# Action Cue (updated)



## Nino Rajacic (Feb 22, 2010)

Hi everybody,

Here's my most recent piece, sort of action cue, I did in a first place to experiment with mocking up fast runs. Still not there, but I'm pretty pleased how it came up for first attempt. 
[mp3]http://www.3peakaudio.com/player/music/singles/Action%20Cue%20I.mp3[/mp3]

All comments are welcome and appreciated


----------



## Guy Bacos (Feb 22, 2010)

*Re: Action Cue (sort of)*

Nice piece Nino.

I like a lot the overall feel and how you give it energy. The repetition strings, Ta-ta-ta
works very well, as well as a lot of other stuff. What brings it down a few notches is the programming in certain sections, it's a bit inconsistent, one passage is convincing and the next not so much than again convincing and then weaker. Perhaps you may of rushed certain passages? The fast runs, musically and the effect is great, but does not really sound like strings. These kind of runs are still a big challenge with samples. Acoustically speaking I'm not very comfortable with the snare, maybe it sounds too close? 

Your sense of drive and intensity is great, I'd just work more on the programming and I'm sure you could raise the level quite a bit.


----------



## Alex Temple (Feb 22, 2010)

*Re: Action Cue (sort of)*

I like this a lot. It sounds a little dry, but I think the transparency of the mix allows us to hear some of the intricacies in the writing that would be lost in a more boomy reverb. Though there is some room for improvement in the programming I would try to maintain the clarity you currently have.


----------



## Nino Rajacic (Feb 22, 2010)

*Re: Action Cue (sort of)*

Thanks for listening and valuable feedback guys 

Guy,
I know what you are pointing at. I had trouble with up-down passages, especially in high strings, patch I made works pretty well in lower range, but couldn't get it working right in higher registers. At the places where strings don't sound like strings, as you pointed, maybe it's problem with mixing, since doubling ww (see? Remembered that abbreviation  ) are "melted" in string sound, and that gives that annoying synthy sound. Maybe there is a way to avoid that I'm not aware of? 
Snare is close, I agree, good point, it sounded just good for this piece, but it's not realistically placed.


Alex,
thanks for kind words, and for pointing out at reverb setting. The fact is that I'm programming and mixing with dry setup since that gives me good insight in weak points in programming and overall balance of the instruments. The problem shows up at the point where I add reverb since my ears are used to the dry sound I'm feeling that I'm loosing on clarity, and that usually ends up with pretty dry final mix as people here were kindly pointing with my previous pieces posted here as well. I'll experiment bit more on that with this piece, and post here if I come up to something good enough. By the way, I really enjoyed your Fireworks, it's amazing piece and mockup is convincing. It would be valuable to hear how you deal with the reverb. My string section sounds pretty close (dry) as yours, but brass and ww are wery well placed and reverberated in your setup.

EDIT: I've experimented with reverb bit more, and tried to keep clarity. It's same link.


----------



## musicpete (Feb 26, 2010)

Hello Nino!

I must say that I liked the first version much more.... It had a fresh and crisp sound. The second one sounds way more like the usual "wishywashy" muddy reverb that is so popular with mockups (and real orchestral recordings) nowadays. But this is a personal preference: I enjoy actually hearing what the instruments play as opposed to just getting a general "feel" of the music behind the mud curtain. 

I really liked how much you could tweak those weak samples to get that kind of nice fast runs and staccati! Would you mind sharing what libraries you used?

I am also eager to hear what snare drum sample you used in the first version. It had a very nice and airy "last career decade of Goldsmith" timbre to it.

I also liked the composition! It hat a complexity to it that I enjoyed a great deal.


----------



## Nino Rajacic (Feb 26, 2010)

Hi Peter,

thank you for your kind words. I guess that you're right about reverb but it is matter of taste. And I've learned that you can't make everyone here pleased on that matter  


Strings are LASS and all other samples are EWQL Platinum. I wander what did you find weak? 

Drum sample is also 3 snares patch from Platinum. It's the same bounce in both versions, difference is at IR/reverb dry/wet setting in the mix.

Thanks again for listening


----------



## musicpete (Mar 1, 2010)

Hello again!

Now that is interesting! It seems that all those fast figures and runs don't bring out the best in those samples....

I must admit that I did not think you were using THOSE libraries. Gotta practice my hearing. 

I really like that snare sound, though. Have to dig into my QLSO again. Thanks for the inspiration!


----------



## KingIdiot (Mar 1, 2010)

did you quantize the runs or step write this at all?

that tends to be a big problem for taking out the "feel" in runs and exposing them. The next is dynamic accents in the phrasing.
besides the obvious..legato samples..slurs..etc..

I think thats why people toss so much reverb on mockups. to mask the lack of feeling in the playing to get... a "basic" feeling of the music. (that and of course films mixes have that big open sound nowadays)


----------



## Nino Rajacic (Mar 2, 2010)

Thanks for the comments guys.

@musicpete, thanks for the comments. As I said in my first post, I was experimenting with runs, and did not tried just to follow my samples and make utterly realistic mockup. That is why I left runs exposed at few places. So this mockup for sure doesn't shows the best those samples can do. It's best I could do in this moment 

@KingIdiot, score is MIDI import from finale, but I set random quantization on each track. And also in Kontakt, with humanization. Maybe I should make them bit more loose, you have right. 
I agree with you on reverb too. But I preffer rather chrisp, and clear sound than wet muddy one. Since I'm dry mixing my stuff, and adding reverb at the final stage of mixing process.


----------



## KingIdiot (Mar 2, 2010)

random quantizing, and Humanization is no replacement for actually playing stuff in (even at slightly slower tempos), or doing MIDI editing to create feel.

as for mixing, if you're mixing libraries, and you're going for a cohesive sound, you need to do more than just add reverb to a dry mix. Atleast use aux sends and pre-fader mixing to balance proximity, but usually multiple reverb sends/inserts on different libs and sections will help,..even if its complicated.


----------



## Nino Rajacic (Mar 2, 2010)

I've said that I'm adding reverb at the final stage of mixing process. Sending channels and groups to various ER channels comes before that. 

Thanks for the tips anyway.


----------



## samworth4 (Mar 8, 2010)

Reverb this and reverb that.. I think we are just too used to hearing a wet orchestral mix with a soundtrack. 
An example of a dry sound in a soundtrack (very excellent):

http://www.amazon.com/There-Will-Blood-Jonny-Greenwood/dp/B000XA50MK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1268073268&sr=8-1 (http://www.amazon.com/There-Will-Blood- ... 268&amp;sr=8-1)

Anyway I think your piece is good the way it is. If you are going for a more human feel, it could use some cc or velocity changes at parts, but the dynamics and tempo really catch the emotion well. Great work.


----------



## Nino Rajacic (Mar 11, 2010)

Thanks Sam


----------

