Stereo Imaging/Modelling in MIDI orchestrations

I don't have any information, but I am very interested in this subject, too.

CDK
Hi all,
 
I’m programming some semi-orchestral tracks using Sonar Platinum and wanted to ask whether you guys consider Spatial Imaging necessary for a smaller ensemble?
 
I’ve not used spatial imaging before but am looking to get my mix sounding more realistic. 
 
My instrument line-up:
Piano/Keyboard
Guitar
Double bass
Drums
Orchestral percussion
Solo violin
2 reeds (covering a combination of either flute, piccolo, clarinet, alto or tenor sax)
2 trumpets
1 trombone
 
Also do you consider using stereo imagers such as Waves S1 or Cakewalk’s the Blue Tubes any easier/any advantage over Kontakt’s stereo modeller?
 
Many thanks.

I've produced many orchestral pieces using Sonar.  I often use a little bit of spatial imaging as it adds to transparency of texture and increasing the perception of the stereo field.  The drawback is if you use too much it can remove too much energy from the center, which can sound awkward.   As usual, finding the right amount of effect is crucial.  I use Ozone 5' stereo imager...
 
Here's an example for a small ensemble (12 instruments):
http://www.jerrygerber.com/mp3/Music%20for%20Twelve%20Instruments.mp3
 
Best,
Jerry
 
 

bitflipper
Ever attended an actual symphony? Did they hand out spatial enhancers at the door?
 
There's the apocryphal story of the audiophile who'd never actually been to a live concert, so his friend took him to one. As they left, the friend asked "how'd you like the concert?", to which the audiophile replied "needed more treble".
 

Thanks. So what's your point?

CDK
Hi all,
 
I’m programming some semi-orchestral tracks using Sonar Platinum and wanted to ask whether you guys consider Spatial Imaging necessary for a smaller ensemble?
 
I’ve not used spatial imaging before but am looking to get my mix sounding more realistic. 
 
My instrument line-up:
Piano/Keyboard
Guitar
Double bass
Drums
Orchestral percussion
Solo violin
2 reeds (covering a combination of either flute, piccolo, clarinet, alto or tenor sax)
2 trumpets
1 trombone
 
Also do you consider using stereo imagers such as Waves S1 or Cakewalk’s the Blue Tubes any easier/any advantage over Kontakt’s stereo modeller?
 
Many thanks.

 I really wouldn't recommend reeds on flute or piccolo. I once put my soprano mouthpiece on a trumpet, which was an interesting sombre sound, but not playable.
 
You have a lot of solo voices in there instead of groups of players. I can see how a spacial tool could widen a section to add realism (I've not done any orchestral music, but seems that reverb is much more of the sound), but for solo voices I think widening makes more of an effect as draws away from realism.
 
I'm pining for a bass clarinet at the moment, after hearing it voiced with a soprano. Saxes I think pull away from an orchestral sound, so a bass clarinet could make a good sub for a tenor sax, if you wanted more weight. I think a piccolo suits sitting over a full orchestra, but in an  ensemble sound you have going on, the higher register of a  Concert (soprano) flute, might be a better choice. I have an alto flute, which apparently is scoffed at a bit by some classical musicians , in preference to the bass flute.

CDK

bitflipper
Ever attended an actual symphony? Did they hand out spatial enhancers at the door?
 
There's the apocryphal story of the audiophile who'd never actually been to a live concert, so his friend took him to one. As they left, the friend asked "how'd you like the concert?", to which the audiophile replied "needed more treble".
 

Thanks. So what's your point?

In a perhaps overly-obtuse way, I was merely attempting to gently challenge your basic assumption, that spatial enhancement is warranted for orchestral music.
 
As jsg notes above, the concert hall experience, like any live performance, is quite different from listening to recorded music. But isn't the goal of recording to try our best to replicate that experience? Sure, not in all genres, some of which have no connection to reality at all. But acoustical music is firmly grounded in the real world. 
 
The placement of instruments and the acoustics of the hall make the classical orchestra inherently stereophonic. If you're lucky enough to be seated in the sweet spot of a concert hall, the sound will completely envelop you in a most pleasing way. Replicate this in your recordings and there's no need for electronic trickery to deceive the ear.
 
I hope my point is clearer now.
 

I have not done any chamber group pieces, let alone orchestral work, but I would imagine that coming up with a mental (or do it on paper if needed) image of the ensemble and then carefully panning all the instruments to sit in the stereo field where they would be in a real group would be the strategy I would employ. Also, sending everything to a reverb bus to give the sense they are in the same physical space I would think would add to the realism, if that is indeed what you are going for.

bitflipper
 

 
...in order to replicate this in recordings,  spacial enhancement, or what you're calling "electronic trickery", is often the best way to accomplish it.  Still not sure what you're getting at....
 
Jerry

 
The best orchestral recordings I've ever heard were recorded with either two microphones or a Decca tree. No post-processing, no EQ, no enhancement of any kind. Just a good, clean recording of a real event.
 
Of course, such recordings benefit greatly from a well-designed acoustical space, a luxury we don't have. Consequently, artificial reverberation is often employed to emulate the reflections within the concert hall. That's a reasonable "trick" because its goal is to make the instruments sound more like they would in a real space.


What we don't generally do is separate the mid and side components so that the L-R differences can be exaggerated. We definitely don't use Haas effect delays or complementary comb filters to create an illusion of greater width. The concert stage is 60 feet wide, after all. Are there other spatial enhancement techniques I don't know about, that might be appropriate for orchestral music?
 
 
 
 

Yeah, good orchestration and creative panning.  Orchestration decisions can make or break a piece, a good orchestration, whether acoustic or digital, has transparency, all the parts contribute to the whole and are balanced in such a way that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.  In the virtual world, starting with a skillful orchestration is bound to produce a better end-result (recording) than trying to fix stuff in mixing and mastering.  A poor orchestration lacks balance, variety, clarity, transparency and often lacks good contrapuntal voice-leading. 
I don't necessarily pan my virtual instruments the way acoustic players might sit on a concert stage, I pan them based on the musical considerations of the piece I am working on.  
 
If this part of the creative process is given sufficient attention, the decision to use or not use spatial processing, and how much or how little, becomes clearer.
 
Jerry
www.jerrygerber.com