# How big a perfectionist are you? Essay...



## deadbeat (Oct 20, 2004)

Well me, when it comes to sound, I'm the opposite of a perfectionist. I'm a get-by-ist. A that's-close-enough-ist. I really am not prepared to go the extra mile. When I was doing stuff with Reason, I never really could get myself worked up enough to tweak the compressor to get the kick to sound 'just so' when I could just flip through some presets and find the one that was closest to what I had in my head.
And now with virtual orchestra I'm the same. I'm just not prepared to spend 20 hours making something sound 97% like a real orchestra when 2 hours makes it sound 94% like the real deal.
Composition, arrangement and mixing, on the other hand I have endless patience for. How much of your time do you spend on these things and how do you allocate it? I guess the acid test is 'How many people think it's a real orchestra?'
I just tend to stop tweaking when I know that, dunno, maybe 9 out of ten folks on the street could hear it and not know the difference. If you played that excellent piece by DPK that was in the demo thread, I reckon about <1% of joe public would know it was fake if they heard it in a soundtrack. But it got pretty slated (soundwise) because it didn't sound real. 
Time is money. And there is an opporunity cost. The more time you spend tweaking to make stuff sound real, the less time you're writing compelling music. 
Like, am I totally wrong? :wink: :wink:


----------



## TheoKrueger (Oct 20, 2004)

deadbeat said:


> I'm just not prepared to spend 20 hours making something sound 97% like a real orchestra when 2 hours makes it sound 94% like the real deal.



Hehehe DeadBeat , what a great quote :D
You are absolutely right and expressed it with the least. 

I'm a perfectionist in compositional terms -when i do stuff for my self-, i want really complicated melodies but realism doesn't matter to me so much as long as there are no glitches -> Cracks or even the slightest pops make me mad and bad loop points drive me crazy.

On the other hand, when i am thinking about releasing something for a company or for a contest Etc. I want everything to be perfect from every aspect... so i'll spend the extra 18+ hours tweaking the midi, another 5 for applying different convolutions to each channel, eq-ing etc . It sort of gets me in a different state when i expect others to hear it.


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Oct 20, 2004)

What I understand about "realism" is that it?s the same of "expressions"(that real players would make)...so , if I don?t care about realism my music will sound lifeless...
...but what I can?t understand is why people is so concerned about mixing and EQ...as I always say , a good composition and orchestration is 95% of the work done - if you have them you don?t need to worry about almost anything else...
...I have received lots of compliments and questions about the mixing of my musics , but the strange thing is - I never mixed any of them!!!


----------



## Sid_Barnhoorn (Oct 21, 2004)

Lol Deadbeat... nice quote indeed...

I'm a perfectionist as well... on all fronts I think. Compositionally, techniquely, productionally... choosing the right articulations per instrument per note. Listening if the volumes/panning are correct. And of course also the neccesairy expression/velocity and other midi controllers. I'm now busy with my new suite and I've been working on it for a few days now and it's about +_4min and still growing. I've been tweaking this composition heavily with Program Change, CC11 and also layering certain sounds... but then again it's virtual and I'm currently on a stage where I still can only go so far to make it sound realistic... though it's one of the goals I like to aim for in my compositions...

Take care,
-Sid.


----------



## Simon Ravn (Oct 21, 2004)

I don't agree with that quote. In two hours I'd say maybe I will achieve a 40% result, in 18, 93%, and take out two more hours to do a proper mix with convolution reverb and some EQ, maybe add the last 4% If you only get 3% better result by spending 10 times as much time on a piece, I'd say: don't bother.


----------



## John Perkins (Oct 21, 2004)

Even with today's great libs, you still are better off if you write with the libs limitations in mind if you are very concerned about realism. I've always found if I write purely with the live orchestra in mind and then try to realize the music with samples, I spend a LOT of time trying to get it to sound right. Whereas if I come up with an idea that I think might be hard to get right on the libs, try it out and find that it really is going to be tough, I usually throw out the idea and find a new one that will work better. Saves a lot of time in the long run and I end up with a more realistic result. Although it is sad the the first (and often best) idea sometimes gets thrown away.

Now I admit I do this less with today's libs than back when the Roland libs were the best there was.

As the simplest example of the above, before the great piano libs came out, I used to say you could write three held notes for an acoustic piano and it would sound great. They will ring a long time and the sounds will change and be interesting as they decay. If you played those same three notes on a piano lib even a year ago, well, yuck. So, you write something for the lib, something with more notes and more movement, something that the old samples could handle with more realism.

John


----------



## TheoKrueger (Oct 21, 2004)

John Perkins said:


> ....So, you write something for the lib, something with more notes and more movement, something that the old samples could handle with more realism.



Another great quote ! This thread is full of 'em 

I have felt this many times as well... writing for a lib instead of the lib writing for you . 
You don't like the sound of the next sample up on F-horn for example, so instead of composing as you want, you change the melody or transpose the whole song so that particular note will be played with that sample . It happens so often it almost hurts now that i think of it.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Oct 21, 2004)

You could also decide to edit that particular note and replace it with a better sample. For melodic lines, I wouldn't want to "play around" bad samples.


----------



## FilmComposerZ (Oct 21, 2004)

I personally MIX as I write. Then I adjust EQ and Compresion and Loudness at the Mastering Stage (SoundForge). I record everything to a stereo track. Just L and R tracks. I don't bother in wasting time putting each instrument on it's separate track. If I do that, then I usually get a "crappy" sound compared to how it was before rendering. I have come to discover that MIXING while I write seems to work for me. I also believe that these sample libaries already sound "EQed" right, so why tweak HIs and Lows. I always go to the symphony and the players are not tweaking "Hi and Low End" on there instruments. The EWQLSO Gold sounds fine to me. No need to EQ. Just a bit at the Mastering stage. But that is just me......

Pablo


----------



## Simon Ravn (Oct 21, 2004)

FilmCompozerz, no the players dont EQ their instruments. But the recording engineer certainly does. And instruments sound very different from recording to recording. So depending on what you want your piece to sound like, you might do different EQ to the samples.


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Oct 21, 2004)

Hi Pablo,

Enjoying a live concert can be an emotionally satisfying event, making you also believe that all is well balanced. That does not imply that the sound is optimal. A raw recording of the same event will probably need EQ-ing on individual mic tracks and the final mix, in order to be palatable for repeated playback from a CD.

Cheers,

Peter


----------



## FilmComposerZ (Oct 21, 2004)

Peter and Simon,

Oh! I agree what you mention. Simply I was stating that I have gotten good results without tweeking so much. just recording to a stereo track and mixing the whole composition as a whole. EQing everything at once. But like I said, that is just me. Thanks for the reply and comments. Though I must say, I am a rock guitarist. When I record "band" stuff, I have to do track by track and MIX track by track. EQing track by track and applying Reverb individually. I guess I get better results using "samples". 

:wink: 

Pablo


----------



## Aaron Sapp (Oct 21, 2004)

I'm probably the biggest perfectionist I know, which is also my downfall in the time it takes. I can't really help it though, if something doesn't sound right, than it grates on my nerves. I really haven't hit that equilibrium between speed/quality that I would prefer, but alot of that is also affected by the tools I have, and don't have... I don't really understand people who buy these mucho expensivo libraries who treat them like GM samples. The main reason why I purchased samples in the first place was for more realism (kurzweil patches weren't doing it back then), not to 'just get by' - which to me skews the whole point.


----------



## TheoKrueger (Oct 21, 2004)

Aaron Sapp said:


> I don't really understand people who buy these mucho expensivo libraries who treat them like GM samples.



Hey Aaron , could you please elaborate a bit more on the quoted ?
I am not sure what you mean but i'd really like to know 

Thanks


----------



## Scott Cairns (Oct 22, 2004)

My answer is; I'll be a perfectionist as much as I can in the time given. 

Lately, every job I get has a deadline of next week. :?


----------



## Herman Witkam (Oct 22, 2004)

Aaron Sapp said:


> I don't really understand people who buy these mucho expensivo libraries who treat them like GM samples.



Me neither. Perhaps it's the thought they've just spent a lot of money and they think everything will be fine afterwards. Those folks should start with cheaper libraries where they have to spend hours of tweaking to get the sound right


----------



## TheoKrueger (Oct 22, 2004)

Dead-lines -> must be as bad as the name suggests 

Even the thought of working under one frightens me at the moment :?


----------



## CJ (Oct 22, 2004)

Unfortunately being on a deadline is part of the drama of working on television and commercial spots as a professional. The flip side is that its seems that the same amount of time and effort goes into hiring real players, hiring a hall and engineer, and rehearsals. I think its worth it to do everything you can to drive home the production to the highest standards - even on a looming deadline.

CJ

addendum to post: that being said, I still am an incurable perfectionist. :?


----------



## Herman Witkam (Oct 22, 2004)

Deadlines aren't that bad...I can get a creative boost out of a deadline actually. :D


----------



## Frederick Russ (Oct 22, 2004)

Exactly - and knowing that somebody is waiting there for the result can be inspiring too.


----------



## ComposerDude (Jan 4, 2005)

Since perfectionists are too often derided for endless polishing, perhaps there should be a new word: "excellentist" -- a perfectionist on deadline.


----------



## christianobermaier (Jan 4, 2005)

>Deadlines aren't that bad...I can get a creative boost out of a deadline actually. 

I very much second that, but don't tell my clients :lol: 

It's amazing how focused things can get if the clock is ticking. You don't have time to try seven different things, you have to go by your gut feeling and do the right thing immediately. 
And, besides, if you're barely making it in time, there's hardly any changes to be demanded either 8) 

Christian


http://www.artofthegroove.com/logic/mp3/Christian_Obermaier_demo.mp3 (show reel) http://uk.geocities.com/christianobermaier/home.htm (home page) http://uk.geocities.com/christianobermaier/Studio.htm (studio pics) http://uk.geocities.com/christianobermaier/Gearlist.htm (gear list)


----------



## Lpp (Jan 5, 2005)

Scott Cairns said:


> My answer is; I'll be a perfectionist as much as I can in the time given.



My deadline often is not the deadline of the project, but my bank account. Sad, but true :( 

If you have a far away deadline, but you need the music finished to fulfil your monthly must-have, so that you can pay your costs, that is really pressurizing. 

But still this leads to a very focused way of working :!:


----------



## Alex W (Jan 6, 2005)

I'm a major perfectionist.

It drives a mate of mine nuts whenever I get him around to record some guitar parts and I just keep saying no... no ... no... do it again.... again... sorry man... comon.... I'll give ya a beer if you do... comon...

etc.

When it comes to orchestral writing, I sometimes spend hours on tweaking the modulation and expression on a 2 or 4 bar passage of one instrument.

Pretty ridiculous in some ways, but I always feel it's well worth it in the end.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 10, 2005)

I don't think I'm a perfectionist but I try to make my orchestral music as believable as possible. Maybe I'm pragmatic but I figure I won't be having a real orchestra play my stuff anytime soon so I'd better make it sound as good as possible so people can hear what I hear inside my head. Hence, I won't write things that will sound bad- like fast runs on violins unless I have an actual sample or use some kind of legato patch where the notes are blurred. I cannot stand the cheesey sound of wind/string runs mostly heard in commercial jingles. Ugghh, they sound terrible. Every note attack is audible. It's so wrong!!! 

James Newton Howard says use your system strengths and not its weaknesses. Meaning don't use that trumpet sample if it sounds terrible. Write for another instrument sample that sounds good.

I adapted a piece for a EWQLSO competition around Christmas. Originally, my piece was written on a Proteus 2 and U20 some 10 years ago. Back then, the oboe patch on the Proteus was pretty good. SO I wrote the melody on it. Because I was limited to EWQLSO Silver, I found that the oboe patch was a little wonky (much better in Gold incidently). So I changed it to a bassoon part and transposed it down the octave. Consequently, I had to do some re-arranging to accomodate the change in the lead instrument.

Point is, and I cannot say this enough, writing for a real group is different than writing for a sampled orchestra. Doubling lines in a real group is good. This isn't necessarily the case with a sampled orchestra. Every time a line is doubled with more and more instruments, I find it flattens out the sound and makes the piece sound more one-dimensional. Less seems to be more when scoring for sampled orchestra. Remember that we don't have to worry about mic positions, and seating as much as a real group does. And in real groups, the brass can pretty much over power the rest of the orchestra. In a sampled environment, a solo oboe, mixed a certain way, can overcome an entire trumpet section.

Hmmm, got off on a tangent....what was the question again????


----------



## Niah (Jan 11, 2005)

Good point Dcoscina


----------



## Frederick Russ (Jan 11, 2005)

dcoscina said:


> Write for another instrument sample that sounds good.



I would love it that samples would get to the level where composers can write for the composition rather than write for the sample. Maybe in a couple of years.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 11, 2005)

Frederick Russ said:


> dcoscina said:
> 
> 
> > Write for another instrument sample that sounds good.
> ...



I think we're almost there. What's more important is how the composer uses the sample. Not to sound snotty or elitist, but knowing more about orchestration would help a lot of people who put together orchestral mick-ups using sample libraries. I know I'm always listening and studying Mahler scores or Prokofiev or John Williams scores to see how they did a certain thing. Studying never ends. But I think some people buy these libraries and expect to sound like John Williams right out of the gate with little formal background (and by formal I don't mean conservatory- just some kind of studying of orchestration be it from Adler, Kanon, Piston's books or college or whatever).


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 11, 2005)

dcoscina said:


> Frederick Russ said:
> 
> 
> > dcoscina said:
> ...


----------



## Lex (Jan 12, 2005)

Im definetly not a perfectionist when it comes to making realistic mock ups...

Most of the times when I do spend extra time on polishing the mockup, I just screw it up even more...


aLex


----------



## Ed (Jan 22, 2005)

leogardini said:


> ...I have received lots of compliments and questions about the mixing of my musics , but the strange thing is - I never mixed any of them!!!



Of course you "mixed" them, to some degree :D 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Jan 22, 2005)

TheoKrueger said:


> Hey Aaron , could you please elaborate a bit more on the quoted ?
> I am not sure what you mean but i'd really like to know
> 
> Thanks



Maybe he means that composing for "proper" samples is different to composing for GM sounds. You have to think differently, and some people that are really used to GM sounds buy these expensive libraries but instead of using them to their fullest potential they just use them as if they were GM

Ed


----------



## Jerry LaBrie (Apr 28, 2005)

I'm kind of a perfectionist. The last piece that I done was a midi mock up done in a notation program as a score meant to be printed out and played by a group. It took about a few days to write the basic melodies and orchestration but took about two months to get the playback and samples to sound okay. Most of that time was for learning the software ( Sibelius, Sonar, and EWQLSO Gold) Some of it sounds ok and some of it still sounds like a GM midi orchestra. For instance, I had midi trills intead of using the library's trill samples. There were some other problems too, but I was more concerned about the writing , structure and orchestration. But I am just a beginner, I'm reading the Adler and the Piston and also learning to let go (which is harder than learning Piston) so I'm off to start a new project that will probably take a log time again but should sound a little better by incorporating some of the new techniques learned along the way and because of that little perfectionist in me thats wants everything a 100% everytime. ( Why am I not Mozart? Why?) I even went on medication to help me along the way. 

Jerry


----------

