# A Miroslav Philharmonik demo



## atmajian (Dec 29, 2006)

Hello, everyone! With the first year of Philharmonik on the market behind us, I decided to post a demo of this plug-in praised by so many and would really appreciate the thoughts of all you other Philharmonik users on this library and module.

This is a 6-minute suite of a score I recently did for a theater play, originally performed by a real orchestra. I thought the work was done, but then I got an idea of trying to see how the same music would sound like performed by Philharmonik that I just recently purchased for sketching reasons. So I decided to take the original orchestrations, rearrange them, re-orchestrate the original score and to make a mockup by using Philharmonik as a sole resource. And, to make things more complicated and representative of Philharmonik's quality, I decided to do a couple more unusual things:

First of all, use only one module for the entire suite, recording it figure by figure, and then glueing them together.

Secondly, use raw samples from the library, i.e. without any sound shaping or tweaking, and with the Attack and Release time in ENV1 being the only parameter changed according to the needs of the patch.

And, finally, to try doing everything in 24 hours, that is perfoming parts on the keyboard, editing events and everything that follows.

This was all for pure demonstration reasons, to see how Vitous' samples sound with their default sound settings (i.e. most natural).

Therefore, I also left out the entire mastering process, patching only Philharmonik's Reverb with its default settings in send mode.

This was all, again, for pure test reasons, as we all know that Vitous' samples are among the most beautiful ever captured, but needing a lot shaping in order to get exactly want you need. Instead of shaping every single part for every figure, I deliberately used default settings and tried to make it in a hurry, as most mockupers have to.

So, here is the result: http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=644479 (www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=644479)

I can't wait for your comments and your thoughts on Philharmonik and its library, hoping that this won't turn out to be just a download link, but will grow into a Philharmonik discussion, which I am very intersted in.

P.S. Please, don't listen to it in lo-fi. 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## synthetic (Dec 29, 2006)

Surprisingly, I liked the legato stuff better than the staccato. It's usually the other way around for smaller libraries. I think if you took the time to add CC11 fades to this it would come to life much more.


----------



## atmajian (Dec 29, 2006)

synthetic @ Fri Dec 29 said:


> Surprisingly, I liked the legato stuff better than the staccato. It's usually the other way around for smaller libraries. I think if you took the time to add CC11 fades to this it would come to life much more.


Yes, of course it would. But I deliberately did everything without any MIDI controlling or sound modeling, to represent default, clean Philharmonik.  Thanx for the comment, synthetic!


----------



## Evan Gamble (Dec 29, 2006)

Even with adding more expression I wouldn't use Miroslav _as a whole_ for anything more than sketching. Though the Choir is still usable today.


BTW you don't happen to be Jeff Atmajian? Either way welcome to VI!


----------



## atmajian (Dec 29, 2006)

Evan Gamble @ Sat Dec 30 said:


> Even with adding more expression I wouldn't use Miroslav _as a whole_ for anything more than sketching. Though the Choir is still usable today.
> 
> 
> BTW you don't happen to be Jeff Atmajian? Either way welcome to VI!



I doubt Jeff Atmajian would use his surname as username.  But he is my favorite orchestrator, that's for sure. 

Ok, now I'm really interested - why wouldn't you use Miroslav a a whole? What do you find lacking about it?

And thanx for the warm welcome!


----------



## synthetic (Dec 29, 2006)

I agree that I wouldn't use Miroslav by itself, the small, mono samples can't compete with something like Sonic Implants. But layering the two could be really sweet.


----------



## Frederick Russ (Dec 29, 2006)

Miroslav actually has a lot going for it when looked at from where its strengths lay. The problem is the staccatos - its very easy to get the "machine gun effect" when triggering the same sample more than twice for the staccato modes. It could be helpful if they would release a different sampler version that could take advantage of round robin (kontakt for instance). They've stretched their 4-violin patch below the normal lowest point so at times the lower notes sound almost viola like (but not quite). The sustained notes are definitely expressive though.

Generally I like the strings although I've noticed that the some of the attacks on the legatos seem a little abrupt, especially in the lower register strings (cellos and basses). 

My favorite patch out of the entire lib are the english horn legatos - hadn't heard a library yet that comes close to the expressiveness of this patch. My second favorite patch is the oboe legato. Also, I like that its possible to build words using the recorded consonants and vowels. The combination patches for full orchestra come in handy for fleshing out ideas, although I feel its weakest representation is brass and percussion whereas it shines in the strings and woodwinds timbre. Still a useful library if you're willing to blend it with other stronger libs - for instance, using the Miroslav Choirs with SISS, Project SAM brass, VSL & Miroslav woodwinds and True strike can yield a very full and rich template.


----------



## choir (Dec 29, 2006)

I think its not bad but it reminds me the EW silver edition  I liked the choirs it could be useful i also liked the woodwinds.
Overall its ok


----------



## atmajian (Dec 30, 2006)

synthetic @ Sat Dec 30 said:


> I agree that I wouldn't use Miroslav by itself, the small, mono samples can't compete with something like Sonic Implants. But layering the two could be really sweet.


Miroslav's samples in Philharmonik *are* stereo, in their true spatial positioning, which is good for instant realism, but does make problems for me sometimes. I still prefer to have control over panning. There are monophonic instruments in Vitous' samples, but I don't use them. And, yes, I agree that both Philharmonik lib and module can hardly be compared to bigger and more powerful orchestral plug-ins, and although it makes it a hard tool for any major scoring assignment, it still has a life in the sounds that I didn't find in many other libraries.

With respect to layering two different orchestras, many advise it, but I never do it. For many reasons, but primarely for consistency in general sound. I made a lot of compositions combining a couple of orchestral libraries, and it never sounded as anything more than two different libraries forced together. Mixing percussion from one lib, for instance, with everything else from another could go for me, but violins from one and violas from another, or ff horns with f horns, never. I just gave up on trying to get the feeling they are all in the same hall, doing the same session.



Frederick Russ said:


> Miroslav actually has a lot going for it when looked at from where its strengths lay. The problem is the staccatos - its very easy to get the "machine gun effect" when triggering the same sample more than twice for the staccato modes. It could be helpful if they would release a different sampler version that could take advantage of round robin (kontakt for instance).


Well, when wanting staccatos, its generally better to just go for the samples with staccato articulation anyway, regarless of how good raw samples are, as much as that consumes resourses more than it could. But, I absolutely agree, the round robin advantage is something *really* missing from Philharmonik, making it harder to use one single module for a project. But, then again, Kontakt has lacks of its own. I hope that we will see an intergration of all that in new samplers, and I hear something of that sort is happening in just a couple weeks from now. I forgot which company and compatibility with what libs.



choir said:


> I think its not bad but it reminds me the EW silver edition Smile I liked the choirs it could be useful i also liked the woodwinds.
> Overall its ok.



Philharmonik or how it sounds in my demo?


----------



## choir (Dec 30, 2006)

"Philharmonik and How it sounds in your demo"

It doesn't sounds very powerful in my opinion for example i didn't like the strings but i liked the choirs and the woodwinds.

If the Philharmonik had good strings and powerful brass it would have been a great library in my opinion.

"All The Best"


----------



## atmajian (Dec 30, 2006)

choir @ Sat Dec 30 said:


> "Philharmonik and How it sounds in your demo"
> 
> It doesn't sounds very powerful in my opinion for example i didn't like the strings but i liked the choirs and the woodwinds.
> 
> ...


Thanx for the explanation and your opinion.  And, in perfect honesty, I agree with the part about the strings ... They are the most tricky thing about every orchestral library, and with time I learned that much of the overall quality of the lib can be judged by the quality of its string section. A lot of work has to be put in shaping strings here, but after some time you can get them the way you need them. The problem that I have with them is a certain lack of fullness, width and sweep, especially during forte leads. But this demo is, again, default Philharmonik, without any sound modifications whatsoever. My guess is violins would sound a lot better if I spent time shaping them prior to recording.

Now that I really think about it, lately I've found so many contradictory opinions about every section and Philharmonik in general that my guess is in the end it's just a matter of taste. I will soon be trying out KHSO Emerald and EWQLSO Platinum, and see how those 24-bit samples perform, pertaining to the latter.

Thanx again!


----------



## david robinson (Dec 30, 2006)

just downloaded and tested the MP demo.

nice oboe and alto flt.

viola's good. cello's good.

sections sound like a synth.

percussion: poor.

verdict: not worth the money.


----------



## atmajian (Dec 31, 2006)

david robinson @ Sun Dec 31 said:


> just downloaded and tested the MP demo.
> 
> nice oboe and alto flt.
> 
> ...


OK, let's hear your recommendations ... What libraries do you own and what are your thoughts on them?


----------



## david robinson (Dec 31, 2006)

hello, atmajian, i only use samples when i can't hire real musos.
chalk and cheese really.

i know that some of the following might seem like sweeping generalizations to you but it's the best i can do without this post qualifying as a small novel.

in a sample library for orchestra i look for these:
no noticable recorded ambience (dry as possible)
individual performances of the chairs in the strings. this makes divisi easier and more realistic.
individual performances by the winds and brass.
round robin.
24bit, but well recorded 16bit will do.
no looping.

over the years i've collected samples of musos and have a good custom library.
not perfect, mind you, but expressive.
i like samples that have character, which is something some of the hi end libraries lack. they are too perfect. and real orchestras certainly aren't.

as to what i like?

sonic implants: strings.
miroslav and AOE: winds.

acoustic modelling is the future, but CPU's will have to improve in speed/cores to supply the horsepower for a full 80-100 piece orchestra in realtime.
AI have the right idea.


----------



## atmajian (Dec 31, 2006)

Believe it or not, but I agree with most of what you just said, David ... I also use samples only when the project budget isn't big enough to hire a real orchestra. But that is the case with every composer, I guess.

But, what I'm interested in is how do you perform long notes without looped samples? And in which significant way will AI improve sample mockuping?

I have to say wet signals don't personally bother me that much, as I always try using the same library for a single session, and send effects, usually only one reverb with prefader. In the past I've tried combining libraries from both external samplers and plug-ins, as well as reverb types, and it never did it for me. So I make things as simple as possible, for numerous reasons.

Also, which libs do you use for brass? And what do you think about EWQLSO Gold and Platinum and KHSO Emerald? Do their engines support round robin? I'm about to try those two, so I'm gathering different people's opinions.

I'm still quite new to the plug-in world, so I'm very grateful for all info and feedback I can get. Thanks!


----------



## Frederick Russ (Dec 31, 2006)

I own Miroslav Philharmonik - I don't know about the demo version though. Although it is excellent as a go-to for sketching out musical ideas, some of the instruments work great out of the box and can be included in your final mockup. Would I use it for percussion or brass? Probably not. The Oboe and English Horn however are nice and expressive. The four-violin patch is nice in the higher register for Bernard Hermann-like passages, and some of the combination patches (several versions involving combining Strings, Woodwinds & Brass patches) can be a real time-saver for fleshing out complex ideas. I haven't used these patches in a final mockup but its possible. Also, the choirs are programmed in such a way as to allow you to do rudimentary word building.

I also own Sonic Implants Complete K2, VSL First Edition, many Horizon products, most of the Project SAM titles, East West Gold and also was part of VI-PRO. Miroslav - although not the silver bullet - is a useful and surprising library which in its day went for several thousand dollars. Its great for texturing in my opinion.


----------



## david robinson (Dec 31, 2006)

KH Emerald is too ambient, for my purpose, but seems good value. 
EW Silver, etc? @@#$hate their GUI, even the colour of it turns me off. Plus the stuff i've heard sounds synthetic. 
Sorry guys, if i sound anti samples - i'm not actually, but whenever i listen to anything using them my ear gets bored really quickly and i switch it off. that includes most of the mock ups on this site. (i'd rather read the score). 

i really don't think any orch lib is worth the money. 

when i listen to music, of any type, i want it to involve me, reach out and grab me emotionally. 
not so with sample mock ups. most leave me cold. 
also, it's fairly easy to do a 100 piece all singing, all dancing mock up, which, on first listen impresses.(because there is so much going on). 
simpler music with exposed solo sections would not work as impressively with samples. 

in other words, i'd rather see a page of someones score posted here, an if i like what i see/hear, i'll mock it up myself. 

why don't i post mp3's here? no web site/hosting yet. coming this year. 
will i post mp3's of my work? probably, but i'd rather post a score excerpt so you guys can critique the architecture.

mock ups can be misleading at times.

anyway, please have a great xmas/new year. this is a most excellent site.


----------



## atmajian (Dec 31, 2006)

I'm sorry, but it seems that you didn't really answer my questions. So, if you would be so kind as to, I would be really grateful.  I am really iterested in your explanations, that's why I'm asking. 

And I really think you are being way too hard on the samples, I've heard things being done with them that I think even the most experienced ear can't put a finger on as mockup.

But of course that everyone who can afford a real orchestra, will.

And, yes, happy new year too all of you on this great site, too!


----------



## david robinson (Dec 31, 2006)

hi again, have you ever written something, say for eg, oboe, and actually sat next to the player as they perform the part? directing them as they go? getting the exact nuances? 
a totally revealing experience compared to programming even the best, most flexible oboe lib. 
try asking any sample lib to perform your work as in the style & intonation of Bartok.......Hummmm. i'd pay to see that. 

re: Brass. these are probably the hardest to do right. haven't found one that's satisfactory yet, but i'm still hopeful......... Sam Horn's maybe? 

maybe someone else more enamored with the current orch lib could chime in here.

Good luck in your quest.


----------



## atmajian (Jan 1, 2007)

david robinson @ Mon Jan 01 said:


> hi again, have you ever written something, say for eg, oboe, and actually sat next to the player as they perform the part? directing them as they go? getting the exact nuances?


Yes, of course I have. And conducted, too. But I still think you are being too hard on the samples. 


> a totally revealing experience compared to programming even the best, most flexible oboe lib.
> try asking any sample lib to perform your work as in the style & intonation of Bartok.......Hummmm. i'd pay to see that.


As a matter of fact, I actually heard one of those, a couple of months ago, a friend brought over a couple of mockups and both of us had a pretty hard time figuring out that it was a real orchestra. If I ever come across them again I'll mail them to you. You don't have to pay. 



> re: Brass. these are probably the hardest to do right. haven't found one that's satisfactory yet, but i'm still hopeful......... Sam Horn's maybe?
> 
> maybe someone else more enamored with the current orch lib could chime in here.
> 
> Good luck in your quest.


Thanks again for your help! And happy new year!


----------

