# Making samples sound less like samples?



## Sasje (Oct 8, 2013)

I wonder if anyone is willing to share some tricks to make sample libraries sound less like samples? 

When I listen to demo's from certain sample libraries, I think like: wow that sounds amazing. I buy the library and it's an instant disappointment. 
I never seem to get the quality I hear from the demo's. Mine sound flat, one dimensional, and it just...well, sounds like samples...
I then bury it in reverb, delay but I never seem to get close to any realism.

I then listen to some of the member compositions posted here, and I think: how did they do that? it sounds so realistic... 
I then try it for myself, and it then seems like a sampler is playing it. :D

What makes it come alive?...reverb, delay, mixing, eq'ing? I'm really struggling to make it sound really good. It probably is a lack of experience, 
and it seems a kind of dark mysterious art to me... 

Would love to know some of your tricks.


----------



## davidgary73 (Oct 8, 2013)

Here are some Mike Verta's videos showing some playing tecniques on how to make your VI samples abit more realistic. 

http://mikeverta.com/wordpress/podcasts ... echniques/

http://mikeverta.com/wordpress/podcasts ... sing-live/

Cheers


----------



## TimJohnson (Oct 8, 2013)

There are lots of little tricks and tips. But the absolute biggest one I can give you is invest in the best sample libraries! The better ones really do at instant realism to a lot of scores. For example, if you go from using EW Symphonic Orchestra Silver or Gold to using Cinematic Strings 2.0 or Spitfire, your head is likely to explode.

Automating expression with the mod wheel to add dynamics is another big one.
Placing your instruments in the correct "space" whilst being sympathetic to the sample library you are using; for example Spitfire products are usually recorded in their correct places in the hall, so no or little panning is needed - whilst Vienna instruments are dry and need careful placement.
If it is a dry instrument I usually add a very short reverb (0.8secs) then play with the "Dry/input" dial to push them back in the space. This is like placing them on the sound stage, don't forget to pan them to the right place. Then you can add your long, hall reverb to cement everything together.

I have three reverbs in my orchestral projects. The two mentioned above and a third for piano and harp. Just remember that some libraries need no reverb at all!

EQ is also important, but again specific to the library. I often find East West Strings too bright, so dipping the EQ around 12K is usually a good idea. Just got to use your ears on that one.

If your library has round robin (most do these days) then the old trick of making things less quantised is less of an issue for non percussive instruments, still works wonders for piano, harp, mallets etc. though. Imperfections can often be your friend.

Blending sample libraries is also a very nice trick to thicken a sound and add colour to it.

Too many things to mention here really, I have work to do! haha! Hope that helps a bit.


----------



## Sasje (Oct 8, 2013)

Thank you, this really clears some things up.

Btw I love Mike Verta's video's and podcasts. Really cool. 

http://mikeverta.com/wordpress/podcasts ... ual-music/


----------



## Rob (Oct 8, 2013)

To me the first requirement is to make sure you have a very clear idea of what an expressive phrasing is... Listen to good singers, violinists, cellists, flute or oboe players, every kind of soloists, and listen carefully to how they draw arcs, vary dynamic, vibrato, pitch, time in order to make the music speak. Only then it'll be the time to make samples do what you want... Trying to do that before you have exactly known what you want isn't the right way to do, in my opinion. Excuse me if you are already there, I'm speaking in general, in which case you're right to think in terms of libraries, tricks etc...


----------



## Daryl (Oct 8, 2013)

I agree with Rob. Whilst better products can help, the most important ingredient is your MIDI performance. I've heard music from 10-15 years ago that sounds fantastic. It isn't the products, it's the skill of the sequencer. Of course if you are using a bad sample library, that will have an impact on your final result.

D


----------



## BenG (Oct 8, 2013)

I think it's really a combination of what everyone is saying. The importance of getting a realistic sound depends on...

(in order)
1. Musicality
2. Mixing/Balance
3. Libraries

Listen to as many examples of specific instruments, or groups, in soloist and ensemble settings. Try and understand the little things they do to affect phrasing, dynamics, attack, and so on. Perform your parts, rather than simply inputting them.

As for mixing, nothing will make your sound pop in the way I think your describing but it will definitely clean up your mix and create a sense of realism in a spectral manner. 

Libraries will help, but as Daryl said, I've heard demos made with EWQLSO Silver sound better than most people using top end products. The only thing that really matters is how well the samples were recorded. "True Legato" or "20RR" are secondary, imo, to the basic recorded samples. 

Just my two cents.


----------



## Neifion (Oct 8, 2013)

100% agree with what everyone's said. Having great libraries and plugins, but lacking knowledge of how to weave emotion and character is like having a great Panavision film camera and not knowing how to cinematically tell an effective story (not saying that's you, just speaking in general!)

I've never played a real cello or violin. But I've spent some time watching performances, reading up, and especially listening to film and game scores. In other words, you don't need to know how to play a violin, but you should know how a violin is played.  Realism comes from knowing what the instrument can and can't do. A violin can't sustain forever without rebowing, a flautist can't perform a bunch of legato phrases without taking a breath, a brass section isn't going to be exactly together with their timing. Knowing things like that can go a long way in tricking the ear and getting closer to "real". Conversely, not paying attention to the limitations of the instrument can raise a red flag to your listeners.

On the creative side, study your favorite performers, take note of what they do that gives you goosebumps, and find out how to control those articulations in your virtual instrument!

Sorry if this is old news for you; I don't know your level of experience!


----------



## ghostnote (Oct 9, 2013)

I think its a wild mixture of all the things mentioned above. It all starts by choosing the right libraries and this can be of course a very personal decision (i.e.: I love sound of HS but dislike the sound of HB.) Sometimes when you hear a demo you instantly know if you can work with that specific library. 

Another big point is choosing the right reverb. Some others will say nay, but I think a good sense for space and the right reverb is essential for realism + if you're looking for THAT (lexicon) sound, then go for it! LPX costs about 150 bucks. 

Playing things in and sculpting things out properly via modwheel and EQ is also a very important part. Always try to hi-pass instruments to get rid of boominess (if there is any).


----------



## RiffWraith (Oct 9, 2013)

The best thing that you can do for yourself to make samples sound less like samples, is step away from your computer, and go and watch an orchestra rehearse. Watching an orch perform is helpful - sure. But watching them during rehearsal is something else. I strongly recommend you - and anyone - to find a local orch, and see if they have open rehearsals. If they don't, talk yourself into attending some. College orchs are especially good, because they need to be - and will be - corrected much more often than a pro orch, potentially giving you some extra insight.

Cheers.


----------



## ProtectedRights (Oct 9, 2013)

Sasje @ Tue Oct 08 said:


> When I listen to demo's from certain sample libraries, I think like: wow that sounds amazing. I buy the library and it's an instant disappointment.



I hear ya. Quite some times it's the same for me. 

First off, I buy a lib, and do some decent "get to know" playing, testing the whole range, testing articulations, velocities, modwheel, ... Virtually every time I quickly discover lots of small glitches, imperfections, bad sounding edges, that were not to be heard in the perfect sounding demos.

Second, you play around on the keyboard and it sounds dull and sample-like. I know exactly what you say. I think the key is, you wont get that perfect sound playing at the keyboard. A huge effort of programming has gone into any demo you hear, and that is how it is. Libraries sound great when you accurately program every tone, every articulation, every velocity, every modwheel ride that it needs to sound convincingly realistic. 

In general, the cheaper and simpler the lib the more programing is needed, the better and more expensive the lib the less programing is needed. Like Sample Modeling stuff, I don't own any, but judging from the videos you can play that live in a realistic way, just putting care to your velocity and modwheel.


----------



## BenG (Oct 9, 2013)

ProtectedRights @ Wed Oct 09 said:


> Sasje @ Tue Oct 08 said:
> 
> 
> > When I listen to demo's from certain sample libraries, I think like: wow that sounds amazing. I buy the library and it's an instant disappointment.
> ...



I kind of disagree with this. A lot of the time, I am just recording in the parts and only afterwards fixing small things like timing, some minor CC info/Velocities, and so on. Then again, maybe this is why my samples don't sound like the pros

Also, every libs plays completely different. Some are not necessarily better than others, but better fitted to your specific playing style. 

Just a thought.


----------



## ProtectedRights (Oct 9, 2013)

Ever tried some $5 lib from Sampleism? It is a lot of work to get a realistic sound out of that


----------



## guitarman1960 (Oct 9, 2013)

I'm pretty new to using high end sample libraries, and am really struggling to get them to sound as smooth as I would like.
That seems to be the main stumbling block for me, getting that smoothness, especially in the String parts and ostinatos, that a real orchestra has. The samples always seem to sound way too bright and harsh even with a good reverb. I use high end monitors and high end headphones, but am not an expert at EQ or mixing so maybe that's what I need to learn next to smooth everything out?

Anyone else having trouble with samples being too bright sounding?


----------



## ProtectedRights (Oct 9, 2013)

@guitarman: which lib do you have? It depends a lot on the recordings. Bigger ensembles tend to sound smoother, and the articulation and microphoning is important. Also try the lower velocity range. If you have detache, go with that.

I recently bought Albion which has a pronouncedly dark / gentle flavor to it. I heard CinematicStrings are much harder / brighter for example.


----------



## germancomponist (Oct 9, 2013)

Sasje,

the most is said here but I will add this: Always follow the note lengths, especially the short. This is very important! If the note lengths of the instrument do not match the note lengths in the key editor, then you have to edit in your sampler as long as it fits. This can be very tricky. And it is always tempo based! 

One more reason to play SM instruments. o/~


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 10, 2013)

guitarman1960 @ Wed Oct 09 said:


> The samples always seem to sound way too bright and harsh even with a good reverb. I use high end monitors and high end headphones, but am not an expert at EQ or mixing so maybe that's what I need to learn next to smooth everything out?



Yes. EQ ... and pushing things back (means: using other mic samples than close mics if available, plus eventually using spacializers).


----------



## mikebarry (Oct 10, 2013)

Critical Things:

1) Monitoring Loudly (so that your forte comes in 2/3rds up the master fader) - listen for detail 
2) Sample Libraries - untweaked - don't reach for the EQ compression unless its an emergency - get the best libraries you can
3) make sure the amount of CC1 you use and CC7 you use are appropriate (biggest novice error I hear)
4) it is ok to add gain to make quiet things speak louder while still wanting a quiet dynamic
5) taper the edges 
6) stack


----------



## TimJohnson (Oct 10, 2013)

mikebarry @ Thu Oct 10 said:


> Critical Things:
> 
> 1) Monitoring Loudly (so that your forte comes in 2/3rds up the master fader) - listen for detail
> 2) Sample Libraries - untweaked - don't reach for the EQ compression unless its an emergency - get the best libraries you can
> ...



100% agree with everything you said, except for point 2. Personally I always tend to end up EQing and or compressing things (if orchestral then only very slightly to glue things together).

I would actually like to hear how others treat sample libraries in terms of EQ and compression. Lets just say you are happy you're programming is as good as it's going to get and your MIDI performance couldn't be better... obviously some libraries need more EQ than others, but in general, what are peoples thoughts?


----------



## Jem7 (Oct 10, 2013)

TimJohnson @ 10/10/2013 said:


> 100% agree with everything you said, except for point 2. Personally I always tend to end up EQing and or compressing things (if orchestral then only very slightly to glue things together).
> 
> I would actually like to hear how others treat sample libraries in terms of EQ and compression. Lets just say you are happy you're programming is as good as it's going to get and your MIDI performance couldn't be better... obviously some libraries need more EQ than others, but in general, what are peoples thoughts?



I mix and eq as I go because eq can change volume of the instrument after the programming so you don't want to go back and program the whole piece again. So I eq as I write and make sure it sounds close to what I want to hear. After writing is done I go back and make final mix.


----------



## guitarman1960 (Oct 10, 2013)

ProtectedRights @ Wed Oct 09 said:


> @guitarman: which lib do you have? It depends a lot on the recordings. Bigger ensembles tend to sound smoother, and the articulation and microphoning is important. Also try the lower velocity range. If you have detache, go with that.
> 
> I recently bought Albion which has a pronouncedly dark / gentle flavor to it. I heard CinematicStrings are much harder / brighter for example.



Many thanks, I use LASS and Symphobia. Symphobia sounds smoother to my ears, but LASS seems very bright especially the Spicc samples?

At the moment I'm just using the sounds 'out of the box' and apart from adding some Altiverb reverb I haven't tried EQ or anything as I wouldn't know where to start :? LOL Maybe a thread on EQ ing sample libraries would help a lot of people out? He says hopefully! :D


----------

