Ok Nick, I understand where you're coming from and respect that. I guess that's part of what makes music so fascinating, everybody relates differently to different music genres and composers. 

@Nick Batzdorf said:

[...] Unfortunately the point at which I just can't enjoy samples is when I hear Bach. It just doesn't sound right. [...]

As I said I know where Nick is coming from and respect that. But here's what was my goal:

To achieve expression within the boundaries of the sample lib. available today. When I tried listening to various versions of this piece with real instruments, most of the recordings I didn't like and some I hate it the sound, and the totally "pure" recordings with the instruments of the origin, that, I have a hard time listening to. I'm wondering if Nick didn't have that knowledge of this piece being samples before listening to it, if he would of reacted the same way. Just wondering :)  But just as Jay Bacal said, in his own words, and I agree, samples is not ready to challenge real players and probably never will. But since that wasn't the intention I don't focus on that, just trying to make it sound expressive, enjoyable and good enough to sound like real strings but in a sort of personal rendition, and as William pointed out, Bach's music could be played numerous ways, just look at Glen Gould, you either love or hate his style. Anyway, I could go on like this,  but I just wanted to say that one can enjoy as much a fillet mignon one day as good hot dog at a baseball game the next. 

Nick, listen again. Smoother mix. Just for you! [C]

Well Guy, I admit to liking it better the second time. :) I think what still bothers me is that the string sections - especially the violins - are too perfect [edit: because they're sampled as a section, not because of your programming]. But you may be right that I'd like it better if I didn't know it was samples.<br><br>

Dietz - yeah, that organ performance is amazing. I remember being totally floored by it the first time I heard it. However, organ is different from strings - there's only one musician rather than 14 or however many you have in the section,

 Very nice Guy. Thank you.

Jim F.

Guy, if you go to iTunes and put in "Bach Air on a G String," all but a couple of the first eight versions or so are what I have in my head when I think of this piece. It's really a totally different thing. I think you could make the case that yours is just different, and I wouldn't argue, because it's not like you don't know what you're doing - your version isn't at all arbitrary. But it's not the same thing at all.<br><br>

Now, it's possible my ears would accept the samples if you were using small string sections, and also if the continuo parts were more prominent relative to the melodies.

I think that Nick Batzdorf is reacting not against  some profound, impossible-to-overcome existential difference between live playing and samples but rather that sample performances are too perfect.  Too perfect in timing,  intonation, constantly monitored flawless balances between instruments, etc.

This is the easiest thing in the world to correct, but no one does it because until now such a thing has never happened.  Too much perfection in a musical performance is basically the last thing any musician ever worried about.  Until now.  I want to work on this, but have not seriously tried it yet.  I would like to hear Jay and Guy do something.  For example on Jay's string quartet work, if he had done some vertical and horizontal alterations of tuning, as well as more radical mistiming, I can guarantee you next to nobody would every know that it was not live.

This complaint that Nick Batzdorf and Paul Robbins have made - that because the strings are sampled as a group they always sound like blocks of sound and not individual players - is incorrect in the case of VSL because of two reasons. 

1) If you are hearing a recording, THEY ARE BLOCKS OF SOUND.  They are no longer individual players, but have merged into a mass.  It only becomes apparent that it is samples of massed players when you repeatedly do the exact same transition, or combination of notes. 

2) with the various kinds of deliberately mistimed layers that are possible with combinations of the string ensembles and solo instruments available in VSL (and very much a part of its philosophy of representing the orchestra) it is possible to create complex, shifting and non-mechanical-sounding performances that have the same sense of individuality as a recorded live ensemble. 

To prove this, I can attest to the fact that I have found it IMPOSSIBLE to duplicate some of the performances I have done with VSL.  (Even when I needed to!) Certain combinations of levels, balances, timings, timbres, harmonies, contrapuntal aspects, as well as all the elements controllable within the mixing environment create an individuality that is as hard to duplicate as a live orchestral performance.

It is stated over and over again by people here that they would much rather use a live orchestra than samples.

I submit that they have not had their music played by live orchestras.  Because if they had, their illusions about everything sounding like John Williams conducting the London Symphony would vanish in an instant.  You cannot communicate with real live people, and have them all sitting and ready to brilliantly present your every musical idea perfectly (even assuming you were in the one-in-a-million position of having a great world-class orchestra at your beck and call) the way you can control samples.  With the sampled orchestra, the composer is at last freed to realize his imagination without submitting it to the ability (or lack thereof) of another person.  This is so significant it cannot be overstated.  It frees a composer to exist within the world of his musical imagination in a way that has never happened before in all of musical history.

@William said:

I think that Nick Batzdorf is reacting not against  some profound, impossible-to-overcome existential difference between live playing and samples but rather that sample performances are too perfect.  Too perfect in timing,  intonation, constantly monitored flawless balances between instruments, etc.

It's interesting William you bring this matter up more detailed, because that is what my next version is all about, at least a compromise. I hope to be able to post it later today. 

The samples themselves are what I was talking about, although what you're saying is also relevant. What I meant specifically is that every player in the string section is in tune, and they all start and stop together. It's a different sound from a live string section.

By the way, William, yes I have had music played by live ensembles quite a lot, although not for a long time - and when I had strings it was a rare treat (plus I used to do a fair amount of orchestration and then heard other composers' music played live). These days I edit magazines and do smaller music jobs here and there, almost always MIDI plus occasional live overdubs. Ten years as a struggling composer when I got out of college (Berklee) - with intermittent but not consistent success - was enough, and I was happy to land the job as editor of Recording magazine in 1991. Being able to get up every day and work on something I loved doing, without having to beg anyone for work, was great.

The subtext is that I don't feel it's necessary to accuse me of being a wanker to make your point. That's the tack you take when someone is being arrogant, and I've already posted without hesitation that Guy is a more accomplished musician than I am - and I say that without putting myself down but rather putting him up.

Please search iTunes as I suggested and listen to the first several versions of the Air. If you don't hear what I'm talking about then it'll be my turn to suggest that you're the one who needs to go to school before voicing an opinion.

Okay, maybe I'm a little OTT. William's insult is slightly more subtle than my response. :)

I'm not accusing you of being a wanker  When did I say that?  I was just talking about how live orchestras are not always the holy grail they are assumed to be.  I've had 35 years as a struggling composer and still beg people for work after my irrelevant day job. Just forget it.  I have no interest in discussing anything with you.

Well, I'd call someone who's criticizing Guy's AOAGS performance without even having heard his or her music played by an orchestra a wanker. But you're right, I overreacted. Sorry.

 Vibrato,

I completely see what you are talking about.  BTW I think your music is very good, so you are not at any disadvantage there.  You are of course right to emphasize that approach of bringing other people "into the mix."  I have always done the opposite, trying to do everything myself, not out of trying to be the King of the World like James Cameron (hey, whatever happened to him?  He disappeared along with that big boring boat) but simply because I like doing the whole thing or as much of it as possible.    To me the ideal of all arts is not a conductor in front of 80 people, but a lone painter isolated in his attic studio with no one else around, his paints prepared, his canvas blank and white and ready. So the sampling environment fits in perfectly with that ideal. 

 All right, Mr. Batzdorf, sorry if I offended you.