# Hollywood Orchestrator and others of its ilk...



## LauraC

Do professionals actual use this? I saw a library in East West called Scoring Tools which actually had entire scored melodies. As much fun as it is to play around with, it feels...unethical.

What is the consensus on this and other libraries like it? Thank you.


----------



## jazzman7

Watched this recently which touched on this very issue


----------



## Macrawn

I see some value in it and I think tools like that will get better and better. 

But the answer is no you can't use it right now. You have to wait 5 years for tools like it to be more accepted. 

I kinda prefer to take the attitude that everything is cheating. That let's me just do things the way I want to without having to pass a litmus test or someone else's opinion about it. 

But to be a pro one has to weight oneself down in some way with the rules and regulations of the game, makes enjoying the unbearable lightness of it way more difficult but it's price one has to pay.


----------



## David Kudell

I wouldn’t get any satisfaction in using something like that. At that point, to me, you’re more of a music editor. I’m not into the phrase based libraries for that reason. 

The other issue is Content ID on YouTube will block stuff like that because it’s been used in other tracks. It can even happen for things like drum beats.


----------



## LauraC

David Kudell said:


> I wouldn’t get any satisfaction in using something like that. At that point, to me, you’re more of a music editor. I’m not into the phrase based libraries for that reason.
> 
> The other issue is Content ID on YouTube will block stuff like that because it’s been used in other tracks. It can even happen for things like drum beats.


Makes sense. I'm trying not to acquire any bad habits - I'm sure I have enough inherent ones I need to shed without taking more on!


----------



## LauraC

Macrawn said:


> I see some value in it and I think tools like that will get better and better.
> 
> But the answer is no you can't use it right now. You have to wait 5 years for tools like it to be more accepted.
> 
> I kinda prefer to take the attitude that everything is cheating. That let's me just do things the way I want to without having to pass a litmus test or someone else's opinion about it.
> 
> But to be a pro one has to weight oneself down in some way with the rules and regulations of the game, makes enjoying the unbearable lightness of it way more difficult but it's price one has to pay.


My main concern is using automated performance samples (aside from the cursory string or wind run), prevents me from learning how to execute it myself, which is the whole point. I mean, the instant gratification of these tools is a rush, but doesn't help my skill set in the long run.


----------



## LauraC

jazzman7 said:


> Watched this recently which touched on this very issue



Yep - It's kinda like white sugar & white flour - tastes good, so bad for you. I think I will steer clear.


----------



## Rey

its like a template. same with art or video game makers or 3d ethusiast,they at times or most of the times all use an existing template, instead of starting from scratch with everything. and i find starting from scratch for everything kinda kills the creative and joy along the way. starting from scratch is when you have everything planned out and ready for official or commercial presentation. i think that would make a lot of sense.

anyway i myself still considering between opus hollywood orchestrator or sonuscore the orchestra 2. since all the sections, and notes, steps, and instruments are editable, once you edited even to a small degree, it wouldnt sound exactly the same as the preset. would that still be called cheating?

if you are using the presets without modification, no regular person will find out unless he or she kare musically inclined or aware of the orchestrator existence. and in the hands of experienced musician, i doubt it sounds as robotic as a person who just holds one note and let it play...

do profesionals do these? if they want to write quickly and save time, the arpeggio and ostinatos would help them alot, unless they already have make their own or have their own templates or system. which i think most do.

the only time i can think of if someone dont really need this is that they are writing a flowing emotional music with mostly strings. Epic music creators will benefit alot from the orchestrator no doubt since it seems like its more intended that way.


----------



## Rey

oh yes, if you are still learning i firmly believe this can help you with learning. also get the sonuscore the orchestra. it will teach you which parts plays what and in all the differenttype of orchestration arrangement style, presented by the preset names


----------



## ism

LauraC said:


> Makes sense. I'm trying not to acquire any bad habits - I'm sure I have enough inherent ones I need to shed without taking more on!


A small counterpoint to add to this, having these kinds of pre-orchestrations at your finger time can also be a very efficient way to learn certain type of figures in orchestration (so long as you approach it that was and not lazily). 

Which is why I bought a couple of the Sonokinetic libraries. Sotto, I think is especially lovely. And while it has some performances that you're never be able to replicate with single note samples, it also has figures that can be replicated. And you both view the score in Kontakt, and drag and drop the midi into your daw. 

So there are good habits to found here also.

I also think that the Sonokinetic phrase libraries are also a good reminder of just how much expressive space a real orchestra has that sample libraries simply can't even imagine. So it's good for the soul in this sense too.


----------



## RogiervG

I would not use it, not because it is cheating. But because i prefer having full control over what the instruments do musically. And sure, it can speed things up tiny bits here and there, by using it. Somehow i don't feel it actually is practical on the longer run in the composing phase. For one, you get to depend on those pre orchestrated motives more and more.. psychological effect, people are lazy in nature, so the lesser you have to do, the lesser you WILL do.
And.. it influences (as side effect) your creativity in a negative fashion., because you can depend on these motives generated, and not thinking about creating your own sonic ideas.


----------



## dzilizzi

I've bought most of these as learning tools, which is why I like when they allow some kind of midi out. 

I am not a professional. I will probably never be a professional. But, I can see some of this being used by professionals, if it is done right. It is basically an arp engine that can be combined in ways a regular arp can't. Most composers use the same ostinatos and runs in their work - it is the rhythm part of the piece. So setting up some standard phrases that you use and saving them makes a lot of sense time wise. The key is knowing what you want and making it work for you. And it will depend on your music. Most hobbyist and beginners - not all, of course - don't have to knowledge to do this. 

And? It is no worse than using something like NOVO or FORTO in your work.


----------



## szczaw

Why would professionals not use, or have moral qualms about using tools that could seed up their work ? The goal of a pro is to make money and complete work as efficiently as possible.


----------



## LauraC

szczaw said:


> Why would professionals not use, or have moral qualms about using tools that could seed up their work ? The goal of a pro is to make money and complete work as efficiently as possible.


I guess if I were a client paying good money for a musical product, and starting hearing repetitious phrases resulting from these tools, I would not be impressed. Not to be a moral arbitrator here, just trying to not develop bad habits as I'm improving my skills.


----------



## szczaw

LauraC said:


> I guess if I were a client paying good money for a musical product, and starting hearing repetitious phrases resulting from these tools, I would not be impressed. Not to be a moral arbitrator here, just trying to not develop bad habits as I'm improving my skills.


Free market will sort it out.


----------



## gamma-ut

Are you going to get people knocking cues out of the stock Orchestrator presets? Yeah, probably. But I doubt it's going to be for TV, video or major games work. It will likely be in the world of corporate videos where it's a toss up between library music and not-far-above-Fiverr "custom" work that might derive from this kind of tool. Well, at least as long as it takes for Acme Paperclips' latest promo getting ContentIDed on YouTube because it turned out to be a bit too close to an original. Awk-ward.

The reality is that this type of tool could be good for prototyping phrases and textures and the canned examples could be handy for reverse engineering but I imagine that, like regular arpeggios, the idea they might bring forward a wave of identikit clones isn't that realistic. Even in dance-music production where you'd expect a lot of arpeggiator-type tools to be used, it's worth noting that a lot of producers like to paint the notes into the piano roll because arps don't give the fine level of control to get a phrase just right.

Similarly, with something like this Orchestrator, you can't get it to generate the connective tissue needed to make more than a short cue work. So at some point, it's going to need some touching up in the notation editor or piano roll at the very least, or you just wind up with some kind of Uncanny Valley sequence of disconnected set pieces.

tl;dr - not nearly as much of a "threat to creativity" as it might appear.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

LauraC said:


> I saw a library in East West called Scoring Tools which actually had entire scored melodies.


I have used that library more than once over the years, nothing wrong with it if used sparsely. They are just snippets, not entire scores. It can quickly provide a “bed” of you need a commercial track that’s quick and dirty. With additional layering and your own touch, they can be a workflow benefit. Anyone who thinks it’s some sort of cheating is only kidding themselves. Anyone using samples libraries and loops is already cheating.


----------



## David Kudell

szczaw said:


> Why would professionals not use, or have moral qualms about using tools that could seed up their work ? The goal of a pro is to make money and complete work as efficiently as possible.


Speaking just for myself, the moment I think that making music is just an exercise in commerce is when it would die for me. Yes we all need to earn a living but one thing I’ve learned recently is that the most successful composers all share an unbridled passion for creating music and that only comes from the joy of the act itself not from looking at it from simply dollars and sense.

If you’re looking at it as “what will make me the most money as fast as possible” then phrase libraries or MIDI packs offer a means to an end. And I don’t fault anyone for doing that, that’s still a pretty cool way to make a living. Also studying phrases to learn orchestration is a neat idea as well. But it just doesn’t give me the satisfaction that this is something I created myself. And does the path to becoming a composer who is scoring a feature film or tv series involve using phrase libraries or MIDI packs?


----------



## GNP

Jeremy Spencer said:


> I have used that library more than once over the years, nothing wrong with it if used sparsely. They are just snippets, not entire scores. It can quickly provide a “bed” of you need a commercial track that’s quick and dirty. With additional layering and your own touch, they can be a workflow benefit. Anyone who thinks it’s some sort of cheating is only kidding themselves. Anyone using samples libraries and loops is already cheating.


You're right in a way. It ultimately boils down to which department you're dependent upon for sounds, and which you can cook up on your own. Everybody depends on someone else's work in a way as well.
That said, I also understand the OP's position on wanting to improve herself. It's both ways, really.


----------



## szczaw

David Kudell said:


> But it just doesn’t give me the satisfaction that this is something I created myself.


Absolutely but do you get satisfaction out of creating repetitive elements like ostinatos or runs ? If somebody's music is all about ostinatos, then I can see why tools like Orchestrator could be perceived as threatening or unethical.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

David Kudell said:


> If you’re looking at it as “what will make me the most money as fast as possible” then phrase libraries or MIDI packs offer a means to an end. And I don’t fault anyone for doing that, that’s still a pretty cool way to make a living. Also studying phrases to learn orchestration is a neat idea as well. But it just doesn’t give me the satisfaction that this is something I created myself. And does the path to becoming a composer who is scoring a feature film or tv series involve using phrase libraries or MIDI packs?


Well said! When it comes to quick cues that will be quickly forgotten, that’s when I may reach for a phrase library, etc. But when I’m putting my heart into a composition, I like it craft it from scratch.


----------



## David Kudell

szczaw said:


> Absolutely but do you get satisfaction out of creating repetitive elements like ostinatos or runs ? If somebody's music is all about ostinatos, then I can see why tools like Orchestrator could be perceived as threatening or unethical.


I haven’t looked at Orchestrator so I don’t know what it does. I do have Spitfire Symphonic Motions and I have no problem using that. Nor do I have an issue using the repetitions patches in the Berlin series. If it creates realism for something I would have written anyway, that’s great. Those are single notes. I’m mostly speaking of some of the Sonokinetic libraries (not the ostinatos) but the ones where you hit one key and it plays some melodic line.


----------



## szczaw

David Kudell said:


> I’m mostly speaking of some of the Sonokinetic libraries (not the ostinatos) but the ones where you hit one key and it plays some melodic line.


That's way too limited to build a career on.


----------



## Living Fossil

LauraC said:


> Do professionals actual use this? I saw a library in East West called Scoring Tools which actually had entire scored melodies. As much fun as it is to play around with, it feels...unethical.
> 
> What is the consensus on this and other libraries like it? Thank you.


I guess there is no consensus.

Personally, i use to have a very clear imagination of what i want to do. An automaton would rather steal my time and corrupt my initial imagination than bringing something useful to the table.
But i guess that's also related to the fact that i'm doing this for >30 years
If i need inspiration, i rather listen to masterpieces while analysing the respective score.
The main difference in the latter approach is that beyond the elementary principles of instrumentation the more complex part consists in finding the right voice leadings, figurations, density, registers etc.
Even if you take a piano sonata from Mozart, Schubert etc. you will see that the whole texture usually isn't static over a longer time. Everything is adaptive to the dramaturgy of the music.
But as written, that's my subjective view.

I guess auto-constructed music will take a larger place in future.
Not, because of the quality of the algorithms but rather because of the habits of listeners.


----------



## alir1296

I think tbh right now the orchestrator is more just a source of ideas for different orchestrations you could consider adding to a piece or maybe to help kick start some ideas going if you're stuck. You can't use it to write a full piece really (talking about the score examples here), as they just don't develop. In a real piece, the instruments are constantly playing something different, however if you use the orchestrator, they're playing the exact same thing each bar just maybe on a different note. Obviously some music will do that but in most orchestral works you'll see that this definitely is not the case. 
I think we're gonna have to watch out in the future though as the technology improves, but I think maybe then it might go back and people will want to hear human composers, I don't reckon a computer will be able to provide that magical touch to a piece that a human can.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

And it's not an old technique. In the past number of years, I have heard many phrase-based libraries all over the place....including Sonokinetic which I heard in a major Audi commercial (it was a phrase from Minimal). I was also watching a reality show recently that had a an old Sonokinetic Vivaci phrase. All the composer did was play a simple Glockenspiel melody over top. And don't get me started on EW Stormdrum 1 loops! They are used excessively. But...I'm guilty as charged


----------



## Reid Rosefelt

I'm not basing this on any research, but I think the majority of the music software business is directed towards people who can't play an instrument and/or don't have any musical training. Loops, the various melodic auto-composers, ujam, and Toontrack products are good examples.

What I find perplexing about Hollywood Orchestrator is that it seems to be a virtual instrument with an identity complex. Who is the target client? To pay the kind of money for it means that you are either a pro or have serious musical knowledge, and therefore you are less likely to be the kind of person who will want to use it.

On the other hand, the same product attached to something inexpensive like Amadeus or Miroslav and pitched towards amateurs, would be very successful. A great IK or NI product. 

Perhaps The Orchestra is already that. And ujam has released STRIIIINGS, and no doubt BRAAAASS and WOOOODS will follow.


----------



## X-Bassist

I picked up the orchestrator and sequels on sale, thought they were great, went through all the patches, then have rarely played it since.

Truth is most film score don’t call for traditional sounding ostinatos that repeat over and over without evolution. And if you use it for more than that then the filmmakers want to change something in it, you could be caught with your pants down. 

So yes, it could be used for some learning, but personally I don’t want to pay $500 for the privilege and having a composition locked into the pricing fluxuations of composer cloud is not my idea of a good time. I feel like I’ve just started composing regularly and 10 years has gone by... that would be $3600 at today’s pricetag... more when EW starts raising prices. But I suppose there will always be another paid upgrade.😄


----------



## X-Bassist

TigerTheFrog said:


> I'm not basing this on any research, but I think the majority of the music software business is directed towards people who can't play an instrument and/or don't have any musical training. Loops, the various melodic auto-composers, ujam, and Toontrack products are good examples.
> 
> What I find perplexing about Hollywood Orchestrator is that it seems to be a virtual instrument with an identity complex. Who is the target client? To pay the kind of money for it means that you are either a pro or have serious musical knowledge, and therefore you are less likely to be the kind of person who will want to use it.
> 
> On the other hand, the same product attached to something inexpensive like Amadeus or Miroslav and pitched towards amateurs, would be very successful. A great IK or NI product.
> 
> Perhaps The Orchestra is already that. And ujam has released STRIIIINGS, and no doubt BRAAAASS and WOOOODS will follow.


The target audience is hobbyist and starters to pay $20-$30/month. And for pros? To pay $30/month.... they don’t want people to buy it outright, they don’t want people to upgrade for $500 (It orginally cost me less than that). They want monthly subscriptions so they can raise it in a few months once many new people are on board.

My only concern is when will they stop selling it outright. I wish they would give us a better break on the upgrade, but it’s not in their best interests ($) and they have a history of deep sales but none for upgrades. Thanks EW!😂


----------



## Frederick

Just speaking for myself as a beginner with no musical training and someone that doesn't play an instrument:

The orchestrator should not be about out-of-the-box presets. Those presets are blurring the whole issue. What's the worth of the orchestrator if it wouldn't have come with any presets? I think it's quite a useful tool for writing your own music.

Without the orchestrator if I would want to make significant changes to my MIDI just to try out an alternative idea, then I might end up having to change a lot of MIDI. What if I let the Cello take over the melodic line from bar 2? What if I would play the basses an octave lower. What if I let the violas play divisi? What if I would change the pattern of the arpeggiator a little. Etcetera, etcetera. The orchestrator allows me to try and preview those changes in a flash. It's also a faster way to get all the MIDI in the DAW. Why would that be cheating or bad in any way?

Of course for the ones that have a clear idea in their head before they started and for who plays a real instrument I can imagine it goes the other way: They would want to perform their music instead of clicking it in with a mouse or using MIDI generators.

One other point I would like to make is that there are no phrases used in the Opus Orchestrator. Every instrument can be exported to regular instrument tracks and it will sound exactly the same. And then you can start tweaking everything the orchestrator wouldn't allow you to.

To me the pre-recorded presets are for learning only. On the other hand I personally don't really care if others will be using it to create fast scores.


----------



## dzilizzi

David Kudell said:


> I haven’t looked at Orchestrator so I don’t know what it does. I do have Spitfire Symphonic Motions and I have no problem using that. Nor do I have an issue using the repetitions patches in the Berlin series. If it creates realism for something I would have written anyway, that’s great. Those are single notes. I’m mostly speaking of some of the Sonokinetic libraries (not the ostinatos) but the ones where you hit one key and it plays some melodic line.


There is no melodic line with orchestrator. It just does patterned ostinatos from what I've seen so far. I haven't got into the part where you can program your own yet - but then, that would be your music. It would be more like Symphonic Motions than a phrase library. It is, after all, using patches from EW that aren't phrases.


----------



## robcs

Look at it in context though.

Orchestrator (and almost every similar tool) is a tool that says 'you can create epic/cinematic/whatever music with one hand, even if you don't have any musical knowledge' and then creates a monolithic, standalone block that, as others have said, has no form and no development. It starts and stops, but doesn't actually 'begin' or 'end' (if that makes sense) and it doesn't go anywhere n between.

Now, look at training products in this market. At least half of the courses that get released promise you 'we'll show you how to write epic/cinematic/whatever music in hours, even if you don't have any musical knowledge.' And what do they actually teach? How to write a monolithic, standalone block that has no form and no development.

It's really about how to create a sound, not how to write in a style.

**BUT** the people who take those courses still end up making good (or at least passable) music as they develop their skills.

So these tools are just automating what people are already asking to learn.


----------



## Bman70

David Kudell said:


> If you’re looking at it as “what will make me the most money as fast as possible” then phrase libraries or MIDI packs offer a means to an end. And I don’t fault anyone for doing that, that’s still a pretty cool way to make a living. Also studying phrases to learn orchestration is a neat idea as well. But it just doesn’t give me the satisfaction that this is something I created myself. And does the path to becoming a composer who is scoring a feature film or tv series involve using phrase libraries or MIDI packs?



For me there are various types of musical satisfaction. One is the _producer _role. George Martin was doubtless satisfied when he took raw material the Beatles wrote, made arrangement suggestions, brought in a string quartet, or a trumpet player, added them all together into his vision of a complete work. No one ever hears who the string players were, or who played the trumpet solo in _Penny Lane_. It's just The Beatles. Likewise, an artist / producer today can take parts from various sample libraries, combine them into a larger work, and have a satisfying original work despite not having played every part. I think a TV or film composer probably should, if it aids productivity, take the music producer role and utilize any sample or loop that fills out the vision for the music. If he writes it himself, that's great, but if not, then he's just being George Martin to his own tracks.


----------



## Crossroads

szczaw said:


> Why would professionals not use, or have moral qualms about using tools that could seed up their work ? The goal of a pro is to make money and complete work as efficiently as possible.


And that last sentence is why you are completely wrong. That is just one way of looking at a professional. Some make money by not being mega-efficient. I make money by being, well, me. And I take my time. Because I create something unique that an Orchestrator simply can't do. The Orchestrator can do things that I don't come up with. And that's fine, I'll just stick with my own (limited yet much wider than the Orchestrator) brains for the meantime.

The orchestrator is great because it shows people how redundant 80% of composers are when you can get the same results from a plugin. It should teach you to bet on a better horse next time.

Production music is a black spot on the art of being a composer, it's just cinematic beatmaking and it has contaminated the whole of film and game music. Then again, producers were asking for it, so yeah the irony is thick.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Crossroads said:


> completely wrong. That is just one way of looking at a professional. Some make money by not being mega-efficient. I make money by being, well, me.


I don’t know you, but is composing commercially your full time career? For someone who needs to make ends meet, being mega-efficient is critical. Time is if the essence, and if these tools help, then all the power to them.


----------



## LauraC

Crossroads said:


> And that last sentence is why you are completely wrong. That is just one way of looking at a professional. Some make money by not being mega-efficient. I make money by being, well, me. And I take my time. Because I create something unique that an Orchestrator simply can't do. The Orchestrator can do things that I don't come up with. And that's fine, I'll just stick with my own (limited yet much wider than the Orchestrator) brains for the meantime.
> 
> The orchestrator is great because it shows people how redundant 80% of composers are when you can get the same results from a plugin. It should teach you to bet on a better horse next time.
> 
> Production music is a black spot on the art of being a composer, it's just cinematic beatmaking and it has contaminated the whole of film and game music. Then again, producers were asking for it, so yeah the irony is thick.


"Cinematic beatmaking"- I think you just crystalized my discomfort with it for me.


----------



## Rtomproductions

LauraC said:


> I guess if I were a client paying good money for a musical product, and starting hearing repetitious phrases resulting from these tools, I would not be impressed. Not to be a moral arbitrator here, just trying to not develop bad habits as I'm improving my skills.


Clients pay "good money" for my services all the time and I use loops/pre-baked phrases whenever I can; it saves time, and if it fits the scene/project, it doesn't make sense for me to spend 3 hours building something similar from the ground up. The only thing I'm concerned about (and the only thing the director is concerned about) is supporting the scene appropriately *shrug*

In the real world, no director is going to complain about anyone using a loop or popular sample. That said, obviously if you just hold down a key for 32 bars and it starts to sound *repetetive* then you've simply used the loops/phrases poorly. You still have to know how to write, even with loops and phrases.


----------



## jdrcomposer

Rtomproductions said:


> Clients pay "good money" for my services all the time and I use loops/pre-baked phrases whenever I can; it saves time, and if it fits the scene/project, it doesn't make sense for me to spend 3 hours building something similar from the ground up. The only thing I'm concerned about (and the only thing the director is concerned about) is supporting the scene appropriately *shrug*
> 
> In the real world, no director is going to complain about anyone using a loop or popular sample. That said, obviously if you just hold down a key for 32 bars and it starts to sound *repetetive* then you've simply used the loops/phrases poorly. You still have to know how to write, even with loops and phrases.


Sonokinetic’s Indie has been included in almost every track that I’ve done professionally in the last few years. Orchestrator has already made its way into my permanent arsenal for quick scoring (mostly the string presets for laying down quick progressions to fill out a track & a few ostinatos). I absolutely think that these are composer’s tools, and it becomes evident when a non-composer is trying to use them. In my experience, clients are able to tell when something phrase-based is used in a non-musical way (they will call it repetitive or tiresome), and if the composer is unable to adapt to this, they will lose the job. I wouldn’t be too worried about these tools taking work from people who know what they’re doing.


----------



## SteveC

I like to use everything that sounds good and fits my workflow! If UJAM, Toontrack, XLN and Sonuscore is a crime - I'm more than guilty. Computer music must not sound natural. You cannot replace an orchestra with a computer. And you cannot replace a computer with an orchestra.


----------



## mscp

LauraC said:


> Do professionals actual use this?


Yes. Quite a few.



LauraC said:


> I saw a library in East West called Scoring Tools which actually had entire scored melodies. As much fun as it is to play around with, it feels...unethical.


Well, you did mention "had entire scored melodies". That is a bit weird, but unethical? Not so sure, otherwise we'd be calling a lot of music out there, outside the confines of orchestral, extremely unethical, but they're out there and lots of them hitting billboard charts.



LauraC said:


> What is the consensus on this and other libraries like it? Thank you.


Great posts! 

My take is, if you're running a tight schedule, an orchestrator/phrase-based library could get you to where you want extremely fast -- in the same way a 'runs' library does. It's not like someone is copying an entire section of a song, otherwise I'd say a lot of people, including A-listers, would by now be considered extremely unethical since a lot of their work is far from being originals. Real originality is really hard to come by in contemporary music...and it's ok.


----------



## Macrawn

Phil81 said:


> Yes. Quite a few.
> 
> 
> Well, you did mention "had entire scored melodies". That is a bit weird, but unethical? Not so sure, otherwise we'd be calling a lot of music out there, outside the confines of orchestral, extremely unethical, but they're out there and lots of them hitting billboard charts.
> 
> 
> Great posts!
> 
> My take is, if you're running a tight schedule, an orchestrator/phrase-based library could get you to where you want extremely fast -- in the same way a 'runs' library does. It's not like someone is copying an entire section of a song, otherwise I'd say a lot of people, including A-listers, would by now be considered extremely unethical since a lot of their work is far from being originals. Real originality is really hard to come by in contemporary music...and it's ok.


And can't you create a your own presets? It takes some work and some new ideas can emerge from that. I know a lot of people are the kind where they have to hear it in their head then get it down. I mostly do things with experimentation. I think building a preset allows for some types of experimentation that wouldn't work in other ways.


----------



## mscp

Macrawn said:


> And can't you create a your own presets? It takes some work and some new ideas can emerge from that. I know a lot of people are the kind where they have to hear it in their head then get it down. I mostly do things with experimentation. I think building a preset allows for some types of experimentation that wouldn't work in other ways.


I'm the type of guy who erases every preset in every synth I own to make space for my own sounds because I'm a glutton for punishment, but also because I have a particular style I follow.

My point revolves around Laura's main question though: Ethics.

Professional musicians do end up hitting the same notes in the same pattern someone else had before at some point in their career, either consciously or subconsciously, and they might end up referring to those as inspiration or whatnot. Even the Star Wars main theme is "inspired"/"based" "[insert adjective]" on...you know..., but I don't see people freaking out about it. Is it unethical? Why would it be? Unethical to me is to compose the exact same song someone has written...in the same exact way.

The music industry has never sounded as "uniform" as recent days. I find it awfully superfluous, but I don't think I have any right to judge it. It's what's "in" these days, and if music makes people happy, mission accomplished to both the composer, and the listener. Bish bash bosh, right?

Music, in a general sense, has to evoke a feeling, and send a message precisely. If it does that, the composer will be praised somehow.

Read up Taruskin's music history books. Great resource. You will then see that true originality hasn't really existed for a long time. Is it a bad thing? of course not.


----------



## Macrawn

Phil81 said:


> I'm the type of guy who erases every preset in every synth I own to make space for my own sounds because I'm a glutton for punishment, but also because I have a particular style I follow.
> 
> My point revolves around Laura's main question though: Ethics.
> 
> Professional musicians do end up hitting the same notes in the same pattern someone else had before at some point in their career, either consciously or subconsciously, and they might end up referring to those as inspiration or whatnot. Even the Star Wars main theme is "inspired"/"based" "[insert adjective]" on...you know..., but I don't see people freaking out about it. Is it unethical? Why would it be? Unethical to me is to compose the exact same song someone has written...in the same exact way.
> 
> The music industry has never sounded as "uniform" as recent days. I find it awfully superfluous, but I don't think I have any right to judge it. It's what's "in" these days, and if music makes people happy, mission accomplished to both the composer, and the listener. Bish bash bosh, right?
> 
> Music, in a general sense, has to evoke a feeling, and send a message precisely. If it does that, the composer will be praised somehow.
> 
> Read up Taruskin's music history books. Great resource. You will then see that true originality hasn't really existed for a long time. Is it a bad thing? of course not.


My point is even if you dislike presets or finds the idea unethical, the tool can still be used creatively with originality by designing your own. But I'm not against presets, I use them and I tend to think that creativity is more the result of accident than plan, and that most thoughts are not particularly original. I think the most creative things I've done were accidental or ignorant misuses of something that turned out to be interesting ideas. Rock and roll proves that. Same 3 chords.


----------



## SteveC

As an opera singer I was told many times that my work can't be creative, because I'm just singing notes that someone else wrote. I think that's not true - a good interpretation of a scene is creative, if you have something to say to the people. For me, it's more important that a composition is an interpretation of a scene that has something to say.

And about presets:


Are all these songs not creative?


----------



## Saxer

As a professional you have clients. Clients want changes and edits. It's like: "This is very good, but can we have this more intimate? And a little bit more modern, you know, we have also younger viewers."

If you use tools like this it's twice the work if you have edits.

But for simple tasks it can be a help. Like synth arpeggiators... how often did I edit parts like string ostinatos from one chord to the next because it's less work than to do all the velocity/articulation edits for each chord again... for parts like this it would be a help. But then again: if you have to change parts or print the score it's a return to go.


----------



## SteveC

Saxer said:


> As a professional you have clients. Clients want changes and edits. It's like: "This is very good, but can we have this more intimate? And a little bit more modern, you know, we have also younger viewers."
> 
> If you use tools like this it's twice the work if you have edits.


But all the "preset plugins" I own can be used as starting points. I can change the preset very fast - or export the midi.


----------



## bill5

LauraC said:


> Do professionals actual use this? I saw a library in East West called Scoring Tools which actually had entire scored melodies. As much fun as it is to play around with, it feels...unethical.
> 
> What is the consensus on this and other libraries like it? Thank you.


I think like most things, it's subjective and a question of degree.

Side note, are you related to Minnie Driver? You could pass for her daughter.


----------



## LauraC

bill5 said:


> I think like most things, it's subjective and a question of degree.
> 
> Side note, are you related to Minnie Driver? You could pass for her daughter.


No, but I do covet her accent.


----------



## ThomasS

Using preset orchestrators and ostinatos, etc. are not the way I like to work. I could never figure out what to do with Sonokinetic stuff, and while I love Sonuscore The Orchestra for messing around, I have never used it for anything in the end.

But I recently took a Composer Cloud subscription to try out Opus, and ignored the Orchestrator for the first couple of weeks. But a few days ago I started messing with the Orchestrator "scores" presets, and just like Sonuscore, it was a lot of fun, and I laid down a few chord progressions and added some Opus instruments over the top.

View attachment A Black Night.mp3

View attachment Family Misadventure.mp3

View attachment The Dork Hero.mp3


It didn't take long to do this, and the cool thing about Orchestrator is that is perfectly blends with the entire Hollywood Orchestra instruments, same room, verb, sound quality, etc., so it is very fasts to make something quick and sound great in a short period of time.

However - if you look at the score presets they have made you will find that they have 8 variations for each set, and you need at least 8 to make any kind of piece, otherwise all the instruments are just doing the same few bars over and over again. Two of the examples above change presets every one or two bars, and for a short peice of a minute or two you can get away with that, although I would have liked several more variations.

I would need to make my own presets, with lots of variations for actual pieces, but I found that trying to write 8 or more presets in a certain style takes a lot of time. Probably more time than just writing a piece the normal way at this stage.

But if I can learn to make my own presets efficiently I think I might use it now and then, when speed is important.


----------

