One thing on the original topic of this thread I have been thinking about is the concept of "writing for the sample."

This is considered bad.  Why?

Don't you "write for the violin" when scoring a violin solo?  Or "write for the organ" when doing a pipe organ piece?  In other words, you must use the characteristics of the "instrument" in question in a very detailed and precise way.  Why should it be different with the instrument known as a Sample Library?  

My impression at this stage is that using samples to duplicate a live orchestra becomes somewhat pointless after a certain level of complexity. There seems to be some connection between SIMPLICITY and samples in the most effective use of them.  One can do a performance of a piece of music that is relatively simple, and it can sound as good or better than a live orchestra  and in fact be more appropriate for samples, because of its simplicity not being something a live orchestra would be interested in performing.  Some of the demos here are like that.  Does anyone notice this connection?  In other words if you do things that are really complicated you start beating your head against the wall, but when you do something simple it can often sound astoundingly good. 

And this aspect might form the basis of a serious artistic approach.   A kind of well-selected minimalism seems more powerful than anxiously trying to duplicate every single musical expression that a live orhcestra can create.

Hey!  Didn't I see RK and then it changed to Jim?

Anyway, very interesting post!  I agree with a lot of that, especially the enthusiasm.  It is a powerful and unprecedented tool that composers have now, and the analogy with painting is very appropriate - one can truly paint with sound with this new form.

I have heard people state things that seem to indicate that samples are not acceptable as a final performance.  They are O.K. as a substitute for the "real thing" (whatever that is) but not as a serious, definitive performance.  I wonder how many people agree with that.  Unfortunately a lot I would estimate.

@ Jim said:

This is the time to stop and smell the roses. After 10 years and 5 Computer. Multiple upgrades of sampling. What is the verdict ? From the work and production of all the different Examples here from this forum. Which is the Best. I've heard it all. Finally. It can be accomplished. What is the final proof is obviously the most Complex Music. Or the most meaningful Music. Which is played around the world. Being of the Great Composers obviously. This is a might Accomplishment for both. The real and the Sampling. Music doesn't get any better. So what is looked at next is two points: the Musicianship, and using Samples for an instrument range and audition as you mentioned william. Beethoven & Mozart to speak of were both Violinist. You know they had their violins on top of their pianos for use during writing. They orchestrated their work. And probably are the best. Isn't that like using samples ? next Musicianship. A Ha ! That is the 64 dollar point to make. As you stated William. You've had Orchestras demolish your Work. And you also have Musicians Demolish with samples. So, it seems that at a certain point its either way. One of the Best Traditionalist Composers in the World today is; i think, Guiilherme Schroeter. If you listen to his work, My God its torn all to pieces by the Orchestra. The Next point to make, in sampling one has to content with is engineering. Boo yuck and a million yucks. What a waist of a life. This is a profession on its own. Before Computers came along. A good engineer in the music business was priceless. He could ask what ever he wanted. And everyone new the best around the world. Mixing and Engineering is not as simple as one brushes it off to be. In fact, the Music business is really about mixing and engineering and Studios. The Best had spent their life learning the craft. Its as complex as learning to play music in a lifetime. That is the difference between the live players and the Sampling. Having said all that. the other side of the Coin as you mentioned william. One can have other aspects of using samples as pulling up the sound in one's face. Where the live can't even begin to have a say so at the most part. there are so many ways to use sampling, One can't even begin to mention. I've waited ten years to look at this issue and use my songs in the best possible way to coin an orchestrated version. And what seems to be the best is the simplest. Ironically. You also see the simplicity William. It appears that if you architect as the great Composers did. Then one has to architect by music notation. Weather its written and played from the Samples. Or just played by reading the music. Here again the Musicianship is epic, Correct & Accurate. And minute or miniscule compared to all the other Commercialists.. And if one creates an impression, then it can produce more than a real orchestra can even dream of. Of course. One might lack the notation score. Or might not have the exact score. But for a Song say, what does it matter. I heard Angelo's work the other day in Songs. And it seems to re-proof or re-inforce what's been trying to adjunct after all these years as one way to deliver an Orchestrative Impression. And a way to use an orchestra in a song. Is sort of Similar to scoring for motion picture with samples. where anything goes. But someone who's been around for a while will always make a better judgment in sound as someone young. Might take a longer time at it though. But, I always pay more attention to those that have been around for a while. One way which seems to work in songs and or Simplicity is playing a full orchestra patch Sample or an Ensemble patch by gushing it out with both hands and all fingers and paying attention to phrases and manipulation in overtones and creative accidents of sounds. And then underlining it with the Contra basses slightly fading in and out underneath it in its own melody line harmonizing in parallel. That sounds better than a real Orchestra. In that type of Sketching. Its literally painting with music. And looking at it from a telescope further back Impressionistic picture. Different Contour of Sound. With only used two patches. On other occasions, you hear producers use one sample in a song as the cello, and make it as the ear is inside the cello. Or the ear is at the resin of the bow as it vibrates the string. Completely new and creative. Yes Simplicity can take a whole new approach to Sampling. And We need a warm up Plugin also. Working in the Digital Domain is like being squeaky clean. Pre-amp Warm up Plugins just add noise to the signal. And it takes the synth sound out.. Its still Engineering that becomes the factor at the end. You can look at the average Orchestra Musician Today and compare. He is the mixing Engineer for a live performance sort to speak. Most are on cortizone. This is what they sacrifice themselves for. And no one will ever point them out as they have accomplished anything. Sort of sad to think about. They must be frustrated out of their gourds. And you can look at the average Sampling Guru. He has the whole Orchestra and more at the end of his or her fingertips. That is Frightening. In my neighborhood, you don't mess around with jim. Meaning, power is Power. I've been told on occasions not to try this at home with a real Orchestra. Much less than that much power under a fingertip. I think more people feel the heat from that sort of thing than what is perceived to be an argumentative issue based from real and not real. And the other side of the coin here lies. I can do all this from behind my private closed door. When ever was that possible ? I don't care if you listen to my music or comment about this and that. The mere Accomplishment is good enough. That's what Ligetti said before he died not too long a go. Micheal Jackson's last CD coast him 20 Million Dollars to produce. And it didn't sell. As well as Garth Brooks costing 3 to 4 million. I'm not sure if it sold or not. Most likely is selling on shelves. I have all the great respect for those that have done it before me. And those that are older. Music is the most powerful Communicative art known to Humanity. Painting with it can be infinite and a benevolent power at hand. As well as a profitable Profession if its Tracked, Mixed, Funneled and or fueled correctly by the right channels and powers to be.

Won the nobelprize for short novella wormliterature!  

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2007/

.

@ Prof. Dummas Fahrt said:

Ge Thanks. Between you and her I can learn so much ! ... She's soooo cute. But Can She Sing or Dance ? Anything ?

As much as I know, she is capable of all that, plus she composes music too, her first work was "The Grass is Singing" in 1949.

Then there is her novel opera titled "The Golden Note Book" (1962), very likely realized on an early Mac laptop, known and sold as Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator back then.

Then she did "The Making of the Representative for Planet 8" (1986), and in 1997 "The Marriages Between Zones Three, Four and Five"

.

[quote= The Terminator I II & III]

Gentlemen please, I must ask you to stick to the original subject of this string: " The Migration of the Wildebeest during the drought season on the plains of the serrengetti " . Thank you.......[/quote]

 original subject ---> The brain is a muscle!

Terminator Your clothes, give them to me. Now. Get down. Hold here. 12 gauge Auto-loader. Yes. I insist. Here, hold this. Remote control. Yes. Chill out, dick wad. No problemo. No. Go away. I drive. Fuck you, Asshole. Terminator II I need your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle. Get down. No, only an object of equal size. Hold here. The other bolt. Why do we stop now?. Reload. You drive. I have detailed files on human anatomy. Terminator III Take off your clothes. Now. Get off. Talk to the hand. Better. I require a cutting tool. Get down. It is your destiny. Torque wrench please. Desire is irrelevant. Go!