# I hereby put forth a challenge to everyone: create "depth" with your samples



## RiffWraith (Apr 10, 2012)

Something tells me this thread is going to die a quick and painless death, but.....

There are two things that easily tell me that samples have been used.

The second is note transitions. We'll leave that alone for the purpose of this discussion.

The first, and by far the most obvious, is the space that the instruments sit in, or better yet, the lack of depth. It's not easy to explain, but depth is really, I think, the best word to fit. When I hear a mockup, I hear a certain_ flatness_ that is not evident (thankfully) in a properly recorded orchestra. I hear this:







as opposed to this:






Hopefully that's clear. And here is a great audio example of depth:

http://www.jeffreyhayat.com/SWEx.wav

You should know what that is. If you don't, shame on you!  It's a Star Wars cue by JW.

Hear how even tho it's extremely busy and there is so much going on, that everything is distinct? You can hear everything, and nothing is clouding nor masking anything else. There is a certain depth, and you can tell that certain instruments are sitting in a different place than others. I have not heard this with any mockup. And no, MIR and Altiverb do not cut it, sorry. 

So, the challenge I put forth is to see if anyone can make their mockups 3-D (ish), and give the music some depth. Doesn't matter the music style (needn't be Williams-esque), doesn't matter the sample libs nor the tools. You can use whatever you see fit, regardless. Just make it sound _not flat_.

Anyone?


----------



## jleckie (Apr 10, 2012)

Beat Kaufmann has some amazing reverb presets to use in conjunction with VSL that is very successful in creating depth. Hetoryn (sp?) over at VSL also has some that don't work as well but they do work to an extent.


----------



## Kralc (Apr 10, 2012)

The demo "Raise the Atocha" for Spitfire's Bespoke libs always blows me away. http://www.spitfireaudio.com/demos
Sounds pretty 3-D (ish) to me


----------



## Oliver_Codd (Apr 10, 2012)

Great topic! I've been thinking about this a lot myself. Alan Meyerson's mixes always have such a great depth to them. The Island soundtrack is a great example because you have the orchestral *and* hybrid elements that both have a nice 3 dimensionality to them. This leads me to believe that you can create depth artificially with EQ, verb, delay, chorus etc. I'd love to see what people come up with. 
Some interesting articles:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb09/a ... pspace.htm

http://www.stonebridgemastering.com/blog/?p=177


----------



## Mossad (Apr 10, 2012)

Kralc @ Tue Apr 10 said:


> The demo "Raise the Atocha" for Spitfire's Bespoke libs always blows me away. http://www.spitfireaudio.com/demos
> Sounds pretty 3-D (ish) to me



Along those same lines, the demo Andy did for their new orchestral grand is pretty amazing. Actually, imo, pretty spot on for instrument placement and overall depth of sound.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 11, 2012)

I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly recorded orchestra sounds one dimensional when compared with the real thing. The combination of live playing, ears and brain is way superior to all currently known recording techniques.

However, for me there is a general problem with sample performances that is inherent. There is nearly always far too much depth! An orchestra just doesn't sound like that. Unfortunately bringing up the close mics won't just bring the instrument forward, because it adds many other problems to the mix, particularly in terms of sound.

Obviously with samples it depends on your original source. If it is recorded in a big space already, then you get what you get. If it is recorded in a smaller space and you are going to use some kind of placement software, then you do get a bit more flexibility.

For solo instruments that already have early reflections built in, I find that either MIR Pro or SPAT works very well for me, but then again I'm not after the sound that many other people are, in that I don't like huge echoy, indistinct mixes. I like to hear the performance, just as I do in a concert hall setting.

D


----------



## MA-Simon (Apr 11, 2012)

> I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly recorded orchestra sounds one dimensional when compared with the real thing. The combination of live playing, ears and brain is way superior to all currently known recording techniques.



I think this is becouse of the artifical Stereo-Output recording/using only 2 fixed Monitors. And i don´t mean 5.1 surround. I just think 2 Monitors (Left/Right) is not enough for the front, there should be more, like upper right, upper left, up, down, far left, far right etc. Becouse I will rotate my head while listening to a real orchestra, maybe look somewhere else etc. So my ears are changing the "recording possition" while listening on the go. I cant do that with just 2 fixed left and right speakers. There would need to be far more.
Maybe in the future if there would be wireless headset controlled monitor-system, which would allow us to control the stereo field of the different mic recording sources by automatically reacting while rotating your head etc.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 11, 2012)

MA-Simon @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> > I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly recorded orchestra sounds one dimensional when compared with the real thing. The combination of live playing, ears and brain is way superior to all currently known recording techniques.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think it may be even simpler than that. The brain is very good at interpreting what it hears. It's a bit like hearing a choir and not knowing what they are saying, but as soon as you know, it is obvious. The brain manages to do a real time mix for us, so that important stuff gets pushed higher in the mix, whilst the less important stuff is partially ignored. This is one reason why you can enjoy a well written piece and hear more and more over multiple hearings, I think. It may be that your idea could help though. In the real world the listener is actually part of the sound field and contributes to it. With a recording this is not the case, so the experience is very different. Maybe with headsets one could remove the listening room from the experiecne.

Sorry Riff, this is all very interesting, but totally off topic. :oops: 

D


----------



## rayinstirling (Apr 11, 2012)

I suppose it always comes back to the same question for me - 

Is the recording musical? If it is, it works.
What is the perfect mix? Along with many here, I strive to find it but I won't because it doesn't exist. Or, if it did yesterday I listen again today and I'm mistaken.
'having fun trying though. :lol:
now with MIR PRO


----------



## Scrianinoff (Apr 11, 2012)

Jeff, the flatness you refer to also surfaces in the non-sampled world, albeit less prevalent as in the sampled world. The reason, I think, is that in these cases not enough care and wisdom has been given to the mix. Since for most mock-ups the mixing is done by the mocker, most of the time being a non-trained mixing engineer, the quality of the mix will most often not surpass the quality of an average mix engineer. 

In this light, I thought it was funny that you chose to give an example of Williams' music of the latest Star Wars trilogy. Music of one of the best composers for film, recorded by one of the best mixing engineers. Have a listen to an example of the original Star Wars movie (1977), welcome to flatland, still wonderful writing and recording of course. In fact, that could be another challenge: whose writing can withstand such a sonic signature?

Then, even if this writing would be there, then it would need to be mocked up. Williams is relying on the musicianship of the superb orchestras he conducts. This also brings up your "first" point, "note transitions". Although Adagio is apparently going to make this accessible even to Joe Average, beautiful flowing string lines full of emotion even without the need for any CCs, normally, musical playing takes the mockers quite a bit more work than Williams waving a stick. It's more than transitions, it's knowing when to squeeze out what sound out of which instrument. This kind of work http://www.vsl.co.at/en/67/702/1782/1431.htm 

To give an example that could meet your challenge, I always thought this mock up presented good writing, a mock-up with musicality, and a believable acoustic signature. http://www.vsl.co.at/Player2.aspx?Lang=1&DemoId=5051 Mind you, this was way before, MIR Pro, Spaces, Vienna Suite, and sampled-in beautiful acoustic spaces (EW, Spitfire). As a matter of fact, nowadays, when I switch on all mic positions in Albion, for example, and adjust the volumes a bit, I hear plenty of depth. Yet, then the limitation is on the other side, the versatility in sounds per instrument (group).

By the way, the 'moving your head while listening' debate reminded me of an article I read a few days ago: http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/04/of-robots-and-cocktails.html (http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2 ... tails.html)


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 11, 2012)

Daryl @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly recorded orchestra sounds one dimensional when compared with the real thing. The combination of live playing, ears and brain is way superior to all currently known recording techniques.
> 
> However, for me there is a general problem with sample performances that is inherent. There is nearly always far too much depth! An orchestra just doesn't sound like that. Unfortunately bringing up the close mics won't just bring the instrument forward, because it adds many other problems to the mix, particularly in terms of sound.
> 
> ...



A big +1.


----------



## ontrackmusic (Apr 11, 2012)

Listening to the Star Wars example, I'm struck by how aggressive some of the panning is. The timpani for example are very far left, as are the horns. By contrast, the strings don't seem quite as spread out as, for example, the out-of-the-box Hollywood Strings positioning (which seems extremely wide by comparison).

I tend to leave the panning alone with most of my libs (with the exception of VSL for woodwinds)...I'm going to start experimenting with collapsing/positioning instruments and sections a bit more to see if that helps with separation in my mixes. However, without VE Pro, I'll need to find a plugin that will allow me to do what power panning does for the VSL folks. Or maybe I just need to quit resisting and pick up VE Pro...

Another thing I'm struck by is the relative "intensity" of the individual performances. The players seem to be playing with a strong, but not overly aggressive technique. It feels like they have plenty of reserve power if needed, and that the intensity is created by the orchestration and composition. I have a tendency to compensate for my orchestration inadequacies by leaning on the ff dynamics of the samples, which no doubt is restricting the depth of the mix.

It's funny how I keep moving my own goalposts with regard to what I'd be "satisfied with" using samples. It's seems like an addiction...always searching for that next level of "realism" (whatever that means...).


----------



## José Herring (Apr 11, 2012)

Space is created by keeping the proper resonant balance between the orchestral instruments and groups.

I'm working on a piece right now as an exercise in creating "space" or depth by just using a balanced template. I programmed everything w/o reverb got the depth I wanted then applied reverb near the very end. Pretty interesting exerciser.


----------



## Mossad (Apr 11, 2012)

Every time I try to modify panning or use a plugin to try and widen the sound, I always feel I make things worse instead of better. Perhaps I'm being over aggressive with it all. Using a sledgehammer to solve the problem when a flyswatter would do...


----------



## rpaillot (Apr 12, 2012)

Same.

The best mockup results I got was by mixing different samples libraries without touching much to the panning.

Still I think panning can add lot of things to a mix but in a reasonable way.
I often hear lot of mix overpanned and it kills all the sense of space.


----------



## ontrackmusic (Apr 12, 2012)

> I often hear lot of mix overpanned and it kills all the sense of space.





> Every time I try to modify panning or use a plugin to try and widen the sound, I always feel I make things worse instead of better.


Agreed...And what I'm interested in is actually narrowing the stereo spread of certain instruments/sections in order to position them with more precision. Like what VSL does with the power pan concept--collapse the stereo information without losing any (like a traditional 'pan' would). Phase tricks that attempt to widen the stereo spread generally have a thinning quality to me.


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 12, 2012)

Originally said:


> Something tells me this thread is going to die a quick and painless death, but.....



Well, I guess not! :lol:




Kralc @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> The demo "Raise the Atocha" for Spitfire's Bespoke libs always blows me away. http://www.spitfireaudio.com/demos
> Sounds pretty 3-D (ish) to me



Yeah - that's getting there, and it's a lot better then most other things I have heard, but it still lacks that depth. Sounds great otherwise tho.




Oliver_Codd @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> Some interesting articles:
> 
> http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb09/a ... pspace.htm
> 
> http://www.stonebridgemastering.com/blog/?p=177



Great articles - thanks!




Daryl @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly
> 
> recorded orchestra sounds one dimensional when compared with the real thing.



Well, technically a properly recorded orchestra is one dimensional, as it's just L/R. Usually; not talking here about 5.1. But the point was that it sounds like has depth, whereas the samples do not.




Scrianinoff @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> Jeff, the flatness you refer to also surfaces in the non-sampled world, albeit less prevalent as in the sampled world.



Exactly. And you bring up a good point too about the musicianship of the orchestras and mixing engineers.




ontrackmusic @ Thu Apr 12 said:


> Agreed...And what I'm interested in is actually narrowing the stereo spread of certain instruments/sections in order to position them with more precision.



Sometimes that works. Not always, tho.



ontrackmusic @ Thu Apr 12 said:


> Phase tricks that attempt to widen the stereo spread generally have a thinning quality to me.



Same here. The music then suffers from phasing issues - even if only a little.

Good discussion - keep it comin'!


----------



## Daryl (Apr 12, 2012)

RiffWraith @ Thu Apr 12 said:


> Daryl @ Wed Apr 11 said:
> 
> 
> > I would take all this one step further and say that even a properly
> ...


I think that this is territory that is best decided by taste. Your JW example has depth. Many sample cues also have depth. They don't sound the same, but both sound equally fake to me. It seems rather Quixotish to try to convert one fake sound into another fake. Film mixing is an art in itself, and has little to do with what an orchestra does and doesn't sound like in real life.

One of the best examples of this is the Raiders March, when the Trumpets seem to jump forward about 20m to play the theme and then run back to seats placed somewhere in the next universe. Nothing wrong with this if it sounds good, but in a way this only works because the playing is live. If it wasn't then it would not be a good trick to use and we all would scream at the mix.

So I suppose that my point is that you are trying to re-create something that doesn't really exist in the real world. I suggest that it's an exercise not worth bothering with.

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 12, 2012)

Daryl @ Thu Apr 12 said:


> RiffWraith @ Thu Apr 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Wed Apr 11 said:
> ...



Yep.


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 12, 2012)

Daryl, I think you know I respect you, but I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you here. 

I think depth does exist in the real world - or at the least, the _perception_ of depth does.

And therefore, even tho the goal may not be acheivable, that should not discourage people from trying. Vivian Campbell (W.Snake, Dio) once said, "I strive for perfection and settle for excellence." I am sure he didn't invent the term, but the point is, you always set your goals high - even if those goals are unatainable, you try to get there, because where you wind up falling will only be that much higher than if your original goals were set lower.

Take a QB coming out of college. With the likes of Dan Marino, Joe Montana, Tom Brady and Peton Manning coming before, what are the chances this guy becoming the best QB to ever play in the NFL? Next to zero. Doesn't mean he shouldn't try.

Cheers.


----------



## Daryl (Apr 12, 2012)

Riff, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I can't just ignore what I've learned from 25 years of conducting professional orchestras. :wink: 

BTW who were all those people you mentioned? I've never heard of any of them.

D


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 12, 2012)

Daryl @ Fri Apr 13 said:


> Riff, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.



No prob.  



Daryl @ Fri Apr 13 said:


> BTW who were all those people you mentioned? I've never heard of any of them.



Ha!


----------



## Goran (Apr 17, 2012)

The problem of "depth" occurs regularly when trying to achieve orchestral realism, especially with string sections, but this is IMO often overplayed in a completely irrelevant, purely fetishist manner. If a production is done in a way that is compelling in terms of realistic and musical performance and the overall sound quality of instruments and acoustical space are satisfying, it will function as music, eventual light deficiencies in "depth" notwithstanding (provided these are light deficiencies, not crass problems).

But, to put my 5 cents in , here is my latest string orchestra production (1st movement of Dvorak's Serenade for Strings) - has enough "depth" for my ears (especially the two second chart versions)...

http://www.digital-orchestra-production.com/en/demos/dvorak-serenade/index.html


----------



## Dan Mott (Apr 18, 2012)

ontrackmusic @ Thu Apr 12 said:


> > I often hear lot of mix overpanned and it kills all the sense of space.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




http://www.waves.com/content.aspx?id=275

Try this. It's a nice power panner. You can pan instruments without losing the stereo spread. 

I hate panning stereo instruments with the pan knobs in my DAW. Sounds very unnatural to the ear. Mono instruments are a different stereo though.

Peace.


----------



## chimuelo (Apr 18, 2012)

I've tried every DSP plug in and even tried Native and after 26 years my trusty old PCM70 on an AUX channel cannot be beat.
It wraps around the audio like a cloud and you can move it back and forth, from side to side, and nothing else works better for me.
Some say I am cheap or lazy but I assure you my stage sound gets noticed more than our singers Ass and cheesy Vanna White dresses which come rolled in on 2 garment carts.
She really suffers from Retail Therapy.

I have to provide the mic still after 6 years, so she can have her voice lessons and clothes. But after 1 year of suffering with wedges and mic cables she did break down for IEMs and a wireless dually.
I try to give her a DSP verb the 4080L, and even she hears the difference and asks for the usual splash of the 70.
Again, I cannot explain why Native/DSP verbs live, sound as if they eminate from the rear of the speaker instead of the front.
Wish I knew the scientific explanation, but until I hear something else that can work, my ancient 70 will continue to be used.
Imagine if I could get AES/EBU like I have on my Solaris synth.
Thankfully my XITE-1 converters are high spec'd. 

I like your idea Jose of recording dry and adding the space to the pan law spaces after the fact. I also do this but don't know about the resonance stuff your talking about...


----------



## Dietz (Apr 18, 2012)

Slighty OT:


Scrianinoff @ Wed Apr 11 said:


> [...] To give an example that could meet your challenge, I always thought this mock up presented good writing, a mock-up with musicality, and a believable acoustic signature. http://www.vsl.co.at/Player2.aspx?Lang=1&DemoId=5051 Mind you, this was way before, MIR Pro, Spaces, Vienna Suite, and sampled-in beautiful acoustic spaces [...]


This is a _great_ piece of music, masterfully executed. I have to admit that I didn't remember it - shame on me. *two thumbs up*


/Dietz


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Apr 19, 2012)

I think sometimes we think too much about reverb and depth. 

I think as long as the music holds up and the mixing supports the musical flow, it sounds great. Of course, the mix matters but not more than the music itself.

As Philip Newell put it to me - There is more in the music arrangement than we think!

So, I stopped worrying too much about reverb sometime back. I have VSL Convolution, Aether, Breeze and VSL Hyrbid. 

Combine these with the power panner, I can achieve really good results. I suppose, if I got a Bricasti it would be nice. Well, I have never used it but thats what everyone says.

I think these things are more useful for Live stuff specially since most libraries come with reverb these days. 

Frankly, I would worry more about the music than the reverb in a sample world. 

And finally, if I actually had the budget, I would just hire a professional to mix my music. I can only do an approximation of a sound but the engineer can really help sculpt the reverbs, eqs etc.

You listen to Beat Kauffman's demos and they sound quite good with VSL instruments in small spaces. He loves to do chamber sound. I doubt many people have achieved that with as much success. 

And I think thats mainly because the kind of music he writes is really good and well orchestrated. Of course, mixing chops help but again not at the cost of lack of musicianship. 

Btw, I myself fall in that group of - Decent at programming/mixing but terrible at music!


Best,

Tanuj.


----------



## ScoringFilm (Apr 22, 2012)

My blog is essentially on this subject. Still loads of posts to come (just haven't had time to upload them yet).

http://www.scoringfilm.net/ (Scoring Film blog)

Justin


----------

