theo,

Your ideas are great! But how would you handle what Thonex talks about with the dynamic adsr envelops?


----------



## Waywyn (May 9, 2009)

Sorry to ask again, but I don't get it kinda ... seriously 
This is no ironic posting or something, but I don't get it.

If you want to have samples playing legato-ish lines and stick with EWQLSO, why don't you use the qlegato samples or make use of the Play engines legato/portamento features.

Besides that every VSL string lib since ever got legato/portamento going on.

Another thing would be to use scripts like TKT or SIPS to make samples automatically connect and also tweak the attack "size" in the beginning inside the script.

So basically there is a slution for almost every sample lib out there ... however I still think that the recutting of samples wouldn't change the tracks attitude or character. I clearly hear an issue of arranging and using samples itself .. but of course, this might be just me.


----------



## Frederick Russ (May 9, 2009)

Jose, thanks for sharing.

The chopped samples are not working, sorry. I believe I do understand the ideology behind what you're aiming at though so really do appreciate the demo. I think a lot of what you're wanting will be found in Lass though - far more expressive and realistic qualities on the staccatos which can be modified in real time to nearly percussive dynamics. Also, very tight editing on the attacks on the legatos.

------------
To all:

Regarding the thread, I personally think its unfortunate when things go south regarding interactions here from time to time. I've actually considered closing this thread early on but wanted to see it play itself out so that some resolution could come of it. I did not however because I could see both sides of the issues being discussed and was curious as to how it would play out.. That said, its never a welcome thing to see members attacking one another. We're all entitled to have a bad day here or there. Free speech is very important to me and to other members of the community. It should not be at the expense of continuing to allow personal attacks on others however and there are many reasons for this regarding VI's longevity. Consider taking personal squabbles and vendettas off the forum and resolve it privately.


----------



## José Herring (May 9, 2009)

The aim isn't realism. The aim is more lyricism. 

But, I just have to come to the fact that I'm just a far different type of composer than a lot of people here and that I think my days of offering help here and receiving it are kind of numbered.

As far as this thread is concerned it just got terrible. I'm really sorry that it did. But, it was not my doing or my intention.


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 9, 2009)

josejherring @ Sat May 09 said:


> Theo,
> 
> Your ideas are great! But how would you handle what Thonex talks about with the dynamic adsr envelops?



Thank you Jose,

I understand "dynamic adsr envelopes" as an envelope which volume points can be adjusted over time either by velocity or a controller.

I think that using the Flexible envelope gives you a lot of control over the various volume points. Both in the attack and the loop section of the envelope so you can make natural swells with their fade out for example. 

One could also connect the Flex envelope with a swell for example, to a certain EQ point to simulate the warmer sound as the volume goes up and does. Something like 10.000 Hz with a slight large Q value - but not too much of that perhaps -2 dB. Just so a tone change "is there"

And an example that comes to mind:

Connect CC1 to Sample Start at around 4%. Also connect CC1 to Attack of ADSR or Flex.

If CC1 is at 0, the sample plays normally from the start. If you set CC1 to 64, Sample start goes to 2% and Attack goes to 4ms.

CC1 to 127, Sample start goes to 2% , attack goes to 8 ms (depends on the curve you have)

You can optionally link the CC to the EQ band mentioned above.

Is this what you mean when mentioning dynamic envelopes? Perhaps you have a different concept in mind.

Best,
Theo


----------



## Stevie (May 9, 2009)

Sorry to say, but the example does not convince me aswell.
It sounds indeed very GM-ish. Try to get some distance from your 
track, listen to some other stuff and then get back and listen again.
You will see what we mean. I know it's hard to have an unprejudiced
opinion about your own stuff. Happens to me all the time.
That's the fate of the composer, I fear.




josejherring @ Sat May 09 said:


> The aim isn't realism. The aim is more lyricism.



I think you can't seperate those two. For me lyricism IS some part of realism.


@Waywyn:
about what you said concerning Hans Zimmer writing "easy to listen" stuff
(in Germany we would maybe say, the Dieter Bohlen of filmscoring…)
I do not agree that John Williams writes complicated music.
He writes elaborate music. That makes a difference imho.
And he is one of the composers that really know to write catchy themes.
As it has already been stated… John Williams has the abilty to put a simple
melody in a very elaborate orchestral environment. That does not make 
the melody less memorable.

Ask people on the street to whistle/hum the theme from red thin line, gladiator or some other blockbuster…
Then ask them to whistle/hum the theme from star wars, indiana jones, superman,
etc…

I'm sure people will go with the John Williams themes 
But anyway, I don't wanna say that Hans is inferior compared to JW.
It's just a different approach.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:


> The aim isn't realism. The aim is more lyricism.



I think you can't seperate those two. For me lyricism IS some part of realism.

[/quote]

I think that statement is entirely wrong. I can be lyrical playing a cello line with a string patch on a Moog, which is no way real sounding.


----------



## mikebarry (May 9, 2009)

I love Zimmer's work 

but lets not compare him to williams


----------



## bryla (May 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sat May 09 said:


> I think that statement is entirely wrong. I can be lyrical playing a cello line with a string patch on a Moog, which is no way real sounding.


No way! It's gonna sound like a real Moog! and that ALWAYS beats a cello :lol:


----------



## Waywyn (May 9, 2009)

Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:


> @Waywyn:
> about what you said concerning Hans Zimmer writing "easy to listen" stuff
> (in Germany we would maybe say, the Dieter Bohlen of filmscoring…)
> I do not agree that John Williams writes complicated music.
> ...



Hey Stevie, yeh I totally hear ya and you are absolutely right. When I said complicated I didn't mean the melodies or hooks at all. I was mainly talking about the ... well, how to put that, ... the background, the framework or the structure of the piece. While JW puts (of course not always) lots of stuff into it, Zimmer e.g. just holds a sustained string .. but in the end, only because something might be more easy to copy/redo/understand .. it doesn't mean it is worse than the other ... but on the other end, that maybe why Zimmer is being copied so much by hobby composers


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

bryla @ Sat May 09 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sat May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > I think that statement is entirely wrong. I can be lyrical playing a cello line with a string patch on a Moog, which is no way real sounding.
> ...



And when you combine the two, you have magic.


----------



## José Herring (May 9, 2009)

Despite some harsh criticism I still think this approach has merit.

Try this one:

https://www.yousendit.com/download/dVlw ... NVZMWEE9PQ


----------



## lux (May 9, 2009)

Good piece Jose. I just have been not so positively convinced by the horns sound, too thin and classical for the epic breath of the piece imho. In general the track works pretty good here. Thanks for sharing


----------



## bryla (May 9, 2009)

FWIW I really like the second piece! And I think it sounds nice.


----------



## PolarBear (May 9, 2009)

josejherring @ Sat May 09 said:


> The aim isn't realism. The aim is more lyricism.


If it's lyric orchestral strings sounds you were aiming for, your example failed to deliver completely. If it's a lyric sound you wanted to deliver, it's a valid option. It's that a certain aspect alone won't make the whole thing sound good.


----------



## José Herring (May 9, 2009)

The Second piece isn't mine. It's from a composer who's on staff at Remote Control. He does use truncated samples especially in the strings but they are only lightly cut back.

I only posted this to get myself out of the equation and find out what I could be doing better. I think that I may have cut my samples too far back. His are only slightly back and may be back only just far enough to get rid of the scratchy sound of the attack.

Well, I'll be back with more of my own stuff once I figure out how to edit properly.

Thanks for the feedback.

best,

Jose


----------



## Lex (May 9, 2009)

Great track! 

I think I understand what you r going for with these no attack patches..
They r much more lively, playable..and easy to work with...as in you can just play and compose and not think about mock up...as such I think concept is really cool..

Trade off is that final result sounds extremly outdated and synth-keyboard like..but you dont intend to use these sounds for anything final, they r just for quick mock up before going live right? or i didnt get it... 

aLex


----------



## Stevie (May 9, 2009)

> I think that statement is entirely wrong. I can be lyrical playing a cello line with a string patch on a Moog, which is no way real sounding.



That's something completely different. You use a synthetic instrument by intention. Of course I can plaòûO    #ZûO    #[ûO    #\ûO    #]ûO    #^ûO    #_ûO    #`ûO    #aûO    #bûO    #cûO    #dûO    #eûO    #fûO    #gûO    #hûO    #iûO    #jûO    #kûO    #lûO    #mûP    #nûP    #oûP    #pûP    #qûP    #rûP    #sûP    #tûP    #uûP    #vûP    #wûQ    #xûQ    #yûQ    #zûQ    #{ûQ    #|ûQ    #}ûQ    #~ûQ    #ûQ    #€ûQ    #ûQ    #‚ûQ    #ƒûQ    #„ûQ    #…ûQ    #†ûQ    #‡ûQ    #ˆûQ    #‰ûQ    #ŠûQ    #‹ûR    #ŒûR    #ûR    #ŽûR    #ûR    #ûR    #‘ûR    #’ûR    #“ûR    #”ûR    #•ûR    #–ûR    #—ûR    #˜ûR    #™ûR    #šûR    #›ûR    #œûR    #ûR    #žûR    #ŸûR    # ûR    #¡ûR    #¢ûR    #£ûR    #¤ûR    #¥ûR    #¦ûR    #§ûR    #¨ûR    #©ûR    #ªûR    #«ûR    #¬ûR    #­ûR    #®ûR    #¯ûR    #°ûR    #±ûR    #²ûR    #³ûR    #´ûR    #µûR    #¶ûR    #·ûR    #¸ûR    #¹ûR    #ºûR    #»ûR    #¼ûR    #½ûR    #¾ûR    #¿ûR    #ÀûR    #Áû


----------



## Frederick Russ (May 9, 2009)

Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:


> José,
> 
> sorry that you took it as "harsh criticism". Was not meant to be…
> Just my opinion, and I guess that also counts for the others who
> ...



Same goes here Jose. For me personally its better to hear the truth of what people think when I post a cue. I'll hear it from the client anyway, good and bad - since redos are part of the biz its better in the long run to deal with cue critiques as not an affront to your ability as a composer but to a particular small section of a mock-up etc.


----------



## José Herring (May 9, 2009)

Frederick Russ @ Sat May 09 said:


> Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > José,
> ...



I hear you buddy. 

I don't think I take it personally as much as my frustration shows through. The constant battle between doing what I hear in my head as opposed to what's really practical with samples.

But, I do appreciate the comments. Always have. And I've gotten a lot of decent things from the forum.

Jose


----------



## Niah (May 9, 2009)

I have said this before but here is hope it will bring some light to this.

This whole "sounds real" thing used to be pretty simple on discussion forums.

When something sounded good to certain people they would use the expression "that sounds real" and when they didn't like it they would say something like "that sounds fake or synthy".

And so as far as I know this expression was commonly used and everybody knew what they were refering to. And it is not meant to be taken literaly, meaning the term "real" here doesn't refer to realility or realism.

It makes perfect sense to me since sampling is used mainly to emulate acoustic instruments, so I can understand the origin of such expression. Particulary sample libraries are created to emulate the sound, performance and every aspect of a real orchestra. As time goes by these sample libraries get more and more complex and offer more and more possibilities to do so.

Somewhere along the line there has been some confusion between the expression "it sounds real"=it sounds good and the term "realism".
The first one (it sounds real) I have already stated that it refers to emulating but the term "realism" refers to imitation. Not the same.

Let me give you one example of this realism deal, striving for realism would be like programing a drum track having in mind the fact that a real drummer musician only has two hands therefore you are going to program your drum track with that limitation. You are imitating what a real musician can do and that's realism even if the sounds used sound synth/fake or whatever.

On another example, years ago I remember Jose H telling me that the trombone section in one of my tracks was too loud, louder than the perc and that that would never happen in the real world and it would be impossible to happen, or something along those lines. But I wasn't worried because I was not striving for realism but for rather the trombone sounding real, meaning that they sounded like trombones or what my perception of the sound of a trombone section is in that situation.

Jay asher's example of the cello patch + moog it's just so subjective. A good example of something sounding good but not real, would be striking a chord on a sampled piano and aftwards raising the volume of the decay of the sound. That would be impossible to happen on a live situation playing a real piano but if might sound good to me. An even more extreme example would be reverse a piano sound.

That's why it doesn't make too much sense stating that "most people here" strive for realism instead of something that sounds good. I don't see no one here writing music with samples with the mindset "hmm this doesn't sound too great but at least it's an accurate representation of how a real violin section would play something like this".

Realism is about repecting real world rules.

Sounding real is about aesthetics and its about: a piano sounding like a piano and strings sounding like strings. And what is that? Well that's highly subjective and it depends from individual to individual. But each person has a different representation of what a good sound of a recorded piano is. Still it's perfectly valid to have a discussion about your preferences. And not to beat on a dead horse but that's what the "it sounds real" refers to.

Now about this whole zimmer sound/remote control thing, personally I am not too found of it, most people say it's edgy and modern, but it sounds 80's, outdated and sometimes cheesy to me. hey I loved the 80's but it's over. :mrgreen: But I do love zimmer, I like quite a few scores he has made especially one of my favourite scores of all time for one of my favourite movies of all time The Thin Red Line.

Now Jose H, you said that people have posted "harsh and negative critiscism" about your clips. Now I understand what it's like to be excited about something, posting in a forum and people not sharing the same enthusiasm. But that's just the way it is, VI control is a very diverse place filled with people that are passionate about music. I don't think people have been harsh at all, I mean if this is harsh what's not harsh?

But what I am seeing more and more is people playing the "that's harsh and negative" card to anything that isn't 100% positive feedback. It's discouraging people from posting and turning VI into a place full of self-censoring users. VI used to be about "hey don't give me the nice job comments routine, give meyour honest opinion I can take it." If people like or dislike a certain sound or library they should be able to post it without someone making them feel guilty about doing so. I mean I still remember that years ago your first posts about SI strings were that they were fake and synthy and nobody said these were harsh comments. Good old times, now it seems like no one can do that anymore without taking heat for it.

Bottomline I think that Jose H, Jay Asher and others have a very particular aesthetic when it comes to sound and other things like libraries that are probably not in tune with the majority of the VI posting crowd, judging by what I have seen over time. But you only have to trust your ears and go with yourself, sometimes divergent opinons can even better confirm that you're on the right track.


----------



## chimuelo (May 9, 2009)

Nice one Niah.

Nothing worse than a hit-hat playing through a tom roll........ o=<


----------



## Niah (May 9, 2009)

[quote:e0fcb48a30="chimuelo @ Sun May 10, 2009 1:18 am"]Nice one Niah.

Nothing worse than a hit-hat playiòû    *û    +û    ,û    -û    .û    /û    0û    1û    2û    3û    4û    5


----------



## Pzy-Clone (May 9, 2009)

josejherring @ Sat May 09 said:


> Frederick Russ @ Sat May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:
> ...




I guess everyone is looking for some way of combining sound\expression with the freedom to write what you want...
So far its not quite there imo, and personally i feel chopping of the attacks is not the right way to go, perhaps just becouse its alot of work, and the results dont justify the labour.

But since you already did, ...have you tried sticking these in sips 2?
In the SAS Articulation script, you can have different groups for the attack , legato, and release parts of a phrase, so you could set it up so that each first note has a normal attack, the legato\connected notes are chopped, then finally a relase when you let go. (sounds like a bad metaphor for life or sex, but hey...it works. Sips i mean. )


----------



## midphase (May 9, 2009)

"If you know me you know that I kind of do take critique hard"

And you work at RC? I would assume that they rip composers apart for breakfast over there.


----------



## midphase (May 9, 2009)

"If you do (and I do) , do they not usually say something like either, "That sounds good" or "I don't like the way that sounds?" How often do they even use the term "real?" "

For the record, most directors that I work for are keenly aware that some samples that I use sound more real than others and generally tend to gravitate towards the more realistic stuff regardless of the composition.

And secondly, when "laypeople" say "That sounds good", 9 times out of 10 it's when the samples are better and not necessarily just the composition. They might not be able to express exactly why something sounds good and why something doesn't....but they will gravitate towards the better mixed and better sample piece!


----------



## Adelmo (May 9, 2009)

i think at the end , it is about the composition and the vibe you create, these are only tools and should be looked on as that, other wise we would not need the use of a real orchestra at all!!!! let me tell you nothing can match up standing in front and hearing a 100 human been putting their heart playing your music.

i can understand you frustration Jose', we deal with it every day and every film we lose, but its not because others music sounds better or good but mostly because they are better connected, today that the name of the game way before talent ever comes in..


----------



## Stevie (May 9, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sat May 09 said:


> Baloney, IMO. I guarantee you I can play a lyrical string part with either the Symphonic Implants or Kirk Hunter strings that most listeners will say, "That sounds lovely." (They would probably not use "vivid" as a descriptor."




Go for it, I'm all ears


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

Stevie @ Sat May 09 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sat May 09 said:
> 
> 
> > Baloney, IMO. I guarantee you I can play a lyrical string part with either the Symphonic Implants or Kirk Hunter strings that most listeners will say, "That sounds lovely." (They would probably not use "vivid" as a descriptor."
> ...



And my reward will be? I don't write on spec.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

midphase @ Sat May 09 said:


> "If you do (and I do) , do they not usually say something like either, "That sounds good" or "I don't like the way that sounds?" How often do they even use the term "real?" "
> 
> For the record, most directors that I work for are keenly aware that some samples that I use sound more real than others and generally tend to gravitate towards the more realistic stuff regardless of the composition.
> 
> And secondly, when "laypeople" say "That sounds good", 9 times out of 10 it's when the samples are better and not necessarily just the composition. They might not be able to express exactly why something sounds good and why something doesn't....but they will gravitate towards the better mixed and better sample piece!



What does "better" mean with samples? More real? Not necessarily. There are samples once again that I think sound better than the more highly praised more "real" sounding ones do and because I therefore probably write for them and mix them better, so will my client IMHO.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 9, 2009)

You always say that, Jay, and I agree in theory. But in the real world I've never heard good orchestral samples that don't sound real. The attributes that make samples sound good are present in real instruments.

The most important thing is life in the performances, which is closely tied to the articulations in the library (because good performances and articulations have a musical purpose). After that comes nuances in the sound, which gas to do with the recording and the programming - and again the performances.

The reason samples don't sound real is usually that they're synthy, and to me there's nothing good about that (in the context of orchestral samples). I like synths too, of course, but that's not the sound you want if you're trying to create a sampled orchestra.


----------



## tripit (May 9, 2009)

Jose, the second example does have that RC sound to it. It's very "pop score" sounding. Reminds me of how many people mix and edit sounds for pop records (bass guitar would be a good example here) Everything is compressed, trimmed, tucked and perfectly even sounding (the attacks I mean) no holes or dead notes. 

Anyway, it sounds good for that style of sound and I can hear what it is you are after. I think that you are right about the amount, you just cut it too much. You can still hear a fair amount of the attack in the the 2nd one, it's just enough to get a sense of attack. You still have an attack, it's just very fast into the body of the sound. I would try sips and if that doesn't work, trim just the very front of the attack and fast fade up to body.


----------



## tripit (May 9, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat May 09 said:


> You always say that, Jay, and I agree in theory. But in the real world I've never heard good orchestral samples that don't sound real. The attributes that make samples sound good are present in real instruments.
> 
> The most important thing is life in the performances, which is closely tied to the articulations in the library (because good performances and articulations have a musical purpose). After that comes nuances in the sound, which gas to do with the recording and the programming - and again the performances.
> 
> The reason samples don't sound real is usually that they're synthy, and to me there's nothing good about that (in the context of orchestral samples). I like synths too, of course, but that's not the sound you want if you're trying to create a sampled orchestra.



I agree.


----------



## tripit (May 9, 2009)

midphase @ Sat May 09 said:


> "
> For the record, most directors that I work for are keenly aware that some samples that I use sound more real than others and generally tend to gravitate towards the more realistic stuff regardless of the composition.



I find the same to be true here. A lot of the directors I work with have a pretty keen sense of what sounds realistic and what doesn't. And they almost always want it more realistic sounding. Of course, I believe a part of this is also the fact that they want their films to seem bigger in scope and budget than they really are. It helps them sell the film.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 9, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat May 09 said:


> You always say that, Jay, and I agree in theory. But in the real world I've never heard good orchestral samples that don't sound real. The attributes that make samples sound good are present in real instruments.
> 
> The most important thing is life in the performances, which is closely tied to the articulations in the library (because good performances and articulations have a musical purpose). After that comes nuances in the sound, which gas to do with the recording and the programming - and again the performances.
> 
> The reason samples don't sound real is usually that they're synthy, and to me there's nothing good about that (in the context of orchestral samples). I like synths too, of course, but that's not the sound you want if you're trying to create a sampled orchestra.



Once again, this is a matter of perception. Let's go back to our beloved Kurzweil 1000 PX clarinet and compare it to i.e the VSL clarinet. If you poll every member of this forum, probably not even 1/2 dozen would say it sounds as "real" as the VSL. And yet I tell you that in many, if not most, circumstances, even with the limited articulations I would rather compose with it, because I will write to its strengths and avoid its weaknesses. And we have to do that, no matter which sample libraries we use.

The worst music is produced by folks who say to themselves, "This is what a real orchestra does so I will bend and manipulate the samples until they come as close to that as possible." Better music is produced by those who say, 'Wow, this sample sounds great when I write this for it and not so good when I write that for it, so I will write this rather than that."

The same is true of singers and real players btw. You do not write for a french horn the same way you write for a flute. They have different characteristics. The french horn has more body, speaks slower. Good composers, whether writing for singers, players or samples, factor these things in and compose accordingly. Bad ones say, "This is what I hear in my head and dammit this singer, player, or sampled instrument is going to have to find a way to do that."

Directors/producers who really understand music say to their composer, "I wish I had the budget for a real orchestra as I think it calls for an orchestral score. I realize however that sample based scores can never do that, so write me a great score and make it sound as good as you can."

Directors/producers who DON"T really understand music say to their composer, "I wish I had the budget for a real orchestra as I think it calls for an orchestral score. But since I don't, write me a great score and when I hear it, I damn well better think I am listening to a real orchestra or I will hire someone else."

Those guys exist, I know, and those of you who want their gigs are welcome to my potential share of them.


----------



## midphase (May 10, 2009)

I have never heard a director tell me either one of those things. They don't reason in those terms. 

They will however reference a certain score and say that they want something in that character or vein. If the score they reference happens to be an orchestral score, then that means they want an orchestral sounding score from me.

I think that most directors realize that samples will not sound like the real deal....as a matter of fact, most of them will be surprised at how much better it sounds than they originally imagined.

The ones who have unrealistic expectations of what samples should sound like, are generally also the ones who don't really know what a real orchestra sounds like in the first place. Those are the guys who will complain that the strings sound fake until you actually tell them that the strings are real...and then hopefully they will shut the fk up!


----------



## tripit (May 10, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sat May 09 said:


> Directors/producers who DON"T really understand music say to their composer, "I wish I had the budget for a real orchestra as I think it calls for an orchestral score. But since I don't, write me a great score and when I hear it, I damn well better think I am listening to a real orchestra or I will hire someone else."
> 
> Those guys exist, I know, and those of you who want their gigs are welcome to my potential share of them.




I don't think it's that cut and dry really. 

You can do both, write great stuff and still come across as sounding real. It's not an either or situation. And what sounds real to us, isn't what sounds real to them. Yes, it can't sound like crap. It has to sound professionally done. If I have a director that I know doesn't want anything that sounds too much like a sample, I make sure what ever I do, there isn't something in there that is going grab his ear as a sample. We certainly have big enough palettes of quality stuff to choose from. I've never had one come back and say, man that part sounded like crap, I'm going to hire someone else. You write to and with what sounds good. That's the number one rule when writing with orchestral samples for orchestral mocks. Don't write a solo french horn part, naked out in the open if you don't have the sample/articulation or chops to make it realistic sounding. I think most of us do that anyway.


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 10, 2009)

All the editing and judging of samples/real and all those things happen in the head while listening happens in the heart.

Its easy to find a way in someone's head with a flashy production, but not in their heart with a great piece of music.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 10, 2009)

tripit @ 10/5/2009 said:


> I find the same to be true here. A lot of the directors I work with have a pretty keen sense of what sounds realistic and what doesn't. And they almost always want it more realistic sounding. Of course, I believe a part of this is also the fact that they want their films to seem bigger in scope and budget than they really are. It helps them sell the film.



Bingo. Same experience here.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

midphase @ Sat May 09 said:


> I have never heard a director tell me either one of those things. They don't reason in those terms.
> 
> They will however reference a certain score and say that they want something in that character or vein. If the score they reference happens to be an orchestral score, then that means they want an orchestral sounding score from me.
> 
> ...



By and large, I agree with this post.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

TheoKrueger @ Sun May 10 said:


> All the editing and judging of samples/real and all those things happen in the head while listening happens in the heart.
> 
> Its easy to find a way in someone's head with a flashy production, but not in their heart with a great piece of music.



+1.


----------



## rgames (May 10, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun May 10 said:


> I will write to its strengths and avoid its weaknesses. And we have to do that, no matter which sample libraries we use.



We have to do that when writing for live orchestra, as well, if we want it to sound "good". Try putting an exposed pianissimo line in the extreme upper register of the horns. Then hire an orchestra and have them play it - it'll sound real - probably really bad!

Whether we're writing for samples, string quartet, solo piano, full orchestra, whatever, we have to know the limitations of the performance device in order to make it sound "good".

"Real" and "Good" are two separate evaluations. A work can be both, neither, or one or the other.

This discussion brings up the larger question of how technology influences opinions of music. There was a time when horns didn't have valves, and clarinets had fewer keys. When those instruments were modified, they no longer sounded like their previous versions, and a lot of composers didn't like the new sounds.

Brahms continued to write for the older horn of his time, not the more modern valved horn with its additional capabilities. Here's a comment he wrote regarding his horn trio:

"I would be apprehensive about hearing it with the valve horn. All poetry is lost, and the timbre is crude and dreadful right from the start."


What's old is new again...!

rgames


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

[quote="tripit @ Sun May 10, 2009 12:26 am"

You write to and with what sounds good. That's the number one rule when writing with orchestral samples for orchestral mocks. Don't write a solo french horn part, naked out in the open if you don't have the sample/articulation or chops to make it realistic sounding. I think most of us do that anyway.[/quote]

In this exactly what I said in my post, that whether it is real players/singers or samples you need to write to their strengths and disguise their weaknesses?

I have never had it happen, but if a director said to me, "I like that cue but the french horn sounds too much like a sample" then obviously I would go back and either choose a different one or disguise it a little. If after I did so he said, "it still sounds too much like a sample" I would say, "It IS a sample. If you want a real french horn, this is what it will cost you for me to record one."

If that costs me the gig, well, I really wasn't the right guy for it.

I have probably been a little hyperbolic in this thread. I guess what bothers me is the following:

I did a DVD release for a producer who I used to be an actor on "Little House On The Prairie." It was about the boyhood of the character he played. The music was classic Americana, Copeland-esque.

I have done other projects for him but this time he absolutely loved everything I sent him. I kept getting back emails saying, "I was very touched by that cue." Or ""That theme brought tears to my eyes", etc.

We both thought, as did the picture mixer, that the music worked great with the film, as did my wife, who has no problem telling me when she does not think something works and to my irritation, is almost always right.

But I am totally convinced that were I to post any of it here, I would get comments from people saying, "The strings sound synthy at bar 5" or "you should have mixed that acoustic guitar back cause it sound fake" or "why do you use that library, it sucks", etc.

I really like and respect many of you here. It may not seem so at times, but I truly do. But as a whole, this forum has become a little like the Hapsburg line of the British family, limited because of too much in-breeding. There is so much micro-focusing on the samples that what has been lost is that at the end of the day it is far less about the tools then what you do with them. 

My composition teacher, Avram David, used to say "I would pay money to hear Ornette Coleman break bottles against trash cans because he is so good I know he would make good music doing so."

I you have ANY of today's libraries and you know how to write for them, you have all the tools you need to write emotional music to picture that serves it well and pleases the client, if the client is not a dipshit. If you do not know how to write for them, tweaking the samples, adding tons of cc11 and cc1, or getting the new greatest library will not help you.

It's the guy, not the gear.


----------



## dcoscina (May 10, 2009)

Sometimes I feel as though my music chops are suffering because I get so distracted with the sonic quality of what I'm writing. That's why when I'm working on a concert piece, I use NOTION or Sibelius. Whatever allows me to think in terms of music first and sounds later. 

Back in the '90s, I used a couple Roland racks (M-OC1, M-SE1) along with the orchestral expansion card for my JV880 and Proteus 2. Did it sound as good as today? No. Did my music sound worse than today? Nope. I have been archiving some of my old K2000 based pieces and they still hold up and terms of musicality. Yes, the sounds are a little dated but it just supports what Jay said about the sounds- it's the composer first and foremost. 

Honestly, sometimes I feel like all this tweaking of sounds is antithetical to writing good music, but I guess it's a necessary evil in today's film score world where most budgets demand the inclusion of samples. I'm on a project now that has no money for real instruments so I'm using Symphobia, VSL and EWQLSO to get the job done. Whatever works at the end of the day I say.


----------



## jeffc (May 10, 2009)

Hey Jay - 

Just to follow up on your last post, I feel the same way. In fact I wonder if I'm doing a different job than what's discussed here. My setup pales in comparison to a lot of the techy stuff that people get hung up on here. And I'm fine with that, I really just rather focus on making music than all the intricate details of scripting (I don't even know how to) or the latest cutting edge crap. At a point, I think everyone has enough stuff to make good sounding music and quit looking for that magic library or plugin that's going to make everything better. There will always be another. Go back and listen to some of Chris Beck's Buffy stuff which was all samples from 10 years ago, and tell me that it matters. That guy is a monster composer, and would make a casio sound great. It's no surprise he is where he is today. In fact, maybe it's me, but take away Lost, and I can watch a bunch of tv shows that most likely have sampled orchestra, but not even pay attention or care that it is, the music sounds good, has the correct emotional effect for the scene, to a point that the question of 'realism' doesn't even cross my mind as a viewer, and that really means that it's successful in its purpose.

In fact, I kind of wonder how the hell I get any work cause I don't know half of the things people are talking about around here. Funny. I've got to laugh at some of the crazy library discussions, like what's the best shakers or cymbals or sleighbell, I mean come on, go buy one and pop up a mike. At a certain point we have to remember that we're musicians selling emotion, not computer scientists......


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

jeffc @ Sun May 10 said:


> Hey Jay -
> 
> Just to follow up on your last post, I feel the same way. In fact I wonder if I'm doing a different job than what's discussed here. My setup pales in comparison to a lot of the techy stuff that people get hung up on here. And I'm fine with that, I really just rather focus on making music than all the intricate details of scripting (I don't even know how to) or the latest cutting edge crap. At a point, I think everyone has enough stuff to make good sounding music and quit looking for that magic library or plugin that's going to make everything better. There will always be another. Go back and listen to some of Chris Beck's Buffy stuff which was all samples from 10 years ago, and tell me that it matters. That guy is a monster composer, and would make a casio sound great. It's no surprise he is where he is today. In fact, maybe it's me, but take away Lost, and I can watch a bunch of tv shows that most likely have sampled orchestra, but not even pay attention or care that it is, the music sounds good, has the correct emotional effect for the scene, to a point that the question of 'realism' doesn't even cross my mind as a viewer, and that really means that it's successful in its purpose.
> 
> In fact, I kind of wonder how the hell I get any work cause I don't know half of the things people are talking about around here. Funny. I've got to laugh at some of the crazy library discussions, like what's the best shakers or cymbals or sleighbell, I mean come on, go buy one and pop up a mike. At a certain point we have to remember that we're musicians selling emotion, not computer scientists......



Thank you Jeff. I feel a little less alone now


----------



## PolarBear (May 10, 2009)

In position of realism:

It couldn't get more real with a video of a Highschool orchestra on Youtube playing some or that piece. But we'll agree that's not the realism we're after. We want good sounding recordings from playable orchestral library patches. That's what at least Jose's intention was, but he gotta adjust a quite few parameters to get there. The idea is worth spending more time with it, the results yet are sub-youtubish.


----------



## Stevie (May 10, 2009)

> And my reward will be? I don't write on spec.



Reward? You claimed you can probably do it. 
So the proposition came from your side.
You want me to pass the hat?


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

Stevie @ Sun May 10 said:


> > And my reward will be? I don't write on spec.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No I said I COULD do it, not that I WOULD do it.

Cash up front, brotha, cash up front, money talks, b.s walks


----------



## _taylor (May 10, 2009)

jeffc @ Sun May 10 said:


> Hey Jay -
> 
> Just to follow up on your last post, I feel the same way. In fact I wonder if I'm doing a different job than what's discussed here. My setup pales in comparison to a lot of the techy stuff that people get hung up on here. And I'm fine with that, I really just rather focus on making music than all the intricate details of scripting (I don't even know how to) or the latest cutting edge crap. At a point, I think everyone has enough stuff to make good sounding music and quit looking for that magic library or plugin that's going to make everything better. There will always be another. Go back and listen to some of Chris Beck's Buffy stuff which was all samples from 10 years ago, and tell me that it matters. That guy is a monster composer, and would make a casio sound great. It's no surprise he is where he is today. In fact, maybe it's me, but take away Lost, and I can watch a bunch of tv shows that most likely have sampled orchestra, but not even pay attention or care that it is, the music sounds good, has the correct emotional effect for the scene, to a point that the question of 'realism' doesn't even cross my mind as a viewer, and that really means that it's successful in its purpose.
> 
> In fact, I kind of wonder how the hell I get any work cause I don't know half of the things people are talking about around here. Funny. I've got to laugh at some of the crazy library discussions, like what's the best shakers or cymbals or sleighbell, I mean come on, go buy one and pop up a mike. At a certain point we have to remember that we're musicians selling emotion, not computer scientists......




It is called VI Control after all ..

I see your point though and I agree with it, but I also think that discussing your set up/tech stuff and being computer savvy is just as important as writing good music.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 10, 2009)

"It's the guy, not the gear."

And Kobe Bryant would beat me one-on-one if I wear the best sneakers in the world and he wears high heels. But that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

Even if you like the 1000 PX clarinet - and it does have a nice wooden sound - you're going to sound half as good using a Kurzweil as you would using good modern sample libraries. I don't care if you write to the Kurzweil; the world hasn't stood still for the past ten years.

And that's not a dis on Kurzweils, which had a very long run at the top and can still sound very good in many contexts. But if you want to do orchestral music with samples, you want modern samples that sound real.

There's no reason for me to post again why I say that's true, but the general idea is that expressive samples will sound real and vice versa.


----------



## Niah (May 10, 2009)

It's the guy/gal, the gear and everything in between.

Everything counts.

In a way I understand the expression, I mean in an increasingly technological world sometimes we forget that machines don't run by themselfs. But cmon particulary in our field of work, gear and technology are huge factors. And especially if you write for film which is one of the most technological mediums, you are going to have to keep up.

But lets say that you are not a composer for film and media, no one can argue that new tools and new technology offer more possibilities of expressing your vision.

Every artist strives for new tools or is going to create new ones in order to expand his or hers palette of colours.

I agree with Nick B on alot of his points, I mean sure I still use the strings in atmopshere from time to time but I don't use them ALL the time. There's certain gear which has a certain charisma and magic that will remain in our templates for a long time but they don't work as substitutes for new gear and tools.

Otherwise what are we doing here anyway? (o)


----------



## spectrum (May 10, 2009)

Thonex @ Fri May 08 said:


> And yes Jose, dynamic envelopes and sample-start times can definitely help things sound more varied and real.


Just so you know Jose, I agree with this and this approach has been widely used since the early 80's with the first samplers that had this capability.

My only point was that simply truncating the attacks was not the 'secret' of Hans string samples.....it's just one of many useful, time-tested sampling/programming techniques that have been around since the dawn of hardware samplers.

Having samples performed by the LSO and recorded by top engineers at Abby Road/Air Lyndhurst with a serious passion and "money's no object" approach has a whole lot more to do with the excellent sound of Hans' private samples.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 10, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun May 10 said:


> "It's the guy, not the gear."
> 
> And Kobe Bryant would beat me one-on-one if I wear the best sneakers in the world and he wears high heels. But that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
> 
> ...



Once again, you are equating "expressive" with '"real". They are not necessarily synonymous.

OK I will settle for having convinced at least a few here.


----------



## Niah (May 10, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Mon May 11 said:


> OK I will settle for having convinced at least a few here.



yea that example you posted for stevie to prove your argument was really convincing  8) 

Seriously now, I don't think that you have convinced anyone about anything, we are all free-thinking people here at VI and what I saw was users who agree with some of your points. You are not saying anything new that someone hasn't said before. I hope that you are not posting to convince people here, I know that that's probably not the case but im just saying. No one is right or wrong here we are just expressing our points of view which reflect in a way what type of composers and musicians we are and one can only learn from sharing these different points of view with others.

And btw Nick B is not saying that "expressive" and "real" are synonymous. He is simply saying that if samples are more expressive they will sound more real, which I couldn't agree more. Essentially the more atributes the samples contain from the acoustic instruments you are emulating with sampling the more natural and genuine they will sound.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 10, 2009)

Jay, my favorite synth in the world is the Yamaha VL1. I play it with EWI, and it has some programs that sound like acoustic instruments - except that they're acoustic instruments that don't exist. They respond like acoustic instruments too, and I could get arrested, I love that instrument combination (VL1/EWI) so much.

Expressive and real - two different things.

The VL1 also has some programs that fall short of emulating the instruments they're going after, and they sound like dookie. Some of its sax programs sound like plastic saxes. They're nice enough sounds, they're expressive, but they suck because they sound like bad emulations.

Samples of real instruments that don't sound like the real instrument they're samples of also suck.


----------



## midphase (May 10, 2009)

Grab it while it's hot!!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kurzweil-1000-PX-Rack-Mounted-MIDI-Expansion_W0QQitemZ350194157922QQcmdZViewItemQQptZKeyboards_MIDI?hash=item518932c962&_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116 (http://cgi.ebay.com/Kurzweil-1000-PX-Ra ... .m20.l1116)


----------



## NYC Composer (May 10, 2009)

If one dd not want to write 'real' sounding 'orchestral music', why would one buy a 'real' sounding 'orchestral library'( and usually an expensive one, at that)?

Although I'm sure you could write non-orchestral music with orchestral samples if you bent your brain enough, seems to me the point of buying an 'orchestral' library is that one wishes it to sound like instruments found in an 'orchestra'. Otherwise, one would save one's money and just bang on de drum all day.

This 'My object is not to make it sound real, my object is to make it sound good" argument seems specious to me, and at this point, driven into the ground. If one wants things to sound 'good', when speaking of orchestral music, there will be a SOME desire to make it sound 'real' as well. It's a no -brainer.

Yes, you ALWAYS have to write to your samples. That's how you get compositions to sound both gooder and realer. :wink:


----------



## tripit (May 10, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Sun May 10 said:


> both gooder and realer. :wink:



Heard over the PA: "Grammer police......we have a clean up on isle nine!"  :wink: =o


----------



## NYC Composer (May 10, 2009)

'Spelling police...we have a...."...oh, never mind  .


----------



## tripit (May 10, 2009)

LOL, yeah, I should talk.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 10, 2009)

I have a 1000 PX+ in a rack that hasn't had power going to it for about five years.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 11, 2009)

I had a Kweil SX, an HX, and a 250. I was _hooked_.

Somewhere in there, though, I bought a bunch of Roland S760s and Eric's outstanding Roland Orch Library....and the game starting changing for me then.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

I think I posted here recently that I have two broken K250s in my garage (one of which belonged to Chick Corea), a working 250 RMX in a closet, that 1000 PX+, and my controller is a K2500X.

The 2500 replaced a K2000. I owned an HX1000 at one point too.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

On a tangent, arguing with myself: it's easy to forget that people were coming up with great samples and programs in the early '80s too. I have the entire MIDI City Prophet 2000 library in the same closet with the 250 RMX, for example, and I'm sure there are a lot of good sounds in there. After a bunch of grinding, those floppies probably still load.

Same with all the Kurzweil sounds - there must be some really good ones in the floppy disk library I have.

But I'm behind in reviewing current sample libraries, so that's gonna hafta wait...


----------



## NYC Composer (May 11, 2009)

I dunno, Nick. At this point, I think I have any bases that the kweil stuff could provide covered...and with Komplete 5, well, the Pro 53 and the FM8 sound pretty smokin' to me, for software. I have Omnisphere for...well...everything , really, etc etc etc.

Except for orch sounds, which I can never get enough of, I think I'm pretty much covered. I converted all my Roland disks to Mach 5 ( GREAT conversion)...that was it for me in terms of revisiting the past.YMMV.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 11, 2009)

Niah @ Sun May 10 said:


> Ashermusic @ Mon May 11 said:
> 
> 
> > OK I will settle for having convinced at least a few here.
> ...



Not necessarily, again. I could tweak the envelope, transpose the samples, and EQ an Oboe sound to the point where it no longer sounded like a real oboe, but it might still be very expressive. A lot of composers whose work I like frequently go to rather elaborate lengths with filters and such to make even real instruments sound less like what they really sound like.

Real, shmeal, good sound is the key. As my engineer friends say, "if it sounds good, it is good."

I am indeed trying to convince some people here, mostly newbies, to worry less about how real the samples are that they have and just spend more time composing with them and trying to make them sound s good as possible.. I think there is just too much focus on it. 

Someone wrote here that when he re-visited his older stuff done with what would not be considered less than stellar samples, it held up really well.That is my experience too. I have some cues done almost 20 years ago with a Proteus Orchestral Plus, M1, and the previously mentioned Kurzweil 1000 PX that I still think sound darned good.

And I do not have to post anything here. My website has lots of samples of my work where people can make up their minds about whether or not it is worthwhile to a least consider my point of view. If they like what they hear they can reach one conclusion, and if not, reach a different conclusion.


----------



## Stevie (May 11, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 11 said:


> Samples of real instruments that don't sound like the real instrument they're samples of also suck.



Thanks for pointing that out so briefly Nick. That's exactly what I meant.


----------



## synthetic (May 11, 2009)

Jay, this is a website where people come to learn about samples and techniques to make their mockups more realistic. Every forum has it's specialty, and this one is more or less about creating film scoring orchestral mockups. There is the occasional composition thread which I also enjoy. But mostly it's about sample libraries. 

It's the guy AND the gear.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

Nah, it's just the gear.


----------



## madbulk (May 11, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Mon May 11 said:


> Someone wrote here that when he re-visited his older stuff done with what would not be considered less than stellar samples, it held up really well.That is my experience too. I have some cues done almost 20 years ago with a Proteus Orchestral Plus, M1, and the previously mentioned Kurzweil 1000 PX that I still think sound darned good.



+1 and BETTER in some cases. I'm not sure how I feel about this, but nonetheless...


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 11, 2009)

Its how much you enjoy what you do! Sure, i can make you guys 10 cappuccinos, but if i dont put my self in the shoes of the person drinking the coffee or if i dont drink coffee myself it will come out like some brown liquid with milk which is supposed to be a cappuccino. The spirit of the coffee just wont be there! Plus i need a cappuccino machine to make the frothy milk in the first place ;- )

Its the beans, the toasting, the coffee, the machine, the sugar, the milk and the art that makes a cappuccino into the cappucino it is. Understand coffee, understand the underlying unity of the universe.







0oD


----------



## jtenney (May 11, 2009)

rgames wrote:

This discussion brings up the larger question of how technology influences opinions of music. There was a time when horns didn't have valves, and clarinets had fewer keys. When those instruments were modified, they no longer sounded like their previous versions, and a lot of composers didn't like the new sounds.

Brahms continued to write for the older horn of his time, not the more modern valved horn with its additional capabilities. Here's a comment he wrote regarding his horn trio:

"I would be apprehensive about hearing it with the valve horn. All poetry is lost, and the timbre is crude and dreadful right from the start."


What's old is new again...!


I like what Richard brought up about perspectives of the past from the future, and also the strange ones of the present from other domains of the present. [Did that come out understandable? I'm short on sleep...]

Reminds me of something from, I think, Nicholas Slonimsky's classic "Compendium of Musical Invective," in which Tschaikovsky is writing a letter of complaint: "I just heard the latest composition from that scoundrel Brahms. What a giftless bastard!"

Maybe that really does fit in a thread about Zimmer...

later,
John


----------



## jtenney (May 11, 2009)

I remembered another choice piece of "musical invective" from a master at it, Stravinsky. He was once asked his opinion of Messiaen's music, and he replied: "It would go well in a movie. 'Charlie Chan In Indochina!'"

Welllll...

later,
John


----------



## Brobdingnagian (May 11, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon May 11 said:


> On a tangent, arguing with myself...



Thank you Nick, for making me laugh a deep, hearty chuckle on this Monday AM.

That is a classic line....after all, half of these arguments are silly. Why NOT go off on a tangent AND then commence to to argue with one's self?


----------



## interoctave (May 11, 2009)

I'm amazed that some do not see Jay's side (and others who agree with him) of the debate here.

I believe that:
No _one _thing is the determining factor to whether or not a score, a cue, a song, etc., is going to sound "good."

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. All of the elements combined, including samples, the composition, the execution (musicianship, sequencing, etc.), determine the overall effectiveness of the music.

The ability to score to picture is a science and art that is an absolute requirement for a good sounding cue or score.

The focus on samples can influence one into thinking that that's all that matters. We all like to have real-sounding virtual instruments, but the quality of samples should also be something that's viewed with perspective.

If the only factor for success was the "realness" of the instruments and samples, then at least half of todays' scores for film and television would fail, due to the fact that many scores are hybrid - incorporating synths, sound design, and instruments such as Omnisphere and Evolve.

I truly believe that if Mozart, Beethoven, and other great composers of the past could teleport themselves to the present time, they would be ecstatic...first, for having a palette of fairly convincing virtual instruments to compose with, and second, for having even more tools such as synths, etc., that make the palette unlimited in potential. (Then, once they understood composing to picture, they'd put all of us out of business.)  

I have a cue that needed a solo oboe and it turned out that the one from the old Proteus 2 bank worked best (I have a sample of it for EXS). The ones from VSL and E/W did not work nearly as well. This may defy "common sense," but one has to use one's ears to know what sounds good or not...and it's not necessarily the newest, biggest, fattest library or sample on the block.

And one other thing I find amazing is that this thread is now ten pages long and has completely gone off track from Jose's original question. :o 

- R. Safir


----------



## midphase (May 11, 2009)

"I think I posted here recently that I have two broken K250s in my garage (one of which belonged to Chick Corea), a working 250 RMX in a closet, that 1000 PX+, and my controller is a K2500X. "

...and a scooter!


----------



## midphase (May 11, 2009)

"I'm amazed that some do not see Jay's side (and others who agree with him) of the debate here. "

I don't think the two views are exclusive. I think you need sharp compositional chops AND a great sounding reel in order to compete against the other guy.

If you happen to specialize in orchestral music, you better have some realistic material on your reel. I do also think that at some point you achieve a curve of diminishing returns for your efforts. In the sense that the benefits that you will gain by going O.C.D. with realism will probably not gain you a whole lot more than you would have achieved with the judicious (but efficient) usage of solid samples.


----------



## synthetic (May 11, 2009)

Q: "What guitar should I buy for more of a modern rock sound?"
A: "It's the player, gear doesn't matter." 

Q: "What shoes should I get for long-distance running on pavement?"
A: "Doesn't matter..."

etc. 

This isn't the only board Jay trolls on. And yet I keep getting sucked in, sigh.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

"...and a scooter!"

Yeah baby!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

Jay's not trolling, Jeff - he actually has the questionable taste to disagree with some things I say (but fortunately not often).

Worse, he's a political centrist!!!!


----------



## midphase (May 11, 2009)

Agreed...Jay is not a troll, he has valid ideas and a clear and respectful way of presenting them.

Ideologically I tend to agree with him...but practically not so much.


----------



## Niah (May 11, 2009)

The thing is that this isn't Jay Asher's side, what Jay is saying we all acknowledge to some degree. The issue about jay's arguments is that he is being an absolutist and making wrong assumptions about VI users.

It's either this or that type of argument, when we are pretty much on the same page here in the sense that we acknowledge the importance of several factors in music making. 

Then you talk about these newbies, where are they? To me it seems that most active posters at VI are not newbies at all. Or is it a newbie someone who says thinks like "that sounds real"? And if you are one I doubt that newbies don't know already that everything from composition, orchestration, mixing, production, gear, etc...is crucial. Everything is.
Why do you make the assumption that people here only care about gear? Is it because they keep talking about it? Because this is a virtual instruments forum you know? But besides this forum still has other sections here to discuss such things like composition, orchestration, mixing and working in industry in much more in depth, not just in general terms like it's being done here, why not direct these discussions to those places?

You have stated inumerous times that it's all about making things sound good and you can make it sound good with any orchestral library. We know this and we get it. But we can still have a specific discussion about the particularities or each orchestral library. 

But right now this goes well beyond samples and libraries, this about hijacking every thread by just stating the obvious. Stating what everyone knows already. It's unnecessary and It always ends like this, going around in circles ...until someone gets tired or realises just how side tracked the thread has gone.

I mean you have a typical topic at sample talk about "what libraries are good for comedy scoring" or "what libraries are good for that hollywood sound". And here we go again "there's no comedy sound or hollywood sound it's all about orchestration, mxing, etc.."
And we all know this already, and it isn't helping anyone at all. Either you have a suggestion for a library or you don't. On the other hand if you want to discuss the hollywood sound of comedy sound or orchestration or composition or whatever try to do so on other sections on the forum that were created for that purpose.
I mean I am not saying that people shouldn't say this, once, twice, 3 times a lady, sometimes we forget what's important and loose perspective, but more than that can be insulting to the person who is looking for some specific helpful insights.

I don't think that Jay A is a troll either but I understand Jeff mentioning it. Some of his behaviour in this forum has resembled trolling no matter how polite it is. You can still be polite and trolling. But he is a reasonable person and I have seen him appologize on some ocasions.

I think that bottomline sometimes Jay A forgets what's this forum all about as well as its dynamics.

I mean I understand people being upset when they see that no matter what the topic is it always goes down this road.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 11, 2009)

Niah, that is a fair criticism and I will give it some thought. I am not a troll but I do tend to get perhaps too strident and persistent on this issue.

As for Jeff, he is entitled to think of me as a troll if he wants. I thought the way he treated Audio Impressions was pretty trollish, so there you go.


----------



## lux (May 11, 2009)

Despite the fact i sometimes disagree with Jay on some matters, i think he's pointing out a concept that deserves some good attention, at least thats what i've deducted out of his words. Concept is that too many times on this forum people tend to detache art from technique and to offer a sterile point of view, often just dictated from whats up and fresh to the "industry" or hyped by trends in our communities. 

Knowing that he sells stuff done with old tools and it works makes me a good impression in general..At least better than hearing that you wont need anything else than layering three loops from Evolve to be a best seller today.


----------



## dinerdog (May 11, 2009)

Niah @ Sun May 10 said:


> It's the guy/gal, the gear and everything in between.
> 
> Everything counts.
> 
> ...




I couldn't agree more. Here are my thoughts:

*Keeping it real:*

I think we as the composers could use a little perspective. Of course the definition of 'real' or 'realness' is different for everyone because we're listening for different things in the music, BUT on some level I think the meaning of 'real' has evolved to mean 'that which sounds like it's from a movie'.

*Film music:*

I remember an old Jeff Rona column saying that film music just had that certain 'thing' about it. When a director says 'that sounds real', some of them mean 'it could be in a movie that's in theaters'. When you write music that makes their movie sound like it could be in theaters too, then you've written some *'real-ly'* good music. :D

*Samples vs the 'real' thing:*

Coaxing the best performance out of any sample is sometimes akin to a producer getting the best performance out of whoever the session guy is. So it's the guy and the gear for me. I still make my living using converted Roland samples that Eric Persing 'coaxed' a REALLY good performance out of. I think the variety of sample libraries as more players in my band that I have to work with. If they all did exactly as I wanted, I might be less inventive. It's such a solitary job we do, I'll take any kind of feedback loop I can get. So playing to a samples strength is not always that bad. (I have some pet peeves on where I think software has made thing more homogenous and predictable, but that's another thread).

*Forum hostility:*

We as musicians are a competitive bunch, and I think sometimes it's hard to be open and friendly when there's an artificial or popular notion of what's good. I don't think writers and painters have the same problem when they get together. Their styles are usually so different they don't feel the need to compete head on. We on the other hand are all going after the same small audience of directors and producers.

*Now, regarding Zimmer and his strings:*

1. I love his stuff. I wore my "Radio Flyer" cd out. Shirley Walker and Bruce Fowlers orchestration were incredible. And as someone mentioned earlier: A World Apart, Black Rain, Driving Miss Daisy and many others changed the game. Show me someone else whose done over 100 features that doesn't have a 'sound' that sometimes gets familiar.

2. I think he'll use whatever he has in whatever time he has. Whether it's 25 Gigastudios and 100 Roland S760s or an acoustic piano & cello (if those are the parameters). He pushes the limits as a way of life, not as an excuse not to do something. He's just trying to find a sound the will make him forget what time it is, or about how many days it's been since he slept. 

3. I also think his obsession is to try and top himself. Only by writing that volume of music will you get to those rarified places where you can surprise yourself in a big way. I'm sure the music has been playing in his head for 52 years. He's just trying to let it out to make room for new stuff.

I could go on...but I'm a newbie here. : >


----------



## NYC Composer (May 11, 2009)

Not to get tiresome here, but...wait, I don't care if I'm tiresome.

If you didn't want 'better', i.e. to some degree 'realer' samples, you'd still be with the Proteus and the PX. Why bother with the unnecessary expense of EWQL, Vienna, etc etc. After all, it's all about great compositional skills, right? 

This absolutist p.o.v. makes no sense to me whatsoever. Better tools, more good options. Jay, I honestly ( not trying to be provocative) don't get why you insist on this seemingly ideological approach. It's the sum of the parts, not one part or the other, imo.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

"But he [Jay] is a reasonable person"

I take exception to that!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 11, 2009)

"BUT on some level I think the meaning of 'real' has evolved to mean 'that which sounds like it's from a movie'."

Really?


----------



## Ashermusic (May 12, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Mon May 11 said:


> Not to get tiresome here, but...wait, I don't care if I'm tiresome.
> 
> If you didn't want 'better', i.e. to some degree 'realer' samples, you'd still be with the Proteus and the PX. Why bother with the unnecessary expense of EWQL, Vienna, etc etc. After all, it's all about great compositional skills, right?
> 
> This absolutist p.o.v. makes no sense to me whatsoever. Better tools, more good options. Jay, I honestly ( not trying to be provocative) don't get why you insist on this seemingly ideological approach. It's the sum of the parts, not one part or the other, imo.



Well,I want to be through with this but since you are asking me directly then I have to answer in terms of what I believe. I use primarily Kirk Hunter Diamond and Sonic Implants Complete Symphonic Collection. I don't think most people here think that overall they are as "real" as Vienna or EWQLSO, but I do not care. I have some VSL and have played Vienna and EWQLSO at other studios many times and while they are fine, when I play them they do not move or inspire me to write the way Kirk's and S.I. do, and so that is why I use them. And BTW, I felt the same way when I played Audio Impressions strings at NAMM.They moved me.

Now you can make an argument that they move me because they sound more "real" but that does not explain why I prefer them to the others, which arguably sound more "real." There is just a quality about them that I respond to emotionally in the same way I responded to that 1000 PX clarinet. And when I sit down to play any of them, the word "real" just doesn't enter my thought process, only, man these sound good and feel good when I play them or they do not.

VSL makes fine libraries but the only library of theirs I felt even slightly that way about when I played it was Apassionata. They make fine libraries, but they do not move me when I play them and honestly that is my sole criteria.

When I play Hans Adamson's pianos I feel that in a way that I do not feel when I play Ivory. Do Hans' pianos sound more "real" than the Ivory pianos i.e.? Most folks would say no.

And the idea that one or the other of these libraries sonically lends itself i.e. to comedy writing more than the others is IMHO, well, comical.

I was not going to make this argument again and I no longer care if I ever make it again, but NYC, since you asked me directly, that is my most honest response.

Can I give myself a break now please, not to mention all of you, and move on? Even I am now bored with hearing what Jay Asher has to say on this subject


----------



## NYC Composer (May 12, 2009)

Jay, as I think you know, I didn't mean those specific libraries...I meant a good sounding ( to you) orch library. Actually, I think Sonic Implants is great stuff.

As to ending the topic, done and done, compadre.


----------



## Niah (May 12, 2009)

It's funny that I always thought me and Jay A had different tastes in libraries. Yea I'm not fond of the KH libs but Sonic Implants is one of my favourites orchestral libraries. And it has been for many years. Im not too crazy about EW or vienna as a whole orchestral package but I acknowledge that vienna has some good products like the woodwinds, appassionatas, etc...

Not to mention Hans' pianos. And to me hans' pianos are highly regarded by this community especially the malsmjo where there's even a thread dedicated to it by polar. Honestly I never saw anyone mentioned the Ivory but I could be wrong.

I still remember that in the begining of VI Sonic Implants and especially the strings were one of the most praise libraries around here. Then alot of people went on the EW boat because it was cheaper but I also saw alot of users complaining about the quality.

Over the years alot of people came and went but I'm pretty sure that Sonic Implants is still regarded as a great sounding library by this community. But I feel it isn't mentioned more kinda like the BBB which is very very expensive considering it is an old library, it still costs the same.

anyway I just wanted to add that


----------



## Hannes_F (May 12, 2009)

Niah @ Tue May 12 said:


> It's funny that I always thought me and Jay A had different tastes in libraries.



Who knows what else you do have in common. You both seriously need to drink a beer some time o-[][]-o


----------



## Niah (May 12, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Tue May 12 said:


> Niah @ Tue May 12 said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny that I always thought me and Jay A had different tastes in libraries.
> ...



eerr...that probably wouldn't work since I don't drink alcohol but hey maybe we have that in common too :lol:


----------



## Ashermusic (May 12, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Tue May 12 said:


> Niah @ Tue May 12 said:
> 
> 
> > It's funny that I always thought me and Jay A had different tastes in libraries.
> ...



Wine or a single malt scotch for me.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 12, 2009)

Jay, KH and SI are both well within the sphere of what I'd call sounding real. I thought you were arguing that ouldy mouldy samples were better.

So that means I have fewer problems with you than I thought I did.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 12, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue May 12 said:


> Jay, KH and SI are both well within the sphere of what I'd call sounding real. I thought you were arguing that ouldy mouldy samples were better.
> 
> So that means I have fewer problems with you than I thought I did.



Oh, good lord, was I really that unclear all this time?

All I have ever been trying to say is that if you like a sampled instrument's sound and playing it inspires you to write, then it does not matter how "real' it is perceived to be, old or new, expensive or inexpensive, it is all about if it moves you.

Duke Ellington: "It Don't Mean A Thing If It Ain't Got That Swing."


----------



## chimuelo (May 12, 2009)

How about that DX7 Clarinet on Law & Order for the last decade, even better the Orchestral Hits ( 2 x notes of an 1/8 note triplet ).
These are hooks that have worked over and over.
The listeners of the movies, series and video games cannot digest perfection, just the quality of the composition and the recording.
I enjoy new developments, and still use an ancient Ensoniq Mirage Guitar sample w/ MWheel feedback since 1984.........( 8bit to 16bit to 24bit GVI )
If the sound is inspiring...use it. Don't let the lick get away because your controller doesn't have perfectly weighted keys, or lacks the exact reed quality... :roll: 

Inspiration...yes !

Actually when I first got Scope DSP cards it was because of the GSIF drivers and the ability to route hardware reverbs into a project window. Nice for 1999.
This unique routing inspired me to start routing everything I could get my hands on.
I actually emptied out my windshield washer fluid container and filled it with Jagermeister, then re routed the fuilds hose through the dashboard, into my ashtray, where a chilled shot glass awaited. Now when I wanted a shot, no problemos.
Just Go With It When Ya' Can.....................


----------



## NYC Composer (May 12, 2009)

I find that DX-7 clarinet to be particularly inspiring. I try to use it as a main melody line in all of my compositions......accompanied, of course, by the pristine clarity of the DX-7 chorused Rhodes sound. I like to think of the combo as my 'sonic signature'. :wink:


----------



## Hannes_F (May 12, 2009)

chimuelo @ Tue May 12 said:


> This unique routing inspired me to start routing everything I could get my hands on.
> I actually emptied out my windshield washer fluid container and filled it with Jagermeister, then re routed the fuilds hose through the dashboard, into my ashtray, where a chilled shot glass awaited. Now when I wanted a shot, no problemos..



HAHAHAHA :mrgreen:


----------



## chimuelo (May 12, 2009)

NYC Composer @ Tue May 12 said:


> I find that DX-7 clarinet to be particularly inspiring. I try to use it as a main melody line in all of my compositions......accompanied, of course, by the pristine clarity of the DX-7 chorused Rhodes sound. I like to think of the combo as my 'sonic signature'. :wink:



Ladies & Gentlemen,.....Mike Post...................ankyu....ankyu....please stay seated.... /\~O 

Here's another inspiring sound of yore....
I had a 360 Systems MIDI Bass back in '84. Had the Moog, Oberheim, Round Wound Picked Precision, and the Velocity switched Slap Bass.......I was rockin.. :roll: 
Anyone here like Jerry Seinfeld ???
The Bass isn't a perfect sound by any stretch, but I find it amazing that the 20 year old Blue floor pedal MADE the seques in that show. 

Speaking of inspiring, I use the PianoTeq 3.0 and agree with many experts that it doesn't sound as good as xxx or yyy 1TB instrument, but it plays like a real Piano,it has the Pedals which is rare, and when I play it I am unconcerned that it isn't the prettiest or most perfect Piano, but the sound and feel pleases me so much I can open my ears and heart up just a little more.

Inspiration is what thrills me, and also I can use it on a slow 4 year old laptop too......... o-[][]-o 

Sorry for the O.T...


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 12, 2009)

I thought that was a Kurzweil bass, actually. But you may be right.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 12, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue May 12 said:


> I thought that was a Kurzweil bass, actually. But you may be right.



He is right.


----------



## synthetic (May 13, 2009)

I like synths, even the DX-7. (I have a TX802.) They have "127-way velocity cross-switch," the sounds are dynamic more like a real instrument. After playing with samples for a long time, it's fun to switch to a synth (or acoustic instrument) for a more dynamic performance.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 13, 2009)

What I really like is NI FM7 (or FM8). It loads the three DX-7 patches I programmed in the 80s and still use, only it sounds better.

But I do have a TX-7 in my closet, and it still starts right up. Same with the RX-15 I bought in 1986. Yamaha's stuff was really brilliant.


----------



## synthetic (May 13, 2009)

I don't like the sound of FM8 as much. It has that spikey metal sound I hear in most NI and Arturia stuff. :(


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 13, 2009)

You don't like it as much as a DX-7?


----------



## Stevie (May 13, 2009)

Can't say anything bad about NI. 
Well of course, Absynth doesn't sound as nice
as Omnisphere (nice and lovely pads). But I regard Absynth as the SciFi and Horror synth anyway. And for that it's absolutely perfect.


----------



## chimuelo (May 13, 2009)

Never was one for missing a photo op.
The Scope Modular DSP developement started by John Bowen has 11 years of developement, and naturally being a lover of anythting DSP based I chose to re create the FM EPiano sounds to my liking. 
Only I know what I like in terms of sound, so I was may as well do it myself insteading of whining.
It took me a whole 15 minutes to make an 8 FM Operator emulation.

http://forums.planetz.com/download/file.php?id=5381


----------



## synthetic (May 13, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Wed May 13 said:


> You don't like it as much as a DX-7?



I don't like the sound of FM7 or FM8 as much as my TX802 (racked DX7II). Though I pretty much use the TX as a preset synth -- I would have to lay on my stomach to program it as editor/librarian software is pretty much extinct. Maybe I need a DX1.  

Maybe if I reamped FM8 or ran it through an analog processor it would be better, but I shouldn't have to. NI stuff just sounds lifeless to me. 

I did like the sound of Scope, I just found it too buggy. I hope that Bowen makes a more affordable hardware synth someday, something like the tabletop òýá    ·)ýá    ·*


----------



## chimuelo (May 13, 2009)

synthetic @ Wed May 13 said:


> I did like the sound of Scope, I just found it too buggy. I hope that Bowen makes a more affordable hardware synth someday, something like the tabletop Virus would be nice.



Yes I agree about the Generation I cards being buggy. That's why I waited for the prices to drop, and the platform to mature. Those cards were made in 1997 and had 13msec.'s @ 44'1k. While they were first to include GSIF drivers with a DSP platform I still used hardware and kept the GSIF WamiRack DAW. But in 2002 the Generation II cards w/ 3msec.'s w/ 44.1 and 96k was released and the 6000 USD price dropped by 50%. Being a cheapskate I jumped in head first at that point.
I have used these live 24/7 for years and yes, the first year I had my usual spare drives, and a redundant DAW. But after an entire year I just starting using both 3 x card DAW's and the rest is history. 

And you're right about a desktop version. I am probably one of a few who uses it live, and he has had many people asking for the Oberheim XPander kind of module. But a beast like this can't be the size of a little Virus synth. 
Besides why waste time even competing with those plastic, desktop synths. That market is already overcrowded w/BloFelds, MoPho's etc. Ebay has plenty of them too.


----------



## José Herring (May 20, 2009)

This is for those who have been following. I promise this will be the my last post on the subject. I know that some will never be convinced, but that's cool.

So in extending the idea further of truncated samples. Yes my first example probably too much truncating. But just edging it back just past the harsh attack actually works much better.

The trick being that once the attack is gone then you have to replace that attack with one that you do have control over. Namely a short articulation of some kind doubling the line. This gives you control over how much attack to use from note to note rather than being stuck with a prefixed attack.

So here's the finished example. (Oh, and before you go chopping it up I played the trailer to a very well known composer and he thought it sounded great.)  

https://rcpt.yousendit.com/690438470/e4 ... e71d3c0239

take care,

Jose


----------



## lux (May 20, 2009)

synthetic @ Wed May 13 said:


> I don't like the sound of FM8 as much. It has that spikey metal sound I hear in most NI and Arturia stuff. :(



oh just read that. Well, as for one i have the exact opposite feeling about both FM8 and Arturia synths, which i find pretty warm sounding and well sitting in my mixes. Matter of tastes probably.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 20, 2009)

josejherring @ Wed May 20 said:


> This is for those who have been following. I promise this will be the my last post on the subject. I know that some will never be convinced, but that's cool.
> 
> So in extending the idea further of truncated samples. Yes my first example probably too much truncating. But just edging it back just past the harsh attack actually works much better.
> 
> ...



Jose, I think it's really lacking in power. It needs a big oomph injection.


----------



## TheoKrueger (May 20, 2009)

Here's one more humble guess to what he might have also done to his samples:

Melodyned them!!!

You can play any chord with a Bass, Cello, Viola and Violin. But unless the pitch is perfect between them the intonation will be always wrong from chord to chord, and every chord, on its own.

That's the only way a string chord can really resonate from the very bottom frequencies to the highest and have a good smooth intonation. Once the pitches are aligned, the sweet resonation starts.

If the samples are even slightly out of pitch.... well it sounds like 4 samples playing together and a "what's wrong with these samples??" question for company through the night.

Just a guess, which i find very possible.


----------



## José Herring (May 20, 2009)

choc0thrax @ Wed May 20 said:


> josejherring @ Wed May 20 said:
> 
> 
> > This is for those who have been following. I promise this will be the my last post on the subject. I know that some will never be convinced, but that's cool.
> ...



Possibly true. I'll look into that next.

best,

Jose


----------



## Niah (May 20, 2009)

I agree with choco it needs more body, I don't know if this was intentional in order to stay away from sound fx etc...

I like the sound design and choir though, it's sounding really nice.


----------



## José Herring (May 20, 2009)

Niah @ Wed May 20 said:


> I agree with choco it needs more body, I don't know if this was intentional in order to stay away from sound fx etc...
> 
> I like the sound design and choir though, it's sounding really nice.



I probably need to get more punch out of the drums. Enhance the low end and the impact a bit. Make the speakers work a little harder.

Jose


----------



## PolarBear (May 20, 2009)

I think the impact is ok. I just think on the orchstration side the violins could use some backing... the first violin runs sound a bit lonely... as does the whole ending... I was like - "...and that was it? Well, the player stopped, it's gotta be."


----------



## Niah (May 20, 2009)

josejherring @ Wed May 20 said:


> Niah @ Wed May 20 said:
> 
> 
> > I agree with choco it needs more body, I don't know if this was intentional in order to stay away from sound fx etc...
> ...



I don't think that's it. 

One has a sense that the sections are alone, there needs to be more colours here. It sounds a bit empty.

It sounds like there's skin and bone here but not alot of meat and muscle.


----------



## Ashermusic (May 20, 2009)

Jose, I think you should worry less about what people here are saying and rely on your ears, your taste, your training, and your common sense, all of which you have plenty of.


----------



## lux (May 20, 2009)

i know i'm not about making many friends from this, but lemme speak out of mind for once, i've a messed up impression of all the comment that follow last beta cue by Jose. I would consider the option, what i try to do as often as i can, to avoid commenting about possible improvements if one have no idea of what can (perhaps) improve the piece. It sounds like a good form of respect to the composer and his skills imho.

btw, i'm not speaking about Theo's technical digression about melodynize (that i'm curious to get deep into)


----------



## José Herring (May 20, 2009)

I hear you Jay and thanks for the compliments.

I had a very specific reason for starting this thread. That reason is so lost that I've even forgotten the reason for starting this thread.

And, yes theo's idea is intriguing. If I had any hopes for this thread it would be along the lines of where Theo is going with it.


----------



## gsilbers (May 20, 2009)

so keeping the thread in topic and not going into reviewland... 

i couldnt understand what you where saying about the chopped beginning and the trailer i heard. i heard stacc strings but didnt sound different than normal stacc.

do you mind uploading maybe just one string phrase or something short so we could tell. 

btw, i like the trailer..


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 21, 2009)

If you pay attention, in the last bar or two you'll hear a fast passage, a run in the high strings. The truncation is clearly audible there.


----------



## mixolydian (May 21, 2009)

I pretty much like the sustain violins from 0:30 til 0:37. José, as I need that glued legato stuff, you're selling those samples and patches? :D


----------

