196,714 users have contributed to 43,030 threads and 258,430 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 6 new thread(s), 11 new post(s) and 97 new user(s).
Hi alltogether,
in december 2012 I wrote a piece called "Fairy Tale" and posted it here.
I got some suggestions in how to let it sound more realistic (e.g. use velocity FX).
Till then I started overworking the piece and now I would like to let you listen to it again.
Hopefully it is a bit better and more realistic than last time [:)]
Tips and suggestions are always welcome.
Best Regards
Christian
Hi Christian
Nice music, nice arrangements and a huge work which is done with a lot of effort and work.
We can observe this enthusiasm in every part of the piece.
If you really want a suggestion which can improve your piece even more I have a "but".
Maybe it is just a personal one. But, after listening 2-3 minutes to your piece I was already tired for continuing to listen to the rest.
I believe that was "the always more or less same and loud output level". And this even if just some instruments played or the whole orchestra.
It' was always loud, loud, loud...
So my opinion is, that you sould give the piece a bit more dynamic (which it probably had originally).
Let me assume the mixing-history. If you tuned this piece during 5 months now you probably thought:
- "aah, the solo violin is too quiet here..." >>> you increased the gain
- "Here we need to have more Cellos... >>> you increased the gain
- "I can't here the piano loud enough..." >>> you increased the gain
....
The result is, that we have: a fat mix from the start to the end. If I'm right with my supposition the recipe would have been:
In case of a too quiet solo violin for example you should decrease all the other instruments instead of amplify the violin with a higher gain.
Otherwise you run into the full "saturation" - sooner or later.
This is a really danger with lager mixing projects. Yours is such a large one (with 100 tracks).
Hope now you are not disapointed about my fedback.
It is based on my first impression, and also based on a distance to this piece which you probably don't have anymore.
So, that's only one feddback. Wait for others until you are going to change anything.
All the best
Beat
Hello Beat,
no I am not disappointed about your feedback [:)]
And I also got feedback from friends in the meanwhile.
I think there is another reason for the loudness... I wrote some other pieces in other music styles and tried to get them all into the same output level... so I put a compressor in the master channel... perhaps this is also too much compression overall?
I know what you mean and... of course a live playing orchestra works different... I am changing some things in detail at the moment (Staccatos, etc.) and I will have a look for the things you mentioned, too.
Perhaps I can get a bit more dynamic into this piece reducing compression and also using more velocity-FX on the Instruments that spread wider (string ensembles for example).
Thanks for your feedback, beat!
Best regards
Chris
Hi alltogether,
I worked again on this piece and tried to get it more dynamic.
This is what I changed:
- reduced overall compression to get more dynamic
- reduced instruments in some parts to get more dynamic into the piece
- overworked solo strings bow-strikes (e.g. violin staccatos, slower viola and cello parts)
- changed expression range of brass sections (still unsure if this is better now)
- changed volumes of percussion hits a little bit
Thanks again for listening 8-)
Hi Chris
I have a bit a bad conscience. I didn't want to trigger such a huge amount of work.
But I must say - comparing V1 with V2 - version 2 is much more to my taste, more musically in my view.
Now we got a long crescendo from around 02.00 ... 04.00 - which we can recognize as acrescendo. Bravo!
But once more: It is not important to make me happy - it's your piece your idea.
You should tune "Fairy Tale" to your taste!
All the best
Beat
Hey Beat,
you don't need to have a bad conscience [:)]
I am working since about 5 Month on that piece and I don't change a song because others don't like it...
I think about all the comments and suggestions I get here and from other people and ask myself if this could be a step forward.
I own the library a very long time now bit I am still very very new to orchestration.
So believe me... I do not want to make you happy... but the things you wrote animated me to try a littlebit again and... yeah - I think I can always make things better - so it's always worth a try [;)]
But a question again... I heared some people saying that the brass section does not sound very realistic.
I don't play a brass instrument... what do you think about the brass section in the song?
Is it really that far away from realism and... if yes... how can I fix that / make it better (in general)?
Thanks for your opinion and suggestions!
Best regards
Chris
@chj501 said:
But a question again... I heared some people saying that the brass section does not sound very realistic.
I don't play a brass instrument... what do you think about the brass section in the song?
Is it really that far away from realism and... if yes... how can I fix that / make it better (in general)?
Hello Chris
People who mentioned the brass did probably mean the trombone/horn section (0:50 and more). But this matter depends on the library you used and not on your play.
Those horns or trombones have a very slow attack time. So they always seem to be too late because of their whhooaaaahhh instead of a Taaaaaa which would fit in a
better way to the context of the music. Maybe you can combine the sustain samples with another articulation to get a bit a better attack time.
Ask those who mentioned the unreal brass what they exatly mean..
Best
Beat
P Paul moved this topic from Orchestration & Composition on
