# Rude Awakening.. general musings about sampled orchestras



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

Click bait topic title notwithstanding, I attended a performance of Prokofiev's 1st Violin Concerto and Shostakovich's 10th Symphony last night by the Toronto Symphony Orchestra. I am not a neophyte insofar as attending live orchestra performances incidentally. I've been watching live orchestra performances for over 2 decades. I've also worked with live groups and composed concert works. But something struck me last night as I marvelled at the fluid virtuosic dexterity that the solo violinist displayed as she performed the Prokofiev, and the massive yet warm sounding string sonorities of 60 musicians playing a Shosty line: sample libraries are never going to be as good as the real thing. And you know what? I'm fine with that. It's particularly timely that I posit this especially when a certain sample developer proclaimed their newest incarnation as the next step in orchestral sampling evolution. guess what? It's still single celled organisms paddling around the pond scum compared to the complexity, dynamism, and sheer power that 80 musicians, all having dedicated their lives towards playing their instrument, care capable of.

The other attribute that especially delighted me was the sheer complexity of the architecture of the works I watched. So much diversity in tone, dynamics, texture, harmonies, melodic/rhythmic variation & development. None of this metronomic plodding ostinati with the most unambitious uninvolved "melodies" layered over them. No, these were deliberate, detailed and multi layered works to inspired joy and awe. I came away from the concert with a slew of ideas for my own work (most of which is composed directly to Dorico so I don't have to be slowed down by the straightjacketed ergonomics of DAWs, at least as far as orchestral writing goes). Hearing the orchestra perform these seminal works made me want better my craft. 

Hey, I still love and use my sample libraries of which I have a ton of. But listening to these masterpieces granted me the opportunity to strive to have my own music performed by a REAL orchestra rather than being content to make serviceable mock ups. And that is a danger when working in the world of samples; it breeds contentment and instant gratification. So many libraries do the heavy lifting as far as arranging goes and I think it's a pity that they take away the key component of composing: creative ingenuity.

Anyhow, I'm off to chip away at a Korngoldian inspired work that I'd never even try to write in Cubase or Logic as it would slow me down too much. NotePerformer is my interim "group" to throw my compositional ideas at. Down the line, I'm hoping to get it read by a local group.


----------



## CT (Nov 14, 2019)

dcoscina said:


> sample libraries are never going to be as good as the real thing. And you know what? I'm fine with that.



That basically says it all.

Regarding developers proclaiming the next step: no, sample libraries will never be as good as the real thing, but that doesn't mean that there *aren't* next steps to be taken. I think most new entries do offer something new, on some level. 

As long as we're always moving towards more musicality and more sheer joy in the process of using virtual instruments, I think it's all good.


----------



## rrichard63 (Nov 14, 2019)

There are two themes here:


dcoscina said:


> ... sample libraries are never going to be as good as the real thing. And you know what? I'm fine with that. ...


and


dcoscina said:


> ... composed directly to Dorico so I don't have to be slowed down by the straightjacketed ergonomics of DAWs ... work that I'd never even try to write in Cubase or Logic as it would slow me down too much ...


While I agree with @miket about the first, I think the second is a more challenging topic for discussion.

Before computers, music was either composed on paper using staff (or some other kind of) notation, or not written down at all. If you are old enough to have started out that way, it's understandable that notation software would be more familiar and easier to adapt to than a DAW framework. But if you grew up with music on computers, what about notation makes it less of a straightjacket than a good DAW? Does the answer to this question depend on genre? If so, how and why?


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> There are two themes here:
> 
> and
> 
> ...


yes it does totally depend on genre. I worked on a game score last year where I had to write 30 minutes of music in a short time and the emphasis was on texture and mood. I used Logic X and got through it well. For orchestral music, I'm finding the ergonomics of playing everything to a fascist little metronome quite restricting. And structurally my music isn't as developed compared to chipping away at it looking at a concert score. I am 51 so I did come up in university with pencil and paper, but I also used a u20 and Atari 520St as well. I'm accustomed to using technology to aid the creation of music. However, if I'd had Dorico with NotePerformer back in the late '80s, I would have stuck with that when writing for musicians. 

As far as orchestral libraries, like I said, I like mine but hearing a full live orchestra really brought out the staggering differences between the real thing and the polaroid equivalent. I think modelling should be used in tandem with samples more because it behaves more like expressive real instruments; and some developers are actively pursuing this avenue thankfully. 

As far as the developer I eluded to, listen, I'd be the first one to jump on a lite version of their current incarnation with single mics because despite all of the controversy, I like the tone and consistency I've heard from different demos. I'd be elated to move to a single self contained library and focus on the damned music for a change as opposed to the production end of it which we all face when combining different developers' products, and to this end, that new library is a step closer to that. But then again, I'm sure every developer is working hard to be the one-stop-shopping experience.


----------



## El Buhdai (Nov 14, 2019)

dcoscina said:


> Hey, I still love and use my sample libraries of which I have a ton of. But listening to these masterpieces granted me the opportunity to strive to have my own music performed by a REAL orchestra rather than being content to make serviceable mock ups. And that is a danger when working in the world of samples; it breeds contentment and instant gratification. So many libraries do the heavy lifting as far as arranging goes and I think it's a pity that they take away the key component of composing: creative ingenuity.



People wondered why I was so picky about my libraries early on, and why I never cared when they showed me how much "better" their libraries were than mine. It's because I don't want to be using sample libraries forever. I want to find a small handful of them to fulfill my needs and use them to work towards a live recording. I don't feel like falling into a camp and getting stuck in the wars people have over who has the best sample libraries.

While orchestral libraries can't perform as dynamically as real players, they can still do a ton, and I mean a _ton_. Like you said though, much of the music that comes from VI-Composers (including my own due to being relatively new to this, even though I don't write epic music) doesn't make that evident. I'm with you though, I would rather work my way towards live recordings than hopelessly purchase thousands of dollars in sample libraries in a continuous search for "the one".

However, where I have to disagree is that this complacency is the fault of the libraries. Many of them are perfectly capable of most of the major articulations you could need for a piece. It's just a matter of stitching them together to form music. It's not a sample developer's fault if nothing but the spiccato, marcato, and legato patches get used in their strings and brass libraries. It's our fault, and as a user, you have the option to use more.

Oh, and I fail to see how they stifle "creative ingenuity" or how "most" of the libraries handle a ton of arrangement for you. Full section patches can do that for sure, but those kinds of patches seem to be the exception in the world of sampling, not the rule.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

El Buhdai said:


> People wondered why I was so picky about my libraries early on, and why I never cared when they showed me how much "better" their libraries were than mine. It's because I don't want to be using sample libraries forever. I want to find a small handful of them to fulfill my needs and use them to work towards a live recording. I don't feel like falling into a camp and getting stuck in the wars people have over who has the best sample libraries.
> 
> While orchestral libraries can't perform as dynamically as real players, they can still do a ton, and I mean a _ton_. Like you said though, much of the music that comes from VI-Composers (including my own due to being relatively new to this, even though I don't write epic music) doesn't make that evident. I'm with you though, I would rather work my way towards live recordings than hopelessly purchase thousands of dollars in sample libraries in a continuous search for "the one".
> 
> ...


There was and is a good many libraries that eschew traditional orchestral sections and soloists in favour of pre-made ensembles. They are good to use in a pinch but c'mon, there's quite a few out there than lean on them more than others. Just go to YouTube and see how many people are "teaching" people to compose with these libraries. 

This topic can easily branch out to the subject of whether the tools determine the end product.

EDIT- I know that the concert was a good kick in the arse for me to do better with my own stuff btw. Easy is the path to the Dark Side.


----------



## jbuhler (Nov 14, 2019)

There’s a danger here comparing orchestral libraries to a live orchestra whereas the more pertinent standard is a recorded orchestra. Recordings of orchestras are no match for live performances either. Or rather what you listen for in a recording is quite different from what you listen for in a live concert. At least that’s always been my experience. At the same time recordings do have their own pleasures and those pleasures are not available with the live orchestra. All of this is to say VIs are much closer to recorded orchestras than live ones and it’s conceivable that what remains of that gap can be closed and we can talk intelligibly about evolution and progress in that domain. 

But VIs and the hybrid music that has grown up with them also offer distinct pleasures of their own, pleasures not afforded by either the live or the recorded orchestra. It is at that level a distinct thing. It is also far more accessible in the sense that few will have the privilege of having their pieces played by a live orchestra whereas entrance into the world of composing for the VI orchestra is pretty inexpensive these days.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> There’s a danger here comparing orchestral libraries to a live orchestra whereas the more pertinent standard is a recorded orchestra. Recordings of orchestras are no match for live performances either. Or rather what you listen for in a recording is quite different from what you listen for in a live concert. At least that’s always been my experience. At the same time recordings do have their own pleasures and those pleasures are not available with the live orchestra. All of this is to say VIs are much closer to recorded orchestras than live ones and it’s conceivable that what remains of that gap can be closed and we can talk intelligibly about evolution and progress in that domain.
> 
> But VIs and the hybrid music that has grown up with them also offer distinct pleasures of their own, pleasures not afforded by either the live or the recorded orchestra. It is at that level a distinct thing. It is also far more accessible in the sense that few will have the privilege of having their pieces played by a live orchestra whereas entrance into the world of composing for the VI orchestra is pretty inexpensive these days.


I understand where you’re coming from but wouldn’t you admit that because of the Plethora of affordable libraries on the market that it’s not compelling more people to write for real musicians?


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 14, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> Recordings of orchestras are no match for live performances either. Or rather what you listen for in a recording is quite different from what you listen for in a live concert. At least that’s always been my experience.



That's quite similar to something i wrote earlier today in the big thread.

And i have to add that there are more factors that count.
Shostakovitch and Prokofjev both were true masters of their craft.
I've heard a lot of (usually modern) composers performed by orchestras where i honestly didn't care that much about the quality of the musicians because the music s*cked.
And then i remember of listening to music of relatively unknown composers performed by not so famous orchestras where my initial guess was that those were mockups. Simply because of the fact that the sound was really lifeless.
And then there is the third scenario were music is performed by an orchestra with a bad intonation (usually that's due to not enough time for preparation) or simply bad performances (i quite had some, over 20 years ago and that was an experience that drove me away from composing concert music).
For a composer with a sensible ear the experience of hearing one's own music with a bad intonation is quite terrible.
Personally, while i usually work with (small groups of) musicians on most projects, i'd always prefer a good mockup to an orchestral recording with a flawed intonation.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> That's quite similar to something i wrote earlier today in the big thread.
> 
> And i have to add that there are more factors that count.
> Shostakovitch and Prokofjev both were true masters of their craft.
> ...


Totally understandable and I’ve been there too. It’s heart wrenching to hear your baby massacred because of short rehearsal times, or inept musicians. I also agree that some celebrated current concert composers aren’t writing anything of any particular interest too. There was a new work on the programme last night that I failed to connect with. There were car brakes and hi hats and none of the instrumentation and what the composer explained the piece was about meshed. And then there’s Andy Blaney who is writing masterpieces using samples. So, yes, the medium doesn’t always inform the technique.


----------



## Tanuj Tiku (Nov 14, 2019)

I am not sure if samples will never surpass a live performance but nothing is happening on that front any time soon. May be even decades. I feel there are many reasons for it but not really relevant at the moment. This is an extremely hard problem from an aesthetic, engineering and software point of view. Your analogy about single cell organisms is spot on!

However, the main issue is that this whole sampling thing becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. 

An average forum member hangs around every week for a good number of hours, reading up, listening to and consuming all things sampled! 

Anywhere and everywhere you see, you have marketing claiming new ideas, technologies, new sounds etc. 95% of what you hear in forums, it is sampled. We work with samples all day long, for weeks and months. If you go to watch a YouTube channel, it is all about samples. 

How do you make samples? Why you SHOULD make your own samples! Why samples this, why samples that...the list is endless. There is hardly any chat about the real thing, with any examples. It's as if the orchestra is this virtual thing and samples are the reality! 

How much time does anyone spend listening to a real performance in comparison? Much less. 

The latest and greatest we buy, takes time to get good at and we then have less time to meet local musicians and do something. 

I am quite shocked to read comments about so many new releases from members. Most often, it sounds unmusical and no way near the real thing. Solo instruments - nope! Nothing sounds as good as the real thing. Everything is a compromise. You choose the best one, at the time of decision making. 

Even on financial matters - people are discussing about the price of sample libraries. Come on...where is the chat about jobs, fees, budgeting, saving up, the ups and downs of a career in music. 

No, but BBC orchestra is too expensive! That is really important!


----------



## Sears Poncho (Nov 14, 2019)

rrichard63 said:


> But if you grew up with music on computers, what about notation makes it less of a straightjacket than a good DAW? Does the answer to this question depend on genre? If so, how and why?



For me, I find that writing for orchestra is very visual. I get a lot of ideas by just "seeing" instead of "listening". 

Strings do slurs and bowings, winds do "phrases". If I double violin with flute, they will have different slurs. I can see that. First endings, double bars, rehearsal letters etc.- much easier to see it. Page turns- very important. One of my first charts years ago had the strings playing a few bars on page 2 then turning back to page 1 for a few bars then turning to page 2 again. Whoops. As I got more experience and learned to be more visual, I check this stuff out more.

The players are 100% visual. I try to get into their heads. When I "see" the brass parts I can say "Damn, that's a long time to play without a rest". When I write fiddle parts I tend to write them in the upper registers. Sometimes I see the part and think "wow, I wrote the whole thing on the E string, that's gonna suck". 

When I compose music with a DAW, it's usually relatively simple. With notation I can write complex music. Part of that is being a crappy keyboard player. Part of it is growing up reading music, it's my language more so than "aural".

I've played the score to Psycho. Listening to it, it seems so complex. Seeing it, not so much. The shower scene is laughably simple when looking at, but of course so effective to hear. Petrushka seems like a nightmare, I would have no clue as to what's going on. With a score, it's "aaaaaaah I get it". 



dcoscina said:


> Totally understandable and I’ve been there too. It’s heart wrenching to hear your baby massacred because of short rehearsal times, or inept musicians.


Then there is the opposite, hearing an orchestra kicking ass and really taking something one has written to a different level. I feel very blessed that I get this a lot. Hopefully, since I've "grown up" entirely in the orchestra world, I know how to account for inadequate rehearsal time etc. Not always, but often. It's always a bit of a shock to people how little rehearsal time there is. I had a few disasters in ye olden days so I've gotten much better at writing 'rehearsal-limited" music.


----------



## MartinH. (Nov 14, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I had a few disasters in ye olden days so I've gotten much better at writing 'rehearsal-limited" music.



That might be the real-life version of "writing for the samples". :D




Tanuj Tiku said:


> I am not sure if samples will never surpass a live performance but nothing is happening on that front any time soon. May be even decades. I feel there are many reasons for it but not really relevant at the moment. This is an extremely hard problem from an aesthetic, engineering and software point of view.



I wouldn't be surprised if one day we're hit with machine learning as the next paradigm in sampling and it could be a big leap forward. The future is fairly unpredictable.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Nov 14, 2019)

MartinH. said:


> That might be the real-life version of "writing for the samples". :D


No, it's writing for "specific" players since I tend to know them. "That flutist is great, write a lot for her. That horn player cracks lots of notes, stay clear of horn solos".


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 14, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> No, it's writing for "specific" players since I tend to know them. "That flutist is great, write a lot for her. That horn player cracks lots of notes, stay clear of horn solos".



It's a different task to write for specific soloists (with few rehearsal time) than to write for ensembles.
Or more specifically: the obstacles differ.
Indeed, i know a couple of composers (in the area of "Neue Musik") who are really great in writing those typical ensemble pieces. (i.e. pieces for chamber orchestras with 5-20 players).
The problem is: it requires a specific language that works. And for me the question that matters is: are the compromises you have to deal with in accordance to your musical language or not.
Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not.
With soloists, it's usually much easier; i'd even say that it's one of the most satisfying experiences as a composer to work with your buddy musicians. An experience that i'm always enjoying to full extent.
No comparison to shouting at the computer.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 14, 2019)

Tanuj Tiku said:


> I am not sure if samples will never surpass a live performance but nothing is happening on that front any time soon. May be even decades. I feel there are many reasons for it but not really relevant at the moment. This is an extremely hard problem from an aesthetic, engineering and software point of view. Your analogy about single cell organisms is spot on!
> 
> However, the main issue is that this whole sampling thing becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
> 
> ...


You nailed it. For me going to a live orchestra performance is a wake up call to focus more on developing the craft of composing and less time spent shopping for new sample libraries. The stuff I mentally took note of yesterday was so abundant I had to try a few things out today. And even when improvising this afternoon, I was working well outside the tonal paradigm I tend to operate in. Listening to Prokofiev and his unique harmonic sensibilities was inspiring and also a kick in the ass to spend more time getting better. I feel the same way when I hear an Andy Blaney piece too btw. 

maybe it’s less about samples not replacing the orchestra but more how technology can be abused and offers creative shortcuts. I remember only havjng a U20 and Proteus 2 back in the early 90s and while my music didn’t sound as real, the fabric of the pieces was, in many ways, better than my output ten years later when computer sample libraries were becomjng abundant.


----------



## Sears Poncho (Nov 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> It's a different task to write for specific soloists (with few rehearsal time) than to write for ensembles.
> Or more specifically: the obstacles differ.


I write for symphonies. I was referring more to principal players. I've been working with an orch. for 15 years and extremely grateful for the opportunity. I had no idea what I was doing when I started writing for them. 15 years later, I think I know even less, I've just become far better at faking it.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 14, 2019)

IDK -- I think I've actually gotten somewhere, having struggled and achieved some level of control ("mastery" is too strong) over the electronics. I feel as though I'm "really" composing again.

On the other hand, I'm writing a lot of stuff that will be recorded live, so maybe subconsciously that changes what one does.

It's a big puzzle. You can learn a lot by working through compositional problems with the samples, but it does seem to be an iterative process. You work hard on something, then put it in front of players and hear what they do, then do that again. After enough times it feels like a little progress. 

That said, as @Sears Poncho wrote, sometimes "I think I know even less...."


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 14, 2019)

dcoscina said:


> For orchestral music, I'm finding the ergonomics of playing everything to a fascist little metronome quite restricting.



You no longer need to do that with Logic Pro X with Adapt Tempo.


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 14, 2019)

Sears Poncho said:


> I write for symphonies. I was referring more to principal players.



ok, that was unclear.
If you have regular access to good symphonic orchestras, you're a lucky guy. No doubt about it.  
I don't know where you live, but in Europe that's quite an uncommon situation.


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 14, 2019)

Ashermusic said:


> You no longer need to do that with Logic Pro X with Adapt Tempo.



So far i haven't ruled out how to use this feature.
The results it gave me so far, were not just faulty, but rather so faulty that i thought i would imply some form of advanced AC (Artificial Creativity) to create such absurd interpretations.
So i just gave up on this feature. Maybe it works with a four on the floor beat, haven't tried that yet.


----------



## BlackDorito (Nov 14, 2019)

jbuhler said:


> But VIs and the hybrid music that has grown up with them also offer distinct pleasures of their own, pleasures not afforded by either the live or the recorded orchestra.


Interesting way to put it. I've found this forum to be a good place to learn from the experience of others wrt. the usability of complicated products such as VIs. Once you've got VI tools you're comfortable with, there is a distinct pleasure because you can use them in your own studio to express yourself. 

Since I have a bit of mileage on me, I used to be entirely 'score-centric' before I came to VIC. Namely, I have a lot of printed scores of Strav, Copland, Prok, Debussy, etc., that I loved to have in front of me while listening. Anything that I produced myself was epitomized in a printed score (... presumably to be performed in the future by some renown ensemble, naturally). At one point I transcribed an action score of a well-known member here, using his stems. It was quite a lot of work. His reaction was that he was quite impressed with what I had done ... but reading between the lines (since he was in Germany), he didn't really care *himself* about that score. I deduced that he was actually mainly oriented toward the sonic result - the mockup - more than the score itself, which was for him perhaps just a graphic representation of MIDI.

After awhile, I became more oriented that way as well. I do all my work in notation and produce my tracks directly from Sibelius. But I no longer print out the score or assign too much value to it. I love the results and try to tinker with the rendering enough to produce a realistic sounding orchestra. The point being: I no longer have some mythical physical orchestra in mind to which I aspire to send a printed score ... I'm enjoying the distinct pleasure of listening to the virtual results.

Separate topic: I do wish folks submitted more concert music (of all types) on this forum. It's not for the faint-of-heart, but I believe there is a community that would like to hear and critique concert pieces.


----------



## dpasdernick (Nov 14, 2019)

So what you're telling me is I just wasted $100 on the Orchestral expansion card for my Roland JV-2080...


----------



## bryla (Nov 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> ok, that was unclear.
> If you have regular access to good symphonic orchestras, you're a lucky guy. No doubt about it.
> I don't know where you live, but in Europe that's quite an uncommon situation.


Uncommon to write for symphony orchestras in Europe?


----------



## JohnG (Nov 14, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> If you have regular access to good symphonic orchestras, you're a lucky guy. No doubt about it.
> I don't know where you live, but in Europe that's quite an uncommon situation.



It's uncommon everywhere! the dude has a dream job.


----------



## JohnG (Nov 14, 2019)

bryla said:


> Uncommon to write for symphony orchestras in Europe?



no -- i think he means uncommon to have one play a lot of your stuff and pay you to do it.


----------



## creativeforge (Nov 14, 2019)

dcoscina said:


> For orchestral music, I'm finding the ergonomics of playing everything to a fascist little metronome quite restricting.



*"I'm finding the ergonomics of playing everything to a fascist little metronome quite restricting."*

This made me smile, had to read it again about 5 times. Compelling visual!  Can I quote you?

Carry on...


----------



## bryla (Nov 14, 2019)

JohnG said:


> no -- i think he means uncommon to have one play a lot of your stuff and pay you to do it.


ah okay  I know I have a dream job


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 15, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> So far i haven't ruled out how to use this feature.
> The results it gave me so far, were not just faulty, but rather so faulty that i thought i would imply some form of advanced AC (Artificial Creativity) to create such absurd interpretations.
> So i just gave up on this feature. Maybe it works with a four on the floor beat, haven't tried that yet.



I have done it very successfully a number of times with rubato piano and even with a vocal e.g. “As Time Goes By.”


----------



## Celestial Aeon (Nov 15, 2019)

I think it's a matter of different requirements and goals. If one tries / hopes to replace live playing and music with virtual one one should quit trying before one even begins. However there is still valid point in working with virtual instruments, no matter what they are if one accepts that that is what they are - virtual. There is place for virtual music as well, it's just different from live.


----------



## Living Fossil (Nov 15, 2019)

Ashermusic said:


> I have done it very successfully a number of times with rubato piano and even with a vocal e.g. “As Time Goes By.”



Did it work for you (more or less) automatically or did you invest some time in tutorials, etc. that contained additional information / suggestions? I remember many yers ago there was a feature to define notes as "archers" (e.g. define which position a certain note is supposed to have) which helped logic doing the required tempo changes, but that was called differently.


----------



## Quasar (Nov 15, 2019)

Re the OP topic: It's never seriously occurred to me that VIs could or should be compared to their "real" counterparts in an apples-to-apples sort of way. Rather, it's an entirely different medium of expression that needs to be judged on its own terms. I think it's that simple.

An analogy might be when TV's arrived about 70 years ago and some spoke of "having Broadway theater in your own home". This of course never became the case, for two different reasons: 1) The experience of watching a Broadway play on TV is not the same sort of experience as going to the theater. It's just not, regardless of quality of production et al. 2) Because the medium is always the message, genre-specific programming developed and TV shows became their own thing...

...Same with music. Digital-age music crafted with VIs and computers may be stylistically linked to anything that came before: Classical era orchestral, grass-roots folk, big-band, rock, jazz etc., but will inevitably have their own 21st century flavor, constituting wholly new styles of expression that, in turn, reshape the collective sensibilities by which they are interpreted and appreciated.

Re the Logic adapter thing. This can be done in Reaper, but I haven't found a way to adapt bars and measures to free-flow playing that isn't a bit cumbersome. This is an area I would like to explore more fully. I loathe metronomes (or pre-fab drum patterns) for ITB work.


----------



## Ashermusic (Nov 15, 2019)

Living Fossil said:


> Did it work for you (more or less) automatically or did you invest some time in tutorials, etc. that contained additional information / suggestions? I remember many yers ago there was a feature to define notes as "archers" (e.g. define which position a certain note is supposed to have) which helped logic doing the required tempo changes, but that was called differently.




As a Logic trainer, I first followed the Apple Pro Training book, but then spent some time practicing doing it (Horror! Shock!) 

To be fair, it can be hit and miss and works better with some things than others. But Apple is promised us this is only "phase 1" for this feature.

This piano was performed freely, not to click.


----------



## Peter Williams (Nov 20, 2019)

dcoscina said:


> Click bait topic title notwithstanding, I attended a performance of Prokofiev's 1st Violin Concerto and Shostakovich's 10th Symphony last night by the Toronto Symphony Orchestra. I am not a neophyte insofar as attending live orchestra performances incidentally. I've been watching live orchestra performances for over 2 decades. I've also worked with live groups and composed concert works. But something struck me last night as I marvelled at the fluid virtuosic dexterity that the solo violinist displayed as she performed the Prokofiev, and the massive yet warm sounding string sonorities of 60 musicians playing a Shosty line: sample libraries are never going to be as good as the real thing. And you know what? I'm fine with that. It's particularly timely that I posit this especially when a certain sample developer proclaimed their newest incarnation as the next step in orchestral sampling evolution. guess what? It's still single celled organisms paddling around the pond scum compared to the complexity, dynamism, and sheer power that 80 musicians, all having dedicated their lives towards playing their instrument, care capable of.
> 
> The other attribute that especially delighted me was the sheer complexity of the architecture of the works I watched. So much diversity in tone, dynamics, texture, harmonies, melodic/rhythmic variation & development. None of this metronomic plodding ostinati with the most unambitious uninvolved "melodies" layered over them. No, these were deliberate, detailed and multi layered works to inspired joy and awe. I came away from the concert with a slew of ideas for my own work (most of which is composed directly to Dorico so I don't have to be slowed down by the straightjacketed ergonomics of DAWs, at least as far as orchestral writing goes). Hearing the orchestra perform these seminal works made me want better my craft.
> 
> ...


Sample libraries are also a real thing, and they are quickly evolving. But I concur with your experience and your awakening. The Shosty 10th is a masterpiece, perhaps his greatest achievement. The Prokofiev is also a great piece.


----------



## dcoscina (Nov 20, 2019)

Peter Williams said:


> Sample libraries are also a real thing, and they are quickly evolving. But I concur with your experience and your awakening. The Shosty 10th is a masterpiece, perhaps his greatest achievement. The Prokofiev is also a great piece.


The reading I saw was good but not as electric as when I saw Kent Nagano conducting the Montreal Symphony. I've seen the 11th 3 times and I really enjoy that as well. The Fifth never did much for me on recording but when I saw it performed live earlier this year, it floored me. The slow movement in particular just rocked me.


----------



## musicbox (Oct 9, 2022)

dcoscina said:


> There was and is a good many libraries that eschew traditional orchestral sections and soloists in favour of pre-made ensembles. They are good to use in a pinch but c'mon, there's quite a few out there than lean on them more than others. Just go to YouTube and see how many people are "teaching" people to compose with these libraries.
> 
> This topic can easily branch out to the subject of whether the tools determine the end product.
> 
> EDIT- I know that the concert was a good kick in the arse for me to do better with my own stuff btw. Easy is the path to the Dark Side.


Lately I have become fascinated with the idea to compose away from any (virtual) instrument. I want to explore about how the DAW shapes my compositions.


----------



## Niah2 (Oct 16, 2022)

I find that hiring real musicians (example: soloists) adds so much to your mockups.

Just the facility you can find nowadays any musician remotely or shared sessions with orchestras. 

I believe technology is moving in a complementary direction if that makes sense.


----------



## jonnybutter (Oct 16, 2022)

Living Fossil said:


> For a composer with a sensible ear the experience of hearing one's own music with a bad intonation is quite terrible.


Yes, it makes you want to jump off a bridge!


----------



## Quantum Leap (Oct 16, 2022)

I realized a while ago that of you are trying to replace 80 amazing musicians with samples, you have to play and shape every part or section in your composition as if your life depended on it. You can’t be lazy. It’s really too much for me and every other average mortal. However, there are genres of music where samples can really shine. And of course they are a fantastic writing tool.


----------

