Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion

Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 12
Author
Post
Essentials Only Full Version
jsaras
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2642
  • Joined: 2003/12/07 10:40:00
  • Location: Pasadena, CA-The Center of the Universe!
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 21:15:28 (permalink)
I figured that if I had seven entries I would have a 10% shot at winning!  As with all things musical, hard work (or maybe just a lot of work) paid off.  My mixing workflow was pretty much uniform throughout and was described in some detail under entry 21. 

It's probably not a coincidence that my next to last entry (using Kontakt 3.5) was the one that placed the highest.  By that point  I had mixed the same material MANY times using a variety of different samples.  Although I do have several of the expensive libraries,  I made it a point to limit myself to the cheaper libraries in my collection to challenge myself and I have a cheap/masochistic streak in me that has to be satisfied.  The Kontakt library was the most "high-end" soundset of all the entries I submitted.  Although my cumulative mixing experience helped, I found that the Kontakt samples were the easiest to mix together convincingly.   GPO was a close #2 in that regard IMO. 

My entry 17 was a bit of a lark.  It was done entirely with Synth 1 (analog synth VST).  It should really only be compared to the Sample Moog entry.  I do use some Synth 1 sounds (and synth sounds in general) to augment samples in real life. 

In any event, I had a lotof fun doing this in between all my other work.

Cheers!
post edited by jsaras - 2010/09/02 21:17:07

http://www.audiorecordingandservices.com ("one minute free" mastering)

http://tinyurl.com/3n6kj (free Sonar mixing template and Ozone mastering preset)
#61
Bob Oister
Max Output Level: -47.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2766
  • Joined: 2008/01/10 00:34:27
  • Location: Scranton, Pennsylvania USA
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 21:31:32 (permalink)
I didn't enter the contest, but just for the record, here's how I voted.
 
My Top Pick -      Entry #47
Second Choice -  Entry #30
Third Choice-       Entry #14
 
I guess my parents dragging me four times a year from age 2 through 13, to Radio City Music Hall and Lincoln Center counts for something.
 
Congrats to everyone who entered, and great job, Randy and Bit!

 
Bob
 


#62
T.S.
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 654
  • Joined: 2005/08/11 17:29:16
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 21:35:13 (permalink)
Wow, heh heh, I must say I'm surprised that #64 did anything.
 
First of all a big thanks to Randy and bitflipper for such a magnificent job in doing this.  You guys carried this off with a lot of class and dignity.  I was content to participate with just your first plan in mind but when it got serious as a contest I have to admit I put a little (maybe a lot) more effort into it. I was primarily interested to see how the parts of my custom library would fair.
Good points about reverbs, Mike. Given how important reverb is to orchestral realism, are we all making a mistake by sending each instrument to a common reverb bus that has essentially mono output? I wonder if it wouldn't make sense to use a true stereo reverb (one that processes left and right independently) and use the send pans to position not only the instrument but its reflections as well.
Just wondering out loud. I do not have any true stereo reverbs to experiment with myself.

 
@bitfliipper:  Actually I did use a true stereo reverb along with some of Peter Rooe's Samplicity true stereo impulses.
Here's something Guitarpima said that I concur with, "...I thought most entries had way too much reverb. It's been a while since I've been to a concert hall to see an orchestra and I don't recall any hall having that much reverb..."
I feel it's a really common problem with orchestral emulations - People tend to pour the reverb on so heavily.  The results often sound like the listener is standing at the very back of a very large and EMPTY auditorium.

 
@Randy:  Actually I try very hard to not use too much reverb.  I have a pretty good studio control room (no paralell surfaces, LEDE type, pretty well balanced) and I thought I had the reverb just about right.  However, when I listened to my entry from my wifes computer that has some really cheezy computer type speakers I thought, oh oh, too much verb.
 
When it comes to verb I think your listening environment has a lot to do with it.  BUT, after hearing it on my wifes computer and if I hadn't already submitted my entry, I might have lowered it some.
 
--There are basically two ways to do orchestral recordings using virtual instruments.  One is to do it As If the music is being performed in a concert hall.  The other is to produce the music in any way imaginable, with the goal of just having a good sounding recording rather one which is sticking to the rules of live performance.

 
Many of the libraries come allready recorded and panned in a concert hall setting of some kind.  However, I totally agree with you Randy, mixing something to be played back on a variety of stereo systems is somewhat different.
But it was from a pro recording engineer where I first got this idea of moving the basses of an orchestra to center.  This was years ago when I read the engineers description of how he mixes orchestras - can't remember his name, but I've seen the same points made several times since then by other engineers.  This man was recording live orchestras, and arranging the seating so it would sound best on a recording - not so listeners could close their eyes and imagine they're in a concert hall where things are so off-kilter, with the basses over on the stage left (audience right) side.

 
The way I generaly approach this (depending on the situation) is to put anything that is very bass orientated down the middle.  Then with instruments that are slightly less bassy but still low I might pan slightly one side or the other (if they aren't allready) depending on everything else.
 
This engineer also moves the 2nd string section directly opposite from the 1st string section because it gives a really nice depth to the stereo image - rather than having all those high strings lumped together on stage right.

 
Of course as we all know the higher the frequency the more directional they are so with things like the high strings I'll even add a different library panned to the other side just to keep them from being too far to one side (generally the left).  I don't add a lot, just enough to keep them from going too far to one side or the other.  I prefere this over simply panning the main library whether it's strings or what ever.  In the end I just try to have a good stereo balance. 
 
Heh heh, just to clarify I,m not what you would call an expert, but this is how I approach it.
Once agian, thankyou Randy and bitflipper, even just the shootout was a great idea, but I must admit when it turned into a contest it became a little more exciteing.
 
T.S.
#63
clarkeo
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 625
  • Joined: 2006/05/29 12:33:23
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 22:13:02 (permalink)
Congratulations to the winners!  This was an interesting concept and fun to see all of the different approaches/interpretations.  I almost didn't submit but glad I went ahead and took a stab at it.  I was a little torn about how much effort to put into it though.  Oh and those drum rolls were a real challenge!

Clark

Sonar PE 8.5.2, Project 5 V2, Firepod
#64
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 22:39:51 (permalink)
Guitarpima


I wanted to use Addictive Drums for the snare but as I had 38 Dim Pro running, it would crash the Sonar. I settled for SD for the snare. I can make AD do nice rolls but it would not work for SD. If I did not have to go camping, I would have created my own wav files to import. I just ran out of time.


Hello again, Robert - Your post here about the snare drum reminds me of one of the sub-topics on the thread we had going during the contest.

Someone pointed out something very true, that an orchestral snare has a very different sound from the ones found in programs like Session Drummer or Addictive Drums, or most any software kit you can name. 

Part of the unique orchestral snare sound is because of its position in the back row, with the rest of the orchestra in front of it.  And part of it is the way the snare itself is tuned, and the rest is playing style.  Orchestral programs like the EW line and GPO have the samples for the orchestral snare so they're orchestra-ready, --light and "papery." 

I know that some orchestral purists held it against entries like yours that used the compressed, aggressive snare from pop drum kits.  I don't know if Dim Pro has such a snare in it - ?

But in case this info is elucidating, I wanted to pass it on.

RB

Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#65
rich936
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 44
  • Joined: 2010/02/17 15:43:04
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 22:56:53 (permalink)
Congrats to the winners. I gave it my best (made a few bowing mistakes in the String lead and didn't notice until I turned it in ). I spent quite a few hours on the entry and guess I miss the point when others seem to whisk them off so quickly with good results. All my drum rolls were randomizes and accelerated and decelerated to emulate a human player, but were done in the midi file by me and not a sampled sound. All entrances (54 tracks worth) were offset by a few ticks here and there to remove the dreaded organ player sound of all attacks being simultaneous. It was a chore but an excellent learning process.

Though the winners did a great effort, I have yet to hear anything that rivals the sound of a true orchestra, sigh. I guess there must be something said for years of practice and performance. 

Again, Congratulations to the winners and I hope you use your winning libraries to their fullest!


#66
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 22:58:50 (permalink)
lorneyb2


If your audience doesn't like it, it is not that there is anything wrong with your music,  it is just the wrong audience.  



Lorne, I want to thank you for being one of the most involved participants in this event.  Your entries were so good, and offered such a good variety of libraries for us to hear - like Independence Pro which is such an interesting library that we never seem to hear as much of as it deserves.

I really like the story of how you and your sons made it a family event, listening to the entries and voting together.  Sterling example of people taking the voting in this contest seriously, instead of just passing on some numbers for friends to vote for.

And I also really like the quote I've pulled out at the top of this reply.  The rest of the sentence, how one's music can sometimes just have the wrong audience - is "...and there's an audience for Everything."  There really is.  Things that become popular are often things that started with a tiny but enthusiastic audience - they pour energy into liking something enough that it attracts the attention of powers that can help the music reach a broader audience, - and once that music is presented as something that people Should Listen To - that music finally has a chance for what we call "success."  It's a cycle that often gets aborted along the way.  But the important point is that there really is an audience for everything.

My musical adaptation of "The Picture of Dorian Gray" is a good example.  It's a stage musical not written in any accepted commercial formula - People have said that it "has Broadway written all over it," - but it really isn't in a Broadway style at all.  That made some people in the initial audiences confused - it was such a different musical experience than they expected.  But it is finding its audience. 

First to champion it was Michael Butler, famed producer of the first "HAiR" on Broadway.  Thanks to him, a theatre impresario in Russia became interested, and now the show is opening in Moscow this October.  My wife and I will be there to see it - And hopefully the momentum on the show will just continue after that opening.

The point is - I wrote a show that I knew from the start couldn't be Instantly Popular - I broke too many rules in writing it.  But it does have an audience, it's already grown to include a very popular, talented troupe in Russia - Who knows what will happen next?!

Thanks for the post that got me tripping out on my show - My wife and I more excited as each day passes, bringing us closer to the time when fly to Moscow next month to see what my Russian friends have produced.

(video in my signature was taken by me when I was in Moscow in Nov, 2008, working with the troupe as they started work on my show).

Thanks for your great work in this event, Lorne.

Randy B.

Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#67
Michael135
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 20
  • Joined: 2010/09/02 18:30:08
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 23:05:23 (permalink)
rich936


Congrats to the winners. I gave it my best (made a few bowing mistakes in the String lead and didn't notice until I turned it in ). I spent quite a few hours on the entry and guess I miss the point when others seem to whisk them off so quickly with good results. All my drum rolls were randomizes and accelerated and decelerated to emulate a human player, but were done in the midi file by me and not a sampled sound. All entrances (54 tracks worth) were offset by a few ticks here and there to remove the dreaded organ player sound of all attacks being simultaneous. It was a chore but an excellent learning process.

Though the winners did a great effort, I have yet to hear anything that rivals the sound of a true orchestra, sigh. I guess there must be something said for years of practice and performance. 

Again, Congratulations to the winners and I hope you use your winning libraries to their fullest!


Actually, I spent a lot of time working on my entry.  I estimate that I probably spent 10+ hours of work, on and off tweaking various things/changing things/changing things again.  A quick job is almost never as good as a job that you put a lot of time and care into.
#68
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
  • Total Posts : 26036
  • Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
  • Location: Everett, WA USA
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/02 23:25:01 (permalink)
Though the winners did a great effort, I have yet to hear anything that rivals the sound of a true orchestra, sigh. I guess there must be something said for years of practice and performance.

So true. People who do sampled temp tracks that are later recorded by a real orchestra will also tell you that recording the real thing takes a lot less time and effort than a convincing fake. It's easy to see why live orchestras haven't faded away despite their high cost and despite the availability of sophisticated fakery.

Already I've taken away three important lessons from this exercise:

1. I will probably never create an orchestration convincing enough to truly compete with a real orchestra. Many more talented people than me have tried and couldn't do it, either.
2. There is a WHOLE lot more to orchestration than routing MIDI tracks to a sampler.
3. You cannot circumvent #2 by buying expensive sample libraries.


All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. 

My Stuff
#69
Guitarpima
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4125
  • Joined: 2005/11/19 23:53:59
  • Location: Terra 3
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 00:06:37 (permalink)
rbowser


Guitarpima


I wanted to use Addictive Drums for the snare but as I had 38 Dim Pro running, it would crash the Sonar. I settled for SD for the snare. I can make AD do nice rolls but it would not work for SD. If I did not have to go camping, I would have created my own wav files to import. I just ran out of time.


Hello again, Robert - Your post here about the snare drum reminds me of one of the sub-topics on the thread we had going during the contest.

Someone pointed out something very true, that an orchestral snare has a very different sound from the ones found in programs like Session Drummer or Addictive Drums, or most any software kit you can name. 

Part of the unique orchestral snare sound is because of its position in the back row, with the rest of the orchestra in front of it.  And part of it is the way the snare itself is tuned, and the rest is playing style.  Orchestral programs like the EW line and GPO have the samples for the orchestral snare so they're orchestra-ready, --light and "papery." 

I know that some orchestral purists held it against entries like yours that used the compressed, aggressive snare from pop drum kits.  I don't know if Dim Pro has such a snare in it - ?

But in case this info is elucidating, I wanted to pass it on.

RB


I'm aware of the papery sound of the snare. They're all the same snares. It's just the type of heads and tuning that make the difference. Same with jazz. They use the papery head also. For the sound and how the brushes work.

Notation, the original DAW. Everything else is just rote. We are who we are and no more than another. Humans, you people are crazy.
 
 Win 7 x64  X2  Intel DX58SO, Intel i7 920 2.66ghz 12gb DDR3  ASUS ATI EAH5750  650w PSU 4x WD HDs 320gb  DVD, DVD RW Eleven Rack, KRK Rokit 8s and 10s sub
#70
Guitarpima
Max Output Level: -34 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4125
  • Joined: 2005/11/19 23:53:59
  • Location: Terra 3
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 00:08:53 (permalink)
So true is the comment about nothing is like the real thing.

Notation, the original DAW. Everything else is just rote. We are who we are and no more than another. Humans, you people are crazy.
 
 Win 7 x64  X2  Intel DX58SO, Intel i7 920 2.66ghz 12gb DDR3  ASUS ATI EAH5750  650w PSU 4x WD HDs 320gb  DVD, DVD RW Eleven Rack, KRK Rokit 8s and 10s sub
#71
Glyn Barnes
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7564
  • Joined: 2009/06/10 05:12:31
  • Location: A Stone's Throw from the Line
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 00:58:15 (permalink)
Listening to mine again, after hearing all the others I am not surprised it was in one of the first batch I rejected.  I certainly did not pay enough attention to the dynamics. I knew the mix was muddier than I wanted and in retrospect I probably laid on the reverb a little too thick. (though not as thick as some.) I think it also suffered as I was running out of time and I did not do my usual tests, such as listening to the mix via the TV, in the car and on a boombox.
 
One thing that I noticed which caused a lot of entries to join mine in the reject folder was too long an attack time on the brass, in some cases causing some of the shorter notes to hardly sound at all.
 
Congratulations to the winners and thanks to Dave and Randy for organising this. It was go to see my cross post on Sound on Sound resulted in at least one entry.
 
I have certainly taken a lot out of this, both in working on my entry and in listening to the others.
 

Intel i7 3770K @4.4GHz, 32GB RAM, 240GB SSD System disk, 2 x 2TB and 1 x 1TB (with SSD Cache) HDD. Windows 10,  Sonar Platinum. Roland Quad Capture. 
Music - Switchwater on Soundclick
Music - Goldry Bluszco on Soundcloud
#72
Red Shirt Guy
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 24
  • Joined: 2010/06/23 17:48:29
  • Location: Minnesota
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 04:53:34 (permalink)
Congrats to the winners; and to everyone who participated!  There were so many excellent entries, it was hard to choose just three.

Very cool seeing a TTS-1 entry as a finalist, too.  Just goes to show that the craftsman still counts more than the tools...

And it is kind of funny that, having let enough time go by that I didn't remember which entries were mine and thus actually judging blind, I eliminated one in the first round and one made it nearly to my top three.

The sad part of that, though, is that the one that I eliminated first was the one that, when I was creating my entries, I had thought was the better one.  Which just goes to show how subjective our listening can be during the production process.  A real eye-opener (or is it ear-opener?) for me that was.

Thanks again Bitflipper and Randy for hosting this shindig and to everyone for participating.  What a great learning experience!

Gordon.
post edited by Red Shirt Guy - 2010/09/03 04:54:59
#73
Glyn Barnes
Max Output Level: -0.3 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7564
  • Joined: 2009/06/10 05:12:31
  • Location: A Stone's Throw from the Line
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 05:00:25 (permalink)
Red Shirt Guy

And it is kind of funny that, having let enough time go by that I didn't remember which entries were mine ,

That has made me feel a whole lot better, I am glad I was not the only one who could not spot their own entry.

Intel i7 3770K @4.4GHz, 32GB RAM, 240GB SSD System disk, 2 x 2TB and 1 x 1TB (with SSD Cache) HDD. Windows 10,  Sonar Platinum. Roland Quad Capture. 
Music - Switchwater on Soundclick
Music - Goldry Bluszco on Soundcloud
#74
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 16775
  • Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
  • Location: Bristol, UK
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 05:01:19 (permalink)
rbowser


And now - SEVENTY TWO PAGES of info on all the entries - Libraries used, contributor, and production notes.

Go visit the newly updated site:

ORCHESTRAL SHOOTOUT WITH FULL ENTRY INFO

Randy B.


Randy, all I get is a black page when I click on the link.

CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughout
Custom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
#75
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 16775
  • Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
  • Location: Bristol, UK
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 08:19:00 (permalink)
Sorted. It must have been a permissions issue with my work pc.

Well done to the winners, and to Bit & Randy for donating their precious time to this project.

I'd like to know what anyone liked (or disliked) about my entry.
I certainly didn't spend as much time as I normally would on a prject like this (work/holiday etc)

I'm also curious if anyone else was using EWQLSO Silver for their production.

CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughout
Custom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
#76
rich936
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 44
  • Joined: 2010/02/17 15:43:04
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 08:21:20 (permalink)
[Actually, I spent a lot of time working on my entry.  I estimate that I probably spent 10+ hours of work, on and off tweaking various things/changing things/changing things again. ]

Michael135, I was remarking on some of the 72 different orchestrator's comments on the web page for the final assessment. Some made the comment that they did not put much time into tweaking their version and just plugged in their particular library. It was a general comment and not aimed at anyone (especially the winners). It was to show the state of sample libraries today i.e. that it doesn't take a lot of effort to get a fairly nice sound. What takes effort is the level of authenticity  when it comes to imitating a real orchestra i.e. I have not ever heard a live orchestra's brass section sound like a church organ playing, I have, however, heard many samplers have brass sections sound like church organs.

I also want to say your entry was on my very, very short list and I enjoyed your particular approach to the problem. Congratulations.

Rich936
#77
Jose7822
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 10031
  • Joined: 2005/11/07 18:59:54
  • Location: United States
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 08:58:42 (permalink)
rich936

Though the winners did a great effort, I have yet to hear anything that rivals the sound of a true orchestra, sigh. I guess there must be something said for years of practice and performance. 


You need to hear a master programer at work.  There are various pieces (mock-ups) that do rival the real thing.
 
For example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEwrbg3Ziz4
 
 
And also the works of Thomas Bergersen that Jsaras posted on another thread: http://forum.cakewalk.com/fb.ashx?m=2082649
 
Some are better than others, but a few of my favorite are "Soaring Over Los Angeles" and "An Awfully Big Adventure", plus the demo piece he made for Hollywood Strings, which is just amazing!  You can check that one out at the EWQL site under the HS demo section if you want to (It's called "Allegro Agitato"): http://www.soundsonline.com/EastWest-Quantum-Leap-Hollywood-Strings-pr-EW-190.html
 
 
Take care!
 
 

Intel Q9400 2.66 GHz
8 GB of RAM @ 800 Mhz
ATI Radeon HD 3650
Windows 7 Professional (SP1) x64
Cubase 6.03 x64
Sonar PE 8.5.3 x64
RME FireFace 400
Frontier Design Alpha Track
Studio Logic VMK-188 Plus

http://www.youtube.com/user/SonarHD
#78
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 2614
  • Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
  • Location: Seattle area
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 09:54:07 (permalink)
So I'm just curious how others felt while going through the entries, what were the major weaknesses?

For me it was the brass on the intro section, and this seemed consistent across all entries (my winners ended up being what I felt were the best on that intro melody).  The string section seemed pretty good in many of the entries. The French Horns would be the exception in the brass/woodwinds, they seemed pretty good across the board (the slow attack of the French Horn makes it easier to fool the ear?)
The snare rolls to a lesser degree, but I think that's just programming.
I kept reminding myself that originally Dave and Randy were looking for "realism" in the libraries.
Thoughts anyone?

Tom

Tom Deering
Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page
Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins

Win10x64
StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM

RME UFX (Audio)
Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
#79
Michael135
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 20
  • Joined: 2010/09/02 18:30:08
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 10:02:59 (permalink)
DeeringAmps


So I'm just curious how others felt while going through the entries, what were the major weaknesses?

For me it was the brass on the intro section, and this seemed consistent across all entries (my winners ended up being what I felt were the best on that intro melody).  The string section seemed pretty good in many of the entries. The French Horns would be the exception in the brass/woodwinds, they seemed pretty good across the board (the slow attack of the French Horn makes it easier to fool the ear?)
The snare rolls to a lesser degree, but I think that's just programming.
I kept reminding myself that originally Dave and Randy were looking for "realism" in the libraries.
Thoughts anyone?

Tom

I had the hardest time getting the brass to sound convincing.  With out a doubt, I spent more time working on that section than any other, especially the french horns and trumpets.  That being said, I'm very happy with how the brass in mine turned out. 

On the other hand, I probably didn't spend nearly enough time working with the strings.  I noticed the winning entry had far better strings than mine.  I think that's possibly what made the difference for him. 

#80
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 10:40:44 (permalink)
T.S.


Wow, heh heh, I must say I'm surprised that #64 did anything.
 
T.S.


I spotted another winner - Hi, Tod "T.S." - very glad to see you on the thread and talking a bit about this interesting exercise we've all been through.

I enjoyed your entry thoroughly.  In fact, it was my favorite entry, so I had yours in my 1st choice slot.

You quote me about reverb in your post here.  That's one element I thought you handled very tastefully.  Interesting point though that you found your track sounds different, wetter than intended, when played on your wife's small computer speakers.   Once again, proof that mixes can indeed sound so different on different systems - hence the pro engineers goal to make tracks sound as good as possible on all of them - but I don't think they ever totally succeed with that goal.  How could they?  Best recordings in the world still sound tinny and weak on speakers that are tinny and weak!

Very glad you joined in on this.  Your work was excellent and deserves more careful scrutiny from everyone who has listened to the Shootout entries.  Like I said, your efforts put you in my #1 slot.

Congrats on the win!

RB
post edited by rbowser - 2010/09/03 11:37:34

Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#81
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 14250
  • Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
  • Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 10:41:25 (permalink)
Just a little suggestion: It would help immensely in following this thread if everyone would include the entry number of the piece they're talking about in every post. e.g. "Yoyo, it sounded like the intonation on the cello in your entry (92) was a little off." 
#82
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 11:36:30 (permalink)
clarkeo


Congratulations to the winners!  This was an interesting concept and fun to see all of the different approaches/interpretations.  I almost didn't submit but glad I went ahead and took a stab at it.  I was a little torn about how much effort to put into it though.  Oh and those drum rolls were a real challenge!

Clark


Hi, Clark - I'm glad to see you on the thread. 

Just now I listened again to your entry, #31, to refresh my memory on what you did.

I think your entry is probably a perfect example of a really good entry which could just as easily have walked off with an award as some that did.  Your track is a very good GPO demo, impressive even.  I can hear the results of the time-consuming editing you did.

We had a decent voter turn out.  Naturally enough, as the number of votes increased, the larger the spread of votes - meaning the more evenly distributed the votes became.  Just as with sampling any cross section of the population, the larger the cross section, the more diverse the results.  If we would have had twice as many votes, three times as many, it's safe to say the scores would have been all the more spread out, with "winners" less easily established.

For my money, there's no reason your entry couldn't have garnered more votes and even walked away with a prize.

With your #31 fresh in my ears, here's some feedback:

I remember distinctly the first time I played it.  I perked up, was impressed, and kept ticking off the moments you pulled off well in the track- entrance of the strings, for instance.  Because my impression was so positive all the way through, as soon as something sounded a bit off, that off-moment stood out all the more in contrast.  And that moment was the tympani roll.

It sounds like you didn't "humanize" the Note On events on that tympani roll, or play with the velocity levels - so I think it's the one unnatural moment in your track.

GPO has such a good tympani, with each note given a right hand hit and left hand hit.  They have to be be played alternately to achieve the natural sound of a tympanist striking the drum.  In this MIDI file, every other note needed to be selected and shifted up 2 octaves to achieve that alternating pattern.  I don't think you did this?

All of the percussion needed special attention in this file - as has been discussed quite a bit on the contest thread.

Really good entry, Clark.  I wanted to share some observations about the work, and to let you know that I feel it's one of the stronger entries.

RB



Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#83
thomasabarnes
Max Output Level: -43 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3234
  • Joined: 2003/11/11 03:19:17
  • Location: Milwaukee, WI USA
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 12:03:37 (permalink)
Well, it's done.

In my view the top winners are the 32 participants who got involved with this project before it became a contest with prizes, and those 1st 32 entries were the ones I considered for my votes.

In the entries after the first 32, there were some better sounding submissions, but I reckon they spent more careful time on their work than us who submitted submissions before the prizes were announced. :P

Nevertheless, congrats to all the winners!

I don't want to embarrass D Carson, entry 48, but I was very entertained listening to this entry, as the horns strke me as sounding funny as heck!!

Great job Randy and bitflipper on managing this project!!!!!!

Again, congratulations to all the winners!!!!
post edited by thomasabarnes - 2010/09/03 12:53:21


"It's not a song till it touches your heart. It's not a song till it tears you apart!" Lyrics of Amy Grant.

SONAR Platinum X64 (jBridge), Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit, Core i7 990X Extreme Edition Processor 3.46 GHz 6 Cores, Gigabyte EX58-UD5, Crucial Ballistix 24GB 1333MHz DDR3 @1333 MHz, TASCAM UH-7000, Behringer X-Touch, EVGA GTX 980TI Superclocked 6GB, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD, 150GB, 320GB, 1TB 7200rpm HDDs
#84
jerrypettit
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 625
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 15:54:52
  • Location: Omaha, NE
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 12:14:01 (permalink)
[Deleted]

Had trouble finding how to listen to these.
post edited by jerrypettit - 2010/09/03 12:19:46

Jerry

www.jerrypettit.com/blog
#85
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 12:21:48 (permalink)
jerrypettit


[Deleted]

Had trouble finding how to listen to these.


Hi, Jerry - Sorry!  The link did get lost in this thread - Here it is again for others having trouble:

ORCHESTRAL SHOOTOUT RESULTS

RB

Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#86
chckn8r1
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 19
  • Joined: 2010/07/16 23:16:56
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 12:22:23 (permalink)
Randy & Dave,

Sorry for taking so long, but I'm on vacation and didn't have anything but an iPod to view the forum - and Sonar doesn't seem to like the iPhone OS as a vehicle to reply to the forum.

A HUGE thanks for organizing this for "the fun of it".  You guys are fantastic!  I can only imagine the hours and stress you've logged administering this.  It's come a long way since before the prizes were announced huh?

Congrats to all the winners!  There was certainly a lot of superb entries.  I loved listening to all the different interpretations.  I can't say anything negative about any of the entries out there.  It was certainly a learning experience.

brundlefly - "High Tempo" - I didn't change the tempo of the piece at all - I think you're hearing the slight emphasis I put on the triplet accompaniment.  The way it was played, especially in the horns, it was a bit flat - putting a slight accent on the beginning of each triplet gives the piece a bit more drive.

guitarpima - sorry to hear that you didn't like the mix - anything specific?  Funny thing is, that I hardly did any mixing at all - the levels are pretty well what the tree mics in EW pick up, so, levels are pretty representative of an orchestral balance.

Again - Dave and Randy, awesome job.  My hat is off to you two for taking this on.  The big question - do you anticipate making this an annual thing? :)
#87
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6518
  • Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 13:09:44 (permalink)
rich936


Congrats to the winners. I gave it my best (made a few bowing mistakes in the String lead and didn't notice until I turned it in )...

Again, Congratulations to the winners and I hope you use your winning libraries to their fullest!


There's so much I want to respond to on this thread - DAVE CHICK--just saw your new post, I'll be replying when I catch up!  Meanwhile - want to respond to rich936:

Hi, Rich - It's great to see a good Garritan Forum friend popping up here at the Sonar Forum now.  Hope you stick around and participate more now that this contest is over.

I listened to your entry again just now, the GPO-driven entry #42.  Throughout the track there's some very good work with the excellent GPO instruments you and I love so much.

You mentioned "bowing mistakes" - and I imagine most of us can hear what you mean.  In the B section where the strings take the lead, you used the aggressive "short bows" probably layered with the legato samples?--it does give a jarring, chugging effect which doesn't seem appropriate for that lyrical section.  I think maybe you used this string layer throughout, and the sharp attack was something you liked in the more martial parts of the piece, but then you realized later it would've been good to have done a keyswitch for the string B section.  Do I have this basically right?

With the intention of giving some other constructive criticism, I found your track to have a generally muffled sound to it.  Not actually "muddy," but a bit overly round and fuzzy, muffled.  Does that make sense?  I think this MIDI file is bottom heavy with bass frequencies - part of the issue I'm talking about here could have resulted from not rolling off bass EQ throughout your tracks.

One other thing - your percussion is a bit buried.  I don't really distinguish the important tympani until the very end when you gave it a crescendo.  I think of this Star Trek theme as militaristic, and as such, one that needs a lot of bite and punch, and of course the percussion helps achieve that.  Did you use the snare at all?--not sure I caught it.

Your topic about the sound of a real life orchestra versus a virtual one is a Huge topic that I want to get in to more as this thread continues.

Rich - I personally thank you for getting involved with this.  Now - stick around here!  It's a very active, fun Forum, with nuggets of helpful wisdom posted here every day.

RB

Sonar X3e Studio
Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller
Alesis i|O2 interface
Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz
8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64
with dual monitors
#88
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
  • Total Posts : 26036
  • Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
  • Location: Everett, WA USA
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 13:14:38 (permalink)
do you anticipate making this an annual thing?

I think I can speak for Randy on this, too: NO!


All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. 

My Stuff
#89
brundlefly
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 14250
  • Joined: 2007/09/14 14:57:59
  • Location: Manitou Spgs, Colorado
  • Status: offline
Re:Orchestral Shootout, Part 4: The Winners and Discussion 2010/09/03 13:40:29 (permalink)
brundlefly - "High Tempo" - I didn't change the tempo of the piece at all - I think you're hearing the slight emphasis I put on the triplet accompaniment.  The way it was played, especially in the horns, it was a bit flat - putting a slight accent on the beginning of each triplet gives the piece a bit more drive.



Hmmm... something's not right, then, because the tempo is distinctly higher than 29 and 31 on either side of it. I confirmed by checking the run time; The last hit clocks in at 54:00 in the player with your entry, and 58:00 for the entries on either side. Yours is 7% faster.


Or did everyone else reduce the tempo? 




#90
Page: < 12345.. > >> Showing page 3 of 12
Jump to:
© 2025 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1