# I can't tell the difference anymore!



## midphase (Jul 16, 2008)

Ok...I give up....I can't tell the difference anymore! Between the new Symphobia Demos http://www.projectsam.com/Products/Symphobia/ and that Star Trek arrangement http://community.vsl.co.at/forums/t/191 ... ageIndex=1 plus other stuff that I'm hearing from around the net....I really can't tell what's real and what's not anymore!

Sample libraries sound fucking amazing, and now I find myself listening to real orchestral recording and thinking that they sound a bit fake!!!

Now, before you jump to conclusions and assume that I've lost my mind, I should let you know that thanks to my lovely wife who works for LA Opera, I get plenty of exposure to real orchestras, and I'm beginning to feel that one of the factors that generally gets people riled up when chumps like me come out and make statements like what I just made is the context of the actual composition being performed.

Let me clear up what I just said:

If you go out, and hear an orchestra perform Beethoven, or Brahms, or Berlioz or Debussy (ha...I bet you thought I was only going to list "B" names!) then, with tears running down your cheeks you will think that samples will never ever ever ever sound like this........fair enough.

However, if you listen to a film score (ideally within the context of the actual film), an orchestra which has been tightly recorded, compressed, processed, harmonically enhanced, put in a blender and added latte to it (with a sprinkle of cocoa powder on top), like most of the film scores nowadays, you will realize that it's become downright impossible to tell the difference.

You don't believe me? Go ahead, listen to the above demos, and then go and listen to HellBoy 2, Iron Man, and the other slew of films that Hollywood is vomiting on us this Summer season, and then ask yourself....have we not reached the point where the line blurs?

There are always exceptions of course, the smaller films where music takes center stage, usually with small ensembles, the lyrical solo violin of a Schindler's List, or the YoYo Ma Cello of Crouching Tiger...but for the most part, I'm beginning to feel that usage of a real orchestra is quickly becoming an Option and not a Need.

Now, I'm not trying to say this is good or bad, I honestly don't know quite yet how to feel about it...but I do welcome the end of the age where people's (guys like us) quality of compositions were mostly judged by how realistic their "orchestral simulations" were and less by how good the actual notes where!

I look forward to this new time, where pretty much everyone can sound damn real as real as what their pocketbooks (or BitTorrent) can afford them! Let the composers be judged as composers, and not as samplist-engineer-programmer-producers! It used to be that pianos sounded like pianos, and when a film director sat down with a composer to hear the score...he would be treated to a piano version of what the orchestra would be playing. This was wonderful, this is exactly why music used to sound the way it did way back when! But we have now passed that stage, and directors expect to hear mockups so realistic, that the real orchestra recording that follows almost pales in comparison to the precision and extended frequencies.

So now it looks like Symphobia, and whatever new VSL is cooking up, and whatever else Nick and Doug have been busy with is the new "piano" in the sense that it's leveling the playing field once again, and hopefully taking the focus away from the "realism" and putting it back into the actual composition, and I think this is a good thing.

As far as the real musicians that are getting more and more displaced out of a job....I do think that there are (and will continue to be) enough high budget films with enough "old school" directors to keep all of those guys busy for quite many years to come.

But ultimately, just like film, just like miniature models, just like big sets....I think real orchestras in films are destined to become a very niche commodity.

I know that many of you will valiantly disagree with me, but how much of that disagreement is based on principle? 

For me, the line is blurred already!


----------



## choc0thrax (Jul 16, 2008)

The thing with that Star Trek demo is that that took a talented person to achieve that realism whereas with Symphobia it sounds like it's going to be great right out of the box. As usual some areas are progressing faster than others, do we have great realisitic sounding string legato sections yet? No. I think the main advance Symphobia made is that now we have access to string and brass sections that are recorded together at the same time. 

I know Danny Elfman is far from what he once was during his decade of reigning supreme(1989-1999) but please don't file him in with Ramin Dwajadi. 8)


----------



## synthetic (Jul 16, 2008)

Sure, tutti orchestra playing piano chords won't sound much different than the samples. But well-written music still sounds great with an orchestra. I was just listening to Goldsmith's "The Wind and the Lion" and I don't know how I would get a sampler to sound like that. 

I would love to hear Mike Verta's Star Trek arrangement played by an orchestra.


----------



## midphase (Jul 16, 2008)

"I was just listening to Goldsmith's "The Wind and the Lion" and I don't know how I would get a sampler to sound like that. "

But who writes like that anymore? Not that some people aren't capable of writing like that...but they're not being asked to.


----------



## lux (Jul 16, 2008)

choc0thrax @ Wed Jul 16 said:


> The thing with that Star Trek demo is that that took a talented person to achieve that realism whereas with Symphobia it sounds like it's going to be great right out of the box.



I'm not sure i feel the same. I think a talented composer/arranger/performer is still everything. Having a good timbre out of the box is the first step, but i feel sometimes it happens to lead to less accuracy on the composing and arranging.

I'm convinced you will always need some talent or professionality or both to sound believable, whatever product you have your hands on.

Different story if you just need to sound plain decent.


----------



## IvanP (Jul 16, 2008)

lux @ Wed Jul 16 said:


> I'm not sure i feel the same. I think a talented composer/arranger/performer is still everything. Having a good timbre out of the box is the first step, but i feel sometimes it happens to lead to less accuracy on the composing and arranging.
> 
> I'm convinced you will always need some talent or professionality or both to sound believable, whatever product you have your hands on.
> 
> Different story if you just need to sound plain decent.




Couldn't agree more...


----------



## synthetic (Jul 16, 2008)

> But who writes like that anymore? Not that some people aren't capable of writing like that...but they're not being asked to.



Mostly the guys who can afford real orchestras anyway.


----------



## nikolas (Jul 16, 2008)

I beg to differ please!

Only because I do write for live instruments, and exacrtly because of that I make sure I take into account the details and the abilities (as well as the short comings) of a live, acoustic instrument! 

I know that we're coming pretty close and I have no trouble with that, but still everything I do for strings (for example) would take a huge amount of effort to emulate in samples. Not as easy as making a midi file, and throwing in EW or VSL or anything. 

And I'm pretty fine with this idea. Whenever I get the chance to write for live, acoustic, instruments I tend to almost exxagerate all the features impossible to be done in samples: quarter tone clusters in strings, various multiphonics in woods, gliss and other effects, bloody amazing legato, etc... 

Again not that it is impossible, but merely very difficult (and impossible for me with my mid range studio and a non owner of VSL or other recorded legato/portamento sample library)...


----------



## midphase (Jul 16, 2008)

Judging from the time estimates for the Symphobia demos....it doesn't sound like it was that difficult to obtain extremely realistic results with that library.

I'm also talking strictly about usage of orchestral music in movies with sfx and dialogue laid in. I would be willing to bet that if you were given an A/B comparison most composers wouldn't be able to tell the difference.


----------



## wonshu (Jul 16, 2008)

For me the biggest problem is, no matter how huge a library is, I'm always missing the dirt and the FX that are possible on a real instrument.

The bow, the air, she shaking and moving of the sound.

It'll be a while...

However, I do agree with what you say about film music and not being able to tell the difference! But the reason for that is, that the producers have lost touch with music and went for bling blang instead of what musicians are capable of doing.

But hey, it's all good.... 8) 8)


----------



## re-peat (Jul 16, 2008)

midphase @ Wed Jul 16 said:


> (...) the Symphobia demos (...) obtain extremely realistic results with that library.


That's true, but even so: what Symphobia has to offer is only a tiny fraction of what a real orchestra is capable of. Same thing with the Star Trek piece or other acclaimed mockups: they only show just one or, at best, only a few facets of what a real orchestra's sound can be.
It's a 'pars pro toto'-logic: like saying that you can play the piano equally well as Horowitz can, simply because you can strike the middle C just the way he can. Doesn't hold up, does it? It's not because Symphobia can do an exciting bit of rousing Hollywood-music extremely convincingly, that all of a sudden the gap between the virtual and the real orchestras has been bridged. For certain types of orchestral manoeuvres, yes maybe, but certainly not when you consider the whole of the orchestral palette and its infinite sonic possibilities. That gap is still as wide as ever, it seems to me.

The same crippled logic was used a while ago on NS, when someone managed to mock-up a few very easy bars of the opening of Dvorak's famous 'Largetto' (from his 'New World' symphony) fairly decently with GPO and that accomplishment was then used as a proof to say that the GPO was capable of successfully emulating a real orchestra.
_


----------



## midphase (Jul 17, 2008)

"It's a 'pars pro toto'-logic: like saying that you can play the piano equally well as Horowitz can, simply because you can strike the middle C just the way he can. Doesn't hold up, does it?"

It actually does when you consider that most composers are indeed being asked to just strike the "figurative" middle C over and over.

Everyone keeps posting about how an orchestra can do this, how it can do that....about the "air" and other misc. noises that it can produce....but that doesn't change the fact that film scores are not being asked to produce music with those qualities nowadays.

Like many others around here, I produce music for trailers from time to time, and I can tell you that I am never asked to stray too far off the beaten path of the "standard trailer music" by my clients. I'm not sure that if I were to ask my clients for the money to use a real orchestra that they would see the value in that. Possibly strictly as a marketing ploy (ie. use our music because it's a real orchestra) or from a vanity standpoint (we are so prestigious because we don't use samples)....but on a practical level it makes not a bit of difference.

A while back our beloved Craig Sharmat was tasked with using a real orchestra for some of his music. I don't know if it's still up on his site...but for a bit you could listen to both his sample mock-up and the actual orchestra playing the very same arrangement. I think you could definitely make the argument that they sounded different, like maybe two orchestras had been recorded using different techniques in different rooms with different players. You could even make the argument that you preferred the sound of one over the other....but on a practical level, I'm really not sure that one was better suited than the other for its intended purpose.

I'm not saying that sampled orchestras can do everything that 80 or so real musicians can...but for all intended purposes (and all intense purses) IMHO it doesn't really matter anymore.


----------



## poseur (Jul 18, 2008)

altogether an interesting thread, imo.....



midphase @ Thu Jul 17 said:


> It actually does when you consider that most composers are indeed being asked to just strike the "figurative" middle C over and over.


hmmm.
i try really, really hard at avoiding jobs
that truly threaten what little dignity & self-respect
i've been able to uncover.




midphase @ Thu Jul 17 said:


> but that doesn't change the fact that film scores are not being asked to produce music with those qualities nowadays.


well, context (and function) should be considered,
i think.

even through these days of broadstroke music-budget cuts,
that's not an accurate description of my own experience.
on 2 relatively recent indie films, we knew that music
would be exposed, and would need to feel.....
..... errrrmmmm...... "genuine".
in both cases, orchestral players were employed,
and to the films' advantage, which was (consensually) 
agreed upon.
and, in both cases, *i* was the party responsible for
presenting the live-orchestra to the director & producers;
critically, i would note,
it wasn't so much about what i was being _asked_ to achieve / do, as it was more about my creatively collaborative initiative.

in one case, i paid for the players, to the detriment of
my own financial profit.
in the other case --- using a bigger group of 65 ---
the indie producers paid, without complaint.

on the studio pictures, there was no question
that orchestral groups would be employed,
though it is key to keep a very tight rein on
costs vs time spent.

as well, all sessions but for one have been recorded
under AFM contract in LA or NY, w/studio approval.
because i request & plead for that,
where i believe it remains possible.



midphase @ Thu Jul 17 said:


> A while back our beloved Craig Sharmat was tasked with using a real orchestra for some of his music. I don't know if it's still up on his site...but for a bit you could listen to both his sample mock-up and the actual orchestra playing the very same arrangement. I think you could definitely make the argument that they sounded different, like maybe two orchestras had been recorded using different techniques in different rooms with different players. You could even make the argument that you preferred the sound of one over the other....but on a practical level, I'm really not sure that one was better suited than the other for its intended purpose.


again, context is key:
this doesn't "work" for me too often for most of 
my scores.
as well, the argument can be seen as weak:
with no disrespect intended, craig s. may be *better*
(and/or, more experienced) with the samples than he
is with the actual orchestra:
working with carbon-based life-forms is quite different
from working with cpu-digits & mice.
quite different, in my personal experience.





midphase @ Thu Jul 17 said:


> I'm not saying that sampled orchestras can do everything that 80 or so real musicians can...but for all intended purposes (and all intense purses) IMHO it doesn't really matter anymore.


well, it's absolutely fantastic that you know that it doesn't
matter a whit to you!
similarly, i know that it can matter immensely to me,
and i would not be creatively satisfied with electronic
results where i felt that spit, grit, blood, emotions, practise, pumping hearts, sweat, a multitude of thoughts, spirit, deeply neurotic human interaction, air, semi-controllable margins of human error, FUN & the irregularities of rooms + tuning (and the rest of the too-numerous-to-mention unpredictabilities of the living musical world)
were key to what i've conceived & written.

fwiw, unless the music is meant to be idiomatically & digitally defined,
i usually prefer some strong elements of my musical electronics to be actually & originally performed, wherever possible.

just some thoughts, there.....

d


----------



## lux (Jul 18, 2008)

I think Midphase is pointing out the fact that despite the undeniable advantages of a real performance, probably for what is being asked to composers on average out there it would not make such a difference.

I believe that most of this thing belongs to composers mediocre approach (not talent or professionality) where even very talented musicians just decide to get the job done. So everything, with some exceptions, seems leveled on the bottom side, being commercial relationships the only engine that moves composers out there.

My impression is that lot of composers spend their time trying to get new friends rather than distinguish themselves with their productions. The funny thing is that a huge lot of them have really an admirable talent.


----------



## midphase (Jul 18, 2008)

"Two Steps from hell went from using samples to live orchestras and choirs EVEN THOUGH Thomas could have done it all and no one would probably have noticed the different anyway, because its Thomas!! So even in trailers, they are still using live orchestras."

If you look back at my original post, you'll see why I think they opted for this route. It allows them to tell their clients that they used a real orchestra and hence are (supposedly) better than the competition. While I don't put Nick and Thomas' talents in question as they're both quite good, I believe their decision to use a real orchestra boils down to a good marketing strategy.


----------



## madbulk (Jul 18, 2008)

Did they? I know we see a choir session in one of the vids, but I never bought the idea that they'd used an orchestra. I figured that was just salesmanship.
Maybe they did. But to at least one of Kays' points, no matter what I hear, I assume TJ has managed it without setting up any mics.


----------



## Ed (Jul 18, 2008)

[quote:f8ef7ed4dc="midphase @ Fri Jul 18, 2008 11:53 am"]"Two Steps from hell went from using samples to live orchestras and choirs EVEN THOUGH Thomas could have done it all and no one would probably have noticed the different anyway, because its Thomas!! So even in trailers, they are still using live orchestras."

Iòn‹   ƒÃn‹   ƒÄn‹   ƒÅn‹   ƒÆn‹   ƒÇn‹   ƒÈn‹   ƒÉn‹   ƒÊn‹   ƒËn‹   ƒÌn‹   ƒÍn‹   ƒÎn‹   ƒÏn‹   ƒÐn‹   ƒÑn‹   ƒÒn‹   ƒÓn‹   ƒÔn‹   ƒÕn‹   ƒÖn‹   ƒ×n‹   ƒØn‹   ƒÙn‹   ƒÚn‹   ƒÛn‹   ƒÜn‹   ƒÝn‹   ƒÞn‹   ƒßn‹   ƒàn‹   ƒán‹   ƒân‹   ƒãn‹   ƒän‹   ƒån‹   ƒæn‹   ƒçn‹   ƒèn‹   ƒén‹   ƒên‹   ƒën‹   ƒìn‹   ƒín‹   ƒîn‹   ƒïn‹   ƒðn‹   ƒñn‹   ƒòn‹   ƒón‹   ƒôn‹   ƒõn‹   ƒön‹   ƒ÷n‹   ƒøn‹   ƒùn‹   ƒún‹   ƒûn‹   ƒün‹   ƒýn‹   ƒþn‹   ƒÿn‹   „ n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „	n‹   „
n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „ n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „n‹   „ n‹   „!n‹   „"n‹   „#n‹   „$n‹   „%n‹   „&n‹   „'n‹   „(n‹   „)n‹   „*n‹   „+n‹   „,n‹   „-n‹   „.n‹   „/n‹   „0n‹   „1n‹   „2              òn‹   „4n‹   „5n‹   „6n‹   „7n‹   „8n‹   „9n‹   „:n‹   „;n‹   „<n‹   „=n‹   „>n‹   „?n‹   „@n‹   „An‹   „Bn‹   „Cn‹   „Dn‹   „En‹   „Fn‹   „Gn‹   „Hn‹   „In‹   „Jn‹   „Kn‹   „Ln‹   „Mn‹   „Nn‹   „On‹


----------



## Ed (Jul 18, 2008)

madbulk @ Fri Jul 18 said:


> It would. Well...
> 
> I'm saying the first thought that ran through my head was, "yeah, you used a real orchestra.... to make your sample libraries... with which you made these tracks. So these tracks were made by recording a real orchestra!"
> 
> And this with not a whit of condemnation. Nor any confidence. I have no idea what they used or didn't use nor do I see how it might really have made much difference either way. Not only because of TJ but also the production style.



TJ isnt stupid though, he knows how disingenuous that would be and has said on this forum their stuff is recorded with real orchestra and they are using more real orchestra in the future, before "legend" came out. I really dont believe he would say that if all he meant was, yea its a private library, because we know the difference and its pretty huge.


----------



## madbulk (Jul 18, 2008)

I didn't know Thomas had said that here. I was referring to what I remember vaguely to be the v/o on one of the videos they made. I'm sure you're right. But that it crossed my mind is more the point. 
You're begging the question a little bit. There's a difference, but the pretty huge-ness of it, particularly depending upon how you approach it, debatable.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 19, 2008)

Without denying that the libraries are indeed getting better and that some of the orchestral recording and processing that is being done to orchestras sound in films is degrading it, or without any disrespect intended to Mike Verta, anyone who cannot tell that the Star Trek mockup is done with libraries and not a real orchestra, seriously has a problem if he/she wishes to be a high quality professional composer.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 19, 2008)

midphase @ Thu Jul 17 said:


> "It's a 'pars pro toto'-logic: like saying that you can play the piano equally well as Horowitz can, simply because you can strike the middle C just the way he can. Doesn't hold up, does it?"
> 
> It actually does when you consider that most composers are indeed being asked to just strike the "figurative" middle C over and over.
> 
> ...



They are still up on the site. The mockups are under 

Dog Bones
they are the last 3 cuts in the list. also be aware that the mockups were made for approval to record the real thing and were not meant to be a finished product. That said I feel they compete fairly well.

It seems with short phrases the samples do well but in lush legato string writing the samples in most libraries fall far short. 

Realize also for Trailer libraries perception is part of the game. If Immediate says they are using a 100 piece orchestra and 50 piece choir it is important that other competing companies to keep up with the hype of that. That or an image needs to be formed to give one a leg up on the competition. Often trailer pieces are so compressed and percussion driven it would make no difference what was used as a brass or sting section. when an editor sees recorded with 100 piece orchestra or recorded with the really cool samples, which one do you think they are going to pick up first to lay in.


----------



## lux (Jul 19, 2008)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat Jul 19 said:


> Often trailer pieces are so compressed and percussion driven it would make no difference what was used as a brass or sting section. when an editor sees recorded with 100 piece orchestra or recorded with the really cool samples, which one do you think they are going to pick up first to lay in.



The one that sounds better?


----------



## madbulk (Jul 19, 2008)

We're a belligerent lot, ain't we?


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 19, 2008)

No Luca,

they will often not even waste their time listening to one they think might be inferior. Often it will not get heard unless it is from a will respected library.


----------



## lux (Jul 19, 2008)

Craig Sharmat @ Sat Jul 19 said:


> No Luca,
> 
> they will often not even waste their time listening to one they think might be inferior. Often it will not get heard unless it is from a will respected library.



So basically half of the work a composer for media and libraries does is hype related?


----------



## José Herring (Jul 19, 2008)

Hope is blind. We all hope that our samples sound like the real thing. So we put our hopes into our perceptions.

While I will say that if you write for the samples and make them musical the results are pleasing. But, in no way do they even come close to sounding like the real thing. Unless you're the type of composer that considers writing pads, real composing.


----------



## choc0thrax (Jul 19, 2008)

So pads falls under the category of fake composing, anything else? We should make a list so those new to composing know the rules.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 19, 2008)

lux @ Sat Jul 19 said:


> Craig Sharmat @ Sat Jul 19 said:
> 
> 
> > No Luca,
> ...



let s put it this way, if one has great pieces of music in a library that is not well respected in the trailer field there is a good chance it will never be heard.


----------



## midphase (Jul 19, 2008)

I still think most of you are missing the point. You are all approaching the argument from a "composer" standpoint. You are augmenting your rebuttals with "respect" for the musicians who slaved away for years of their lives to learn their instruments and on and on.

But the bottom line is still the same to me...when listened within the context of a film, tv show, trailer or ad, the line is already quite blurred (and will continue to get even blurrier with new products like Symphobia and whatever else is coming out in the next few months).

Now, I'm not saying that the average joe can pick up these tools and sound like the stuff is real. My argument presumes a basic understanding and production experience to know how to maximize the realism in these products. But while up to recently, this was a realm restricted to a handful of individuals who (after slaving away for weeks) were able to push the boundaries of realism in samples, now it appears that the amount of composers who are able to achieve realism is much greater.

Now, there is also subjectivity at work here...someone like Thomas who is obviously ultra-focused on realism will not be fooled no matter what. But he is not the audience....and he is not even the majority of other composers out there.

This reminds me very much of the countless arguments that we all had to endure in the late 90's about analog vs. digital. How many times we all had to read about the obvious digital "coldness" and how obvious the differences were. And this is also reminding me of another argument that is very much alive right now, about 35mm vs. Digital.

These arguments keep on going on and on until ultimately the fade away as the differences blur more and more. 

IMHO, this blurring process for realism in orchestral music has already begun, I don't question anymore if a TV show or an advert, or videogame that I watch uses a real orchestra or a fake one....I honestly don't know most of the times. Are there some exceptions to this? Of course! But overall, for me, it has become very difficult to tell (and no, I'm not a complete idiot when it comes to what a real orchestra sounds like).

As an additional point, to me....most of the tracks on the POTC soundtrack sound like really well produced sampled orchestra tracks. If someone told me that this was 100% samples....I would totally believe it (albeit I would figure they must be using a good deal of custom stuff).


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 19, 2008)

quite simply when a i hear a bad track being used i think that sucks, but that is the exception. there is no question the line is blurred. Many composers now use orchestra to accentuate their samples not the other way around.


----------



## José Herring (Jul 19, 2008)

Sounds like and feels like are two different things. Of course a good cello patch will sound like real cellos, 'cause they are. But the expressiveness is missing. They don't feel like real cellos, they don't express themselves like real cellos, and the expressiveness is limited to the patch.

From the demos I heard symphobia suffers from the fact that it sounds generic. Sounds like it wasn't written for anything in mind. I've been working lately at creating new sounds for specific projects. It works pretty well cause you have a custom set of sounds that comes from your own heart therefore fits better to your music. 

And, the average Joe does know the difference. They just won't express it in a way that musicians understand. They say things like, "the music doesn't have the right feel" , or it sounds kinda stale, or worse, " sounds like it's coming from a keyboard." But on a communication level they know, it just doesn't speak to them, or the music just isn't effective enough.


----------



## jeffc (Jul 19, 2008)

I've got to agree with Kays on this one. I find myself, as an audience, not being able to tell if something is real, or just not paying attention - which in my mind means it's good enough. If I'm watching some show and don't question whether it's real or fake, then it doesn't matter, it's doing the job. Now obviously there are exceptions where the writing is very specific for live (Lost,Simpsons) but for others it's hard to tell. I've done cues for CSI:Miami where I thought I'd go the extra mile and record a real orchestra on some special ones and nobody could even tell the difference at the dub.

I've also had the opposite happen to me - I did a film last year where I got everything signed off on from my demos. I thought I'd go the extra mile, sank half my budget into a real orchestra in Prague when I didn't have to, and get a call from the dub questioning the midi patches, because strings 'can't sustain that long' and sounded fake, where there was not a sample in the whole score - it was ALL real! So obviously there are producers, directors, dubbing mixers that can't tell the difference, and sometimes act like they know it but really don't.


----------



## madbulk (Jul 19, 2008)

jeffc @ Sat Jul 19 said:


> ... got a call from the dub questioning the midi patches, because strings 'can't sustain that long'



Nice! We should have a list of these compiling somewhere around here, eh Frederick?


----------



## José Herring (Jul 19, 2008)

It also depends on the type of music you're doing. One of the reasons that I moved away from the "pure" orchestral music and into doing more contemporary based music is that it's really a lot more convincing to do that with samples. And, in these cases then yes samples can fool.

But, on a John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith type traditional orchestration, doing that with samples is a daunting task. Not that some of that couldn't be done, mostly that most of it can't be done convincingly. And, this I speak from experience too.

best,

Jose

edit: Just listen to the Star Trek demo for the first time. I don't mean to sound condescending to anybody, but if you really think that that sounds anything like a real orchestra you should really head to the symphony more often.

I don't really think I have anything more to contribute to this thread.


----------



## bryla (Jul 19, 2008)

jeffc @ Sat Jul 19 said:


> ... get a call from the dub questioning the midi patches, because strings 'can't sustain that long' and sounded fake, where there was not a sample in the whole score - it was ALL real!


How long should that be?? Strings don't get interrupted by breathing


----------



## Stephen Rees (Jul 20, 2008)

bryla @ Sun Jul 20 said:


> jeffc @ Sat Jul 19 said:
> 
> 
> > ... get a call from the dub questioning the midi patches, because strings 'can't sustain that long' and sounded fake, where there was not a sample in the whole score - it was ALL real!
> ...



Perhaps the note was so long the bow would have worn out?


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 20, 2008)

I think there are two different discussions going on here.

One regards the audience. If the music is well written and mixed into the picture at a proper level, regardless of whether it is a real orchestra or samples, the audience is not focused on the music to the point they are analyzing it because they are involved with the picture.

Kays started the thread and since he is a composer, many of us assumed he meant his comments as a composer in the audience. His "not being able to tell the difference" is IMHO as much an inditement of how badly some real orchestral music is being processed and mixed as how good the samples have become.

The second is whether the sample library music can come close to the real thing. I will say this flatly: NO sample programmer can put into the piece the nuances real orchestral players, who study their whole lives, can, period. And whether the audience knows it or not, in a well written orchestral score performed by a real orchestra will subconciously work their emotions in a way the sample library music will not.

For me, the best results for contemporary come when you use sample libraries and synths to augment real players, as John Powell and many others, including Jeff C. here, do well. For period music, it is no contest, the real orchestra wins hands down.

While it is true that that some producer or director (or even a composer who has not trained with orchestras) may or may not understand this is a reality we have to deal with, but it does not change the fact that the sample libraries simply are not commensurate to a real orchestra that is playing a score that is well composed, and then well mixed and integrated into the picture.


----------



## Lunatique (Jul 20, 2008)

I think about this sometimes and I think it's one of those situations where you need to consider more than one factor, and it's not simply black or white.

Factor 1 - What level of expressiveness does the cue require?

Factor 2 - How talented is the composer?

Factor 3 - How much time/budget is there for the project?

Factor 4 - Who is your audience?

Obviously, only the very best of the current crop of composers can do amazing sounding mock-ups, so this means for the vast majority of mere mortals, samples will not get you there. But where is "there?" If it's being compressed to hell and mixed with a ton of sound effects and dialog for film/TV and video games, then only a very tiny percentage of your audience will be able to tell (they are probably other composers). 

For a lot of music composed today, it's actually a waste of money and orchestral players' talent to record them with a real orchestra. All the epic bombastic tutti with thundering percussion--do you really need a real orchestra for that? 

I think there's also the matter of "what the audience doesn't know won't hurt them." Let's say you do a cue that's an intimate dramatic one with a violin solo on top of a cello, acoustic guitar, and piano. If the audience can't tell it's not done with real instruments (let's say you used Synful, Real Guitar, Ivory, and Garritan Cello), then where is the problem? There is only an issue if you gave them the option to pick between the sampled version and a version recorded with live instruments--then most people would probably be able to tell that one is more expressive than the other. But I think unless the sampled version actually sounds bad--as in robotic, sterile, and clumsy, then no one has missed out really. But truth is, with today's technology and tools, we're already far away from robotic and sterile and clumsy. Nowadays, music will only sound that bad if the person has no idea what the hell he's doing, and in situations like that, an incapable person will sound bad even when using real instruments.

And of course if there's budget, then just record with the real deal. If there's ample time and no budget, then do the MIDI shuffle dance in a sequencer. But that's really the least fun thing to do isn't it? (Does anyone actually ENJOY tweaking MIDI data for hours and hours, days and days?)


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 20, 2008)

Lunatique @ Sun Jul 20 said:


> For a lot of music composed today, it's actually a waste of money and orchestral players' talent to record them with a real orchestra. All the epic bombastic tutti with thundering percussion--do you really need a real orchestra for that?
> 
> I think there's also the matter of "what the audience doesn't know won't hurt them." Let's say you do a cue that's an intimate dramatic one with a violin solo on top of a cello, acoustic guitar, and piano. If the audience can't tell it's not done with real instruments (let's say you used Synful, Real Guitar, Ivory, and Garritan Cello), then where is the problem? There is only an issue if you gave them the option to pick between the sampled version and a version recorded with live instruments--then most people would probably be able to tell that one is more expressive than the other. But I think unless the sampled version actually sounds bad--as in robotic, sterile, and clumsy, then no one has missed out really. But truth is, with today's technology and tools, we're already far away from robotic and sterile and clumsy. Nowadays, music will only sound that bad if the person has no idea what the hell he's doing, and in situations like that, an incapable person will sound bad even when using real instruments.
> 
> And of course if there's budget, then just record with the real deal. If there's ample time and no budget, then do the MIDI shuffle dance in a sequencer. But that's really the least fun thing to do isn't it? (Does anyone actually ENJOY tweaking MIDI data for hours and hours, days and days?)



I could not disagree more. One's personal standards should not just be aiming for what "what the audience doesn't know won't hurt them."

I am not a purist, but if we let that be our standard, we are nothing more than whores.

If I have an orchestral score and the budget does not permit me to use a real orchestra, then obviously I will use the silicon orchestra, but I would never base my decisions on what boils down to simply what I can get away with.

And BTW, there are big bombastic cues in POTC that were done with orchestra and some with samples only and I can tell the difference immediately.


----------



## lux (Jul 20, 2008)

> And BTW, there are big bombastic cues in POTC that were done with orchestra and some with samples only and I can tell the difference immediately.



Still the average sound of that score is siliconish. And it probably doesnt have to do with what has been used but to the writing.



Ashermusic @ Sun Jul 20 said:


> I could not disagree more. One's personal standards should not just be aiming for what "what the audience doesn't know won't hurt them."I am not a purist, but if we let that be our standard, we are nothing more than whores.



While not referring to you directly but speaking in general i find a bit uncoherent this whores thing. I really believe thats just the actual situation. And its up to you guys who have the direct contact with the business to change things eventually, expecially if you are LA based composers. I suspect that when it comes to keep the foot in the door or fight the composers war the scandalized approach becomes magically realism and everyone contributes to the party.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 21, 2008)

Lunatique, it is not our job as composers to consider whether the budget we are given could be better used for production purposes rather than a real orchestra. One thing a film composer is wise to learn is that it is not OUR picture, but theirs. We are post production.

What IS our job is to take the budget we have and create the best sounding music we know how that plays the picture. And if we decide the score is primarily orchestral in nature, that is, as you concede, hands down the real thing.

Sadly, with today's budgets and the level of my career, it has been several years since I have had the pleasure of standing in front of a real orchestra to conduct music I have composed for a film, just small ensembles and software instruments/sample libraries, and I really miss it.


----------

