Just listening - great stuff.
What was used for the Euphonium/tenor Tuba? - not listed in the arrangement
What was used for the Euphonium/tenor Tuba? - not listed in the arrangement
-
Thanks for those comments - very much appreciated. Miklos The Mighty did a fantastic job on the mix with this. Dave, I just used the bass tuba in upper range, and tried to get it sounding pretty harsh. I am afraid I lost track of the hours. It took a long time, since I did the original transcription from the score as well as the programming. I don't know if I am competent to give out tips since I am just learning to use Vienna Instruments myself. I just tried to do each part as an individual instrument and make it sound right. I also went pretty far (maybe too far?) with the "looseness" and avoiding any quantizing, since this piece is so repeated in its rhythms it could start sounding mechanical very easily. Other than that it is just the genius of Holst and the awesome Vienna Instruments. Thanks to Herb and VSL for letting me do this! It was fun (in a masochistic kind of way...)
-
William, dear fellow, a wonderful rendition!
I've downloaded this one, and will listen intently and regularly to hear how you put this together. And a big hand for Miklos too, for taking on this formidable task, and rendering it so well.
As a listener to the planets on a regular basis, i've often wondered just how big a challenge it would be to perform this with samples. I can barely imagine how many hours it took.
Congratulation to you both!
Regards,
Alex.
-
Great work, William and Miklos.
After suffering through countless film scores, it was nice to hear the actual composition again which "inspired" so many film composers. [:D]
I think your orchestra has a great "feel"-- the interpretation breathed, which is probably due to the lack of quantization. Quantizing can be the death of virtual tracks, and *not all* interpretive details can be convincingly drawn in manually.
I am curious-- what reverb did you use?
-
thanks a lot for those compliments. One odd thing about Holst's score is the use of the pipe organ. He just threw it in, I think possibly because it was part of the concert hall where the piece was premiered. It is not too audible, since everything else is so loud.
Someone asked on another thread why do this? I would say first of all (besides it being a job) is that it is the best score study you could ever do. In fact, doing a midi rendition is much more intense study than copying by hand a score. I would never do this kind of work on a piece I didn't really admire. Also, I remember Jay Bacal saying it was a great way to play music. In other words, for the fun of performing music, though in a new way. Or is that distorting what you said Jay? I do notice that when the music begins to come together, there is a magical quality to it. you can hear the music coming into being. The silent score leaps into sound. Though it is great to get live performances also, that feeling you can get in midi, of music being born right in front of you, you don't quite get any other way.
-
Yes that is very interesting and I think that goes against the general tradition that would assume that computer recordings or music are less human, in fact that is not true at all, unless you quantise everything precisely. It's a very interesting topic this could start a long discussion about this!
Miklos.
-
Very nice William, excellent job.
One of the good things about these mockups is the fact that you hear these great pieces of music and it brings you back to them as JWL mentioned.
William is one of the very best at this kind of thing and certainly one of the most expressive composers I've heard using samples.
-
William,
Amazing job!
Wonderful feel. I am a big fan of 'section slop' as this adds intensity to the work if done well (and it is).
I know you like to consider these sounds as instruments unto themselves, removed from their intended role as a substitute for the real thing. This makes me appreciate your mockup all the more!
Clark
-
@William said:
One related thing - a performance such as this is a demonstration, and a test of the library because the music was not written for samples. But why is "writing for the sample" bad, when "writing for the piano" or "writing for the flute" etc. is o.k.?
Great semi-rhetorical question, William.
The wonderful thing about writing for human beings is that the performer brings elements to the music that cannot be written down. No two pianists will interpolate a crescendo the same way from the same score. Likewise, no two users of a sample library will effect the same articulations and dynamics the same way. That's why this forum is so great for keeping tabs on how others are accomplishing their goals.
Again, I really appreciate the hard work you've done and chose to share with us.
-
Samples are an instrument like the organ itself! We write for the organ, and the VSL cube is another technological innovation just like the organ, but it takes it's source from other instruments.
It has been the dream of many inventors for a long time to do what Herb and VSL have achieved, to be able to put all the sounds of the orchestra into one machine that can be access via a keyboard! That was what the organ was aimed at in many of it's incarnations.
Miklos.
-
This is exceptional. Here's two qualities that I most admire. 1. An ostinato rhythm that never sounds mechanical. It's enough of an achievement to make any sampler rhythm sound human, much less one repeated this often. 2. In spite of the verticality of the score, this recording never sounds "tone-y" or "blocky." Somehow it manages a transparency within its thickness. Great work.
-
