[quote=PaulR]........... have you gone Potty btw> :)))
Not until August, thank goodness. Still as sane as ever ATM [;)]
DG-
Thanks very much for the replies. I suppose I should rephrase my question. I dont want the strings to sound more realistic, but I do want them to sound like a real orchestra. I know alot of it is great orchestration. I am considering going to the Scott Smalley course in LA to learn some of the Hollywood tools and tricks. I guess my main problem is that I am sending alot of my mixes out to established composers (I am still young and new and learning) and they are saying, your midistration sounds fake, it is too simple, and things like that. Orchestration is one area I will continue to study but I am really thankful to DG because those are very useable tips. How do you articulate the bowing differently though? You said it should start and stop at different points. I was also wondering with layering, how many violin tracks would you typically have in a song? Could someone post something they have done using special edition so that I can ask a few questions about it? Bob
-
Bob, I would suggest that you find a composer whose MIDI mock-ups you like and see if you can get them to show you how they do stuff in return for a bit of your time to help them with other stuff.
Regarding orchestration, there is a wealth of great study material out there, as well of centuries of scores to study. Learn to orchestrate well first, and then worry about how to translate it to MIDIstration. However, leaving orchestration aside, mock-up existing classical pieces and you'll soon find what questions to ask. As I've never heard anything you've done I can't be more specific. You must also realise that many of these composers that you're sending stuff to might not have much of a clue what an orchestra sound like. [;)]
DG
-
Yeah, about orchestration I can recommend you "The Study Of Orchestration" of Samuel Adler. Exists only in english, but as far as I understand you're from the USA. The book is in my opinion one of the best about orchestration, instrumentation available nowadays! And the good thing is that it contains also CDs with sound clips to the given examples and videos (about specific techniques on individual instruments) and if you have enought money and time then there's also the "Workbook" with tons of exercises to develop your skills and technique in orchestration/instrumentation.
Check in Amazon, I think in USA it might be even a little cheaper than here. The CDs (they're around 5 or 6) must be purchased seperately from the book.
I think it's the best one you can get, exactly because of the fact that it has sound and video samples makes it much more effective.
It will also give you answers to your question how to achive such a lush and rich string part.
Otherwise there are also other good books like Hans Kunitz "Instrumentationslehre", they are around 13 single books for each instrument/section. But it has never been translated from german. Or Richard Strauss/Hector Berlioz "Instrumentation" is a fantastic book but a little old fashioned, stuck a little in the late romantic periode, instead Samuel Adler's "Study Of Orchestration" shows also modern contemporary instrument techniques, though he puts focus on traditional orchestration from baroque, classic, romantic, impressionism to 20th century literature (Stravinsky, Schönberg, Bartok, Webern, Penderecki and more american contemporary composers than european ones)
Good luck!
Andie
-
Here are the links:
the "Study of Orchestration" (main book):
http://www.amazon.com/Study-Orchestration-Third-Samuel-Adler/dp/039397572X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206554889&sr=8-1
the additional "Workbook":
http://www.amazon.com/Workbook-Study-Orchestration-Third-Samuel/dp/0393977005/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1206554922&sr=8-2
couldn't find the additional CDs on Amazon, but I'm sure they're still available (I bought them just 2 years ago).
-
Hi there, Thanks again so much! I have already ordered the Samuel Adler book and began reading Rimsky a few days ago and am almost finished. There are alot of rules of thumb to remember in orchestration! Anyways, here is a sample of my work, feel free to critique the mixing and the orchestration. If you want to suggest points where there should be a counter melody, ornamentation, or different instruments used and changing I am open to that as well. I hope to win a spot at the ASCAP workshop this year and submitted a demo. I have also tried to find internships but since I am Canadian I cannot get into the states for one. I joined the Guild of Canadian Composers and hopefully I will win a spot on their mentorship program next year, although there is only 3 spots in the country and it only occurs once a year. Thanks again, Bob Graham Here is the link: http://www.box.net/shared/wxur9jsw0w and another for good measure-thanks to Heteroyn for a template to help me make the mix on this one: http://www.box.net/shared/yijbnoj4s4
-
Hi Bob
Well I quite like that - it's OK. It's not a disaster by any means.
If you were to ask me to be brutal, I would probably suggest a couple of things that are just personal taste really.
The sound is a bit flat - that is to suggest a bit 2 - dimensional. Everything is melding into itself giving the listener little direction, thus the mind starts to wander. It's a fairly busy piece and just needs a bit of time and space.
The writing is OK - you mentioned counter melody - there is some attempt of that here right? I like to hear contrapuntal things going on in pieces - again that's just personal taste.
(a) I would suggest that for an exercise you do what Daryl suggested re: a well known orchestral piece (not too long) and give it go with VSL.
(b) As another exercise, try writing something a little simpler and give yourself a couple of melodies that weave in and out and around themselves (about a minute long) - AND when you choose the instrumentation from the start - stick to it throughout and DON'T add later. Just as an exercise you understand :) Things tend to meander otherwise. I'm no expert btw.
PR
-
Hi guys, there's some great tips here, not wanting to completely hijack the thread, but I'm looking for some advice on how you take one or two melodies that sound great on piano but when I try and split out the parts to strings, woods, brass etc it sounds pretty dire. So anybody any useful tips about how to develop the melodies and themes and introduce more - anything other than counterpoint would be great!
Best
Tim
-
@timkiel said:
Hi guys, there's some great tips here, not wanting to completely hijack the thread, but I'm looking for some advice on how you take one or two melodies that sound great on piano but when I try and split out the parts to strings, woods, brass etc it sounds pretty dire. So anybody any useful tips about how to develop the melodies and themes and introduce more - anything other than counterpoint would be great!
Best
Tim
That's probably just choice of instrumentation - everyone does that. That's why for hacks like me, sample libraries are a great aid. I just don't have the ears, technique or general skills required to hear it all and then write it out on paper so it sounds remotely any good.
Contrapuntal and Counterpoint are obviously sort of related. Counterpoint is useful for taking a theme and developing it - then a new one with the old theme underneath as it were. Great way to develop themes and sound like Handel or Bach. Contrapuntal is what you're talking about I think.
Why don't you put the piano piece up for a listen.
-
Ok, so the piano piece can be downloaded at www.timkiel.com/Piano_Demo.mp3 - it's a fairly simple straight forward piece so please don't laugh too much. But that makes it more infuriating when it comes to try and arrange it for strings or orchestra. Any ideas on where to start would be great.
TIA
Tim
-
You hijacked my thread and now I hate you!!!! No Im just kidding, I listened to the piano piece and it shows potential. I really think it is a question of how you want to orchestrate it and what musical ornamentation or counterpoint you want to throw in. I intentionally write my music very simple because I want to stand apart and have a personal style.... Its all just about what you want to do. You can read about orchestration for free and download online examples at northernsounds.com but i dont recommend their products. I recommend Vienna its much better. Bob
-
Also, If all your looking for is straight up suggestions on what to do with it, I will try. You should start with the piano line and worry about adding in extra counter point etc later. I think it might sound cool with a harp doing the arpeggios, the woodwinds carrying the chords and a solo violin or cello singing the melody for a while, after that it might be nice to hear the whole string section take over the chords, with the woodwinds playing along also to keep it soft. At this point a new instrument would need to do the melody and it may be cool to have once again a solo string or all the 1st violins doing it. Just suggestions, but its really up to you, where do you hear the piece going and how do you want to build it. Dont be intimidated just try something out then post it here and we can listen!
-
Dear Tim,
I had a listen to your piece, and enjoyed it. I think you need to clarify whether you intend it arranged for strings or orchestra. If it were my choice, I would avoid arranging it for full orchestra - you would have to be incredibly careful to avoid killing the intimacy of the piece.
I'd recommend this: your piano playing is very idiomatic. I would keep the piano in there (or even move the upper parts over to an acoustic guitar). I would put in place a string accompaniment. The key to this will be in the inner part movement (violas, 2nd violins). Where you have the crotchets (quarter notes) that are effectively sustaining the harmony on the second and third beats of the bar, I would be tempted to have the vla/vln2s noodling (for example in bar 1, I would have the violas playing something like A3 (220Hz) - C below in quavers and perhaps moving around (possibly making use of the implied suspension on the B below middle C - therefore something like A3-C3-A3-C3-A3-B3-C4-A3 for the first bar. To make a realistic string arrangement, there needs to be this kind of inner part movement. I may also be tempted to add a French (or Viennese!) horn into the mix. However, keep it very simple. An alternative might be a wind arrangement, but not too many instruments. I might also think about starting with piano and adding the strings in later in the piece, as these would function to lift it.
Dear Bob,
I thought the problem with your piece was mainly to do with the reverb. I'm not massively keen on oodles of reverb, but I thought yours was far too dry. The problem (unique to sampled performances) is that when insufficient reverb is used, and unless things are very carefully programmed, you can hear the seams between notes, and get this kind of swell just after the beginning of the note, particularly in strings. Use of reverb evens that out, as does very careful articulation selection. My process is to programme with very dry reverb, but NEVER issue without a much wetter setting. I agree with Paul that the sound is a little 2-dimensional. I think there are a few ways to improve your piece:
1) You are not differentiating between the distances in the Z-axis that players will be playing. Physically, string players in most typical orchestral layouts are closer than wind or brass. This can be simulated by using different impulse response distances or the stage positioning feature if you happen to use altiverb. You can further simulate it by applying a very small delay to the buss that you are routing your further back instruments to, and rolling off a little of the high end for the further away instruments (using your EQ).
2) You have mixed the wind very high. Typically, if you had that many string players, the wind would not be quite so easily heard.
3) I'm not sure, but your strings sound pretty loud - in the sense that they are PLAYING loudly, regardless of the overall volume of the track - i.e. their bows are pressing against the string hard. It may be that you have too high a velocity selected on the string parts, and your velocity cross-fader is set too high. Take a look at other articulations as well - possibly chamber strings or the flautando or con sordino arts.
4) Speaking of velocity cross-fading - use it all the time on strings. They swell and ebb constantly, and very seldom stay at the same volume even for a couple of seconds.
5) Part writing - A typical orchestra will (most of the time) have 5 parts in operation - 1st violins, 2nd violins, violas, celli and basses. Now your track is quite tender, so you may want to go easy on the basses, or even possibly use the chamber string articulations in the main. However, you may want to give thought to writing consistently in 4 or 5 parts.
6) Idiomatic - each instrument is written for in a different way. For exmple, if you have an intricate melody that is very fast, a piccolo would play all of that and possibly some additional runs and ornaments. A tuba would probably play some of the notes and possibly not the ornaments, due to the amount of time it takes to get a column of air moving through the instrument (Dave TK will probably kill me for saying this). Hence, you write melodies differently depending on the instrument that they are to be played upon, and the best way to understand how to do this is to listen to a) a lot of orchestral music and b) solo music for each of the instruments if you are planning a big solo on them.
There's a kind of weird duality to writing string parts. You must think vertically (i.e. in terms of chords from top to bottom) but you must also think of the individual parts. That's where the contrapuntal writing comes in. Contrapuntal means the same as counterpoint - counterpoint is just the noun; contrapuntal means writing in a manner like counterpoint. String parts (and wind parts come to that) tend to move from note to note quite a lot - really long held notes are not normal. However, in the beginning, you should hum each part through in isolation - if it is easily hummable it is likely to flow as a part.
Regarding the Scott Smalley course - it is a great course. I have been, and I couldn't recommend it highly enough. Scott is very personable and experienced, and has a great outlook and original take on orchestration. If I were in your shoes, I would try and realise a few (short) mockups of orchestral scores (i.e. traditional literature) before you go on the course since, at least when I attended, some knowledge of orchestration was assumed (along the lines of the guidelines above). Then you'll get the most out of it.
I hope all of this is of help. I tend to babble on when a subject interests me.
Kind Regards,
Nick.
-
PaulR (and others)
Here's the midi version at www.timkiel.com/Piano_Demo.mid - and here's the mp3 version again at www.timkiel.com/Piano_Demo.mp3. If anyone wants to play about and see what they can come up with then feel free by all means.
Cheers
Tim
-
Hi Nick, Thanks so much for your reply... Not sure if you have IM or anything but would be cool to get you on there. anyways, I got alot of what you said and it made sense to me but certain things I could use some more clarification... you said that I may want to give thought to writing consistently in 4 or 5 parts... I do understand that there are violins1, violins2, violas, cellos and basses... and that the 5 each have a role but I was under the assumption that cellos and basses kind of build the low end harmonys and the violins2 and violas build up the high and mid harmonies and the violins 1 either add to that or take a melody.... Not sure if this is what you meant. Secondly, I have a really solid understanding of chords and melody as well as harmony, but I really dont know what contrapuntal means... Are you kind of saying that parts must be able to weave in and out of eachother while maintaining harmony and melody without interfering or being overbearing on eachother? Well, either way, I apprecaited your advice, and I was using the panning in logic but Im thinking I may have to get altiverb.. Bob
-
I do understand that there are violins1, violins2, violas, cellos and basses... and that the 5 each have a role but I was under the assumption that cellos and basses kind of build the low end harmonys and the violins2 and violas build up the high and mid harmonies and the violins 1 either add to that or take a melody.
Thinking about strings in this way is, I believe, tremendously limiting, and I urge you not to do that.
If you don't already have them, I suggest that you get hold of Tchaikovsky's Serenade for Strings, and Vaughan-Williams's Fantasia on a theme by Thomas Tallis, both on CD and in full score (see eBay or Amazon for these for a modest price), and study how much the melody and harmony move around between registers, and how much the different string sections come in and out, supporting, complementing and occasionally conflicting with, each other.
In particular, I hope you'll notice how Tchaikovsky almost leads his melodies on a tour of the string sections, while Vaughan-Williams organizes and uses the strings quite differently from the usual five sections, to wonderful effect.