# Mahler Symphony No. 6 Mockup



## callen1685 (May 30, 2016)

Hello everyone,

This is a mockup I created about 2 years ago. About 3 months ago I decided to create a video showcasing it. Since posting on youtube I've noticed it getting a lot of traction and random people posting it all over the web. Some slightly positive...

http://goo.gl/8s4GcZ

and some very negative...

http://goo.gl/fuB0Ev

I haven't chimed in on any of them mainly because it wasn't me that posted it.

That said I was hoping to hear your all's thoughts and have a conversation that "I" started. 

This seems like a pretty safe place...  

Thanks,
Curtis


----------



## tack (May 30, 2016)

First post after 4 years! Welcome. 

I really like the presentation format in the video. Clever!


----------



## Reactor.UK (May 30, 2016)

You're the man... Mahler is no easy feat (also choosing my favourite, the 6th Symphony).

The world of classical critique can vastly differ from person to person... Gustavo Dudamel wins a Mahler Conductor competition yet he'll be slated by Tom, Dick and Harry that he has no understanding of Mahler.

With this said, I'll listen to it later today and give my feedback, however, I'll will stay as inpartical as I possibly can.

Once again... a adventurous choice... full credit (and good taste).

Kindest regards.


----------



## synergy543 (May 31, 2016)

That's quite a lot of work. You've approached the "Uncanny Valley" which opens up several rusty cans of worms. And you're quite good with After Effects. Controversy aside, I can hear some places where you might improve the phrasing, ambience, and the overall mix. And some of the repeated notes did not vary enough in dynamics and expression for my taste and made them sound a bit mechanical. These are "nit-picky" comments that would be easy to change and make it more enjoyable to listen too. Its easy for me to criticize, and I have no expertise in such large-scale mockups so I'll just leave that as my opinion. However, the best person who could give you honest criticism is Carles as he's done several of these large-scale mockups so I hope he visits here. His comments on this would be really valuable to hear and I too would like to hear what he has to say.

Can you share with us what you learned (musically) from doing such a mockup? And maybe about your process? Was it all MIDI or did you burn tracks to audio as you went? (that's a large template) How'd you create the tempo map? I noticed it seemed to change tempo for the most part on the bars, and less within a bar? I've tracked orchestral tempos and the often seem to change within a bar to accommodate phrasing and expression. Leon Fleischer explains this best to Yo-Yo Ma in this little gem.



Overall, I found it "technically" quite interesting, although not quite good enough that I'd enjoy listening to it. But like I said, you've approached the Uncanny Valley and this is where it becomes really difficult to make improvements and create more realism. Its the nature of the territory, so all considering, you did a great job.


----------



## waveheavy (May 31, 2016)

Good job mostly. There are some things you could do to make it better, like more variation in the dynamic ranges using CC automation, some EQ in places, and things you can do to create more space between the instruments and sections.

Jake Jackson - See his YouTube video on mixing, the mix tips he does share in it are 'core' ideas for mixing. He uses multiple reverbs (short and long) across all the instruments. He EQ's each instrument listening in solo as needed (I don't use solo much). He sometimes uses a very small delay on some instruments (not enough delay to be apparent), just to separate them more in space. Most string libraries have some harsh frequencies, like around 2kHz which Jake does a small EQ cut there. Violins especially in their high range are harsh in the 2kHz area.


----------



## Hannes_F (May 31, 2016)

Great effort, and well done, really. This is difficult terrain for samples and you have put them through the paces.


----------



## Goran (Jun 1, 2016)

I agree with most of what synergy, waveheavy and Hannes wrote. This is already an advanced and quite skilled mockup (especially for a piece which is, in terms of the difficulties it presents a mockup artist with, light years away from most of standard fare media orchestral music).

To my ears, most headroom for improvement can be found in the performance shaping department (micro- and macrodynamics, intensity variation, agogics etc.) and I think the piece would already sound better even if only these were polished out and you didn't even change anything in the sound department. But then, I am accustomed to listening to music as an evolving totality of _sound relations_, not of sound in and for itself (and am therefore alergic to the uncritical positivist variety of sound fetishism very much in vogue these days), so this point may be controversial.

The "weakest link" is imo the 2nd subject (starting with 3'23''), due to strings being too constant and "flat" in their playing intensity (a kind of "too bland" for the ecstatic swelling character of this theme, marked with ff and _schwungvoll_ by the composer). They sound forte, but sometimes in a very "unorganic" and "unstriving" (for lack of a better way to describe it) way. Strong, full, "striving" sounding strings would make an immense difference on how such a high intensity passage would feel (if you like, you can compare this to examples here (from 4'30'') and here (Grieg from 0'55'')).

...and I am very interested in technical details: which libraries & reverbs did you use?


----------



## Erik (Jun 1, 2016)

The first link in the original post says:

Sample Libraries Used: ORCHESTRAL TOOLS- Berlin String, Berlin Woodwinds, Berlin Woodwinds Exp A and B, The Timpani, Symphonic Sphere and Orchestral String Runs
PROJECT SAM: Orchestral Brass
NATIVE INSTRUMENTS: Komplete 8

Basically very well done this mockup btw!


----------



## Jorgakis (Jun 1, 2016)

Until 3:23 the strings sound perfect, wow. Then it suddenly it gets strange. Maybe a huger string section is needed here. I have a little problem with the WW on the fast passages.
But this mockup is limited to the libraries that are used imo. Some HW Brass or Cinebrass would have helped with realism I think. Overall ofc a great mockup, as much as I can judge. 
I've also done some Mahler mockups but never went this far doing 5 minutes. I understand how much work this must have been.:DD


----------



## callen1685 (Jun 2, 2016)

tack said:


> First post after 4 years! Welcome.
> 
> I really like the presentation format in the video. Clever!


 
Sorry I'm a bit shy (well not as much as back then) and after joining I kind of lost track of this forum and couldn't remember the name for a long time. Then about a year ago I found it again and retrieved the password! I'm going to try and get more involved from now on.

Thanks, the video was one heck of a project in itself! It took a lot of experimenting to figure out how to display MIDI AND score.


----------



## callen1685 (Jun 2, 2016)

Reactor.UK said:


> You're the man... Mahler is no easy feat (also choosing my favourite, the 6th Symphony).
> 
> The world of classical critique can vastly differ from person to person... Gustavo Dudamel wins a Mahler Conductor competition yet he'll be slated by Tom, Dick and Harry that he has no understanding of Mahler.
> 
> ...



So what do you think?

That's awesome it's your favorite (it's obviously my favorite as well). Partially due to the fact it was one of the 1st symphonies I ever saw live. Boston Symphony/Levine/2007. 

Do you have a favorite recording/conductor?

I have my personal opinions about Dudamel's Mahler work. Save that for another day another thread...


----------



## callen1685 (Jun 2, 2016)

synergy543 said:


> That's quite a lot of work. You've approached the "Uncanny Valley" which opens up several rusty cans of worms. And you're quite good with After Effects. Controversy aside, I can hear some places where you might improve the phrasing, ambience, and the overall mix. And some of the repeated notes did not vary enough in dynamics and expression for my taste and made them sound a bit mechanical. These are "nit-picky" comments that would be easy to change and make it more enjoyable to listen too. Its easy for me to criticize, and I have no expertise in such large-scale mockups so I'll just leave that as my opinion. However, the best person who could give you honest criticism is Carles as he's done several of these large-scale mockups so I hope he visits here. His comments on this would be really valuable to hear and I too would like to hear what he has to say.
> 
> Can you share with us what you learned (musically) from doing such a mockup? And maybe about your process? Was it all MIDI or did you burn tracks to audio as you went? (that's a large template) How'd you create the tempo map? I noticed it seemed to change tempo for the most part on the bars, and less within a bar? I've tracked orchestral tempos and the often seem to change within a bar to accommodate phrasing and expression. Leon Fleischer explains this best to Yo-Yo Ma in this little gem.
> 
> ...




Thank you very much for taking the time to critic this. All very valid points and I agree with you. 

The phrasing could definitely use some work I agree but I just wanted to point out that the tempo map changes like crazy on AND between bars. Most drastic obviously being 3:23 on. This was the most difficult part (which I'll explain in more detailed in another comment). It's basically a combination of some of my favorite live recordings/interpretations that I stitched together then tweaked to make it my own. 

Thanks for the Leon Fleischer video link. Hadn't seen it before and it was very informative, enjoyable and funny to watch. It will hopefully stay in my thoughts when constructing/feeling-out phrases and expression in the future.


----------



## callen1685 (Jun 2, 2016)

waveheavy said:


> Good job mostly. There are some things you could do to make it better, like more variation in the dynamic ranges using CC automation, some EQ in places, and things you can do to create more space between the instruments and sections.
> 
> Jake Jackson - See his YouTube video on mixing, the mix tips he does share in it are 'core' ideas for mixing. He uses multiple reverbs (short and long) across all the instruments. He EQ's each instrument listening in solo as needed (I don't use solo much). He sometimes uses a very small delay on some instruments (not enough delay to be apparent), just to separate them more in space. Most string libraries have some harsh frequencies, like around 2kHz which Jake does a small EQ cut there. Violins especially in their high range are harsh in the 2kHz area.



Brilliant, those Jake Jackson tips are really cool. I need to watch this like 10 more times and practice these.


----------



## callen1685 (Jun 2, 2016)

Jorgakis said:


> Until 3:23 the strings sound perfect, wow. Then it suddenly it gets strange. Maybe a huger string section is needed here. I have a little problem with the WW on the fast passages.
> But this mockup is limited to the libraries that are used imo. Some HW Brass or Cinebrass would have helped with realism I think. Overall ofc a great mockup, as much as I can judge.
> I've also done some Mahler mockups but never went this far doing 5 minutes. I understand how much work this must have been.:DD



I almost gave up multiple times because the brass wasn't doing it justice but made do with the resources I had. Which was my main "moto" on this project basically... I'll explain later


----------



## higgs (Jun 2, 2016)

This is really well executed and it sounds great! Personally, I was easily able to forget about the fact that it was made using samples because your expression was really compelling. If you happen to go back to incorporate some of the suggestions....well, I'd be excited to hear you make it even better than it already is!


----------



## bbunker (Jun 2, 2016)

It's kind of a tough one to comment on, because what you did shows a lot of craft, and time, and determination, and lots of very good things. But it's not very enjoyable to listen to, I have to confess. The problem isn't in the musicality of the individual lines, it isn't in the samples (or at least I don't think your performance suffered from them here), and it isn't in the overall mix, or anything technical. It's in what would be the 'conductor' musicianship - in the balance that the group gets at any given time, and in bringing out the parts that matter, and balancing the musical phrase.

In the first phrase, in measures 4 and 5, there's more power in the descending voices because of numbers - upper div. Cellos, Violas, 2nd Fiddles, 2 Clarinets, 2 Oboes, the Bass Clarinet and Two Bassoons are all playing the descending part (in thirds/sixths, of course, but that only reinforces the line in terms of volume), but don't you think that the outnumbered ascending 1st Violins, and First Chair Oboe and Clarinet are meant to be the dominant voice? I'd definitely say so myself - as a continuation of the 'sentence form' that the first two 'dum-da-dum's' start, it needs to finish the phrase by starting with the same material. And without the upper voices 'winning' the fight, you don't hear that connection, and the passage doesn't make musical sense. It doesn't last long, it's just a short two measures, but when I listen to your version I immediately want to stand on a podium and gesture at those lower voices to get the heck out of the way.

It keeps happening...the trombone two measures before 2 takes all the attention away from the strings - is it really more important than what they're playing? I know that the first measure of 2 is marked fortissimo and then it's just the oboes playing, but those four oboes can make a racket! The relative balance between the 'plod plod plods' and the oboe line feels like the oboes are just along for the ride - and they're the MOST important voice at the time!

I guess what I'm trying to say is that your rendering is technically pretty brilliant - and you get a great sound from the group that you're using. I can't necessarily think of ANY version of this piece using samples that's better. I know for sure I couldn't get anywhere near what you've done with samples. But I just run into a very hard problem of trying to apologize for things that just don't fit together quite right because of the technical mastery in making it work at all.

You've clearly got a knack for working with the material, the tools, and the sounds - have you considered digging into automation of levels to get the performance to sound like what you as a conductor would want, rather than you as a sample programmer??


----------

