No I wouldn't worry about that. The smaller movie productions that could never afford real orchestra will be much better off because of VSL and the likes, but bigger productions and that's pretty much all of the films released by major studios will still use the real thing because they can. The orchestra cost on a 40+ million dollar movie is very little. Most of those composers get a budget that easily includes orchestra, so why would they want to compromise and settle for less? I wouldn't.
VSL is very imprerssive until you put it up against the real thing then you realize the difference. You can't program the all the techinques and subtle dymanics of all the indivduals and the orchestra as a whole. It's just not possible. A real orchestra offers endless articulations, only limited by the composers imagination. VSL offers a handful of articulations which require a lot of time and a pile of PC's if you are going to work in any kind of time frame. A real orchestra is faster to produce even better results.
I love VSL. I've already used some of it in two movies so far and it's great for the independent film maker level films - where a real orchestra is absolutely out of the question. It makes a great mock up tool to get your idea's accross to the director - but I've taken mock up to real orchestra before and believe me, it's not the same. The real thing isn't going anywhere for a long time.

nah, musicians themselves bring alot to a piece. Its in the performance. While VSL is one of the best tools to realize your compositions, nothing will replace a live player. Its about "character"

now will directors be compelled to stay with VSL instead of a real orchestra?...only the ignorant ones. Producers on the other hand are more money minded and may be more inclined to suggest it, what one should do is try to emphasize the reasons why live is always better (well with good players). It may be subtle, but worth it in the end.

Believe me, the argument was alot easier until VSL came around, thats for sure, but even the best MIDI orchestrators will tell you that live is better in terms of asthetics and sound, even with VSL here and QLSO coming around the corner.

now about budget.....thats a completely different story, and with the multimillion dollors being spent on "indie" films, one should be able to spend 100k on music production, but everyone is cutting corners anywhere tey can, and samples make it easier to say "its good enough".... but thats the exact quote that one needs to think about "good enough", or "perfect".

Thats not to say I dont think VSL is amazing, it is, and will be a wonderful tool for some time to come. Its inspired me quite a bit and made me realize my weaknesses with orchestral music, not to mention taught me so much about how instruments should play. Its just taht it is a "tool" to realize your music (and possibly inspire), not a replacement for live performances. I bet even Herb would agree with this.

Its about us as composers to convince studios/producers that live performances are will better, if the option is there to do it right.

Two - hopefully interesting - older threads on similar topics:

http://235.deatech.at/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=202
http://235.deatech.at/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=176

HTH,

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library

Although he brings a good point, I think there´s a self-question that settles the topic:

"If you had the money/resources would you record with a live orchestra instead of using sample libs?"

I think the answer would be "yes" even for the VSL crew. (don´t quote me on this though [:P] )

Hey, we do record the live-orchestra - day in, day out! ;-]

/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library

Ok, but you don´t record the final composition with it, do you?


neener,neener,neener [:D]

Think about this: the live musicians are making the sounds in either case ("live" or "VSL" version).

Of course, the "conductor" of the VSL orchestra has an enormously more difficult task than the live conductor. He must basically "play" everything as muscially and as naturally as live players playing their parts in real time. A very tall order.

But, I bet it will be possible even to exceed the quality of a live orchestra soon. (It might take 4 months to produce instead of 3 weeks, but that shouldn't matter when striving for perfection [[;)]] ).

- Paul

What some of the obviously professional composers on this forum don't seem to understand or admit is that it is ALREADY possible to exceed the quality of live players.

I find it irritating how a double standard is always used when discussing sampler vs. live performances - (1) any quality of sample recording, and (2) only the best quality of live performance. I guess most here have had a piece of music they wrote SLAUGHTERED by a group of incompetent orchestral players. I know I have. So has every other serious composer who writes for orchestra, no matter how good he is or what stage he is at in his career.

I am tired of this question eternally being looked at from the performer's standpoint. From a composer's standpoint, sampling is already far superior to many live performances. And it is a fact that if you record with a live orchestra you are stuck with exactly what they did at the session, for all time. (Unless you're a millionaire.) Whereas with sampled recording, you can change things so delicately and expressively that it would take literally MONTHS of recording to do the same with live players.

I also disagree with the number of nuances and subtle expressions available. I am a professional orchestral player and composer/conductor, and I am astounded by the nuances available to the composer who uses VSL, Miraslav Vitous and Garritan Strings to name three. If you do a quickie job, (which I know many film composers have to crank out to meet deadlines) - sure, then there are no nuances or subtleties. But if you spend two years on one recording, as I have done, there are subtleties that are mind-boggling.

I think the possibilities with sampling are limitless. As a regular method for recording music, sampling is becoming superior to live recording because all these factors amount to control. It works both ways - the control a composer has, or the control a player has. If you use live players - they have all the control, and the conductor merely influences them - and you are at their mercy. If you use samples, you as composer have all the control, and with what is now being done at Vienna, it is an unprecedented amount of control.

Virtual Bands on Broadway?
Producers vow to use technology if musicians go on strike

Live Broadway may not be quite so live, if unionized musicians strike next week.

Broadway producers said yesterday that they would turn to "virtual orchestras," or technology that mimics live bands and symphonies, if musicians walk out. Both sides are preparing for the worst as negotiations between them began to resemble the bitter relations of chorus girls Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly in "Chicago."
...
The producers want to get rid of us because a virtual orchestra is less expensive than a live one," said Bill Moriarity, president of the 1,000-member American Federation of Musicians Local 802 in Manhattan. "They say they want to get rid of the rule for artistic reasons. They're doing it only for economic ones."
http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/stage/ny-bzshow263147428feb26,0,5461451.story?coll=ny-theater-print

Craig Duke

William,

Thanks for sharing your opinion. It is really interesting as I never thought of that in this way before. It makes me look at things with a different perspective. [:)]

Martin