VSL is a cut above the "just for mock up" tag for sure. The main reason I have purchased virtually everything VSL has produced is because of their commitment to numerous articulations. Picking up on Williams' remark about fine pigments though does point out a weakness for a particular sort of composer when it comes to creating with VI's -  I mean the composer who has been classically trained and has studied enough scores to be able to imagine some of the myriad possibilities possible when writing for orchestra - in other words, being able to think orchestrally when/whilst writing, the orchestral sound being inherent in the act of creating and a lot of the time, an instigator of material. (this is the decisive factor in writing for orchestra and incidentally, when done well, will also be the most convincing in midi emulation)

It is this composer who has the hardest time with VI's because none of the companies who produce them have gone far enough (yet) with velocity layers, attacks, techniques and all the other parameters that make up a real instrument. I am not levelling any accusations here against VI companies because as I have intimated in my first post, the technology is not there yet for such complexity and so for me, the implication and frustration of not being able to realise a particular and complex moment of scoring with VI's forces two issues.

Firstly, if you accept Jerry' premise and utilise midi VI as an instrument in its own right,  you are restricting your creative journey in sound to limitations which you may well find acceptable to work in (and to be fair, good results can be produced ), but will not have (at this time!) the finery of pigment a real orchestra would have with which to create musical colour. This is assuming you want a pure orchestral sound of course. What Jerry has done (well in my view) has been to supplement on occasions his VI pallette with synths. This approach makes the orchestra look capable of only a few primary and secondary colours when it comes to sonic possibility and has a long fruitful path ahead in my view.

However none of this helps a more purist (in terms of sound) approach. My second issue concerns actual composition and it is here where my opinion differs from Jerrys (at this time!). Whereas Jerry has embraced midi, I still see it as a limiting means to an end, because the score (on paper) has no limitation other than practicality and represents to me the totality of acoustic space - one that can be manipulated with artifice and aesthetic proclivity into a piece of music. I am free to express any whim I want to on this empty page and am emancipated from the lack of a particular attack or timbre hindering my creativity and influencing my choices.

Until VI's begin to get close to the subtlies and complexities  of an orchestra I and many others in this dwindling niche of composers will struggle to get music heard, but its a price worth paying for me because (and this is just my subjective approach - not a condemnation of other approaches) I don't want to feel hindered nor compromised when writing music.

@mh-7635 said:

VSL is a cut above the "just for mock up" tag for sure. The main reason I have purchased virtually everything VSL has produced is because of their commitment to numerous articulations. Picking up on Williams' remark about fine pigments though does point out a weakness for a particular sort of composer when it comes to creating with VI's -  I mean the composer who has been classically trained and has studied enough scores to be able to imagine some of the myriad possibilities possible when writing for orchestra - in other words, being able to think orchestrally when/whilst writing, the orchestral sound being inherent in the act of creating and a lot of the time, an instigator of material. (this is the decisive factor in writing for orchestra and incidentally, when done well, will also be the most convincing in midi emulation)

It is this composer who has the hardest time with VI's because none of the companies who produce them have gone far enough (yet) with velocity layers, attacks, techniques and all the other parameters that make up a real instrument. I am not levelling any accusations here against VI companies because as I have intimated in my first post, the technology is not there yet for such complexity and so for me, the implication and frustration of not being able to realise a particular and complex moment of scoring with VI's forces two issues.

Firstly, if you accept Jerry' premise and utilise midi VI as an instrument in its own right,  you are restricting your creative journey in sound to limitations which you may well find acceptable to work in (and to be fair, good results can be produced ), but will not have (at this time!) the finery of pigment a real orchestra would have with which to create musical colour. This is assuming you want a pure orchestral sound of course. What Jerry has done (well in my view) has been to supplement on occasions his VI pallette with synths. This approach makes the orchestra look capable of only a few primary and secondary colours when it comes to sonic possibility and has a long fruitful path ahead in my view.

However none of this helps a more purist (in terms of sound) approach. My second issue concerns actual composition and it is here where my opinion differs from Jerrys (at this time!). Whereas Jerry has embraced midi, I still see it as a limiting means to an end, because the score (on paper) has no limitation other than practicality and represents to me the totality of acoustic space - one that can be manipulated with artifice and aesthetic proclivity into a piece of music. I am free to express any whim I want to on this empty page and am emancipated from the lack of a particular attack or timbre hindering my creativity and influencing my choices.

Until VI's begin to get close to the subtlies and complexities  of an orchestra I and many others in this dwindling niche of composers will struggle to get music heard, but its a price worth paying for me because (and this is just my subjective approach - not a condemnation of other approaches) I don't want to feel hindered nor compromised when writing music.

Mike makes a lot of good points.  No doubt, technology is still evolving, and I too would like to see more velocity levels, 8 would be ideal (ppp, pp, p, mp, mf, f, ff, fff).  All artistic mediums have limitations..  It's really a choice of which limitations we're most comfortable with, which ones inspire us to create.  There's no comparison that is meaningful between a live orchestral performance and a MIDI recording.  A much more reasonable comparison is between a MIDI recording and a recording of a live orchestra.  Some composers thrive and need the live performance, it is the whole point of composition, to have a live audience listening in real-time to a piece being played well. I started writing music around the age of 10 or 11 and started playing around with tape recorders at about the same time, so the union of music and the recording arts has been natural to me since I was a young boy.  Perhaps that is why I am inspired by the virtual orchestra, music and technology have always gone together for me.   When I do go to live concerts, I find that listening to an orchestra play is always more fascinating for me than watching.   Probably another reason why I hold the recording arts in such high esteem.   To each his own, as they say.  I also consider myself a practical musician, and it's more practical to produce my pieces with VSL than chasing down conductors and trying to get them to program my pieces.  

Not much is perfect in this life on Earth, so we must make the very best of what we have to work with!

Jerry

Some excellent, insightful comments to digest from Jerry, Mike, and William.

With regard to the term "mock-up":  I confess to personally not giving it that much thought, nor seeking a deeper sub-text to its meaning, insofar as it can imply an inferior end product to a live performance.  I simply as a relative "newbie" to this world, used the vernacular of the common man (no pun intended, Copland!) to refer to an orchestral work rendered with virtual instruments.

Mike, your artistic goals, and approach to composition in my estimation, is the result of seeing "beyond the notes"; afterall, the movement to more modern forms of musical expression is due to the need for composers to continue to push the envelope, explore new sonic landscapes, and go beyond the conventional ideas of form and harmony, so vastly developed already.  I completely respect this, but am to some extent grateful that my own personal proclivities are toward more conventional ideas of music, which is why I rarely explore extended techniques, and am inclined to write in a neo-classical/romantic style.  So, the current tools on offer via VSL and others, typically meets my requirements.  In fact, I am often daunted by the abundance of articulation offerings via the extended library, for which, if I ever get those extended libraries, may allow me to further explore areas of composition I'm not yet ready to explore.

Jerry, it strikes me that composers in general are introverts, and that we are quite comfortable as such.  The problem with being "islands unto ourselves" as I see it, is that we may desire to control our own destinies and not rely on all those external social norms required to build a network and get our music performed publically, but in so doing, will limit the exposure our music receives to the few "fellow composers" that regularly comment on our music on forums such as this.  It's clear that by posting our music on forums, we're all seeking some form of validation/feedback/commentary.  In other words, we don't want our music to exist in a vacuum, or we simply would create it and never share it anywhere.  So with that ideal in mind, I was happy to see you mention the desire of many composers to get the live performance and share their work in a public forum.  This shared/communal experience is why people still go to movies, theatres, restaurants, etc.  It is a powerful, transcendent experience that elevates the music to new heights.  It's as addictive as a drug.  As performers, my wife and I can make hundreds of youtube videos and put out recordings, but our greatest feelings of accomplishment come from sharing our music in live concerts and interacting with audience members.  I want the same for my own compositions, which is why I continue to pursue this.

I recently read a quote from a new music presenter that stated, "If orchestras didn't play Mozart in his lifetime, we wouldn't be playing Mozart today."  This is the only problem with not building an audience for our music in the "real world."  My fear is that no matter the fact that we're "documenting" our works via recordings and sharing them on forums, they are not being shared on a scale large enough to build a "buzz".  And further creating an alientation between composers and performers (for which I agree exists through faults on both sides of the coin) may do more long term harm to all of us (composers, performers, conductors, etc.) that will leave the overall state of the performing arts in ruin.

I'm learning so much from you guys.  Thanks for continuing to share your poignant insights!

Dave

One thing I didn't mention was that I still feel a need to put everything on paper, not necessarily before doing MIDI, but in many cases afterwards, as the music needs the old-fashioned reality of notes on paper for it to seem real to me.  Which does not make sense I realize.   

@Acclarion said:

Some excellent, insightful comments to digest from Jerry, Mike, and William.

With regard to the term "mock-up":  I confess to personally not giving it that much thought, nor seeking a deeper sub-text to its meaning, insofar as it can imply an inferior end product to a live performance.  I simply as a relative "newbie" to this world, used the vernacular of the common man (no pun intended, Copland!) to refer to an orchestral work rendered with virtual instruments.

Mike, your artistic goals, and approach to composition in my estimation, is the result of seeing "beyond the notes"; afterall, the movement to more modern forms of musical expression is due to the need for composers to continue to push the envelope, explore new sonic landscapes, and go beyond the conventional ideas of form and harmony, so vastly developed already.  I completely respect this, but am to some extent grateful that my own personal proclivities are toward more conventional ideas of music, which is why I rarely explore extended techniques, and am inclined to write in a neo-classical/romantic style.  So, the current tools on offer via VSL and others, typically meets my requirements.  In fact, I am often daunted by the abundance of articulation offerings via the extended library, for which, if I ever get those extended libraries, may allow me to further explore areas of composition I'm not yet ready to explore.

Jerry, it strikes me that composers in general are introverts, and that we are quite comfortable as such.  The problem with being "islands unto ourselves" as I see it, is that we may desire to control our own destinies and not rely on all those external social norms required to build a network and get our music performed publically, but in so doing, will limit the exposure our music receives to the few "fellow composers" that regularly comment on our music on forums such as this.  It's clear that by posting our music on forums, we're all seeking some form of validation/feedback/commentary.  In other words, we don't want our music to exist in a vacuum, or we simply would create it and never share it anywhere.  So with that ideal in mind, I was happy to see you mention the desire of many composers to get the live performance and share their work in a public forum.  This shared/communal experience is why people still go to movies, theatres, restaurants, etc.  It is a powerful, transcendent experience that elevates the music to new heights.  It's as addictive as a drug.  As performers, my wife and I can make hundreds of youtube videos and put out recordings, but our greatest feelings of accomplishment come from sharing our music in live concerts and interacting with audience members.  I want the same for my own compositions, which is why I continue to pursue this.

I recently read a quote from a new music presenter that stated, "If orchestras didn't play Mozart in his lifetime, we wouldn't be playing Mozart today."  This is the only problem with not building an audience for our music in the "real world."  My fear is that no matter the fact that we're "documenting" our works via recordings and sharing them on forums, they are not being shared on a scale large enough to build a "buzz".  And further creating an alientation between composers and performers (for which I agree exists through faults on both sides of the coin) may do more long term harm to all of us (composers, performers, conductors, etc.) that will leave the overall state of the performing arts in ruin.

I'm learning so much from you guys.  Thanks for continuing to share your poignant insights!

Dave

Music as a recording art, including VI, will not replace live performance, never in a million years.  There will always be performers, and always be composers who write for live performance.  Though one of the university libraries has accepted my entire CD and score catalog, when I am dead I don't think I am going to care much about whether my music is still heard by others or not. 

As Woody Allen once remarked, "I don't want to be immortal through my work, I want to be immortal through not dying!"    ;>😉

I enjoy working in the studio more than I enjoy rehearsals with groups.  I've done both and given my particular temperament and mix of talents, the studio suits me better.  I think the pianist Glenn Gould felt the same way, he was the first classical musician to embrace multi-track recording. 

Jerry

This is an almost existential philosophical discussion about the sheer heart of music. I don't have any opinion on well or not writing of a traditional notated score, but I wanted to express my point of view concerning the conservation of music itself and its reason of being.
Why do people sing? Why do they imitate birds? Why do they enchant in rituals? Why do they dance and therefore produce rhythms...?
Birds can sing lovely (romantic) tunes, but are they in fact? Actually not. Most birds sing a fairly agressive song to let opponents know where their territory is and not to amuse human ears. All the-like forms of 'music' have a reasonable explanation. The question is: is that music as we tend to understand it? So many good composers have tried to imitate these chants and put every detail down in written scores. Why? It would have been a lot easier to improvise on appropriate instruments the calls of animals... But somehow, they wanted us to kow how it is done, to have us remember, to show their mastery or skill, or simply to create a repeatable and identical sound for many generations (almost scientifically).

Is it absolutely necessary to make a written score? Of course not, but it is some kind of certainty that the creative work will survive (be it in dusty archives). Digital versions are always tied to digital means of performance and storage known today. For how long will that be the case? Look at the CD (disappearing). The MD long time ago forgotten... The sampling techniques we all praise today will eventually vanish and be replaced by entirely new ways of playing back on 'computers'. Even that magical instrument will finally be dusted under by history and evolution.

My point is, that there is no real urge or necessity to write scores, but it seems (for now) the most reliable way to preserve your creations. It is indeed a rather slow and tedious job, but it remains the universal storage of music for later performance or study. I'm an old school musician, I even couldn't create a simple song within a DAW. Somehow I need the physical visualisation of staffs and notes to see (and hear) music. The dots and squares in a piano roll don't speak to me at all. And since I'm not a piano player, I can hardly use my limited skills to play directly in a track in order to have a lively performance... I just need my pencil and paper (computer keyboard and screen) to enter my ideas and emotions. Old fashioned or outdated? Maybe, but who cares. It's my way...

Max

To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 

@William said:

To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 

:)))

These are very interesting insights and quite fascinating thoughts! Well, I'm going to add mine, too.

I'm making music with synthesizers and with samples for more than 25 years, and I've never fleshed out a single score. I've occasionally jotted down some ideas (like Schubert did in taverns), but my composing is too much "sound-bound", meaning: My aim while composing is to make something sound good, and especially with samples it's a lot about finding the right articulations and getting the whole mix to sound appealing.

I consider myself to be composer, mixer and producer in one person, and as such I'm constantly switching between those roles. If an instrument blurs or deters my mix, I substitute it or let it play a different phrase - even if a real orchestra could do the trick. Whileas composers for real orchestra finish their score and rely on the score to contain all the musical information needed for the orchestra to play it according to their musical vision. I think this purpose is absent in midi composing and - at least for me - it's too much of an iterative process for score writing to be involved.

To be honest, I'd love to have a full score of my works in my hands - just for the feeling of it :), but it's so much work and it would only pay if I had a real orchestra ready to play it. Or could there be another reason?

@William said:

To me music does not exist unless it is written down on paper, preferably by candlelight while wearing a powdered wig.  Though jazz can't be and needs recording media.  The best  thing for that purpose is 78 rpm ceramic discs. 

I wear my powdered wig every morning when I go to my studio.  Otherwise I don't get paid!   ;>😉

@Max Hamburg said:

My point is, that there is no real urge or necessity to write scores, but it seems (for now) the most reliable way to preserve your creations. It is indeed a rather slow and tedious job, but it remains the universal storage of music for later performance or study. I'm an old school musician, I even couldn't create a simple song within a DAW. Somehow I need the physical visualisation of staffs and notes to see (and hear) music. The dots and squares in a piano roll don't speak to me at all. And since I'm not a piano player, I can hardly use my limited skills to play directly in a track in order to have a lively performance... I just need my pencil and paper (computer keyboard and screen) to enter my ideas and emotions. Old fashioned or outdated? Maybe, but who cares. It's my way...

Max

Max, you are aware I assume that DAWs do contain notation editors?   I've never used the PRV in the 26 years I've been using a DAW.  It's the dumbest thing ever invented, at least when compared to standard music notation.  If DAWs didn't have notation, I could hardly compose and produce the kind of music I do.   The following DAWS have notation editors:

1.  Cubase

2.  Sonar

3.  Reaper

4.  Pro Tools

5.  Digital Performer

6.  Logic

Hi Jerry,

Of course you're right about most DAWs having a scoring unit. I started a couple of years ago with Logic Pro X. It was my first DAW experience and I found it hard to handle, very complicated, mainly in the automation section. Moreover I found the notation unit very messy and clumsy (probably due to my ignorance).
Since I work with Notion (notation) and since Notion has been acquired by Presonus, it was obvious that I would work with Studio One Pro. It is a lot easier and they planned at Presonus to integrate it in Studio One. But so far, they haven't. The only cooperation between the two is rewiring from Studio One to Notion (which is not what I would want) and mainly for audio tracks. Importing midi data from Notion is quite tricky as well, but they are aware of this and will tackle it in an updated version.

In my limited experience I noticed that most DAWs are actually designed to work with audio and are not so effecient and user friendly with midi.

I'm still hoping (and I'm definitely not alone) that Presonus one day will fully integrate Notion in its DAW, so that both worlds can live in peace (audio and midi) and that classical composers can produce - if necessary - a decent score and parts.

I remember a fellow composer in the States (Randy Bowser), who composed only with his DAW (I think it was Sonar) and hardly did any writing of parts and scores. Only when absolutely necessary he extracted a notated version of his creativity, but he hated this. (That is quite the opposite, but I can understand it. Without notation, I would be lost in dots and little blocks...)

And I banned my powdered wig and all the candles some weeks ago. Much too hot over here. A cool summer wine is more efficient nowadays... 😉

Max

@Max Hamburg said:

Hi Jerry,

Of course you're right about most DAWs having a scoring unit. I started a couple of years ago with Logic Pro X. It was my first DAW experience and I found it hard to handle, very complicated, mainly in the automation section. Moreover I found the notation unit very messy and clumsy (probably due to my ignorance).
Since I work with Notion (notation) and since Notion has been acquired by Presonus, it was obvious that I would work with Studio One Pro. It is a lot easier and they planned at Presonus to integrate it in Studio One. But so far, they haven't. The only cooperation between the two is rewiring from Studio One to Notion (which is not what I would want) and mainly for audio tracks. Importing midi data from Notion is quite tricky as well, but they are aware of this and will tackle it in an updated version.

In my limited experience I noticed that most DAWs are actually designed to work with audio and are not so effecient and user friendly with midi.

I'm still hoping (and I'm definitely not alone) that Presonus one day will fully integrate Notion in its DAW, so that both worlds can live in peace (audio and midi) and that classical composers can produce - if necessary - a decent score and parts.

I remember a fellow composer in the States (Randy Bowser), who composed only with his DAW (I think it was Sonar) and hardly did any writing of parts and scores. Only when absolutely necessary he extracted a notated version of his creativity, but he hated this. (That is quite the opposite, but I can understand it. Without notation, I would be lost in dots and little blocks...)

And I banned my powdered wig and all the candles some weeks ago. Much too hot over here. A cool summer wine is more efficient nowadays... 😉

Max

I've used Sonar for some 25 years.  The notation editor in a DAW is designed for MIDI input and editing, and, if you accept it as such, it works great for sequencing and composition.  Some people expect a DAW's notation editor to be a publish-quality program, able to generate parts for rehearsals and otherwise be a finished "score".  I think that is too high a bar, Sibelius, Notion, Finale, these are dedicated score programs for those purposes.  All DAW's notation programs work OK, but you have to really dive into them and figure out how to use them efficiently.  Once you do that, they work.  I've produced, so far, 9 symphonies and 14 albums composing directly in Sonar and though I have some complaints, I am able to do what I need to do.

I can only speak for the score editor in Logic. While it is not meant for publishing, it can be used to quickly prepare readable parts for the musicians (including the musicians in an orchestra). A classical music performer will find it quite unprofessional, and most of what is needed in a contemporary/avantgarde score is missing. But it will get the work done, in particular in film music or less academic-inspired fields.

Paolo