# The Excelsior Class - Main Title



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 3, 2018)

Hej Guys,

I know actually many of you are excited about the new products from Spitfire and VSL, and maybe not many wants to listen to my music, still maybe if you have 3 minutes of your time I would be happy if you take a listen. Big Star Trek Fan since my childhood and so I decided to take a closer look at the harmonic language Horner & Goldsmith used back then with their own scores. So I applied certain gestures from them to create this 3 minute theme.



EDIT: Not so lazy ending:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8e64gvw97k1sqsk/Alexander_Schiborr_The%20-%20Excelsior%20Class%20-%20Maintitle%20Version%202%20Ending.mp3?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/8e64gvw97k1sqsk/Alexander_Schiborr_The - Excelsior Class - Maintitle Version 2 Ending.mp3?dl=0)

I will get some beers from the supermarket..


UPDATE:

FULL SCORE:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/dvxrsfd6qh9u7sd/Alexander_Schiborr_%20Excelsior%20Class%20-%20FULL%20SCORE.pdf?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/dvxrsfd6qh9u7sd/Alexander_Schiborr_ Excelsior Class - FULL SCORE.pdf?dl=0)

And SCORE VIDEO:


----------



## AdamAlake (Mar 3, 2018)

Beautiful piece, the inspiration shows very clearly there.


----------



## MarcelM (Mar 3, 2018)

awesome (as always)... and iam a trekkie aswell (so sagen wir deutschen glaube ich)


----------



## Kony (Mar 3, 2018)

Excellent, really enjoyed this - thanks for sharing


----------



## Saxer (Mar 4, 2018)

Always fun to listen to your music! Well done again!


----------



## merlinhimself (Mar 4, 2018)

What are you using on strings? Im sure your programming has a lot to do with it, but the high strings sound amazing for that sound


----------



## South Thames (Mar 4, 2018)

Nicely done! Definitely more than Horner than Goldsmith in the mix I'd say. The programming overall sound great, but I would try to do something about the trumpet solo in the opening. Very difficult to pull this off with samples, and to my ears the attacks and phrasing on the solo notes are off.


----------



## PeterN (Mar 4, 2018)

Thanks for sharing Alexander. Mind asking, how do you do your time signatures and tempo in the orchestration. Do you tap an idea beforehand and go according to it, do you keep the 4/4 here and slow it down at certain points, or do you do the Verta style and just play naturally and build it up accordingly?


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Mar 4, 2018)

Fabulous work @AlexanderSchiborr in every way. You really nailed the language of Horner/Goldsmith in this track. I marvel at the mix and sound quality you are able to achieve. In fact, I am very jealous! Your skill continues to grow and grow. Congratulations!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 4, 2018)

Cool guys. Much appreciated.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 4, 2018)

merlinhimself said:


> What are you using on strings? Im sure your programming has a lot to do with it, but the high strings sound amazing for that sound



Berlin Strings and Expansions here.



South Thames said:


> Nicely done! Definitely more than Horner than Goldsmith in the mix I'd say. The programming overall sound great, but I would try to do something about the trumpet solo in the opening. Very difficult to pull this off with samples, and to my ears the attacks and phrasing on the solo notes are off.



Agreed. It was a bit of a pain in the butt. Solo Exposed trumpet lines in such context are indeed difficult to pull of conv. with samples.



PeterN said:


> Thanks for sharing Alexander. Mind asking, how do you do your time signatures and tempo in the orchestration. Do you tap an idea beforehand and go according to it, do you keep the 4/4 here and slow it down at certain points, or do you do the Verta style and just play naturally and build it up accordingly?



I started the whole piece with a couple of chord progressions and chord relations. Based on that I improvized a melody over it, more or less. I played for a while around with different kind of melodies of those chord progressions until I found one with was appealing to me. Then I performed everything for 2 handed piano, first freely - _*which told me then which Tempo I am going for*_. So the answer is: _*My playing tempo determines for what speed I am going for*_. You can do that & rebounce the click afterwards. Or you can tap it and perform it with click. The Keysignatures are 2/4 or 4/4. I more often start to use 2/4 recently as it lets me be more free with decisions regarding surprise moments which I can put in. I am also not so restricted to the 4 count standard bar pattern thing.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 4, 2018)

Paul T McGraw said:


> Fabulous work @AlexanderSchiborr in every way. You really nailed the language of Horner/Goldsmith in this track. I marvel at the mix and sound quality you are able to achieve. In fact, I am very jealous! Your skill continues to grow and grow. Congratulations!



Thanks Paul. I will get an answer to your mail later, if that is ok. But it is Berlin Strings, Brass & Woods, and in fact that track was produced with the same template that you already heard some of my previous tracks with. I think you didn´t liked the sound so much in first place probably because the template wasn´t devloped at that point and pretty new (like I told you). To make templates sound better they need some weeks in development. I remember the template I did sent you back then was just 3 days old. Now its already like 5 Weeks in development and it sounds like that. I think it does sound better. But it is the same one.


----------



## Brendon Williams (Mar 5, 2018)

Love it, really nice work!


----------



## PeterN (Mar 5, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> The Keysignatures are 2/4 or 4/4. I more often start to use 2/4 recently as it lets me be more free with decisions regarding surprise moments which I can put in. I am also not so restricted to the 4 count standard bar pattern thing.



Okie dokie. You are right about the 2/4 and the freedom it can give.

Curious about something else here. This question is outside the main topic, but has to do with the tempo and time signature. Just skip this question if its too much out of context.

What do hou think about adding 5/4 to a mainly 4/4 and 2/4 orchestration, to create a slight ”slowdown effect” or what would be a good word, I mean, to stretch it this way? I think most commonly used way is to slow down tempo, would you have an opinion on 5/4 sometimes in a 4/4 composition? And as I said, please skip this question if its out of context, dont want to steal your thread.

And thanks for the previous reply.


----------



## FriFlo (Mar 5, 2018)

Good work, Alexander! And I am on fact much more interested in these kinds of threads (and musicians helping musicians) than all commercial announcements going on. It's a pity, that there seems to be much more involvement by most users in those. They could actually learn a lot by taking part in this rather than having an ego/opinion war over there ... if you ask me, you could just close down more than half of the tiers and have a way better forum that is actually about music and music technology.


----------



## dcoscina (Mar 5, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Hej Guys,
> 
> I know actually many of you are excited about the new products from Spitfire and VSL, and maybe not many wants to listen to my music, still maybe if you have 3 minutes of your time I would be happy if you take a listen. Big Star Trek Fan since my childhood and so I decided to take a closer look at the harmonic language Horner & Goldsmith used back then with their own scores. So I applied certain gestures from them to create this 3 minute theme.
> 
> ...



Terrific music Alexander. While I commend your programming/playing skills and your use of samples, I'm more impressed at the pure skill in writing from a music standpoint and honestly focus on that as opposed to whether it's hyper realistic. Great job as always! Thanks for sharing your music with us all.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 5, 2018)

PeterN said:


> Okie dokie. You are right about the 2/4 and the freedom it can give.
> 
> Curious about something else here. This question is outside the main topic, but has to do with the tempo and time signature. Just skip this question if its too much out of context.
> 
> ...



I am not sure if I correctly understand, but how affects the 5/4 the tempo within a 4/4? I am bit off or not exactly sure what you mean here? I normally work in the post production with tempo faders in cubase to add more variation in the tempo. Is it that maybe? sorry for the question and stuffs, just making sure we correspond correctly.



FriFlo said:


> Good work, Alexander! And I am on fact much more interested in these kinds of threads (and musicians helping musicians) than all commercial announcements going on. It's a pity, that there seems to be much more involvement by most users in those. They could actually learn a lot by taking part in this rather than having an ego/opinion war over there ... if you ask me, you could just close down more than half of the tiers and have a way better forum that is actually about music and music technology.



Actually you speak (also from my heart) something out which feels very similiar to me. In fact I would love to have much more interaction about that things with members here also, but it is not really happening, I guess the interest is more related towards the more modern hybrid soundtracks. And that was and is the reason why I hang around more on Redbanned e.g. because there it is much more to the core of musicanship in the old style and not so much techtalk also. But I think the times are so different now, also this kind of music what I do here is a very outmoded, sorry to say but dead finished chapter. I do it because I love that shit..and because I want to learn to improve as a composer, not sure if I will be one day there with the really good ones, but I keep trying.



dcoscina said:


> Terrific music Alexander. While I commend your programming/playing skills and your use of samples, I'm more impressed at the pure skill in writing from a music standpoint and honestly focus on that as opposed to whether it's hyper realistic. Great job as always! Thanks for sharing your music with us all.



Glad you enjoyed! :D

Actually my own critic comes here:

The ending is a bit lazy. So I had rewritten it completely, or almost:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8e64gvw97k1sqsk/Alexander_Schiborr_The%20-%20Excelsior%20Class%20-%20Maintitle%20Version%202%20Ending.mp3?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/8e64gvw97k1sqsk/Alexander_Schiborr_The - Excelsior Class - Maintitle Version 2 Ending.mp3?dl=0)


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 5, 2018)

Brendon Williams said:


> Love it, really nice work!



Thank you Brendon. Much appreciated. Hope you are doing good and keeping up your creativity.

PS: You should post your GW2 Work..


----------



## joed (Mar 5, 2018)

Thanks for sharing this. Very evocative of Star trek. Great job.


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 5, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> In fact I would love to have much more interaction about that things with members here also, but it is not really happening, I guess the interest is more related towards the more modern hybrid soundtracks. And that was and is the reason why I hang around more on Redbanned e.g. because there it is much more to the core of musicanship in the old style and not so much techtalk also. But I think the times are so different now, also this kind of music what I do here is a very outmoded, sorry to say but dead finished chapter. I do it because I love that shit..and because I want to learn to improve as a composer, not sure if I will be one day there with the really good ones, but I keep trying.



First of all, let me say this is great work you're doing and I have tremendous respect for your efforts. You're really making significant progress learning about composition and orchestration in the Star Trek genre.

I relate to what you are saying above but I don't necessarily agree that members don't want to discuss issues about music more than gear. Its just "easier" to talk about gear. And while music is all about what you hear, composition is also about what you write. And, since everyone writes to their DAW, there's not really much to discuss about other than the sound. ("sounds cool"). If you want to have a discussion about the composition and orchestration, then it would be helpful to see the score. However, as most people write to their DAW, there is no written score other than piano rolls (which are kinda hard to analyze). OTOH, when I look at a Prokofiev score, I can play through the composition and look at the orchestration and come up with a million questions to discuss. Of course the answer today always is "well then transcribe it". And while I agree transcription is a good exercise, it pretty much turns the discussion about the composition and orchestration off (other than, how was my transcription?...and they generally suck).

Another reason people don't want to discuss is because they don't have anything nearly as good as the piece you're posting. So why would you want to hear from me? I'll just remain in lurk mode most of the time until I have something equally worthy to share.

If its the composition you'd rather discuss rather than "which library did you use?", it might help to create a score or at least as sketch. When it gets into orchestration, it would really help to see a full score though. Otherwise, we're left only to discuss the sound or the production engineering process which tends to lead toward the typical "gear talk". And that's a lot easier to do than studying your score in depth and looking at the harmony, orchestration, voice leadings, etc. So when I want to really study a score, I tend to pick one up by Prokofiev or Stravinsky and have a discussion with myself (as nobody around here seems to ever want to discuss about someone else's score - though it would seem fun to me to have a thread discussing a particular great orchestration and hear various observations, opinions and possibly mockups on it). Unfortunately, the psychology of internet forums would probably lead us toward endless arguments over which composer or orchestration is really great before a true discussion about the details of a piece could get off the ground.

We did at one time have such discussions here on this forum when Peter Alexander (RIP) started a free online orchestration class. It was open only to members who joined. and he moderated in such a way that required everyone participating to use their real names and to only provide constructive supportive criticism. Members were very helpful to each other in this sheltered environment because they had a commitment towards each other and towards a common goal and a moderator to keep the balance. There was no trolling, nasty comments or bullying which is what commonly destroys open forum discussions. I guess that's part of the success over at redbanned is that people feel its a community (along with an outspoken moderator) and this is the same thing that Spitfire seems to be attempting to cultivate. Though it doesn't always work out like that (quite a lot of fighting over on the VSL forum as egos battle for territory).

Well, enough ranting. I'll ask a few questions.

1) Did you study any of the Omni scores such as Horner, Silvestri or Goldsmith or are you just learning "by ear" and transcribing?

2) Assuming you don't have a score and wrote the to DAW from a piano sketch, how did you balance the orchestration? IOW, did you wing it as you laid down tracks just adding tracks section by section as you felt were needed or did you use some other method? However you worked, your orchestration sounds quite balanced between the various sections as well as within each section. I have no idea how you would accomplish this without a written score which is why I'm curious.

3) Nice dynamics and mixing balance. I assume you played the parts in mostly? Though some would seem hard to play (fast brass repetitions, runs, etc.). How do you handle these more difficult passages? Pencil pecking at the piano roll? Or slowing the tempo to play by hand?

4) Not being able to see the score, I can't ask any questions about orchestration but it sounds really balanced and very playable by a real orchestra. One of the things I'm trying to learn about now are dynamic markings and how to balance them between various sections. When I play popular scores in Sibelius, the better ones tend to balance out quite nicely but not always. Sometimes I have to make dynamic alterations to get a more balanced sound. I'm not sure if this is due to a flawed representation by Note Performer or whether is actually a problem with orchestration. Any thoughts on how to learn this? I assume that only with time and enough experience one would build a mental consensus of what works and what doesn't. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this topic.

I'll stop before I hijack your thread with random drunken talk. Oh, btw, if you get a mug to drink your beer from, it will taste so much better!


----------



## artomatic (Mar 5, 2018)

Much respect, @AlexanderSchiborr 
Your composition/talent really shows in this piece!.
Hats off to you!


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Mar 6, 2018)

@synergy543 I agree with most all of your comments and would like to see the answers to your questions by @AlexanderSchiborr if he has the time. I never participated in the orchestration forum hosted by Peter Alexander, but it sounds awesome. 

You and I are exactly alike concerning our reliance upon a written score. I am not sure why, perhaps for me because of musical training since childhood, but I cannot imagine trying to analyze a work with any precision without a score. 

I also agree that using real names tends to foster a more positive and congenial, even collegial atmosphere. This is very apparent on Redbanned. Except of course when politics intrudes into the mix. I hate that. I wish we could all just keep politics out of any music forum.

I am not aware of the Spitfire forum you mention. Where is that located?


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Mar 6, 2018)

@AlexanderSchiborr with this new template, you have moved far beyond my skills and are reaching new levels of excellence. It is more than just the library used. You have an excellent ear and I am positive that you are using EQ and mixing close and room mics very carefully to get the wonderful sound you are achieving.

But just out of curiosity I will ask about the libraries. Previously you used an all Spitfire template. Now you are using an all Berlin (except percussion) template. After now having mastered the Berlin libraries, I have a couple of questions if you have time to answer:

1) What do you think are the greatest strengths and weaknesses of Spitfire and Berlin?

2) Could you have achieved such excellent results with Spitfire?

3) Which do you enjoy working with the most, Spitfire or Berlin?


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 6, 2018)

@Paul T McGraw - There is not a Spitfire forum that I'm aware of however Christian mentioned in one of his videsos (#88?) that they realized the power of the Spitfire community and wanted to tap into that more. This is a common business strategy that goes way back (warning - here comes the politics...). Remember the Pepsi Generation and "Girl Watchers"? A community that is no longer appropriate to join, but Pepsi was building a community to entice gullible young men into popping open an icy cold bottle of Pepsi in order to become one of the "Girl Watchers" (funny how much political correctness has changed over time - now poor sods just drink beer). To join the Spitfire community, you just need to buy the Hans Zimmer Strings


----------



## ironbut (Mar 6, 2018)

Wow!
Great orchestration and arrangement.
Very inspiring!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer (Mar 6, 2018)

I absolutely LOVE your orchestration and themes here, well done!!

My only complaint is the actual libraries you chose. Not sure if it's your programming or the actual patches, but to me they sound very "synthy" throughout the piece, and unrealistic. Sorry, I don't mean to be insulting.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 6, 2018)

synergy543 said:


> First of all, let me say this is great work you're doing and I have tremendous respect for your efforts. You're really making significant progress learning about composition and orchestration in the Star Trek genre.



Thank you! Glad you enjoyed the ride.



synergy543 said:


> I relate to what you are saying above but I don't necessarily agree that members don't want to discuss issues about music more than gear. Its just "easier" to talk about gear. And while music is all about what you hear, composition is also about what you write....




I felt somehow the other way around in that regards. Not that they don´t want to talk about that but to be honest still I think the majority ot people here come for techtalk and not that much for music talk. First it is easier to talk about gear and libraries and second the focus of what they want to create with that libraries is very much either that epic music or trailer sound stuff. Plus my music contributions are not featuring any Zimmer or epic trailer music. So of course the interest is decreasing in those things when most of the people here want to write Zimmer ´esque composition. (few exceptions excluded). And then they struggle with their approach because it doesn´t sound that good. And why is that? Imo it is because they lack total fundamentals. And to be clear: There is nothing wrong with the dominance of epic / trailer music here, but looking at the last 2-3 years threads here ongoing I feel that this is what most want to talk about about but forgetting to learn and improve compositional aspects. But I can be wrong of course. Mike V. commented in that regards, that the majority skillset of composers nowadays are in the fucking basement. Sure maybe a bit of a hyperbole, but there is a little something true in it.
Having said that:
Looking at a score is a good thing to do as it is true it can help understanding the orchestration better when you are able to read it. And imo but this is just again an assumption: I think many of the people here even can´t read orchestral scores for several different reasons, some maybe because they fight reading notes in different clefs and others that they just have problems with transposed reading. Not sure about that.

I could try to make a score available but it would take a lot of time because I am slow in doing such things.





synergy543 said:


> Another reason people don't want to discuss is because they don't have anything nearly as good as the piece you're posting. So why would you want to hear from me? I'll just remain in lurk mode most of the time until I have something equally worthy to share.
> 
> If its the composition you'd rather discuss rather than "which library did you use?", it might help to create a score or at least as sketch. When it gets into orchestration, it would really help to see a full score though. Otherwise, we're left only to discuss the sound or the production engineering process which tends to lead toward the typical "gear talk". And that's a lot easier to do than studying your score in depth and looking at the harmony, orchestration, voice leadings, etc. So when I want to really study a score, I tend to pick one up by Prokofiev or Stravinsky and have a discussion with myself (as nobody around here seems to ever want to discuss about someone else's score - though it would seem fun to me to have a thread discussing a particular great orchestration and hear various observations, opinions and possibly mockups on it). Unfortunately, the psychology of internet forums would probably lead us toward endless arguments over which composer or orchestration is really great before a true discussion about the details of a piece could get off the ground.



Maybe it would be an idea to create a shoresheet of that piece then? I am open to that idea.





synergy543 said:


> We did at one time have such discussions here on this forum when Peter Alexander (RIP) started a free online orchestration class. It was open only to members who joined. and he moderated in such a way that required everyone participating to use their real names and to only provide constructive supportive criticism. Members were very helpful to each other in this sheltered environment because they had a commitment towards each other and towards a common goal and a moderator to keep the balance. There was no trolling, nasty comments or bullying which is what commonly destroys open forum discussions. I guess that's part of the success over at redbanned is that people feel its a community (along with an outspoken moderator) and this is the same thing that Spitfire seems to be attempting to cultivate. Though it doesn't always work out like that (quite a lot of fighting over on the VSL forum as egos battle for territory).



Yes I am remember the time when P. Alexander was posting here, sadly he passsed away. RIP.

Well, enough ranting. I'll ask a few questions.




synergy543 said:


> 1) Did you study any of the Omni scores such as Horner, Silvestri or Goldsmith or are you just learning "by ear" and transcribing?
> 
> 2) Assuming you don't have a score and wrote the to DAW from a piano sketch, how did you balance the orchestration? IOW, did you wing it as you laid down tracks just adding tracks section by section as you felt were needed or did you use some other method? However you worked, your orchestration sounds quite balanced between the various sections as well as within each section. I have no idea how you would accomplish this without a written score which is why I'm curious.
> 
> ...



1. I used for this track some non engraved scores from Horner, so handwritten which was a bit hard to read to be honest. But I got an idea how some basics in his orchestration work. Normally I do a mix of both. I listen to the music also a lot to get an idea of the flow and dynamics which you can´t see so good in the orchestration purerly. You have to listen imo. Transcribing makes sense in regards of the harmonic frame which is important to the compositional aspects. (which I do!)

2. I first create a basic template from scratch which I "pre" belance. That means I try first to balance the instruments in each section, then the section to the each other. Just by ear and I use reference scores after that which I like. It is not done in a few days. It takes..like 4-5 weeks to get a proper balanced result. This template is now around 4-5 weeks in development. Believe me in the beginning it sounded not like that. So it takes time and I think that the micro balancing is also a crucial part in such process. To get the balance in such track legit I listen to similiar orchestrations done by the real orchestra and compare my version to the real thing. So after a while you gain an "ear" of how it has sound right, for instance when you have this layered brass block chords, so how do you know how loud has to be the trumpets in comparison to the bones doubling an octave below --> The answer is the real recordings reveal an idea of that relation. And when you repeat doing that after a while you first try is already pretty close to the real thing. It requires practise I would say. I apply this technique in general.

3. Good question. I mostly play / perform the parts. As it comes to his fast brass repetition, I even try to play them. Matter of fact is: I often play them not that good. So still I record them and then corrrect some of the notes manually. For the fast string lines: I also play them, but again: I correct them afterwards.

4. I think all this automatic programs are no "performance" oriented things. A machine or algorithm can´t bring any excitement into a mockup because it lacks of knowing the intention. Where is the performance? I think every programmed mockup has that problem that you can hear that there is something missing and that is imo the performance. At least that is my thinking to improve realism into a mockup. All those playback score softwares are nice to get an idea but I won´t recommend them to create realistic mockups. Another big point is layering different articulations in order to surpass limitations of provided articulations. Also it helps thickening lines. I see it like that: If it sounds good: Do it.



synergy543 said:


> I'll stop before I hijack your thread with random drunken talk. Oh, btw, if you get a mug to drink your beer from, it will taste so much better!



No Problem, I didn´t felt that you hi jacked thread at all. Thanks again.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 7, 2018)

Paul T McGraw said:


> @AlexanderSchiborr with this new template, you have moved far beyond my skills and are reaching new levels of excellence. It is more than just the library used. You have an excellent ear and I am positive that you are using EQ and mixing close and room mics very carefully to get the wonderful sound you are achieving.
> 
> But just out of curiosity I will ask about the libraries. Previously you used an all Spitfire template. Now you are using an all Berlin (except percussion) template. After now having mastered the Berlin libraries, I have a couple of questions if you have time to answer:
> 
> ...



1). Good question. I could make a long list. Lets focus on a few fundamentals.

Berlin Series:

Pros: I think one of the greatest things in the berlin series in general is that the samples are recorded with a lot of musical intention which means they offer a bit of imperfections but also they have a lot of expression and vibrato. Berlin Series offers a very classical symphonic sound which can be big but yet very detailed because their sections are not overly big. The micings are very flexible in creating depth but still you get a good amount of details from the near micings. I think also the instruments are fairly playable for a sample library.

Cons:

There are inconsitencies in the balancing at least from my opinion. Mostly I had that with Berlin Brass. Also which is a bummer, not that much for me, but also I had to find a way to work around that: Berlin brass is very gentle and doesn´t really do that really loud double / Triple forte layers. Which actually doesn´t bother me that much but sometimes I have then find ways and layer trumpet lines with very specific patches (e.g. MA3 or MA1).

Spitfire:

Pros: Very lush sound, wide and big. I would say that sums it up. Spitfire also shines in their dynamic range, you can go from very quite to very nasty loud. Relatively playable also, depends on the patches. Their Woodwinds are quite beautiful recorded. And if you like you can go very ambient and epic with the sound.

Cons: It is difficult to create (at least for me) convincing runs with the woodwinds, therefore I did replace for those things it with a few other instruments. In the pros I mentioned the luch wide and big sound, while there is the thing: You are a little to be forced to that more ambient character of sound. While the libraries offer close micings even these contain still a lot of room informations which makes it hard for me to let sound it more direct and intimate. Also there are some inconsistencies in their patches. E.g. the bones tree / ambient micings are somehow much drier than their shorts. But well I think there is no library out there which is perfect.

2. I don´t know, but instanly I would say, yes why not. But it needs a lot of programming and the sound would be different. I am not sure how it would translate here. I would comment better to it if I try that out.

3. Actually I prefer Berlin Series for several reasons I mentioned in the pros from Point 1. For me musicality is most important even more than loud triple forte dynamic layers.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 7, 2018)

ironbut said:


> Wow!
> Great orchestration and arrangement.
> Very inspiring!



Thank you. Much appreciated.



Wolfie2112 said:


> I absolutely LOVE your orchestration and themes here, well done!!
> 
> My only complaint is the actual libraries you chose. Not sure if it's your programming or the actual patches, but to me they sound very "synthy" throughout the piece, and unrealistic. Sorry, I don't mean to be insulting.



Thank you too. Any tips how I can better the sound / programming? I didn´t felt it sounds that synthy to my ears but if you have some suggestions I would be happy to hear them. And no worries: where is the insult? You just tell your opinion and how you feel about the sound which is perfectly fine and welcome. Thank you for commenting.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 7, 2018)

douggibson said:


> I posted there once. However there was this asshole named Doug Gibson who kept on pissing me off.
> Fuck him.


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 7, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I felt somehow the other way around in that regards. Not that they don´t want to talk about that but to be honest still I think the majority ot people here come for techtalk and not that much for music talk. First it is easier to talk about gear and libraries and second the focus of what they want to create with that libraries is very much either that epic music or trailer sound stuff. Plus my music contributions are not featuring any Zimmer or epic trailer music. So of course the interest is decreasing in those things when most of the people here want to write Zimmer ´esque composition. (few exceptions excluded). And then they struggle with their approach because it doesn´t sound that good. And why is that? Imo it is because they lack total fundamentals. And to be clear: There is nothing wrong with the dominance of epic / trailer music here, but looking at the last 2-3 years threads here ongoing I feel that this is what most want to talk about about but forgetting to learn and improve compositional aspects.



Alexander, you hit a BIG nail on the head. And its so big I don't know where to start. Well first, yes, I agree with what you say completely. However, its not just a symptom of this forum, but a much more general tendency towards shallowness throughout the world today. People in general want instant answers and are not willing to dive deep and commit themselves to intense study as you're doing. It seems to me (based on historical theory books I've been reading and music history) that 100 years ago the general public was much more eager to learn and study music. However, you have to compare other aspects too. 100 years ago they didn't have Facebook, Youtube, TV, Grand Auto Theft, Army of One, etc. where people can rot their minds consuming trivial content as compared with studying a textbook in depth over the course of several months. And distractions today are far more numerous than I even implied. We live in a world that seems to suffer from ADHD, and a divisive one at that, where everyone seems to be polarized in extreme opinions and only willing to argue with each other rather than be tolerant of different opinions and be willing to discuss them logically.

However, I think its important to realize that 100 years ago, while people may have aspired to study more seriously, not everyone became a Stravinsky or a Prokofiev. Though in general, there was more musical talent overall, in part, because music was one of the few forms of entertainment and many more homes had pianos which were more the center of entertainment than today. Music was also not devalued as it has become today. Still, there were only a relatively small number of people that emerged from this environment to become considered serious talent. And even seriously talented people had a very difficult struggle (you should read Gjerdingen's book on Partimenti about how difficult things were back in time).

I think the answer, as you likely realize, is not to compare yourself with others nor try to teach them a lesson as its futile, but rather to focus on your own self. if you do, you'll find much that you can criticize about yourself and focus on areas where you can self improve. Of course, this is difficult to do, as its easier to criticize others than oneself. Yet, its far easier to improve oneself than it is to change others! These may all seem like trite observations to you, but I don't think this is a common way of thinking in our society today. Which could explain why you're one of the few that's willing to make a deeper commitment to yourself to learn deeper things. So the questions you should focus on, is not why others are not willing to learn, but what you can do to further improve yourself. Its a selfish approach, but in another respect, you're setting an example that others might follow.

I share your desire to join with other like-minds to discuss and learn to improve composition and orchestration. Yet, part of the problem is that were in the wrong space. Even with the internet, its hard to find such a similar group of focused learners. The truth is though, were likely in the wrong place due to our various circumstances. There are people who are extremely focused on composition and orchestration at schools such as Julliard, Eastman and other conservatories around the world. But most of us on the internet forum tend not to be members of those schools which concentrate on the very thing we desire to focus on is. My wife went to Julliard and I went to USC for a year so I have a bit of a glimpse of those worlds and they are very intense. When I was there, the focus on composition was to create something new and different more than on something that sounded good to my ear (which is why I left). However, today I think it might be a bit different and there may be more openness to tonal works such as what you're interested in. However like me, its probably hard for you to go back to such a school due to your life circumstances. So the alternative left for us outliers is to study on our own. And if you want one hell of a challenge, well then you chose a good one!

In my case, I've got to go back to work for a number of hours before I can get back to my focus on music. And by that time, I'll be a bit more tired. But I'll keep plodding along as best I can (though it does seem like a fruitless effort) as I have so many personal challenges at this time (which I won't bore you with). However, excuses are meaningless and won't change a thing. Only I can make change where ever I see it possible. And to fight the tendency of distractions in modern society is an even bigger challenge than even my one personal issues.

Before I run though (and sorry about another long rant), I'd like to share what has been valuable to me. I suggest you check out archive.org and dive into some of the older theory and orchestration books. These are free and you can learn so much from these. Combined with scores from IMSLP and sounds from youtube, you have a treasure trove that can allow you to learn as much or more than you could in an intense music conservatory. The limit is your own focus on what to study and your own drive. I suggest this as a way to expand your horizons beyond film composers of the 80s. IOW, as Mike Verta suggests, study what those guys were studying! If you want suggestions for details on which books I've found interesting you can send me an e-mail (synergy543 "at" gmail) and I'll get back to you later. Sorry I have to run now.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 8, 2018)

Good news to Everyone: There is a plan (which I get help with) to create a full orchestra scoresheet from the 2nd version of this track. So stay tuned!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 8, 2018)

synergy543 said:


> Alexander, you hit a BIG nail on the head. And its so big I don't know where to start. Well first, yes, I agree with what you say completely. However, its not just a symptom of this forum, but a much more general tendency towards shallowness throughout the world today. People in general want instant answers and are not willing to dive deep and commit themselves to intense study as you're doing. It seems to me (based on historical theory books I've been reading and music history) that 100 years ago the general public was much more eager to learn and study music. However, you have to compare other aspects too. 100 years ago they didn't have Facebook, Youtube, TV, Grand Auto Theft, Army of One, etc. where people can rot their minds consuming trivial content as compared with studying a textbook in depth over the course of several months. And distractions today are far more numerous than I even implied. We live in a world that seems to suffer from ADHD, and a divisive one at that, where everyone seems to be polarized in extreme opinions and only willing to argue with each other rather than be tolerant of different opinions and be willing to discuss them logically.
> 
> However, I think its important to realize that 100 years ago, while people may have aspired to study more seriously, not everyone became a Stravinsky or a Prokofiev. Though in general, there was more musical talent overall, in part, because music was one of the few forms of entertainment and many more homes had pianos which were more the center of entertainment than today. Music was also not devalued as it has become today. Still, there were only a relatively small number of people that emerged from this environment to become considered serious talent. And even seriously talented people had a very difficult struggle (you should read Gjerdingen's book on Partimenti about how difficult things were back in time).
> 
> ...



Hey 
Thank you for the link. I will check that out and your email contact.
However..regarding your comment:
I plan to create a full orchestral score for you guys, of course with the help of a great guy that I know for quite some time who has much more experience in orchestration and also doing orchestral score sheets. He will supervize that and will technically create the score sheet. I am actually preparing and cleaning up the midi project.

It will take a few weeks but I will come back.

Maybe it is the wrong space here, but lets see. And also: The world needs the kardashians and gossip. And why is that? Just because that we do feel better and so we can say: Look how nasty these retard turds are..I actually stay away from all that bullshit because it just steals my time and it doesn´t teach me anything for life..maybe it just teaches me the following: Don´t be like that mousheads.


----------



## sherief83 (Mar 8, 2018)

You really brought me into the Horner feel for sure! great job, very difficult to nail that sort of style. thanks for sharing it with us


----------



## synergy543 (Mar 8, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Good news to Everyone: There is a plan (which I get help with) to create a full orchestra scoresheet from the 2nd version of this track. So stay tuned!


Congratulations that's good news and I look forward to seeing it.

One thing I would like to say is that if you're truly serious about learning orchestration and improving your composition you'll get your hands on a copy of Sibelius or Finale and learn to score yourself (preferably Sibelius + Note Performer). Not that you should have any reason to listen to me, but if you look back in history, all great composers copied scored. And it wasn't just because they didn't have xerox machines or IMSLP. Rimsky-Korsakov would have his students copy scores, and by doing so it forces you to think about each instrument, each line, the voice-leading, the interaction with the surrounding instruments, etc. in a way that you don't get by just transcribing. Nor by score-reading. Call it transcribing by writing if you will, but the process is different and it will create impressions on your brain that you don't get by just reading or playing. And it also lets you analyze scores in a way you can't by just listening.

I know Mike Verta has really been pushing transcribing and people are taking this to heart which is really wonderful and amazing. However, Mike also knows how to score, read clef transpositions, and read scores but for some reason, he doesn't seem to push this aspect of his own skill base. Maybe he's smart enough to know that less than 10% of the base will "get it" and be willing to do learn these skills (as many don't even read). And pushing the scoring/reading side is not necessarily advantageous for him because he's unlikely to convert the other 90%. However, if you ask him directly, I'm sure he'd agree that scoring to paper is an essential skill. Apparently though neither he nor Desby use Note Performer and I think this is a tremendous tool for anyone learning orchestration. With Sibelius and NotePerformer, you can listen to various combinations of sections or solo lines and really rip apart a score in ways that would otherwise be very hard to accomplish. Of course, the playback sound is compromised compared with the quality of a DAW and performing in the parts with a good library. However, that's not the point. The point is not to get a good performance, but to use the tools to study and analyze and this is where they are a tremendous asset that I think is far under-appreciated in this community. My guess is that only about 10% "get it" because its quite a bit of extra work.

In any case, that's my opinion. I would at least hope you'd try it at least once and see if you don't learn one hell of a lot. There's a bit of a learning curve to these scoring programs but there are some good tutorials for Sibelius on MacProVideo.com by Thomas Goss that I would recommend. Plus, I'm sure many people who know the programs would be willing to answer questions. Once you get past some of the initial snags, it will start getting pretty fast and payback of your effort will increase tremendously.


----------



## Architekton (Mar 8, 2018)

Alex, bravo!!! This is an extremely good piece of music...and me being a big fan of Star Trek loved it even more! Well done!

Btw, someone mentioned that higher strings during some parts sound like synth and I have to agree, but none the less, amazing job!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 9, 2018)

synergy543 said:


> Congratulations that's good news and I look forward to seeing it.
> 
> One thing I would like to say is that if you're truly serious about learning orchestration and improving your composition you'll get your hands on a copy of Sibelius or Finale and learn to score yourself (preferably Sibelius + Note Performer). Not that you should have any reason to listen to me, but if you look back in history, all great composers copied scored. And it wasn't just because they didn't have xerox machines or IMSLP. Rimsky-Korsakov would have his students copy scores, and by doing so it forces you to think about each instrument, each line, the voice-leading, the interaction with the surrounding instruments, etc. in a way that you don't get by just transcribing. Nor by score-reading. Call it transcribing by writing if you will, but the process is different and it will create impressions on your brain that you don't get by just reading or playing. And it also lets you analyze scores in a way you can't by just listening.
> 
> ...



As I said: I can read scores and I am doing it very often in fact, transposed scores also and I can create score sheets, but I am slow with that and I want to make also sure that there are not strange quirks going around. I know T. Goss Channel. Pretty cool and packed informations there. 



Architekton said:


> Alex, bravo!!! This is an extremely good piece of music...and me being a big fan of Star Trek loved it even more! Well done!
> 
> Btw, someone mentioned that higher strings during some parts sound like synth and I have to agree, but none the less, amazing job!



Thank you. I think someone mentioned not specifically the higher strings, but didn´t liked the sounds in general. But he didn´t told me where / what and why, and he didn´t replied what can be improved and how. Well..
Now to your observation: Where exactly? I honestly feel and just that is my perspective that the strings fit greatly for this kind of style and music and they absolutely do here a great job to be honest. So I don´t think at all that they sound synthy. It is a bit surprising me because I felt exact the other way around. But it seems that there is something with the sound expactations maybe? I am not sure. But it seems opinions are very different on this subject because another guy even asked me what strings that are because he felt that they sounded really great. Can you maybe point out if there is a specific spot for you which does sound synthy? Thank you.


----------



## Jeast (Mar 9, 2018)

Very very nice Alexander!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 9, 2018)

Jeast said:


> Very very nice Alexander!



Cool that you enjoyed it!


----------



## Josh Richman (Mar 9, 2018)

Fun. I enjoyed the listen and hearing all of the signatures from Horner and Goldsmith. How was the low rumble/drone made at the very beginning? It really nailed that Aliens space atmosphere in the first 10 seconds.


----------



## marcodistefano (Mar 9, 2018)

Thanks for sharing, really nice piece and well orchestrated!
And yes we can hear the influence and inspiration


----------



## aaronventure (Mar 9, 2018)

Josh Richman said:


> Fun. I enjoyed the listen and hearing all of the signatures from Horner and Goldsmith. How was the low rumble/drone made at the very beginning? It really nailed that Aliens space atmosphere in the first 10 seconds.



You can do that with just white noise and a narrow band going up and down the frequency spectrum.



[AUDIOPLUS=https://vi-control.net/community/attachments/noise-mp3.12306/][/AUDIOPLUS]

The narrower the band, the more pronounced will the sweeping effect be.


----------



## Guy Bacos (Mar 9, 2018)

What can I say that hasn't been already said? You are a master of your craft, much admiration.


----------



## Josh Richman (Mar 10, 2018)

aaronventure said:


> You can do that with just white noise and a narrow band going up and down the frequency spectrum.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




@AlexanderSchiborr can you confirm this was your method?


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Mar 11, 2018)

Josh Richman said:


> @AlexanderSchiborr can you confirm this was your method?



Aaron gave a good suggestion. You can do it like that. Of course you can use any descent saw wave synth. Also layering is a good method to create a bit of your own sound.

@Guy Bacos Thanks so much, man.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 1, 2018)

Sorry for bumping that old thread, but the score sheet is going well for the track, my big helping hand from New York is in the later parts and I am sure to post something soon. I hope also to get some learning from that (what was good and what not in regards of the midi performance vs. real orchestral score sheet).


----------



## Przemek K. (Apr 3, 2018)

So I did take the 3 minutes to listen to your piece Alex, and only because I'm also a big Star Trek fan.
Well... I love it what can I say more.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 13, 2018)

We ARE...on the fucking way..stay tuned..full throttle..


----------



## BlackDorito (Apr 13, 2018)

Alexander, not to deflect from this discussion (which has been excellent), but I am almost done with the Sibelius score of 'Polychordal' .. would you like to create a play-through video of that one?


----------



## South Thames (Apr 13, 2018)

The MIDI you get out of Sibelius sounds fantastic. I purchased Sibelius after a long hiatus about six months ago and have found manipulating the MIDI to be an incredible pain which has really slowed my progress in getting back into the software and trying to shift some of my workflows out of Logic.

I was very surprised to see the opening passage marked forte for three trumpets? From the MIDI anyway, I took this to be a sort of echo of the Alexander Courage theme (over the deep drone etc). It's all relative of course but three trumpets at that dynamic seem too loud for the entrance.


----------



## Mads Skønberg (Apr 14, 2018)

I am so extremely impressed of this track. Totally blown away!! 

Sounds 100% like a real orchestra.

New year orchestra of Vienna!

GREAT work Alex! You should be proud! Just love the horns, brass and the theme.

Kudos!


----------



## Paul T McGraw (Apr 14, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> I honestly feel and just that is my perspective that the strings fit greatly for this kind of style and music and they absolutely do here a great job to be honest. So I don´t think at all that they sound synthy. It is a bit surprising me because I felt exact the other way around. But it seems that there is something with the sound expactations maybe? I am not sure. But it seems opinions are very different on this subject because another guy even asked me what strings that are because he felt that they sounded really great. Can you maybe point out if there is a specific spot for you which does sound synthy? Thank you.



I agree with you @AlexanderSchiborr about the strings. They sound great to me. The sound is a bit more aggressive than the Spitfire sound, but that does not make it bad or unrealistic. A pro recording/mixing engineer can make real strings sound darker or brighter, silky smooth or harsh. The thing that makes samples sound synthy to me is when the phrasing is not musical or the mixing is bad. That does not apply to your work. This piece sounds VERY believable and awesome!

I am looking forward to seeing the score, when finished. Thanks for sharing it with us.


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 16, 2018)

BlackDorito said:


> Alexander, not to deflect from this discussion (which has been excellent), but I am almost done with the Sibelius score of 'Polychordal' .. would you like to create a play-through video of that one?



Hey there , 

I didn´t heard for quite a time from you and I thought you were busy so I didn´t want to bother with questions regarding the older polychordal deep space track, but sure I would love to see what you have done so far? I hope the stuff brought you also some good insight? 




South Thames said:


> The MIDI you get out of Sibelius sounds fantastic. I purchased Sibelius after a long hiatus about six months ago and have found manipulating the MIDI to be an incredible pain which has really slowed my progress in getting back into the software and trying to shift some of my workflows out of Logic.
> 
> I was very surprised to see the opening passage marked forte for three trumpets? From the MIDI anyway, I took this to be a sort of echo of the Alexander Courage theme (over the deep drone etc). It's all relative of course but three trumpets at that dynamic seem too loud for the entrance.



I will doublecheck that this week. And thank you for pointing that out. I need still to revise the whole score sheet and of course I have to check dynamics as well. Thank you for the interest here.



Mads Skønberg said:


> I am so extremely impressed of this track. Totally blown away!!
> 
> Sounds 100% like a real orchestra.
> 
> ...



Thank you Mads. 
I appreciate such words, but I know it always can be better. Some stuff work quite well with that samples here, some others totally not, but that´s either imcapability in programming or limitations of samples sometimes too. 



Paul T McGraw said:


> I agree with you @AlexanderSchiborr about the strings. They sound great to me. The sound is a bit more aggressive than the Spitfire sound, but that does not make it bad or unrealistic. A pro recording/mixing engineer can make real strings sound darker or brighter, silky smooth or harsh. The thing that makes samples sound synthy to me is when the phrasing is not musical or the mixing is bad. That does not apply to your work. This piece sounds VERY believable and awesome!
> 
> I am looking forward to seeing the score, when finished. Thanks for sharing it with us.



Fingers crossed but hopefully withhin the next 3 weeks. Doug is actually pretty busy and I have work these days on the some corrections in the track (according to his input).


----------



## Loïc D (Apr 16, 2018)

@AlexanderSchiborr : Great piece of music ! What you can achieve with libraries only is outstanding.
And thanks a lot for sharing the score, this is not only very kind, but also a very good way to study for beginners like me


----------



## BlackDorito (Apr 16, 2018)

AlexanderSchiborr said:


> Hey there ,
> 
> I didn´t heard for quite a time from you and I thought you were busy so I didn´t want to bother with questions regarding the older polychordal deep space track, but sure I would love to see what you have done so far? I hope the stuff brought you also some good insight?
> 
> ...



Sure … I’m learning a lot with Polychordal. First of all, I find the music very inspiring. Since I now have a score I can read, it makes it easy to analyze the musical flow, e.g. transitioning from active to lyrical parts (angry musical surface to smooth surface), interesting harmonic progressions and instrumental gestures .. lots of things.

In addition, because of the nature of the task – taking the MIDI file of a track implemented mainly with Spitfire Symph Orchestra and creating a rendition in Sibelius that drives the VSL Special Edition equivalent voices – I’m getting good insight into the following practical considerations:

· How particular Spitfire SSO voices are used in combination to create tension, swells, soft passages, tri-tonic fanfares … all the goodies that are in Polychordal J

· When to employ solo, a2 and a6 versions of voices

· What the equivalent VSL voices sound like in comparison to Spitfire … including their placement on the MIR stage compared to the Spitfire mic selections. As an example, viz. articulation, the Spitfire horns can have just a bit more punch in the attack, for which I need to use an ‘sfz’ marking in Sibelius to trigger the VSL sfz patch to get the same effect.

I’m happy to say that, IMO, you can take a MIDI file that drives Spitfire SSO and implement the same music in VSL driven by a Sibelius score, by just transcribing the same MIDI notes and adding reasonable score markings. Do they sound exactly the same? …. No. Spitfire strings are more lush and brass is bolder. Could I get them closer by spending time tweaking the VSL parameters? .. undoubtedly. [For those of us who are notation-based, parameter tweaking can result in lots of messy score markings … for which I liberally use the Hide feature of Sibelius]

I should be finished with the score in a few weeks.


----------



## NoamL (Apr 16, 2018)

Alex I just heard this now! I freaking love this piece! Influences of Silvestri (but also Poledouris?) and you mix it all up in a wonderful original piece.

I am only going to tell you one thing, which I know you won't like to hear but you know that both of us are No-BS! people... you just _have_ to do your final mockups on the grid... The issue is not the tempo changes but that the instruments don't sound tightly enough together as if they are being directed by a conductor throughout the tempo changes. Sometimes different instruments have different tempos and they only "catch up" to each other at the downbeat, etc., a real orchestra grooves together more because everyone is listening to each other. This is the ONLY element of realism I think your mockup is lacking, otherwise it is INTERSTELLAR 

I made the following rough MIDI tempo map for you (see attached ZIP file) which contains all the tempos in your mockup, but on the grid (please note it starts at the downbeat of the music, not the beginning of the audio file). I think this works in Sibelius too, so maybe Doug can import it if he wishes, and will have the MIDI playback sound even more like your mockup.

In any case, the next time you have a piano sketch you're going to orchestrate, just send it to me and I'll make a tempo track for you _before_ you orchestrate! It'll be so easy, I promise


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 16, 2018)

NoamL said:


> Alex I just heard this now! I freaking love this piece! Influences of Silvestri (but also Poledouris?) and you mix it all up in a wonderful original piece.
> 
> I am only going to tell you one thing, which I know you won't like to hear but you know that both of us are No-BS! people... you just _have_ to do your final mockups on the grid... The issue is not the tempo changes but that the instruments don't sound tightly enough together as if they are being directed by a conductor throughout the tempo changes. Sometimes different instruments have different tempos and they only "catch up" to each other at the downbeat, etc., a real orchestra grooves together more because everyone is listening to each other. This is the ONLY element of realism I think your mockup is lacking, otherwise it is INTERSTELLAR
> 
> ...



Wow, cool!  I think thats great idea here and I will try that out now because I anyways need to go back to the piece and change some spots according to Dougs input so that it translates better to the real thing but luckily nothing major that I found out. So I can just import the tempo map into my cubase project or how that goes? I use cubase 6.5 64 bit and I know how I can import things, I think also xml tempo maps?
And thank for the compliment regarding the other. I know you have very good ears in both regards (composition and sound mockup)..


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Apr 16, 2018)

BlackDorito said:


> Sure … I’m learning a lot with Polychordal. First of all, I find the music very inspiring. Since I now have a score I can read, it makes it easy to analyze the musical flow, e.g. transitioning from active to lyrical parts (angry musical surface to smooth surface), interesting harmonic progressions and instrumental gestures .. lots of things.
> 
> In addition, because of the nature of the task – taking the MIDI file of a track implemented mainly with Spitfire Symph Orchestra and creating a rendition in Sibelius that drives the VSL Special Edition equivalent voices – I’m getting good insight into the following practical considerations:
> 
> ...




Wow cool, that is exactly why I do that and share everything because here you mentioned such great. I am looking forward to the score and if you feel to let me know that there is something which doesn´t translate well, just say something, it is all easy and good. And if you like more after that..I am actually in the making of that here, still a sketch orchestra phase though.

The Quest is the projecttitle.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/yp0pkb4ibkf7fpw/AS_Comp_The_Quest_Orch_Sketch_template_v7.mp3?dl=0


----------



## nik (May 17, 2018)

Alexander the Great! Really an awsome work!


----------



## yhomas (May 18, 2018)

Good structure, good amount of content, accessible but still interesting; mock-up is solid enough. I just don’t personally like the song (maybe it’s not my style).

What I really like, and want to hear more of is the transitional section around 2:05—2:08; not sure how far this could expand out.


----------



## stevedeath (May 19, 2018)

Great stuff! Really evokes Horner and Goldsmith.


----------



## Nils (May 24, 2018)

Wow - this is really great!


----------



## pipedr (Jun 1, 2018)

I really liked it!


----------



## AlexanderSchiborr (Jun 18, 2018)

Okay, FINALLY, like promised: Here is the full score as some few requested. 
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dvxrsfd6qh9u7sd/Alexander_Schiborr_%20Excelsior%20Class%20-%20FULL%20SCORE.pdf?dl=0

Many thanks to @douggibson for his incredible help to prepare the score. 

Here is also a video which he did. 



If anybody of you would like to work with a professional orchestrator and score sheet creator, give him a call and message. My total recommendation. 

Hope you enjoy. 

I updated also the first post for those who are new to the thread.


----------



## wbacer (Jun 18, 2018)

That's a lot of work. What dedication to your craft. Congrats, it come out excellent. Also to Doug for helping to prepare the score, looks and sounds amazing.


----------

