Yeah, I also apologize; for wasting my time with anybody that would call Bartok's music neat... No common ground here in taste or cultivation whatsoever. Bela would be proud...
Over & out.
-
Whatever music you try to compose/write, you should know something about history of music, because there is only one history of music on this earth from which also today music grown {classic, R&B, techno, you name it...}. Just my toughts...
-
@Errikos said:
Please! Do anything BUT write "neat" orchestral music - above everything else, NEVER post it publicly or share it with ANYBODY. Shhhh!.... Isn't absolute silence so much more preferable? Stick to computer programming (If you're so good at it).
Haahhaaaaa! Erik you really have become my new role model. But lets not forget also that at his day job, this guy is a 'highly respected' computer programmer!!!
Buddy do you know Rupert Hadyn?
Do what DG says. Simple as that.
-
@Errikos said:
How are you Paul? I spent most of last week in the UK; I should have looked you up. Next time... Listen, I have no idea who Rupert Hadyn is, or what DG says. You got me curious...
Alright based on all things considered thank you Erik. Rupert Haydn? Think pantomime horse.
Whereabouts in England were you Erik? Don't forget I'm a long way from London down in Budleigh Salterton. A long way a wayyyyyyyy........
-
Back to the OP ... a struggle that many of us have dealt with!
Work process is not only different for each of us but is likely not uniform across all of our projects. Some of my pieces begin as an improvised piano skeleton that I MIDI record and then flesh out with other instruments/sections in Cubase and full VSL library (or Sibelius as an intermediary) ... other pieces are worked out as full orchestration in Sibelius with help from playback (either default sounds or SE samples) before MIDI export and harnessing the full VSL libraries ... still other pieces take shape from the very first improvised note with full VSL libraries in Cubase (and now MIR).
Sometimes you will surprise yourself (in a favorable way) by radically changing your workflow as an experiment. For example, when I started writing in Sibelius after many years of improvise-and-MIDI-record, it broke me free of many a rut I had previously gravitated towards.
In general, I agree strongly with getting the essential musical structure/arrangement worked out in any way you are able while the ideas are flowing, without pausing to perfect a sound/instrument/articulation. If you can "hear," beyond your immediate sketch, a more complex articulation or more refined timbre, etc. during this phase or upon reviewing your piece during later sessions you can work it out later. Yes, those "later" sessions can be incredibly tedious but it is a different creative mindset, at least for me.
As for a click track ... I would be interested to hear how many folks stick to bars-and-beats and work through the tempo track to achieve a more natural "flowing" result, and how many just play (MIDI record) into the sequencer and ignore how the bar lines end up. I prefer the result I get from the latter, but it's a devil getting that into notation (and sounding as good as your improvised version, that is) later ...
It goes without saying that your most important tool is between your ears. Cubase, VSL and any other software or implements you apply are simply a way to translate the music in your head into sound waves that you can share, and they are far more complex than most of us will need for our particular niche. From that complexity, though, we ALL can get great musical results despite our individual, idiosyncratic techniques and creative differences.
Cheers,
Craig
-
Some of the most satisfying playback renderings I've created were first done in Finale then from printed parts I played them into a sequencer along with the imperfections of timing that would go with that.
However invariably there are things that I cannot play or issues of timing with sustained passages, etc. not to mention controller data which I was never proficient at manipulating while playing the notes.
so what about these situations to elaborate on your question Craig.
-
Ah, there is quite a bit of detail I have left out ... ;-) ... my MIDI recording is so replete with timing and dynamics imperfections (ha-ha) that I end up tweaking a lot of notes afterwards. So what I am playing in is a rough approximation, not a finished "take" in many situations. I almost never quantize, but I do frequently nudge notes. Performer I am not, and with a non-music day job and other evening obligations my skill in that realm progresseth not. It's all I can do to find an occasional evening to compose these days!
The more technically difficult passages I have much more success tackling by note-drawing in Cubase or notating in Sibelius, preferably upon enough of a played-in framework to avoid a stiff, quantized sounding outcome.
I seldom use left hand controllers while playing, but draw in CC data later. I often use velocity for the rough draft phase of keyboard improvisation and play-in, and change to other CC channels (exp, vel XF) for expressive control in the subsequent editing process.
I compose largely by ear rather than "intellect" -- always have -- but when I started composing in notation software (Sibelius) for the first time the visual bridge to structure and theory led to some much better compositions than I would have arrived at by my original improvise-overdub-and-MIDI-edit technique. That was, perhaps, what I was trying to explain when I commented about the benefits of trying a new workflow.
Confession - I feel guilty about using the sequencer as a simple MIDI recorder, and ignoring the correlation of sequencer bars and beats with how the passage would actually be notated, when I build a piece through improvisation. Perhaps I shouldn't, because it is highly unlikely that anybody will want a score of my music on short notice ... which gives me some freedom that others may not have in their own music production "environment."
Craig
-
Thank you Craig. I appreciate the explanation. I've always started with pencil and paper or nowdays virtual pencil and paper. If I really want to render something a little more convincing than what comes out of Finale I may export from Finale and import to Reaper where I can tweak some of the keyswitches and controller data. As I mentioned I've also played in the parts from the printed page trying to pretend to be the flautist, clarnietist, etc.
Nothing's perfect to be sure.
-
I stopped using a keyboard years ago cos it slowed me down. I just use a pen tablet and enjoy actually writing in the notes .. midi or score. Keyswitches are also a breeze cos it's all right there in the matrix editor.
The only way to a good steady workflow is really to spend time setting up the Vienna Instruments player your way. Load the samples you know you want to use. If you're not having fun actually writing the parts then it's going to be pulling teeth the whole way through.
Not saying you should ditch your keyboard, I know many composers can't work without one. Myself I work very quickly just with the matrix editor .. dealing with writing notes .. velocity xfade and expression control. Wouldn't have it any other way.
Most important thing is to pay attention to the sound you're working with .. not what it is. Workflow is only as fast as the obstacles you've put in front of you. Seriously I would look at getting a bigger keyboard if that will help. But bare in mind .. you don't actually need one at all. And you might even find .. as I did .. that 'writing' rather than 'playing' unlocks you so you can do bigger and better things.
-
I joke with people, when they ask what instrument I play, that I can sort of play the piano/keyboard, but that I really play the mouse. I often use the keyboard to mess about (ahem, improvise) and get themes/textures/rhythms started but I end up doing a lot of "mouse painting" clicks and drags especially for harmonies and for filling out orchestration. All CC data I draw in. I thought I was just so manually unskilled that I had to work the "slow" way. How reassuring to hear that someone as accomplished as you, Hetoreyn, is a "note-drawer" as well!
You've hit the nail on the head (no pun intended) with your comment that it should be fun to write the parts and if it isn't, you probably need to change something about your workflow.
Cheers,
Craig
-
I have to get in on this if Errikos and PaulR are mouthing off !
btw to the person who taunted Errikos about his compositions - they are fabulous, complex operatic music. I wish they were more readily available to hear.
On the original topic, there is no one way to work but perhaps the best in general is to get inspired by the sounds that are available. Which is easy with VSL because there are so many wonderful instruments that naturally make one think - "Wow! What can I do with that Bass Flute, or Wagner Tuba" (ha-ha! see my other endlessly fascinating post which no one responded to because they were reduced to a comatose state after merely looking at it), or...? etc.etc. The VSL sounds themselves are a profusion of inspiration. When you can just press down on a keyboard and hear instantly three great trombone players in a resounding fortissimo or one of the greatest pipe organs in the world or almost any sound imaginable - what more do you need? Forget technicalities and go with inspiration always!
-
Thanks BIll, and Paul, I just saw DG's post. Had I read it before I might not have posted myself (well...). I must say, Daryl's blood pressure and irony seemed to me to have been just a little higher than usual on his post (understandably considering...). I do hope it's not my bad influence.
And inspiration Bill? Not necessary at all with all the fabulous musical-nuggets-and-chips stoolwares available today. I hear there is a great new one out, called Glumina or something...
-
@William said:
I have to get in on this if Errikos and PaulR are mouthing off !
On the original topic, there is no one way to work but perhaps the best in general is to get inspired by the sounds that are available. Which is easy with VSL because there are so many wonderful instruments that naturally make one think - "Wow! What can I do with that Bass Flute, or Wagner Tuba" (ha-ha! see my other endlessly fascinating post which no one responded to because they were reduced to a comatose state after merely looking at it), or...? etc.etc. The VSL sounds themselves are a profusion of inspiration. When you can just press down on a keyboard and hear instantly three great trombone players in a resounding fortissimo or one of the greatest pipe organs in the world or almost any sound imaginable - what more do you need? Forget technicalities and go with inspiration always!
Quite right Billy!
I love the Bass Flute. In fact I would highly recommend VSL's Special Edition Woodwinds that, apart from the Bass Flute also include the Oboe D' Amour. The oboe sound on that is as good as anything out there today and it's been around for quite a while now. There are more, let's say, slighty more exotic woodwinds on that library. It's a must for anyone. The legato patches alone are worth the trouble.
Orchestration or the way you use different instruments is just about imagination and while there are obviously set parameters ect, I don't see why you can't use just about any mixture of sections available. Experimentation is the key.
When working with samples I would highly recommend that you play the sounds first via a keyboard rather than mouse clicking. Even if you're a crap keyboard player it doesn't matter. Let the sound itself dictate your mood. After all, I believe most amateur writers write to their mood. Nothing wrong at all with that. Professionals on the other hand don't really have that luxury. I spend my time musically between being an amateur (which I find infinitely preferable) to pro (which is fun also).
-
you're still being pretty dismissive. I have to stand with my "speak for yourself" I think.@MDT said:
I'd like to hear some of your work if it's available. I'm not trying to be critical of people who enjoy using virtual instruments, that would be silly as I'm one of them. But would you not agree that given the choice, the real thing is preferable? Therefore we can only approximate. If you've recorded live musicians (good ones) you'll agree that V.Instruments, though good for background stuff, are a long way from a real performance. I am only responding to the notion that it is a mistake to write to the samples any more than it is to write to the musician.Yeah, I've recorded live musicians, for years. I'm not going to be Miles Davis with a samples library, but your belief, only regard what I have as 'background', means to choose be restricted in a way I don't have to be, doesn't it?
features some somewhat Varese-influenced brass work and there is some expressive flute...