196,663 users have contributed to 43,022 threads and 258,418 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 1 new thread(s), 2 new post(s) and 96 new user(s).
Thank you esperlad very much for your kind comments on my recording.
Actually I thought as a very first attempt to work with the latest Synchon-Percussion-Library it would be a good occasion for a concrete musical discussion on the usage of the new samplelibraries, thats why I posted it in the Forum for VI.-Libraries, because my recording was just an first attempt to work with Synchron-Percussion and the Synchron-Vene for the Pianos.
But obviously except your kind and very friendly interest for my render there is obviously only deplorable little interest for concrete discussion of music and the usage of VSL-Samples among the other participants of this Community here.
The more I am glad and thankful for your encouriging reaction. I am sure the most part of your Pleaure owe to the composer Bartok. I just tried to realize it with my means as far I am able to.
However I think there is and will be alot to learn concerning the usage of the new Synchron-Libraries andd the Synchron venue, which would be worth to discuss.
I'm curious about the details of matching synchron percussion and synchron MIR room pack.
I think your choice of piece is very challenging for the mixing task. The percussion instrumentation, including piano, really exposes the qualities of reverb of synchron percussion library and also in the MIR room pack, and the short tails of the synchron venue make it even harder to make that match. I imagine that if it's possible to make the piano match very closely the sound of the synchron percussion library, then similar mixing approach would also work well for other instruments in MIR, at least woodwinds and strings, for the purpose of matching to synchron percussion.
So having said that, some concrete questions and thoughts:
(1) Can you please describe more about how you have mixed the pianos so far, and what have you tried so far in an attempt to match the sound of synchron percussion library?
(2) Which microphone positions / mix have you used for synchron percussion in this piece?
Here's the way I am hearing the mix currently. I feel like the pianos sound great by themselves, but they seem to be in a different "space" than the synchron percussion library. Compared to the sound of synchron percussion, it feels that the piano has too much "solid presence" in the tone, and it sounds too much like a coincident microhpone technique, or panning the two pianos, as opposed to having them be spatially positioned. Which does sound great then only the pianos are playing. but with the xylophone or timpani along with, suddenly the piano mix sounds too up-front and not spacious in the correct way.
I would be very interested to know if any of these ideas actually makes an improvement or not, if you have time to try them. I don't (yet) have synchron percussion or synchron MIR roompack yet to try myself. But I'm very excited to buy them when I can.
Possibility 1 - is it possible the pianos sound more like synchron percussion if we used a reduced dry mix / increased wet mix?
Possibility 2 - Do you have the "distance dependent scaling" turn on, in your MIR mix? What about "simulate air absorption"? I wonder if that would help the fit.
Possibility 3 - Would it make any difference to move the pianos further from the virtual microphones in the MIR venue?
Possibility 4 - The panning issue is a big one that breaks the immersion between piano and synchron percussion. In this kind of studio space, the percieved position of an instrument is actually not so much caused by the volume level difference between L and R channels. In fact, by the meter, the L and R levels may not be much different at all, even though we would still perceive some spatial positioning of the instrument.
Instead, I think the perceived spatial position in the synchron percussion library is more attributed to the reverb of the stage itself, the early reflections, and even just the phase difference of the same sound arriving at slightly different times on each mic (i.e. 0.1 - 0.2 milliseconds different perhaps? it's possible to do some rough geometry estimates with the speed of sound to get a good number. but it's not just the distance between the two mics, it will be less delay than that).
So maybe it's worth a try to keep the pianos more centered across the stereo field, in terms of their level difference between L and R, and instead to further accentuate their side positioning by using a sub-millisecond phase difference between L and R channels, like 0.1 milliseconds or even less. This can be done with the Matrix Mixer FX. And, maybe even emulating a deca tree by having two mixer channels of audio for each piano, one channel for L and R, another channel for C, with levels and phase delays adjusted to simulate the sound coming from a specific location on the stage.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
Nice accomplisment. Major pieces are so challenging, not just the programming but knowing that there are tons of great recordings around. I agree about the ambience, a bit sterile, I'm sure among all the possibilities offered you could find a more suitable one, keep experimenting, Suon makes interesting suggestions.
I know you must of put in a lot of work into this, all these notes and chords, but I find the playing too mecanical and often too perfect, this takes away some of the warmth and musicality. Also, what would be interesting is to feel more complicity between the perc instruments and pianos, but that could be a combination of the right amnbience and more humanizing.
Thank you Suon and Guy Bacos very much for taking the time to listen, think and responding to my first Synchronlibrary recording.
Hi Suon
That is very intersting to read, since I tend to hear most things completly different than you does
I can not find even in the few moments where both play something similar together with the Xylophon any immersion at all or what you call "Panning issue" of the pianos. Bartok has given with his score a very concrete plan for the position of the instruments. Since I am not able to chose the position of the Synchron Percussion instruments but only the way their Microphones are mixed I just cared to keep them as Bartok showed it in the Background behind the two pianos,
For the pianos we can not mix different Microphone positions in MIR, but we can place them in the venue and we can place the Microphone and we can chose the wet/dry ratio So I was able to place as it was indicated in Bartoks plan in the front an each on one side, which in my impression is good to hear all over the piece.
I tried to avoid an "immersion" of the two pianos also by chosing two completly different samplesets. (the I. Vienna Imperial of course and the II. Synthogy Studio Grand Bösendorfer) Meanwhile in my impression the pianos still tend to be for me even still a bit to wet. Of course there would be enough possibilities to give them them more space as you asked for, but Bartok intended them to be clear and in the foreground. they should be very present. they are not the orchestra they are the soloists! So it was conciously chose to have them infront and very present as it is.
However starting fom the VE-Presets for the Percussion I also tried to keep the percussion clear and not to much sunken in ambience. In short what you hear is what I like to hear with that piece. To be concrete I started for the Percussion with the VE-Presets provided with the Library which have been a great time-saver to at lleast have an starting point to tweak.
Hi Guy, Bacos yes I have listened to a lot recordings, but I do know the piece since decades pretty well since I have also played the piece myself while i was studying so I know quite well what I want to hear and I was not that enthusiastic with many of the existting conventional recordings I could listen. And to be honest the amount of "humanisation" was in most of the conventional recordings something what often enough was really annoying or more or less "the poblem". I do not talk about cconciously flexible shaped tempodetails which I programmed in this recoding as usual very detaild. But "humanisation" in term what conventional Interprets lack in respect to precision. No Bartok is neither a romantic characterpiece nor a Wagner opera oreover it is pretty near what we call in germany the "neue Sachlichkeit" from the late 30th. So if you hear something "sterile" great! Take a look an some pictures of "Christian Schad" you will see how "sterile" the "neue Sachlichkeit" in the 30th could have been. It is as every body know a very metric percussive piece not only for the Percussion but likewise for the Piano ( I always thought Corea and Hanckock wold have been presumably quite good interprets pehaps even better than Barenboim or other more strict classical pianists).
However it is of course my very first attempt to wok with the completly different acoustic setup of a Synchron -Library. The VE-Presets were very helpful as starting point, but I still fear the chance to control each microphoneposition for each Instrument seperatly could things very complex to handle.
Thank you both for your detailed critical reaction I hope I was able to answer them in an appropriate way. Otherway do not hesitate to ask if I left any conrete important aspect unmentioned you are interested to know.
Hi Guy, Bacos yes I have listened to a lot recordings, but I do know the piece since decades pretty well since I have also played the piece myself while i was studying so I know quite well what I want to hear and I was not that enthusiastic with many of the existting conventional recordings I could listen. And to be honest the amount of "humanisation" was in most of the conventional recordings something what often enough was really annoying or more or less "the poblem". I do not talk about cconciously flexible shaped tempodetails which I programmed in this recoding as usual very detaild. But "humanisation" in term what conventional Interprets lack in respect to precision. No Bartok is neither a romantic characterpiece nor a Wagner opera oreover it is pretty near what we call in germany the "neue Sachlichkeit" from the late 30th. So if you hear something "sterile" great! Take a look an some pictures of "Christian Schad" you will see how "sterile" the "neue Sachlichkeit" in the 30th could have been. It is as every body know a very metric percussive piece not only for the Percussion but likewise for the Piano ( I always thought Corea and Hanckock wold have been presumably quite good interprets pehaps even better than Barenboim or other more strict classical pianists).
I'm not talking about humanizing like mushy Chopin rubato, you're really going extreme there, give me some credit 😊 A passage could be very rhythmic while not sounding mecanical, not that this is the case, but leans towards that and this makes it less musical in my opinion. I have a feeling this is because of too much editing, wanting to make each note perfect, this happens often in programming. I'm sure it has nothing to do with your playing skills. I'm just saying what I hear and I trust my ears, but if you're happy, just ignore my post.
If you know the "Ballet Mechanique" written by Gearge Antheil a few Years befor Bartoks Sonata which has a very similar Instrumentation (Ballet pour Instruments Mécaniques et Percussion), you can perhaps imagine why "sounding mecanical" could be just what this music is about, and why Antheil already prefered to use playerpianos over "humanizing" conventional interprets. And yes even if you ever tried to play Bartoks Sonata for two pianos and Percussion yourself on the piano you will know that the slow movement has inevtiable an athmosphere of aseptique vacuum kind of the denial of any conventional kind of musical expression,It is a bit like a soundtrack to nihilism.
If you ever had the chance to listen one of the exsiting Recordings of Antheils Ballet Mecanique, you might perhaps understand, how the inability of most conventional players to provide the necessary precision might end up in a real interpretationproblem. Yes I am indeed quite happy that a sequencer could be precise whithout demonstrating again and again how difficult this is for human players. For romantic virtuos music I know that the inabilty to play exactly what is written is often an important part of its passionat musical intention (not only in Liszts but in many Virtuos music and I enjoy it very much to imitate those effects with a detailed programming of the timecurve) but here the opposite seems to me necessary (nevertheless the timecurve still follows the articulation of musical thoughts as it is musical necessary) But imho. The brilliance of the 20th century is to overcome the "romantic passion" of not being able to play precise.
Steff, I'll be direct here, and I don't mean to be rude, however, you can't keep on shoving aruments down people's throat to make them appreciate something or see things the way you do. This is "ART", pre-requisites to enjoy a work should not be necessary, and that's the message (some might say snobbish) you're constantly giving, it can help to better appreciate what the author is trying to convey and having knowledge of the endless litterature and history behind it + structure, form bla, bla, bla,, but not the pure pleasure of enjoying what you hear, and you definitely are conflicting both. Did you think Beethoven wrote music for just the elite? Absolutely not, everyone enjoys Beethoven, simply because it's enjoyable, no questions asked, no knowledge required and that's what music should be about.
Oh I do not have any reason for any concerns that others would not like what I do. And this s also true for my recent recording of Bartoks Sonata for two Pianos as I can see in predominant amount of the spontaneous reaction frrom users.
So I personnally actually have no need at all to argue anything if there are enough who simply enjoy what they hear. If you obviously do have some problems It is up to you. But if you ask me why I do something in a certain way and not another than I can frankly let you know the reason I do have.
BTW Do you seriously ask if I think that "Beethoven wrote music for just the elite? "
For sure, of course he does and by far more than perhaps anyone nowaday!
Just take a short look whom he dedicated all his works if you do have any doubts in the fact, that the Audience in Beethovens time was far from being "everyone". And even if they are today worldwide many more, be sure it is still far from being "everyone" in any sens of the word.
But did you seriously believe to have today a good explainable reasons in music for why and what I do something would be "snobbish" only "for the elite". Than I confess I am obviously a bit more optimistic about the intelleectual potential of those who are interested in classical music.
However even if I do have thousands of concrete proofs that many people simply enjoy what I do without any question or discussion at all. Serious classical music is nothing what in any way is in conflict with an open mind, reason and understanding and yes there are always many interesting things to learn and to know which are very helpful to consider in musical decisions at least of music in classical tradition. If you ever have had a decent musical education I am sure you would know what I am talking about.
I will not dispute if you might find your way to your own understanding of music without profound knowledge about and therefor hesitate to understand the inspiring potential of background knowledge. But this is actually nothing anyone has to be afraid for. If you like to discuss just do it but do not fear that you will get your answer.
If this not your way since you perhaps fear other opinions, no problem, no one forces you to participate in any discussion.
You just seem to be pretty cocksure of yourself and your advices given the fact, that I can not see any indication of any familiarity of you with the interpretation with classical modern Music like Bartok. Berg, Schönberg, Webern, Ligeti, Honegger, Prokoviev, Messiaen, Skriabin, Nancarrow or likewise ambituos living Composers (of which you can find more than enough of well received examples on my site - in numbers 680 mp3's just with music from the 20th century).
Regarding the fact, that I can not see any recording of any of those or likewise composers produced by yourself, Isn't it simply the more propable, that this kind of music is just beyond the scope of your personal musical universe?
Never mind I will let you your personal limitations of understanding, but just take in account that it is simply more convincing to get advices from someone who have a practical and theoretical insight of what he talks.
For me at least is grumbling against precision, "elite", and deeper musical knowledge in general simply not enough to make interesting inspiring or at least in anyway convincing "friendly advices". Sorry for that, but I am just honest in that point. I think we both will learn to live with that difference.
This recording is instantly obvious as computer driven MIDI. It is obvious that it was generated digitally, not humanly. It is dead, and cannot be listened to beyond a few minutes. It is a bad representation of great music and you should take it down.
The fact you cling to this makes obvious - you have no idea of what you are doing, and yet try to put everyone here down as your inferior. I am sick of your attitude. I have put up with your insults and arrogance for too long. You are not superior to anyone here - even the most rank amateur. You cannot even begin to match Guy's performances, let alone compositions. You are not even a composer and strut around, acting superior to actual composers who create music. Composers like ones you steal from on your website. They didn't give you permission to do their work - they are dead! What makes you think you can profit from their work? That also makes me disgusted. You ought to shut the fuck up and listen to Guy and other people here - but you are so arrogant, you will never do anything except make your silly little point, and think you are right and anyone who argues is a fool. You are actually near psychosis in your certainty of being correct.
In answer to your stupid tagline - yes, "to be serious," there is a far greater resource - it is the VSL website. It is also Guy Bacos' website. And yet, in your little arrogant brain, quantity = quality. In reality, quantity means nothing, and quality means everything. Do you understand that? I doubt it. You are incapable of it.
btw - don't answer me - I don't care what you think about anything.
You just seem to be pretty cocksure of yourself and your advices given the fact, that I can not see any indication of any familiarity of you with the interpretation with classical modern Music like Bartok. Berg, Schönberg, Webern, Ligeti, Honegger, Prokoviev, Messiaen, Skriabin, Nancarrow or likewise ambituos living Composers (of which you can find more than enough of well received examples on my site - in numbers 680 mp3's just with music from the 20th century).
Regarding the fact, that I can not see any recording of any of those or likewise composers produced by yourself, Isn't it simply the more propable, that this kind of music is just beyond the scope of your personal musical universe?
Never mind I will let you your personal limitations of understanding, but just take in account that it is simply more convincing to get advices from someone who have a practical and theoretical insight of what he talks.
For me at least is grumbling against precision, "elite", and deeper musical knowledge in general simply not enough to make interesting inspiring or at least in anyway convincing "friendly advices". Sorry for that, but I am just honest in that point. I think we both will learn to live with that difference.
I would be embarrased of that post.
William I know how easy you get personal. And yes this is enough to be reported.
Be sure that by far the most of all living composers whose Works are presented on my site gave me their personal allowance, asked me to do their music worked with me together and show in opposite to you all very friendly reaction on what they have heard..
You do with this kinds of posting neither you nor Guy Bacos any favour.
You just seem to be pretty cocksure of yourself and your advices given the fact, that I can not see any indication of any familiarity of you with the interpretation with classical modern Music like Bartok. Berg, Schönberg, Webern, Ligeti, Honegger, Prokoviev, Messiaen, Skriabin, Nancarrow or likewise ambituos living Composers (of which you can find more than enough of well received examples on my site - in numbers 680 mp3's just with music from the 20th century).
Regarding the fact, that I can not see any recording of any of those or likewise composers produced by yourself, Isn't it simply the more propable, that this kind of music is just beyond the scope of your personal musical universe?
Never mind I will let you your personal limitations of understanding, but just take in account that it is simply more convincing to get advices from someone who have a practical and theoretical insight of what he talks.
For me at least is grumbling against precision, "elite", and deeper musical knowledge in general simply not enough to make interesting inspiring or at least in anyway convincing "friendly advices". Sorry for that, but I am just honest in that point. I think we both will learn to live with that difference.
I would be embarrased of that post.
Am I wrong in any single fact I mentioned?
Steffen, your personal insults to Guy Bacos should not be tolerated on this forum simply due to your own shortcomings and lack of willingness to accept honest, truthful feedback.
I have had numerous discussions with Guy Bacos while he is preparing for his demos and I can assure you that he does extensive in-depth research and is most familiar with the body of works from a plethora of modern composers as this has often been the basis of our conversations and analysis. Whether Bartok, Adams, Guibaidulina, Esa Pekka Salon, Ligeti, Prokofiev, Scriabin, or many others, I know Guy has listened and studied the scores of these modern composers as we have discuss their compositional techniques and orchestrations in detail. It has simply been a subject of interest to us both to study and learn from existing works even if these discussions sometimes become rather exhaustive.
So Steffen, you are most wrong in your comment that Guy is unfamiliar with such modern pieces. Making assumptions and accusations such as this debases you more than anyone when you are so wrong.
Steffen, your personal insults to Guy Bacos should not be tolerated on this forum simply due to your own shortcomings and lack of willingness to accept honest, truthful feedback.
I have had numerous discussions with Guy Bacos while he is preparing for his demos and I can assure you that he does extensive in-depth research and is most familiar with the body of works from a plethora of modern composers as this has often been the basis of our conversations and analysis. Whether Bartok, Adams, Guibaidulina, Esa Pekka Salon, Ligeti, Prokofiev, Scriabin, or many others, I know Guy has listened and studied the scores of these modern composers as we have discuss their compositional techniques and orchestrations in detail. It has simply been a subject of interest to us both to study and learn from existing works even if these discussions sometimes become rather exhaustive.
So Steffen, you are most wrong in your comment that Guy is unfamiliar with such modern pieces. Making assumptions and accusations such as this debases you more than anyone when you are so wrong.
Sorry there is no "insult" at all.
Stay with the facts: Just take a look on the approximately 340 recordings with VSL-Samples I can find.
Simply none of them show any attempt of an interpretation of any music by the named composers. To state, that this gives no indication at all, that Guy might has any practical expierience in programming music by any of the named composers is no "insult" but simply a matter of fact.
We Guy and me are both working a pretty similar time with the same library and after having produced myself nearly 3000 predominantly very friendly received sample based recordings with among them nearly 700 of composers like the named serious 20th century classical modernism I can see absolutly no reasoon why I should not be honest when it comes to say what convinces me and what does not.
Is it so difficult to accept, that Guys interest in using Samples has obviously a likewise very different character as our both musical education has. I confess I never have "worked as the house pianists in different places, among them was the prestigious "Club Saint Denis" of Montreal." And honestly I even never had any interesst or ambition to do so, but followed completly different challenges.
But if Guy love this kind of music as it seems to be, - why not? This no problem at all for me. But is it so difficult to accept that this is not necessary the appropriate precondition to play in any way the predominant judge for what I do. No one should or would expect that from a inhouse Pianist who can play the Chopin-Studies. But If one nevetheless tries to one should be at least ready that there are more possible answers than Guy is obviously ready to accept. And yes a decent musical knowledge and ability to give reasons based on historic arguments is also what he should be ready to come allong with and not ignore it simply with terms like "resistance" or even more abusive wording against me.
An "advice" which is not allowed to discuss without being insulted for something like being not obediente enough is neither friendly nor in anyway an advice but imho simply naive. Sorry. but discussion like that will scarcly convince me in any way at all.
By the way I do not have the impression that Guy has on his side ever been in anyway ready to serious reflect the friendly hints I gave him , but prefered exactly that behavior a few people here believe one might insult me for.
It is not about what any one has just "talked" once about anything, but an in depth knowledge and practical expiereince. Many important aspects of seious classical modernism of the 20th century look very different if ever you have spent the work to be able to play the music and do have an notable expierience in realising that music not only once ot twice. Just show me your interpretation of Bsrtoks Sonata for two Piaanos and Percussion and we can fairly judge who is able to convince for musical reasons. Up to now I cant hear anything like this.
So come back to reality. I will not dispute or reduce in any way Guy Penchant to very popular titles of the standard repertoire and self composed genre pieces inspired or not by bajuvarian Brassbands or Christmas Carols. This is what he likes so why should he not do so.
But sorry if anyone seriously believe that would or even could in any way be any kind of Benchmark for what I do.... frankly but this is really completly inapropriate in any way.