Hi Paul,

Though I'm very curious to hear your project I don't have a broadband connection at the moment and haven't downloaded your file. I can comment though that even if you prefer to work with all parts at once and have an extremely powerful machine, it's normally best to render each part separately to audio and mix them together afterwards.

The problem lies with the MIDI specification and it's implementation in the computer operating system. It just isn't designed for immediate throughput of a very dense series of events. You will get an increasing amount of latency with an increasing density of MIDI events (such as note on's, note off's, etc.,)

I can hear timing ideosyncrasies with a lot of demos so you shouldn't be surprised to find that yourself.

Forester

Yes, I've noticed that this only occurs when a lot is happening at once. If this is a design flaw in MIDI (or at best, an application for which MIDI was not designed), what other solutions are there? Can MIDI be improved (old as it is)? Is something else needed altogether? If so, who's working on that (and how is it going?) MIDI-2? Seems like there are many other problems with MIDI besides this one, but I wonder what's in the research pipeline now.

- Paul

wow, you are really going for it! This does sound very good. My two suggestions: needs more reverb and some of the repeated notes sound a bit quantized, especially 3/4 the way through.

Thanks for the feedback.

This symphony is a real challenge because it

a) is the most famous symphony on the planet,

b) has a bit where everyone in the orchestra plays the same eighth note repeatedly, like, 9 times at ff (making it a prime spot for sounding fake-y),

and c) requires timing adjustments on micro and macro levels (from fermatas to stringendos, to slightly moving certain notes ahead in time, etc.).

I could work on something awash in reverb, with percussion sounding at the beginning of each melody note (to mask fake-y sounding transitions), but I really want to see how far I can push this (First Ed.) VSL, both in terms of my own abilities, and in terms of circumventing the VSL's inherent limitations (such as having no high notes in the solo violin marcato instrument).

This symphony has an undeserved reputation as an old "war-horse" that has been played to death, and that nothing new can be "said" by playing it again. The VSL gives me a chance to prove that's wrong. A real orchestra would balk at even considering the things I'm going to be doing with this ... such as making it so you can hear the oboe's antecedent phrase before it's ad lib. solo in the recap. ... which is the only way to make sense of that damned solo.

BTW, Forester, freezing the tracks helps immensely with the timing issue I originally posted about. (It's a Logic thing ... converts to audio, temporarily.)

I can't wait to get back to work on it!

Also, some interesting research DOES seem to be happening in the musico-theoretical halls of academe regarding the representation of music in computer systems. The MIT Press's "Computer Music Journal" is a good place to see what I'm talking about. But I somehow get a sinking feeling that litttle of that effort will percolate up to our level and result in true fixes or advances for our MIDI world.

- Paul

I think I've improved this quite a bit:

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/beethoven_5.1_c.mp3

Still a lot more to do, but the timing issue has been fixed (I think). Let me know if you still hear any timing weirdness. Thanks!

- Paul

this shows some progress but there is still a ways to go. The balance is pretty good but you may try referencing it against different recordings to make sure all the instruments maintain their perception of size in relation to each other. It may also help to solo each line and work with it until it sounds as effective as it can be. In no way will it sound quantzed if that is done. Take the viola part for example. it's nothing short of intensely wicked, and although you can approach it many different ways, if it doesn't get to that point, things are going to suffer. same with all the other parts. After all, an instrumentalist would not let something pass that wasn't all there. Do that for all the parts and they won't line up rhythmically perfect but they will communicate something. the thing that raises the most red flags for me is the lack of intensity and attention to the note durations and cutoffs. they sound a bit lazy (them not you!) and seem to sap the percussive elements of this piece which are so important. lastly, marcatto/sfz horns before the quieter section is an interesting idea. but if you are going to do it, it really could sound more natural to convey it, especially because it seems such a departure.

In all candor though, I have not conducted this piece live. I did render it in vsl among many others to work out my template. forget about asking me to post it though because i did it very roughly only to assess balances. but in that roughness was its magic. just keep up the good progress.

I think the 2nd version is a hugh improvment. I also enjoyed hearing how you worked with the legato passages.

I would suggest layering in the solo violin to simulate the concert master playing.

I would like to hear how this work would sound with the chamber strings.

Thanks for the suggestions. I've got the solo violin in there a few times, but it's not very prominent.

Here is a new version that includes the entire exposition (and goes faster now):

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/beethoven_5.1_d.mp3

My solo violin instrument doesn't play notes as high as the legato violin. So, many of the places where I wanted to add it, I couldn't because the notes were too high (and the instrument just did not play anything). Maybe there's a setting the VSL tool to increase the upper range ... I'll check later, since I'm beat now.

- Paul

You may want to consider getting the solo strings.

@esperlad said:

You may want to consider getting the solo strings.

Yes, I do want them. And the Pro Edition. (Just waiting to hear about that contest :lol[:)]

What are your thoughts on this question: Is this project simply futile using only the First Edition Cube/Perf. Set? Maybe I should shelve it at this point until I somehow get an upgrade. [:(]

I would suggest getting the chamber strings for the Beethoven symphony. Using that along with the First Editon should be good enough. The string section in Beethoven's time was smaller than the size in the late 19th and 20th centuries.

It sounds good. Clearly a lot of work has gone into it. In some of the more thickly orchestrated areas, I can detect the 'organ-like' sound that dogs every sound module or software system I have used. I really don't know how to get around that (although when I'm writing, I tend to compose my way around it - 0/10 for artistic integrity though!).

Something I've found extremely useful is to pick your favourite recording and try to get your mock-up to sound *exactly* like it. You'll learn a great deal about which samples to use, reverb and quite a bit about conducting as well.

I'm currently trying to produce audios of a Requiem I recently completed, using VSL PRO and the Voices of the Apocalypse. It was incredibly valuable to mock up parts of Mozart's requiem and try to make them sound like Von Karajan's fantastic 1962 recording. I ended up using instruments and gigstudio settings I never would have found on my own.

I've found that that organ-like sound is usually less a product of the samples than performance factors. If each part is musical in and of itself, there will be literally no chance for the timing to line up on a micro level. Especially with this piece, the composer was competent enough to make sure of that for you!

Okay, it's getting much better, thanks to your help. Here's the latest:

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/beethoven_5.1_f.mp3

I made each part separately and tightened a bit of the sloppiness (like different note lengths on the chords). Still a few minor "rough edges" to fix, though.

I did listen to many recordings (and have played and conducted this piece when I was in school), so I have a good frame of reference. But let me just say that I'm not trying to reproduce the sound of any pre-existing recording. The phrasing and balance have more to do with how I'd like this piece to sound than with erroneously NOT mimicking another orchestra. So, I take the full blame! [[;)]]

- P

As has been debated elsewhere on this forum, there is a legimate question as to why one would make "mockups" of classical music with the VSL. The word "mockup" is revealing. Does the Boston Symphony make a "mockup" of Beethoven's 5th when they play it again? Stupid question. It's obviously a performance. And that's what I'm doing with this symphony ... performing it.

The VSL is my instrument -- and like anyone who's only had an instrument for 1.5 years, the performance I make ain't gonna be perfect. [:O]ops:

Even so, one of the very special things about performing these works with the VSL is that you can probe them as deeply as they deserve to be probed.

And that is how I found out how to make sense of that crazy oboe solo in the recap. (This always bothered me. Why did Beethoven stick that in there?) Every performance I've ever heard of this most-performed work fails to make clear that the oboe solo is the consequent of an antecedent phrase just before the fermata.

Have a listen to just the oboe itself:

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/b5_oboe_solo_context.mp3

Hear what I mean? What could be simpler? Well, if your orchestra covers up that first part of the oboe phrase with violins, the second part of it makes no sense (especially when most players treat the high G as the start of the solo, instead of as the end of the prior phrase).

Here it is with the rest of the orchestra:

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/b5_oboe_solo_orchestra.mp3

Of course any orchestra COULD play it this way. There's nothing inherent in this symphony that requires the VSL to "bring it out." It's not my problem that they always chose to ignore the oboe!

(For fun,here's Furtwängler conducting this bit in three different performances):
http://www.furtwangler.net/audio/lvb5/lvb5-10.mp3

In 1937, 1943 and 1954 ... in each one, you can hear that Furtwängler seems to need to create space for the oboe solo by introducing an incredible ritardando. I don't think you need that, if you keep the violins out of the way to hear the oboe before the fermata. But that's my perogative.

So, this is just one small example that illustrates why using the VSL to play the classics can be much more than just "mocking up" "demos" to help sell the VSL. It is a way for us musicians who do not have our own orchestra to engage in the same artistic pursuits as any of those analog music directors who happened to have played their cards right and gotten a conducting gig [*-)]

If you want to hear the latest version of this piece (up to the oboe solo), here it is:

http://fauxharmonic.com/music/beethoven_5.1_g.mp3 (7 Mb)

Enjoy.

- Paul

I guess this demonstrates that people use VSL for different purposes. For my part, I can't generally afford to bring a 70 person orchestra together when I'm working on a composition (at least not until that lottery ticket comes good!). I try to make mock-ups to sound close to my favourite interpretations in order to give me Giga performance files and patch selections which hopefully can be exploited make my own compositions sound more realistic. I have to say I have despaired since joining this forum. Composing new material is hard enough, but the level of technical skill and time required to make plausible recordings seems prohibitive. For example, to my surprise there are very few postings showing non-technie composers how to make Sibelius sound realistic with VSL.

@Another User said:

I try to make mock-ups to sound close to my favourite interpretations in order to give me Giga performance files and patch selections which hopefully can be exploited make my own compositions sound more realistic. I have to say I have despaired since joining this forum. Composing new material is hard enough, but the level of technical skill and time required to make plausible recordings seems prohibitive. For example, to my surprise there are very few postings showing non-technie composers how to make Sibelius sound realistic with VSL.

Although I'm not a composer (conductor, by training), I totally agree with you.

Let's assume you are Johannes Brahms and you write a violin concerto. Now, go get a Stradivarius and practice like hell until you can get it to sound just as you imagined! Maybe in 15 years you'll be done ... but more likely never. That's why Brahms got Joachim to play his concerto.

Now we're in the 21st century ... you're a composer ... you've got a choice: Practice like hell on your VSL, or find a present-day Joachim. Back in the old days, composers had their pianos and organs to grapple with. We have our computers and gear.

One likely path in the evolution of computer-produced music may indeed be the splitting of functions. Some of us (perhaps you among them?) may decide that it's a waste of time to practice your VSL and you'd be better off composing. While others of us (like me) may decide that getting the best orchestral performance possible is the goal (and NOT composing at all).

This eventual division of labor makes sense. Who can do everything well? If this scenario comes to pass, then composers may be having their pieces played by digital orchestras, without having to "play" the orchestra themselves. But, like I said, this is just one likely path that I suspect is already emerging.

- Paul

@paulhenrysmith said:

Some of us (perhaps you among them?) may decide that it's a waste of time to practice your VSL and you'd be better off composing. While others of us (like me) may decide that getting the best orchestral performance possible is the goal (and NOT composing at all).

I let my computer to generate music (midi files) from pictures and trying myself to
learn to use software instruments to play those pieces...

LG
metacomposer
www.synestesia.com

I thought of the following: In a great painting the painter knew his techniques how to accomplish it. If he didn't it wasn't a great painting. Now on the digital side people who wouldn't make a great picture in oil can still produce amazing graphics in 3D, but they have to know the techniques how to accomplish that, too. A great painter would perhaps have to go a long route to get a decent 3D picture out of Adobe Photoshop. Perhaps because the choice of tools also matters.

PolarBear

Concerning music your analogy goes astray. Painting is not performing art. Music is. Good performance can even make a bad composition a little bit more enjoyable. Bad performance can destroy a marvellous score on the other hand.
LG