Workflow Using Multi-timbral Orchestral Samplers?

Hey guys!
 
Maybe this has been asked a million times, but I wanted to open this thread partly as a way to get out of the Sonar Forum's noise and also take the opportunity to ask a question.  I basically want to know how you guys go about working with big sample libraries like EWQLSO in Sonar.
 
So far, my basic workflow is to Insert the synth (with the normal Audio and MIDI tracks) and then add as many MIDI tracks as the synth can handle (in this case 8).  Each MIDI track is set to a separate MIDI channel of said synth which enables me to use it's Multi-timbral qualities.  Now the only problem I have is when it's time to mix since there's only one Audio track for a bunch of instruments.  This makes it hard to work with volume envelopes and/or adding FX to individual instruments.  So I was thinking of maybe bouncing each MIDI track to audio, but that's very time consuming since you can't do it all at once (or else you bounce every instrument to one stereo track).
 
The other alternative was using the All Stereo Outputs option, but then you only get one MIDI track which makes editing MIDI a nightmare if you have instruments overlapping or playing unison.  So how do you guys that work with EWQLSO or other Orchestral Libraries do it.  What's the best workflow for this type of compositions?
 
 
Thanks for your help!

Hi Lorneyb2,

I have no problems using EWQLSO for sketching (my system has enough resources).  So that's not what I'm having issues with.  My issue is during the mixing part of the process.  I wanna be able to use volume envelopes (not velocity/MIDI volume enevelopes), as well as have the freedom to use FX on individual tracks as needed.  So far I haven't found an easy way to bounce individual tracks simultaneously, or a way to just have the amount of control I want without bouncing. 

What I want is to hear how you guys go from composing the piece to the finish product in the most seemless way.  Actualy the ideal would be to use multiple Audio and MIDI tracks per instance.  That would give me control over writting each individual MIDI tracks on it's own as well as the ability to insert FX and/or audio automation at will, but I don't think that's possible..  The ONLY way I can think of is by having one instance of EWQLSO per instrument group (i.e. 1 for Violins, 1 for Violas, 1 for Cellos, etc).  That would give me several MIDI tracks for each articulation and one Audio track for envelopes and FX.  Is this how you guys do it?  Or is there a more elegant way of doing the same without sacrificing control.

By the way, thanks for the tips on combining solo with grouped instruments.  That's good stuff :-)


Take care!

Hey Wookiee,

You have described exactly what I want to avoid.  I'm currently experimenting with just using an instance of EWQLSO per instrument (as explained in my previous post).  The down side of it is that it'll probably raise CPU consumption, so I'm gonna have to resort to freezing.  But at least it gives me what I want (control over automation and FX).  Guess I answered my own question.  However, I'm still interested in hearing how you guys work with these big sample libraries.


Take care!

Bristol,

Rather than Bouncing to Track, use the Freeze function.  This way you'll be able to revisit the original tracks at any time.  Freezing will let you squeeze more resources out of your system without sacrificing flexibility.

Regarding your two questions:

I personally keep everything in Stereo since all instruments were recorded in their natural placement (although some articulations seem to need small panning adjustments).  Then you can use Busses to group similar instrument families for treatment.  This type of music doesn't need much processing like other more popular types, so treating it as stems with a little EQ'ing is enough.  You'll find youself spending more time making them sound real and adjusting levels, than processing them.

[Wow, I just described a nice workflow idea right there :-P]

Bristol_Jonesey


I think a lot of the time when we ask these questions - we already know the answer & just want a second opinion.

Thanks for your input mate - especially regarding freezing/bouncing.

Yeah, I know.  Ain't that funny when it happens? :-P
 
Still, I'd like to hear how others do it in Sonar.  The more ideas, the better I can improve my current workflow.
 
Oh yeah, no problem man :-)
 
 
Take care!

Good question. IIRC TTS works the same way..... One audio track where the synth lives and then an assortment of midi source tracks where the data for each channel exists.

I have pretty much stopped using TTS  as my synth of choice..... but if my memory doesn't fail me..... I was able to place the enveolpes (volume & panning) in the midi source track and that would be reflected in the synth's output. But you are still limited to just haveing ONE audio track. If you wish to apply compression or EQ.... you have a problem, since that doesn't work on data. (in the midi channels....only in the audio channel FX bin..thereby affecting all the synth channels)

You can bounce to audio like you said..... but that is quite a bit of work, especially if at a future point you need to change a few notes.... edit midi..bounce to audio..... just a pain.

OR: you can insert a seperate instance of the synth for each track you need. Your limitations on this are how many synths (VST's) your platform can run at one time (a real number determined by Cake) AND the ability of your computer to process all those synths in real time and keep it all synced and running.

OR: you can do as I do.... record the midi track get it right (or as close to right as you think it needs to be)... bounce to a track (audio) and freeze/archive the synth/or delete it and hide the synth tracks...and then work with the audio.

I stopped using TTS because I found better sounding synths. And as it turns out, they are one track synths. Problem solved. I use Koreplayer, Jamstix, and cakes Sound Center now. And I have also started the practice of working almost exclusively in the audio realm. I bounce all tracks to audio...it's easier on the processor and leaves my CPU's available for my mastering & sweetening software plugs.

BTW - I always use TTS-1 for editing the MIDI - saves CPU.  I don't add the real softsynths in until I start actually mixing - which of course is what the OP actually asked, but thought I'd throw that in.

My main problem with freezing/bouncing - whatever, with regard to any sort of orchestral production is that, from a compositional viewpoint, I never know if it's finished!!!

I started work on a piece last Christmas, and it's now developed into a four-part work lasting about 16 minutes.

I guess I should pull the plug on the writing side, call it a day and mix the damned thing!!!!

I'm switching to reaper!















lol

jackn2mpu

Jose7822


Hey Wookiee,

You have described exactly what I want to avoid.  I'm currently experimenting with just using an instance of EWQLSO per instrument (as explained in my previous post).  The down side of it is that it'll probably raise CPU consumption, so I'm gonna have to resort to freezing.  But at least it gives me what I want (control over automation and FX).  Guess I answered my own question.  However, I'm still interested in hearing how you guys work with these big sample libraries.


Take care!

I generally use one EWQLSO Gold Pro XP instance per instrument per MIDI track. If I need different articulations of an instrument I'll have them in one instance. I can, depending on the instruments in use, have 6 to 7 instances of EWQLSO running at once before the system begins to protest. But that's more related to lack of ram - I only have 1 gig because that's all my laptop can handle - than processing power with the simple system I have - an ancient 2.53 GHz P4 Toshiba Satellite laptop running WinXP Home SP3 tweaked to the max.

Further to my workflow: when I get an instrument to where I like it I then freeze it with any effects or eq added afterward. Then it becomes like working with a real instrument - if I don't like the way it works in the mix I go back and unfreeze it (like re-recording a real tuba, sax, whatever) and change things and proceed.

My only real limits working this way, with the ancient system I have, is bringing in frozen tracks or other audio from my external hard drive (Glyph daisy-chained off the lone FW port with my Powercore dsp box). The most complex I've been able to get is 16 audio tracks and that's only because that's the largest project I've done - and that includes non-sample lib (i.e. real instruments) work as well. I do have a version of Tubular Bells I'm working on that will end up with 32+ tracks.

My workflow is the closest to jackn2mpu's.
 
Usually I have to deliver the final audio in stems of each instrument in a seperate track, and this method makes it very easy to export the stems at the end.

One of the unique problems with the EWQLSO is that you can't do a freeze with the fast bounce option without totally garbling the results.  If you have a 10 min song it takes 10 min to freeze each track.  Short songs aren't the problem, it's the long ones where you need to try to get creative in reducing the number of freezes you do.  Hopefully at some point Sonar and EW  can get together to move it into fast freeze realms and then we'll have huge smiles.

Hey Bristol,

Is it possible to use one MIDI channel for all articulations?  I'm trying to figure out how to do this in Sonar since I don't like how the Kompakt player has separate keyswicthes for long and short notes.  I don't wanna work with multiple MIDI channels any more, so please tell me there's a way to change articulations from the same MIDI Track :-)

Thanks!

OK,

I have another question.  So far, the best way I've found to deal with all this articulation mess is to simply use an Instrument Track for each Instrument in the Orchestra (Violins, Violas, Cellos, Bass, etc).  I load up Kompakt with all the articulations I need for each instrument (each in their own MIDI channel), and go to the PRV/Event View to change the MIDI channels of the notes based on the articulation needed.  That reduces the amount of tracks in the project considerably, great!

Now the problem is, how do I play a certain articulation of an instrument?  For example, if I want to play a staccato Violins part using my MIDI controller, but channel 1 is set to sustained Violins, how do I go about changing the channel my MIDI controller is triggering?  My guess is that I'll have configure it in my MIDI controller, right?  Or is there a better way of doing this?


Thanks in advanced!
 
 
 
 

You can change the MIDI channel on your controller, but there's no way I know of to do that dynamically, that is when you're playing. So it's of no use playing live or trying to do it as you're recording. Has to be done after the fact.

The operable question for Jose becomes then: why are you doing things the hard way? Why not multiple MIDI tracks? Why not using keyswitches in Kompakt? I use them but then again I never use the Kompakt player that comes with EWQLSO but Kontakt 2. I've already mentioned earlier in this thread about loading up Kontakt with all the articulations I use. I do that when I have overlapping tracks of say, violins, where one might play a sustained note and another might be playing a staccato or pizzicato string of notes over the top of that.

However, if the violin tracks never play different articulations at the same time in a piece then I use keyswitches. If you play the instrument it it's preferred register (easy to see by way of the colored keys on the gui for Kompakt or Kontakt) you'll see there's a bunch of different colored keys for the keyswitches. To change articulation that way I just embed in the MIDI track for that channel a short note on message corresponding to the articulation I want to play.

Still it comes down to I prefer to use separate MIDI tracks for each articulation because of ease of volume level changes and other things. Unfortunately Jose what you want - a way to truly play a sample set like a real instrument with being able to change articulations on the fly like a real violinist or guitarist or whatever musician can - is not here yet, although some sample lib providers get close. Or even playing two articulations at the same time on the same instrument. Think guitar where the player uses the thumb to play a bassline while the other fingers strum the rest of the strings - we ain't there yet.

Hey Jose, our above exchange:

I guess I should pull the plug on the writing side, call it a day and mix the damned thing!!!!

Don't worry, it happens to all of us

Reminds me of a conversation I had with Marah about 18 months ago, when I was still a relative noob.
She was getting disheartened about having so many projects in a state of limbo, and was losing objectivity about getting them finished. I proudly announced that I'd never start a new project before finishing my current effort.

Fast forward to now, and I've got well over a dozen "in-progress" projects - a couple just need mixing, some need vocals, some need fleshing out in terms of arrangement, some need their MIDI parts replaced with guitars, some are just sketches......

Funny how things change.