Ah... this is where we will never agree.

I use samples. Extensively.

I orchestrate and conduct and work with live orchestras. Extensively.

Music to me is about emotion. NOBODY, i repeat, NOBODY gives a crap about any single articulation.

Part of the magic is that sometimes, collaborators will all inspire and influence each other. If you view your orchestra as robots trained to perform on cue exactly your vision of perfection, you will be one very disappointed composer. And a composer without musician friends who don't look forward to playing your work.

I use VSL as much as anyone -- at the highest levels, but never, EVER discount the importance of the hybrid and the collaboration with the real guys. Never.

We're only making music. It's just not that important. Sure, I get notes from fans, "your music helped me through a difficult time" or "we played your music at our wedding and it brought us joy" -- that's a fringe benefit of what we do... but it's never so important that we miss the bigger picture: "does it feel good?"

As a non-film maker, I would never say, "but the DP should have used a different lens for the wide shot... it ruined the film" -- I may leave the film unsatisfied, but the viewer never would call out any technical moment. Unless you're a pro. NOBODY will ever say, "but the viola section didn't articulate the detache's with the snap that VSL library would give it..." that's total bullshit if you think that ANYONE anywhere is actually listening to your music that way. Trust me, nobody cares. Do they like the song? Does it make you feel something? Does it score the scene and make an emotional impact? Everything else is just stuff you do for your own entertainment.

If you truly think that you can make better music with machines -- great. I use the machines as a creative choice and usually financial issue -- machines vs. $30,000 session?  Then there are the hybrid scores...  so we do whatever services the music. But maybe it's my age, but I no longer believe that anything I do is important. Yeah, people enjoy it. And they pay me. And I get pleasure doing it. And I get pleasure knowing others enjoy it. But if not me, it will be someone else. I am not the only guy who can make a song sound good. So I just do my thing... speaking of, I have 170 bars of orchestration I need to deliver by tomorrow.

Couldn't agree more Jeremy. I've always enjoyed the interplay between the musicians and myself at sessions. While not letting it get out of hand, there have been plenty of times when a concertmaster said "Tom, do you want it like this....or like this..." (because I had not made it clear enough in the score) and I often changed my mind on the spot based on hearing someone play the the figure differently than I had thought it out.  I wish I had the budgets you do Jeremy, as live sessions for me are more and more rare.

And as far as changes "on the clock," William...yes they are done all the time, sometimes they have to be in film because of last minute changes....whole bars and even sections are taken out (no fun, but it does happen.)

TH

@aerovons said:

  I wish I had the budgets you do Jeremy

is this a comedy forum? know any other jokes? 

VSL was a purchase that came right off the top of an album budget -- we either paid for 1 day in a studio with orch, or we bought VSL -- that was a "jumping off the platform without knowing if there was water in the pool" moment. Because if it didn't work, I'd be out $14k + nothing would be recorded. Of course, our $14k was only going to get us about 30 minutes of music. we had a 60 minutes of music. It cost me about a month of really learning the tools. And then another month while getting up to speed. And some hardware issues.

Major label budgets are a fraction of what they were. As in 1/10th -- for years and years, we did projects in the 500k+ range. Now, we're lucky if they can find $50k -- that's just how it is. And the big live sessions are the first thing to go. We just did a single 3hr big band date for 4 songs (used to only do 2 songs per 3 hrs) -- and instead of an entire record of orchestra, some songs are specifically arranged ot be smaller -- these are choices based on finances... from the label. Fortunately, there's always another way to tell the story. Would it be great with an 80 piece orch? yeah? Will it be great with a trio? Of course it will. 😉

William needs to go work with real players to really appreciate the samples. And to really appreciate the musicianship that only a room full of cats can bring to the project.

And yes, I have never done a session, ever, where the robots, er, musicians, didn't interpret the score and make it better. As I said in a post earlier -- any crappy orchestrator can sound good if you write for a good band, since the musicians will always make it sound good. But the samples are unforgiving. Useful tools, huh? 😊

Go to work with the real players? How long did you play in orchestras, operas and chamber ensembles? I spent 25 years going to work with real players for your information. Playing as a professional horn player. Then conducting and recording live music for concert or film. One other thing - you are a New Yorker. O.K. - I live in the sticks - Reno, Nevada. So laugh at that, Mr. Hot shot New Yorker. yeah, I'm pathetic. I can't go down the street and bump into great players every second and know everybody who is sophisticated and ultra-talented like you. But I can do this...

www.williamkersten.com/page13.html

My last statement on this is not a bunch of hot air but some music - the last section of a 15 minute symphonic poem. I tried to make it realistic and expressive and made innumerable changes I could never have done with a live group. Go ahead - you can put me down and show me how much better you are in New York or Florida or wherever. But if you do, I want to hear it. Put it right here. Live or sampled. [8o|]

William, the work at your link is very well done, impressive, and I'm sure took many hours. I cannot for the life of me see how you could compare it to a live orchestra playing the same thing with good players. It would sound 3 times larger to begin with, which is one thing that all emulations seem to have a problem with...the air and size of the sound. 

The position that an emulation of the real thing is better than the real thing is untenable. Will it work? Will it fool some people? Will you get paid? Absolutely. But those are different subjects. And I think you are taking all this too personally and getting far too angry over a difference of opinion. If you like samples better than the real deal, that's entirely your choice.

TH

It's a very nice piece, William.   

@aerovons said:

William, the work at your link is very well done, impressive, and I'm sure took many hours. I cannot for the life of me see how you could compare it to a live orchestra playing the same thing with good players. It would sound 3 times larger to begin with, which is one thing that all emulations seem to have a problem with...the air and size of the sound. 

The position that an emulation of the real thing is better than the real thing is untenable. Will it work? Will it fool some people? Will you get paid? Absolutely. But those are different subjects. And I think you are taking all this too personally and getting far too angry over a difference of opinion. If you like samples better than the real deal, that's entirely your choice.

TH

What is "the real thing"?    Is it performers?  Is it a composer's score?  Is it a composer's imagination of sound?  Is it a dream of sound a composer had and tried to realize? JUST WHAT EXACTLY IS THE REAL THING?  Answer me.      You can't.  Because it never occurred to you that music is not just what performers do to annoint a composer with their genius.  MUSIC IS THE WORK OF A COMPOSER.   Performers are lucky if they even begin to approach that.    No one like you will ever understand that.  In this time of cutesy glamour string quartets and beautiful young cellists and artistically posing young phony conductors and aping of the latest sound design masquerading as film music and what-have-you. THEY DON'T EXIST compared to what a composer creates out of his life, his inspiration, his agony,  whatever someone wants to list as part of being a composer.  And so for the first time in history, this artist can express his ideas without the compromised world of begging for performance and catering to conductors and grovelling before music directors.  That is a tremendously exciting development in the history of music.   It is nothing less than the direct realization of orchestral ideas from the mind of the composer limited only by his imagination and skill.  AND YOU DON'T LIKE THAT?  To you it is nothing but an "emulation" ?   

Enough William...enjoy your libraries!

TH

Actually......it doesn't necessarily sound larger with a human orchestra. It can in fact, very often sound quite a lot softer in amplitude when it's live. I can be very surprised when sitting at an orchestral concert and getting attuned to the live, rahter than sampled sound. It's not so much a larger sound but a different sound. 

The trouble with sampled sound is that very often it can be unrealistically too loud. Especially certain types of string sound like staccato. Some of the staccato things you hear on a sample based recording are almost impossible for a live section of really good players to reproduce.

What you get with a live orchestra of good players is an organic sound that is impossible to reproduce with samples. It's impossible and that's all there is to it. That is not to say that a sampled recording is not as good as etc. It's just different and then it's simply down to personal taste. For example - is this live? Yes it must be. But could a good sample operator reproduce this piece of music and make it sound the same. Doubtful but there are some good sample people out there.

And than after all that - are samples added to the recording? Or is it a sampled recording in the first place? Hahahahah. 

Incidentally is there a difference between New York and Reno? I thought these were figment places and merely sampled for the only real place in America......HOLLYWOOD!!!!!! Hahahahaha.

Paul I'm speaking of recordings re the size thing.

I'll post an example of what I'm talking about when I get a break tonight.

TH

Yes, please post something.  I was waiting for that.  A LARGE SCALE SYMPHONIC WORK you have recorded with either VSL or the equivalent great orchestral players.  Also Jeremy Roberts (from New York) I'd like to hear from  - some actual music.  Though he seems to have vanished from this thread.  Perhaps he bumped into Yo-Yo Ma on the streets of the Big Apple and they are having a latte and croissant before strolling to the studio to record his new cello concerto with The Phil.  

You're being childish and abusive, and turning this into a personal matter.

It has nothing to do with what I write, or what Jeremy writes, or what you write. I was very complimentary to what you posted, it takes great skill to put something like that together. You just didn't like the fact that I said I would no way find it a substitute for a real orchestra playing the piece. Sorry, but real is real, sampled is sampled.

If you can't hear the difference, then your ignorance is bliss and you can go on thinking samples sound as good as the real thing forever, I could care less.

There is a terrric VSL mockup of a John Williams piece from E.T., why not listen to it, then listen to the real John Williams work with live orchestra, then come back and tell us about how the sampled version sounds just as good as the real orchestra, and that you could have saved John a ton of money.

You're ridiculous.

TH

I was on a plane to Korea. I'm orchestrating a new musical for Broadway - out of town tryout is in Seoul.

http://tearsofheaven.co.kr/html/

some of what you hear on this site is stuff i produced -- and yes, VSL (except the wood flute, played by David Weiss)

I am non-disclosed with my artists -- we don't talk about production. if I give you links to iTunes, I'd be breaking the trust of my clients, who don't want anyone to know how we did it.

William, your contempt for musicians is astounding.

I have nothing to say to you.

@William said:

MUSIC IS THE WORK OF A COMPOSER.   Performers are lucky if they even begin to approach that.    No one like you will ever understand that.  In this time of cutesy glamour string quartets and beautiful young cellists and artistically posing young phony conductors and aping of the latest sound design masquerading as film music and what-have-you. THEY DON'T EXIST compared to what a composer creates out of his life, his inspiration, his agony,  whatever someone wants to list as part of being a composer.  And so for the first time in history, this artist can express his ideas without the compromised world of begging for performance and catering to conductors and grovelling before music directors.  That is a tremendously exciting development in the history of music.   It is nothing less than the direct realization of orchestral ideas from the mind of the composer limited only by his imagination and skill.  

PS -- I just had to quote this, since it beyond amazing any music creator could show so much disrespect for musicians. I hope you get your work played by a major orchestra, and I hope they spit on your music when they discover you feel this way.

FInd me a successful composer or orchestrator, and I will show you someone who loves making music with musicians. I'm done. I have to prepare for my orchestra rehearsals, First read is later today. 😊

@Another User said:

You're ridiculous

Yeah, I'm being abusive. 

Everything you say is an absolute statement of fact, but you can't understand it is just your narrow-minded opinion. 

Yet again,  someone compares one of the greatest orchestras in the world - the London Symphony -   with samples.  I already stated over and over again that the absolute best of live performance is very difficult and rare to obtain.  This difficulty profoundly affects a composer's existence and if you don't understand that just take a brief look at music history.  And the advent of sampling has changed that immensely. 

I posted this  little statement  on the other thread, speaking to someone who is not dogmatic and adamantly opposed to samples as art as you are and this is my last statement to you : 

"It is impossible to discuss this on that other thread because those people are dead-set against the artistic aspect of samples.  They are of the narrow-minded and depressing ilk  which views samples as nothing more than a cheap substitute for live players.  But my idea is that one can create things for samples which would never be presented to live players for one reason or another - musical or practical.  Also, this affects one's concept in the composition process in a very good way  You are not thinking "O.K. Is some orchestra going to play this and is a conductor going to take it seriously?"  That really affects what you compose.  Hugely affects it.    In fact, it can profoundly change your entire approach.   Samples add immensely to the art of composition in the highest sense, not merely for crap-film scoring or music library potboiling. "   

Oh my, now we are quoting people of great ignorance who dismiss film scoring as "crap".....now there's some credibility! 

Idiots like that will never be fit to shine the shoes of people like  Jerry Goldsmith or John Williams. Complete morons.

And again you keep changing the point, changing the point. No one said samples weren't a wonderful addition to our arsenal, but a straight ahead mock up of a piece for traditional orchestra will always be a mock up of the real thing. Something you want to play around to be something a real orchestra could either not really do, or could only do with great difficulty is a different subject, it wasn't the subject of this thread, and never was. 

You are insulting and have great trouble keeping to the subject without personal attacks and attempting to reduce the discussion to the equivalent of a shootout. Again, really childish, which seems to be the mode of operation on Planet William.

Boy - you Yanks are fucking mental!

I watched an episode of Miss Marple tonight and I believe Dominic Scherrer who uses VSL does that with VSL and probably other sample libraries. It may not be real, but it sounds good. Isn't that what it's really all about?

No, it's not what THIS THREAD was all about.

It wasn't about "Can samples sound good?"

"Can samples be used creatively in ways the real orchestra can't?" 

"Do some TV shows use sample libraries instead of real people?" 

"Does Joe Blow on the street know or care?"

It wasn't about any of those things.

If someone could please tell me how to unsubscribe to this thread, let me know, please. I feel like I've entered Monty Python's Argument Clinic.

TH

@aerovons said:

No, it's not what THIS THREAD was all about

What is it all about?

This thread is about...

@Stephen W. Beatty said:

An interesting video highlighting the production methods for the film Tangled scored by the composer Menkin. With the advent of MIR and the ability to acheive a superb realism for instruments samples in a real hall, how different are these sounds from the actual orchestra?  If  you are comparing the digital recording of an actual orchestra with an equivalent live ( not a step edited ) midi performance using MIR and VI can a listener really tell the difference in a double blind test? The problem with comparing a step entered (Jay Bacal)  well known Classical compositions and a digital recording of the same compositions by an live orchestra is not the quality of the resulting sound but the gesture and expressive flow of the music. Are we on the verge of  or in an era of equivalence of sound of the recorded real orchestra and a recorded midi sampled orchestra?

Regards,

Stephen W. Beatty    

Mr. Beatty simply asks, are we at the point where a sampled orchestra can conceivably replace a real orchestra?  It is my opinion that, for the average listener (average Joe), yes a mock up would sound just as good as the real thing.  I think it's safe to assume that the average listener wouldn't include somebody who works with samples for a living.  The average listener isn't listening to the same things we are in a particular piece and, whether we like it or not, the average listener doesn't care about the same things we care about.  As I said in my first post, I know a flautist who wouldn't know a sample library from the Public Library so even some musicians wouldn't know the difference.

I am also of the opinion that we are at the point where the real thing isn't always superior to the sampled rendition.  I think it's a mistake, and rather narrow-minded as well, to think of samples as nothing more than tools to make mock ups totally disregarding their worth.  Of course, samples are not infallible but neither are real players. 

Composers who have real orchestras at their disposal can't appreciate what a MIDI composer/orchestrator goes through when trying to create a virtual emulation of what they are hearing in their heads.  The countless tedious hours of painstakingly tweaking a couple of articualtions to get a brief phrase to sound like it should.  Composers who use real orchestras just get it as close as time will permit then just have the players figure it out when it all goes live.    

 Strangely enough, this is one thread where I think everybody has been staying pretty much on topic actually.

BTW just click on "Email Subscription Enabled" if you don't want replies to this post going to your email.