One of the people on this Forum was listing as his example of how live players are vastly superior in performing to samples a tiny trio composition. It is obvious that espressivo playing by individual players - if they are good enough - will be better than samples most of the time. Simply because their instantaneous expressions suit the music better at the moment, not because they actually play better.

But I was never talking about small-scale chamber music played by individuals, even though there are solo strings and Dimension players, etc., by VSL that can actually give many good live players a run for their money. Listen to Jay Bacal's John Williams cello and you will understand what I mean.

But this person conflated two different things - massive orchestral composition such as what I have done with VSL, and tiny solo pieces such as what he has done. There is no possible comparison in difficulty, practical, musical or otherwise.

Some of the greatest composers in history have large scale orchestral works ignored until they die. Schubert's Ninth - probably the greatest romantic symphony ever being a case in point., etc. etc. Yet this composer-troll here on this forum implies that if you don't have everything you composed played live - like his tiny little trio - you are an "idiot" as he calls me.

I would love to hear his performances - live or otherwise - of compositions like these -not little solo pieces played by his friends, but massive orchestrations that dwarf his productions.

if he has them, put them on this Forum! I want to hear them! Here are what I have done, the productions of an "idiot" his term -

williamkersten.com

That is a small sampling of my music. I am now working on a feature film score, and am neglecting further classical concert works as a result. I would be able to more properly represent what I've done if I had a publicist but don't have one and am too busy working on music and film to properly present myself. And so I am afflicted by creeps like this guy who want to trash me and do so publicly, to feel good about themselves. I find it disgusting. I thought of quitting this Forum, but I won't give them the pleasure...

Why precisely am I a Troll? 

I called you an idiot because I had commented in the past that I liked some of your music, but that seemed to pass you by in your fury......context Kersten all context. The rest is in your head, nowhere else.

I have no need to trash you publicly because you do a pretty good job of it yourself. You should actually be ashamed of yourself.

Can I request some moderation please VSL as this person has taken everything out of context and it has become cheap and unfounded ad hominem.

"There is no argument between the quality and artistry of a great soloist's or ensemble's rendition of a quality work, to that of the greatest programmer's with the best samples and technology on the planet." -Errikos

I don't care.  I am only interested in the composer's point of view. I don't care about whether a performer is fully represented or not.  If he feels underepresented then he can contact his congressman.  

"Orchestras on the other hand, they do mutate and evolve but in a different way. In fact, there are many music critics that prefer the Berlin and Vienna Philharmonics of old to today's. It's not worth getting into that huge discussion here, but what I am proposing is that those orchestras will sound - comparatiely to samples - pretty much the same thirty years from now, as they did thirty years ago (comparatively!)."  -Errikos

Again, it doesn't matter.   Because I am talking about pure expression of musical ideas divorced from any performer's variance, or ensembles evolution, etc. etc.   That is all fine, but has nothing to do with me as a composer unless I am a sycophant  of orchestra music directors. 

It  is far more purely represented in the fundamental recording of musical tones that a composer can use, totally separate from the mind of any performer.  

"It is my contention that composers of that time will still prefer, not just the NY Phils and the Concertgebouws, but any professional ensemble that will put the requisite amount of time and effort in the performance of their works, than their computer simulations, even with all the anticipated improvements thrown in."  _Errikos

And you are wrong in that contention because of the simple fact that if an artist creates an idea, he wants to control the realization of that idea.  Not cede it to someone else.  Including the great performers who strut around arrogantly in front of their adoring audiences.  

Your argument is premised upon the concept that music is ALWAYS  collaboration. One doesn't need a collaboration to create musical ideas - they are there, right there, without the blessing of any performer.  So what I am saying is the composer is not the inferior of performers and dependent upon them. And the kind of work that VSL has done actually realizes that.  

Do yourself a favour and get help .....oh and don't whine again for an apology.

Actually - I won't joke about it.  

If Hans Zimmer, composer of the most robotic orkestral compositions (that require no expression, nuance, or variety for their execution, and which are further complemented/distorted by being blended with synthesized sounds), who has not just the best, but ALL samples available on the planet (including his own) and can afford the best programmers and studio apparati in the world, if a man of his aesthetics and tastes still engages a real orchestra to perform his locomotive drones, that says something, loudly.

Nevertheless, you refer to "pure expression of musical ideas", bereft of any performer's input. I cannot refute this of course, since only a mechanical device programmed by the composer can come the closest to this particular ideal today. Add to this the efforts on behalf of the programmer to simulate 'Realism' in that performance by using the best samples available to him, Impulse Responses and filters and whatnot in that strife for purity (so no 'Humanizing' features I presume, or any feature that would reflect a real performer's chance, inadvertent deviations...)

Like I said, one cannot argue against this, simply because it is a matter of preference. The same could have been said 30 years ago with the technology that was available then. It doesn't matter that sampled performances sounded inferior compared to good live performances (they still do today, only less so), a composer -such as I was back then- could still contend they preferred the simulation, for it expressed my musical ideas purely. This principle could be further extended to the Casiotone, or a Pianola further back. I don't know whether Debussy would take that over Michelangeli.

Now if you argue that today we have more control over more parameters of performance than we did then -therefore our results are closer to that "pure expression of musical ideas"- then I'll say you're right there, but that expression is not pure yet, it will keep getting purer as technology and individual programming skills keep improving.

To me, samples still sound like what they are, just better than before. At best, as with Bacal and others, they sound glorious for what they are, and I marvel at the programmers' abilities to get this much realism, and generate quasi-living musical organisms out of neutral, mechanical sound molecules.

Additionally, I will say that if for some reason I was only allowed to keep only one version of my each orchestral composition thus far (simulated vs. live), in most cases I would keep the simulated one, only because they are better in many respects to the live performances. However, that is because the live performances were so far below par. Were they par or above, I would opt for those instead, as a) There is no fakeness in the sound which hugely detracts from the overall enjoyment of the work, and b) The music sounds alive, breathing (it sounds so in the bad performances as well, but sick and dying unfortunately). Sadly, the main issue is that the fakeness in sampled performances is most pronounced in the strings, which are the most important section and half of the orchestra. I am sure this shortcoming will be ameliorated in the coming years/decades. As we stand now, I have to say I am unable to make that 'leap of hearing' and pretend it is actually an orchestra performing and not Cubase. It's not even close. It's like in that other thread with the trio(?) where we are asked to pick which version we prefer. I immediately went for the live performance, I am suprised that it was even a question since the simulation was not good; it sounded very fake and plastic from 'Go'. I am only mentioning this since I too am not a great programmer.

Finally, I have experienced quite a few instances where performers actually improved on the purity of my musical ideas (ex. change of tempo in a section, rendition of a line, etc.), and I would be sorry to have missed out on those. And if you remember, I ended my post with the idea that we have not been put in a position where we have to choose between one world or the other, but in one where ideally we can take the best of both.

@Errikos said:

It's like in that other thread with the trio(?) where we are asked to pick which version we prefer. I immediately went for the live performance, I am suprised that it was even a question since the simulation was not good; it sounded very fake and plasticfrom 'Go'. I am only mentioning this sinceI tooam not a great programmer.

Dave,

If I may interject....you seem to have taken Errikos's comment personally but I dont read anthing personal in what he said about your piece. I read his comment as being about the samples  and not the programming. I think your programming of this piece was as good as it possibly can be, particularly the performace shaping was excellent. 

I think the fakeness that Errikos is referring to relates to the tonal quality of the string instruments, and I tend to agree. As much as I did not like the intonational and rhythmic inaccuracies of the live performers, I loved the tonal purity. There are rich overtones in string instruments that are possibly the hardest to reproduce in sampling. While VSL is remarkable in its ability to mimic real performance (e.g., smoothness in dynamics during transistions in articuluations, etc.,), and is probably the best out there, to my ears it still falls short in terms of the tonal fidelity. And often this is so jarring to me. 

So while I admire the performace accuracy of the VSL rendition of your trio, if someone were to shut me in a room and make me listen to this over and over again, I would choose your live performance. It sounds more natural and pleasing.

(I should note again that none of this is about you as a composer or a programmer...I have achieved nothing in music but you are all professional composers, so I am even unqualified to comment. My comment is purely as a listener and hope it makes sense)

Now going back to what I said previously, I do see why you were frustrated with the live performance and prefer the VSL version because VSL does exactly what you want to do. This is something I learnt on this forum, that its not easy to get a good live performance of ones work. So in that sense your comparison is highly informative as to the pros and cons of live vs samples. Maybe I will face this one day!

Cheers

Anand

One thing that seems fundamentally wrong to me in this whole argument is the concept of "fake" being applied to VSL samples.  They are not "fake" they are REAL.  This is not an old style digital synthesizer which WAS fake, the wave forms ripped away from their original context and changed into an artificial sound.  But VSL avoids this  and is extremely, even obsessively careful and scrupulous in being faithful to the original musical sounds.   They are real, incredibly good players, many virtuoso, being recorded.  That is the whole attraction  in that the real players expressive sound has been captured and made available to the composer.  It is actually an insult to those players to place them on the "fake" side and live performers on the "live" side!  

The real comparision involved in this whole argument should be with recorded pieces of music vs. recorded samples of music ---  not actually present live players.  Obcviously if you have standing in your studio Perlman ready to play your violin composition it will be better than VSL.  But that is not the point.  To me it is a comparison of a recording of an orchestra playing an entire piece vs. a recording of individual samples, and one can often create a better overall recording with samples. 

But the debate is now irritating and pointless. If somebody thinks samples are inferior musically then fine, go ahead and think that.  It is utterly meaningless to me and I am so finished with this argument.   

Anand,

I do agree with many of your comments and appreciate your voracity for the rich, authentic timbre that is perhaps still not fully developed with regard to virtual instruments.

As for comments re. Errikos, I feel confident that my understanding of his words was spot on:

Errikos' words:   It's like in that other thread with the trio(?) where we are asked to pick which version we prefer. I immediately went for the live performance, I am suprised that it was even a question since the simulation was not good; it sounded very fake and plastic from 'Go'. I am only mentioning this since I too am not a great programmer.

First, by even implying that asking that question was silly, because the "simulation was not good; it sounded very fake and plastic from 'Go.'" offends me because it suggests that I'm blissfully unaware of what strings should sound like and in asking a question with such a subpar version of my piece against the real thing doesn't even merit a response.

Second, he says he is only mentioning this because he TOO is not a great programmer.  The insinuation of such is that I am in his company.  And for that, combined with the fact that he voices his very strong opinions so frequently with very little willingness to support and contribute to the efforts of those on this forum that regularly put themselves out there and share their work, rubs me the wrong way.  The sum of his contributions are philosophically-based arguments, and even if he objectively would offer his musical opinion on the work of others, I find it hard to believe he couldn't temper a criticism such as he proferred for my piece, with a compliment or at least an observation that the effort was quite significant in putting together the virtual rendition.

Anyway, I don't like this back and forth bickering that seems to prevail in recent times, but feel compelled to defend my position especially in light of your response on his behalf (which may or may not be his actual intention...I don't know, but I do know how it appeared to me in reading his words).  Again, I do appreciate your comments on the actual subject matter of samples vs. live.  William, your additional comments are also spot on.

Regards,

Dave

Dave: When you post your work on the 'Orchestration - Composition - Instruments' category in this forum, whether specifically or by inference you are soliciting comments and opinions. I have noticed there are quite a few half-wits here (not you), that do the above only in order to get enthusiastic responses from fellow forum members, and bellyache the moment someone expresses dislike (let alone hate) towards their work. Id est, unacceptably childish behaviour... That is the main reason I usually refrain from commenting on people's pieces on the forum, unless I have something positive to say. 

[General comment: Just to be clear, and for what it's worth of course, I don't listen to everything here so if I haven't commented on your work it doesn't necessarily mean I disliked it]

Now about me not commenting on the actual thread you opened about the trio: So what?!?!?! I wasn't planning to contribute anything further on this discussion (even on this thread), but William e-mailed me that he had written something here(!) about my earlier post, I read it and proceeded to respond here.

My mentioning your piece was merely a side-note in the whole diatribe (I tend to ramble as you may have noticed). I never intended to post in your thread, for the reason that I felt it was not worth the posting. Why, you ask? Because I felt it was an unfair comparison between the VSL and your live performers, since your electronic simulation of the work was really unconvincing! Yes, due to inferior programming! Why are you offended?.. Do you believe yourself to be a great programmer of samples? Have you listened to Jay Bacal's work? Guy Bacos'? Alexandre Temple's? Mike Verta's? William Kersten's? And a host of others... Sampled performances are fraught with unrealistic aspects (especially solo strings - and exposed solo strings at that) that we have to mask in simulations. In fact, that is where the whole art of programming lies. Why is it offensive to be told that you have a long way to go in that department? I said 'inferior' programming (compared to the above gentlemen), not 'bad'/'puerile' programming. "Disparaging"? Well that's what it sounded like to my not so inexperienced ears. "It's easy to criticize other persons' work, isn't it?" I suppose it is. As easy as it was for those that gave favourable comments, and I am certain you would not have asked me this question had I also responded positively. You don't think that would also have been easy for me? You're right, I have chosen not to post tracks here, mainly because I am self-conscious about my programming (not my composition!), but it's a free forum. You go ahead and post to your heart's content, I promise you I will never henceforth refer to your efforts on any thread. We will continue having philosophical discussions instead.

Lastly, you don't want to be in "my company"/league? Don't worry; you aren't.

Anand: Thank you very much for jumping in before I had a chance. It is never my intention to offend or hurt anybody unless they are obnoxious (and Dave isn't), but that's just how I felt about the programming effort and the whole thread. If Dave is that great as a programmer, I'm sure VSL-management are already contracting him as an in-house composer/simulator (like Guy).

Bill: I said the sampled performance sounded fake. Obvously the samples are very real, and greatly recorded (the '80s samples also were real).

@Errikos said:

Dave: When you post your work on the 'Orchestration - Composition - Instruments' category in this forum, whether specifically or by inference you are soliciting comments and opinions. I have noticed there are quite a few half-wits here (not you), that do the above only in order to get enthusiastic responses from fellow forum members, and bellyache the moment someone expresses dislike (let alone hate) towards their work. Id est, unacceptably childish behaviour... That is the main reason I usually refrain from commenting on people's pieces on the forum, unless I have something positive to say. 

[General comment: Just to be clear, and for what it's worth of course, I don't listen to everything here so if I haven't commented on your work it doesn't necessarily mean I disliked it]

Now about me not commenting on the actual thread you opened about the trio: So what?!?!?! I wasn't planning to contribute anything further on this discussion (even on this thread), but William e-mailed me that he had written something here(!) about my earlier post, I read it and proceeded to respond here.

My mentioning your piece was merely a side-note in the whole diatribe (I tend to ramble as you may have noticed). I never intended to post in your thread, for the reason that I felt it was not worth the posting. Why, you ask? Because I felt it was an unfair comparison between the VSL and your live performers, since your electronic simulation of the work was really unconvincing! Yes, due to inferior programming! Why are you offended?.. Do you believe yourself to be a great programmer of samples? Have you listened to Jay Bacal's work? Guy Bacos'? Alexandre Temple's? Mike Verta's? William Kersten's? And a host of others... Sampled performances are fraught with unrealistic aspects (especially solo strings - and exposed solo strings at that) that we have to mask in simulations. In fact, that is where the whole art of programming lies. Why is it offensive to be told that you have a long way to go in that department? I said 'inferior' programming (compared to the above gentlemen), not 'bad'/'puerile' programming. "Disparaging"? Well that's what it sounded like to my not so inexperienced ears. You don't want to be in "my company"/league? Don't worry; you aren't.

Anand: Thank you very much for jumping in before I had a chance. It is never my intention to offend or hurt anybody unless they are obnoxious (and Dave isn't), but that's just how I felt about the programming effort and the whole thread. If Dave is that great as a programmer, I'm sure VSL-management are already contracting him as an in-house composer/simulator (like Guy).

Bill: I said the sampled performance sounded fake. Obvously the samples are very real, and greatly recorded (the '80s samples also were real).

I got a notification of this response, and "HOLY SMOKES", you are delusional, Errikos.  You need help.  Serious help.  I'm not in your league?!  This is the kind of arrogance that pretty much lets me know exactly how insecure, how irrelevant, and how completely inconsequential your artistic endeavours are.  Seriously, who talks like this in real life?  You hide behind a keyboard and spout your diatribe, claiming your supreme musical reverence.  Do you approach people face to face and suggest that they're not in your league?  You need a dose of humility, and I'm almost certain that with those social skills, you are one very lonely man in real life...and if people smile to your face, Errikos, I'm certain they're calling you an "A__" behind your back.  Wow.  Just wow.  

As to my programming skills, I am aware that they are not at the level of Guy Bacos, etc. but I am equally confident that the piece in question was programmed to a level of quality that elicited quite a few compliments from others precisely FOR the midi rendition.  Further, suggesting that VSL would contact me is ridiculous.  Why should they?  I don't produce the style of music which would connect with the majority of those interested in samples, nor do I write music that purposely exploits all of the articulations/instrument combinations, etc. that would suggest "demo."  

Anyway, I'm done here.  I will not indulge a single further response to any of your attempted retorts.  You've shown your God awful arrogance with that ridiculous comment, and I prefer to surround myself with "earthly beings" that are positive, inspiring, and supportive.  Good luck to you, God Among Men.

Dave

p.s.  I'll help pay for the procedure to remove the stick.  As high up as it is, we'll need a very skilled surgeon.

How do we actually get notifications for post-responses? I only get an e-mail when I have a PM waiting...

I came back here to "improve" on my 'from-the-hip' post, but too late... In any case:

As far as the "in my league" comment: Apart from not seeing the humour in the riposte, you're the one that declared twice you don't want to be in my (lowly) programming-company. When I tell you that you are not, you actually complain?! How exactly did you diagnose the 'stick' and the arrogance when I was the first to admit that I am not a good programmer (certainly not in your company...). It is a very sophisticated skill, and only a few in the world possess it to a level high enough to at least atempt to compare their outputs with those of live performers. Where did you actually detect a hint of arrogance on my part?

Maybe it is you that needs help getting off that giant Trojan horse, where you are unable to accept that there could be somebody in the universe not dazzled by your programming skills. You keep repeating, with breathtaking insecurity I might add, that there are so many others here and elsewhere that have congratulated you on your mix. And?? Are you trying to change my mind with that statement? Do you think there would be plenty that -even when "hiding behind a keyboard"- would tell you they weren't too impressed? My comments were not meant as an affront Dave. I have already repeated that I said I felt your programming to be inferior (not bad or awful) as to not be good enough for a comparison with live players, and you got offended by that... You'll just have to live with my believing your mix to be sub-par. And you will, for a) I'm sure that you don't care what I have to say, and b) it seems that my solitary opinion is drowned in an ocean of unqualified praise. So why don't you take the initiative and contact the VSL, they actually have a huge library of classically oriented demos, they don't just cater to Hans-clones.

You are right in one thing, my social skills do create problems for me, I have a loose tongue and I abhor political correctness. You are wrong in that other thing, that you prefer to surround yourself with "earthly beings" that are positive, inspiring, and supportive. Surrounding yourself with such people in your life -family and social circles- is a must (I try to as well). Proffering your music and demand that people mandatorily respond to it with cotton balls is ill-considered. If you are confident about the MIDI quality of your work, so be it. I am equally as confident about it. I don't understand your hysteria about this. I certainly didn't call you names like you implied people call me, and never called you arrogant for your insistence that you are a fair programmer. Is it impossible for you to compute that somebody might think you are not (and be wrong)? Or is it that he says it publicly that bothers you (subsequent to you having offered your work for public comment)?

To refer to the original topic, if we are performers as well, then (as with instrumental performers) we are not all at the same level of artistry.

I'll be thankful for any financial assistance you may afford me regarding the removal of the stick ailing me -it is a procedure that I won't deny I sometimes am in need of (as many artists have been before me)- perhaps we can both book with the same physician?

@Acclarion said:

Hi all,

I've been thinking about the question, "are we as composers/sample users also performers?"  This was born out of a couple of things:  first, everytime I go to register a new piece with my PRO, I'm forced to list the instrumentation of the work and then the performer(s).  It always feels weird listing "Vienna Symphonic Library" or "David Carovillano" as the performer, even though I often play parts in, rather than simply edit midi data.  Second, also tying in to this was an article I read that tried to argue that percussionists are not musicians but rather technicians, because many aspects of musicianship are not required to "bang on a drum in time" (as a distilation of the main argument).

This had me thinking that when we create our performances using samples, are we essentially acting as technicians and not performers?  Here are my arguments for and against the thought of also being a performer in addition to the composer:

We're performers because: 

-we interpret our music and carefully consider many/all of the same things a live performer would (articulation choices, dynamics, phrasing, tempo, etc.)

-we may phsyically be able to play parts in due to advanced keyboard skills

We're not performers because:

-even if we play parts in, we're almost always going to edit data after, and a performer would have no such benefit in a live performance situation

-much of performance training/skill is the ability to not only perform the material, but to do so under the stress of live performance with an audience, and further, to connect with the audience in ways that go beyond the simple mechanics of playing notes

As a further aside, one might also suggest that to the outside world, if you were to present a mockup of your music and the audience loved it, they would more likely credit the "computer" for the performance, more than your skills in realizing the work through samples...I hear almost daily from people outside our realm, when they hear a piece of mine, "wow, computers are really close to making humans obsolete!"  They never consider the skill/learning process/time that goes in to making a mockup.  

So, while this is really not the most pressing issue, I'm curious as to how others view the work they do.  When you use samples are you simply a technician adjusting cc curves, tweaking knobs, etc. or are you also the performer of your own work?

Dave

 

-

Excellent topic and good questions Dave!    I consider myself primarily a studio musician, a recording artist.  I  play piano and improvise well and sometimes improvise for the public either solo or with a clarinetist.   But MIDI recordings are not "performances" in the sense of there's no live audience, no risking making a mistake or losing the beat and no group-transcendence, i.e the psychospiritual and psychosocial energies of sentient musicians listening and reacting to one another in real time.  Yet there are "MIDI performance standards" that call attention to the fact that many MIDI recordings sound like dead crap and others are highly musical and a pleasure to listen to.   And everything in between. 

II think you addressed the issue of performance nicely when you talked about how we computer-based composers are as concerned about dynamics, phrasing, attack and release times, tempo, beauty-of-tone and expression as any highly trained performer.  The techniques are entirely different, performing a phrase on the violin is based on body, arm, hand and finger movements, (and mind of course!) the techniques we use to get a computer and software to really "sing" requires programming, lots of programming of tempos, velocities  envelopes, note length and notes relative to the beat just for starters. and this doesn't include the more traditional skills of composition, orchestration and texture and the decisions made on those levels.  

Playing a part into MIDI makes it more like a performance in terms of physical spontaneity and real-time expression, though I have heard highly musical results through sequencing (rather than playing) if the same quality of attention is given to envelopes, strong-and-weak beats and dynamics (not merely velocity and CC11 but sectional dynamics, structural dynamics and the macro-dynamics of post-rendering wave volume envelopes). 

Here's an example of modern virtual orchestration using a 12-tone matrix to generate melodic material and musical intuition to govern harmonic choices, an attempt to reconcile dodecaphonic chromaticism with the harmonies that mean something to me.

symph10mvt2

Jerry