# Release Tails, Compromise & Alternatives..



## Tod (Apr 18, 2006)

Well, I got a chance to play around a little bit with the legato script and the release tails in EW Gold. Since the regular Gold library is the only one I have that was recorded with hall-verb and uses release tails, that's what I'm going to discuss here so how it may relate to any other libraries I'll leave to you.

The two big problems of course are first, how the release tails (RT) interfere with Bob's legato script and second, how adding reverb to the already wet samples may or may not work so good.

One concept is to use the tails only on the end of each phrase. Haveing persued this myself along with takeing in to account what Stefan (sbkp) had to say about this I've come to the conclusion that this dosen't work at all.



sbkp said:


> It doesn't seem to me that having the release sample played only on the last note of a phrase would sound very good. Reverb does happen on the notes in the middle of a phrase, not just the end. You wouldn't set the reverb send level to be audible only on the last note of a phrase, would you? (Well, you might, but only for a special effect...)


Stefan proceeded to give a very good example of what happens with the lack of the verb or RTs in the middle of the phrase and have them only on the end. I hope it's okay that I used your link Stefan.

http://media.stefanpodell.com/audio/release_last_note.mp3 (http://media.stefanpodell.com/audio/rel ... t_note.mp3)

Although I think the RT on the end of the phrases sounds okay, the lack of verb on the transition of the notes in the phrase sounds pretty bad (awfull actually) to me. For me at least this totaly rules out useing RTs strictly on the end of the phrases.

Another concept is to simply delete all the release tails and add more verb to the allready wet samples. If Thonex used samples like this in his mp3 demo and then added verb on top of it, then he shows that it can work very well. However, doing this all the time will no doubt end up with mixes that sound pretty wet and although it may sound good on many if not most occasions, it can start to get on your nerves after a while.

An alternative would be to maybe use a combination of both release tails and added verb. This can be done one of two ways, at least that I know of.

One way would be to do as Theo suggested by haveing two instruments set to the same midi channel. One instrument would have the main "on" samples and the other would have the "rel" samples.

However, there is another way to do this without haveing to use two instruments. Simply change the cc11 on the "rel" samples in the Amplifier to cc12. (You can use any cc# you want for this but since I use cc12, that's how I'll reference it from here on. )

To do this you need to first select only the "rel" groups in the Group Editor. Then in the Amplifier under the Modulation menu change the cc11 to cc12. While your there, click on the "output" on the Amplifier and select an output that won't have the added reverb directed to it (you will also have to make sure this output shows up in your host). Also, If there is more than one "rel" group you might want to do this with each group individualy to insure that they are all directed correctly.

Once this is done it is then a matter of balanceing the added verb with the release tails (RTs) in your programing. 

One way to start out might be to turn the RTs off in the PRV (Piano Roll View) by inputing a value of 0 (zero) for cc12. Then bring up the Aux send for the Main "on" samples until you hear just enough verb to suit your taste so that it is not to wet. (Remember, the RTs should be on a different output so that they are not directed through the added verb which means you could also simply mute that output in your host.)

Setting it up this way you can now go into the PRV and adjust the volume on the RTs (cc12) so that they sound okay with the added verb. Actually if your useing a lot of cc11 for the main notes you may end up putting in a different value for each "off note" (RT).

Another very important factor is to keep the overlap of the legato notes as little as possible so that the RTs don't sound too late. According to Bob's Manual the amount they overlap.is not important.



Bob's Manual said:


> Unless you are useing the special 'Key-Up' Rls Mode, the amount of time overlap is not imortant to the script.


Of course this all includes a lot of compromiseing but in order to use release tails there's going to be compromises any way.

I should also add that I haven't used this in a composition yet so, hehe, it's basically all just hypothedical on my part so don't be too hard on me if it doesn't work.


----------



## rJames (Apr 18, 2006)

yes, Tod, that is exactly right. Great idea! A smart way to address the volume of the RTs.

Every note in a legato phrase has reverb (in a real situation).  When a note plays (no matter how short of a time) it continues to bounce around in the room.

When a legato transition is played, that too bounces around the room. So in a slow legato passage, say a half note that moves up a 5th to a nother half note, the 
"connection" reverb is minimal compared to the bottom note or the top notes reverb tail.

Here you could literally leave the RTs at full volume. I've done it. In a slow passage, the RTs can work with the script.

In a fast passage, the RTs of the notes are way too long. they don't even work with the library as designed (and this cc12 idea might help even without the legato script) the note length is now similar to the "connection" length. So, realism is broken when using the RTs. But if you lower the volume of the RT (great idea on the cc12) you are still getting a wet sound. And these notes would still be reverberating in the room.

There is no getting around the fact that in the East-West library, natural release=reverb=RTs.

On a gliss, you will have to use reverb.


----------



## Tod (Apr 18, 2006)

Hi rjames,

Actually there's another way to use cc11 and cc12 with Gold. One thing I've been doing for some time now is setting up 2 sets of groups and assigning them keyswitches.

For instance lets take a simple example useing an instrument that has only 2 groups, the "on" group and a "rel" group. First I assign them with a keyswitch, say C2. I then copy those two groups and paste them back in for the second set of groups and assign them to C#2. Then I change the cc11 in the amplifier to cc12 for the second set of groups (the C#2 groups).

What this does is give complete control of the separate notes and thier coresponding "rel" tails. For instance in a slow passage there are many times where the previous note goes out at a relatively high level while the incomeing or next note needs to come in at a much softer level. If all you have is cc11 then it will cause an abrupt cut off on the "rel" tail. However, if you use cc12 to bring in the next note then there is no problem with cutting off the "rel" on the previous note.

Depending on whether the notes are overlaping or not, It can be a little confuseing and does take a little manipulateing to get the keyswitchs put in properly but once you get on to it, it works great.

Also by cutting and pasteing like this I don't think it adds anything to CPU or memory allocations. :smile:


----------



## sbkp (Apr 18, 2006)

That's flippin' cool! I've always done that with two tracks. Time to play with that trick.

Thanks,
Stefan


----------



## Thonex (Apr 18, 2006)

Nice little trick Tod!!!

Thanks for sharing.

T


----------



## Tod (Apr 18, 2006)

Thanks guys,

Actually there's another little side advantage in useing the keyswitchs with cc11 and cc12.

Every once in a while I run into a situation where I have a line going with an instrument and then suddenly I have another short phrase where I'd like to use the same instrument but still have separate volume control. 

By haveing cc11 & cc12 available I can use cc11 on the main line and cc12 on the short phrase. This saves haveing to load in another instrument just to cover a couple of bars or so. :smile:


----------



## sbkp (Apr 18, 2006)

Very cool.

I wonder if you could do similar things with remapping other controllers (say pitchbend for example). Let's say I have a trombone part and I want one them to slide at different rates (or even different directions).

Inquiring minds...
 
- Stefan


----------



## Tod (Apr 18, 2006)

Humm, I don't think you'd have any problem with the regular cc controllers but pitch wheel is kind of a separate entity in itself. I'm not sure.


----------



## Big Bob (Apr 18, 2006)

Hi rJames,



> Every note in a legato phrase has reverb (in a real situation). When a note plays (no matter how short of a time) it continues to bounce around in the room.



That I agree with. And, I love to be agreeable but ...



> When a legato transition is played, that too bounces around the room. So in a slow legato passage, say a half note that moves up a 5th to a nother half note, the
> "connection" reverb is minimal compared to the bottom note or the top notes reverb tail.



I'm afraid I have to totally disagree with your 2nd statement above. When two notes are connected as they are in a legato phrase, the sound continues between the notes. While it is true that the room echo-train still contains the influence of the old note, the old note didn't just stop as it does when the instrumentalist plays a separate note. Therefore, to fold in a release sample at the end of the first note when it immediately connects to the next note does not represent the true physics of the situation. What you really need in addition to release samples are transition samples.

This whole thing starts to get very messy and it's all because the reverb was recorded with the sample and therefore only represents the reverb picture for the way the sample was played. The same holds true for the release samples. They only contain the correct reverb picture for an ending note situation. Now here we are trying to play notes (the way they *weren't *playing when they were recorded) and we want to somehow 'bend' the recorded reverb to sound like it *would have *, had the instrumentalist played the notes the way we're playing them now.

This problem presents the strongest case for recording samples dry. Don't add the reverb until the source material is made to sound as you want it. Then the reverb will match the performance. I realize that once a library is recorded with reverb, there's no removing it and so you are stuck with having to use inventive, band-aids to trick the ears. But, please recognize what the real problem is. When you record a sample with reverb and other effects such as vibrato, etc, you must also realize that while it may sound very nice when played back as recorded, it's also very inflexible.

For a very simple example to illustrate this, you could buy a quality CD with a nice recording of a beautiful symphony orchestra playing say The William Tell Overture. Now that recording has all skilled performers playing real instruments with real legato passages, real vibrato, etc. Now, take that recording and make it into a recording of 'The Poet and Peasant Overture'. Won't be too easy to do, right? My point here is what we want is not only quality sounds but lots of flexibility. Recording reverb and vibrato are steps toward inflexibility. If we can produce these effects any other way, we should not record them with the samples or at least offer it both ways.

In any case, I'm glad to see such lively discussions as you guys are having and the divergence of opinions expressed are healthy and should be beneficial to us all in the end. I'm also glad you guys are so inventive and I sincerely hope you can find ways around some of these problems. 

God Bless,

Bob


----------



## rJames (Apr 18, 2006)

Big Bob @ Tue Apr 18 said:


> When you record a sample with reverb and other effects such as vibrato, etc, you must also realize that while it may sound very nice when played back as recorded, it's also very inflexible.
> 
> For a very simple example to illustrate this, you could buy a quality CD with a nice recording of a beautiful symphony orchestra playing say The William Tell Overture. Now that recording has all skilled performers playing real instruments with real legato passages, real vibrato, etc. Now, take that recording and make it into a recording of 'The Poet and Peasant Overture'.
> 
> ...



Bob, first of all...everyone...everyone is VERY happy with your scripts.

And we realize that samples that are recorded with the "room" in it are inflexible.

We are in agreement there.

What you seem to be denying is that some people, though you say they should have a different sample set, have this sample set. the alternative to have a set that is recorded more flexibly is about $10,000.

So, we don't have to go over that argument too many more times.

The question for many of us is...what is the best way to make our current investment work with these new tools and still give us this very impressive quality that is easy with the East-West libraries.

And though I am a creative thinker, I'm not sure your analogy of converting the William Tell Overture into another piece is quite valid...I don't know...

Unluckily, you are completely missing my point about the scripts working with the RTs in a slow legato phrase. Yes, of course in a real setting the reverb folows the flow of the instrument...can there be anything more obvious?...

I am talking about compromise. 

I love your script but I'm not going to buy a new library because of it.

I will see if having the body of the samples soaked in (double) reverb works better than other compromises.

All we are discussing here is which compromise we are willing to live with.

The scripts are great, but they don't replace real instruments. Why?

Because we live in a world of compromises.


----------



## Thonex (Apr 19, 2006)

rJames,

Before this script came out, did you use reverb on your EWQLSO mock-ups?

T


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

Yes, Thonex.

I'm not fighting you on the reverb idea. I am just interested in methods to keep as much of the natural sound recorded into my library as possible.

Hence the discussion.

I think Tod's idea of changing cc11 to cc12 on a second set of duplicate samples is a brilliant and elegant idea.

I have already programmed a legato horn leaving the RTs intact. It sounds fine to me (although I have terrible hearing). 

I am discussing the comparative compromise of having double reverb vs having minimal (since most of us do use some reverb to append the EW room sound) reverb in the "connective" section of a legato phrase.

that "connection" is tiny, tiny, tiny, in an everyday use of legato.

that is what I'm thinking and talking about.

Bob is comparing that nuance to morphing a silk purse out of a sows ear.

I'm sorry that I responded to him with a degree of sarcasm.

But it would be more helpful, if he were to refrain from hyperbole.

We are talking about final details.

If the only way to use the script effectively is to lose the RTs then I will do that.

In the meantime, I will play with RT levels.


----------



## Thonex (Apr 19, 2006)

rJames @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> I have already programmed a legato horn leaving the RTs intact. It sounds fine to me (although I have terrible hearing).



It would be great if you could post some results. With and without external reverb perhaps.

Thanks,

T


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

Here is my first try with the script. The Fr horn has the legato script.

I didn't do an example that is dry..but we're interested in how in sounds in a mix anyway.

Mind you, I'm not saying I've used it very well...and my ears are constantly ringing from some injuries many, many moons ago.

So, I will be happy to hear all critiques on leaving the RTs. Cause I know I can't hear that well.

http://digitmusic.net/music/Suspense1b.mp3 (Suspense1b)


----------



## Thonex (Apr 19, 2006)

Hi rJames,

Thanks for posting that. Is there a way to solo the Fr. Horns so we can hear this technique isolated? Like the SIPS solo mp3? 

Thanks,

T


----------



## José Herring (Apr 19, 2006)

rJames @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> Here is my first try with the script. The Fr horn has the legato script.
> 
> I didn't do an example that is dry..but we're interested in how in sounds in a mix anyway.
> 
> ...



It's not bad but the sound quality of the orchestra is a bit out. I'm not clear if you left the RTs in or if you're using artificial verb. If you're using artificial verb then which one?

edit: Sorry I didn't keep up with this thread. So the RT's are left in? hmmm, It sounds to me that the horn sound is a bit muffled and not set back in the hall properly. Are those the close mics and are you eq anything?

I don't hear any bending artifacts from the legato script so that's pretty good especially with the RT's left in.

Best,

Jose


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

josejherring @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> It's not bad but the sound quality of the orchestra is a bit out. I'm not clear if you left the RTs in or if you're using artificial verb. If you're using artificial verb then which one?



Oh, that's great Jose.  "The orchestra is a bit out." Well there goes any need to try to keep the RTs.

That is the Surround mikes from EW. No reverb at all. No stage mics. Except on percussion that is not from Platinum.

I had read your thread (I think you wrote about that) about listening from this place out in the audience and thought I'd give it a try.


----------



## Thonex (Apr 19, 2006)

I'd love to hear the horns isolated if that's possible. 

Cheers,

T


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

Thonex @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> I'd love to hear the horns isolated if that's possible.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> T



Yes, here it is. Same piece, only surround mics (the worst possible situation).

Legato script with Fr Horn (section) preset right out of the box. Did not tweak in any way.

Seems I cut of the last note...http://digitmusic.net/music/FrHornSurround.mp3


----------



## Thonex (Apr 19, 2006)

rJames @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> Thonex @ Wed Apr 19 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love to hear the horns isolated if that's possible.
> ...



Hey rJames,

Thanks for doing this.

ok... let me preface by saying this is just my opinion... and in music.. really there are no rules.

It sounded a little unnatural to me... but we're breaking new ground here. There is a faint long bloom that happens in between phrases... is that part of the CC11 and CC12 trick?

I'm guessing you could get a more (IMO) realistic sound using the F mic position without the Release samples and a touch of hall verb... just enough to smooth things out.

My 2 cents.

Again, thanks or posting this.

T


----------



## José Herring (Apr 19, 2006)

Yes the orchestra is getting a physical modeling type sound. I couldn't isolate it before but it sounds like with the Script going and the RT that the reflections themselves are undergoing processing so you're left with the situation of the horns sounding distant and dull but it's hard for the listener to tell spacial distance because the reflections are out of wack.

Oh and be careful of using only surround mics. You have to realize that mics don't pick up the same info as the human ear can. So even though an audience member may be seated 1/3 of the way back in a hall he'll still hear in more detail than any mic can pick up. So dialing in the stage and the close mics is essential to the clarity of the instrument from a recorded stand point. A listener will hear those details even in the back of a hall sometimes while a mic won't necessarily pick up any detail at all back there. Just my experiece. For what it's worth. 

Best,

Jose


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

Jose, I think you're hearing things based on what you think is happening.

Your point about using surround mics only, may be valid although Doug told me that Thomas J did his original demo with only surround. (I don't know exactly how true that is but I certainly believe Doug)

You seem to want to agree to a problem in the sound.

But I do not have the script on anything but the Fr Horn in that one line.

And the RTs are intact. The only difference is Big Bob's connective tissue, which is instantaneous.

Physical modelling? I think that's just my programming skills coming through.


----------



## rJames (Apr 19, 2006)

Yes, it gets quite subjective...quickly.

The bloom you hear is East West Surround. I have done nothing to the samples. The RT is the same on the inner notes as it is on the outer notes.

I have not tried the cc12 idea.


----------



## José Herring (Apr 19, 2006)

Could be true Ron. I'm learning just as everybody else. So I sometimes come to conclusion about this stuff that may or may not be true.

I'd be curios to find out how instant the script is.

Interesting little tidbit about TJ's demos.


----------



## sbkp (Apr 19, 2006)

josejherring @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> Interesting little tidbit about TJ's demos.



My understanding was that Thomas's "Mars" demo used only the surround mics for the strings. The other sections were blends (or other mics entirely).

- Stefan


----------



## Tod (Apr 19, 2006)

josejherring @ Wed Apr 19 said:


> I'd be curios to find out how instant the script is.



Hi guys,

I'm not sure what you mean here Jose but if you wondering how quickly the script is reacting to the midi notes on/off I can tell you it's very quick. 

I did some testing with a sine wave because I was curious as to how the fade in & out envelopes might look. At most there was a difference of about 6ms. The funny thing is, the fade-out started about 6ms ahead while the fade-in started about 6ms behind. Quick enough to where you could almost call it seamless. :smile:


----------



## José Herring (Apr 19, 2006)

I can deal with seemless legato.

BTW I got my first cue approved using the legato script. Put it on the K2 vsl french oboe patch which played a major solo in the cue. I call it the Black man's way of getting VSL legato instruments. :mrgreen: (okay, before anybody get's offended. Yes my name is Jose. My mother is Puerto Rican and my father is African American.)


----------



## Evan Gamble (Apr 19, 2006)

yeah man it works wonders on the english horn and oboes..

BTW why is it that you are allowed to make fun of your race but not others? makes me sad cause cracker jokes are lame. 

I guess I can make drunken irish, or nazi german jokes

reminds me of that Seinfeld episode where the dentist converted to judaism for the jokes or something. :lol:


----------

