# We need a professional "Phrase LIbrary" for all instruments.



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

I have been thinking about this for a while - years. I would be happy to help develop this. I have only old skool programming skills alas. 
We all need a professional phrase library/creator.
What I mean is a very good user interface to store phrases, create phrases, and most importantly constrain phrases per instrument type. Possibly a MIDI VST instrument or similar

Firstly, this library would have a full knowledge of the range of each instrument. The instrument would know how these ranges 'develop' . For example a tenor sax does not go below Bb, it has three principle ranges. The lowest octave accounts for the lowest note, then after B (in Bb pitch) it 'leaps' to the following C, tghe fingering is quite different and a different overtone becomes the fundamental - (lipping and fingering are involved). After this the fingering repeats in a MID range, then there are the extended upper range notes (ending in high pitched squeaks. These notes are often FX tones and not for the learner players. 
The tenor sax is further contrained by the fact that it can only produce one tone at a time and the tranfer of sound can be legato (Legato: a very different word for many different instruments) where the player simply sustains the sound whilst closing and opening pads, or they can be punctuated with a stop in the airflow, giving a customisable attack. 
The saxophone cannot slide from tone to tone (like a tronbone could) it must cease one note to begin the next. You might be able to pull off a party trick by bending the reed, but this is essentially true. The interface would know these ideosyncracies for this instrument. 

The range of tones available to the user, would be contrained per instrument, with colorised ranges for things like uppoer partials. There would be a piano roll and a notation view available. Two, or four bars in length, with pick up notes. Drag and drop a pattern to the sequencers. 
Within the device there would be the basic arpeggios. I won't list them here, but there should be an ability to impose a rhythmic pattern on a arpeggio, perhaps store rhymn and melody indepentently.

Along side the basic or fundamental phrase library. There should be custom phrases suitable for the selected instrument. For example, for a guitar there would be fingerpicking patterns using the E bass string. 

There should be an ability cut and paste bits of patterns and save them in four or eight bar sections (with pick up notes). There should be an ability to tranpose the phrase, to audition it with different instruments. To set a standard instrument such as piano or guitar, for phrases, or save a custom.
Lastly of course there needs to be a users save function for a custom bespoke library as you want it. All needs a clear and helpful gui.

Presently when we buy a library, we may get some very authentic sounds,you may, if your lucky, even get a small library of phrases (think a banjo vst with a few fingerpicking patterns), it's quite a challenge to find and then tranfer the data from instrumen to instrument - however, if one had a phrase for a concert flute, it would likely work with many arabian or indian flutes. 

What we don't have is some kind of universal resource for these things. This is what I am envisioning a "Universal phrase library"

Z


----------



## Lawson. (Jan 23, 2017)

Isn't this called "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov?


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

Lawson. said:


> Isn't this called "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov?



Absolutely not  - I read it. This book was about orchestration (and was _very_ boring in large parts here). This is software a way to store your musical thoughts and morph them as you need. It's a toolkit. You can hear what you want. You could use your phrases with any instrument from any manufacturer.


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 23, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Absolutely not  - I read it. This book was about orchestration (and was _very_ boring in large parts here). This is software a way to store your musical thoughts and morph them as you need. It's a toolkit. You can hear what you want. You could use your phrases with any instrument from any manufacturer.



The Rimsky Korsakov is actually a very good book on orchestration. Not as good as the Adler, but still quite useful.


----------



## Dietz (Jan 23, 2017)

Take a look at the APP Sequencer inside Vienna Instruments PRO 







-> http://www.vsl.co.at/en/Vienna_Software_Package/Vienna_Instruments_PRO#!Video_Demos


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

Parsifal666 said:


> The Rimsky Korsakov is actually a very good book on orchestration. Not as good as the Adler, but still quite useful.


Of course your right, for others, it is online too - Garritan put it up here. I suggested this idea tgo him at the time. https://www.garritan.com/principles-of-orchestration/introduction/ 
But for _me _it was boring. I had already done my time in orchestras and bands - it is still not a phrase library by any means. Putting a phrase library in paper form is never going to be malleable. The Victorians tried all sorts of methods and tutorials. When rendered on paper, there can only be a 'sample' content, unless you want 36 volumes. Good for a starting point but no more.

Imagine Czerny dancing on the page - alive. Imagine hearing the phrase then inverting it, putting it inot Bb, then voicing it on a clarinet of your choice. Changing the position and rhythmic values, at will, adding accents, then dragging it into the sequencer. Saving a copy as an "archetypical phrase" from which one can boil derivitives. 

I preferred Adler, as you could get the audio clips. My reading of bass clef and piano score, is not so quick, as I developed on single clef transposing instruments (brass and woods). A weakness of mine.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

Dietz said:


> Take a look at the APP Sequencer inside Vienna Instruments PRO
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is a similar idea - but I am thinking of a more universal tool.
_
Confession: I avoid VSL since they refused to restore my orchestral packages (without me paying HALF price!!!) when I lost my dongle. I will avoid them where I can. _

This is idea is reasonably good though, in my descriptions above I avoided describing harmonic issues. I would like an app that was independent of ALL manufacturers, so it can utilize ANY library that supports MIDI track playback of their instrument.

In regard to the piano, for (another) example. The phrase library would house stock piano voicings - suitable for the instruments timbres and styles. 

I did not see an ability to view the track in notation view. I would like to see some sort of window for selecting and morphing chords. Perhaps a four part harmony function for string and section parts.

Think of this like a cauldren for ideas

Z


----------



## vms (Jan 23, 2017)

not being rude
but if you can't come up with melody/phrase on your own
um...may be ...you need to work harder on musicianship


----------



## InLight-Tone (Jan 23, 2017)

No offense, but that smacks of loop libraries and pre-composed phrases that EDM "producers" assemble into "music". That takes all the fun out of composing for me. I will use an occasional Heavyocity or other drum loop to get a groove/feeling going but it will be buried in the mix underneath a bunch of parts I play and/or write in myself...


----------



## Living Fossil (Jan 23, 2017)

@ZeroZero : to be honest, i don't get your point.
Either your aim is to create music; then having ideas to write the appropriate "phrases" is a part of the creativity.
Or your aim is to have fun with the achievements of other people. In that case there are millions of midi files out there.


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 23, 2017)

Sonokinetic has several really good phrase based libraries...and they include the sheets/MIDI so you can do edits as you see fit with them. I have not gone that deep but the videos seem to make it look easy.

I love their sound, even if a bit canned (and sometimes with repetitive sound errors) but it is highly usable to get ideas down or jumpstart some inspiration when feeling dry.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 23, 2017)

I know, I know, but I still have trouble putting "phrase library" and "professional " in the same paragraph.


----------



## Red (Jan 23, 2017)

Quality of phrase libraries are so far limited by the ability of the composer who wrote those phrases.

Isn't the point of professional composing to try to be better than that guy?


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 23, 2017)

Red said:


> Quality of phrase libraries are so far limited by the ability of the composer who wrote those phrases.
> 
> Isn't the point of professional composing to try to be better than that guy?


I don't know if I have ever set out to even _play_ one piece of music with the goal of being better than someone else. To me it is about being better than myself. Leaning on guys who spend more time with it or have more experience will help me grow. Granted a lot of us here make money with our music (or considering what these libraries cost...make music with our money...) and subjectively our clients may choose us for a variety of reasons. But making money is really what defines "professional" in any field, not besting someone else.

In composing, if we are really honest, we might study work to understand how and where certain phrasing is used and then we may utilize some of that in our own work. I think the OP wants a quick solution to get to an end product without jumping through tons of hoops. I think some of that IS counterproductive and doesn't help our personal growth. On the other hand, as I mentioned...listening to music always helps my creativity, and having a plethora of phrases at my fingertips might jump start that as well.


----------



## JJP (Jan 23, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Imagine Czerny dancing on the page - alive. Imagine hearing the phrase then inverting it, putting it inot Bb, then voicing it on a clarinet of your choice. Changing the position and rhythmic values, at will, adding accents, then dragging it into the sequencer. Saving a copy as an "archetypical phrase" from which one can boil derivitives.



So in other words, you don't want to have to go through the trouble of sequencing it yourself. Okay, but you're operating on the assumption that the way music is written is exactly as it is performed. Any professional performer can tell you that's not how it works. That's why we don't have computers that exactly translate notated music into wonderful performances.

In a similar way, that's why we don't have computers that convincingly can read an actor's lines from a screenplay.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 23, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> I know, I know, but I still have trouble putting "phrase library" and "professional " in the same paragraph.



But you managed to do it LOL. I dunno. I am not a professional, but I dislike phrase libraries for the simple reason that I'm a piano player and when I hit a G note or an Ebm triad, I want to hear a G note or an Ebm triad. I don't want to hear a run of notes that have already been prefabricated. It just doesn't make sense to me.

On the other hand, I don't believe it's inherently impossible to employ phrases in such a way as to make them your own, especially if used judiciously as a spice and not as the main course, so I have nothing against the idea per se. There are no rules in art...


----------



## StatKsn (Jan 23, 2017)

I don't know if I would need universal phrases across the instruments, but VIs are still very weak with repetitive phrase (such as ostinato-type stuff, repetition on the same note) and I'd love to see more performance-sampling incorporated ala VSL. This can be said in all kind of instruments from orchestral stuff to guitar to playing legato on drums. I confess that I use a lot of phrase libraries (I often re-sample a simple phrase performance in Kontakt, using Time Machine, and make it a chord) in that end.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

JJP said:


> So in other words, you don't want to have to go through the trouble of sequencing it yourself. Okay, but you're operating on the assumption that the way music is written is exactly as it is performed. Any professional performer can tell you that's not how it works. That's why we don't have computers that exactly translate notated music into wonderful performances.
> 
> In a similar way, that's why we don't have computers that convincingly can read an actor's lines from a screenplay.



Not true. such a library is a starting point only. We have dictionaries for words, why not dictionaries for phrase libraries. Having a dictionary does not mean you are not creative.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 23, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> I know, I know, but I still have trouble putting "phrase library" and "professional " in the same paragraph.



Well, don't professionals use triads, seventh chords scale runs? If there was an easier quicker way with modifying them than writing each note in would you not take it - sometimes? Would you not like to store themes/motives, then bring them back in your major symphonic work in the second movement? Maybe professional typists should still be using typewriters?


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Until you try, it's a surprise how hard it is to write an authentic voicing line for a guitar especially moving up the neck, or reflect the constraints put on a line by the pedals on a concert harp. If we had an app that could offer such lines, an app that could signal for example when the Dulcimer is out of range, this could help, along with the mental gains of working with _ musical _phrasing options such as inverting melodies, inverting chords, retrogrades, revoicing in sympathetic ways for an instrument, applying melodies to cadences and vica versa.


----------



## mikeh-375 (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Until you try, it's a surprise how hard it is to write an authentic voicing line for a guitar especially moving up the neck, or reflect the constraints put on a line by the pedals on a concert harp. If we had an app that could offer such lines, an app that could signal for example when the Dulcimer is out of range, this could help, along with the mental gains of working with _ musical _phrasing options such as inverting melodies, inverting chords, retrogrades, revoicing in sympathetic ways for an instrument, applying melodies to cadences and vica versa.




Or, you could just immerse yourself in a deep study of all aspects of technique. Becoming familiar with music at a profound level gives you the ability to manipulate at will giving you total creative freedom. This cannot be done by using a computer, this has to be a cerebral journey. There is no easy way to master music, but it does depend on your aims and what you want/need in order to achieve your artistic goals. 
Just be aware that in the industry, there are some seriously well trained individuals who may well be your competition one day.


----------



## Daryl (Jan 24, 2017)

A phrase library would be useful, but not necessarily for the purposes stated. I think that one of the bet ways to learn to sequence and orchestral instrument, for example, is to try to mimic a recording of an existing peice. However, that is a huge endevour, and is way beyond the ability of someone starting off. So, imagine that you had access to phrases recorded on their own. Then it would be easy to do an A/B comparison and no worries about mixing, orchestral placement and the rest. You could hear close-up when the articulations aren't right, when it sounds false, where there is no time to breath.

Of course that would mean that we would all put more pressure on our sample developers to give us better products.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 24, 2017)

I am reading a lot of ignorance in this thread concerning phrase based libraries (_I foresee a lot of push back for that comment_). Sorry Jay but to pick on you for a minute, yes you can use them professionally and there are a lot of A-list pros who use them. Whether or not you think it's useful is subjective. They aren't for everyone but for those who are interested in using them firstly get the idea out of your head that they are "cheating" or only limit you to the composer's creative ideas. The best phrase based libraries can do two things, capture the most commonly used idioms of the instrument or ensembles or accomplish very difficult orchestrational concepts that samples fail miserably at. It doesn't matter the type of libraries you have, multi-sampled articulations cannot imitate certain patterns or orchestrational textures without revealing their faux-hood. 

The best way to use Phrase based libraries is sparingly. Why? Well, because you will sound like a hack if you don't. Anyone can be a "one-key" composer but it takes creativity and imagination to use these tools sparingly and create original work. I've spent a lot of time with Sonokinetic's products and yes, I used to be a beta tester for them, but their methods are tried and true in this industry. Whether or not they work for you, again, is subjective. I've found that on the majority of the big orchestral stuff I write, I usually need to reach for one of their orchestral phrases to fix a section of my cue that the other samples just can't get right. It's not a mixing thing or an orchestration problem. It is simply the fact that those passages using multi-sampled articulations sound dull. Between the entire range of orchestral phrase libraries I have, one of them is bound to have a similar phrase that I've written. It may not be exact but through some clever trickery and some of the library's scripting, I can get it damn near close. I also layer both multi-sampled libraries with phrases, especially if I want to create accents that aren't present in the phrases.

Yes, the workflow may seem odd to you all, especially if you haven't used them before but it takes an hour to really grasp it and then after that, you are working quickly. Aside from Sonokinetic's products, I've also used Spitfire Audio's EVO Grid series which is very useful. These types of phrases cannot be created using sampled articulations. That is the point. It's a tool designed to get you something that can't be emulated with samples in a convincing way. I love that type of stuff.

At the end of the day, there is a lot to be said about a sample that captures a full performance of a phrase versus a phrase of individually crafted midi notes each playing a single note performance that was captured out of context to the rest of the phrase (that is not human). In conclusion, I feel that phrases and individual samples work collectively hand in hand and you can use them effectively in your work as long as you understand those simple fundamentals of their strengths. If you don't have the budget for live players, having some idiomatic performances can proved useful when you have a deadline approaching.

Cheers,

Chris


----------



## Smikes77 (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Not true. such a library is a starting point only. We have dictionaries for words, why not dictionaries for phrase libraries. Having a dictionary does not mean you are not creative.



Wasn`t there a "Friends" sketch where Joey wrote a reference for Chandler and Monica, and he wanted to use big words, and looked up an alternative word for everything he wrote? It didn`t make sense. Instead of signing it Joey, he signed it "baby Kangaroo". Creative, yes...


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

"The best way to use a phrase library is sparingly"

..Well, this depends on the power of the application, its useability and your imagination. If you simply paste in four bar sections all with velocity at 100 then construct a AABA song - or something of this skill level, then of course your music will sound dull, but if you have a flexible application _and _a good understanding and knowledge of harmony a lot more can be achieved.


----------



## Saxer (Jan 24, 2017)

Aside from the greed or need to use phrase libraries I see another problem: Midi.

Midi doesn't translate the same way from library to library. For example a string run: What note length? Overlapping or not? What velocity? Fixed or variable? Added CC-controls or not? And if: what CC? 1? 11? How much of it? Which articulation should play it? One shots? If so: which length? Legato? What about the attack? Is it fast enough? And so on...

What I actually wanted to say: Midi isn't able to transport the way instruments behave. Making 'acoustic' music with midi is still like eating soup holding the spoon with Chinese chop sticks while wearing gloves.
A useful library would be audio+video showing performers playing their instrument to get the feel for the sound and behaviour of the instrument incl. showing standard articulations in musical context and things that are hard or impossible to play and why. There are actually some of these videos in the net and they are very helpful.

Recreating those phrases with midi is an art of it's own and there are so many solutions as libraries and mockuppers are out there.


----------



## The Darris (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> "The best way to use a phrase library is sparingly"
> 
> ..Well, this depends on the power of the application, its useability and your imagination. If you simply paste in four bar sections all with velocity at 100 then construct a AABA song - or something of this skill level, then of course your music will sound dull, but if you have a flexible application _and _a good understanding and knowledge of harmony a lot more can be achieved.


Yes, sparingly is in reference to using the same phrase over and over again or simply as the meat and potatoes of the composition. Like I said, using it sparingly and with some imagination, you will get better results. That has been my findings over the last few years as well as how I've heard it used in professional works.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Saxer said:


> Aside from the greed or need to use phrase libraries I see another problem: Midi.
> 
> Midi doesn't translate the same way from library to library. For example a string run: What note length? Overlapping or not? What velocity? Fixed or variable? Added CC-controls or not? And if: what CC? 1? 11? How much of it? Which articulation should play it? One shots? If so: which length? Legato? What about the attack? Is it fast enough? And so on...
> 
> ...



Of course this is true. Xml might help a little, but many sample libraries use cc's in a bespoke way. I have just come across an app which uses velocity to change from major to minor!
There _will _be apps that make no sense with the phrase library, but hacing one would make many things usefully universal too, I recently tried to move a finger picking riff from one guitar to another from another library - not easy.
but they would be in the minority. 

If you write a letter, you don't say well I don't want a quicker way to enter my address and phone number, simply because creating such a macro might not be suitable for writing Hamlet. Of course you can use both, free style and phrase based, mix and match. I would NOT think it advisable that one should use ONLY phrase libraries, nor would I say it is necessary to simply stop fixing your music simply because you started with a phrase from the library. It's a tool and a useful one.

Z


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Trying not to take my own thread off topic here. But Band in a box, does a lot (sadly non orchestral only) in this direction. I use it's real tracks for piano practice. They are very malleable.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

mikeh-375 said:


> Or, you could just immerse yourself in a deep study of all aspects of technique. Becoming familiar with music at a profound level gives you the ability to manipulate at will giving you total creative freedom. This cannot be done by using a computer, this has to be a cerebral journey. There is no easy way to master music, but it does depend on your aims and what you want/need in order to achieve your artistic goals.
> Just be aware that in the industry, there are some seriously well trained individuals who may well be your competition one day.



And these individuals don't use what Beethoven called his sketchbooks?


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 24, 2017)

I wish you hadn't used the term phrase library! Nuts how that's rubbed the great unwashed up the wrong way!

From the OP I got the idea of something like Sibelius' sketch pad where you can store YOUR OWN phrases, but then have the "app" transpose them, render them with different instruments, basic harmonies, basic instrument combinations, tutti etc... as a way to experiment faster. If there was enough "AI" in the "app" of course it would be great if the app could "phrase" melodies automatically with e.g. legato transitions, shorts etc. and "perform" melodies e.g. make tonal and articulation changes based on register and instrument combination etc.

I don't want "pre-cooked" phrases, I just want VIs to be much better and more intuitive at rendering my ideas and enabling me to experiment with my ideas... a lot of the time that means helping me be more idiomatic, playing to the "rules", but also being able to break them.

I don't see this as such a big step beyond the latest performance legato patches. 

I think we should also take a step back This VI world has grown around Kontakt, and the way Kontakt is designed splits the samples from the music/composition (which is in the DAW). This seems pretty arbitrary to me. If Kontakt had followed a different path and had more music creation features we would probably have these "phrase experiment" features already.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> I wish you hadn't used the term phrase library! Nuts how that's rubbed the great unwashed up the wrong way!
> 
> From the OP I got the idea of something like Sibelius' sketch pad where you can store YOUR OWN phrases, but then have the "app" transpose them, render them with different instruments, basic harmonies, basic instrument combinations, tutti etc... as a way to experiment faster. If there was enough "AI" in the "app" of course it would be great if the app could "phrase" melodies automatically with e.g. legato transitions, shorts etc. and "perform" melodies e.g. make tonal and articulation changes based on register and instrument combination etc.
> 
> ...


Yes that's about the measure of the idea. On the point of 'precooked phrase libraries" You would need them. You could not get by without a triad or an a pentatonic run. Not many people could tell you what voicings a guitar uses for each chord as it runs up the neck - if you want authenticity for a MIDI guitar, these things are important. Yes, you need to learn every instrument, but this would help this process, not hinder it as some have inferred. It is the same process as studying scores - in some basic senses at least. You look through a library and get inspired, structure is revealed.


----------



## rocking.xmas.man (Jan 24, 2017)

what zerozero described in the OP does not sound like what we would understand as a phrase library at all I think. At least for me it sounds like he is speaking of a phrase-sequencer that is capable of (offline) interpeting sequences with different instruements using authentic playing styles.

Wasn't there something from Orangetreesamples in the making (Intuition)? And also from wallander instruments (Note performer)?


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Call it a "Resource centre"?
_"Ah, what's in a name... a sock by any other name doth smell as sweat... (Shakespeare) " (modified in a phrase library). 

Some of you guys need to read De Bono and "Po". _


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Yes that's about the measure of the idea. On the point of 'precooked phrase libraries" You would need them. You could not get by without a triad or an a pentatonic run. Not many people could tell you what voicings a guitar uses for each chord as it runs up the neck


I am trying to agree with you but... no...
This is exactly what guitarists learn! And guitar teachers teach. From the basics of the first two major barre shapes and their derivatives. 
Chord scales, scale fingerings, possible vs impossible double stops... are already handled by some "performance" libraries (Amplesound's string priority override thingy is one example)... but then it gets interesting... how soon before "AI" can take my melody, "transpose" it for the selected instrument (go on then, guitar), render it plausibly (without impossibilities) and then render it idiomatically (based on a phrase database?)... 

Hmm phrase database... do you want your "lick" to be fingered and phrased in the early blues idiom, or like Extreme (sorry)... do you want your sweeping string underscore to go through the Hermannator? I can understand people being uncomfortable with this as it is close to Band-in-a-Box, Apple Loops etc... but a lot of "professionals" are about to buy the Hermannator! Shades of grey really


----------



## Iskra (Jan 24, 2017)

I honestly think the idea of the OP it's a bit too much forward-thinking, but some of the comments are really not getting to the point either, tbh. From a more philosophical point of view, any kind of technical advance might be seen as 'cheating' (thus the rants/ counter-rants about phrase based libraries). But I do think Zerozero have a point when comparing to other technical advances. Beethoven changed his writing everytime he got a new, more modern piano with a bigger range (not to compare Beethoven with MIDI loops, God condemn me!).

From a practical point of view, I understand the OP idea more as a MIDI library, of which there are already thousands. That said, it would be a very easy to implement feature in orchestral libraries to add a MIDI library for the most common techniques or more idiomatic writing for the instruments. This is very common on drum libraries (and less so on guitar libraries), basically because it is easier to use a MIDI drum groove or MIDI strumming pattern as a starting point and save the hassle and difficulty of programming your own drum groove from scratch. A real drummer with V-drums will record it way better than you can program it, and in real time - not hours in front of the screen.

Plus, the developers themselves knows best what is feasible with their own product, so for example, good pre-programmed ostinati string patterns, or brass fanfares, strings or woodwinds runs, timpani or snare figures, most common and physically feasible harp glissandi, etc... There are a lot of things that are very common in the orchestral language that developers could help us program in advance. I don't think that is cheating, it's just saving time in programming. It is not cheating with drum patterns or guitar strumming patterns, right?... Our own DAWs have often the functionality of showing a guitar voicing for a chord, because unless you are a guitarist, for some voicing you probably need to check a chord diagram to check how a A7flat9 is voiced up in the neck of a guitar. To have a similar functionality inside the DAW is not cheating, is it?
There are many possibilities, although a super-vitamin-enriched-mighty-MIDI-phrase-sequencer that works with every sample library is a bit too sci-fi, maybe...


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Is "cheating" Shakespeare borrowing from Milton?

When I was younger I had friends that made the 'compulsory' purchase of a guitar - rite of passage. When I suggested they learnt about chord structures they put me down - _they _did not need this knowledge, they were above it, _everything _they were doing would be 'original'. I left them behind banging about, and thinking they sounded like Captain Beefheart.

This tool would be educational. It would teach ranges, instrument foibles etc. rather than obviate the need to learn them, it would reinforce the need to learn them and become a source.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> I am trying to agree with you but... no...
> This is exactly what guitarists learn! And guitar teachers teach. From the basics of the first two major barre shapes and their derivatives.
> Chord scales, scale fingerings, possible vs impossible double stops... are already handled by some "performance" libraries (Amplesound's string priority override thingy is one example)... but then it gets interesting... how soon before "AI" can take my melody, "transpose" it for the selected instrument (go on then, guitar), render it plausibly (without impossibilities) and then render it idiomatically (based on a phrase database?)...
> 
> Hmm phrase database... do you want your "lick" to be fingered and phrased in the early blues idiom, or like Extreme (sorry)... do you want your sweeping string underscore to go through the Hermannator? I can understand people being uncomfortable with this as it is close to Band-in-a-Box, Apple Loops etc... but a lot of "professionals" are about to buy the Hermannator! Shades of grey really



I think that post IS an agreement with me . 

Of course a blues lick won't suit a flamenco guitar passage, but have you ever tried to transfer one country finger pick pattern to another steel string? It could be easier, if the pattern was held universally. 
I am not trying to state that this applicatrion can deal with all eventualities, I am stating that for many situations it clearly could be very useful and creative.


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 24, 2017)

Iskra said:


> There are many possibilities, although a super-vitamin-enriched-mighty-MIDI-phrase-sequencer that works with every sample library is a bit too sci-fi, maybe...



Going by some of the marketing videos I think we already have a few of these


----------



## Iskra (Jan 24, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> Going by some of the marketing videos I think we already have a few of these


Only if it took 130 decades and 2.3 billion lines of code in the making


----------



## TekNoir (Jan 24, 2017)

@OP: It almost sounds like you're describing Synfire Pro from Cognitone. It allows you to make music by stringing together figures and phrases from an extensive (user created) library using contours or phrase shapes.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> Going by some of the marketing videos I think we already have a few of these


Where?


----------



## Baron Greuner (Jan 24, 2017)

Someone like Daryl, for instance, invests time and money going into a studio and recording live players, after having written, orchestrated and printed the music. So phrase based libraries based on that, quite right imho, are about as useful as a fart in space suit to musicians like Daryl.

I do however agree, if you're not recording live musicians, that good phrase based libraries should almost be used as an afterthought, creating small details almost in an ornamental way.


----------



## Illico (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> This tool would be educational.


I'm agree for that purpose. For example, a tool that could validate works for the real orchestral world, is it playable or not ?


> Hmm phrase database...


With some John williams's or Zimmer's packs ?  It looks like a supermarket. An industrial music generator...
In a few days, we'll find a google score online generator that will create music trailer for free!
We call it evolution.

But it can also be seen as an educational tool with some templates from BIG composers.
At one point, at a beginners like me, we all seek to be 'like' the great composers. Use same recipes. I learn every day.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 24, 2017)

The Darris said:


> I am reading a lot of ignorance in this thread concerning phrase based libraries (_I foresee a lot of push back for that comment_). Sorry Jay but to pick on you for a minute, yes you can use them professionally and there are a lot of A-list pros who use them. Whether or not you think it's useful is subjective.
> Chris



Absolutely fair, Chris. It is _my_ conceptual difficulty ands need not be anyone else's. Using phrases, while no doubt can lead to a good result, just does not feel like composing to me, but intelligent, maybe even musical, assembling. 

When I bought Stylus RMX I spent a lot of time editing the loops, changing the FX, etc. even though they already sounded great. 

A friend asked me, "Are you sure that you are making them better?"

My response was, "No, but I am making them mine."


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

People - especially the experienced, should know that the work of great masters is made up of the same stock triads, scales and phrases as we all use. They don't use something 'else' they use the same things as are in a phrase library, the opening theme of Beethoven's ninth is a child's nursery rhyme of a melody - it is a question of taste and discernment when these things are arranged and delivered with Art. One could even incorporate serialism or any other technique. This does not prevent writing lines independently or doubling the bass manually.

Is not "music assembling" aka arranging? This is bonafide?


----------



## robharvey (Jan 24, 2017)

@OP it's an interesting concept but I think it's been put into practise with something like action strings? Which to me is really difficult to get sounding right. It also stymie's your sound... I feel it's quite important to put your own musical voice across in your compositions. So taking from a pool of stuff that's been pre written by someone else with an entirely different set of inspirations would be, to me, borderline plagiarism... 

But what's stopping you from having a midi phrase book? Quite a neat idea really, as you've put together and played in bits and bobs which your brain has made. 

Quite like the idea I'll give it a shot.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> People - especially the experienced, should know that the work of great masters is made up of the same stock triads, scales and phrases as we all use. They don't use something 'else' they use the same things as are in a phrase library, the opening theme of Beethoven's ninth is a child's nursery rhyme of a melody - it is a question of taste and discernment when these things are arranged and delivered with Art. One could even incorporate serialism or any other technique. This does not prevent writing lines independently or doubling the bass manually.
> 
> Is not "music assembling" aka arranging? This is bonafide?



I accept it intellectually, less so emotionally. Like I say, my problem. Back in college, I felt the same way about aleotoric music.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

I am just looking at Action Strings today. It is a very cut down version of this idea - very limited. Midi is essential some for of (near) universal library, ability to save your own lines/harmonies, then warp them with inversion tools, revoicing, etc


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> I accept it intellectually, less so emotionally. Like I say, my problem. Back in college, I felt the same way about aleotoric music.



Accepted, I do know the feeling myself, but in a sense you are faking it too, you should be using a scratchy quill and parchment!
Recently I made a kind of breakthrough in my thinking about orcherstration. I was trying too hard to get it orchestrally 'legit'. In the sample world you can simply conjure up a string section to add a stacatto attack to a mushy string section. This is not possible in the real world for those that don't have Disney's budget. I feel like this is cheating - but I am beginning to realise it is not. It's a new modus operandi that is all. The sound is the final arbitar.


----------



## Iskra (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> a pool of stuff that's been pre written by someone else with an entirely different set of inspirations would be, to me, borderline plagiarism...


I don't think ZeroZero is refering to this and sorry to speak for him (he obviously do not need that), but more to just a pool of stuff that's been MIDI pre-programmed by someone else - preferably and expert?
I don't see any harm on that, nor plagiarism or making your work less personal... MIDI is editable, we al know that  A good MIDI phrase book I think will be useful to everyone around here, whatever the technical advances it may have.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

though thgere are some "Aesthetic objections" on the grounds of what is legit 'art' or not (AKA Marcel Duchamp) . I do think there is sufficient interest in this thread to indicate that a viable product might be possible. I hope a developer picks this up. Think of it like a wallet for all your ideas.


----------



## robharvey (Jan 24, 2017)

Iskra said:


> I don't see any harm on that, nor plagiarism or making your work less personal... MIDI is editable, we al know that  A good MIDI phrase book I think will be useful to everyone around here, whatever the technical advances it may have.



Sorry I don't think I've understood this, are saying plagiarism and making your work less personal is ok?

Phrase books are definitely great but it's got to be your own in my opinion. Otherwise it would be like taking bits of poetry you've read over the years and mashing them all together and calling it your work.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Iskra said:


> I don't think ZeroZero is refering to this and sorry to speak for him (he obviously do not need that), but more to just a pool of stuff that's been MIDI pre-programmed by someone else - preferably and expert?
> I don't see any harm on that, nor plagiarism or making your work less personal... MIDI is editable, we al know that  A good MIDI phrase book I think will be useful to everyone around here, whatever the technical advances it may have.



We are all plagiarists, we use the same scales chords phrases and runs as all the rest. Even a poet uses the same words. If you write in a pentatoinic run on the flute, does this make it more 'yours' than crafting it in a phrase library, then tweaking?


----------



## Iskra (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> Sorry I don't think I've understood this, are saying plagiarism and making your work less personal is ok?


Oh, no! I probably explained myself badly (not native English speaker here).  
I meant that using MIDI phrases is not plagiarism in any way, as those are obviously editable, and therefore they will not be making your work less personal. Hope this clarifies 
I'm not thinking on a MIDI library with licks or melodic stuff, but more the kind of the MIDI drum grooves that many libraries have. Just pre-programmed starting points to save time on programming.


----------



## jononotbono (Jan 24, 2017)

I can't imagine ever purposely buying a Phrase Library. Using someone else's Phrases? I see no fun in that. I love writing my own. Speaking of which, each to theirs.


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 24, 2017)

I could see a use for a tool where you could give it some basic info, say melody and chord progression, and have it generate, say, a typical jazz pianist ballad part, or a typical rock bass part. For those genres, the composer will often just throw a chord progresson and some vague instructions at the musicians, and they'll fill in the rest. And the musicians will often just throw out some fairly typical stuff.

Realitone's instruments seem to be pretty close to that concept - "give me some typical drummer drums for a rock song, now a little more busy, more crash, great, that'll work".

For orchestral music that could also work, but since there traditionally the composer writes out all the parts, it'd have to be more like "give me a mix of Mozart and Bach, kind of a Mach piece" and less like "give me typical pianist".


----------



## procreative (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> Sorry I don't think I've understood this, are saying plagiarism and making your work less personal is ok?
> 
> Phrase books are definitely great but it's got to be your own in my opinion. Otherwise it would be like taking bits of poetry you've read over the years and mashing them all together and calling it your work.



I get what you are saying. However in the world of TV and Films I can think of many "original" works that sound rather familiar? Its not always plagiarism, it may be an example of influences taking over or a director wanting something "in the vein of".

Western music only has so many variations that work tonally and sooner or later repeats itself albeit maybe using different instrumentation and genres.

Ultimately one has to make ones own choices, but in the end the listener is none the wiser and so taking the moral highground might not make any real difference. After all playing any VI is kind of cheating as unless you play the violins in yourself, even hiring a session musician is cheating as the way a part is played has as much impact as the notes they play.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

If you want to write everything from scratch then do so but if you say that pro composers do this all the time - then I think you may be mistaken.


----------



## robharvey (Jan 24, 2017)

procreative said:


> I get what you are saying. However in the world of TV and Films I can think of many "original" works that sound rather familiar? Its not always plagiarism, it may be an example of influences taking over or a director wanting something "in the vein of".
> 
> Western music only has so many variations that work tonally and sooner or later repeats itself albeit maybe using different instrumentation and genres.
> 
> Ultimately one has to make ones own choices, but in the end the listener is none the wiser and so taking the moral highground might not make any real difference. After all playing any VI is kind of cheating as unless you play the violins in yourself, even hiring a session musician is cheating as the way a part is played has as much impact as the notes they play.



You're right and I agree but that isn't my point.

The point is if you're pulling from a phrase library that isn't your own, you're changing what YOUR music sounds like for the reason of "it's quicker". Which fundamentally undermines what you're trying to achieve.

I do disagree about the VI playing though. If a composer composes for an orchestra, is he stealing the sound of the orchestra? No because it's his/her composition. You're just taking the orchestra out the mix when you play with a VI.


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 24, 2017)

Phrase libraries
John Wiliams plagiarism
Hermann

All this thread needs is a Mac vs PC angle...

Hey, maybe Play Pro has phrase library features?


----------



## procreative (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> You're right and I agree but that isn't my point.
> 
> The point is if you're pulling from a phrase library that isn't your own, you're changing what YOUR music sounds like for the reason of "it's quicker". Which fundamentally undermines what you're trying to achieve.
> 
> I do disagree about the VI playing though. If a composer composes for an orchestra, is he stealing the sound of the orchestra? No because it's his/her composition. You're just taking the orchestra out the mix when you play with a VI.



I guess thats a debatable point though, using rhythmic phrases for instance such as those in Action Strings or many of Sonokinetic's titles, they are designed as parts of a puzzle. Often they are underscores to the main theme.

Used creatively they can be very useful to realise an idea. 

I agree they are never going to be used to write a part but a part will be written around them. But some of the phrases in Action Strings are purely rhythmic and the melodic part is down to the user.

The challenge with samples is often balancing idea vs what can be achieved technically. Its not a problem facing big-time composers as they always know their parts will get transcribed and played by real ensembles.

But phrases are not the be all/end all as often the time required to work them into a piece can suck inspiration dry especially if you are trying to maintain a feeling of originality and ownership.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> Phrase books are definitely great but it's got to be your own in my opinion. *Otherwise it would be like taking bits of poetry you've read over the years and mashing them all together and calling it your work.*



As in the 1920s surrealists and William Burroughs "cut up" technique?

http://www.languageisavirus.com/art...ction=showcomments&id=1099111044#.WId6mlyjYoM

If you make something new out of it, then you've made something new. Whether in literature or music, everything is ultimately borrowed and rehashed anyway. The only relevant questions are:
1) Have you created something identifiably new, that is yours?
2) Is it in any way worthwhile or good?

Think of, say, all the zillions of pop songs that go I–V–vi–IV or whatever... As long as when you hear the melody you can say "Oh I recognize that. It's John Lennon/Paul McCartney's _Let it Be."_, then it's an original melody, regardless of how unoriginal or formulaic the component parts may be. I never get it when people say doing x is valid but doing y is not, as there may always be another way or approach that makes this not so.


----------



## Daniel James (Jan 24, 2017)

If you learn a certain phrase from a teacher or in school...for argument lets say a major glissando style arpeggio that goes up and comes back down repeating. What is the difference of remembering that from your days in school and calling it up in a midi phrase library?

The point here should always be compositional intent. If a certain reusable or recallable phrase is what you were going to do anyway it should not matter if you are personally recalling it from your education or a phrase midi selection.

Think about how many meals contain tomato.....to say they are all identical because the cook decided to use a tomato from the store instead of invent a completely original tomato replacement, is just being overly protectionist or elitist about the craft. You can do new things with old ideas but sometimes you just need a tomato.

-DJ


----------



## Baron Greuner (Jan 24, 2017)

Daniel James said:


> If you learn a certain phrase from a teacher or in school...for argument lets say a major glissando style arpeggio that goes up and comes back down repeating. What is the difference of remembering that from your days in school and calling it up in a midi phrase library?
> 
> -DJ



Nothing.

But it may stop you from writing something different, even if it's only a gliss. Phrase based libraries are very real sounding but will make you lazy.

Another thing you hear, is this will add realism to your track. There's also nothing wrong with that and I do it, but there's a voice that's saying to me, you're adding what we may think as realism supposedly, to something that is definitely not real, so why am I doing that?


----------



## novaburst (Jan 24, 2017)

JonSolo said:


> ...listening to music always helps my creativity, and having a plethora of phrases at my fingertips might jump start that as well.



Listing to pieces is the is very fertile if one is looking to grow and develop, borrowing from other compositions weather it be phrase or melody can tell us where we are and how we feel about creating music,

Spending, or making, or giving time to your own skills and ability is the back bone of any true and genuine growth.

If I am reaching out for some one else's phrases that is telling me I have none of my own or that I am not satisfied of my own, it can also tell me I need to develop in this area of music.

I have often used the word professional, if professional only means to get from one point to the next any way possible or the fastest way possible then get paid at the end of it, then I would have to say there are many types of people that do music.

In this case I think we need to call for more artist.

The level of love you have for your music will be measured to how much time you dedicate to it, some have no time but because of there love for music they make time.

Practising is not one of the top points of music is it, instant gratification is what we all want , we so often forget what it takes to get there, we forget about the hard work, many hours, some times heart breaks, some times through troubled times but we stuck to it and for some it paid off.

A professional will may not need to give his or her best as long as there is a pay check at the end.

An artist will give there all and see his or her creation through to the end no matter what.

A professional will be satisfied with his or her pay check.

An artist will be satisfied with the completion of his or her piece of music.

To the pro.......... I will do this until it does not work any more.

To the artist......... I will do this come what may.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 24, 2017)

Wow, the last three posts are excellent, really highlights the pros and cons.

For me, in the end it comes down to the fact that at 68 years old, I want to enjoy composing with libraries and VIs, at least as much as is possible, and I just don't enjoy working with phrase libraries generally, although for woodwind flourishes and things like that, I might in the future.


----------



## procreative (Jan 24, 2017)

Slightly off topic, but one of the reasons I sometimes reach for phrases...

In strings libraries for example, yes there are various Legato patches, but if someone were to make a whole lot more Legato options that convinced eg Legato to Staccato, Legato to Marcato and the opposite...

I have tried as an experiment trying to replicate the phrases in Maximo and its almost impossible to get the same feeling of motion. Particularly with the faster phrases.

Often I have an idea of a phrase and cannot get any combined articulations to repicate them.

I really think there is a gap in the market for more joined up articulations.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> You're right and I agree but that isn't my point.
> 
> The point is if you're pulling from a phrase library that isn't your own, you're changing what YOUR music sounds like for the reason of "it's quicker". Which fundamentally undermines what you're trying to achieve.
> 
> I do disagree about the VI playing though. If a composer composes for an orchestra, is he stealing the sound of the orchestra? No because it's his/her composition. You're just taking the orchestra out the mix when you play with a VI.


So, if you pull in a few arpeggios for the harp because someone has written the arpeggio for you, its not your own? This is a mind set thing. We all use notes and phrases that have gone before, it's quicker to bring in a phrase then alter it. Just my opinion of course.


----------



## jononotbono (Jan 24, 2017)

Ahh sod it. After playing with Albion IV I've had a change of heart. Where can I buy it? Might as well get on board rather than fight the inevitable. If it brings out creativity then it can only be a good thing. Although, I will be honest and say, I would only use it for all the phrases that are NOT in my head and that I wasn't going to write. I'll play the rest.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

procreative said:


> Slightly off topic, but one of the reasons I sometimes reach for phrases...
> 
> In strings libraries for example, yes there are various Legato patches, but if someone were to make a whole lot more Legato options that convinced eg Legato to Staccato, Legato to Marcato and the opposite...
> 
> ...



I hear this all the time. It is a major reason for dissatisfaction with mock ups. We are slightly off topic, but a phrase built from individually recorded notes is not the same as a phrase pre-recorded as a whole. Especially true for Strings IMO. Staccato is a bug bear for me because although there may only be two notations for it (staccato and staccatisimo) there are clearly wide variations in staccato lengths that cannot be accounted for this way - briefly, the faster the staccato the shorter it's length - but even this is a simplification. Many other articulations exist in limited forms in samples. There is also something cohesive about the internal reverb in a string section which has to be created by individual players micro adjusting their playing style like mini recording engineers, as a phrase comes into being - it's instinctive, musicians often don't even know they are doing it, but a staccato/marcato etc gets played differently in a stone chapel, than in a large concert hall, there is a feedback loop to the ears of the players.


----------



## robharvey (Jan 24, 2017)

Well the difference is if you call up a phrase in a phrase lib it will sound different to how you would play it. Ie someone else has either programmed it in or played it themselves. What I'm trying to say is you're always going to play something slightly different to how you or someone else played it last time. 

Does a phrase played by you sound the same as a phrase played by me?

It's not a black or white answer but in my opinion a phrase lib will give a different result. No two performances are every the same and one of the keys to making midi sound good (IE not the same) is the human element and the mistakes.

And then the other question is: Is editing quicker?


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> Well the difference is if you call up a phrase in a phrase lib it will sound different to how you would play it. Ie someone else has either programmed it in or played it themselves. What I'm trying to say is you're always going to play something slightly different to how you or someone else played it last time.
> 
> Does a phrase played by you sound the same as a phrase played by me?
> 
> ...



Reasonable points in my opinion. EZkeys for piano is a case in point, a useful starting point for those that could not play the piano that well in the respective genres. http://www.toontrack.com/product-category/ezkeysline/ezkeys-midi/

Did you know that Gershwin had help with orchestral arranging from Ravel, Fisher and many others - plagirist!


----------



## procreative (Jan 24, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Reasonable points in my opinion. EZkeys for piano is a case in point, a useful starting point for those that could not play the piano that well in the respective genres. http://www.toontrack.com/product-category/ezkeysline/ezkeys-midi/
> 
> Did you know that Gershwin had help with orchestral arranging from Ravel, Fisher and many others - plagirist!



Actually there is one really useful tool in EZKeys, it has a kind tool to reharmonise any chord played in or from midi into a variety of inversions and keys, which is a really good teaching tool and very useful for taking a simple triad and exploring the alternative voicings (obviously if you are classically trained you would know all this).


----------



## Iskra (Jan 24, 2017)

robharvey said:


> Well the difference is if you call up a phrase in a phrase lib it will sound different to how you would play it. Ie someone else has either programmed it in or played it themselves. What I'm trying to say is you're always going to play something slightly different to how you or someone else played it last time.


To be precise, actually that's what we all do with all our current samples. We are just repeating some notes that were played once by someone, mic'ed & mixed by a super engineer with state of the art equipment, but we're just re-playing over and over the same dead note. That's more flexible because it's a note by note performance instead of a whole phrase doesn't, but this fact does not change its nature, just changes the measurement. 

We have more flexibility with note by note samples, but as pointed by many above, there are just things you can't perform with discrete samples, and thus a phrase library is just another tool.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 24, 2017)

Iskra said:


> To be precise, actually that's what we all do with all our current samples. We are just repeating some notes that were played once by someone, mic'ed & mixed by a super engineer with state of the art equipment, but we're just re-playing over and over the same dead note. That is more flexible because it's a note by note performance instead of a whole phrase doesn't change it's nature, just changes the measurement. We have more flexibility with note by note samples, but as pointed by many above, there are just things you can't perform with discrete samples, and thus a phrase library is just another tool.



Agree. I think sample libraries should have round robins for ALL notes, AND you should be able to select a different patch for the same legato/marcato/staccato/spiccato or any other note, even where it has the same velocity/volume. After all this is what happens with real instruments, we only get one "two dimensional" sample for each note - on sax I don't think I ever played the same note twice (sound wise). Same for all acoustic instruments. Unconsciously this makes a huge difference. One guy I know talks of "long term machine gun effect" meaning that string section coming in again with the same patches - bores the ear, even where we don't realise it consciously - tedium being fatal creativily.
On this front I have experimented with hocketing (using more than one sample library in the same line) and this works pretty good.


----------



## chrisphan (Jan 24, 2017)

Completely disagree with this idea and I can go on for hours to say why. But I think I'm just gonna quote DJ: it all comes down to the "compositional intent." Yes we're all influenced by our musical heroes and what not, but it's different to sit down, and try to write something despite those influences that will make it to your final compositions, and sit down, browse through phrase library. That's not composing, period.

P/s 1: "Imperial March" is different from "Mars" significantly to anyone who have listened to the entirety of these 2 pieces. 
P/s 2: It's unfair to use such small units as muscial notes or scales to say that we all plagiarize. That's just ridiculous.


----------



## vms (Jan 24, 2017)

melodic phrases are very different from runs, chord phrases/arpeggios
the latters are rather static in terms of rhythmic figures & involvement of non-harmonic tones
and usually a melodic phrase wont sit well in the existing chord progression on the fly
so you are likely going to spend more time on it then coming up with your own ideas

youtube is the best thing if you need some musical inspiration


----------



## humco (Jan 25, 2017)

Cthulu is somewhat down this path, I toyed with it a few years ago. Basically like a scale midi function that turns your keystrokes into a Bach choral or Beethoven arrangement, etc. it's not what your suggesting, but was interesting.


----------



## GtrString (Jan 25, 2017)

What you are suggesting remind of what Toontrack is doing for drums and keys with the EZ midi libraries. Just having it for strings instead.

I can appreciate that for sure. Cinesamples has some of that in Hollywoodwinds, NI has some products with that, Sonokinetic ect but none with the same flexibility similar to the Toontrack libs.

There are any number of ways to use and mangle that, and as with any other tool, the only limitation is your own creativity..


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 25, 2017)

chrisphan said:


> Completely disagree with this idea and I can go on for hours to say why. But I think I'm just gonna quote DJ: it all comes down to the "compositional intent." Yes we're all influenced by our musical heroes and what not, but it's different to sit down, and try to write something despite those influences that will make it to your final compositions, and sit down, browse through phrase library. That's not composing, period.
> 
> P/s 1: "Imperial March" is different from "Mars" significantly to anyone who have listened to the entirety of these 2 pieces.
> P/s 2: It's unfair to use such small units as muscial notes or scales to say that we all plagiarize. That's just ridiculous.



Happy that you disagree and you would of course never use anything of this ever - you can of course impose this rule on yourself and work this way.
I also agree that the imperial march and Mars are different, he did not pinch the whole piece, maybe he used the score like a "phrase library" then modified it. I know that many composers did this they study _other peoples_ work (shockingly) then use snippets when they need. 
Some of course will not like this idea and it will be unsuitable for their work flow - this is OK with me.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 25, 2017)

vms said:


> melodic phrases are very different from runs, chord phrases/arpeggios
> the latters are rather static in terms of rhythmic figures & involvement of non-harmonic tones
> and usually a melodic phrase wont sit well in the existing chord progression on the fly
> so you are likely going to spend more time on it then coming up with your own ideas
> ...



And not waste more time on Utube? 

In almost all cases you are correct, static scalar runs are pretty boring - I consciously put a little of something different in all I write. I have always seen this concept as importing something then adapting it to _your _means


----------



## Iskra (Jan 25, 2017)

Honestly I think we are all confusing and mixing two different things here. In one hand some were talking about a MIDI library, but the thread soon derived to a discussion regarding sampled-phrases libraries. And those two has nothing to do with each other. As I mentioned earlier, developers including some kind of pre-programmed MIDI files for the most common uses would be indeed helpful and save us time on programming (if it's done with drum libraries, I see no problem on including them on other libraries).
But we are 4 pages long already with this confusion...


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 25, 2017)

Iskra said:


> Honestly I think we are all confusing and mixing two different things here. In one hand some were talking about a MIDI library, but the thread soon derived to a discussion regarding sampled-phrases libraries. And those two has nothing to do with each other. As I mentioned earlier, developers including some kind of pre-programmed MIDI files for the most common uses would be indeed helpful and save us time on programming (if it's done with drum libraries, I see no problem on including them on other libraries).
> But we are 4 pages long already with this confusion...



Yes, seems like this topic is contentious for some - curiously a 'no go area'. I do think there is some positive interest in this concept I hope a developer takes this up.


----------



## vms (Jan 25, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> And not waste more time on Utube?
> 
> In almost all cases you are correct, static scalar runs are pretty boring - I consciously put a little of something different in all I write. I have always seen this concept as importing something then adapting it to _your _means


when you listen to youtube videos
technically you hear the melody, chord progression, instrumentation, FX...etc
simply put you would get a lot more ideas
provided that you are good enough play them back after a few attempts
time well spent IMO


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 25, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Yes, seems like this topic is contentious for some - curiously a 'no go area'. I do think there is some positive interest in this concept I hope a developer takes this up.


As a bassist, I don't see it as so controversial. That's how a lot of my interaction with better songwriters goes - they give me a chord progression and a vocal melody, I give them a typical bass pattern that connects the chords in a logically flowing way, they might say, not a walking line, more like a jazz ballad, so I give them a different typical pattern. I do pay attention to the vocals and pick up rhythmic accents from those pretty often, and to energy levels in everyone else's playing, but the thinking I do would not be hard to replace with a phrase library that has stylistic options, an overall energy level control, and a busier/simpler slider.

It's neither magic nor rocket science, but it's a little more than just stock MIDI patterns.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 25, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> As a bassist, I don't see it as so controversial. That's how a lot of my interaction with better songwriters goes - they give me a chord progression and a vocal melody, I give them a typical bass pattern that connects the chords in a logically flowing way, they might say, not a walking line, more like a jazz ballad, so I give them a different typical pattern. I do pay attention to the vocals and pick up rhythmic accents from those pretty often, and to energy levels in everyone else's playing, but the thinking I do would not be hard to replace with a phrase library that has stylistic options, an overall energy level control, and a busier/simpler slider.
> 
> It's neither magic nor rocket science, but it's a little more than just stock MIDI patterns.



Exactly - well put! Music IS like Lego bricks, it comes in basic shapes, you can strip it all down to one brick at a time approach or use useful chunks.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 25, 2017)

vms said:


> when you listen to youtube videos
> technically you hear the melody, chord progression, instrumentation, FX...etc
> simply put you would get a lot more ideas
> provided that you are good enough play them back after a few attempts
> time well spent IMO


Understood - many modus operandi.


----------



## mc_deli (Jan 25, 2017)

Iskra said:


> Honestly I think we are all confusing and mixing two different things here. In one hand some were talking about a MIDI library, but the thread soon derived to a discussion regarding sampled-phrases libraries. And those two has nothing to do with each other. As I mentioned earlier, developers including some kind of pre-programmed MIDI files for the most common uses would be indeed helpful and save us time on programming (if it's done with drum libraries, I see no problem on including them on other libraries).
> But we are 4 pages long already with this confusion...


Thank heavens. I thought I was alone in this.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 25, 2017)

mc_deli said:


> Thank heavens. I thought I was alone in this.



Oh, if we are talking about a MIDI library where I can customize it to make it more my own that is indeed a different thing for me than audio phrases.


----------



## JPQ (Jan 25, 2017)

always


ZeroZero said:


> Agree. I think sample libraries should have round robins for ALL notes, AND you should be able to select a different patch for the same legato/marcato/staccato/spiccato or any other note, even where it has the same velocity/volume. After all this is what happens with real instruments, we only get one "two dimensional" sample for each note - on sax I don't think I ever played the same note twice (sound wise). Same for all acoustic instruments. Unconsciously this makes a huge difference. One guy I know talks of "long term machine gun effect" meaning that string section coming in again with the same patches - bores the ear, even where we don't realise it consciously - tedium being fatal creativily.
> On this front I have experimented with hocketing (using more than one sample library in the same line) and this works pretty good.



same way analog synth i feel you never sound exactly same. Some instruments needs more multisampling than others. i mean multismapling for roundrobin.


----------



## procreative (Jan 25, 2017)

Iskra said:


> Honestly I think we are all confusing and mixing two different things here. In one hand some were talking about a MIDI library, but the thread soon derived to a discussion regarding sampled-phrases libraries. And those two has nothing to do with each other. As I mentioned earlier, developers including some kind of pre-programmed MIDI files for the most common uses would be indeed helpful and save us time on programming (if it's done with drum libraries, I see no problem on including them on other libraries).
> But we are 4 pages long already with this confusion...



I actually think midi phrases are less useful when it comes to orchestral libraries. Sure percussive instruments such as drums, pianos, harps etc might work fine, but having played around with the Midi drag in the Sonokinetic phrase titles it becomes apparent how tricky it is to get close to the original.

Sparing use of flourishes and runs a la Hollywoodwinds can be useful and do not form part of the main theme.

Where I see phrases as very useful are for rhythmic and pulsing underscores. I dont see any difference between using these and say a recorded roll on a cymbal. Neither are played in and neither make or break a composition on their own.

Personally I have also found phrase libraries very useful teaching tools as I have often found myself attempting to recreate phrases keyswitching articulations until I achieve a close match, in the process learning new tricks. They are often also really good idea incubators.

Now for those that have spent years in formal education/working as an assistant to a composer in a conservatory etc they will have stored up 100s of these classic motifs in their minds and will be able to recall them at will.

For the jobbing/or even hobbyist composer, its what gets the job started/done and the final result is what counts.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 25, 2017)

procreative said:


> its what gets the job started/done and the final result is what counts



It seems that is all that matters these days just get it done, what about excelling, growing becoming a better composer, or even becoming a great composer, ok maybe the last statement was a little bit to far but there have been great composers in this time and age.

Richard Wagner, Ludwig Van Beethoven, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Johann Sebastian Bach, Dmitri Shostakovich
Are just some of what listeners call great composers.

They have gone down in history as greats

Today let us be honest with our self yes there are a few great composers in this time 2017, but can we really say they have excelled Mozart,

What did Mozart and Beethoven reach out for when they were writing music, what phrase library did they go for
They had none of what we have today but yet they still excelled far beyond us with all this tech at our grasp.

Is todays attitude towards music changed because of modern technology, have we missed the point of what music is all about, is it no wonder this modern age has hardily any more greats to look to.

To me the most innovative thing to happen to music is the computer and midi, and library's and all that goes with it we may never ever see such a great opportunity as we have now.

But this tech can also be our biggest curse, as it has the ability to stop our natural creativity and growth and innovation and skill and I would also add our greatness.

Seems we are relying on technology to do it all for us, emotive strings NI, Action strings, NI in the latest Cubase you have chords progression, action horns NI, phrase library's by sonic or what ever.

Today you don't need to know twat scott nothing to write a piece of music just let the computer do it you know the end result is all that matters.

There are no short cuts in this world, it will always be hard work and if I fail I try and try again.

If Mozart was here today what will he say, would he say what a sham !!!!, or wow look how music has progressed, if Beethoven was here I really wonder what they would have to say.


----------



## jononotbono (Jan 25, 2017)

novaburst said:


> If Mozart was here today what will he say, would he say what a sham !!!!, or wow look how music has progressed, if Beethoven was here I really wonder what they would have to say.



I think they would LOVE today's world. Good and bad music has existed since the dawn of time. Why is it any different now? With the advancement of technology so much more is possible now and so much different music now exists that I reckon they would be having a field day. Creativity is your only limit.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 25, 2017)

Hi @jononotbono I guess its neither here nor there and we can say what we feel.

But one thing to consider is the composers I have mentioned from old have carved there way through time and they are long dead and gone but there great music is in college's, schools, it is music being learned all over the world even today, and it does not look like its going to stop.

yet since before me and you were born there music touched the hearts of the world its fair to say and still hold great value todays musical education.

So one thing is what we feel and want to say another is what is stamped down in history for decades and is still alive today.

Anyway just some thing to consider but don't want to drift from the thread.


----------



## Udo (Jan 25, 2017)

Never heard about a "pastiche" (= composed using "borrowed" parts)? Famous composers and painters are "guilty" of that!


----------



## Chandler (Jan 25, 2017)

I'm not really interested in phrase libraries, but I would like something like Jamstix for other instruments. For those that aren't familiar Jamstix is a drum program that lets you program drums by altering parameters such as timing, feel, power, etc. IMO you can create much more realistic drum patterns using it than midi drum patterns, but you have to understand how drums work.

Something that would let you humanize your phrases easily would be nice.


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 25, 2017)

Chandler said:


> I'm not really interested in phrase libraries, but I would like something like Jamstix for other instruments. For those that aren't familiar Jamstix is a drum program that lets you program drums by altering parameters such as timing, feel, power, etc. IMO you can create much more realistic drum patterns using it than midi drum patterns, but you have to understand how drums work.
> 
> Something that would let you humanize your phrases easily would be nice.


Yeah, Realidrums is also a somewhat similar concept, and I really think we need more stuff like that for more instruments.


----------



## bbunker (Jan 26, 2017)

I don't really get the idea - so you're talking about a MIDI library of 'phrases.' But what kind of phrases? How much variation between phrases would constitute a new phrase? How long would these phrases be? And how would this actually improve the act of writing a piece?

You mention Band-in-a-box, which does a decent enough job of generating stock 'phrases' with standard voicings that are common in jazz performance, for sure. But the first problem is that the lines generated aren't actually as good as what a skilled human would play, and usually quite obviously so. Not that BIAB's walking bass lines are 'poor,' but that they sound like sequences of fixed patterns. There are set patterns for ii-V's in 2, 4, 8 and 16 beat lengths in major and minor keys. But lines which would be obvious to a human player who has absorbed the rules and not just phrases, like connecting chromatically down to the b7 in Days of Wine and Roses, for up from the ii to the iv (like the last measures of the A section in Meditation) usually aren't played by BIAB in favor of straight harmonic tones. And things get hairy when you give it more freedom in note selection, like allowing more 3rds and 7ths or passing tones on downbeats, because it doesn't 'know' when the 3rd is necessary, and when it is just throwing it in because it has a quota of 'non-root notes' to fill.

These seem to be the problems of what happens when a computer is in charge of selecting from stock phrases to make something simple like a walking bass line. So if a human were doing it, would it be better? You'd presumably need a set of phrases for every permutation of chord movements - even something as simple as a ii-V runs into issues, because the ii-V that starts on iii (think third measure of satin doll) presents some choices to make - do you play it as a straight ii-V (with, say an F# as the 9th on the Em in that Satin Doll example) or do you play a iii that stays in the key? Both are legitimate (depending on whether the piano and soloist are playing the changes or the key there, especially) so a Phrase Library would need to include that information, and details about when to do what.

So, imagining this phrase library for walking bass, I can't imagine how it would make anyone's lives easier, because with all this information to plow through, that it would be easier to just learn how to play it. No need for individual phrases for chromatic and diatonic approaches to every chord possible, because you look at the chart, and process all of that while you're playing it! It's appropriate that 'guitar voicings' is one of the reasons given earlier in the thread, because the idea of a phrase library sounds like one of those '16,700 Guitar Chords' books - which always make me feel sad to think of so much effort expended in reprinting the same E barre chord on every fret, playing different sets of strings, with different extensions, etc.

I just can't imagine how much data would be wasted repeating iterations of the same basic concepts - how many 'spelling out triads' ideas would there need to be to be vaguely comprehensive? And how does having a library of every permutation of chord member and non-harmonic tones provide any more information than a good first-year harmony course does? How would that library provide any information on what the actual reasons for the choices that composers have made in the past derived from?

And finally, for a phrase library to be meaningful, it would have to capture some kind of 'platonic essence' of what makes the passage it looks at work. The repeating swirling strings that precede the big first theme in the Schubert Unfinished, or the repetitive String Patterns in Tannhäuser's Overture could be captured pretty easily, but how would you distill the climax of Sibelius' 7th? All that's come before is 'basically' C major scales. Some of the most meaningful C major scales you'll ever hear, with their real power in their combination, and in their slow, steady and subtle ascent, until the Trombone emerges as if its polished quicksilver had lain dormant within those scales the whole time; how can one possibly turn this into a box to be checked in a phrase library?

Maybe only things that can be immediately converted would be in this library. But how much is lost then? Sibelius 7 isn't easy to distill into a phrase, but it is very easy to study, and listen to, and for it to inspire new works - just ask Hanson, or Copland, or Persichetti, or David Diamond, or John Williams, for that matter. Isn't the root of the problem with a 'phrase library' that a master like JW hasn't absorbed the phraseology of Hanson's 2nd, but the spirit of it? And I don't know what a 'spirit library' would look like.

My two cents, anyway. And...Ravel didn't meet Gershwin until 1928, well after Gershwin had orchestrated his own Piano Concerto in '25. Ferde Grofe would seem the more likely name to bring up in terms of Gershwin orchestrations!


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

bbunker said:


> I don't really get the idea - so you're talking about a MIDI library of 'phrases.' But what kind of phrases? How much variation between phrases would constitute a new phrase? How long would these phrases be? And how would this actually improve the act of writing a piece?
> 
> You mention Band-in-a-box, which does a decent enough job of generating stock 'phrases' with standard voicings that are common in jazz performance, for sure. But the first problem is that the lines generated aren't actually as good as what a skilled human would play, and usually quite obviously so. Not that BIAB's walking bass lines are 'poor,' but that they sound like sequences of fixed patterns. There are set patterns for ii-V's in 2, 4, 8 and 16 beat lengths in major and minor keys. But lines which would be obvious to a human player who has absorbed the rules and not just phrases, like connecting chromatically down to the b7 in Days of Wine and Roses, for up from the ii to the iv (like the last measures of the A section in Meditation) usually aren't played by BIAB in favor of straight harmonic tones. And things get hairy when you give it more freedom in note selection, like allowing more 3rds and 7ths or passing tones on downbeats, because it doesn't 'know' when the 3rd is necessary, and when it is just throwing it in because it has a quota of 'non-root notes' to fill.
> 
> ...



(Friendly debating)...

First Band in the Box has come a long way. Real Tracks have made a huge difference. They may not be perfect but here are a few: 

They only do a few genres though. I use them for practicing accompaniments for standards. 

Lets say you decide to have your clarinet go up from the seventh (upbeat) then root third fifths 7th and 9th, you then want to come down modally on the dorian minor same pattern - all this in f#. Now you can work it all out, but if you had a quicker way to do this with two or three clicks, then you could do things like shorten the beats a little, add accents, push a little, would that not still be YOUR intention? What makes that worse? 
I grew up thinking that notation was the ultimate way of writing music, but in reality its not, there are so many compromises, so much left undefined, so much almost impossible to express (blues harmonica riffs for example). If we can make the process easier - why not? We can still keep our intentions and creativity.


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

novaburst said:


> It seems that is all that matters these days just get it done, what about excelling, growing becoming a better composer, or even becoming a great composer, ok maybe the last statement was a little bit to far but there have been great composers in this time and age.



I salute your high standards. But are we talking about just being a great composer as in writing music for concert performance here? 

For every John Williams, there are 1000s of media composers whose job is to support moving imagery. And often writing a fantastic theme is either a small part of the final job or non existent.

Sure if you have the budget a live orchestra will always beat samples for certain parts, but in many arenas now there are just not the budgets or time to do so.

There are still certain phrases that are impossible to recreate in MIDI and it seems whenever a new library appears it tends to cover the same ground.

I just dont get the hang up with phrases. Nobody seems to fret about using stock photography or wordpress templates for their websites, or using pre made typefaces for their logos? All of these are demeaning to photographers, web coders and typographers.

There is a vast difference between using non-melodic phrases and fully orchestrated hits.


----------



## Iskra (Jan 26, 2017)

bbunker said:


> Not that BIAB's walking bass lines are 'poor,' but that they sound like sequences of fixed patterns. There are set patterns for ii-V's in 2, 4, 8 and 16 beat lengths in major and minor keys. But lines which would be obvious to a human player who has absorbed the rules and not just phrases



Also friendly debating, but you're going to the extreme example a bit there. Of course no MIDI patterns will play bass with the musicality or technical ability of Dave Holland playing through rhythm changes, but Dave Holland is not playing in commercials, background music, jingles, etc, right? That is done usually by a very good session player that is doing just the basics as he is requested to do. 

Please don't get me wrong, I don't mean this in a bad way, I played piano on many sessions and gigs absolutely enjoyable but also forgettable, because the session or gig didn't demanded a Brad Mehldau-style playing, but just the most common and mainstream. I really can't picture myself backing a singer in a hotel with a trio, and playing bossa novas like McCoy Tyner would play them. You can do that, but you will probably never be called back for a similar gig. 

For many musical applications, just a standard walking bass line or comping guitar pattern will do, and for all those 'secondary' and not incredibly 'artistic' applications, I repeat that I see no harm on making things easier and faster to lay down.
It is not like we are always trying to write the next Faure in everything we write. When writing 'next Faure' piece, I agree with you, but for many meat & potatoes pieces, I think making programming easier is not wrong. 

I guess what I mean is that is not black or white, there's a lot of grey in the middle.


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 26, 2017)

Really... there is more to imitating a session bassist than stock MIDI phrases, but not that much more. Looking a few bars ahead in the harmony, picking up specific places to accent from the rest of the music, and getting the levels of complexity and energy right - that's probably 98% of what a good session bassist will do in one of these quick sessions.

Non-jazz styles like funk or rock would mostly be easier, though in some cases might require different inputs - guitar part for rock, for example. Doubling the guitar part in a lower octave but sometimes throwing in some passing notes or variation would actually be an interesting algorithm to develop.

A perfect application for machine learning.

For a real-life example, I'm using darbuka-nut in a track I'm working on now. It's a properly sampled darbuka, and also comes with MIDI patterns for traditional and Western styles. I took one of those patterns, imported it, and made a bunch of copies that were the same basic pattern but with rhythmic accents in the places where I needed them in a particular bar. Then I made another copy with lower velocity and some hits removed, to use as a background layer during the verses. This works, but it would also be possible to have software do the pattern-altering for me, and do a better job than I did. "Emphasize accents here, or add an accent if there's no hit there" and "give me less stuff and quieter" are not difficult tasks to automate.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

A point that has not been mentioned - is the art of simplicity. I have been playing 50 years and still appreciate and value going back to simplicity. This is what a 'stock' phrase is, its a simple phrase, and they can be beautiful, even devastatingly beautiful.

Z


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 26, 2017)

True, they wouldn't have gotten to be stock if they hadn't been so useful in so many situations in the past.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 26, 2017)

procreative said:


> salute your high standards. But are we talking about just being a great composer as in writing music for concert performance here



Sorry if the post gave you the wrong thought,

I merely wanted to point out that in the time of Beethoven they created came from the imagination, 

They did not start out as great composers but becuase they pushed there creativity they became great, becoming good, great, or fantastic, was never there aim or it was not what motivated them

They just followed a natural course of creativity which was using there skill, or pushing there music coming up with different phrase, melody, harmony, with out midi library's, so there creativity was very healthy, 

With out it they had nothing to call on for help, ok maybe they had friends, but they did not have what we have today.

And they composed pieces of music what we call great.


----------



## Iskra (Jan 26, 2017)

They composed pieces of music what we call great, but we often forget theat they were making music for a living, and they used many, many devices to cover the "usual gigs", so to speak.
Beethoven did score the 5th symphony, the late string quartets and last piano sonatas, but he also scored over 160 folk songs for (mostly) a violinist customer in Britain that paid very well. The renditions of those songs are charming, but light years away of his true masterpieces. He was making the smallest possible effort to get the job done, and perfectly knew -and most likely did't care about- that he was doing them just for the money, not for the artistry in it.
This looks weird from our present perspective of Beethoven as a genius, but it's just an example that even the great composers chose their battles to become great. They didn't fought every battle, and they knew sometimes they just needed to cover the basics quickly. Lay down some easy pieces quickly and without hassle. Sounds familiar? 

All the above was for the sake of having another view often overlooked. For me personally: Beethoven is God.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2017)

I think it comes down to the old '60's slogan: "If it feels good, do it."

For me presently, it doesn't, but hey, I could change my mind.


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

But many of these great composers lived in a different era where much like the painters and poets of the day they made a living from their art largely due to the patronage of wealthy royalty and noblemen commissioning works.

With their years of training and skill, they used a piano and a pencil.

What a large proportion of forum members are likely to do is one of these 3:

1. Compose music that stays entirely in their DAW and thus has to work with what they have. Mostly composing music to fit with a theme or media.

2. Compose cues that may be several seconds or a minute long that fit a scene. And given new world budgets mostly staying in the DAW.

3. Compose music that starts in their DAW, to be transcribed then recorded by a live ensemble.

1 and 2 need to work using samples. But given expectations they need to seem real. As we know there are still things that sound rather lifeless when programmed and thats where less melodic phrases can really help.

Unfortunately sound wise Action Strings is not quite right but useable as support material. Sonokinetic stuff sounds great, but their most recent Ostinato title aside is more melodic. 

Still think there is still a gap for an Action Strings type of product with more options and better sound.

Dont know why but strings seem the hardest to create totally convincing flowing phrases that use a mixture of Legato, Staccato and Sforzando. Maybe its because there are so many possible inflections with Strings compared with Brass and Winds.

I guess it depends on your aims. Of course it would be great to realise everything just from playing in notes, but to get some of the more rhythmic stuff down is currently either impossible or very very tricky.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

This is relevant asnd interesting:


----------



## novaburst (Jan 26, 2017)

Iskra said:


> This looks weird from our present perspective of Beethoven as a genius, but it's just an example that even the great composers chose their battles to become great. They didn't fought every battle, and they knew sometimes they just needed to cover the basics quickly. Lay down some easy pieces quickly and without hassle. Sounds familiar?



The folk song controversy or so it appears, Beethoven put his heart and soul in all that he did and that financial gain was not the motive,

at least reading from these notes

As Barry Cooper points out in his book _Beethoven’s Folksong Settings_, Beethoven described his settings as compositions, which suggests that he took the commissions seriously. Responding to one of Thomson’s many requests that he simplify his accompaniments, Beethoven placed the settings implicitly on a level with his other works when he testily declared: 
_“I am not accustomed to retouching my compositions; I have never done so, certain of the truth that any partial change alters the character of the composition. I am sorry that you are the loser, but you cannot blame me, since it was up to you to make me better acquainted with the taste of your country and the little facility of your performers.”_

Beethoven’s arrangements are ingenious. The violin and cello parts are designed to be optional, but they are no simple reproduction of the piano part. They are sufficiently independent so as to add interest when used, while detracting nothing when omitted. Another is that the folk settings required Beethoven to work with modal harmonizations in a classical context, sometimes using drone basses which are suggestive of a bagpipe, yielding some strikingly beautiful results. These settings display tremendous energy in the faster settings and haunting expressiveness in the slower ones, combining rich textures and innovative harmonization with delightful variety.

Publications of the Irish (1814, 1816), Welsh (1817) and Scottish (1818) settings failed to sell well. Thomson lamented that,_ ‘He composes for posterity’_, that they were too elevated and difficult for the intended public. Nevertheless, he continued to reissue earlier songs, as well as publish a few new ones, right up to the 1840s, but never with much commercial success. Perhaps this is why they sank into obscurity.

Why did Beethoven devote such a substantial proportion of his compositional output to these settings? The available evidence shows that financial gain was not Beethoven’s primary motivation. Of all the reasons put forth, the one suggested by Barry Cooper resonates most strongly, namely that ‘he was tapping into the immortality of time-honoured songs from the past, so as to create with Thomson a folk song monument for future generations’.

the whole reading can be found hear.

http://www.triovanbeethoven.at/cms_...-Beethoven/Folksong-Arrangements-by-Beethoven

In a concise yes with Phrase librarys there are so many options to speed up compositions and to get the job done.

My argument is if your not thinking about it your self or at least trying to put some thing down by your own skills, it stops your creativity development and I strongly feel its the ingredient that must be guarded through out our musical life. (keep creativity healthy)


----------



## Iskra (Jan 26, 2017)

novaburst said:


> suggested by Barry Cooper resonates most strongly, namely that ‘he was tapping into the immortality of time-honoured songs from the past, so as to create with Thomson a folk song monument for future generations’.



This would derail the thread, but no, I don't think Beethoven himself put the folksongs at the same level of other his works. His own comment regarding the not revising old compositions suggest more his ego - widely known - than putting simple songs very commonly (but lovely) arranged to sell copies at the same level as the rest of his output.

Honestly it would be difficult for me not to think an author that wrote a book about Beethoven folksongs has some bias in seeing them as masterpieces.. I prefer to use my own judge (and the judge of many many others, true experts, not myself) to see that comparing Beethoven's folksongs with the chamber music masterpieces he did is almost a blasphemy.
Regarding the effort Beethoven put into those, I also refuse to believe he devoted not even a 5% of the energy he put into other works from the same years.

Anyway, Beethoven folksongs were just an example that even the biggest composers were not always trying to hit it out of the ballpark, and there are thousands of examples in the classical repertoire aside from the juvenalia of each composer.


----------



## vms (Jan 26, 2017)

novaburst said:


> In a concise yes with Phrase librarys there are so many options to speed up compositions and to get the job done.
> 
> My argument is if your not thinking about it your self or at least trying to put some thing down by your own skills, it stops your creativity development and I strongly feel its the ingredient that must be guarded through out our musical life. (keep creativity healthy)


I think this's an illogical comparison in the first place
arranging folk songs is totally different from using phrase libraries

but
Beethoven was quite honest
op108 title is literally 'Twenty-Five Scottish Songs'
I doubt any one here would name his album as 'Ten Phrase-Library-Songs'


----------



## novaburst (Jan 26, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> This is relevant asnd interesting:




I have action strings but found it very hard work, out of all the demos he showed action strings did sound nice

But nice post,


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 26, 2017)

vms said:


> I think this's an illogical comparison in the first place
> arranging folk songs is totally different from using phrase libraries


Not really. There are lots of very standard folk basslines, or mandolin chord voicings and rhythms, for example.

But I think some of us who have worked as session or sub musicians who have fleshed out others' song ideas see this very differently than the composers. A smart phrase/pattern/standard-operating-procedure library can do what we do, pretty much. Most of the time we're not really doing anything special, and if there's one thing we generally stay out of, it's how you write your music (though I did once tell someone to change "they have blond hair" to "blond pubic hair"). We have no interest in doing your job as composer. Arranger and performer, yeah, but composition? Nah.

I wonder how producers who've worked with session musicians, or who have been the songwriter in a band whose members arranged their own parts, see this. That's yet another perspective.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

_[QUOTE="

My argument is if your not thinking about it your self or at least trying to put some thing down by your own skills, it stops your creativity development and I strongly feel its the ingredient that must be guarded through out our musical life. (keep creativity healthy)[/QUOTE]_

So, a writer should not use a word processor - preferring to type the letters in individually? Agree that one must inject one's own creativity, but one can start with a phrase and listen. Listening to work produced by others is always part of creativity. We are all plagiarists.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

Here is another comparison video



For me Action Strings has a homogenousity which can only be created by the reverb of real instruments playing together in real time - something libraries can lack. Action strings may lack in other ways though.
I am studying Action Strings and Ostinato today, for my ears Ostinato sounds better, but the Action strings GUI can produce more advanced result.


----------



## vms (Jan 26, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> Not really. There are lots of very standard folk basslines, or mandolin chord voicings and rhythms, for example.
> 
> But I think some of us who have worked as session or sub musicians who have fleshed out others' song ideas see this very differently than the composers. A smart phrase/pattern/standard-operating-procedure library can do what we do, pretty much. Most of the time we're not really doing anything special, and if there's one thing we generally stay out of, it's how you write your music (though I did once tell someone to change "they have blond hair" to "blond pubic hair"). We have no interest in doing your job as composer. Arranger and performer, yeah, but composition? Nah.
> 
> I wonder how producers who've worked with session musicians, or who have been the songwriter in a band whose members arranged their own parts, see this. That's yet another perspective.


of coz, and these partially explain why more then 50% of songs on this planet suck


----------



## DSmolken (Jan 26, 2017)

vms said:


> of coz, and these partially explain why more then 50% of songs on this planet suck


I'm not going to argue on the Internet. I do more than my share of arguing with musicians in real life.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 26, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Here is another comparison video
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Action strings seems to out shine the rest, I really tried to like something else but it seems action strings have got some thing correct where the other have not.

or is it your playing


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 26, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> I'm not going to argue on the Internet. I do more than my share of arguing with musicians in real life.




Funny for me it is the opposite, I almost never argue with musicians in real life, only on the internet


----------



## vms (Jan 26, 2017)

DSmolken said:


> I'm not going to argue on the Internet. I do more than my share of arguing with musicians in real life.


I am not going to argue as well
just my 2 cents


ZeroZero said:


> Here is another comparison video
> 
> 
> 
> ...



oh man...easily VSL is the worst one here


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 26, 2017)

Off topic, and apologies: in regard to Beethoven, I get the feeling (after a lifetime of studying his music and life) that, after the template-busting and ultimately widely-acclaimed Eroica, he was (like Wagner) so confident in his greatness that he knew he couldn't help _*but*_ be commissioned. The only time (after his early Haydn and Mozart sycophancy) he came close to being seriously second guessed composition-wise was when he presented his late, preposterously groundbreaking string quartets, which today of course are seen by many musicologists as perhaps the greatest compositions in the history of the Occident. And yeah, he was pre-commissioned for those as well, and handsomely.

This is my first and possibly only post here on this topic, and from what I've gathered there's been some terrific talk from many people. I think this is both a really interesting and important topic overall.

I interject just because of the Beethoven posts. I can't add anything to the topic that doesn't seem to already have been talked out (and quite well in most instances) already.


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

I offer this as a very basic very quickly knocked up example. Granted the tone of Action Strings out of the box is not as lovely as Sonokinetic, though its much easier to program as every note can be played in so it really is up to you to decide the notes and how to switch phrases.

As a test I blended in Ostinato strings playing almost identically, but the flourishes are AS only, somehow it adds something to the rhythm and definitely improves the tone.

Now I am not saying this is perfect, far from, and hopefully Sonokinetic might look at this and do something better. I think more round robins are needed to make these kind of phrase ones work better.

It might even be in the end some of this would get chopped once melody comes in but it gives a bed to make something more of or could be an underscore during a sequence where not too much needs to happen ie a moment of tension or chase sequence or such.

[AUDIOPLUS=http://vi-control.net/community/attachments/as-ostinato-mp3.7270/][/AUDIOPLUS]


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Interesting! But I can't get the second mp4 to play sadly.



There is no second mp4, thats just a quirk with how files upload. Its a blend of the two. As I said really quickly done, less than 2 minutes or so.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 26, 2017)

Comparing Ostinato to Action Strings today, as I have done, they both have advantages and disadvantages. Action strings can handle 3/4 (well sort of) but so far Ostinato seems to have better sounds - for my ears. Overall I prefer Ostinato so far, but Action strings does have more options for ostinato files. Even so, both are limited. 
In the real world an ostinato figure is hugely flexible it can involved all sections of hte orchestra and can define itself a little cul de sac with identifiable but unusual bedfellows. Neither package is up to that. For basic rhythmic string ostinatos they are both good, and there are a lot of options for decoration on most systems. I do like the seperate mic controls for the three string sections in Ostinato, they sound great when brought in over a standing bass line. I can only find a global volume in Action strings. I don't think action strings are worth the price, they should be around 100 bucks too


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 26, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> Comparing Ostinato to Action Strings today, as I have done, they both have advantages and disadvantages. Action strings can handle 3/4 (well sort of) but so far Ostinato seems to have better sounds - for my ears. Overall I prefer Ostinato so far, but Action strings does have more options for ostinato files. Even so, both are limited.
> In the real world an ostinato figure is hugely flexible it can involved all sections of hte orchestra and can define itself a little cul de sac with identifiable but unusual bedfellows. Neither package is up to that. For basic rhythmic string ostinatos they are both good, and there are a lot of options for decoration on most systems. I do like the seperate mic controls for the three string sections in Ostinato, they sound great when brought in over a standing bass line. I can only find a global volume in Action strings. I don't think action strings are worth the price, they should be around 100 bucks too



I usually just come up with my own ostinato string stuff (though I own and like Action Strings). In fact, I tend to treat Action Strings the way I treat phrase samples in general: as something to inspire me to do something different. Granted, there might be only so many combinations of notes, but I just feel funny about using something like Action and/or Luminoso much. Same with phrase samples, though I'm first to admit the phrase variety can be really helpful, and I'm not afraid of using them to tie a piece together.

Nine times out of ten when I use phrase samples I end up feeling weird and wanting to do something on my own though. Just me.


----------



## jamwerks (Jan 26, 2017)

Didn't read all the thread. But I think you should change the title. "Professional" and "phrase library" aren't terms that go together.


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 26, 2017)

jamwerks said:


> Didn't read all the thread. But I think you should change the title. "Professional" and "phrase library" aren't terms that go together.


Could,not agree more. I loathe these libraries because it takes away any skill or originality from the composer. What the hell is the point of even calling yourself a composer if you simply arrange someone else's music ideas together....that sound more like a producer


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

jamwerks said:


> Didn't read all the thread. But I think you should change the title. "Professional" and "phrase library" aren't terms that go together.



Thing is while I know what you are saying, there seem to be too many people round here that think they are going to be the next Zimmer or Newman. Nothing wrong with ambition. But the amount of composers that actually get to score features are small. Phrases ARE professional tools, and used intelligently thats what they are, tools.

If you really want to have a career in media composing and by that I mean earning income you have to accept you will likely be working on jobs with no budget for live recording or the time to do so. Which means compromises.

1. Finding ways to get kickstarted.
2. Finding tricks to get your ideas into shape quickly.

Some of the guys round here do just that and they dont get hung up on "did I personally record every midi note in by hand". And neither will their clients. What they want is original music that fits their project and adds something.

Most of the time that equals completely written parts, but other times it might require some help.

Having listened to the earlier comparison video, hands down for me the phrase based ones sounded better (although the programming of the midi ones was not too clever). For purely staccato patterns in fairly straight rhythms/polyrhythms perhaps there is not so much distinction, but once you get into 16ths and more blurred figures you can clearly hear the benefit of an ensemble playing it rather than programmed as there is a blurring due to timing variances.


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

dcoscina said:


> I loathe these libraries because it takes away any skill or originality from the composer.



Well thats your choice, but then purists would say that to anyone using samples and a DAW. Use a piano, pencil and staff paper.

I am a graphic designer by day and I have seen my business eroded over the years by Wix, Wordpress, Vistaprint etc. I doubt many here care about that when they order their next set of business cards using a template driven app? 

Its not real design is it? Your business wont look too much different to anyone else should you use that template you found on Themeforest, but it gets the job done. Not as well, but good enough.

Trying to equate a media composer to a great like Beethoven is frankly insulting. Even Mr Williams is not in the same league, especially given Ludwig was almost 100% deaf during most of his career and had to bite his piano to hear his music (or so I read somewhere!).


----------



## Parsifal666 (Jan 26, 2017)

procreative said:


> Trying to equate a media composer to a great like Beethoven is frankly insulting. Even Mr Williams is not in the same league, especially given Ludwig was almost 100% deaf during most of his career and had to bite his piano to hear his music (or so I read somewhere!).



Well, as you probably know it goes deeper than that; suffice it to say that most music historians and -ologists will tell us that only a handful of composers (none of them in film...in fact quite probably none since Richard Strauss) have come near Beethoven's magnitude since his heyday. And that's not even considering such a shattering disability.

Film music could be argued as the "classical music" of today, though there are plenty still writing symphonies, Kammermusik etc. (including people who suck, like me).

It's interesting for me to ponder just where film music will stand one hundred years from now. I mean, it's quite possible we're all wrong and there will be folks putting men like Williams and Zimmer up there with...well, how about Copland (excellent composer btw).

I know I used to (up until recently, really) dream of there perhaps being a Beethoven out there no one knew about...the problem with that idea is, most of the composers who were around that level in the past: the examples of the top of my head are Wagner, Strauss....were widely recognized as such and in huge demand in their day. Granted, Wagner didn't take off until King Ludwig stepped in, but once he caught on he was *massively* acclaimed. Strauss was buying houses and all sorts of luxuries early on. Even Mahler (though the great majority of his recognition as a composer came post mortem) was a hugely admired conductor and had a fine house in a beautiful area.

Anyway, I apologize for going off topic again. I spent so much of my life studying the above composers' music and lives, I love their music so much. But then, I'm a fan of Williams, Goldsmith, and Zimmer too .


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2017)

dcoscina said:


> Could,not agree more. I loathe these libraries because it takes away any skill or originality from the composer. What the hell is the point of even calling yourself a composer if you simply arrange someone else's music ideas together....that sound more like a producer



This type of attitude (musical snobbery, arrogance) which has come out a lot in this thread is not really necessary. There was nothing in the OP that mentioned "composers" or "originality" even. The topic is that we "need a professional phrase library for every instrument". Now I do not know if we NEED it per se, but as a PRODUCER I find it more beneficial to get to my ideas.

This discussion is much like what used to happen (or in some cases still does) about synthesizers. Even album covers by Queen and Boston brag on the fact that they did not use synths. They claim that they are not REAL instruments. When recording went computer based 20 years ago, I remember the local big studio in town did nothing but talk down and bad mouth the idea of going completely tape free (and some places still do). They said that computer based music was not REAL music. While not completely the same thing it is still to say that you could create an argument for almost everything...strummer software is not real guitars, arpeggiators are the devil, etc. etc. etc.

It is all in the eye/ear of the beholder and we do well as a community to discuss what good can come from such ideas as this topic instead of degrading anyone who would use such a tool. 

We have been using tools to shape every form of art since the beginning of time and those tools have gotten better and more complex...that has NO BEARING on whether or not the end product is or is not art, was or was not composed, is or is not creative. 

We are not talking about whole verses of songs...a phrase usually consists of some variations around whatever chord is played. What is that? 1 bar? Even Close Encounters of the Third Kind riff is 2 bars. So creativity will STILL have to come into play to get anything good from it. But I stand behind the ongoing creation and virtualization of new technologies, instruments, and ANYTHING that can help me get to my ideas quicker.


----------



## procreative (Jan 26, 2017)

We just need to learn to separate performance from composition. Many a great recording has had a contribution from an unamed session player or ghost writer that has MADE that piece. The Sax player in Baker Street was an uncredited session player. Rafferty gets the plaudits, but that Sax lick is the most memorable part of the whole song.

Now the player probably improvised it in minutes, laid it down and went on his way £100 in hand.

But whose idea was it to get a Sax player in give him a key and a rough idea of what they wanted? Probably the songwriter or producer.

Then there are the countless "real" bands in the 70s who used tape loops to drop in the same BVs wherever they occurred in a song. Or bands like the Beatles who used the Mellotron complete with looped phrases.

Whats the difference?

Film/TV music mostly is fairly throwaway to the audience. It brings the moving images to life. But outside of fellow musicians and film geeks, doubt there are that many who give two sh*ts about Zimmer being on board for the next Christopher Nolan flick.

But each to their own...


----------



## dcoscina (Jan 26, 2017)

JonSolo said:


> This type of attitude (musical snobbery, arrogance) which has come out a lot in this thread is not really necessary. .


I will never use these kind of libraries because, for *me*, they are bereft of the very thing that got me interested in composing music 35 years ago.

If you want to brand me as elitist or snobby, fine. I don't agree with your point of view and I'm tired of cases whenever anyone mentions anything remotely close to some kind of higher aesthetic that they are the victim of backlash by other parties who seem to have a hard-on for anyone who endorses a more formalistic ideal of music and music composition.


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2017)

dcoscina said:


> whenever anyone mentions anything remotely close to some kind of higher aesthetic that they are the victim of backlash by other parties



That is what I mean...that...higher aesthetic...as if my ideas are not a part of that. No one has lashed out at you. If anything this thread has consisted of posters wandering in here to lash out at the idea of the topic. So if anyone is lashing out it is them. I have not labeled you or anyone else here at all. I just am stating that we do need need to act like snobs as it relates to our craft. It is an open club and anyone can join. 

Choose to use the tools or choose not to. That does NOT mean they are wrong. That does not mean they cannot contribute to creativity. That does not mean that users are not composers. It is your choice how you build your music. That is not a point of view. That is a reality.


----------



## chrisphan (Jan 26, 2017)

JonSolo said:


> instead of degrading anyone who would use such a tool.


Don't know about other people, but when opposing to an idea like this, I'm just worried about the future of music creation, not degrading other people. Using technology like that is right at the border of letting technology assist us and let it spoil us and stop composers from writing great music.

Also off-topic, but can people not look down electronic music producers? I've seen some comments that call out electronic music. I'm all for great and original music of any kind


----------



## JonSolo (Jan 26, 2017)

And then you post Haywyre (whom I happen to love his work) who borrowed several phrases for his Smooth Criminal masterpiece...

When I see comments like "Using technology like that is right at the border of letting technology assist us and let it spoil us and stop composers from writing great music" it worries me. "1984" was a work of FICTION!!!

I am sorry to the OP for allowing myself to briefly get caught up on the off topic nature of this thread has been spun into. Someone should start a separate thread as to whether or not Phrase Libraries are creative or a hindrance to such. This thread needs to go back to topic.

Sonokinetic did announce another library coming up. I do not know if it is phrase based but I like the things they are doing.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jan 27, 2017)

procreative said:


> We just need to learn to separate performance from composition. Many a great recording has had a contribution from an unamed session player or ghost writer that has MADE that piece. The Sax player in Baker Street was an uncredited session player. Rafferty gets the plaudits, but that Sax lick is the most memorable part of the whole song.
> 
> Now the player probably improvised it in minutes, laid it down and went on his way £100 in hand.
> 
> ...



That is a very good argument for the validity of using them. Well done.

But it doesn't change the fact that I still don't enjoy working with them


----------



## Christof (Jan 27, 2017)

I chimed in pretty late here and I didn't read all posts, but we certainly don't need phrase libraries.
When you use prerecorded phrases it isn't your own composition anymore, even worse.
Buy them and use them to learn and get inspired, but I would not sell one single cue that contains phrase samples.
The chance that you hear them in a cue of another composer is way too high


----------



## novaburst (Jan 27, 2017)

JonSolo said:


> start a separate thread as to whether or not Phrase Libraries are creative or a hindrance to such.



Not sure if you went off topic, your just stating there is a need for phase library's and there are some including my self who believe you should not use them, does and donts are what make up a topic, you will get different views and you can learn a lot from other composers view giving there reasons if they agree or disagree.


----------



## procreative (Jan 27, 2017)

Christof said:


> I chimed in pretty late here and I didn't read all posts, but we certainly don't need phrase libraries.
> When you use prerecorded phrases it isn't your own composition anymore, even worse.
> Buy them and use them to learn and get inspired, but I would not sell one single cue that contains phrase samples.
> The chance that you hear them in a cue of another composer is way too high



It depends on what you define as a phrase though? How would you know if a rhythmic phrase like the one I posted (excepting this was a quick rough and had no further instrumentation on it) was created using phrases or played in?

As the original phrase is designed to be played melodically, 10 composers could use it in many different ways. For example in Action Strings there are probably about 40-50 rhythmic phrases recorded chromatically that can be played much the same way (that many get so excited about) as Albion IV or even the EVO series.

Point is, if you cannot record live musicians and you cannot get a better result as quickly for this type of supporting rhythmic part its the next best thing.

By the way, do you use Trills, Legato Intervals, or any other flourishes? These are also phrase samples and contain just as much harmonic data as the type of phrases I am talking about.

But ultimately everyone is entitled to their own view, I just do not consider either right or wrong. And I doubt do many commissioners unless they have specifically asked for an original piece of music completely performed.


----------



## procreative (Jan 27, 2017)

Ashermusic said:


> But it doesn't change the fact that I still don't enjoy working with them



Ha! But that also proves they are not super easy, it still requires work and is a different discipline. I do confess it does not feel the same as writing from scratch, but then editing MIDI after the fact also feels like cheating.

If we were all purists we would only use material played in live with no edits...

...But we have moved on from music as JUST an expression of proficiency and technique.


----------



## NoamL (Jan 27, 2017)

You know if PL's actually worked then at least there would be an argument here.

But they don't.

It's like trying to drive an F1 car in a supermarket. You hit the gas, get inspired, rev up, drive 5 feet and thunk into a wall. Try something else, 5 feet, thunk, wall again.

It's things as simple as playing one phrase that's a question and instantly hearing the answer you want to compose. Except you can't because they didn't record it.

Wanting to move the ostinato to the next chord except you can't because the voice leading is terrible.

Needing to add a note here or there and you can't because none of your other libraries have remotely the same tone.

Getting a note back from the director asking for a tweak and you can't deliver because your "composition" is a drag and drop WAV.

There are things like risers, glisses, effected drum loops, exotic vocal phrases, and the like where you can add "confetti" to your piece fairly well. But for actual melodic lines and ostinatos? It's just asking for trouble.

Melodic phrase libraries are not a tool. It's more like you become the tool and have to shape your whole composition to cater to the extremely limited dimensions of how the prerecorded phrases can be developed.


----------



## procreative (Jan 27, 2017)

NoamL said:


> Getting a note back from the director asking for a tweak and you can't deliver because your "composition" is a drag and drop WAV.



Well its not always the end of the world to be told "not possible in the time we have", what if they ask this once you have recorded that orchestra? The answer would be "No, unless you want to pay for a new session"



NoamL said:


> Melodic phrase libraries are not a tool.



But not all phrases libraries are Melodic, some are rhythmic phrases designed to be played melodically a bit like playing a Trill.

Although the sound is not ideal, Action Strings can switch phrase or change note anywhere within a bar cycle. So in effect it can be played like an instrument. Granted there are some less flexible phrases in it that only perform melodic material.

Anything that can be done better or better sounding should be done with MIDI, but there are still many joined notes that are missing from all the main libraries.

But I think I have said enough and NI are not paying me so no more free promos...


----------



## humco (Jan 27, 2017)

chrisphan said:


> Don't know about other people, but when opposing to an idea like this, I'm just worried about the future of music creation, not degrading other people. Using technology like that is right at the border of letting technology assist us and let it spoil us and stop composers from writing great music.
> 
> Also off-topic, but can people not look down electronic music producers?



You shouldn't be lose any hair over the fact, it's going away and that's that, accept it. 

First of all, copying ideas isn't stealing in my opinion, and I flip flop my stance on this every few years, but for now, from John Williams to Kanye west, imitation is often necessary for inspiration. Even Ludwig grew up studying someone else's music before setting out to create his own... but then you might say YES but he DID create his own and those were the particularly worthwhile pieces. If you think Beethoven operated in a vacuum then we're not gonna get anywhere, he was influenced by the mores of his time.

Damnit i have to run, but basically, we are imitators as a species, it a large part of the learning process. The OPs suggestion is something Ive often thought about, even though I know no phrase would simply slide into a song I'd already made. Music technology is always changing the game, slowly in the past but at the end of the road, everyone who wants to is gonna be making music and none of them will be musicians. They'll Train their machine learning algorithms and it'll make original music, as well as tell them stories, make paintings, etc. music isn't the only craft that's on its way out, and there may always be a desire to have real people create certain things in our society. That decision will be left up to the grandchildren of the Millennials (yikes...)

Luckily that's a long way from here, were at a time of middle ground where some interesting new things can be done without musicianship, but many new things demand it. That is what we inevitably stand to lose as technology progresses, and what has everyone's panties in a bunch. Don't worry, we'll all be dead before this age of musicianship passes.

Ive read every post in this so I know I'm off topic from the OP but just had to say it, the craft will eventually die and there is nothing you can do to save it...


----------



## novaburst (Jan 28, 2017)

humco said:


> They'll Train their machine learning algorithms and it'll make original music, as well as tell them stories, make paintings, etc. music isn't the only craft that's on its way out, and there may always be a desire to have real people create certain things in our society



If you can put a heart soul and emotion in a machines I guess we need to pack our bags and go.

fortunately there are a few things left in this life that will take the human heart and feeling to make it happen and that is art. yes if your going to play dubstep and EDM or electro perhaps there is not much heart and feel needed.

As a human you will always be searching for certain emotional drive, feeling of sadness, happiness, inspiration, in music and a machine just cant and will never be able to do that.

only a human can feel the soul and heart of another human and that is that, this is what music is about it has its own language and feel and needs to be orchestrated by a human, and if you like an angel or spirit.

If this is the concept then there is no fret that in some strange way machines are going to take over music and art ever.

Those who understand music would already know this anyway if you don't understand music and the part it plays in our life then of course you will believe that in some strange and unusual manner machines will take over


----------



## lucky909091 (Jan 28, 2017)

If I had the money, I would create a new guitar library. 
And I think I would earn some very good money for this idea because a lot of composer would be in need of this...

This new guitar library would have thousands of hooks and fill-ins in every key and in a lot of musical styles.
The great example would be the "Virtual Guitarist" from Steinberg with all of its useful patterns.

I always wished to get a "guitar phrase lick and hook" library for all purposes.
Please, can someone make this dream come true?


----------



## humco (Jan 28, 2017)

Nova I'm in agreement 100%, but have you seen the kids these days? That's more what I'm talking about, we really are losing our heart slowly, it won't be in our lifetimes but I can't see the future happening any other way short of a second renaissance. Awareness, responsibility, and personal legitimacy (as opposed to social legitimacy) are in short supply these days. I've been a musician for about 30 years, trust me I don't wanna see it go... 

Maybe I'm salty bc I'm in a college town and work on the strip, but the hundreds of soulless 20-somethings I meet every night and the music they love (I work at a venue, different "famous" DJ every night etc), leave me with little hope.

Edited- autocorrect on my phone messed me up


----------



## novaburst (Jan 28, 2017)

humco said:


> (I work at a venue, different "famous" DJ every night etc), leave me with little hope.



@humco I here you and understand what your saying, but I am not sure if its what others do or think, its what I do or you do,

some will accept gold look alike or gold plaited metals, others will only accept solid gold, it is not what others do that gives me hope, its what I know and have knowledge of that gives me hope.


----------



## humco (Jan 28, 2017)

Amen. I'll be honest, I don't think musicianship will ever disappear. My goal in life (with a neurophysicist 25+ year best-y) was to create an AI that could please us with art. We have since abandoned that goal. Now he and I both have a masters in physics, focus in neurology (modeling rat brains and such), and he's joining the military (he's writing a book "mathematical methods to counter terrorism") and I went back to music. 

We do what we love, I don't wanna be a physicist, I want to create art. Its what I've always been driven to do... make something "badass" (to me of course). It's crazy that I spent the last 6 years of my life on this degree, but in a way it's introduced me to a whole new understanding of sound (sound waves are the focus of certain university physics courses). 

Ok, I've been drinking and I'm replying while smoking a cig in a crowd of 300 kids at a 5000$ frat party that I'm working at the moment....my children will not be a part of this zeitgeist. 

I love this convo, and honestly my post a page back was intended to get a rise out of anyone who dared to answer the call of preserving humanity. Let's make sure our species carries its humanity into the sterile, metallic future that we might very well be heading towards. I fucking love the music I make, I made it for the sole purpose of listening to it myself. My music has an audience of one, and for me it's the perfect jogging/gym playlist. I don't expect I'll ever earn a cent with it, but it's my hobby and my passion, and I'll do everything within my power to ensure future generations don't lose touch with their own souls. I'm more of an optimist that I've let on, forgive me for playing devils advocate!


----------



## humco (Jan 28, 2017)

Lol certain things I want to say about the OP I'm refraining from because I've for a long time anticipated that I would create this very thing myself. Like Cthulu... but with phrases. I mentioned the AI I was working on to create personal art... anyway I am 100% on topic but have to keep deleting paragraphs because I don't wanna reveal something I'm working on, so sorry but I'm only talking about the musicianship element of topic because that won't give my gems away!!

I was writing screenplays in LA ten years ago, and on a few occasions would find my same ideas being made into movies without me. This is because I got my ideas from my environment, while 1000 other LA screenwriters in the same environment had the same ideas, independently. This is a big part of why I'm talking so vaguely, I've learned how to be careful with ideas that EVERYONE might be having at the moment 

Love u guys!


----------



## MChangoM (Jan 29, 2017)

novaburst said:


> If you can put a heart soul and emotion in a machines I guess we need to pack our bags and go.
> 
> fortunately there are a few things left in this life that will take the human heart and feeling to make it happen and that is art. yes if your going to play dubstep and EDM or electro perhaps there is not much heart and feel needed.
> 
> ...



Do I agree with everything you say here? YES! But do I think big, unknowable changes in the creation and consumption of our art are going to impact us more and sooner than we know? Take a look at his video. I'd watch it all if you have time, but the part that addresses creative endeavors starts around 11:19.


----------



## novaburst (Jan 29, 2017)

MChangoM said:


> I'd watch it all if you have time, but the part that addresses creative endeavors starts around 11:19.



I watched the whole vid, and can understand why machines must be put in places of humans and animals,
esp in the working industry.

but bringing it back to phrase librarys and must apologise to @ZeroZero for drifting away from the main topic.

a phrase library, (computer) can be played very well inside your musical piece if you know what your doing.
The difference is in doing the and thinking of the phrase your self and just playing a recorded phrase can be quite a big change in dynamic out put

if for some reason you may have lost a very close loved one and are still writing a song or you may for some reason still need to perform live or in your studio, because of the way you feel at that given time you will radiate a different feel, mood, and vibe, and it will connect to the listener in such away that is unexplainable. 

this is where your music can touch listeners or give listeners goose bumps if you like.

so its not about connecting every note correctly and using your brain, your may perform the same piece of music all through the week but to listeners it sounded different each time because your emotion heart, soul, mood was different, it was you all the time but some event may have taken place that was happy, sad, wonderful, you may have falling in love, you may have landed a great deal, so many things and our own personality can effect the dynamic of our music and this is what makes music so wonderful to listen to.

Have you ever worked on music after a heavy car crash and you came out of the crash unharmed how will you write or work or perform will you be as shaky as hell, or very thankful and delightful your still alive, will it be the best performance of your life because for some reason you now see things differently, all these moment by moment events in our life are intermingled in our creation of music.


----------



## ctsai89 (Jan 29, 2017)

isn't this already what sonokinetic does? honestly only people who aren't knowledgeable enough to have phrasses their own use that kind of stuff. But then there are also smart people who actually know how to compose who needed to get ideas from those already-made phrases as inspiration tool. 

i'm against phrase/loop libraries.

Do your own work.


----------



## ZeroZero (Jan 29, 2017)

ctsai89 said:


> isn't this already what sonokinetic does? honestly only people who aren't knowledgeable enough to have phrasses their own use that kind of stuff. But then there are also smart people who actually know how to compose who needed to get ideas from those already-made phrases as inspiration tool.
> 
> i'm against phrase/loop libraries.
> 
> Do your own work.



This answer I oppose (but not the person). Who is to say who can do what and how they do it? My idea functions as a kind of notebook and since the beginning of classical music composers have kept notebooks, this is simple a digital version. I would welcome some app to take a phrase and warp it. "Only people who are knowledgeable enough to have have phrases of their own..." Really? Then what is the next sentence above?

Must be only 'smart people' 

"Do your own work" Sounds like an order.


----------



## ctsai89 (Jan 29, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> This answer I oppose (but not the person). Who is to say who can do what and how they do it? My idea functions as a kind of notebook and since the beginning of classical music composers have kept notebooks, this is simple a digital version. I would welcome some app to take a phrase and warp it. "Only people who are knowledgeable enough to have have phrases of their own..." Really? Then what is the next sentence above?
> 
> Must be only 'smart people'
> 
> "Do your own work" Sounds like an order.



yea and you definitely make good points, exactly as i expected. There is no rules and law against what you want so if you really wanted, sonokinetics, there you go and they even have midi for you to reference and study which i think it's good for you. Definitely give it a try. My opinions are just opinions and i know it. But if you really wanted to get better at making phrases based off other composer's phrases without using phrase tools, you can use your ears and listen to recordings instead. That's going to require ear training of course and i think it's the best thing you can invest in if you're a composer. Best wishes to you though.


----------



## Quasar (Jan 29, 2017)

NoamL said:


> You know if PL's actually worked then at least there would be an argument here.
> 
> But they don't.
> 
> ...



I was going to drop out of this insanity, but you don't HAVE to do shit, and sometimes there is more to the art of music making than creating business relationships and pleasing clients. Whether your car analogy describes either your experience with phrase libraries or your concern about what is likely to happen if you did use them, this only applies to you, lives only in the world between your two ears, and cannot be generalized to include everyone as though it were a universal law like F= ma or something... If you don't like them, fine. I don't like or use them either. But this does not in any way diminish their potential value for those who do.


----------



## Coqui (May 25, 2017)

ZeroZero said:


> I have been thinking about this for a while - years. I would be happy to help develop this. I have only old skool programming skills alas.
> We all need a professional phrase library/creator.
> What I mean is a very good user interface to store phrases, create phrases, and most importantly constrain phrases per instrument type. Possibly a MIDI VST instrument or similar



Do you mean something like Synful? Synful was a very promising idea, to me.


----------



## Zhao Shen (May 25, 2017)

I feel like some people are getting a bit mixed up on why people support or oppose phrase-based sampling. I think the biggest argument against would be that phrase-based libraries are a lame shortcut that takes the skill out of composition. The biggest supporting argument would probably be that phrase-based libraries are necessary because sampling will never get as realistic as a recorded performance.

Personally, I'm pretty indifferent to the whole thing. I appreciate the versatility of sampled instruments, but if a developer makes a fantastic phrase-based library, I hardly see a point in complaining... There's still the point of "but he knows no music theory and uses phrases to cover that up" but honestly it's a pretty weak argument. If you're excellent at music theory, it will show. If you're not... it will show.


----------



## P.N. (May 25, 2017)

I'm not sure if anyone suggested this. This is what i'd like to see:

A phrase search engine.

You play your idea, the engine goes through your phrases libraries and gets the one that matches the phrase you've just created. That way, you could replace your note based (flawed) passage with the real thing. It would be a huge timesaver for those passages that just don't sound right after lots of massaging.
Lots of variables to make this work, though...

Toontrack did this a few years ago, with Ezdrummer 2. Play a rythm - it automatically searches your midi files and gets you a professional performance (with a drummer's vibe), and/or similar ones.

For orchestral stuff, i could see this getting more complex, but it can be done. Maybe a script that has all your phrases in arrays. Someone would need to store those inside... etc... and another big etc.


----------



## procreative (May 25, 2017)

What I do find funny is that the same people that are deeply opposed to phrase based libraries get all moist when companies like Spitfire release titles like EVO Grid or Uist. These are playable phrases.

And that to me is the real kay to getting over the hang ups with phrases.

Now for me what could be developed further is the technology used in Action Strings. The concept, programming and ease of combining rhythmic phrases is potentially unlimited.

The current problem is the sound (basically the lack of control over the Mic Mix and the quality of recording) and lack of additional rhythms.

What is so good about this title is with creative use of phrase combinations unique new phrases can be created.

And that is the key, making something that permits endless new possibilities...


----------



## JohnG (May 25, 2017)

procreative said:


> ...EVO Grid or Uist. These are playable phrases.



I know what you mean but I think there is an important distinction in both cases. At least the EVO Grid stuff I've seen isn't even close to phrases -- I haven't seen it all by any means, so maybe I'm wrong? -- it is much more like some kind of elaborate "manipulatorium" that nevertheless the composer can control to a great extent.

UIST, another animal altogether, has _some_ phrases, but a lot more hits and combinations of instruments hitting. I acknowledge that this means that they are, technically, "composed." But, if used as punctuation, or as a cluster effect or something, they are arguably analogous to having the section play a cluster that the composer asks for.

If you are arguing that you don't want someone else to exercise _any_ input, then I guess you have a point. On the other hand, when I want a cluster, I write a diamond-shaped note and put little directions in the parts saying something like, "play wobbly quarter-tone dissonant chord, each member of section playing different, very high pitch." 

In such an instance (or when you have a jazz chart and ask for a solo), you are not exercising 100% control over the music either, but it's still yours, in the sense that you planned it, curated it, and blended it into your music. 

Yes, someone else is adding something but to me the matter of degree is important.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 25, 2017)

I was not expecting a "stop liking what I do not like" kinda discussion when I clicked on this thread.


----------

