Orb Composer Pro S 1.5 (A.I Composing Software) - Review
- Thread starter will_m
- Start date
This is really a useful and honest review, evrybody interested in this stuff should view.
The gap between the "how great this is" from the official videos especially done for the 1.5, which are helpful in the way to show what might be "best of all imagineable cases", and this shows the bandwide possible at the moment I think. There is really a loooong way from the Hobbits to the Jurassic park
.
I am really believing in this software while I see the problems (at least for the way I want to use it) very realistic and this video helped me in two ways:
- showing me that I am not deaf, dumb, crippled and blind if my imported melody does NOT sound like jurassic park in the "showroom" video
- that I really have to try out MORE before I start to make something serious, I mostly had a kind of clear idea what I wanted to do, drag in one blog and tried to work on it without just hitting the "create evrything from the scratch" button again and again which might be (one) good starting point to use this
So really thanks for this video, helped me much in having a more focussed view on the possibilities and how to use
EDIT: another deep approval: you have to really kind of choose the sounds you want from your VST/Kontakt library before trying out anything, the default piano sound on nearly any channel gives you no impression at all if this general idea could fit to your needs
The gap between the "how great this is" from the official videos especially done for the 1.5, which are helpful in the way to show what might be "best of all imagineable cases", and this shows the bandwide possible at the moment I think. There is really a loooong way from the Hobbits to the Jurassic park
.I am really believing in this software while I see the problems (at least for the way I want to use it) very realistic and this video helped me in two ways:
- showing me that I am not deaf, dumb, crippled and blind if my imported melody does NOT sound like jurassic park in the "showroom" video
- that I really have to try out MORE before I start to make something serious, I mostly had a kind of clear idea what I wanted to do, drag in one blog and tried to work on it without just hitting the "create evrything from the scratch" button again and again which might be (one) good starting point to use this
So really thanks for this video, helped me much in having a more focussed view on the possibilities and how to use
EDIT: another deep approval: you have to really kind of choose the sounds you want from your VST/Kontakt library before trying out anything, the default piano sound on nearly any channel gives you no impression at all if this general idea could fit to your needs
Last edited:
chocobitz825
Senior Member
I feel like this software is misrepresented. You can get great results, but it depends on the approach. I don't think I'd ever write a song in Orb, or expect it to just generate a usable song. What I have found best is to set out your chord progressions first and then enter those sections and progressions into Orb. From there, you let it generate arrangements. As stated by @KarlHeinz, it's really important to choose your sounds. I think it's better to do this by syncing it with your daw and keeping a template project file for Orb. It makes it much easier to identify what you're creating. The change from piano samples to a piano/strings pad sample in Orb 1.5 also makes it much harder to understand whats going on with multiple tracks if you don't use your sounds.
I've also found that while it gives the option to create a Question/Answer progression block type, I find them mostly to be repetitive and lacking in melodic value. I find it much better to set your chord progressions and use the Standard setting instead. It, of course, depends on the song, but I find much better melodies that way.
Also, when importing a complicated midi file, the "User Melody" function might become messy. Sometimes it might be better to let orb create around the chord progressions you've made, and then in your DAW, use the melody your melody as an extra layer added to the project after you've done your arrangement in orb.
I've also found that while it gives the option to create a Question/Answer progression block type, I find them mostly to be repetitive and lacking in melodic value. I find it much better to set your chord progressions and use the Standard setting instead. It, of course, depends on the song, but I find much better melodies that way.
Also, when importing a complicated midi file, the "User Melody" function might become messy. Sometimes it might be better to let orb create around the chord progressions you've made, and then in your DAW, use the melody your melody as an extra layer added to the project after you've done your arrangement in orb.
chocobitz825
Senior Member
I'll send a bug report for it. For some inexplicable reason, it defaults the Solo Cello and Violin to Percussion and -100% density. No matter what you change, it never actually generates anything for it.
Last edited:
dekrue2019
New Member
I am very disappointed in Orb ! I was elated when it first came out, had very strong A.I. to it and loved to have a great future with it. That is until the updates. It seems that every time it got updated it became worse. Now the melodies that it creates are very lacking as to when the program first came out. On top of that it's not very intuitive and keeps crashing my new Dell Alienware computer. I have a midi generated from over ten years ago that makes much better sketches / renderings.
OP
OP
will_m
Active Member
This is really a useful and honest review, evrybody interested in this stuff should view.
The gap between the "how great this is" from the official videos especially done for the 1.5, which are helpful in the way to show what might be "best of all imagineable cases", and this shows the bandwide possible at the moment I think. There is really a loooong way from the Hobbits to the Jurassic park
I am really believing in this software while I see the problems (at least for the way I want to use it) very realistic and this video helped me in two ways:
- showing me that I am not deaf, dumb, crippled and blind if my imported melody does NOT sound like jurassic park in the "showroom" video
- that I really have to try out MORE before I start to make something serious, I mostly had a kind of clear idea what I wanted to do, drag in one blog and tried to work on it without just hitting the "create evrything from the scratch" button again and again which might be (one) good starting point to use this
So really thanks for this video, helped me much in having a more focussed view on the possibilities and how to use
EDIT: another deep approval: you have to really kind of choose the sounds you want from your VST/Kontakt library before trying out anything, the default piano sound on nearly any channel gives you no impression at all if this general idea could fit to your needs
Thanks Karl, glad you found it useful. Its definitely an interesting tool that has a certain learning curve to it and like most sample libraries the official demos are often a 'best case scenario' that the first time user may struggle to achieve without hours of use.
InLight-Tone
Senior Member
I think spending some serious time to ramp up your keyboard chops so you can improvise what's in your mind is a better use of time than fiddling with these crutch systems. They will NEVER deliver the music you want. You already know what it is you're looking for, and being able to freely play it on the keyboard is a more direct route than sifting through a ton of OK material, (speaking from lots of experience)...
dzilizzi
Senior Member
I initially bought it as a learning tool. It was supposed to follow classical music theory. I can play (a bit - between my arthritis and lack of coordination, sometimes playing a keyboard is difficult) but the problem I was having was on how to separate the parts. And just how the instruments play. Since I bought it, people like Spitfire have come out with "learning how to orchestrate for midi" videos that have been really helpful. I still like Orb because I can get midi lines out of it. I probably will start with it, just as I do with the midi I get from Toontrack's EZKeys, and then adjust it to fit my melody. But you can't expect it to write your whole piece for you. AI isn't at that point yet and this was never really meant to be more than a starting place that requires a lot of adjustments. But that is what makes you the composer.
ChristianM
Active Member
Hexachord team are not musicians or composers… Forget this software !
dzilizzi
Senior Member
Yes and no. He actually studied music theory to make this. Or really as he was studying theory, the idea came to him to create it. I'm sure it is a hobby for him, and I already own it, so too late.
As long as we do not know how exactly our brain works, we will not be able to analyze the creative process. Therefore, A.I. doesn't exist. What is meant by A.I. is the sophisticated handling of a database.
I didn't try out Orb Composer Pro, but I noticed that the chords are not being named after their grades and functions. Instead, they're being named according to the popular chord notation. So in A Major I, II, and III are being called A, Bm, and C#m. Apparently this tool is aimed at musicians who specialize in popular music.
Listening to an example, I noticed that there's is no voice-leading whatsoever. That gave me the frightening thought the OCP has been developed by a musician with a lack of classical training.
It is impossible to handle a chord progression in a sophisticated manner if you never studied classical harmony, voice-leading, and even music history if you want to write in different styles.
Furthermore, I know this forum is all about VSTs and DAWs, but if you're going to review software for composers, it would help if you're not just good with sliders and knobs, but also had a decent theoretical training. Especially if so-called A.I. is part of the marketing. By the way, I watched OCP's official video, not will_m's one.
Orb Composer Pro (sic) is a nice toy and the makers are excellent software developers. That's it. It certainly isn't useful for composers, but if you would like to have a try at composing music, this tool could be fun.
Years ago I found a plugin that builds chord progressions in a classical manner with excellent voice leading. It was written by someone who knew his theory. That plugin was way more useful than OCP. It didn't write melodies, but an interesting and well sounding chord progression is what most learning composers need. A melody is not that difficult to write.
I forgot the name of that plugin, but perhaps someone else will remember.
I didn't try out Orb Composer Pro, but I noticed that the chords are not being named after their grades and functions. Instead, they're being named according to the popular chord notation. So in A Major I, II, and III are being called A, Bm, and C#m. Apparently this tool is aimed at musicians who specialize in popular music.
Listening to an example, I noticed that there's is no voice-leading whatsoever. That gave me the frightening thought the OCP has been developed by a musician with a lack of classical training.
It is impossible to handle a chord progression in a sophisticated manner if you never studied classical harmony, voice-leading, and even music history if you want to write in different styles.
Furthermore, I know this forum is all about VSTs and DAWs, but if you're going to review software for composers, it would help if you're not just good with sliders and knobs, but also had a decent theoretical training. Especially if so-called A.I. is part of the marketing. By the way, I watched OCP's official video, not will_m's one.
Orb Composer Pro (sic) is a nice toy and the makers are excellent software developers. That's it. It certainly isn't useful for composers, but if you would like to have a try at composing music, this tool could be fun.
Years ago I found a plugin that builds chord progressions in a classical manner with excellent voice leading. It was written by someone who knew his theory. That plugin was way more useful than OCP. It didn't write melodies, but an interesting and well sounding chord progression is what most learning composers need. A melody is not that difficult to write.
I forgot the name of that plugin, but perhaps someone else will remember.
Rowy, your post shows the (very difficult) balancing act Hexachord tries to fulfill in my mind. Their main target is to be a classic composer orchester tool. I have not the knowledge to judge the quality of this.
But of course this takes lots of ressources (the theory behind it alone). For me I just use it as an inspirational tool that helps me find inspiration and fills (some) gaps in missing knowledge as an only hobby "composer" who mainly wnats to have fun while driving threw this soundscape lands opened to (nearly) evryone with the development status of todays electronic music software.
The problem is that for anything other then the classic "theme" the devellopment is more then rudimentary (in the ambient template for example which I would like to use mostly I can see no real devellopment).
Maybe someday two different versions might be a solution (Artist and Pro are no solution cause there are to much general functions missing in Artist), one for the "real" classic orchestral composer (which of course would need more like what you are talking about) and one for someone like me who is glad to find some inspiration and help for making some simple things to devellop further in daw or whatever.
I think they really trying hard to bring this tool to a point where it is really useful (at least for some), but devellopment seems to follow the way two steps forward, one back. And that of course opens doors for new bugs while old ones still not fixed.
I wont use this for evry track, I have different workflows for different targets and moods, this is one of them but I am really happy to have it and I am kind of optimistic for further devellopment even if I see it not getting easier with tools like AIVA for example.
But of course this takes lots of ressources (the theory behind it alone). For me I just use it as an inspirational tool that helps me find inspiration and fills (some) gaps in missing knowledge as an only hobby "composer" who mainly wnats to have fun while driving threw this soundscape lands opened to (nearly) evryone with the development status of todays electronic music software.
The problem is that for anything other then the classic "theme" the devellopment is more then rudimentary (in the ambient template for example which I would like to use mostly I can see no real devellopment).
Maybe someday two different versions might be a solution (Artist and Pro are no solution cause there are to much general functions missing in Artist), one for the "real" classic orchestral composer (which of course would need more like what you are talking about) and one for someone like me who is glad to find some inspiration and help for making some simple things to devellop further in daw or whatever.
I think they really trying hard to bring this tool to a point where it is really useful (at least for some), but devellopment seems to follow the way two steps forward, one back. And that of course opens doors for new bugs while old ones still not fixed.
I wont use this for evry track, I have different workflows for different targets and moods, this is one of them but I am really happy to have it and I am kind of optimistic for further devellopment even if I see it not getting easier with tools like AIVA for example.
In that case, they started off on the wrong foot. If you use the popular chord notation and the popular idea of chord progression, then how on earth is this going to be a tool for the classical composer?
Besides, if a (neo) classical composer wants to write music, he certainly isn't going to need this tool. All he needs is a pencil and paper. And an instrument, if necessary.
But I know what you mean. If you want to be a classical composer and you're still learning, you'll need all the help you can get. A tool like this might give you the impression that the path to the top of Mount Parnassus has been paved. That, it has not!
You'll learn more if you take lessons. Real lessons, with a licensed teacher. That is something I blame the internet. Nowadays people tend to think that you can learn anything just by reading articles, watching videos and installing software. It doesn't work that way. Not with studies that are difficult.
You don't want a doctor to check your health if all he did was searching for information on the internet, do you? The same goes for a trained composer. Four years music school, six years at a conservatory of music (or university) and you are qualified enough to call yourself a beginning composer.
I'm not being a snob here. I've taught amateur composers with great joy. It's Hexachord who is being the snob. AI? No, not true. Classical composers? Not true. Interesting chord progressions? No, not even close. A toy to play with? Yes, that it is.
And I admire software developers who are capable of writing something like OCP. All I managed was some assembler code and a bit of Android. I'm not calling myself a software developer though. I wouldn't dare.
ChristianM
Active Member
If you only want create progression, you have for example Harmony Navigator :
You have 2 versions.
ps : In fact, I use Synfire Pro and, for me, I think Orb Composer is a gadget or toy without AI… (where is AI ?)
You have 2 versions.
ps : In fact, I use Synfire Pro and, for me, I think Orb Composer is a gadget or toy without AI… (where is AI ?)
ChristianM
Active Member
^^
Christian, before Orb Composer I worked with Rapid Composer which I think is comparable to Synfire Pro but the problem is really steep learning curve and lot of time just to keep up with the devellopment.
What makes Orb Composer great for someone like me is the general user friendliness which I may just let drop under the table while thinking about their targets and that is definitely the one they seem to manage the best so far and gets forgotten easyly while talking about the problems.
I know I really loved the idea tool in Rapid Composer and the tirelessly devellopment from one Guy doing this and stil try to keep up track a little following in the forum but you have to dig so deep into it and that is really done well with Orb Composer. You can open the program and just start. Choose a template, choose a scale, choose a chord progression, choose a block, choose some instruments and there you go (wherever that might lead you )
What makes Orb Composer great for someone like me is the general user friendliness which I may just let drop under the table while thinking about their targets and that is definitely the one they seem to manage the best so far and gets forgotten easyly while talking about the problems.
I know I really loved the idea tool in Rapid Composer and the tirelessly devellopment from one Guy doing this and stil try to keep up track a little following in the forum but you have to dig so deep into it and that is really done well with Orb Composer. You can open the program and just start. Choose a template, choose a scale, choose a chord progression, choose a block, choose some instruments and there you go (wherever that might lead you
)
