# Virtual Instruments...Life beyond the Mockup



## 98bpm (Sep 11, 2017)

Hello out there. I recently decided to join after discovering this forum while searching Google for reviews of virtual instruments a while back. There's a lot of knowledge and experience here that I know I don't have. So, respectfully, I want to get perspectives from the community and hopefully, not come off as completely clueless.

I am not a composer, though I have dabbled in music for many years and have began making the switch from hardware MIDI instruments over to virtual instruments. I was always fascinated by how MIDI gear evolved through the years to become more "life-like" and how so many sounds were becoming available in synths that mimic acoustic instruments. That envelope was always being pushed further, and now with virtual instruments, the sounds are so incredibly realistic, the limits are fading more and more. I've heard orchestral library product demos that I STILL can't believe weren't live musicians!

But it seems like a catch-22 in a sense. Developers create elaborate sample libraries that music makers use in order to simulate acoustic instruments. Music makers buy and spend time learning how to use these products to create music that sounds like the real thing. Producers and directors accept the musical work done with the virtual instruments and then have it recorded with live musicians.

With the learning curves of complicated products, technical difficulties, hefty expense (I recently saw one library for over $12K), how do you feel about placing all of that time, energy and money into virtual instruments that don't make it to print in the end? Why would developers go so far to create their products to sound so real if in the end, the decision makers don't really want the virtual instruments in their production? They want live musicians. Seems like a lot of effort to capture the sound and feel of real instruments and acoustic spaces that is ultimately only serving as a means to convey an idea. 

Please pardon me if this sounds pessimistic. I'm learning some of the VIs I've purchased and after reading interviews of professional composers, it "seems" like a lost cause to go through all this (from the developer's standpoint as well as the composer's) if live musicians will finish the job. What are your thoughts?


----------



## kurtvanzo (Sep 11, 2017)

There are places where live musicians are always going to be a better way to go- a beautiful solo or a difficult peice that needs to show dexterity yet be soulful. You can only sample so much. But there are also many sounds and elements that either work better with samples or synths (some abstract sounds come to mind) or would just be too expensive to record for one cue (an 80 piece string section) where samples can get you the tone or sound you need, that kind of stuff is rarely replaced. 

Even more traditional pieces are done with samples on most lower budget projects, and many times not replaced for budget or time constraint reasons. Then again, redoing a cue with an orchestra can be faster than endlessly tweaking midi to get a slightly better than average performance. In any case, it will most likely always be a mix of samples and live, and the days of the score being purely live orchestra (except for the rare exception) may be behind us. Yet live players add something special (especially solos and featured parts) that will always be difficult to manufacture.


----------



## 98bpm (Sep 12, 2017)

Thank you for the reply. In my mind at least, it seemed that the development of sample libraries years ago, was for the purpose of putting instruments in the hands of music creators that they otherwise would not have access to. When I first started learning about sample libraries in the mid 90s, the impression I got was that these were being marketed to be used "instead of" the real thing as an option/solution for composers. 

For lower budget projects, I can see your point and it makes good sense to keep the mockup. I felt a little discouraged reading interviews of composers of big budget projects that usually replace their mock ups with live orchestra. To me, it seemed like the virtual instruments became more of an elaborate sketch pad than an instrument worthy of using in a production. But that's just me and since I'm not a composer, I'm sure I've oversimplified it. 

I also agree that some things are hard to manufacture in the virtual world. For example, solo instruments like the saxophone have come a long way from the Melotron to Sample Modeling, but there's still a long way to go.


----------



## Saxer (Sep 12, 2017)

For me as a composer and arranger it is just the fun to play with good sounds. Much more fun than just writing notes on paper or work with bad samples or synth sounds because a good sound gives immediate emotional feedback. It's a big playground. And when it's recorded with real musicians it even rises the quality level. Nothing to complain about that.


----------



## 98bpm (Sep 12, 2017)

Me, not having a formal education in music (but with music always in my head), I've gravitated to virtual instruments to help me create. True, real musicians raise the bar. I guess, I may take a personal liking to the mockup, especially if I put a lot of effort into it. Perhaps to a fault.


----------



## j_kranz (Sep 12, 2017)

I would honestly say in today's climate more virtually produced cues make it 'to print' than those that are live recorded... The industry has many levels of budget, and I'd say a healthy portion of TV/Video Game/Advertisements these days do not have the budget for live orchestra. So in that sense, yes these tools are invaluable to most of us composers.


----------



## lastmessiah (Sep 12, 2017)

98bpm said:


> But it seems like a catch-22 in a sense. Developers create elaborate sample libraries that music makers use in order to simulate acoustic instruments. Music makers buy and spend time learning how to use these products to create music that sounds like the real thing. Producers and directors accept the musical work done with the virtual instruments and *then have it recorded with live musicians*.



I'm not sure this is true anymore in most cases... 

If you are a big-name composer on a big-budget project then you will probably have live musicians, but I was under the impression that a lot of finished and mastered media scores are sampled these days.


----------



## 98bpm (Sep 12, 2017)

lastmessiah said:


> I'm not sure this is true anymore in most cases...
> 
> If you are a big-name composer on a big-budget project then you will probably have live musicians, but I was under the impression that a lot of finished and mastered media scores are sampled these days.


You may be right and honestly, I hope you are. LOL. It does makes sense that big budget production would expect live musicians for the final recording. I'm a realist and I can confidently say the odds of me getting a big Hollywood gig is about as likely as me finding a 5 pound diamond while planting flowers on my front lawn. So using VIs is probably the closest I may ever get to the real thing but, who knows. Could it be that when the big name composers use midi mock ups, they do it for the sake of the producers and directors so they can get them to see their vision as best as a VI can convey? Perhaps they do consider them as scratch pads since they know they'll finish with live musicians and massage the performances out of them. Clearly, I have a lot to learn and I appreciate all the feedback.


----------



## lastmessiah (Sep 12, 2017)

98bpm said:


> You may be right and honestly, I hope you are. LOL. It does makes sense that big budget production would expect live musicians for the final recording. I'm a realist and I can confidently say the odds of me getting a big Hollywood gig is about as likely as me finding a 5 pound diamond while planting flowers on my front lawn. So using VIs is probably the closest I may ever get to the real thing but, who knows. Could it be that when the big name composers use midi mock ups, they do it for the sake of the producers and directors so they can get them to see their vision as best as a VI can convey? Perhaps they do consider them as scratch pads since they know they'll finish with live musicians and massage the performances out of them. Clearly, I have a lot to learn and I appreciate all the feedback.



I regard samples as essentially instruments in their own right. Sometimes a processed artificial sound is exactly what I'm after, sometimes I don't need human expression, sometimes I just need to modulate the sound source slightly beyond what a human player could do, etc. So while they might be considered mere scratch pads by some composers, for others they are the end in itself. YMMV


----------

