# Why isn't Garritan as good as VSL?



## alphabetgreen (Jan 10, 2009)

*Garritan Personal Orchestra* 

£100 with a great support network :?: 

*Vienna Symphonic Library* 

£2000+ not too sure about the support network :?: 

Gary Garritan includes recordings of 16th century instruments like Stradivarius o/~ and Guarnari (apologies for spelling). Every time I ask somebody about GPO, it's always a positive answer. 'Yes, it's good' they say, not 'Yes, it's excellent value' (which it obviously is?). 

However, all the best mock-up artists are either using VSL, EWQLSO or SONIVOX. But apart from the amount of articulations, what is it that makes VSL better? Are the samples more realistic sounding? Remember, GPO has recorded only the best instruments as stated above, plus they have the ensemble building facility. Are the musicians who play the instruments better, or is it the microphone technicians? 

What is it EXACTLY that makes VSL or even EWQLSO better than this amazingly good value package? 

Just a thought, 

Cheers, 

Simon 

p.s. By the way, for the record, I use Miroslav and HALion so I'm not really qualified to say. That's probably why I'm asking.


----------



## Lex (Jan 10, 2009)

Witchcraft maybe? :shock: Sheer amount of samples per articulation? Real Legato? 

all I know is when I load VSL in my soft sampler and press them keys it sounds sooo nice, like the sound i hear on me CDs...but I have to put some reverberation first...

aLex


----------



## Peter Emanuel Roos (Jan 10, 2009)

Volkswagen vs Rolls Royce discussion? :D


----------



## dariusofwest (Jan 10, 2009)

Finally,a topic without developer bashing lol.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 10, 2009)

GPO has originally been aimed at being a sketch tool for orchestra music. Its advantage is that it uses low resources, basically you can run an orchestra on a laptop. If you look under the hood you will find that often one sample is used multiple times: for other notes by pitching it up or down (this is called using 'stretched samples). Another method that has been used is to use one sample with an EQ for a different volume layer.

Nevertheless I believe it is possible to make decent mockups with it - but it really takes work. This is what I have been able to pull off GPO with a free reverb two years ago:

[mp3]http://www.frischat.com/compose/HannesFrischat_Mozart_Der_Vogelfaenger8_192.mp3[/mp3]

However it is undeniable that VSL, EWQLSO and SI play in another league. When you play a single strings sample in EW or SI you really can sense the strings section sitting there (good monitors given). Same with VSL but you need mixing chops there. 

The higher quality is composed by several factors: mic technique and engineering, playing quality of the musicians, sample count for different notes and nuances and bit resolution. Additionally to that VSL has recorded legato and portamento transitions.

BTW when setting money vs. quality on a scale it would be unfair to expect ten times the quality for a ten times more expensive product. For industrial goods this is a logarithmic scale usually, that means getting a result with double the quality normally consumes ten times of money and care on the developer's side.


----------



## handz (Jan 10, 2009)

alphabetgreen: That was a good one 

What makes VSL and other better? Better samples and programing.


----------



## RiffWraith (Jan 10, 2009)

Better players
Better instruments
Better room acoustics
Better engineering
Better mic pres
Better console
Better mics
Better mic positioning
Better editing
and on....


----------



## Fernando Warez (Jan 10, 2009)

VSL with their silent stage(studio) have something very unique going on. The result is a recording so clean and detailed. Which makes VSL samples very versatile. 

Plus what others said before.


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 10, 2009)

Garritan GPO is not only as good, but better than VSL ....






when used in conjunction with Sibelius 5.

Of course that depends upon your definition of "as good as". In my case, the most important criteria is load time and GPO loads almost instantly. Plus, integration of GPO with Sibelius is relatively simple compared to VSL.

No question though that VSL "sounds" better.

btw, is anyone using full VSL VI Instruments (not SE) with Sibelius? What is your experience? How fast is load time when switching a full orchestration? Wonder how it compares with Xsamples - in terms of ease-of-use, integration, and symbol realization - do you have to roll your own each score?


----------



## rayinstirling (Jan 10, 2009)

Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> To be honest if you can listen to both (including comparing to EWQLSO) and think they sound the same or in the same league then maybe you dont have an ear for it, to put it in the nicest possible way!


That's it in a nut shell.
If you can't hear what doesn't sound as good as it should then you've no future in producing better recordings of your work.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 10, 2009)

RiffWraith @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Better players
> Better instruments
> Better room acoustics
> Better engineering
> ...



+1


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 10, 2009)

rayinstirling @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> 
> 
> > To be honest if you can listen to both (including comparing to EWQLSO) and think they sound the same or in the same league then maybe you dont have an ear for it, to put it in the nicest possible way!
> ...



I also have to agree with that and I really don't mean to sound aggressive nor to rant around, but you can always refer to other things in life.

I mean apply everything to food. You can eat burgers and fat fries on McD, buy crappy and cheap microwave menus all the time or you could actually go an visit a gourmet's restaurant. Of course you could ask, what is all so special about those expensive meals and this cook with all the awards, the burgers are good - so what's the point 

So in this case, if you are not able to taste it, ....

... oh, and of course if you visit this McD and there is the cook running around telling people that his meals can compete with the finest restaurants in town, well ...


----------



## rgames (Jan 10, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Every time I ask somebody about GPO, it's always a positive answer. 'Yes, it's good' they say, not 'Yes, it's excellent value' (which it obviously is?).



I gather you haven't asked around here before this post...

GPO was a good concept that was poorly executed. There's no reason for it to be as bad as it is - the samples are not well-recorded and many sound like they come from amateur musicians (poor tone quality, drifting out of tune, etc.). Plus a lot of the programming is poorly done - horrible choice of loop points, bad attacks, etc.

It's just not a professionally produced product. It is, however, heavily marketed.

If it were produced with as much passion as it is promoted, it would be amazing.

rgames


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 10, 2009)

You have to understand that GPO was specifically designed to operate in systems with a minimum of 1GB of RAM. To do that required serious programming chops. By comparison, nothing from these other companies was specifically r&d'ed to operate in that level of RAM. 

Despite Gary's persona and how he deals with people, I can look beyond that to see what's been achieved and he's earned the credit for that.


----------



## Ed (Jan 10, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Every time I ask somebody about GPO, it's always a positive answer. 'Yes, it's good' they say, not 'Yes, it's excellent value' (which it obviously is?).



I missed this bit. What kind of composer are you asking? If you ask people on Northern Sounds, its not surprising you get that kind of answer since theres so many amateurs on there using GPO that for some reason genuinly think it holds up next to "proper" libraries.


----------



## rayinstirling (Jan 10, 2009)

Peter Alexander @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Despite Gary's persona and how he deals with people, I can look beyond that to see what's been achieved and he's earned the credit for that.


You're so right about that Peter,
GPO is singularly responsible for my interest in orchestration.
The fact that I've moved on to more powerful computers and bigger libraries doesn't diminish that fact. I'm grateful even if others listening to my cues aren't so sure :D


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 10, 2009)

Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> alphabetgreen @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> 
> 
> > Every time I ask somebody about GPO, it's always a positive answer. 'Yes, it's good' they say, not 'Yes, it's excellent value' (which it obviously is?).
> ...



Sorry, old boy, but you're off on that one.

Ric Flauding, who is a superb string arranger with 100s of credits, did some stuff with GPO in Finale for string orchestra that was superb. And he's no programmer either. But he knows how to write for strings and the sound he achieved supported that


----------



## handz (Jan 10, 2009)

Peter: C´mon.... Ed is right, no doubt. 

I must absolutely agree on that Mcdonald vs Gourmet opinion... some people mabybe even if thay had chance to taste best food on earth, don´t recognize the difference... and this is sad.


----------



## Lex (Jan 10, 2009)

Peter Alexander @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> You have to understand that GPO was specifically designed to operate in systems with a minimum of 1GB of RAM. To do that required serious programming chops. By comparison, nothing from these other companies was specifically r&d'ed to operate in that level of RAM.
> 
> Despite Gary's persona and how he deals with people, I can look beyond that to see what's been achieved and he's earned the credit for that.



So, 1 sec of poor recording and not so great performance takes less RAM then 1 sec of good recording and good performance?

To me Gary's strings were a breaktrough at the time...everything after that...meh..

And I love burgers..simply love em....and dont like gourmets restaurants...such tiny portions every time...home made food beats both tough...wich would b custom made libs in this case..lol...hmmmm

aLex


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 10, 2009)

Sure. Someone good can make a pile of goat dung sound good and someone bad will make the best libraries sound like goat dung.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 10, 2009)

Sorry but the McDonald vs. Gourmet analogy is a bit lame, at least for me, because on my scale the gourmet restaurant would not be VSL, SI or EW but a good recording with the LSO or Berlin Philharmonics.

We are talking about GOURMET food. That is something that can be _exhaustively enjoyed, _ and even if you are used to a level way above average ... :wink: 
I can appreciate good samples and mockup chops but can I _fully enjoy _any orchestral work? Did not happen up to now (sorry, this is not meant to be harsh). Actually I can not even fully enjoy most live orchestra recordings ...

This is the reason why I never really understood why users of the more expensive libraries thought they were so - out of the world - away from GPO. For me it is just a different amout of compromise ...

To quote Ed with a little variation: To be honest if you can listen to 1. the best available samples 2. some sightreading film orchestra and 3. one of the top 20 symphony orchestras with a well-rehearsed work under a top conductor ... and think any of them are in the same league then maybe you dont have an ear for it, to put it in the nicest possible way!

Compared to that how big is the difference between GPO and the others really?


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 10, 2009)

I'm thinkin "Arby's...

(sorry, its a US ad for fast food - for what they call "roast beef")


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 10, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Sat 10 Jan said:


> GPO has originally been aimed at being a sketch tool for orchestra music. Its advantage is that it uses low resources, basically you can run an orchestra on a laptop. If you look under the hood you will find that often one sample is used multiple times: for other notes by pitching it up or down (this is called using 'stretched samples). Another method that has been used is to use one sample with an EQ for a different volume layer.
> 
> Nevertheless I believe it is possible to make decent mockups with it - but it really takes work. This is what I have been able to pull off GPO with a free reverb two years ago:
> 
> ...




Thanks, that was the sort of answer I was looking for. And congratulations, by the way, on your mock-up. Apart from a very metallic sounding piccolo and a bassoon appearing somewhere inside my cerebral cortex, it really wasn't half bad, for a library that costs about £70.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 10, 2009)

RiffWraith @ Sat 10 Jan said:


> Better players
> Better instruments
> Better room acoustics
> Better engineering
> ...



Whoah, hold it there! Better instruments?


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 10, 2009)

rayinstirling @ Sat 10 Jan said:


> Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> 
> 
> > To be honest if you can listen to both (including comparing to EWQLSO) and think they sound the same or in the same league then maybe you dont have an ear for it, to put it in the nicest possible way!
> ...



I CAN hear the difference in sound. I just want to know WHY one is better than the other! :evil:


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 10, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Sun 11 Jan said:


> Sorry but the McDonald vs. Gourmet analogy is a bit lame, at least for me, because on my scale the gourmet restaurant would not be VSL, SI or EW but a good recording with the LSO or Berlin Philharmonics.
> 
> We are talking about GOURMET food. That is something that can be _exhaustively enjoyed, _ and even if you are used to a level way above average ... :wink:
> I can appreciate good samples and mockup chops but can I _fully enjoy _any orchestral work? Did not happen up to now (sorry, this is not meant to be harsh). Actually I can not even fully enjoy most live orchestra recordings ...
> ...




Nice one Hannes. Geddin!!! Mieooowww!!

I do so love this flexi-banter!!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 10, 2009)

"I just want to know WHY one is better than the other!"

Because of the performances, recording quality and techniques, programming, choice and quantity of articulations, features, and (if not covered by the previous factors) the overall concept and choices made along the way. Those choices can be when and when not to correct the pitch, use noise reduction, whether to use multiple mic positions...and on and on.

You can put those in any order - they're all important.

Also bear in mind that all libraries have relative advantages and disadvantages. For example, VSL's winds are fantastic, EWQLSO's low brass and strings are big and powerful, Kirk Hunter has a few standout instruments across the board, SI also sounds really good...you get the idea.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 11, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> Sorry but the McDonald vs. Gourmet analogy is a bit lame, at least for me, because on my scale the gourmet restaurant would not be VSL, SI or EW but a good recording with the LSO or Berlin Philharmonics.



Hey Hannes,

I hope i got you right, but I would stick to samples for this one. Of course you can discuss about gourmet food and burgers etc. and actually there are a lot of restaurants using crap meat and groceries while McD really cares about where they get their salad from etc.

But I think the idea was clear, a live orchestra is something completely different and has nothing to do with samples.

If you stick to the sample world simply the best available stuff is VSL, EW, SI, ProjectSAM etc. ... of course I like the sound of GOS and stuff, but this thread is mainly about GPO. I am also aware that a real pro guy can create wonderful written stuff with GPO, but so they can with a Roland JV 1080 or a GM set ... 

... anyway, my main concern is about the sound and to be honest Hannes, how long did it take you to get your mockup sound like this? And still ... there is stuff in there which simply doesnt cut it, especially in the detail (bassoon melody, flute runs). Anyway, this is a cool mockup skillwise, but sound and articulationwise it simply can NOT compete with "bigger" libs.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 11, 2009)

Waywyn,

I am absolutely sure sample libraries or virtual instruments or what else we will have will get a lot closer to the upper range in future to be really enjoyable even on my scale. I think electrons can make wonderful instruments sometime, no reason why it has always to be wood, gut and hair.

But regarding the actual state I can hardly watch TV because my toe nails frequently bend upwards. And this is all done with VSL, EW, SI and ProjectSam. I know, economic pressure and time etc., and that is all well and fine but please don't compare that to gourmet food. 

Now you say, OK, nobody does notice the difference anyhow, and real recordings would be so much more expensive.

This is exactly the same that GPO users think about the other libraries. That is what I would like to put into a perspective.

BTW my mockup was done before I had SISS and Altiverb and with a weird ethno pan flute, so I am sure I could improve it a lot even with GPO (don't want to touch the piece because I don't use GPO anymore).

Alphabetgreen,
while there are one Stradivarius and one Guaneri sampled in the GPO recordings I believe quite some other instruments both in the sections and the solos were more on the cheap side. At times it does more sound like some sent their students as substitutes which is a common practise in some orchestras. The general instrument quality of EW for example is definitely higher, and also the musicians are playing more involved.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 11, 2009)

Hannes,

I agree with you and feel the same on what's been heard on TV, especially in some documentaries or tv series and stuff like that, but this is not what it's about in this thread. We are not talking skills of the composer, but the actual advantages and disadvantages of libraries, their sound and their options regarding articulations/programming etc.

Noone would disagree with you that it is "in ones hands" what to create and how good it is.

The actualy main point (and what was the question of the thread's creator) is, does GPOs sound, programming, articulation list, quality etc. compare to more expensive libs and if I hear through mockups of GPO no matter how excellent they are composingwise, you still have that weird sound behaviour.


----------



## Hal (Jan 11, 2009)

Is this comparison for real !

ok GPO : 
*PROS*
Light 
cheap
small HD space
Better then ur GM bank !
could be used on a laptop
good entry level library for midi mockup composer

*Cons*
average sound
only basic articulation
no scripting no legato
targeting students 
u cant depend on it for a final product 

*VSL PRos* just to name a few
-64 bit
-chromaticaly sampled with a high quality recording/editing(better sound)
-all the articulation you might need
-legatos,portamentos,trills,performance tool,recorded runs and blabla (more realistic sound)
-targeting pros
-u can depend on it for a final product (i mean a finished track for cinema)


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 11, 2009)

Waywyn @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> The actualy main point (and what was the question of the thread's creator) is, does GPOs sound, programming, articulation list, quality etc. compare to more expensive libs and if I hear through mockups of GPO no matter how excellent they are composingwise, you still have that weird sound behaviour.



Alex, I fully agree. I have been wrestling this sound a long time.

Wow Hal, you really say that cinema work can be done with VSL. Please point me to an example.


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 11, 2009)

GPO is just such a pain in $%^% to get sound good to get it at a high pro level. You have to mess around with all the players then go in and adjust each player and yada yada yada. Even after that VSL kicks in the pants for sound quality and everything already written here.
Yea it can sound pretty damn good but it takes twice as much work too!


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 11, 2009)

StrangeCat @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> GPO is just such a pain in $%^% to get sound good to get it at a high pro level. You have to mess around with all the players then go in and adjust each player and yada yada yada. Even after that VSL kicks in the pants for sound quality and everything already written here.
> Yea it can sound pretty damn good but it takes twice as much work too!



Yes, ... and actually that also belongs to the terms "as good as" or "better". It is not just simply how realistic or good something sounds, it is also a matter on how long I need to make something sound good - of course I am not talking of simply throwing loops in the sequencer and do the copy and paste dance


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 11, 2009)

Then I guess it comes down to this, if you can make GPO shine then you can make VSL Shine even more and every lib after GPO really. If you have the know how and tools to really make GPO come alive then just think what you can do with any other lib, now why is that? It's already been mentioned^_- 

alphabetgreen use GPO it's cheap and make it sound as expressive and alive as possible then take those same skills and apply them to VSL, EastWest, etc and be amazed! Those same midi skills are something you will be using all the time. 

Then you will end up building some huge template that uses different libs and multiple convolutions to get that sound you want.

Now DPdan is obviously the GPO engineering master what he has posted on NS has been pretty damn impressive. But GPO is not in the same League as say VSL RiffWraith already mentioned it.

GPO is like some starter or beginner lib, something to use on a laptop and all that, something that doesn't take to much to through an orchestra together.


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 11, 2009)

Yes, 

GPO is a best starter/beginning lib and something more. You have not to fight with tons of articulations and can use your time more for composing. 

And this is the first thing for beginners (with orchestration...): The composition and not "the best sound". This is also for composers who work for example with a notation-program and let play a real orchestra their scores... . o/~ 

Gunther


----------



## handz (Jan 11, 2009)

I don´t want to be agressive but... If you ever listening to live or good Orchestra recording then if you have the gift for it - you must recognize bad and good sounding samples. 

I never heard GPO demo that was sounding at least as good as EWQL, VSL and others, sorry but not. In those "pro" libs, you just hit a key and you feel that you are close to real instruments, but when I tried GPO someday... no no... it sounds very.... very cheap. There is no execuse - no in these days of group buys etc. BTW I was using GOLD on PC with 1GB RAM many years and i warked fine.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 11, 2009)

StrangeCat @ Sun 11 Jan said:


> Then I guess it comes down to this, if you can make GPO shine then you can make VSL Shine even more and every lib after GPO really. If you have the know how and tools to really make GPO come alive then just think what you can do with any other lib, now why is that? It's already been mentioned^_-
> 
> alphabetgreen use GPO it's cheap and make it sound as expressive and alive as possible then take those same skills and apply them to VSL, EastWest, etc and be amazed! Those same midi skills are something you will be using all the time.
> 
> ...



I think I mentioned it before. I use Miroslav and HALion.


----------



## lux (Jan 11, 2009)

there's nothing to do, the more i read those threads the more i'm convinced that only synth-based orchestral products will save good and colorful orchestral writing from the oblivium...

Until Arne, Eric and all people involved in those kind of researches will find some definitive solution we will continue writing like crap, with the exception of TJ or a very few more composers able to manage 4598 libs in a single orchestral arrangement.

Despite the obvious statements about quality, quantity and everything i believe its not a case that so many real orchestra composers have many many difficulties to approach the "cadillacs" and finish using smaller products. Even with the most blind attitude is impossible not to understand that there's a problem with that.


----------



## tripit (Jan 11, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> "I just want to know WHY one is better than the other!"
> 
> 
> Also bear in mind that all libraries have relative advantages and disadvantages. For example, VSL's winds are fantastic, EWQLSO's low brass and strings are big and powerful, Kirk Hunter has a few standout instruments across the board, SI also sounds really good...you get the idea.



Amen on that. No one library does it all best. IF they did, we wouldn't need any others. They all have stand out sounds and features, some more than others.


----------



## choc0thrax (Jan 11, 2009)

Good points. All libraries have strengths and weaknesses, it depends on your needs. If you want your music to sound great then certain libs will give you that and if you want your music to sound like flaming dog $h1t, some libs cater to that.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 11, 2009)

Well, I think the question why some libraries are better than others was serious. In all honesty part of that has occurred to me too, i.e. does it really cost more to produce a high-end library than a budget one?

I can't imagine anyone going into a sampling session thinking they're going to do a cheap orchestra, in other words. Sure some studios are more expensive, and you can use better players and record more articulations, but if you really think about it the differences are mostly due to the skill of the developer.


----------



## Moonchilde (Jan 11, 2009)

lux @ January 11th 2009 said:


> there's nothing to do, the more i read those threads the more i'm convinced that only synth-based orchestral products will save good and colorful orchestral writing from the oblivium...
> 
> Until Arne, Eric and all people involved in those kind of researches will find some definitive solution we will continue writing like crap, with the exception of TJ or a very few more composers able to manage 4598 libs in a single orchestral arrangement.



I really disagree with this. If you're wirting for a live orchestra, then chances are you don't really care how the mock up sounds. Why woul anyone in their right mind spend a ton of time mocking something up and tweakin everything if they know its going to be recorded live anyway? Live orchestra gets what is printed out by the orchestrator. They don't care in the slightest about the mock up.

Seriously folks, "realistc" legato and samples and all that jazz means jack shyte if its going to be live anyway. If people let the sound of the samples affect their writing just because they can't do what live stuff does, then maybe they shouldn't be writin with samples. Just wirte, and don' give a crap about how it sounds. Stop writing for samples if you know your work is just going to be live. Regardless, I doubt anyone who does write for live orchestra cares about how the mock up sounds. The only time anyone should care about how the sample sound is if there is no way the music wil be done live. That would be understandable.

If your wirting is crap because they're samples, then its going to stil be crap if it was live. No amount of synthesis or magic plugins will change that.

On the subject, GPO isn't as good as higher profile libraries because of the sound quality an depth of programming. Really doen't matter unless you're trying to compete against others for a composin gig and the director has a hard on for sonic quality instead of writing qualty. VSL or whatever coul help you there. Bad writing can't, no matter what library it is.


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 11, 2009)

I'm really surprised that nobody else finds GPO useful for rapid realizations in Sibelius. Sure, I have VSL VI, EWQLSO Platinum, Sonic Implants and all of those libs too - no question top notch libs for "sequence" mockups. Yet, I find it invaluable that I can pull up an entire GPO Sibelius orchestration in 30 seconds, and switch to another one in the same amount of time. Sure its a rough sketch, but very useful to me nonetheless. Just to open my VSL VI standalone lib takes over two minutes - and that's with nothing loaded. Worth the wait for sequencing, but not for notation sketches in my opinion.

If anyone has found a similarly fast alternative to GPO that realizes various notation articulations, please let me know. I'm very interested in the new Xsamples (only have the older Xsample lib now) but I wonder about the load time.

So please enlighten me if I'm in the dark and there's a better alternative than GPO for Sibelius. 

What are you using?

Greg


----------



## Daniel James (Jan 11, 2009)

The way I see it is, if you need something quick and light to do a mock up with GPO is just fine.

However if you are planning to have the track your working on used in a project as is that's where the pro libs come in.... I'm guessing if you are just wanting to show the general idea of where the track is going, to say a director, you would not need to bother too much with the pro libs until you wanted to push the project to final quality.

Everything has its purpose.

Dan


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 11, 2009)

synergy543 @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> I'm really surprised that nobody else finds GPO useful for rapid realizations in Sibelius. Sure, I have VSL VI, EWQLSO Platinum, Sonic Implants and all of those libs too - no question top notch libs for "sequence" mockups. Yet, I find it invaluable that I can pull up an entire GPO Sibelius orchestration in 30 seconds, and switch to another one in the same amount of time. Sure its a rough sketch, but very useful to me nonetheless. Just to open my VSL VI standalone lib takes over two minutes - and that's with nothing loaded. Worth the wait for sequencing, but not for notation sketches in my opinion.
> 
> If anyone has found a similarly fast alternative to GPO that realizes various notation articulations, please let me know. I'm very interested in the new Xsamples (only have the older Xsample lib now) but I wonder about the load time.
> 
> ...



I really like using GPO studio in Sibelius 3 that was a trip I did a lot of music in it with that set up! But Why would I care what the sounds sound like in Sibelius? I have the score in front of me after all^_-
Also I think Xsamples in Sibelius 5 is pretty amazing from what I have heard I haven't set that up yet though but will sometime. You could just use Gold Kontakt instruments and they follow all the articulations phrases, dynamic marks etc right out of the box in Sibelius.

was fun sharing scores with you Greg! 

Doesn't sound like anyone has had to easy a time using other libs with Sibelius 5. By the way the technology for using vsts in Sibelius 5 comes from the same guys who created Bidule! A genius program!


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 11, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> StrangeCat @ Sun 11 Jan said:
> 
> 
> > Then I guess it comes down to this, if you can make GPO shine then you can make VSL Shine even more and every lib after GPO really. If you have the know how and tools to really make GPO come alive then just think what you can do with any other lib, now why is that? It's already been mentioned^_-
> ...



Sorry Man I missed that. ok so Miroslav the Sonic Reality version? I have Sampletank2 and SonicSynth 2 the music I am doing right now uses both of those vsts.
I own the old Akai Samples I consider them treasures that I use over and over again. Miroslav just had some much expression in his samples. The oboe is amazing!


----------



## lux (Jan 12, 2009)

Moonchilde @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> lux @ January 11th 2009 said:
> 
> 
> > there's nothing to do, the more i read those threads the more i'm convinced that only synth-based orchestral products will save good and colorful orchestral writing from the oblivium...
> ...



I disagree as well. Your implying that composers that lead the trends because they work for major networks or they do features or whatever are strictly live orchestral composers and they arent interested to mockups. This is not. Actually i believe a large percentage of composers who work for major shows and features use extensively midi and mockup tools. So, being the mockup not only a way to approach to a live recording but sometimes a result itself, then you'll have more simplified stuff placed (orchestrally speaking). Because 99% of composers basically follow what the mainstream ones do, you have that 99% of composers will accept easily to cut away half the staves and stay within the scheme (ensembles+percussions). Because there reside the bucks.

So, having very complex and detailed samples, paradoxally leads composers to use a very few instruments instead of using a lot, for the reason that you really cannot use a lot of instruments at the same time, when they are complicated, large in size, memory and cpu intensive. 

This means the death of colourful counterpoints, dialogues and whatever makes writing for orchestra a challenging experience.


----------



## Lunatique (Jan 12, 2009)

Lex @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> To me Gary's strings were a breaktrough at the time...everything after that...meh..



You know, I never could understand what happened between GOS and GPO. One was a critically acclaimed product that no composer at the time was without, and the other just....eh. It seemed Gary realized that the lower-end market is where the money's at, and he's been producing entry-level lower-end libraries ever since. 

I bet some here still use GOS.


----------



## hv (Jan 12, 2009)

Has the underlying GPO sample set changed any from it's original 16-bit release way back when? I was under the impression that their newer editions were mostly revisions to bundled players, hooks, and programming.

Howard


----------



## Nickie Fønshauge (Jan 12, 2009)

hv @ 12th January 2009 said:


> Has the underlying GPO sample set changed any from it's original 16-bit release way back when?


Not the least. They haven't even fixed bad samples.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 12, 2009)

Me too. It doesn't matter how bad my mock-ups are as a result. It will never hinder my style of composition. I learnt that when I neglected the violin sections in my concerto _just because I knew _that Miroslav wouldn't do them justice.

In answer to my original question, it just seems as if Mr Garritan has been a bit lazy with his manufacture in order to put more effort into marketing.

It seems he certainly has the ability if he's been working alongside the Samplemodeling guys, and produced the Strad Violin package.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 12, 2009)

Maybe lazy was the wrong word. I don't know the guy. But someone earlier said that there was no reason to make GPO sound _that_ bad. I sort of cottoned on to that.

In all honesty, I've never used GPO. I've heard the demos and read the reports. I used to think that Miroslav was the best until I started researching other libraries, and people on the composers' forum tend to prefer GPO to Miroslav.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 12, 2009)

Miroslav Phil is far better than GPO. Even though it does not have the velocity switches, the strings still sound amazing, especially the non looped ones. In fact, they are my favorite strings except for perhaps Symphobia now. Something about the vibrato and richness really sounds awesome to these ears.


----------



## P.T. (Jan 12, 2009)

I recently purchased Miroslav based mostly on the demos which I think sound quit good.

The strings seem to have quit a lot of bowing noise. It seems somewhat overwhelming at times. I have never heard anyone comment on that.
Overall, I like Miroslav.


----------



## Moonchilde (Jan 12, 2009)

lux @ January 12th 2009 said:


> Moonchilde @ Sun Jan 11 said:
> 
> 
> > lux @ January 11th 2009 said:
> ...



Thats not at all what I implied. Please read it again. What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up. Why should a busy composer bother tweaking a mock up when its just going to be live? Busy composers do not have the time for this.

Also, I wrote that if you're limiting your writing to the "quality" of your samples, then you shouldn't be writing. Besides, the more detailed samples may only mean what, having more audio tracks? How long have people been complaining about having 500+ tracks because of all the articulations? Your logic of more samples = crappier writing because of not being able to oad enough instruments is a tiny bit flawed. Plenty of people have been dealing with 2 gig llimits and much worse for ages now. There is a such thing a bouncing audio and freezing tracks. Thats what you do whe you can't play everything back in real time. Even if you aren't writin for live music, this shouldn't affect you writing because you can bounce anything that can't be played back in real time.

Really now, bad writing is bad writing, is bad writing. There is no excuse for it, and no amount of magic virtual instruments will make it more colorful or better.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jan 12, 2009)

"What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up."

That's a very small group. I know Essa-Pekka Salonen just uses the built in audio in the Mac triggered by Sibelius. He doesn't care what it sounds like. But most composers have to sell their cues, so even mock-ups have to sound good.

I personally would hate to have to use shitty samples for writing.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 12, 2009)

I sort of agree with both Nick and Moonchilde.

With Moonchilde I agree that samples can often get in the way of good music composition. If I'm ever composing something that is intended to be performed by a live group, well, frankly I compose using NOTION. It's the most transparent interface and its sounds are just good enough to give me an overall timbral idea of how things will sound without me getting too involved in the minutia of MIDI settings, sample settings etc. Too often the tools can often restrict the composer. And I would rather spend my time working out a multi part fugal section in my music rather than fitz around with sample buffers and BS like that. For concert works that is.

Now film work is a VERY different beast. I use VSL, EWQLSO PLAY, Symphobia, pretty much every orchestra lib and synth lib on the market because in many cases, what I compose in the studio will end up in the film, so it cannot sound like poo. I love NOTION but I would not use it on a film recording. Sorry but I would not. At least not in its present incarnation. Nor would I use GPO. But I would and have used VSL and PLAY in a recent television theme. Seemed to go over very well with the client. So, I guess what I am saying is that writing for concert hall and film are two very different mediums. these days, no one gives a shit if you compose an inspired cantus firmus for the latest exploits of Miley Cyrus or whomever. 

John Adams does not use great samples but he's a big name in American orchestral music and he knows he's getting a top notch orchestra (or two) to play his stuff when it comes out. Most of us here would probably drop the DAWS and samples if we knew slaving over music with traditional tools would yield a reading from a professional group of musicians. But it often does not happen so we must resort to the next best thing- sample libraries. Some of us are more successful than others at emulating real acoustic musicians. I'm still trying to get better myself.


----------



## Moonchilde (Jan 12, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ January 12th 2009 said:


> "What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up."
> 
> That's a very small group. I know Essa-Pekka Salonen just uses the built in audio in the Mac triggered by Sibelius. He doesn't care what it sounds like. But most composers have to sell their cues, so even mock-ups have to sound good.
> 
> I personally would hate to have to use shitty samples for writing.



Semi agree here. I think there is a huge difference between sounding good to sell a cue and slaving hours on end tweaking eveything to sound OMG REAL. I reallly think samples mainly serve as a timbral/texture idea of what a cue sounds like. Still, if you're guaranteed a live orchetra I don't know of anyone who would spend too much time on a mock up. Mock ups are just to get a quick idea across, and people know the difference between a synth mock up and what the live orchestra will sound like.

Unless of coures, those sampled cues are going to be used in the final product. Then they must be slaved over. Think i mentioned that in my post too, that if you won't have access to a live orchestra, then obviously, its important to get the best out of your samples and realize the strengths an weaknesses.

I do agree its nice to have good sample to write with, but the reply was to the idea that they cause bad writing because of the short comings of samples. Good writin wil never meet obliviion because of samples. Reason is, the best writers have access to the best budgets, which earn the best live players. Those guys do not care what the mock ups sound like, they're writing for big budget 100 piece live orchestras.


----------



## Moonchilde (Jan 12, 2009)

dcoscina @ January 12th 2009 said:


> Now film work is a VERY different beast. I use VSL, EWQLSO PLAY, Symphobia, pretty much every orchestra lib and synth lib on the market because in many cases, what I compose in the studio will end up in the film, so it cannot sound like poo. I love NOTION but I would not use it on a film recording. Sorry but I would not. At least not in its present incarnation. Nor would I use GPO. But I would and have used VSL and PLAY in a recent television theme. Seemed to go over very well with the client. So, I guess what I am saying is that writing for concert hall and film are two very different mediums. these days, no one gives a [email protected]#t if you compose an inspired cantus firmus for the latest exploits of Miley Cyrus or whomever.



I don't have any film soundtracks that have any of those libraries in them. Game soundtracks, maybe. But film? Never heard any. They're all live, or at least, mostly live with maybe some samples sprinkled on top to thicken it up. But not one soundtrack I've purchased is based solely on samples.

Also, please note I did cover in my original post about samples, that obvoiusly if you don't have access to a live performance, then getting the best out of your samples is a must, and having the best sonic quality, i.e. not GPO, is desireable. *This still shouldn't affect writing to the point that good writing is going the way of the dinosaur, which is what someone suggested earlier in this thread.* In general, if anyone has to write for samples, maybe bend a teeny tiny bit to the will of the samples, maybe let go of some of that gotta-have-realism for the sake keeping a melody, but lord o lord don't let the samples or a ram ceiling dictate anything!


----------



## JohnG (Jan 12, 2009)

Moonchilde @ 12th January 2009 said:


> lord o lord don't let the samples or a ram ceiling dictate anything!



But they do dictate what's going to sound good, so why shouldn't they dictate what one writes? They do for me. 

For an Authority Figure, I cite a 10 year old interview, in which James Newton Howard said not to use a sample unless it sounded good, and (as I recall) even went so far as to say that if you had a feeble-sounding sample, not to write for it. (Which maybe is the same).

I subscribe to the same philosophy; if I'm stuck using samples as part of the palette, I don't write stuff that doesn't sound good on -- samples.

And, if you are in fact stuck in that position, Garriton will limit the number of cool sounds at one's disposal more than VSL.


----------



## nikolas (Jan 12, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> "What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up."
> 
> That's a very small group. I know Essa-Pekka Salonen just uses the built in audio in the Mac triggered by Sibelius. He doesn't care what it sounds like. But most composers have to sell their cues, so even mock-ups have to sound good.
> 
> I personally would hate to have to use shitty samples for writing.


Depends on the end client. If I'm in charge of producing the end product (eg. VG or other media), then I use the best I can. If not and we're talking about 'concert hall music' then I really don't give much shit about how it sounds in the mock-up. I'm actually doing them a favor to offer a mock-up! The score is what matters and I'm goooooooood with scores.

BTW, if you stretch samples, and you don't have velocity layers OF COURSE it will need less RAM, won't it? GPO is very lite, and thus uses less resources. It can sound rather good if you press hard, or if you know how to use Finale (which seems to be working quite well with GPO).

I am still puzzled at those "Gary comments", which I simply don't understand. I simply don't see anyone talking about Doug, or Nick, or Kirk, or anyone else like "Ohhhh... the poor guy, he doesn't know better, and blah blah", yet something is providing the right to some of you do go under the belt and onto personal comments :roll: 

But bottom line (without knowing any real 'facts' on this): It does appear that the GPO was not produced under the best of terms, or by hiring the best performers in the Seattle area. It was conceived to need heavy tweaking, without articulations and with very light specs needing. Garritan has made some fine instruments, apart from GOS. The strad is working very fine, and the Steinway as well. 

_You get what you pay for..._ In GPO's case you get a light, cheap library which might sound semi-good if you try too hard. You can't compair 2-3 GB with 700 of VSL, or 128 of EW...


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 12, 2009)

nikolas @ Tue 13 Jan said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jan 13 said:
> 
> 
> > "What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up."
> ...



_*WOW!!!*_ Is the VSL library 700 gigabytes?


----------



## Moonchilde (Jan 12, 2009)

JohnG @ January 13th 2009 said:


> Moonchilde @ 12th January 2009 said:
> 
> 
> > lord o lord don't let the samples or a ram ceiling dictate anything!
> ...



I think you're selling yourself short by letting the samples dicate what you write.

Ask yourself this: Would you rather have a great melody that sounds not so great, or a bad melody that sounds somewhat decent? At least one you can blame on the synth's quality... the other... you can only blame yourself for poor writing. At least with the former, someone could say, "hey, thats a great melody! I wish I wrote that," instead of "man that sounds pretty good because of the samples, but that melody is SOOO uninspired..."

Its like directors and storyboards. Storyboards give an idea of the shot and what the film will be like prior to shooting. Just like samples give an idea to a composer what the live score will be like. Say someon can only storyboard and not have access to a crew, they'd basicaly have a comic book. That shouldn' stop their vision from being what they want. They don't let that limit take control. They can still try to convey motion with static images, rather than just making everything static because paper can't show motion, just convey it.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 12, 2009)

JohnG @ Tue 13 Jan said:


> Moonchilde @ 12th January 2009 said:
> 
> 
> > lord o lord don't let the samples or a ram ceiling dictate anything!
> ...



_"if I'm stuck using samples as part of the palette, I don't write stuff that doesn't sound good on -- samples."_

John, I have to say, that that is a wee bit scary. No composer should have their limitations dictated to them by the quality of their samples. It happened to me once, and only once, and it will never happen to me again. The score is the most important aspect of a composition, not the mock-up. Even if you don't have it played by a live orchestra, at least write the score as you wish it, and then provide an alternative score for the mock-up.

Schubert once wrote a piece of music and put in his drawer ready to send to the publisher when the time came. He died prematurely, and it wasn't until years later that Mendelssohn discovered it. It was his 'Great C Major Symphony'. Now in Schubert's day, the equivalent of a mock-up was a reduction of the score to be played by four hands at the piano. I've actually studied this at university and if the pianist couldn't play what was written on the score sheet, then an alternative texture was written out for the four handed pianist (two players).

Why can't we align ourselves with that system? It worked for them.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 13, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> Why can't we align ourselves with that system? It worked for them.



Would not work for me since I am not a very good piano player. I can finger my way through progessions and such but no way I could play a symphony. So using samples is gold worth to me.


----------



## JohnG (Jan 13, 2009)

_"No composer should have their [sic] limitations dictated to them..."_

What a jolly world that must be!

If you are famous / established / charming enough so that you can put some feeble-sounding mockup in front of the guy(s) paying for the orchestra and tell them to trust you that it is going to sound good, then you should carry on with that. Otherwise, I find it handy to have a good sound so they don't go hire their cousin after the first demo you play for them.

About Samples?

I conditioned my proposition by saying, "if I'm stuck using samples..." in a thread _about_ samples, not a thread about Artists' Rights or Being a Great Composer. 

Since the question in the thread was, I thought, asking "so what" about using or buying good samples instead of simpler but less nuanced ones, I was trying to answer that question, in part by parroting the (possibly out of date) perspective of James Newton Howard, whom I think writes rather well for both real and synthetic players.



Generally, I'd rather write for a soloist than a huge rack of samples, so I am sure we all agree on that.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Jan 13, 2009)

Writing for samples demonstrates craft in that you can discern which is strong or weak and in which register. It demonstrates that you know what will and won't work. 

It's not limiting as it demonstrates that like a musical Iron Chef, you can work successfully even when there are limitations, and with real players, depending on who you're writing for, there are always limitations.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jan 13, 2009)

nikolas @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jan 13 said:
> 
> 
> > "What I wrote was that people who KNOW their music is going to be live just won't care about the mock up."
> ...



If you're referring to my comments about Gary, I said exactly what I think based on PERSONAL interactions with him. I was unhappy with a product( JABB) he suggested user error. I suggested static, too short samples. He demurred and again suggested inefficient user use of controllers. I demurred, saying no matter how much congroller info you throw in, a bad sample is a bad sample, etc etc etc etc, ad nauseum. On that other ( un named) forum, I observed the same pattern with others. He seems to have an interest in primacy I said what I thought to his virtual face.

If reporting back on that is 'below the belt', so be it.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 13, 2009)

If that's the way the conversation went with Gary (and you've no reason to lie about it), then you have the right and almost an obligation to say what you think of him.


----------



## nikolas (Jan 13, 2009)

NYC: Interesting story. For the record, no I wasn't referring to you. There was no comment about GARY himself in your post and your post seemed perfectly reasonable.

I was referring to the following:



> "Despite Gary's persona and how he deals with people, I can look beyond that to see what's been achieved and he's earned the credit for that."
> 
> Yup. And the poor guy is so insecure that he will never believe you feel that way, no matter how many times you tell him.


First quote (the "") by Peter Alexander and 2nd quote from Nick.

...Gary's persona... how he deals with people...

poor guy *IS* so insecure...

I'm sorry. These people may know Gary, they may know him very well, they both are pros, excellent people for all I know. I know nothing about their persona, or themselves really, but I just had to say something towards those comments (which is a huge leap of difference between talking about a post and an action maybe, rather than a personal comment and about the personality of someone.)

BTW, just to make sure I make myself clear. The post themselves are not negative in any way, right? "he's acheived, earned credit, etc...", I'm not blind. I was just annoyed at the personal comments. (then again I'm certainly too touchy these days, if I'm off I do appologise)


----------



## Mahlon (Jan 13, 2009)

About the writing with good or bad samples, I REALLY like the process of composing and mocking up a piece with samples as a final result. So I would want to use only the best to do that.

Mahlon


----------



## rJames (Jan 13, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Mon Jan 12 said:


> _"if I'm stuck using samples as part of the palette, I don't write stuff that doesn't sound good on -- samples."_
> 
> John, I have to say, that that is a wee bit scary. No composer should have their limitations dictated to them by the quality of their samples. It happened to me once, and only once, and it will never happen to me again.



It is a sad truth that you must write for the samples IF your final published work is to be samples.

Just like the limitations put onto a composer by the director, or the producer, or any of the other forces that dictate how a composer proceeds with his/her art, the samples impose another dictate onto the composer. 

IMHO, the successful artist juggles all of these impositions to fulfill their clients goals. I see this as part of the art. Certainly part of the technique.

If you are writing for yourself or someone who can imagine how the cue will sound after it is recorded live, then you may use samples in any way you like.


----------



## rgames (Jan 13, 2009)

The notion that samples are limiting and live musicians are not is simply not true.

Try writing a very high, very fast staccato line for clarinet and see what you get. Or try writing changing mixed meter for a youth orchestra.

Whether it's live musicians or samples, you're faced with limitations. Part of the "craft" of composing is working around those limitations.

rgames


----------



## nikolas (Jan 13, 2009)

I agree! Samples are taken (at least by me), exactly like every other performer: With their abilities and limitations. Exactly as I make sure I write something playable by the performer who commissioned me, I write something... _doable_ from the sample library.


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 13, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> Wow Hal, you really say that cinema work can be done with VSL. Please point me to an example.



Not Hal, but here's your VSL movie Hannes.... :wink: 

http://vsl.co.at/en/65/71/894/1442/1055.vsl


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 13, 2009)

synergy543 @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> Hannes_F @ Sun Jan 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Wow Hal, you really say that cinema work can be done with VSL. Please point me to an example.
> ...



Oops, ... and this is the example? :( 

I like the big "East-Wurst" (they called them so in this video...) cinematic sound much more than the VSL. o/~


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 13, 2009)

Well, have fun PLAYing with your East-Wurst wiener schnitzel**...but you missed the "wink" :wink: *

OK, here's your "serious" example:

http://vsl.co.at/en/65/276/281/147.vsl

*btw, that was another "wink". Almost all the sounds on Steven Odden's CD I'm promoting in my tag were done with East-West RA samples. 

As for myself, I use GPO, EW, SI, VSL and whatever I want, for whatever fits best. I have no brand allegiances.

** American Wienerschitzel® "is" a wurst. We twist things like "French fries" and "English muffins" with our own definitions and trademarks.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 13, 2009)

synergy543 @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> OK, here's your "serious" example:
> 
> http://vsl.co.at/en/65/276/281/147.vsl



Well, Paul Haslinger says that he used "Vienna’s samples next to actual orchestral live recordings as complementing elements."


----------



## synergy543 (Jan 13, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> synergy543 @ Tue Jan 13 said:
> 
> 
> > OK, here's your "serious" example:
> ...



Exactly. 

Proving that real cinema work has been done with VSL.

But Hannes, you know as well as I, that 99% of the audience cannot tell the difference between a real instrument and a very good recorded and played sample. Even sample developers and golden ear musicians have been fooled into not being able to distinguish in A/B tests. So it all really depends upon how the samples are used. Even recordings of John Williams are "recordings" just as samples are. When the orchestra is "really" in front of you, it sounds COMPLETELY different as you know. Stereo recordings have no surround cues for example. So semantics aside, there are truly good uses for every sample library if you are creative - and I'm sure that a very skilled person could pull off a movie with any of them.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 13, 2009)

synergy543 @ Tue Jan 13 said:


> Proving that real cinema work has been done with VSL.



No. Some VSL mixed under real orchestra proves nothing. Mix a sampled string with real strings and then reduce the samples by 6 dB and they are practically gone. The same thing could be done with GPO.

Of course to get there you need to convince the director and there is where you need the best samples you get.

But please show me a cinema film (and I mean one that I could see in a multiplex) that is end-produced with VSL for the orchestra but without real recordings and we are talking.

I don't say it is not possible, I just want to know an example.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 13, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Tue 13 Jan said:


> synergy543 @ Tue Jan 13 said:
> 
> 
> > Proving that real cinema work has been done with VSL.
> ...



I honestly thought that they were ALL done with samples nowadays. I thought that was the whole point of them, to cut budget costs in film making.

Shows how ignorant I am.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 13, 2009)

For TV work yes. For cinema I still see live players in the credits whenever I watch.

It is a question of budget and general artistic level, just like the level of acting and directing usually is different. Same for script, consistency, costumes, sound etc.. Exceptions confirm the rule of course.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 13, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Tue 13 Jan said:


> For TV work yes. For cinema I still see live players in the credits whenever I watch.
> 
> It is a question of budget and general artistic level, just like the level of acting and directing usually is different. Same for script, consistency, costumes, sound etc.. Exceptions confirm the rule of course.



Ok, so it's safe to say that the 'Harry Potter' films are played live then.


----------



## bryla (Jan 13, 2009)

YES!


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 13, 2009)

I think it is sure to say that for the newer HP films a lot of terrific sample work is involved in the stages of orchestration and intermediate phases but the actual recording are mostly live players.


----------



## Mihkel Zilmer (Jan 13, 2009)

At least 3 of the Harry Potter films were recorded by London Symphony Orchestra, not sure about the others. You can always search IMDB with the name of the orchestra for a complete listing of recordings.


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 13, 2009)

well it goes like this the director wants the theme you have some themes you did on the piano and it's time to mock them up to the best of your ability and make them sound amazing! 
Then it's like hey look here is the music! I mean it's going to sound just like this really(director has better idea of the theme now). Then it's time for the score and Sibelius 5 to the rescue and parts and everything.

How could anyone think the music in Harry Potter first 3 films are samples! John Williams should have won awards for those not that Geisha film!

Oh and a lot of movies have used East West's samples as full score, most are indies though. Lot of string writing in films is so damn simple it's easy to mock-up with samples, that is the romantic slow themes. It's not like the strings in the main theme for Harry Potter first 3 films. 
(someone came close with VSL though)
that's all I know...
keep composing and producing!


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 13, 2009)

I didn't read the whole topic and probably won't. Just chimed in on the last bits where there is said, that no newer films involve samples. That's not completely true. Hans Zimmer or James Newton Howard and accidently others are throwing in some samples, see the legendary Malsmjö thread in the OT section for example, or JNH uses TreStrike here and there and Zimmer and his folks some from their personal library. This is because things may have changed on last minute (in case HZ might not have the time to record things again) or the director likes the demo track that much that it would stay or the scene was skipped and got back into film again - many possibilities of that scenario.

And the other reason as for Malmsjö and TrueStrike or SD2 samples or maybe similar is, that they're already ready recorded and the quality is up to a real recording. Plus it's a timesaver if you don't have to record them again. Finally, they're unique, that's why they will be used. I'd expect more and more of that in the future even with major composers as most will work with their samples anyway before going to record in order to have something to show of to the director.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 13, 2009)

Do you know? Call me ignorant, but that surprises me. I really actually thought that samples were the order of the day with all major film companies. I've actually listened in wonder to the Harry Potter themes on the latest venture (Order of the Phoenix) and thought to myself "Wow, someone's really got those mock-ups to a T, there".

I really believed that. Now I think I'll have to go and see an ear specialist.

Another question. We all know that VSL, EW, and SI are the best libraries in the commercial sector, but are there any in existence that major studios use that the ordinary end-user could not afford. Really top-notch samples that are way out of VSL's league?


----------



## nikolas (Jan 13, 2009)

I only know rumors (others will know perfectly clear, I simply don't have enough facts), about private libraries. Personal libraries made by a few people to meet their needs! I would imagine this tops everything!


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

PolarBear,
just for the records, I never said newer films did not involve samples. That would be crazy. 

I said show me a film (cinema, not TV) where the orchestra sounds (I should specify: strings, winds, brass) have been entirely done with VSL (I am not talking about private samples or EW here). Again, I don't say it is not possible, I just want to know a specific example, please.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 14, 2009)

Oh right, so what you're saying is that it is more likely that a cinema film that was using samples would use EW rather than VSL?


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

alphabetgreen,

I think I asked a very precise question, and nothing more. Still waiting for an example.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> alphabetgreen,
> 
> I think I asked a very precise question, and nothing more. Still waiting for an example.



I doubt you will find such an example due to the simple fact that films in the cinema have so large budgets that there would be no reason to use samples. 

However if one were to use samples I think VSL would be a good choice, and for the most part it would work just fine. The average audience would not notice. 

But obviously the real deal is better.


----------



## germancomponist (Jan 14, 2009)

Christian Marcussen @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> However if one were to use samples I think VSL would be a good choice, and for the most part it would work just fine. The average audience would not notice.



I think one can use the most samplelibraries for this. :mrgreen:


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

We are walking in would-could-should-land now. Example, please.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> alphabetgreen,
> 
> I think I asked a very precise question, and nothing more. Still waiting for an example.



Hannes, go on the VSL website and listen to the demo by Bill Brown Brass II Battle March (Epic Horns). Then listen to Special Brass demo like Journey to Greatness by Rob Elliott. Then listen to app. strings demos like Anaheim by Christian Kardeis or Eurasien	by Simon Ravn. And then tell me VSL can not work for film?


----------



## lux (Jan 14, 2009)

Serenity


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

Fernando Warez @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > alphabetgreen,
> ...



Fernando,
why can't you read what I wrote? I am not saying it can not work for film, on the contrary I said I believe it is possible.

But I want concrete real-world examples please, not speculations.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Serenity



Thank you so much, lux. Finally someone that can read.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Serenity


Hmm, lux,

according to what I read Serenety was recorded by the Hollywood Studio Symphony. So I am still waiting for an example.


----------



## Fernando Warez (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Fernando Warez @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> ...



Why? What's your point? You and i and others know it can work so....?

I didn't reed the whole thing BTW so maybe I'm missing something?


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

Fernando Warez @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Why? What's your point?



You are evading.

My point is that Hal said you can rely on VSL for cinema work, so I want to know a concrete example where this was the case, please. A soundtrack for a cinema movie (and I am not talking about TV, a commercial, a trailer or a DVD-only release) done with VSL but without live players that I can buy and listen to.


----------



## nikolas (Jan 14, 2009)

Honestly, I'm also getting curious: Doesn't anyone know a film made by VSL? It's not unreasonable to ask, nor bashing in any way, nor bad to ask, etc...

I would be most curious (and btw, gunther: LOL It does stand true that the average listener will not distinguish between sf2 and VSL and live playing I think! :D)


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Fernando Warez @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Why? What's your point?
> ...



Well I just told you. It aint gonna happen. Cinema films have a high enough budget to get an orchestra. So I'm guessing Hal's statement was a hyperbole to access the quality of VSL not an actual statement of fact.


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 14, 2009)

Christian Marcussen @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Well I just told you. It aint gonna happen. Cinema films have a high enough budget to get an orchestra.



That is not the only reason. You would also need a team of ten or more assistants with the abilities of JBacal or Guy Bacos, especially since VSL programming on a high level is time-consuming. How much would they cost for say three or four weeks? That is the cross-point where real orchestras are getting less expensive than samples.


----------



## Christian Marcussen (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Christian Marcussen @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Well I just told you. It aint gonna happen. Cinema films have a high enough budget to get an orchestra.
> ...



Good point. Although I'm not sure it would be that expenssive. Especially not if the composer himself has some good mock-up chops as many of them do. Guys like James Newton Howard already provides directors with oretty complex mockups. 

But again - there is not real point when you have the budget of a cinema movie-


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 14, 2009)

When I said VSL/Symphobia/EWQLSO is good for film work, I might remind some people that I do not work in the same strata as JN Howard, John Williams and the rest of those guys. 

For smaller projects where budget demands little to no musicians/acoustic instruments, these orchestral sample libs are crucial. So GPO would not be the first lib I would choose if I had to bring in the finished goods without having a real orchestra on those tracks.


----------



## lux (Jan 14, 2009)

Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Serenity
> ...



Well, my ears tell me that serenity has some EWQLSO inside. But could be wrong


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 14, 2009)

Hey, no need to sweat here. I'm not always on... Well, other than Paul Haslingers "Underworld" score I got an IMDB entry with the credits "The Collector (2004/II) ... Orchestra", have a look here for the VSL company entry. My point though wasn't that scores are completely done with a sample set, but that major scores do contain samples partially and not everything is recorded live because of the reasons told. Probably a misunderstanding of mine for not reading the whole topic.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 14, 2009)

Why isn't Garritan as good as VSL?


----------



## PolarBear (Jan 14, 2009)

Erm, what was the topic about then so far if that hasn't been covered yet? lol 

Short answer: Sound quality and articulation depth. Mostly sound quality for me.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 15, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> Why isn't Garritan as good as VSL?



Asking again? Well to make it also short (again): Listen to a high string patch of GPO and then to VSL Appassionata strings. If you don't hear it it doesn't matter anyway.


----------



## nikolas (Jan 15, 2009)

You get what you pay. Bigger is better. etc, etc...

In terms of money actually I find that the quality/price ratio is much better in GPO rather than VSL. In terms of quality vs effort I find that both are quite bad compared to EW! :D In terms of quality I find that VSL is top (even if I use EW almost exclusively). I just prefer the more 'classical' sound, as I've known it all those years, as a classical composer and audience.


----------



## choc0thrax (Jan 15, 2009)

lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> ...



Which part of Serenity? The french horns do sound pretty terrible at times.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

Sorry, I apologise. I was being ironic and just illustrating the digression from the original topic. Won't happen again.

simon


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

nikolas @ Thu 15 Jan said:


> You get what you pay. Bigger is better. etc, etc...
> 
> In terms of money actually I find that the quality/price ratio is much better in GPO rather than VSL. In terms of quality vs effort I find that both are quite bad compared to EW! :D In terms of quality I find that VSL is top (even if I use EW almost exclusively). I just prefer the more 'classical' sound, as I've known it all those years, as a classical composer and audience.



Hi Nikolas,

I trust you're more of a pencil and paper man, such as myself. Even though I do need to improve my production skills, rest assured.

Simon


----------



## nikolas (Jan 15, 2009)

Yup, pencil and paper man I am. I do use the computer extensively as a copyist and I do use Cubase for composing purposes when the purpose requires it, but I do love my manuscripts!


----------



## lux (Jan 15, 2009)

choc0thrax @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> ...



well, as example I was surprised, when i first saw it, by the part when they mask the starship with red paint, blood and deads and start walking into the reavers space. I believe i hear ewqlso french horns very upfront.

btw, in general i like that score, sorta hollywood meets dixie drags.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

nikolas @ Thu 15 Jan said:


> Yup, pencil and paper man I am. I do use the computer extensively as a copyist and I do use Cubase for composing purposes when the purpose requires it, but I do love my manuscripts!



I'm glad we're still around. One of my most treasured possessions is my handwritten score of a piece I wrote at university called 'Fundamendicus' with Barry Wordsworth's conductor markings all over it in magic marker. Worth nothing financially, but worth everything to me.

However, when I can afford it, I'm going to invest in Sibelius or Finale (whichever's best value), because writing parts is the most time-consuming job I've ever undertaken, even worse with a deadline.

Cheers,

Simon


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 15, 2009)

lux @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> well, as example I was surprised, when i first saw it, by the part when they mask the starship with red paint, blood and deads and start walking into the reavers space. I believe i hear ewqlso french horns very upfront.



Btw and with absolutel speculation only, but I don't wanna know how many movie scores are out there (I mean big ones) whose composers tried to put in a sample patch here and there. I mean why should these guys only stick to real orchestra etc. only because they have the budget ... I bet my ass that most of them are also freaks and "soundsmiths" as we are. I am sure lots of famous guys sit in their studios, trying and testing little 99 buck plugins, fool around with sample libraries and piss their pants of joy what plugin A or B does with the audio signals. Why not?


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 15, 2009)

Waywyn everything you say is completely true. It is always brought up in interviews as well. 
Pen and Paper is cool but there is only so much that can be done with that. As a composer you should be able to composer in every style for all instruments and all cultures, there all related after all. Of course we have all the tools to do it too!

And yea I am sure everyone on this forum composes on paper as well. Classical, Jazz these are just styles of music to compose.


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

StrangeCat @ Thu 15 Jan said:


> Waywyn everything you say is completely true. It is always brought up in interviews as well.
> Pen and Paper is cool but there is only so much that can be done with that. As a composer you should be able to composer in every style for all instruments and all cultures, there all related after all. Of course we have all the tools to do it too!
> 
> And yea I am sure everyone on this forum composes on paper as well. Classical, Jazz these are just styles of music to compose.



Too true, especially if your composing for film. But an orchestral composer can hardly include samples in his work that can't be performed in a concert hall. I know some have done it, like the avant garde etc who compose for 'orchestra and tape' but generally speaking, orchestral composers generally stick to the four main groups with occasional ethno instrument when specifically required.


----------



## StrangeCat (Jan 15, 2009)

who in the world would just be an orchestra composer? 
man it's so late I am going to sleep look forward to all the NAMM news! 
Later Gents


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

StrangeCat @ Thu 15 Jan said:


> who in the world would just be an orchestra composer?
> man it's so late I am going to sleep look forward to all the NAMM news!
> Later Gents



Me, in a word. Unless, of course, I'm forced to sell my soul.

Sweet dreams pussycat.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 15, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> StrangeCat @ Thu 15 Jan said:
> 
> 
> > who in the world would just be an orchestra composer?
> ...



Sorry, but I dunno what's "soulselling" if a customer wants additional Duduk, Taikos or a whole rockband playing along with the orchestra?


----------



## lux (Jan 15, 2009)

Waywyn @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> lux @ Thu Jan 15 said:
> 
> 
> > well, as example I was surprised, when i first saw it, by the part when they mask the starship with red paint, blood and deads and start walking into the reavers space. I believe i hear ewqlso french horns very upfront.
> ...



yup, I agree, cant see the reason why this shouldnt happen. A good few of them probably lurk here too.



Waywyn @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> if a customer wants additional Duduk, Taikos or a whole rockband playing along with the orchestra?



hehe, you squeezed out three cliches in a short phrase :mrgreen:


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

Waywyn @ Thu 15 Jan said:


> alphabetgreen @ Thu Jan 15 said:
> 
> 
> > StrangeCat @ Thu 15 Jan said:
> ...



I was joking. But on a serious note, there's nothing whatsoever wrong with a composer wanting a whole rockband playing along with an orchestra. I was merely suggesting that it would be difficult to incorporate actual samples with a live orchestra. Possible, yes, but difficult.

The 'soulselling' jibe was just a personal thing. I write for orchestras and try to get what I can out of that particular medium. It doesn't mean that everyone else has to. I mean, James Last and Mantovani have electric guitars in their music, don't they? It's just not my thing, and I'm sorry if I offended you.


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 15, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> Waywyn @ Thu 15 Jan said:
> 
> 
> > alphabetgreen @ Thu Jan 15 said:
> ...



Nono, you didn't offend me at all, but I was just curious to ask. I surely know the term "soulselling" but I just know it in connection with something we don't like to do but have to. Of course this is a personal attitude and everyone should have his/her own, but for me music is not about "Did he pollute his track with unholy samples or break the law of the seating plan by using 10 french horn players" but about making my music to absolutely fit to the job.

I always tend to see a project from the visual site too. E.g. I create music for a fantasy game. There are mages throwing fireballs and 100 feet giants run around in that world ... and then someone is critisizing the music because one used a 100 piece string section (and only had 50 live players so he stacked up the rest with samples) .. I hope you get my point, why I was asking o-[][]-o


----------



## alphabetgreen (Jan 15, 2009)

Sure, I guess writing music for a fantasy game, you'd use whatever your imagination would bring forth. I know I would. 100 feet giants, bring 'em on!!!..lol

No-one is qualified to criticise the instrumentation for music that fulfils that sort of role.


----------



## Ed (Jan 15, 2009)

Peter Alexander @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> 
> 
> > alphabetgreen @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> ...



I didnt say every user of GPO is an amateur. Second, does Ric Flauding think GPO is better than VSL? I doubt it, or, he only knows GPO. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Jan 15, 2009)

alphabetgreen @ Sat Jan 10 said:


> rayinstirling @ Sat 10 Jan said:
> 
> 
> > Ed @ Sat Jan 10 said:
> ...



No need to get angry, people already told you.


----------



## Ed (Jan 15, 2009)

Hal @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> *Cons*
> average sound



Actually I wouldnt give it that much credit. If Roland was programmed as nicely as GPO was it would sound just as good, in fact I think it would sound better. Point is Roland was made, what... 15 years ago or something? And GPO came out in I think it was 02 or 03.


----------



## Ed (Jan 15, 2009)

Moonchilde @ Sun Jan 11 said:


> Why woul anyone in their right mind spend a ton of time mocking something up and tweakin everything if they know its going to be recorded live anyway? Live orchestra gets what is printed out by the orchestrator. They don't care in the slightest about the mock up..



Yea TJ, Maarten etc are insane.


----------



## Ed (Jan 15, 2009)

Fernando Warez @ Wed Jan 14 said:


> Hannes_F @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> 
> 
> > alphabetgreen,
> ...



How about Armageddon, in the small print on the cd it says composed and PERFORMED by Trevor Rabin. I assume Harry G also used samples for his cues as well. I know theres spme live solo instruments in there but its mainly samples. I suspect Face Off and Enemy of the State or Bad Boys 2 was also the same.

EDIT: Oops didnt realise the question was JUSt about VSL. Nevermind


----------



## Waywyn (Jan 15, 2009)

By the way, how about the score of Van Helsing "Transylvania 1887".

The stac and trem strings plus the wood ostinato in the beginning does sound very sample-ish to me


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 15, 2009)

Waywyn @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> By the way, how about the score of Van Helsing "Transylvania 1887".
> 
> The stac and trem strings plus the wood ostinato in the beginning does sound very sample-ish to me



You mean the cue that is the personified orchestra hit. I kinda liked it.


----------



## JohnG (Jan 15, 2009)

Waywyn @ 15th January 2009 said:


> The stac and trem strings plus the wood ostinato in the beginning does sound very sample-ish to me



and string players seem to hate playing lots of staccato / machine-precision stuff. Odd, since it's sort of a baroque vibe in a way, but that's my experience.

Sometimes you end up with a better "performance" from the samples so they stay in the mix, to a greater or lesser extent.


----------



## choc0thrax (Jan 15, 2009)

lux @ Thu Jan 15 said:


> choc0thrax @ Thu Jan 15 said:
> 
> 
> > lux @ Wed Jan 14 said:
> ...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnThk1qr ... re=related

Starting around 20 seconds yuck.


----------



## dariusofwest (Jan 16, 2009)

:shock: Yep,those are the EWQLSO horns with that charaterisitc buzzy noise,yuck/


----------



## mducharme (Jan 18, 2009)

I've recently had the opportunity to compare GPO side by side with something else for the same piece - I'm applying to go to university for music, and as per entrance requirements I've been working on notating a piece that I originally wrote in Cubase with mostly Sonivox samples. Now I am stuck with the GPO playback in Finale. It sounds pretty awful compared to the same piece with good samples. Of course I'm sure a better sound can be coaxed out of GPO as I've heard a better sound, and I only have one trumpet carrying the melody instead of 3 trumpets because I can't quite figure out how to make the unison without 3 staves in Finale, but it gives a bit of an idea of the light-years difference between GPO and pro samples, and gives an idea of what you can expect to get from something like Finale directly:

http://www.box.net/shared/kgftrkrk5n

Is the track from Finale..

The track from Cubase using good (non GPO) samples is:

http://www.esnips.com//doc/52932df3-a889-474c-80a1-d3625dc7d3da/Mega-Mallard-Main-Theme.mp3


----------



## Hannes_F (Jan 19, 2009)

mducharme,

to be fair you should use the wet samples of GPO or add reverb. By directly comparing dry samples to wet samples you could even make VSL sound bad. Also I wonder whether your cubase version has the same amount of cc data involved or more. 

If so your comparision would not really be relevant. There clearly is a quality difference between GPO and SI samples but it is smaller than in your example.

BTW can't you send midi data from Finale to Cubase via MidiYoke? Then you could use your Sonivox samples with notation.


----------

