# Sanity check please - LASS Lite vs Symphobia vs My Talent



## noiseboyuk (Oct 21, 2010)

So I did a short little theme to try out my new orchestral template – just a simple phrase really. Thought it sounded pretty darn good. Sent it to a non-musician TV-sound-mixer friend who had decent ears for his thoughts. His two comments - he loved the choir sound (1 whole velocity layer of the Kontakt Core library! Though I agree I do like the tone, but I really need more dymanics in there). But he didn't like the unrealistic strings in the phrase at around 50s... in fact he said the “synthy string pad”. There was me proud of my shiny new LASS Lite legato samples, all arranged in 1st, 2nd voilins, violas and cellos... “SYNTHY STRING PAD?!” I thought to myself...

He wanted to hear a version with more reverb, but that didn't help for him. As an experiment, I cut and pasted the whole section onto three Symphobia 1.2 patches - 1st violins onto dyn attack, the final note onto basic sus, and everything else onto regular dyn, then redid the dymanics. This didn't help either.

At this point, it's kinda hard to avoid any other conclusion other than I've gone wrong with the writing / arranging. I've listened back and forth obsessively, and I can't hear anything wrong – it sounds GOOD to me, which is worrying as all I have to go on are my ears, and they've done me pretty well until now. I have zip knowledge of music theory to fall back on. To me it sounds like a string section, to my friend it sounds like a guy playing unconvincing samples on a keyboard. I keep thinking... why THIS bit? What can't I hear?!!!

So I've put a little zip file together. To avoid hundreds of versions, I've just put in the version with LASS that has quite a bit of reverb – a shade much perhaps – and the version using Symphobia's stage mics. The controversial section is 52s in. I've also put clean string mixes of this section only. FWIW I do prefer LASS, it sounds more real to me, but Symphobia ain't too shabby.

I need some input here... is it bad? If so, where am I going wrong? I'm interested in all comments - the mix, the samples, the composition but most of all the arrangement. I've got 1st and 2nd volins (the 2nds double an octave higher half way through), violas and cellos.

http://www.box.net/shared/xq7b59jqva

EDIT - as a result of feedback below, there is another version which combines libraries here - http://www.box.net/shared/22dm9avirs

PS – further paranoia check – I haven't unintentionally ripped of this tune from anywhere, have I?


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Oct 21, 2010)

Man, I dunno. I _really_ don't hear "synthy string pad." I wonder if perhaps he was reacting to the choir or brass during that passage? Those attacks do sound somewhat synthy and pad-like to my ears, and perhaps that colors his perception of the strings. There are also some significant inconsistencies in timing between sections, especially around 1:10, and that hurts the authenticity to some degree. For what it's worth, though, I think the quality of the LASS stuff in there is really good.

As far as unintentionally ripping something off, it definitely has a Harry Gregson-Williams/Hans Zimmer kind of vibe, but as far as I can tell the tune is an original.


----------



## Justus (Oct 21, 2010)

Short answer for now:

What makes the Strings sound synthy is the missing "air".
Give them more High End. People want to hear the bowing sound of the strings.


----------



## David Story (Oct 21, 2010)

Nice theme.

You're sane, but non-musicians notes can be puzzling. "What did they mean?"

I agree, the strings sound pretty good. It's probably the brass/choir that are the "synthy string pad".
Personally, I feel the symphobia version is more emotional.

More air is good, and speaking of bowing, the legato transitions could be a *little* louder. These are details.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 21, 2010)

Thanks guys, really appreciate those suggestions, will look at both of those areas for starters.


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Oct 21, 2010)

David Story @ Thu Oct 21 said:


> Nice theme.



I should have mentioned that as well. 

It's very nice indeed, and has been stuck in my head since listening to it.


----------



## wolf (Oct 21, 2010)

Guy,

I like the theme and how the piece builds. 

One impression I had is that the timing sounds mechanical - maybe try not quantizing and playing with the tempo curve a bit. 

Interesting to compare the LASS and Symphobia strings. The lines + dynamics sound better to me with LASS, the sound is better with Sy (maybe too bright even). I agree with Justus: brighten LASS up; reduce mids around 500Hz?

For me, the choir is actually a weak element - maybe because I know how nice Voxos or Requiem demos can sound.


----------



## RiffWraith (Oct 21, 2010)

First off, nice writing. Like the melody. It kinda reminds me of something, but I cant place it. If it comes to me, I will let you know.

I don't hear "synthy string pad", but it's not the most realistic of mockups.

Out of curiousity, how does this sound to you, and for that matter, everyone else?

http://www.jeffreyhayat.com/noiseboyukstr.mp3

Cheers.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 21, 2010)

Thanks Riff - it's interesting. It's a really nice verb (what is it?), but I'm concerned it might sound a bit much in the mix (I can try it out tomorrow, actually). It might be what my friend is after though, I'll play it to him later today. EQ wise sounds really nice - what did you go for? A/Bing them, I think I'd go for your EQ definitely and perhaps 40% less verb. Makes me think I should try some different tails.

If there's anything else you can ID, Riff, realism-wise regarding the whole cue, grateful for the input. This it turning into a really useful exercise for me.


----------



## Revson (Oct 22, 2010)

Hmmm. I'd rethink the "decent ears" estimate you have of your mixer friend. At least his ear for strings. We all know synthy and this ain't it. It does, indeed, sound good.


----------



## wolf (Oct 22, 2010)

I uploaded an EQed version of the LASS strings to my soundcloud page.

http://soundcloud.com/wolf-wein/noisebo ... naked-eqed

I'll erase it as soon as you tell me to (and after a few days the most). I attached a screenshot of the EQ I applied. The Exciter adds just a little bit of shine to it. This hopefully partly answers your question about air - it's the high frequencies around and above 5kHz; and to me that's often combined with a lack of boxiness (which is too much happening around 400-500Hz). I'm guessing that the reverb you are using adds to the boxiness - what was it?

@Jeffrey: nice rendition. I like how you ride the controllers to add dynamics (if that's indeed how you did it). What library are you using here? HS? CS?


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 22, 2010)

Nice piece Guy, but I can understand why your engineer thinks it sounds a little synthy. It's basically lacking in 'expression', part of which is due IMHO to the lack of vibrato and part due to a lack of dynamics. Be more aggressive with your bowing strength curves. I also think the inner writing can be improved upon. I can hear some lovely flowing cello lines in my head that I think would really help.

Not much to do to make it sound very nice! Hope this helps.

~C


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 22, 2010)

Forgot to say, regarding your worry that it sounds like something else, the first four notes/harmony are the same as the verse from Justin Timberlake's "Cry Me a River". However, different timing/context so nothing to worry about! 

~C


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 22, 2010)

My take on why I think it sounds synthy.

Personally, I do not like the sound of the strings them selves. Not that your writing is bad, I think the strings actually sound like a synth to me. The other thing that's already mentioned is the lack of expression. As you would know, the expression playes a massive part on making them sound good. Heck, you can even make a synth string sound, sound good with expression.

I've heard HS sound synthy before, even though I dig the sound completely, but it was the composers lack of expression that made it off putting.

Nice track.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 22, 2010)

Thanks again everyone, love this place! Really appreciate the time people are putting in here, very kind of you all.

Wolf - I think that audio has been soundclouded, it sounds very strange on my system! [tangent... so many people seem to have problems with the quality on soundcloud, not sure why it keeps getting used?] However, the EQ looks pretty much like what others have suggested (and thanks for taking the trouble to do those jpgs), so I'll definitely be trying that as a starting point.

I guess the jury is split on "does it sound synthy". It looks like some people think it doesn't sound synthy at all (which is a relief as I didn't think it did), but others do. I had a chat today with my friend, and played him Jeffrey's version - he said it was better but still sounded synthy. On further probing, he thought it might be the ends of notes that are too clean, with a real section it would be more blurred. Could be a fair point - and only full LASS would help there, of course. It's an interesting thought that perhaps the releases of samples have been rather overlooked in terms of library development - perhaps release triggers could be round-robined and / or be quite loose for timing (the latter I know might cause more problems than it solves though).

As it is, I'm going to try the following:

EQ to cut 500 and boost 5k upwards(ish)
Work on a tempo map
Redo the controllers (to be clear, there's quite a bit of dynamics already, but I take the point that I should try and be bolder with this)
Try a new, longer non-dark tail.

Chris - I think you're the only one that's suggested a new arrangement. Obviously I can't hear what's in your head! It might be impossible to deconstruct what I've done and explain why it doesn't quite work for you, but if you can give me any clues I'd be grateful. The cello line I have now I do rather like, it was a clear line in my head when I played the main melody. But things can always be better, and I guess that's what this exercise is all about. 

I'll also see what I can do with the choir - hopefully will have a new version up on Saturday or Sunday.

EDIT - forgot Ian's comments on timing, will also check that.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 23, 2010)

OK, so here's the results:

http://www.box.net/shared/22dm9avirs

Here's the list of fixes, as far as I can remember:

EQ'd LASS (about 1.5db out around 600, wide Q), 1.5db boost around 6k upwards)
Fixed small timing issues on all string parts
Redid all controllers making the dynamic range bigger
Changed tail reverb for longer (experimented with several, ended up using a truestereo hall from SIR2)
Added a layer of Symphobia (1st violins, violas, cellos - found that the soft dyn patch added a bit of sheen but didn't swamp)
Minor changes to cello and viola parts
Fixed minor hmmmm choir overlapping notes issues (didn't have much more success with this patch though)
Globally made small tempo adjustments throughout
Fixed other timing issues throughout, esp brass and piano

The results... well, I think it sounds a little better but nothing revolutionary... I still doubt it will convince my friend! After doing all that, I kind of expected a bigger change. The EQ I'm actually in 2 minds about... the flat eq does have this sort of older romantic tone to it I like, but I get that this EQ is a little cleaner and makes it sizz. Tempo mapping is an art in itself, and I don't think I have it yet... feels quite artificial doing it with drawing tools on a DAW, conceptually it might be nice to draw this in using a controller somehow. I ended up with only very small adjustments... if I "heard" it, I didn't like it. Speaking of controllers, I went round the houses with the dynamics - it's certainly bigger, but will welcome comments if I have the phrasing right (I definitely overdid one discarded version). The biggest change, perhaps, was the Symphobia layering. I originally used the sus dyn patch, it sounds huge and glorious paired with LASS but I think it tended to swamp and felt I lost the reality with it. LASS seems to respond to dynamics more realistically too, to my ears. Ended up figuring less is more (or, haha, wait for it... LASS is more!!! see what I did there?)

I suspect I'm not far off as far as I can go with it. Maybe a totally new set of IRs, or a new library completely (or full LASS).

Anyway, if I can try anyone's patience just a little further to listen and comment I'd be grateful once more - cheers all.


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 23, 2010)

Much better noise. Expression wise is way better and emotive. I don't think I'm the right person to comment on reverb since I'm not as knowledgeable as many others. I will comment that from my ears, the instrument placement sounds fine. The only thing that bothered me was the trumpet, maybe too dry... not sure.

Nice update.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 23, 2010)

Cheers Dan, much appreciated! I'm now going through the old Heard-It-So-Many-Times-Can't-Tell-What's-Good-Any-More thing, so really grateful for your perspective. Will send it to my mate!


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 23, 2010)

That's a big improvement Guy, but from around 59", I feel you should try to add a counter melody with cellos, and when the statement repeats, I think it's crying out for violins an octave above to really make it more emotional, as well as some more work on inner harmony which feels a little lacking to my ears.

Hey, we all hear things differently, and my comments are the result of what I would expect to hear in a typical 'Hollywood' score, so if you don't want that sound, feel free to ignore me!

Cheers,

~Chris


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 23, 2010)

Hi Chris - the octaves above line at 59s is exactly what I have on 2nd violins! I just checked the mix and it doesn't cut through in this version for some reason though (it does in the earlier ones) so I'll have a look later to see what happened. I think I might need to double that line on symphobia and didn't... yeah, that would explain it. I do have a cello counter melody there too... perhaps something bigger / busier?


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 23, 2010)

Yes, a 'busier' cello line would help, I feel. Also, much as I love Symphobia, I never use it for high violin parts. It's not expressive enough. If LASS doesn't do it for you, and if you have QLSO, try the "Violins Lyr B" patch, which was my old favourite for many years. I only just stopped using, purely because Hollywood Strings has taken over most of my string needs.

~C


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 23, 2010)

Chris.

I'm not trying to have a go at you in any way possible. No offense or anything, but you cannot tell someone that in bar 59 the violins and cellli or whatever should play a melody of some sort. I say this because maybe that's what you would do in your preferences of notation, but maybe Noise wanted and heard something different which he liked. It's kind of like listening to one of Hans Zimmer's pieces and trying to find a way to email him saying the Celli should of played a certain note at a certain time.

I hope you see what I mean. If a jumped to conclusions though...... I apologise.

I respect and know that you are helping out trying to make Noises song better, but I hope you know what I'm getting at.


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 23, 2010)

Dan,

This is why I previously said:

"Hey, we all hear things differently, and my comments are the result of what I would expect to hear in a typical 'Hollywood' score, so if you don't want that sound, feel free to ignore me!"

Maybe you missed that bit. The other thing, that I have also been guilty of myself for many years, is thinking that if I just had better sounds, my orchestral music would sound more real. That is partly true of course, but unless the arrangement is right, even HS will sound fake, as you well know and you mentioned this earlier.

You paid me a very nice compliment for my recent HS demo, and I believe much of what makes that piece sound real and effective are the inner counter melodies with expressive dynamics, and of course the lovely HS sound. If I didn't have those inner movements, I'm sure you and others would not have responded so favourably.

~Chris


----------



## Ed (Oct 23, 2010)

Quick opinion for whats its worth, I think it lacks dynamics. It swells to a crescendo but I dont feel it because the dynamics dont seem to change much. But I dont know what the picture you're writing to looks like, unless you arent writing to picture and then it _should _be different imo. To me that's what makes it seem "synthier" than your sounds. Are you using any compression? To me its hard to "fix" stuff in this way after Ive already done it, though.

EDIT

I just listened to the strings only files and LASS sounds much better than Symphobia here and I thought Symphobia sounded quite synthy. I would try and use Synphobia more effectively by doubling lower notes and again there is not enough dynamics here. If you use Symophoba like a big pad it can sound synthy quite quickly. I dont know if you did this, but I usually have several Symphobia strings patches open and if I have atop line that will be on its own channel so it can have its own dynamics vs the basses for example. Oh and remember the VEL sustained patch not the modwheel patch sounds better than the mod crossfade one in the soft register.


----------



## lux (Oct 23, 2010)

Dan-Jay @ Sat Oct 23 said:


> Chris.
> 
> I'm not trying to have a go at you in any way possible. No offense or anything, but you cannot tell someone that in bar 59 the violins and cellli or whatever should play a melody of some sort. I say this because maybe that's what you would do in your preferences of notation, but maybe Noise wanted and heard something different which he liked. It's kind of like listening to one of Hans Zimmer's pieces and trying to find a way to email him saying the Celli should of played a certain note at a certain time.
> 
> ...



Dan,

musicians on this and other boards have exchanged comments like the one Chris made from the early times. Thats one of the reason some of us improved a bit in our techniques and strenghts. We give and take. 

This is the first time i read something like "you cant tell him what to play there". He's not telling him what to play there, he's just suggesting, from the experience, that maybe he could consider adding something on that part.

An orchestration is a pretty complex machine. Its not just a matter of "hey, i play mu fuckin melodies wherever i want and nobody should tell a word about it", which more or less seems your position.

The amount of artistic indipendence and personality of a composer doesnt express in refusing to blend ideas or considering how other guys/girls would do a certain thing. Guy is probably perfectly able to evaluate a suggestion from a nice writer as Chris is and decide himself about this and other possibilities. We all do that stuff every day, in chats and in person when we have the chance to meet eachother. 

Putting yourself in a ghetto where nobody can even think about telling something otherwise your creativity gets offended doesnt look like a big deal imo.

Luca


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 23, 2010)

Ok. I see.

My attitude is certaintly not "I'll put my melodies wherever I want" and so forth, but it's the composers preference and taste. If someone has a different taste and want's another melody than the one already there, then they simply should just accept that they don't like that part of the song, rather than suggestion something that they'd prefer in someone eles's track.

Sorry, but I'm really strong opinionative about this topic because it does drive me a little crazy. Yes you can suggest, but just because one suggests something to make it better doesn't exactly mean it will be better in the end result. It's personal taste in music and the whole song it's self. Someone is going to like it, someone will dislike it and someone will hate it. There's been a heap of professionally composed tracks I've wanted to change, but I just accept the fact that they have different ears

I'm all for people telling me straight if they like one of my songs or not, but as a song, not some part that they would change some notation in to their liking because obviously their taste did not like the certain melody in that exact part. 

If it's something like "there's too much reverb, or "the trumpet is too loud and it burries everything else" is actually to me alot more of a valid comment to ones composition than composing for them. 

I like noises song, and IMO I wouldn't change anything other than a few mixing issues. It was my personal taste that I like what he did with the instrumentation.

Peace.


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 23, 2010)

Dan,

Guy came here asking for help on how to make a specific section sound less 'synthy' and I gave him my humble advice. I did NOT suggest he changes the melody. I merely made suggestions that I feel will enhance the melody. This is what good orchestrators do for composers that don't have the experience to do it themselves. I have been helped on numerous occasions in the past by orchestrators that have taken my themes and made them sound much better, purely by good orchestration and counter melodies. They did not re-write my melodies though!

As my orchestration/writing has improved, I rarely require the help of an orchestrator these days, but it does still happen. Unless you have the skills of someone like TJ, you may need help with the arrangement and orchestration to get things sounding both real and effective.

~C


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 23, 2010)

Dan-Jay @ Sat Oct 23 said:


> Ok. I see.
> 
> My attitude is certaintly not "I'll put my melodies wherever I want" and so forth, but it's the composers preference and taste. If someone has a different taste and want's another melody than the one already there, then they simply should just accept that they don't like that part of the song, rather than suggestion something that they'd prefer in someone eles's track.
> 
> ...



Dan-Jay if one posts something here then one has to accept that criticisms and suggestions related to any aspect of it is fair game. That is 
the price of admission.

Which is why I don't post anything here :lol:


----------



## lux (Oct 23, 2010)

Dan, I can understand that you dont want to receive any comment different than "there's too much reverb", its up to you and mostly your business.

What i dont understand is that you transpose your personal attitude to someone else's case.


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 23, 2010)

Guys.

I understand where you're coming from, but Lux inparticular..... you're going overboard to what I'm saying.
ò05   ìµÀ05   ìµÁ05   ìµÂ05   ìµÃ05   ìµÄ05   ìµÅ05   ìµÆ05   ìµÇ05   ìµÈ05   ìµÉ05   ìµÊ05   ìµË05   ìµÌ06   ìµÍ06   ìµÎ06   ìµÏ06   ìµÐ06   ìµÑ06   ìµÒ06   ìµÓ06   ìµÔ06   ìµÕ06   ìµÖ06   ìµ×06   ìµØ06   ìµÙ06   ìµÚ06   ìµÛ06   ìµÜ06   ìµÝ06   ìµÞ07   ìµß07   ìµà07   ìµá07   ìµâ07   ìµã07   ìµä07   ìµå07   ìµæ07   ìµç07   ìµè07   ìµé07   ìµê07   ìµë07   ìµì07   ìµí07   ìµî07   ìµï07   ìµð07   ìµñ07   ìµò07   ìµó07   ìµô07   ìµõ07   ìµö07   ìµ÷07   ìµø07   ìµù07   ìµú07   ìµû07   ìµü07   ìµý07   ìµþ07   ìµÿ07   ì¶ 07   ì¶07   ì¶07   ì¶07   ì¶07   ì¶07   ì¶08   ì¶	08   ì¶
08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶ 08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶08   ì¶ 08   ì¶!08   ì¶"08   ì¶#08   ì¶$08   ì¶%08   ì¶&08   ì¶'08   ì¶(08   ì¶)08   ì¶*08   ì¶+08   ì¶,08   ì¶-08   ì¶.08   ì¶/08   ì¶008   ì¶1              ò08   ì¶308   ì¶408   ì¶508   ì¶608   ì¶708   ì¶808   ì¶908   ì¶:08   ì¶;08   ì¶<08   ì¶=08   ì¶>08   ì¶?08   ì¶@08   ì¶A08   ì¶B08   ì¶C08   ì¶D08   ì¶E08   ì¶F08   ì¶G08   ì¶H08   ì¶I08   ì¶J08   ì¶K08   ì¶L08   ì¶M08   ì¶N08   ì¶O08   ì¶P08   ì¶Q08   ì¶R08   ì¶S08   ì¶T08   ì¶U08   ì¶V08   ì¶W08   ì¶X08   ì¶Y08   ì¶Z08   ì¶[08   ì¶\08   ì¶]08   ì¶^08   ì¶_08   ì¶`08   ì¶a08   ì¶b08   ì¶c08   ì¶d08   ì¶e08   ì¶f08   ì¶g08   ì¶h08   ì¶i08   ì¶j08   ì¶k08   ì¶l08   ì¶m08   ì¶n08   ì¶o08   ì¶p08   ì¶q08   ì¶r08   ì¶s08   ì¶t08   ì¶u08   ì¶v08   ì¶w08   ì¶x08   ì¶y08   ì¶z08   ì¶{08   ì¶|08   ì¶}08   ì¶~08   ì¶08   ì¶€08   ì¶08   ì¶‚08   ì¶ƒ08   ì¶„08   ì¶…08   ì¶†08   ì¶‡08   ì¶ˆ08   ì¶‰08   ì


----------



## Ed (Oct 23, 2010)

[quote="Dan-Jay @ Sat Oct 23, 2010 9:51 am"
TJ for example. He makes good songs, I don't care about the arrangement. It doesn't matter how he arranged it. Someone could not like his songs either because they don't like the song it's self, not the arrangement and how he's arranged his instruments. Get me? [/quote]

Hmm dunno about that.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 23, 2010)

Whoa! Look what happened to the thread while I was away!!!

OK, first of all I did literally ask for this! Check out the OP. I was bothered that someone thought the string section sounded synthy whereas it didn't to me, so I needed help in isolating what I couldn't hear. Could have been reverb, samples, arrangement, anything. Indeed, I was really beginning to think it was arrangement. I have no formal classical training at all, just a half-decent pair of ears and poor keyboard skills... I have no clue how to musically deconstruct what I do myself. All I can do is do what sounds right to me. And the final part of the equation is that I'm setting up a new template which will be used in anger and at great TV-budget-defying speed when I've sorted it, so now seemed like a perfect time to grapple with everything. And indeed it has proved to be!

So I'm genuinley grateful for everyone's input. Chris' music is stunning, so I'm delighted to get some constructive criticism from him. I'm not sure about this cello part, I rather like my line, but the point of this exercise is to challenge my own perception a little. I can't yet “hear” what Chris is suggesting but I'll definitely play around. I might make something work or not.. and if not, well I don't dislike what I did (and clearly it works for other people too). But I have to keep reminding myself... this could be a factor in what makes SOME people think this doesn't sound too real. Chris is right... the arrangement is a huge part of what can make it sound real or not, so maybe I have to try to think outside my own box a little more. Easier said than done of course!

And I totally value your comments too Dan, really helped steer me in the right direction (and it's terribly reassuring to hear that other talented composers like my own arrangement – I have an over-inflated inferiority complex which wrestles with sporadic, fragile self-belief egged on by constant amazement I'm getting away with it at all). And I get the sensitivity of this issue, and why you said what you did. In this case though, it's definitely ok by me!

Ed – did you listen to the most recent version? This seems to have addressed some of the dynamic issues for some people (should add that yet another version will be forthcoming very soon to sort out the top octave that got unintentionally buried, but I'd more than understand if everyone's had more than enough by then). In answer to your questions - no this one isn't to picture, it's just a random melody that came into my head and I realised I'd never done a piece with a hmmmming choir! And it would make a good test case for my template. No compression used on strings. And on the v5 version I posted I doubled with soft dyn Symphobia, but not the highest notes so that kinda fits. Your points are pertinent though, cos when it comes to it I won't have much time on the projects I do to finesse to any great extent. I'm trying to get a template and workflow that can get as good results as possible as quickly as possible. (A huge part of this, btw, is this concept I have of only mixing by playing instruments quieter or louder, hardly ever touching the faders... in theory this should be pretty realisitic, but one can easily see how it can be limiting. A thread of it's own, right there).

And finally - my friend says it's the best version yet but yeah it still sounds synthy. Now he thinks the swells sound the same on each note... which is odd cos they really don't and they're not. That said, I'm not 100% convinced I got the dynamics as good as they could be... if I could play a stringed instrument I'd probably be better at this... 

Thanks and peace to all!


----------



## Ian Dorsch (Oct 23, 2010)

Guy, I think the new version is a big improvement.


----------



## David Story (Oct 23, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Sat Oct 23 said:


> ... if I could play a stringed instrument I'd probably be better at this...
> 
> Thanks and peace to all!



This about *keyboard* playing. Playing a stringed instrument is more confusing than helpful in creating a sample mockup, imo. I have to relearn how to play, and what is effective.

LASS often sounds better at low velocities and cc1 values, below 80.

V5 is sounding good, could work in a lot of tv settings, I feel. Great strides!


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 24, 2010)

Good mò0Ð   ìÓK0Ð   ìÓL0Ð   ìÓM0Ð   ìÓN0Ð   ìÓO0Ð   ìÓP0Ð   ìÓQ0Ð   ìÓR0Ð   ìÓS0Ð   ìÓT0Ð   ìÓU0Ð   ìÓV0Ñ   ìÓW0Ñ   ìÓX0Ñ   ìÓY0Ñ   ìÓZ0Ñ   ìÓ[0Ñ   ìÓ\0Ñ   ìÓ]0Ñ   ìÓ^0Ñ   ìÓ_0Ñ   ìÓ`0Ñ   ìÓa0Ñ   ìÓb0Ñ   ìÓc0Ñ   ìÓd0Ñ   ìÓe0Ñ   ìÓf0Ò   ìÓq0Ò   ìÓr0Ò   ìÓs0Ò   ìÓt0Ò   ìÓu0Ò   ìÓv0Ò   ìÓw0Ò   ìÓx0Ò   ìÓy0Ò   ìÓz0Ò   ìÓ{0Ò   ìÓ|0Ò   ìÓ}0Ò   ìÓ~0Ò   ìÓ0Ò   ìÓ€0Ò   ìÓ0Ò   ìÓ‚0Ò   ìÓƒ0Ò   ìÓ„0Ò   ìÓ…0Ò   ìÓ†0Ò   ìÓ‡0Ò   ìÓˆ0Ò   ìÓ‰0Ò   ìÓŠ0Ò   ìÓ‹0Ò   ìÓŒ0Ò   ìÓ0Ò   ìÓŽ0Ò   ìÓ0Ò   ìÓ0Ò   ìÓ‘0Ò   ìÓ’0Ò   ìÓ“0Ò   ìÓ”0Ò   ìÓ•0Ò   ìÓ–0Ò   ìÓ—0Ò   ìÓ˜0Ò   ìÓ™0Ò   ìÓš0Ò   ìÓ›0Ò   ìÓœ0Ó   ìÓ0Ó   ìÓž0Ó   ìÓŸ0Ó   ìÓ 0Ó   ìÓ¡0Ó   ìÓ¢0Ó   ìÓ£0Ó   ìÓ¤0Ó   ìÓ¥0Ó   ìÓ¦0Ó   ìÓ§0Ó   ìÓ¨0Ó   ìÓ©0Ó   ìÓª0Ó   ìÓ«0Ó   ìÓ¬0Ó   ìÓ­0Ó   ìÓ®0Ó   ìÓ¯0Ó   ìÓ°0Ó   ìÓ±0Ó   ìÓ²0Ó   ìÓ³0Ó   ìÓ´0Ó   ìÓµ0Ó   ìÓ¶0Ó   ìÓ·0Ó   ìÓ¸0Ó   ìÓ¹0Ó   ìÓº0Ó   ìÓ»0Ó   ìÓ¼0Ó   ìÓ½0Ó   ìÓ¾0Ó   ìÓ¿0Ó   ìÓÀ0Ó   ìÓÁ0Ó   ìÓÂ0Ó   ìÓÃ0Ó   ìÓÄ              ò0Ó   ìÓÆ0Ó   ìÓÇ0Ó   ìÓÈ0Ó   ìÓÉ0Ó   ìÓÊ0Ó   ìÓË0Ó   ìÓÌ0Ó   ìÓÍ0Ó   ìÓÎ0Ó   ìÓÏ0Ó   ìÓÐ0Ó   ìÓÑ0Ó   ìÓÒ0Ó   ìÓÓ0Ó   ìÓÔ0Ó   ìÓÕ0Ó   ìÓÖ0Ó   ìÓ×0Ó   ìÓØ0Ó   ìÓÙ0Ó   ìÓÚ0Ó   ìÓÛ0Ó   ìÓÜ0Ó   ìÓÝ0Ó   ìÓÞ0Ó   ìÓß0Ó   ìÓà0Ó   ìÓá0Ó   ìÓâ0Ó   ìÓã0Ó   ìÓä0Ó   ìÓå0Ó   ìÓæ0Ó   ìÓç0Ó   ìÓè0Ó   ìÓé0Ó   ìÓê0Ó   ìÓë0Ó   ìÓì0Ó   ìÓí0Ó   ìÓî0Ó   ìÓï0Ó   ìÓð0Ó   ìÓñ0Ó   ìÓò0Ó   ìÓó0Ó   ìÓô0Ó   ìÓõ0Ó   ìÓö0Ó   ìÓ÷0Ó   ìÓø0Ó   ìÓù0Ó   ìÓú0Ó   ìÓû0Ó   ìÓü0Ó   ìÓý0Ó   ìÓþ0Ó   ìÓÿ0Ó   ìÔ 0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ	0Ó   ìÔ
0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ 0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ0Ó   ìÔ 0Ó   ìÔ!0Ó   ìÔ"0Ó   ìÔ#0Ó   ìÔ$0Ó   ìÔ%0Ó   ìÔ&0Ó   ìÔ'0Ó   ìÔ(0Ô   ìÔ)0Ô   ìÔ*0Ô   ìÔ+0Ô   ìÔ,0Ô   ìÔ-0Ô   ìÔ.0Ô   ìÔ/0Ô   ìÔ00Ô   ìÔ10Ô   ìÔ20Ô   ìÔ30Ô   ìÔ40Ô   ìÔ5              ò0Ô   ìÔ70Ô   ìÔ80Ô   ìÔ90Ô   ìÔ:


----------



## dedersen (Oct 24, 2010)

ChrisAxia @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> Good morning Guy,
> Likewise with orchestral music. The Orchestration/arrangement is usually the most important part of making the piece sound convincing. I say usually, because it depends on the type of music, in the same way that some racetracks are more technical than others. So, think about improving your arranging skills before you spend thousands on the latest suspension kit for your studio!
> ~C



This is why I sometimes find it very useful to compose music in notation software with sub-par sample sets. It forces me to focus on the actual composition and arranging rather than EQ, reverb, which library to use, etc. Of course, it depends on the style of music you are working on. But if I can make it sound good with poor samples then I know that it is due to the actual arrangement/composition and not just because a certain brass sample sounds really epic.


----------



## rabiang (Oct 24, 2010)

this goes a lot deeper than we might think first time around. its too much to write here, but here are some core concepts: authenticity, aesthetics, modernism,post-modernism etc etc.

what i mean is that we all have a standing point from where we value music. some value it because it can resemble a live band/orchestra. some value sound because it doesnt resemble anything. 

my view is that its useful for us to break free of the categories. libraries can be used for great music that doesnt resemble an orchestra. 12-tone esthetics can be used in dance music. 

so, its kinda obv that i dont mind if a string ensemble sometimes can sound like a synth. for me, the song is great, i will not let a "non-realistic' sound destroy my enjoyment.

about arrangement: i guess it only matters when the composer f*** it up . many ways to rome etc. 

if this song had started with all the instruments and then after 3 bars gone to a solo flute, i think you would have a problem.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 24, 2010)

Ah, yes I see how the word "arrangement" causes problems! Primarily I was thinking of it in terms of arranging parts - a string arrangement etc, as opposed to the structure of a cue (which part goes where).

Chris / Dedersen - my lack of formal training is obviously a problem here. It gets worse - not only am I compositionally illiterate, I've never been able to learn in any conventional formal sense (musically I mean). For better or worse, I rely on instinct and experimentation. If you think that's a bad thing, then I think you're right! (though there can be upsides too). I really became aware of it acutely when trying some big band arrangements and was thoroughly lost in no time. I couldn't translate the phrasings I heard in my head into actual parts for the instruments.

With orchestral stuff, it seems to come much easier, but I do of course hit problems. So how does someone like me develop? My guess is - learn by doing. If Chris, you can hear a line I can't, but you've described the sort of place to look well, then I need to experiment more myself using these ideas as a starting point. However I think in this case - possibly a dangerous conclusion - that the arrangement I did seems to work well enough for enough people to stop me panicking that I got nothing, but I'm well aware I need to grow.

For me, the tools really help. If I have an instrument that sounds authentic then it helps me find authentic lines (I think). Something in my brain clicks - I go "ah, I know that sound, it goes with what I've got like THIS". The danger there is you can work only in cliches if that's the only way you work... hopefully (as you mention Ray) there's more to it than just this!


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 24, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> I've never been able to learn in any conventional formal sense (musically I mean).


Respectfully Guy, unless you literally suffer from learning disabilities like dyslexia, (and if you do, please disregard what I am going to write next) this translates to "I've never been willing to do the hard, sometimes painful, time-consuming work that it takes to musically learn in any conventional sense."

Formal musical training requires no extraordinary intelligence. I know some great trained musicians who otherwise are dumber than tree stumps. 

It is 10% inspiration, 90% perspiration. I fear we are raising generations of musicians who just are not willing to accept this because they can get pretty decent sounding music without it, thanks to the technology so they will not make the effort. And at the end of the day, the level of the music will be and indeed already is lowered.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 24, 2010)

Respectfully, I don't agree! It's been true of me and music for 40 years... I learn conventionally and it doesn't stick. My brain just doesn't work that way. I see the same thing in my son, the way he's learning piano is just like me. Of course some things I (we) pick up, but hit brick walls where others don't. Perhaps it really is a form of artistic dyslexia?! No matter how hard I tried, I never could sight read at anything above 5 notes a minute. But I could figure out a tune from scratch and write my own, whereas someone like my dear wife is the complete opposite. We all work differently.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 24, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> Respectfully, I don't agree! It's been true of me and music for 40 years... I learn conventionally and it doesn't stick. My brain just doesn't work that way. I see the same thing in my son, the way he's learning piano is just like me. Of course some things I (we) pick up, but hit brick walls where others don't. Perhaps it really is a form of artistic dyslexia?! No matter how hard I tried, I never could sight read at anything above 5 notes a minute. But I could figure out a tune from scratch and write my own, whereas someone like my dear wife is the complete opposite. We all work differently.



Well, Guy, if you really did give it a sincere effort over a long period of time, and I am quite willing to take you at your word, then clearly, you are right, it just doesn't work for your specific learning style.

But for every Guy, there are thirty others who just use that as an excuse.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 24, 2010)

It's another whole thread really, isn't it? I sometimes feel guilty that I'm doing this at all. 20 years ago it would have been impossible. I can well understand why people with all the training can be a little fed up with people in my position. The way I see it is that music notation and theory is a very mechanical construct to develop a language that makes communication possible. Just like learning a foreign language, this is something I'm astoundingly bad at (perhaps the same part of the brain? Dunno). But I hopefully have other talents that mean I'm not useless... hopefully...


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 24, 2010)

Interesting. 

Guy, I am more similar to you than you probably think. Yes, I had classical piano and violin lessons up to a decent standard, but I never studied composition, orchestration or arranging. Like you, I go by 'feel', BUT I have made an effort in the last 5 years to really understand these better, so that I do not have to rely on others when I get stuck. I have taken private orchestration/arranging lessons but I am still a long way from where I want to be, knowledge-wise.

As for Dan's statement:

*"When I listen to TJ's stuff, I do not like it for the arrangement, but I like it for it's sound"*

Dan, please realise that the sound is the result of the arrangement as much as the individual sounds!! No matter how hard this may be to hear, you will never sound like TJ without great orchestration/arrangement knowledge. 

~C


----------



## lux (Oct 24, 2010)

Ashermusic @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 24 said:
> 
> 
> > Respectfully, I don't agree! It's been true of me and music for 40 years... I learn conventionally and it doesn't stick. My brain just doesn't work that way. I see the same thing in my son, the way he's learning piano is just like me. Of course some things I (we) pick up, but hit brick walls where others don't. Perhaps it really is a form of artistic dyslexia?! No matter how hard I tried, I never could sight read at anything above 5 notes a minute. But I could figure out a tune from scratch and write my own, whereas someone like my dear wife is the complete opposite. We all work differently.
> ...



an excuse for what? With all due respect i think training and knowledge is something a musician should pursuit for a scope. If you havent that scope you can do for general culture. Both cases the only reason one should invent an excuse is if he's being forced to do something. Which is exactly the opposite what music and art is for.

so, in my vision, if he's not familiar and doesnt empathize with formal training there is no reason why that should be an obligation. There are musicians who built an entire career with minimal training and others who spent an entire life on books without being able to pull off a decent sequence of notes.

Luca


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 24, 2010)

lux @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> Ashermusic @ Sun Oct 24 said:
> 
> 
> > noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 24 said:
> ...



an excuse for what? With all due respect i think training and knowledge is something a musician should pursuit for a scope. If you havent that scope you can do for general culture. Both cases the only reason one should invent an excuse is if he's being forced to do something. Which is exactly the opposite what music and art is for.

so, in my vision, if he's not familiar and doeò1   ìÝû1   ìÝü1   ìÝý1   ìÝþ1   ìÝÿ1   ìÞ 1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ	1   ìÞ
1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ 1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ1   ìÞ 1   ìÞ!1   ìÞ"1   ìÞ#1   ìÞ$1   ìÞ%1   ìÞ&1   ìÞ'1   ìÞ(1   ìÞ)1   ìÞ*1   ìÞ+1   ìÞ,1   ìÞ-1   ìÞ.1   ìÞ/1   ìÞ01   ìÞ11   ìÞ21   ìÞ31   ìÞ41   ìÞ51   ìÞ61   ìÞ71   ìÞ81   ìÞ91   ìÞ:1   ìÞ;1   ìÞ<1   ìÞ=1   ìÞ>1   ìÞ?1   ìÞ@1   ìÞA1   ìÞB1   ìÞC1   ìÞD1   ìÞE1   ìÞF1   ìÞG1   ìÞH1   ìÞI1   ìÞJ1   ìÞK1   ìÞL1   ìÞM1   ìÞN1   ìÞO1   ìÞP1   ìÞQ1   ìÞR1   ìÞS1   ìÞT1   ìÞU1   ìÞV1   ìÞW1   ìÞX1   ìÞY1   ìÞZ1   ìÞ[1   ìÞ\1   ìÞ]1   ìÞ^1   ìÞ_1   ìÞ`1   ìÞa1   ìÞb1   ìÞc1   ìÞd1   ìÞe1   ìÞf


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 24, 2010)

*"What I respect less is people who do not care if their stuff is well composed or orchestrated as long as it sounds "good" to their ears or sounds "real" to their ears. And there is a LOT of that going around"*

Everybody cares about their stuff if the have love for music. I don't think there's anything wrong with doing what sounds good. I think it actually makes young composers find who they really are. I'd respect anyone if they took the approach on doing what sounds good because atleast they are experimenting.

Why do people have to care if their stuff is well orchestrated? Can't it just sound good and that's it, without caring about all that other stuff.

Some people work differently. Some people work unconsciously and the music takes them to the world they want it to leed them to without even thinking.

I'd also like you to elaborate on that statement because maybe I didn't understand.



As for the TJ comment.

I do not, nor am trying to sound like TJ, but these days I'd be certain that someone would make a comment saying "Oh, you are trying to be like TJ" or "That's what TJ did"

Yes, I see that the arrangement is part of the sound and now I understand what everyone is talking about, but this is still something I do not pay attention to, nor I would suggest any sort of arrangement to someones track at certain bars. The overall sound is what matters no matter how it's all put together because some people can make an amazing sounding track with only one sustained chord.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 24, 2010)

Hey everyone - hands up who's bored of this cue?!

v6 - http://www.box.net/shared/xspl3vjyvq

OK, surely this is the last pass for the purposes of this thread. Here's the changes, mostly at the latter string section at 52s:

Exclusive all new cello and viola lines!
Boosted top octave string part with SO 11v Lyr B
Tweaked piano part to match
Increased level and reverb of solo cornet

And that's about it. For anyone left standing, I'd be curious to know which version you prefer, I'm not sure myself... might need a bit of space. I don't know if this is the sort of thing you had in mind, Chris... I felt that anything busier and more in-your-face would just be getting in the way.


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 24, 2010)

Dan-Jay @ Sun Oct 24 said:


> *"What I respect less is people who do not care if their stuff is well composed or orchestrated as long as it sounds "good" to their ears or sounds "real" to their ears. And there is a LOT of that going around"*
> 
> Why do people have to care if their stuff is well orchestrated? Can't it just sound good and that's it, without caring about all that other stuff.



No. Film scoring is a craft and if you are going to aspire o work professionally, you need to be try to learn to be a craftsman. Otherwise, you are just a poser.

And if you are writing an orchestral score and you do not know how to orchestrate decently, even with samples it is unlikely to sound good to anyone who actually knows the difference, as opposed to a bunch of Facebook friends.

When I entered the conservatory, I knew nothing about any of this. And I KNEW I did not know anything about this so I studied.

When I got to LA I realized that while I had learned a lot about theory, harmony, and counterpoint, my orchestrating was still weak so I studied orchestration with Dr. Albert Harris privately and studied some jazz piano with Charlie Shoemake so I would have a basic handle on those kind of voicings and harmonies. Over the years, I have continued to study.

5 or 6 years ago due to vanishing budgets, I had to start sometimes engineering for myself. I KNEW i was very weak at it so I started to study to learn how to do it better and I continue to study work to improve it.

THIS is what people who wish to become a craftsman do, Dan-Jay. Aspire to be a craftsman, not just somebody who can take a bunch of samples and loops and make it sound OK. It is a long difficult journey that never really ends but it is one worth embarking on.


----------



## rabiang (Oct 24, 2010)

IMO, its a strange discussion if you dont relate to specific examples. all could be in agreement, but disagreeing in words.'

unless of course you want to prejudge based on a persons credentials.

take the music of the OP in this thread: it can cetainly hold its own in most values of music, sounds, orchestration, arr.


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 24, 2010)

*"not just somebody who can take a bunch of samples and loops and make it sound OK"*


Jay, I understand what you are saying, but if you think the quote above is me than you have got it all wrong because it isn't. It kind of upsets me if someone were to think that of me.

Some people can orchestrate well without training (not saying that's me), but they can and I know people who can. They can because they can understand what others have done and learn that way, rather than having to study a book or something like this.

I do not show my music to anyone who doesn't know anything about music. I do not have facebook friends I show it too, but even if I did have a bunch of facebook friends who didn't know anything about music, it can still sound good to their ears. I always show the people who are into music first because they can hear different things. So what if people haven't studied, it still counts if one who hasn't studied thinks a piece sounds good, but then there's always going to be that one person who comes along who has studied and just makes irrelivant coments about have amature and simple it is. Simple is good.

You don't need to learn to be a craftsman, and no one does. You can still orchestrate well, and learn from others doing it. I have not studied music, but I feel music from what other people have done and also mood aswell. My mood can write my music for me. I do not use loops, nor I would want to because I'd rather create my own loops. I do not buy the best libraries and think they will sound good no matter what because I know I have to do alot more than that to make a library such as HS to come alive.

It doesn't matter how one learns, aslong as they are pleasing many human ears, I;d say that's all that counts, even if one does use something as simple as loops.

These two worlds conflict with eachother and do not work. I write how I feel and I don't care what I do aslong as that mood has serverd it's purpose and made other people feel the some way. That's what music is all about to me and not about how much you know, or how good you are at complex orchestrating and so forth.


----------



## rabiang (Oct 24, 2010)

dont worry, dan, he probably means people like me. 

Just so we bring it from the abstract to the concrete: here is a track from our album that will be released in the beginning of 2011. its not music for film, but uses libraries. just remember that i dont think "it sounds like a synth" is a bad thing necessarily. it could be a bad thing, but not as a premise.



now, i must remove this link soon, because its part of an upcoming project.



EDIT: link removed, PM me if you want the link.


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 24, 2010)

rabiang @ Mon Oct 25 said:


> dont worry, dan, he probably means people like me.
> 
> Just so we bring it from the abstract to the concrete: here is a track from my album that will be released in the beginning of 2011. its not music for film, but uses libraries. just remember that i dont think "it sounds like a synth" is a bad thing necessarily. it could be a bad thing, but not as a premise.
> 
> ...



Heck. That is some trippy stuff. I like it!


----------



## Ashermusic (Oct 24, 2010)

@ Dan-Jay: Once again, I am talking about the specific craft of writing music for film scores. Make a list of the 30 film composers most here admire. How many are trained? It is not a coincidence. You have complained that you have trouble finishing a piece of music. On any given day, I can sit down and write 3-5 minutes of music. Why? Not because I am brilliant but because I was trained to do so.

@Ray: Composing music for an album is a different craft than film scoring and I totally acknowledge an non-formally trained person can do it well. IMHO, The Beatles did it better than anyone and they were not trained.


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 25, 2010)

Guy,

Much better for me, and you're not that far away from what I envisaged. However, I still think it could be improved upon, but again, that's just my opinion. If you're happy and the client is happy, that's most of the battle won!

Jay. I agree with everything you have written here, but I fear what you and I are trying to explain to Dan is falling on deaf ears. Dan, please listen one last time to what I am trying to say. You remind me a little of my ex-writing partner who was very musically gifted, BUT he felt he didn't need to study in any way. While I was striving to improve not only my musical abilities, but my studio/technical understanding also, he was happy to stay as he was. It wasn't long before the record company we were working for were rejecting more and more of his ideas, and we eventually parted company. 

Very few people are talented enough to create top class orchestral music without some sort of study, whether it is at a college or simply by listening to the music of those you admire and learning from them. I tried to 'fake' it for years, but eventually realised I was out of my depth. I knew my limitations and thereafter started hiring an orchestrator for help on certain cues and for private study. 

I used TJ merely as a reference, but could have easily said John Williams or any other top composer. If you aspire to create orchestral music in a truly 'cinematic' style, you will need to study, one way or another, or hire an orchestrator. I would love to be proved wrong, so if you have an orchestral/filmic piece of music you feel is worthy and you had no help in putting it together, I would love to hear it.

One thing I would like to add. Guy started this thread to ask what we thought of his piece, and has now put a new version for our comments. Do you not think it disrespectful to carry on chatting about arrangements etc without first giving Guy some feedback? I have seen this happen on many other threads. Someone asks for feedback and too many join the chat without the decency to make a single comment about the music. Do you really feel that is respectful?

~C


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 25, 2010)

Hi guys.

Yes, It is very rude of me to keep talking about something different in Guy's thread, but I did give Guy feedback, it's not like I completely ignored his piece because I didn't.

Jay. I'm not saying that I refuse to study. I actually want to study and have been studying. I just have other issues, personal issues which is why I believe I cannot write well. I also cannot run the libraries I want to very well which isn't an excuse because I'm working on it. All I need is more Ram to load more instruments so I can write more than 15 seconds, aswell as sorting out my other issues.

I'm not some arrogant prick who will not study. I know you probably didn't think that, but I wanted to say it. Like I said. I have studied pretty hard and will continue to do so. I love talking to other composers to learn, such as your self, Jay.

Sorry for the confusion on the arrangement stuff. Music means something different to me in a way and it conflicts with this discussion. Also my knowledge on arrangement thought something different. 

Chris. What you say is very clear to me, I just think that maybe I was slow to understand. Trust me, I'm willing to learn. I have spoken to so many composers, asking questions, learning from professionals and ofcourse studying orchestral arrangement.

Jay. I am amazed you can write 3-5 minutes a day. That almost makes me want to go into tears. I respect that.

Sorry Guy.


----------



## Dan Mott (Oct 25, 2010)

noiseboyuk @ Mon Oct 25 said:


> Hey everyone - hands up who's bored of this cue?!
> 
> v6 - http://www.box.net/shared/xspl3vjyvq
> 
> ...





The solo cornet sits much better. The reverb you added made it sit in the mix alot better and made it blend with the rest on the instruments.

The expression is great and it brings life into the samples. Nice work.

I'm on headphones right now, but I'll take a listen on studio monitors when they're done being fixed.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 25, 2010)

Thanks for the feedback, Chris... glad I'm heading in the right direction! Must admit I'd love a few more comments on this latest version but I'm aware it's probably trying people's patience... On the other hand, it is (obviously) highly relevant to this thread, so if for no other reason than an example of someone without formal training trying to improve an arrangement, perhaps it might have some interest. I know you never comment on other people's compositions, Jay, so c'est la vie there...

Latest version, v6, is here - http://www.box.net/shared/xspl3vjyvq 

Speaking of Jay, I was reflecting on a couple of your points. As you suggest, almost every current film composer whom one can think of classically trained (Danny Elfman is the closest of the big names I can think of that hasn't gone a conventional route, at least, but I'm sure he's had a helluva lot more than I have). What intrigues me, though, is that contemporary technology has the potential to challenge this status quo, for better or for worse. Partly it opens the door to upstarts like me, sure, who can try things they'd never have been able too before and see if they are adept at it. But there's another angle too. I've been listening to Zimmer's Inception recently, and what a remarkable score it is. There are some sections that are pretty demanding from a composition standpoint (there's some really wild stuff going on in the brass in Dream Is Collapsing, for example). The majority, however, is compositionally not so taxing perhaps, but is very interesting from a perspective of textures and sound design and - most of all - how it serves story (my own obsession... when scoring I think of myself as a storyteller first and foremost). I cite it as an example that it helps me conceive of someone technically brilliant (not me, I should add) producing remarkable scores who isn't classically trained, especially if they team with an orchestrator when they need to.

The second issue, Jay, is volume of music. I suspect you won't be too thrilled with the results, but the last TV series I did I was hitting 10 minutes a day (more in some cases). It's absolutely not crafted to where it should be, I listen back and hear all sorts of little horrors, but there's some stuff I'm really proud of (there's some stuff on my website from this series). But my point is that my instincts can make fast... ok, this is for a kids' comedy and for some genres I'd be way out of my depth. I've often read composers comment that working on something with deadline without musical depth of knowledge would be "scary" and... well, it is! But it's surprising what you come up with when you have to.

I'm certainly not arguing that ignorance is bliss... I crave more knowledge. But being very left-brained needn't be an insurmountable obstacle, I'd argue.

EDIT - thanks for the comments, Dan and (of course) no worries! Let me know how you find it on the monitors.


----------



## ChrisAxia (Oct 25, 2010)

Best version so far Guy, but as John says, (and he KNOWS what he's talking about!) it could be further improved. In fact, now that it's much better from 52" until 1'02", it really feels like it needs more inner movement to create a stronger sense of power that you're clearly going for, straight after that section.

OK, I think you've probably had enough from me. I do hope I have been of some help. Time to get back to making some of my own music, hopefully without having to call on a good orchestrator!

~C


----------



## JohnG (Oct 25, 2010)

discussion about training, success, and so on moved to:

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... o=1#242795


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 25, 2010)

Thanks again Chris, and John and all those who've given me such useful feedback.

It would be nice to develop this piece ò1ñ   í31ñ   í41ñ   í51ñ   í61ñ   í71ñ   í81ñ   í91ñ   í:1ñ   í;1ñ   í<1ñ   í=1ñ   í>1ñ   í?1ñ   í@1ñ   íA1ñ   íB1ñ   íC1ñ   íD1ñ   íE1ñ   í


----------

