# Mascagni Intermezzo from Cavalleria Rusticana



## Morodiene (Dec 12, 2016)

I just got EW Hollywood Orchestra and I thought I'd learn how to use it by doing mockups that focus on each instrument section. So I chose this piece for strings.

Any feedback that you have, especially in mixing, is greatly appreciated!

https://app.box.com/s/77z655cgpjczpq70z2vh05crjgvsdu4p


----------



## jamwerks (Dec 12, 2016)

Overall nice job. My ears tell me there's maybe a eq cut to do in the violins. Maybe somewhere between 2k and 5k?


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 12, 2016)

jamwerks said:


> Overall nice job. My ears tell me there's maybe a eq cut to do in the violins. Maybe somewhere between 2k and 5k?


Thanks for this! Mixing is where I'm weakest. Can you tell me how you arrived at that conclusion? Was there something specific that you are listening for that perhaps it easy to point out?

I'll definitely give this a try once I get more feedback and other issues to work out.


----------



## jamwerks (Dec 12, 2016)

Just an impression. It might even be up at 7k.

I use HS quite a bit and it can sound good on the right piece. I've seen mixing engineers mix HS doing lots of eq'ing, and it always amazed me how much better they would get it to sound.

Also, are you using just the main mic's? I know it uses more resources, but adding-is some close mics (mains + close) can also sound nice.


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 12, 2016)

I think you're doing an excellent job! Especially considering its a first run with this lib. And, this is a very challenging piece to pull off with samples too.
I don't have suggestions about mixing as for me, the larger issues is the phrasing and dynamic expression. Below is a reference you can compare to for phrasing ideas. 
Notice how he pulls the dynamics down to make room for the next phrases so they too can have room to swell.

Warning: turn down volume at beginning and end as clapping is LOUD. Starts at 41s.


----------



## OliverLee (Dec 12, 2016)

(Sorry for my poor English)
You did very well! Thanks for beautiful copy of an intermezzo from Cavalleria Rusticana, one of my favorite music. overall very nice, but IMO it would be more better if only two thing are improved.

1. after 2:20 till 2:50,the repeating part of high F note(this is F major scale right?), is something unnatural because power is a little weak and the articulation feels a little awkward.. I know that this is difficult to mock up and I can't be confident, but according to this, it seems like to be needed one more layering for 1st violin part because of this. If you just play that(one more layering) through the unison note(pp) before 2:20, and utilize the additional layering by marcato attack, that would be more powerful and more accurate timing.

2. In some parts, the tempo is a little monotonous, especially between the nodes - This is completely my thought. I've heard a lot of this music, and in my memory, the tempo is very dynamic that makes me so moved.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 12, 2016)

@jamwerks I have gold only, so no choice in the mics. I'll try playing around with the EQ, but not sure what exactly to listen for, so I'll see how this changes it and see if that helps 

@synergy543 I see what you mean and this seems to be a particular problem that I have with being a bit more extreme with dynamics. I'll try to do more 

@OliverLee I'm using the marcato legato patch for that, but I could try layering and see if that helps give it more presence. RE: tempo, I'm not playing with a metronome at all. I played it on a piano track the way I wanted it to go, and then used that as my "click" track. It was a new technique I was trying because I didn't want it to sound metronomic at all. Can you point out where you find the tempo needs more altering?


----------



## synergy543 (Dec 12, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> @synergy543 I see what you mean and this seems to be a particular problem that I have with being a bit more extreme with dynamics. I'll try to do more


This is a very difficult thing for anyone to achieve with samples. You're focusing on the bleeding edge, which is a great challenge.

If you want to tackle another issue at the same time, listen to Dudamel's timing and how some notes are drawn out and held longer than others even though they may have the same time value. Its very hard to explain in words, although as an accomplished performer, you'll likely already know what I'm referring to. Leon Fleischer explains better than I can in this video.


----------



## Kent (Dec 12, 2016)

For a first shot with a new library this really isn't bad!

If I had to make notes for improvement:
1. Violins are a little too present vs the rest of the ensemble. I'm not sure if it's baked in that way, you gave them a touch more in the dynamic department, it's an EQ issue, or what, but I was always wanting just half a dynamic less or so of violins. 
2. Watch note transitions. Right now it seems blocky-ish as if it's a series of keys being depressed in turn...which it is. But we have to create the illusion it isn't  Another way to look at this is learn how to use legato masterfully. Real monophonic instrumentalists use techniques approaching what most libraries label legato in their natural playing, even when the parts aren't marked as such. (This is particularly hard for me in EW, which is a chief reason why I avoid using it these days: I'm not a fan of their releases. YMMV)
3. Be mindful of your microdynamics. By this I mean your overall phrase-to-phrase dynamics were fine to my ears, but each note felt more from a synth than from a string. Real dynamic levels are changing note to note and within each note. A succession of such shaped notes creates a musical phrase. Right now they're verging on (but not completely) monotone.

I hope those made sense. Really overall it did not sound like a first attempt. Great job!


----------



## OliverLee (Dec 13, 2016)

@OliverLee I'm using the marcato legato patch for that, but I could try layering and see if that helps give it more presence. RE: tempo, I'm not playing with a metronome at all. I played it on a piano track the way I wanted it to go, and then used that as my "click" track. It was a new technique I was trying because I didn't want it to sound metronomic at all. Can you point out where you find the tempo needs more altering?[/QUOTE]

Oh really? I also have hollywood string, but It doesn't seem like marcato attack and a little weak. (beacuse maybe I only use the legato, sustain and staccato.) 
I think that the tempo before 2:00, is very good and brilliant. Bhw after 2:00 it should be increased 2% more passion and depth. you can it by drawing the tempo more dynamically. IMO it would be more better that you draw the tempo with curve to be a little faster with cressendo(ex: 2:07, 2:20~2:27, 2:37 ~2:40), and a little bit smoother at 2:30, 2:45(not bad but something like a straight line) But again, it's my opinion entirely.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 13, 2016)

@OliverLee Thanks for the clarification. I will mess around with the tempos a little bit, but I have a question that perhaps you or someone else can help with:

I'm using Logic X, and what if I want to create more space at say, the middle of a track. I can select the individual MIDI notes from that point onward and drag them to where I want them, but that won't also drag the CC's, correct? Is there a way to select those so they stay with the notes selected?


----------



## Kent (Dec 13, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> @OliverLee Thanks for the clarification. I will mess around with the tempos a little bit, but I have a question that perhaps you or someone else can help with:
> 
> I'm using Logic X, and what if I want to create more space at say, the middle of a track. I can select the individual MIDI notes from that point onward and drag them to where I want them, but that won't also drag the CC's, correct? Is there a way to select those so they stay with the notes selected?


If I'm not mistaken you can split the MIDI region there and, when you move it, all the appropriate CC data follows.


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Dec 13, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> I just got EW Hollywood Orchestra and I thought I'd learn how to use it by doing mockups that focus on each instrument section. So I chose this piece for strings.
> 
> Any feedback that you have, especially in mixing, is greatly appreciated!
> 
> https://app.box.com/s/77z655cgpjczpq70z2vh05crjgvsdu4p



I like the tone quality. I didn't realize that the EW Hollywood Strings could be so well adapted to a classical piece. I think you should be very pleased with the result. Is it possible to get even closer to a live performance? Probably yes. But is it worth further work? I'm sure you already learned a lot about your samples and your DAW by doing this piece. More rubato, experimenting with some layering, messing with EQ, these are all fun things to try, but only if that interests you, because you did a great job as it is.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 13, 2016)

@Paul T McGraw Ya, I tend to not like to do endless revisions of things, but I would like to have a run at doing some of the techniques suggested so I can learn how to do that and hear what it does to improve the sound. Hopefully I'll have time this weekend to play around with it 

@kmaster Oh, of course..I forgot you could do that LOL


----------



## Cass Hansen (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodienne,

As compared to some of your other replies on this thread, I think you did an excellent job here, especially for your first foray into rendering with HS. I think you did as good as one could expect with the tools you are using, especially since this is Gold and not Diamond edition. Everyone has different ears (at least I hope so) so EQ and balancing is very subjective IMO unless it’s way off. And the violins are much stronger in a concert hall in general than on a recording studio stage. Just depends what venue your taste leans towards.

I do agree with kmaster’s third comment however on microdynamics which is independent of whatever library you are using. If legato transitions aren’t the best in HS (don’t’ know, I don’t own it), not much you can do about it then. But this you can change.

Do you have or use a wind controller? If not, please, please try to use one at some point and become proficient at using it . You of all people would excel at using a wind controller because of your vocal background. Strings are more expressive than any other instrument, but vocal _voice_ trumps them all! Since you are a singer the slight variants in expression would come so natural to you in shaping dynamics and micro expressions. It’s in your soul, so don’t rely on manual CC 1 finger dexterity or mouse automation for fluid legato lines such as in this piece. Sing it in, you might be surprised at the results!

Cass


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

Thanks, Cass. I will definitely consider a breath controller in the future as funds allow. I started doing some more tweaking of the dynamics and I think it's sounding better.

How do you feel about layering?


----------



## Cass Hansen (Dec 15, 2016)

I'm assuming you mean using different articulations with same/or different libraries on top of each other to achieve a fuller, richer sound , rather than doubling a line in unison. 

I try to avoid it if possible because it seldom sounds real to me unless in the hands of master renderers. BUT... if you can't afford top of the line libraries (I'm in the same boat) then yes, do layer where needed. it's better than having a weak line due to using a library which doesn't muster up to the sonic brilliance we're all getting use to in these new libraries or in the sound we expect in a concert hall for that matter. Rendering after all has an adjunct; a box full of tricks and plugins to justify verisimilitude of the real thing. It comes with the territory.
Cass


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

Cass Hansen said:


> I'm assuming you mean using different articulations with same/or different libraries on top of each other to achieve a fuller, richer sound , rather than doubling a line in unison.
> 
> I try to avoid it if possible because it seldom sounds real to me unless in the hands of master renderers. BUT... if you can't afford top of the line libraries (I'm in the same boat) then yes, do layer where needed. it's better than having a weak line due to using a library which doesn't muster up to the sonic brilliance we're all getting use to in these new libraries or in the sound we expect in a concert hall for that matter. Rendering after all has an adjunct; a box full of tricks and plugins to justify verisimilitude of the real thing. It comes with the territory.
> Cass


We'll, and since I'm new to this and my ears aren't quite refined enough to know when to layer or not, I'm thinking that idea can be put on hold.

Someone said once - in regards to mixing I think - don't just do something because you think you should, do it because the sound requires it. I just butchered that quote, but it was something to that effect.

Really, I am trying for a concert hall sort of sound. Also, this piece is rather unique in that you have 4 out of 5 string sections playing the melody halfway through, in 3 different octaves. 1st violins are on the top, 2nd violins and violas the octaves lower, and cellos an 8va below them. So 1st violins were getting kind of lost. I gave them a little boost in the mixer and lowered everything else to make sure I could hear them above the others. Could it be that layering would give it the presence it needs?


----------



## Kent (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> We'll, and since I'm new to this and my ears aren't quite refined enough to know when to layer or not, I'm thinking that idea can be put on hold.
> 
> Someone said once - in regards to mixing I think - don't just do something because you think you should, do it because the sound requires it. I just butchered that quote, but it was something to that effect.
> 
> Really, I am trying for a concert hall sort of sound. Also, this piece is rather unique in that you have 4 out of 5 string sections playing the melody halfway through, in 3 different octaves. 1st violins are on the top, 2nd violins and violas the octaves lower, and cellos an 8va below them. So 1st violins were getting kind of lost. I gave them a little boost in the mixer and lowered everything else to make sure I could hear them above the others. Could it be that layering would give it the presence it needs?


How are you monitoring, too? That informs your mixing needs.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

kmaster said:


> How are you monitoring, too? That informs your mixing needs.


I have a pair of JBL LSR305's, but the room is untreated (yet another project).


----------



## Kent (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> I have a pair of JBL LSR305's, but the room is untreated (yet another project).


I used to use those. They are fairly accurate for what they are (easily the best in their price range). They have a bit of veil on the high end though, which is probably why you think the Violin I levels were too low? 

With layering you just have to be aware that real instruments divide when "layering" and samples multiply.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

kmaster said:


> I used to use those. They are fairly accurate for what they are (easily the best in their price range). They have a bit of veil on the high end though, which is probably why you think the Violin I levels were too low?
> 
> With layering you just have to be aware that real instruments divide when "layering" and samples multiply.


So am I misunderstanding what layering is? I thought it was where you'd double a section to give the sound more dimension or character.


----------



## Cass Hansen (Dec 15, 2016)

I was remiss in saying that I think layering works the best when you are using to define attacks. By that I mean, for example, using a violin spiccato type articulation patch on top of a sustain/long violin patch which gives some nice crisp results to the sustain. In other words, if you library doesn't have the articulation patch you need, this layering can save the day. I'm saying this in that your violins might come out more by adding a short articulation to the sustains as long as the notes aren't legato on every beat. Hearing mechanism in our ears can be tricked by many means. Our ears would hear the attack and then actually follow the violin line even though it might be softer in the overall mix. Once perceived, are ears tend to follow that line. And yes, monitoring can make a HUGE difference. Have you tried it on other DAW systems?


----------



## Kent (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> So am I misunderstanding what layering is? I thought it was where you'd double a section to give the sound more dimension or character.


There is "doubling" in the traditional orchestral sense where you add more instruments/tone colors to achieve just this.

Usually "layering" refers to a synthestration technique wherein you duplicate the same instrument/instrument family. If you're not careful in how you do this, 16 Violin Is can quickly sound like 64...or whatever number.

Does that make sense?


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

Cass Hansen said:


> I was remiss in saying that I think layering works the best when you are using to define attacks. By that I mean, for example, using a violin spiccato type articulation patch on top of a sustain/long violin patch which gives some nice crisp results to the sustain. In other words, if you library doesn't have the articulation patch you need, this layering can save the day. I'm saying this in that your violins might come out more by adding a short articulation to the sustains as long as the notes aren't legato on every beat. Hearing mechanism in our ears can be tricked by many means. Our ears would here the attack and then actually follow the violin line even though it might be softer in the overall mix. Once perceived, are ears tend to follow that line. And yes, monitoring can make a HUGE difference. Have you tried it on other DAW systems?


By that do you mean importing all of the MIDI info into say, Cubase and listening to it there?


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

kmaster said:


> There is "doubling" in the traditional orchestral sense where you add more instruments/tone colors to achieve just this.
> 
> Usually "layering" refers to a synthestration technique wherein you duplicate the same instrument/instrument family. If you're not careful in how you do this, 16 Violin Is can quickly sound like 64...or whatever number.
> 
> Does that make sense?


Yes, it does. So how do you avoid the build up?


----------



## Kent (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> Yes, it does. So how do you avoid the build up?


Carefully 

In reality, it truly depends on the piece and your arrangement and the mix and what exactly you're trying to accomplish with the layering. Cass's example of using another library to refine/define the articulations would be a common type of layering. Since the additional library would be adding short/"quick" sounds, the human ear is much harder-pressed to see those as unnaturally expanding the section by double. But then you have to account for stereo/stage placement so the sound that belongs to one instrument doesn't jump around strangely.


----------



## Cass Hansen (Dec 15, 2016)

Morodiene said:


> By that do you mean importing all of the MIDI info into say, Cubase and listening to it there?


No---I meant to perform a mixdown and export it into a .wav music track and play it on someone else's setup with good monitors. Or if you have a really, really, good friend who would lend you a pair of $5,000 monitors, that would work too. 
It really is true what they say in all the mixing/mastering books. The one thing you want to save your money up for and get as good as you can possibly afford, is a pair of great monitors. It does make all the difference.


----------



## Morodiene (Dec 15, 2016)

Cass Hansen said:


> No---I meant to perform a mixdown and export it into a .wav music track and play it on someone else's setup with good monitors. Or if you have a really, really, good friend who would lend you a pair of $5,000 monitors, that would work too.
> It really is true what they say in all the mixing/mastering books. The one thing you want to save your money up for and get as good as you can possibly afford, is a pair of great monitors. It does make all the difference.


Haha, well, until I do anything worth justifying that kind of expenditure, I will have to make do with what I have (and no, I don't have friends with nice monitors  )


----------

