AO sounds better than GPO [Archive] - Northern Sound Source

Marsdy

12-17-2003, 02:52 PM

Gandalf.

In fairness to Gary Garritan, I don\'t think the hype has come from him. However, I can understand someone buying GPO and being disappointed if they\'ve taken as gospel much of the uncritical gushing and a** kissing that\'s been associated with this library.

At one point someone connected with GPO was claiming it was going to be as good as EWQLSO! Someone else claimed he found the sound of GPO almost indistinguishable from the real thing!!! That\'s just pure hype.

Let\'s be honest, we\'re not talking VSL, SAM, GOS, EWQLSO, SISS, PMI, Dan Dean or Kirk Hunter here. We\'re talking about a $250 library designed to fit a whole orchestra into a laptop.

Personally, I\'ve heard quite enough of GPO to be sure it simply isn\'t going to compete with the more expensive libraries I\'ve mentioned, nor is it fair or helpful to claim that it does. More to the point, it is unfair to expect it too.... IT ONLY COSTS $250! If I\'m wrong then why does VSL cost thousands and why can\'t you run it on one laptop?
If I\'m wrong and you believe GPO is as good as it gets then why is Gary still selling GOS?

To be honest, I\'m sick of the hype and it\'s about time GPO was seen in perspective. GPO isn\'t a miracle, it\'s a targeted product designed to be an orchestral sketchpad that will run on a laptop.

It\'s fantastic that now, just about anyone can afford a whole orchestral library for $250 and if GPO floats your boat, great have fun! However, I really hope there aren\'t too many people like Gandalf who, because of all the hype, have got less than what they had bargained for.

PolarBear

12-17-2003, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
Done by an Italian composer in two hours.I\'m sorry to quote this out here, but it catched my eye as this goes for almost all demos recently showing up, and this way I do not single out a certain piece. Is it really about the time that you needed to compose, mix and master? I think many demos lacked in not having invested enough time to them. Even great film composers compose only 1-5 minutes of music a day, not having to struggle with any MIDI or mixing issues, mostly not even with the full orchestration. I think a lot of the pieces could benefit from a more intensive care. Compositionally and in the mixing area. This way some opinions might not arise about quality issues.

Hansi

Alan Lastufka

12-17-2003, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by Gandalf the Goober:
\"AO sounds better than GPO\" Usually I TRY to stay out of these kinds of posts, but I had to respond to this one:

B.S.!

Respectfully,

AL

Haydn

12-17-2003, 03:26 PM

Gandalf,

It sounds like you didn\'t read the manual! Read the manual and learn how to really use the instruments - it makes a BIG difference.

I\'ve got AO also and haven\'t used it since using GPO. The woodwind, strings, harps, pipe organs, harpsichords, etc. in AO just don\'t compare. AO was the biggest disappoint to me! Maybe you just compose with phrases and GPO just doesn\'t have them.

Marsdy,

You\'re using a library that costs 12x as much as GPO. It sounds like you\'re trying to compare the expensive library to GPO. GPO was designed for students, hobbyists and as a sketchpad orchestra. Gary hasn\'t been out here doing PR on his library. He just posted demos as his PR and the demos sound great especially for a $249 library. Duncan\'s Mozart demo is just exceptional. Let\'s here you pull off this piece with QLSO then you\'ll convince me how great your library is. Sure the big brassy QLSO demos sound great, but that\'s all I\'ve heard to date.

Houston Haynes

12-17-2003, 03:51 PM

OK OK - I\'ll bite. If you think AO sounds better, then just do a mock up of any of the classical pieces listed at http://www.garritan.com/mp3.html (\"http://www.garritan.com/mp3.html\") using Advanced Orchestra ONLY.

Post a poll in a new thread here with the links to your version of the demos, and if the majority of respondants here agree with you, I\'ll personally refund your purchase price for GPO - that is - if you can provide proof of purchase. images/icons/grin.gif

robgb

12-17-2003, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Marsdy:

Someone else claimed he found the sound of GPO almost indistinguishable from the real thing!!! That\'s just pure hype.
Since I was the one who made this statement, I can assure you and Gandalf that Gary Garritan had nothing to do with my saying it.

I do, however, take exception to your characterization that it\'s pure hype. I made the statement after I had made a side by side comparison between one of the GPO demos and a recorded orchestra (I don\'t remember which demo at this point).

They were very, very close. And I still think that the average listener -- which includes many who frequent these forums -- would have a very tough time distinguishing between the two.

I challenge anyone to do an honest blindfold test. You may be able to tell the difference if you really know what to listen for, but most people won\'t pass.

The same goes, of course, for the more expensive libraries. The sampling world is so wonderful these days that very few people know what\'s real and what\'s Memorex. In fact, I\'ve even seen people in this very forum be astonished to learn that certain pieces of music were done with samples.

Hype? I truly don\'t think so.

sporter

12-17-2003, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Houston Haynes:
OK OK - I\'ll bite. If you think AO sounds better, then just do a mock up of any of the classical pieces listed at http://www.garritan.com/mp3.html (\"http://www.garritan.com/mp3.html\") using Advanced Orchestra ONLY.

Post a poll in a new thread here with the links to your version of the demos, and if the majority of respondants here agree with you, I\'ll personally refund your purchase price for GPO - that is - if you can provide proof of purchase. images/icons/grin.gif I\'d be interested in hearing both libraries play the same midi files. I doubt I could make something sound as good as the demos on the Garritan site, but I would be all ears if I could hear the same tunes done by the same players with the only difference being the samples used.

Scott Cairns

12-17-2003, 04:13 PM

I\'m pissed that someone would use Gandalf\'s name to make such a ridiculous post.

Leave the Grey wizard alone!!!

Marsdy

12-17-2003, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by Haydn:
Marsdy,

You\'re using a library that costs 12x as much as GPO. It sounds like you\'re trying to compare the expensive library to GPO. GPO was designed for students, hobbyists and as a sketchpad orchestra. Gary hasn\'t been out here doing PR on his library. He just posted demos as his PR and the demos sound great especially for a $249 library. Duncan\'s Mozart demo is just exceptional. Let\'s here you pull off this piece with QLSO then you\'ll convince me how great your library is. Sure the big brassy QLSO demos sound great, but that\'s all I\'ve heard to date. I compared GPO with a number of libraries not just EWQLSO and it doesn\'t stand up IMO. I\'m not expecting it to, as you say it\'s designed for students, hobbyists and as a sketchpad orchestra. And I agree, the demos sound great considering the asking price but... There are some, including Z6, (who I understand is involved with GPO) who have hyped GPO well beyond a library designed as a sketchpad that works on a laptop. I would contend that these people may be unfairly raising people\'s expectations of GPO.

I would also contend that as soon as anyone so much as raises a whisper of dissent against GPO they instantly get shouted down as if they are not entitled to an opinion. The ironic thing is, many of these same people doing the shouting are doing user demos that frankly make GPO sound quite poor.

The Mozart demo sounds great. I don\'t don\'t feel the need or have the time to do Mozart myself.

RickD

12-17-2003, 05:06 PM

robgb,
I would love to take that test.

Rick

SWL

12-17-2003, 07:27 PM

Originally posted by Marsdy:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Haydn:
Marsdy,

You\'re using a library that costs 12x as much as GPO. It sounds like you\'re trying to compare the expensive library to GPO. GPO was designed for students, hobbyists and as a sketchpad orchestra. Gary hasn\'t been out here doing PR on his library. He just posted demos as his PR and the demos sound great especially for a $249 library. Duncan\'s Mozart demo is just exceptional. Let\'s here you pull off this piece with QLSO then you\'ll convince me how great your library is. Sure the big brassy QLSO demos sound great, but that\'s all I\'ve heard to date. I compared GPO with a number of libraries not just EWQLSO and it doesn\'t stand up IMO. I\'m not expecting it to, as you say it\'s designed for students, hobbyists and as a sketchpad orchestra. And I agree, the demos sound great considering the asking price but... There are some, including Z6, (who I understand is involved with GPO) who have hyped GPO well beyond a library designed as a sketchpad that works on a laptop. I would contend that these people may be unfairly raising people\'s expectations of GPO.

I would also contend that as soon as anyone so much as raises a whisper of dissent against GPO they instantly get shouted down as if they are not entitled to an opinion. The ironic thing is, many of these same people doing the shouting are doing user demos that frankly make GPO sound quite poor.

The Mozart demo sounds great. I don\'t don\'t feel the need or have the time to do Mozart myself. <hr /></blockquote>Ahhhhhhhhhh, the voice of reason ;-)

My sentiments exactly Dave.

meeehoon

12-17-2003, 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Scott Cairns:
I\'m pissed that someone would use Gandalf\'s name to make such a ridiculous post.

Leave the Grey wizard alone!!! Dude, you obviously haven\'t seen the 2nd installment of Lord of the Rings yet!!! Gandalf became white!!! images/icons/grin.gif

meeehoon

Scott Cairns

12-17-2003, 08:38 PM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Scott Cairns:
I\'m pissed that someone would use Gandalf\'s name to make such a ridiculous post.

Leave the Grey wizard alone!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dude, you obviously haven\'t seen the 2nd installment of Lord of the Rings yet!!! Gandalf became white!!!

meeehoonHey Jun, I\'ve seen the Two Towers, and read the books a gazillion times. images/icons/smile.gif Just wasnt sure which name people would remember best!

Haydn

12-17-2003, 08:42 PM

I think Gandalf the Goober is Donnie again!

robgb

12-17-2003, 08:53 PM

Just as we who defend GPO are accused of being over zealous in our praise, I would suggest that the naysayers who have already purchased the more expensive libraries are hoping and praying that we\'re wrong. Because if we\'re right, how can they possibly justify the thousands of dollars they\'ve spent?

That said, I don\'t mean to suggest that GPO can compete with the bigger libraries. But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.

Besides, most film composers are eventually going to be taking our work to a live orchestra. And GPO certainly gives us enough to make that transition without our having to spend a small fortune on samples and the computers needed to run them.

DevonB

12-17-2003, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by PolarBear:
[QUOTE]Is it really about the time that you needed to compose, mix and master? I think many demos lacked in not having invested enough time to them. Even great film composers compose only 1-5 minutes of music a day, not having to struggle with any MIDI or mixing issues, mostly not even with the full orchestration. I think a lot of the pieces could benefit from a more intensive care. Compositionally and in the mixing area. This way some opinions might not arise about quality issues.

Hansi But you\'re missing the point though. This is a stetchpad. It\'s supposed to be quick, and this is what you can achieve in a couple of hours. Somehow, I don\'t believe the VSL and QLSO demos I\'ve heard were produced in that short of time. I\'m sure they would be better with some more tender, loving care. But this library is about effiency, as it is its selling point, yes? Showing me what can be done within 2 hours and making it sound good is better than what you can show me what it can do with 16-24 hours with the same piece of music. If I wanted that, I\'d look at the big libraries.

Devon

PolarBear

12-18-2003, 12:54 AM

Point me to a composer who has used it as sketchpad. For most of the people I\'m speaking of it\'s all they got. And I would not even think of posting my sketch as a (more or less final) demo of my work. See the people who defend it as the tools the end all bigger (and more expensive) libraries, which you are supposed to have forked your money out on: You were misguided into a marginal difference in quality with them! It\'s not that I don\'t like the smaller libraries around, as long as you see the limitations. But once people not even try to get close to its limits I cannot be the judge over quality. Showing me what can be done in 24 hours with the same piece and make it sound really good is better than showing me what you can do in 2 hours sounding like the new GPO/VSL/QLSO demo (see the other thread). Please don\'t miss my point about the compositions utilizing the smaller libs, that\'s a substantial part of the post. And I took the advice already not to listen to demos/sketches anymore that have a disclaimer on the short worktime.

Hansi

Aaron Levitz

12-18-2003, 04:05 AM

I can\'t speak for everyone, but...

If I produce something up to your standard, the countless hours put in to achieve maximum result, GPO used not as sketchpad but a final production tool... that music won\'t be posted here.

You will, at best, get casual sketches I don\'t feel are worth exploring further. And you may be right to not download those. But I don\'t understand why you\'d expect anyone to post more than that.

Marsdy

12-18-2003, 04:11 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
Just as we who defend GPO are accused of being over zealous in our praise, I would suggest that the naysayers who have already purchased the more expensive libraries are hoping and praying that we\'re wrong. Because if we\'re right, how can they possibly justify the thousands of dollars they\'ve spent? Did I suggest anyone was being over zealous in their praise? On a number of occasions I\'ve said myself that GPO sounds amazing considering it\'s cost. What I DO suggest is that there are some, including yourself, who may be unfairly raising peoples expectations of what to expect from GPO.

So fine, I, and plenty of others have wasted our money on the various expensive libraries we\'ve purchased. On the other hand, you seem to have difficulty differentiating between a sampled orchestra and a real one. And yet you expect me to take your opinions of sample libraries seriously? I don\'t see what makes you such an expert on these matters.

You may have difficulty telling the difference between the real and the sampled but the \"average listener\" is capable of a quite a lot more discrimination than perhaps you give them credit for, even the \"average listener\" around here that you seem quite happy to patronise.

That said, I don\'t mean to suggest that GPO can compete with the bigger libraries. But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price. OK, so you don\'t mean to suggest that GPO can compete with the bigger libraries. But then in the next sentence, you state the bigger libraries can\'t justify their higher price tag compared to GPO. Which is it? I\'m confused. This is what I mean when I accuse you of over-hyping GPO.

Besides, most film composers are eventually going to be taking our work to a live orchestra. And GPO certainly gives us enough to make that transition without our having to spend a small fortune on samples and the computers needed to run them. So now you\'re a film composer who will eventually be taking your work to a real orchestra? Frankly I\'m amazed but why would you want to do that? Why not save your film director clients some money if GPO sounds barely indistinguishable from the real thing? I\'m sure Mr Spielberg is going to be delighted you\'ll be saving him so much money.

Gary M. Thomas

12-18-2003, 05:50 AM

Hey ya\'ll , I\'m kinda curious...why \"Gandalf the Goober\" has not answered any of these posts yet? Where in the world did he go??????????? images/icons/shocked.gif Gary

12-18-2003, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by robgb:

That said, I don\'t mean to suggest that GPO can compete with the bigger libraries. But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
TJ\'s \"Rise With The Angels\" for VSL? Or TJ\'s \"Bird A Short Lived life\" ?

GPO can do that?

Ed

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 06:41 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
Really? OK that says a lot about your listening abilities.

Ray Lindsley

12-18-2003, 07:12 AM

Gandalf\'s post is obviously a prank, and I would wager that Xpert\'s is, as well. Simon continues to cling to his childish, delusional and highly inflated sense of self-worth and disdain for anything that is outside his limited system of beliefs. We can all get along quite nicely without any of them.

PeterRoos

12-18-2003, 07:24 AM

Originally posted by Ed:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:

That said, I don\'t mean to suggest that GPO can compete with the bigger libraries. But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
TJ\'s \"Rise With The Angels\" for VSL? Or TJ\'s \"Bird A Short Lived life\" ?

GPO can do that?

Ed <hr /></blockquote>Apples and oranges!
You\'re not allowed to throw TJ into the comparison. images/icons/wink.gif

If you have heard his works of a few years ago, you should know why. He can do it with ANY library images/icons/cool.gif

Cheers,

csduke

12-18-2003, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
Really? OK that says a lot about your listening abilities. <hr /></blockquote>From the GPO demos I have heard, I believe The Orchestral Collection (Prosonus), which I own, has a more convincing sound - and it costs less then GPO. http://demo.bigfishaudio.net/demo/oc.mp3 (\"http://demo.bigfishaudio.net/demo/oc.mp3\")
http://demo.bigfishaudio.net/demo/ocstrings.mp3 (\"http://demo.bigfishaudio.net/demo/ocstrings.mp3\")

I also own VSL FE which is certainly worth the cost. You get what you pay for.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-18-2003, 08:09 AM

Guys...perspective!!!!

No one does a producer or the business (or themselves) any good making statements that are outside reason. GPO is a remarkable, affordable product, which clearly outperforms its price point.

When you start getting into inflammatory statements about how people with VSL, et. al., must be questioning their purchases, I don\'t think that is very realistic.

Someone made a great point about demos. A demo is a demo. No one is going to sit and handcraft one of those things for a week. They\'re usually not even realistic pieces. On an actual scoring project, most of what you\'re going to write is too thin to even call coherent music. There\'s very little \"hollywood\" work out there, and I don\'t think people realize that. Most films are not big wide epics, which support epic scores. In fact, outside the blockbuster market, most filmmakers disdain that size and emotional scale of music altogether.

I promise this will eventually make sense.

What you generally end up doing, if you go orchestral on a film which doesn\'t want to be \"epic,\" is stripping down your orchestrations and your ensembles themselves, to reflect a more spare, lean musical vision. Something that can be placed in a film of less than epic scale and look like it fits and makes sense.

And that is why Gary calls his GPO a great sketchpad. People get the idea, I think, that big fat 100 chair orchestras are the test of a library, and the fact is, you can make most libraries sound about as good (to AVERAGE LISTENER ears) as an orchestra in that size setting. The sheer size of it forgives detail. Construct your ensembles carefully enough, write to the strengths of the library (or pick literature that doesn\'t expose the seams), produce skillfully, and you will come up with something that sounds pretty great.

But where GPO and something like VSL differ is in the amount of material that\'s there. I can really score a feature film with VSL. If I want to do a percussion ensemble that includes 25 different gongs, each sampled in detail, I can do that piece. THIS is the difference...not so much the sound, but the sheer scope of the raw material. Now, one would expect the sound to be right up there with the scope, of course, but it is still the SCOPE, not necessarily the sound, which is going to separate libraries like VSL and to an extent EWQLSO from their lower priced cousins.

I would say EWQLSO has a slightly different mission than that of VSL...it is far more specifically tailored to doing the kind of work Nick does, and pulls that off in an almost unbelievable quality. It too is about getting and producing specific kinds of work that you as a composer CAN GET. So, there, you are paying for a sound perhaps a little more than the scope. Opposite with VSL, you are paying for the scope there, sound being just as important to the authors, but that SPECIFIC sound being a little less important.

Hence the reason that people who are working will come back with the predictable answer \"you should probably get both.\"

OK, this is one of my morning coffee rants, and I need more coffee and less rant right now. But please, guys, put these discussions in SOME perspective of reality. GPO is not made for completing scores that you\'re going to hand over in a given work situation. You can do some of a score in it, for sure, and if you are sketching or a student, you can do a magnificent job of mocking things up. Hence Rob\'s statement to that effect...if it\'s going to be cut by a real orchestra anyway, then GPO is going to be a tremendous, inexpensive tool.

But if you\'re not in Hollywood, knocking out work on shows that will have six-figure orchestra budgets, GPO is not competing with the VSL/EWQLSO or for that matter the individual Dan Dean, Kirk Hunter, GOS, SISS, et. al. collections. It is not the SOUND, or the ability to mock up a tutti orchestra that is necessarily the difference. It is a matter of scope and malleability. Mr. Garritan has never said anything to the contrary about his product. And I believe that the rabid mis-application of pros/cons that are engaged on both sides of this little battle do nothing except obscure the real issues...that there are some great deals from top to bottom and that they all have a purpose and a value.

Otherwise, as was mentioned before, why WOULD Mr. Garritan continue to sell GOS with a straight face? Beacause it is a library of far more expanded scope and depth, it has a different use...ironically, the more expensive library probably makes the composer cash on the less expensive project!! But that\'s the way it is. Thank god for non-blockbuster movies!! 99% of us would be unemployed otherwise.

What people need to know when they\'re making buying decisions is all about that: Purpose, Intent, Relative Value to purpose. NOT \"whose team you\'re on.\" That says nothing. It just muddys the water for everyone, your \"team\" included.

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Ray Lindsley:
Gandalf\'s post is obviously a prank, and I would wager that Xpert\'s is, as well. Simon continues to cling to his childish, delusional and highly inflated sense of self-worth and disdain for anything that is outside his limited system of beliefs. We can all get along quite nicely without any of them. Actually I don\'t think Gandalf\'s post is a prank - I know that Xpert\'s is though. As for me, yeah sorry for believing in my ability to use my ears.

robgb

12-18-2003, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Guys...perspective!!!!

When you start getting into inflammatory statements about how people with VSL, et. al., must be questioning their purchases, I don\'t think that is very realistic.

With all due respect, Bruce, you\'re wrong. How many of us have spent thousands on a new piece of equipment only to see something better come along a couple of months later for about a third of the price? It happens all the time.

So, while I will NOT say that GPO is as good as the big boys -- that IS unrealistic -- I DO think some may be wondering why they spent so much on something that, in all honesty, does not justify the price paid, in light of the newer, less expensive libraries coming to light.

It\'s human nature to second guess yourself and its human nature to react defensively when something more cost effective rears its head.

As far as doing Garritan a disservice, that\'s ridiculous. His products and his superb customer service speak for themselves. You give us too much credit.

robgb

12-18-2003, 09:00 AM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
Really? OK that says a lot about your listening abilities. <hr /></blockquote>Yeah, it says I listen without my hearing being clouded by elitist buying anxiety....

Notice I didn\'t suggest they DON\'T sound better. Just not ENOUGH to justify the vast difference in price.

sporter

12-18-2003, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:

And that is why Gary calls his GPO a great sketchpad. Very good post, Bruce. I agree with most everything, but I do gave one issue: I don\'t think GPO has been marketed as a \"sketchpad\". When it was first announced, I honestly thought it was something along the lines of VSL/EWQLSO, but with a $249.00 price tag. I was quite excited, at least until I heard the demos.

As a sketchpad, is it worth $249.00? For me, I want the best sound possible. (heck, I need all the help I can get). I\'ll spend more money to get better sound, so for me, it is not worth it. I want my music to sound the best it can sound.

(Not to dis anyone who worked on the demos as they are very, very good...but the sound of samples I am sorry to say, disappoints)

Houston Haynes

12-18-2003, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
Guys...perspective!!!! BRILLIANT POST!

I rarely shout in forums, but this one is deserved. Bravo, Bruce - this post should be made a separate announcement at the top of every forum here.

That being said... I do think that Gary has closed the gap on price/performance more than folks here want to admit - and you\'ll probably see a lot of composers in \"lower\" media outlets (TV, games, etc.) using GPO as extensively as GOS to produce music that is more convincing than I\'m hearing now in those areas.

I made a post the other day about how I\'ve been listening to Discovery Channel and History Channel while doing general house clean-up, and noticing that a lot of programs have music under them that was just plain unconvincing, technically and musically. But, considering that some of these programs were made two years ago - that\'s like a lifetime in technology circles. So, I expect that in the next season or two we\'ll start hearing better scores and perhaps forget to notice - and GPO will be a big part of that.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-18-2003, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
With all due respect, Bruce, you\'re wrong. How many of us have spent thousands on a new piece of equipment only to see something better come along a couple of months later for about a third of the price? It happens all the time.

So, while I will NOT say that GPO is as good as the big boys -- that IS unrealistic -- I DO think some may be wondering why they spent so much on something that, in all honesty, does not justify the price paid, in light of the newer, less expensive libraries coming to light.

It\'s human nature to second guess yourself and its human nature to react defensively when something more cost effective rears its head.
No, I\'m not wrong. You say in the very next breath that I\'m not wrong.

You couldn\'t sell VSL for much less than it is currently sold. There is that much in it. It is simply mind-boggling how much material is there. You could spend a year composing only percussion pieces, and never repeat yourself tonally. In the scheme of getting paying work, and producing that work in such a way that your future clients can see a progression and variety in the sounds you make, you had better believe VSL is worth what you pay for it.

Now, if someone purchased VSL who does only mockups with it for later orchestration, I\'d halfway agree with your premise. They could get by without 40-50 different gongs and tam tams. They could get by without bowed versions of every percussion instrument that will make a sound when bowed. You could get by with a lot less microscopic sampling of instrument behaviors--because you\'re interested in laying down a good first impression of something that will be redone anyway.

But man, you\'re talking about what, 1% of the available work for composers that fits into that scenario? For the other 99% who are scoring for media, an investment in VSL-like microscopia (and I am using VSL generically at this point to represent any of the gigantic, epic products) gives you a tool that WILL allow you to complete work which will not have to be re-done. It allows you to focus on interesting minutia that is in scale with non-hollywood-blockbuster type films.

I\'m not dissing Gary\'s product for a minute. But representing GPO as something which negates the value of VSL (et. al.) is ludicrous. They are products of completely disparate purpose.

Bruce A. Richardson

12-18-2003, 09:53 AM

Man this is a hard topic to discuss when it starts getting outside the realm of reason.

I just reread what I wrote a minute ago, and I don\'t mean by any stretch to condemn the sound of GPO as unusable, or something that is LIMITED to sketching. I am just trying to make the point that VSL (et al) are not hugely overpriced rip-offs, somehow embarrassed now by low cost alternatives. The \"sound\" is not everything. It is one component. The amount of material, the variety and depth of sampling, the non-traditional techniques represented in depth--these too have financial benefit to a type of end user. It is not enough to say, \"Well, look, this $250 product makes decent sounding Mozart, too.\" There is more to being a working musician/composer/producer than that. Value is a complex equation, not a simple one.

robgb

12-18-2003, 09:55 AM

Well, first off, I\'m not saying that GPO negates the other products. What I\'m saying is that this is the FEAR. And those who fear this tend to lash out against GPO. It\'s a simple case of human nature.

I WILL say, however, that I have not heard one demo that is SOOOO much better than GPO that I\'d run out and spend $3,000. I don\'t care WHOSE demo it is.

Why? Because a great musician can make even a cheap guitar sound fantastic.

Many, many years ago, I bought a Yamaha sequencer for three grand. It had every bell and whistle you can think of and sat in some of the most prestigious recording studios around the country.

Six months later, Yamaha came out with a sequencer costing $300. I felt sick to my stomach when I saw it. No, it didn\'t have all the bells and whistles of the $3,000 model, but it had everything I -- and most of those studios -- needed. I got great use out of my top of the line sequencer, but to this day I wish to hell I\'d waited six months.

12-18-2003, 10:00 AM

GPO has ease of use and good sounds, ability to compose on a lap top and still have all instruments availible to you. Price.

QLSO has superb sound (natural reverb), multi mike distances and no need for mixing.

VSL has the legato tool.

GPO is different from the latter 2, and I really dont think it has any chance to compete with these points no matter how hard some people think it can.

But I dont think GPO is supposed to, its a different kind of product, but people suggesting it sounds no different to QLSO or VSL is just clearly nonsence.

Ed

PaPa Chalk

12-18-2003, 10:05 AM

Ok everyone is entitled to their own opinion but please have some common decency and respect for each other.

If in doubt read our rules.

http://www.northernsounds.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=000001 (\"http://www.northernsounds.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=23;t=000001\")

I\'m seriously think of creating a ringside forum section but we\'d probably still have hitting below the belt. images/icons/grin.gif images/icons/grin.gif
Doesn’t anyone here have children somewhere in their family it should be a joyful month. Don\'t wait till the last minute to get something

I\'ve already purchased a PDA for my 2-year-old daughter, and I may buy her a home theater PC.
I just can\'t find a fatar Keyboard that will play back Dora the explorer.
I still have this uncanny feeling my wife is going to drag me out on the 24th. images/icons/rolleyes.gif images/icons/grin.gif

seasons greeting everyone

12-18-2003, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by robgb:

I WILL say, however, that I have not heard one demo that is SOOOO much better than GPO that I\'d run out and spend $3,000. I don\'t care WHOSE demo it is.

Why? Because a great musician can make even a cheap guitar sound fantastic.
<snip>

True, and TJ can make anything sound good. However, look at what VSl has - the legato tool. GPO cannot compete with that level of realism. Neither can QLSO! However, QLSO has no need for mixing and no need for additional reverb. VSL nor GPO can compete with that.

GPO has good points, but it cannot compete with VSL and QLSO on these levels.

Ed

Waywyn

12-18-2003, 10:26 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ed:
[/QUOTE

yes it can - in terms of the price ... and thats the thing! EWQLSO was made to have a realistic natural and huge sound. VSL was made to have a lot of close samples and realistic tools and GPO was created to make it possible to buy for students and other guys who don`t earn much money yet or want to have a careful look and a \"cheap\" start into the world of samples.

uhm, guys, didnt you realize that our gandalf just never showed up again ?

Waywyn

12-18-2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by Ed:
GPO has good points, but it cannot compete with VSL and QLSO on these levels.
yes it can - in terms of the price ... and thats the thing! EWQLSO was made to have a realistic natural and huge sound. VSL was made to have a lot of close samples and realistic tools and GPO was created to make it possible to buy for students and other guys who don`t earn much money yet or want to have a careful look and a \"cheap\" start into the world of samples.

uhm, guys, didnt you realize that our gandalf just never showed up again ?

robgb

12-18-2003, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by Ed:

But I dont think GPO is supposed to, its a different kind of product, but people suggesting it sounds no different to QLSO or VSL is just clearly nonsence.

Ed I don\'t think anyone is suggesting it sounds NO different. I\'m beginning to wonder if anyone reads posts before they jump in. I\'m saying there isn\'t ENOUGH of a difference to warrant the MASSIVE difference in pricing.

Certainly a Mercedes is going to get me across town. But so will a Civic. But I\'m not hung up on appearances, and for a trip across town I\'d rather pay Civic prices.

Neither car is going to make me a better driver. The Mercedes may have a smoother ride and a lot more bells and whistles, but it\'s still just a car.

P.S. These ARE all opinions and nothing else. We\'re all entitled to one. Or more. Or many.

Kenn159

12-18-2003, 10:38 AM

Quote
I do, however, take exception to your characterization that it\'s pure hype. I made the statement after I had made a side by side comparison between one of the GPO demos and a recorded orchestra (I don\'t remember which demo at this point).

They were very, very close. And I still think that the average listener -- which includes many who frequent these forums -- would have a very tough time distinguishing between the two.

I challenge anyone to do an honest blindfold test. You may be able to tell the difference if you really know what to listen for, but most people won\'t pass.

The same goes, of course, for the more expensive libraries. The sampling world is so wonderful these days that very few people know what\'s real and what\'s Memorex. In fact, I\'ve even seen people in this very forum be astonished to learn that certain pieces of music were done with samples.

Reply
I have yet to here compositions recorded by a real orchestra, compared to midi mockups, where I could not tell which was the real orchestra.
For Example, more than ever artist are going with real orchestras [Vanessa Carlton, Evanescence, etc.
Why would they bother if as you say most people can’t tell the difference?

I remember the days of the Mirage, and I for one are happy to be beyond those horrible emulations of an orchestra
I play several acoustic instruments [guitar, bass and drums] and feel the one area that electronic instruments need improving is in articulating expression.
I think the old Yamaha DX72 was for a electronic instrument fairly expressive.
With the use of a mouth piece wind controller and FM synth engine that had the ability to morph between very different sounds via velocity and aftertouch, although the fm sounds were not very acoustic sounding.

Until we can express ourselves spontaneously when playing an electronic instrument ,equal to that of a acoustic instrument , electronic instruments will always be a static facsimile.

I have found samples very useful in composition and hiring a real orchestra is beyond most of our budgets ,but to say we have reached a point to were they sound the same , I have to disagree.

robgb

12-18-2003, 10:41 AM

Ken, certainly we musicians listen to these things with a more critical ear. I said CLOSE, not the same. And I don\'t think the average listener could tell the difference.

T Parks

12-18-2003, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by robgb:
Ken, certainly we musicians listen to these things with a more critical ear. I said CLOSE, not the same. And I don\'t think the average listener could tell the difference. I\'d argue that the casual listener often doesn\'t really listen - that\'s probably why.

T Parks

12-18-2003, 12:04 PM

I think it boils down to what the composer is using the library for.

If your music is intended for a real orchestra then GPO is great. Nothing more is needed. Its a way of trying out ideas and giving people and idea of what works and what doesn\'t. Why?. Because none of the sampled orchestras can replace the real thing live, so GPO is as adequate as anything else. The EWQLSO Platinum Beethoven\'s 5th demo may have been more impressive, but it still ultimately sounded fake.

However, if GPO is intended as the main sound element for film or tv scores, pop tracks or radio jingles, then Simon is right. A library of greater quality is required.

J. Whaley

12-18-2003, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Actually I don\'t think Gandalf\'s post is a prank - I know that Xpert\'s is though. As for me, yeah sorry for believing in my ability to use my ears. [/QB]Oh yea? Well if Gandalf is real - SHOW YOUR FACE! Come out and take it like the REAL Gandalf would!

I think Gandolf the Goober is Actually Joanne Babunovic. She\'s testing her \"Christmas Humor\" theory she posted a few days ago about how many forum members it takes to change a light bulb...... and she\'s been miiiiighty quiet for this post.........

(enter suspense music - composed with GPO)

Joanne.....are you lurking......?

graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

robgb

12-18-2003, 12:13 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
But if you\'re a pro and want to make a living doing MIDI orchestral music, the choice should be obvious. And if you\'re going to do that, you\'re not likely to start from scratch and only have $249 at your disposal anyway. So I really belive these libraries are for totally different users. You\'re not gonna score the next LucasArts game with GPO. I don\'t know, apparently Jeremy Soule uses GPO. And I don\'t think he\'s doing so bad. images/icons/smile.gif

Look, I understand your point -- but there\'s no need to start frothing at the mouth over it. That said, I, for one, CAN imagine GPO being used for a LucasArts game because the end user won\'t really know the difference. Hell, he won\'t even THINK about it.

Some people here seem to think that cost equals value and that\'s complete BS. Why let yourself get caught up in that kind of nonsense?

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 12:33 PM

robg: How do you know Jeremy uses GPO? I hope you\'re not referring to that \"beach picture\"...

No, maybe some people won\'t notice the difference between GPO and VSL (something tells me you\'re right...) but thankfully I believe most big titles developers will notice the difference. And even if people don\'t consciously notice the difference, it\'ll still affect the gaming experience how good/real the music sounds (if the gamer has music turned on at all). I won\'t get into a complete game music discussion now so I\'ll leave it at that.

As for the price=value comment. Often that is true and you know it. Buy a cheap wine glass and it\'ll break in a month, buy an expensive one, and you\'ll get something more sturdy and lasting. Because the latter cost more to produce. Of course it\'s possible to produce crap for a lot of money, but usually those extra $$$ that you pay for the big libraries can be heard.

lex

12-18-2003, 12:50 PM

This reminds me of GOS days...

A lot of people are almost fnatical about GPO...

But so far it\'s all talk..offical demos are great for that price, but if you are adventurous enough to compare it with any big library you can hear very well what are they lacking.

Another thing, some people complained how QLSO demos are only \"big hollywood\" compositions.
What about GPO? All demos are \"small classical\" compositions....User demos so far do not sound so much different then edirol orchestra.

Judging by demos , AO can sound much better, but costs more.

If you look at GPO as a tool for quick ideas, orchestration, and quick mock ups before recording the score with an orchestra, it sounds great and it\'s a great price.

This is how Gary started to advertise...over time, little by little, advertisment and
fan(atic)-posts started this redicilous \"GPO is so much more\" idea.

I do not own it, my stated opinion is based on all the demos so far.

If I\'m dead wrong, I would love to hear some demos that prove me wrong.

Alex

Markus S

12-18-2003, 12:53 PM

I for myself am really concerned about the identity of Gandalf. Who is he? This mysterious provocativ poster?
Is it somebody just checking out here for the first time, tapping this message to leave us with it alone forever? No... it is too well aimed, I guess it is somebody who knows this forum quite well, maybe checks it out every day. He could imagine the reaction... The poster clearly attacks on Gary G and his new product GPO (ok, no need to be Sherlock for this one;-) ), Silver is not aimed... interesting. So who could be interested in hurting GPO? Maybe a personel ennemy of Gary from the past? (wow, this is getting scary). Or maybe another sample developper company with a similar product???? Then again, no, this attack is too primitive... Hm, who expressed himself often against GPO latly... well, sorry Handz you are demasked :-D. You tried to avoid the suspicion by posting latly you would finally appreciate GPO, of course I never believed you. A man like you don\'t change his mind so easily! But Handz could not be alone on this: he has a cooperator! Someone with an exellent english. So, who on this forum has a good english (not me, I\'m out)... well this is getting kind of complicated, I\'ll leave it there for today and get me a beer...

KingIdiot

12-18-2003, 01:07 PM

This is a really bad thread, but anywway

One thing that keeps popping up is \"value\", which obviously is different for different people.

A concern I have is that rob jsut doesn\'t have any idea of what is actually IN all these libraries.

Take EWQLSO for example, hiring the \"best\" engineer, renting out a \"great\" hall, and getting a \"great\" orchestra all together for the amount of time it takes to sample (chromatically BTW, and sometimes with alternates)is FREAKING EXPENSIVE. Its not like some drum library made in a home (or cheap) studio with the producer of the library playing the kit (the equivelant of me producing a \"cheap\" guitar lib).

Here\'s where \"worth\" plays into the picture. Is Prof Keith J., the big hall, and the musicians, worth it. Would you pay the money to hire an engineer of that caliber if you could afford it? Or would you search for a cheaper alternative? I know that if I had the money I\'d go with the proven thing? (but I never have the money)

The same goes for VSL. We\'re talking Sir Mixalot\'s Baby\'s @ $ $-load of samples, that have to be edited, programmed, tested, most for a playback style that is truly innovative and forward thinking, and is always expanding. 3 frigging GB for a waterphone... theres stuff in there I didn\'t know a waterphone could do. Its inspiration in a bottle (or rather on a disc) [read: value]

For me, I havent paid for either of the above libraries (which I think works into this discussion because we\'re talking about peoples opinions based on how much they spend), but I would gladly work one or both into my budget if it allowed (which it doesn\'t right now).

BOTH would be warranted for different projects. As are most of the other libraries I\'ve purchased/recieved.

I\'m not saying GPO isn\'t great value, or that alot of $$$ and work hasnt gone into that project. There\'s quite a bit of value in that product. Alot more than what other people would charge for the same thing. But to say that there would be \"Fear\" from some users for paying for the expensive libraries, means that either you have no idea whats gone into these libraries and what they truly offer, or the people you are referring to dont recognize the value of the products they\'ve purchased (which is sad).

and remember each person defines value differently. One man\'s \"synthy music\" can be another man\'s \"chariots of fire\" or \"Blade Runner\"

robgb

12-18-2003, 01:35 PM

I don\'t think it\'s a matter of fanaticism. People, like Gandolf, come to this forum and make ridiculous statements that are meant to provoke and, obviously, those of us who use GPO and KNOW what it can do, come to defend it.

We\'re simply stating an opinion. Next week there could well be something to come along that changes that opinion.

I really -- truly -- don\'t think its such a radical statement to say that there\'s nothing in the bigger library demos that -- to my mind -- justifies the vast difference in cost between them and GPO.

Again, it\'s MY opinion. It never ceases to amaze me how lathered up people can get over this stuff.

This talk about cheap wine glasses vs. expensive ones means nothing to me. It\'s the WINE that counts. And GPO is good wine.

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
This talk about cheap wine glasses vs. expensive ones means nothing to me. It\'s the WINE that counts. And GPO is good wine. No, when I put wine glasses in place of sample libaries in my comparison, it is the glass that counts. Not what is in it.

dpasdernick

12-18-2003, 01:42 PM

King,

You nailed it! Perhaps the best question one can ask regarding these libraries is \"If money wasn\'t a deciding factor, which one would you buy?\" Now we use our ears, not pocketbooks, to decide. Now we argue about release trails and articulations. Now we try and figure out which horn sample will get us the hottest chicks. (pardon me ladies images/icons/wink.gif ) If we all took the \"Pepsi Challenge\" and weren\'t told the price, just asked to listen, now which one is best? (Of course this theory is all blown to hell because we do have to pay!)

All the best,

Darren

robgb

12-18-2003, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by KingIdiot:

A concern I have is that rob jsut doesn\'t have any idea of what is actually IN all these libraries.

I\'m well aware of all the time and effort that went into creating the big libraries and I know they\'re just chock full of amazing goodies. I don\'t begrudge you that point.

But I\'m coming from the perspective that MOST of us -- even the pros among us -- don\'t really NEED all of those goodies. Sure, they give us choices, choices up the wazoo, but too many choices can quickly spoil creativity. We spend more time searching for the \"right\" sample than we do searching for the right melody.

If YOU feel you need all those choices and are willing to pay thousands to have them, then MORE POWER TO YOU.

I felt that need, as I said, many years ago with that Yamaha sequencer and have regretted it ever since. Having the best and the biggest does not make us better writers or performers.

Take one look at Willie Nelson\'s battered guitar and you\'ll know where I\'m coming from.

robgb

12-18-2003, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
This talk about cheap wine glasses vs. expensive ones means nothing to me. It\'s the WINE that counts. And GPO is good wine. No, when I put wine glasses in place of sample libaries in my comparison, it is the glass that counts. Not what is in it. <hr /></blockquote>Well, if you want to argue that point, then I\'d say that more often than not, expensive wine glasses are more delicate and easier to break. The cheap ones can last forever (as my cupboard proves)... images/icons/smile.gif

KingIdiot

12-18-2003, 01:56 PM

thats just it, you\'ve been putting words in other peoples mouths by saying that they may not find the worth in the libraries they purchased.

I\'ve got no problem with you not needing the other stuff, but to say it as fact for other people on such a broad generalization....

well.... images/icons/smile.gif

I still have my old tools, and love them. I also remember buying Cubase 2.5 and thinking how cool it would be, then shutting it up in the closet because I thought all I needed was my VS 1680. Times have changed and I\'m glad I had Cubase around images/icons/smile.gif (as well I still have my VS around too, Everything has a value images/icons/tongue.gif )

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 01:58 PM

robg: OK my experience with wine glasses is different... images/icons/smile.gif I broke a lot of cheap ones very easily:) Oh well back to the discussion.... you say even the pro\'s dont NEED all those things in the big libraries? You mean, they should all just settle for GPO and that would be all they ever needed? I don\'t think you\'ll ever find any \"pro\" wanting to limit himself to only using GPO... That would cause his stuff constantly to sound less impressive than his competitors using the big libraries (and real recordings). Now this is going in circles. If you agree with me that if some pro game composer like Bill Brown or Soule stopped using anything but GPO, they would loose out to the competition, then you afterall agree that you need more than GPO... right?

PolarBear

12-18-2003, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
But I\'m coming from the perspective that MOST of us -- even the pros among us -- don\'t really NEED all of those goodies. Sure, they give us choices, choices up the wazoo, but too many choices can quickly spoil creativity. We spend more time searching for the \"right\" sample than we do searching for the right melody.
Now you\'re not telling YOUR opinion, you\'re telling MOST people\'s opinion, and you\'re perhaps right on this, but not in the sector of the PRO\'s. If you\'re a pro you know your tools, you don\'t need (siginficantly) more time utilizing it as the other thing. And those PRO\'s usually know what they buy before they do buy it. It would be very short-sightened if you didn\'t think of the fact new tools will arise next year/month. VSL is out for a year, was it beat yet? Miroslav and AO had the great marketshare for a very long time.

Houston Haynes

12-18-2003, 02:01 PM

Time will bear all of this out.

I\'m sure that there will be plenty of composers that have bought a big library that will get to a gig and will do a quick mock-up with GPO and the producer will say \"PERFECT, don\'t change a thing\". Do you think the composer will say, \"No, I want to use this other awesome library to do even better\" or do you think they\'ll cash their check and move on to the next gig?

It\'s like the studio owners in the Nuendo forum that say they keep ProTools in the corner to keep their customers happy, but use Nuendo to get their real work done.

Time will tell.

robgb

12-18-2003, 02:08 PM

LOL, you guys really crack me up. You\'re looking so hard for reasons to attack my statements that you completely overlook the point:

In the end, the tools don\'t matter. It\'s the talent that counts.

KingIdiot

12-18-2003, 02:13 PM

images/icons/rolleyes.gif

rob, you\'re worse than my ex-girfriend.

No one\'s looking hard to attack you on points, you made statements that were broad generalizations, and you\'ve been defending them, now you\'re saying they had no relevance to what you\'ve been trying to point out.

If it really is the talent, than all the libraries are worth their price (which is pretty much what I think, tho there are some that should have been split into seperate \"modules\" some time agao..cough DAN cough images/icons/tongue.gif )

Patrice Deceuninck

12-18-2003, 02:14 PM

Maybe Gandalf the Goober and Peter Siedlaczek is the same person???
Just kidding images/icons/grin.gif

Patrice

esteso

12-18-2003, 02:17 PM

Ah yes, percieved value. Nobody has the same wants or needs and so there is actually no basis for a discussion..... although everyone\'s giving it a go.

I had a guitar student ask me why my guitar cost so dang much and his was so cheap. \'cause he couldn\'t hear the difference really. I said, \"Well I can, so it was worth it to me.\" He said, \"DO you think it sounds 10 times better than mine?\" \"Gee I don\'t know, what does 10 times better sound like anyway?\" \"Is it twice as good?\" \"Probably\" \"Then you got ripped off \'cause you paid 10 times the price and it\'s only twice as good\"

But of course there are people that are willing to pay astronomical prices for a vintage mic or something like that.....that is only slightly better than it\'s modern counterpart. To them it\'s worth it. It does not matter what it costs. The point is that it IS better than the next product on their list. Even if it\'s 5% better....it\'s better. End of story. Some people don\'t see things that way so they don\'t buy the vintage mics (or the VSL\'s) That\'s OK, isn\'t it? Viva la difference!!

all the best

Patrice Deceuninck

12-18-2003, 02:20 PM

Just got EWQLSO Platinum. I like my Roland JV1080 better...

Kidding again images/icons/grin.gif images/icons/grin.gif

Patrice the Goober

Btw, what does mean \"goober\"??? Didn\'t find this word in my dictionary... images/icons/rolleyes.gif

robgb

12-18-2003, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by KingIdiot:
images/icons/rolleyes.gif
If it really is the talent, than all the libraries are worth their price images/icons/tongue.gif ) images/icons/shocked.gif King, this makes absolutely no sense.

robgb

12-18-2003, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by esteso:

But of course there are people that are willing to pay astronomical prices for a vintage mic or something like that.....that is only slightly better than it\'s modern counterpart. To them it\'s worth it. It does not matter what it costs. The point is that it IS better than the next product on their list. Even if it\'s 5% better....it\'s better. End of story. Some people don\'t see things that way so they don\'t buy the vintage mics (or the VSL\'s) That\'s OK, isn\'t it? Viva la difference!!
Excellent point! Which is why I have to laugh when people get in such a lather over me expressing my opinion. This really isn\'t world shattering stuff here...

images/icons/smile.gif

KingIdiot

12-18-2003, 02:30 PM

you\'re right it doesnt

Marsdy

12-18-2003, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
LOL, you guys really crack me up. You\'re looking so hard for reasons to attack my statements that you completely overlook the point:

In the end, the tools don\'t matter. It\'s the talent that counts. Huh????

You think you\'re laughing??? I\'m laughing so hard my kidney exploded which is a shame because I sold the other one to buy EWQLSO and the VSL Performance set.

images/icons/rolleyes.gif images/icons/confused.gif images/icons/frown.gif

12-18-2003, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by Waywyn:

]yes it can - in terms of the price ... and thats the thing! EWQLSO was made to have a realistic natural and huge sound. VSL was made to have a lot of close samples and realistic tools and GPO was created to make it possible to buy for students and other guys who don`t earn much money yet or want to have a careful look and a \"cheap\" start into the world of samples.
[/QB]If you are going to quote me, quote me again.

\"GPO has ease of use and good sounds, ability to compose on a lap top and still have all instruments availible to you. Price.

QLSO has superb sound (natural reverb), multi mike distances and no need for mixing.

VSL has the legato tool.

GPO is different from the latter 2, and I really dont think it has any chance to compete with these points no matter how hard some people think it can.

But I dont think GPO is supposed to, its a different kind of product, but people suggesting it sounds no different to QLSO or VSL is just clearly nonsence.\"

I agree with you Waywyn, and Im one of those guys with not a lot of money. Im a self teaching student. I will get GPO eventually but Im going with Silver right now becuase I have AO and Prosonus and I like QLSilvers strings better. Next Im probably going for VSL\'s Opus becuase of the legato tool, although this will cost a bit I know I think the legato lool is worth it.

Even Gary Garritan says that GPO isnt supposed to compete with the big libraries. Its a different product, for a different use. Its very good for a starter kit, its very good as a lap-top on the go, its very for good for students and its an amazing price. Thats what GOP is for, and yes its a huge step up and Gary should be congratlated for bringing such great sounds to us for such a small amount of money. But I\'d still want to buy VSL and QLSO for the things that GPO cannot deliver.

Ed

Houston Haynes

12-18-2003, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by Ed:
But I dont think GPO is supposed to, its a different kind of product, but people suggesting it sounds no different to QLSO or VSL is just clearly nonsence.I certainly think it sounds different - and that\'s why I own it. images/icons/wink.gif

Bela D Media

12-18-2003, 02:39 PM

http://www.beladmedia.com/lala.gif

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Houston Haynes:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Ed:
But I dont think GPO is supposed to, its a different kind of product, but people suggesting it sounds no different to QLSO or VSL is just clearly nonsence.I certainly think it sounds different - and that\'s why I own it. images/icons/wink.gif <hr /></blockquote>Are you saying that if you had the choice between a package consisting of GPO or one consisting of EWQLSO and VSL, you\'d take the one with GPO?

filmtvbiz

12-18-2003, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
Besides, most film composers are eventually going to be taking our work to a live orchestra. And GPO certainly gives us enough to make that transition without our having to spend a small fortune on samples and the computers needed to run them. Isn\'t that the truth. For television, there is no excuse, but we still see/hear, tv spots done with keyboard and on-board ROM sounds. (Roland, Motif, etc), it should be out-lawed. (smile).

The GPO, from what I\'ve heard (demos), are far suffient for televsion work and then some. What they can do with them, well, that\'s up to \"them\" isn\'t it.

If you give an college artist a canvas and some paint, then another to Andy Warhol, and yet another to Michelagnolo (Lodovico di Lionardo Buonarroti Simoni), all three will be different, and yet, the Michelagnolo could be the masterpiece created with coal.

The same apply\'s with Loop libraries, give a set to Moby, a set to Crystal Method, and another to some person walking down the street...(you get the picture)...((I\'ve seen bumpers, promo\'s done with nothing but loops as well)).

Perhaps I don\'t get the full picture, and wasn\'t around for the hype so I might be a little unclear to the argument, but for $249.00? Add $50 to a USB controller and you have some sounds that far surpass anything internal (ROM) or VST orchestral (Edirol, etc, etc)..

Just a few thoughts....now to continue reading this thread.

cheers,
/fe

12-18-2003, 02:47 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
Excellent point! Which is why I have to laugh when people get in such a lather over me expressing my opinion. This really isn\'t world shattering stuff here...

To say that VSL\'s legato tool is anyway comparable to GPO\'s is less than an opinion. You might as well say the earth is flat. Ok, little extreme but still.

Ed

robgb

12-18-2003, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by Ed:
To say that VSL\'s legato tool is anyway comparable to GPO\'s is less than an opinion. You might as well say the earth is flat.
Ed, I don\'t believe I ever made that comparison.... images/icons/smile.gif

By the way -- *isn\'t* the earth flat?

filmtvbiz

12-18-2003, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by T Parks:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
Ken, certainly we musicians listen to these things with a more critical ear. I said CLOSE, not the same. And I don\'t think the average listener could tell the difference. I\'d argue that the casual listener often doesn\'t really listen - that\'s probably why. <hr /></blockquote>(grin)...

If your writing clasical, ok, you\'ll be heard on the classic stations, but how many here are classical artists? If you where, you would also be a string, brass, vocalist, percussionist, otherwise, if your writing for film and tv, to some extent, it is the composers job to make sure they are NOT listening but instead be focusing on the scene, emotion, tension, depression, scenary,(exception, the likes of multinational melodic John Williams themes)... otherwise, your not doing your job.

Just a few more pennies...(ie. my few cents)

Bruce A. Richardson

12-18-2003, 03:19 PM

I\'m not the first poster--I have nothing against the sound of GPO. For $250, hell, it sounds like a million bucks. But I have a lot against the false idea that VSL or its equivalents don\'t represent AN EQUAL OR GREATER VALUE.

If you are not experiencing that value, or not comprehending that value, or even not in need of that value--then it doesn\'t exist to you, and that\'s fine. But that is not a blanket truth. I guess that\'s the distinction I\'m hoping to communicate.

robgb

12-18-2003, 03:25 PM

I think -- at least I hope -- we\'re all educated enough to know that there ARE no blanket truths.

As Oscar Wilde said:

It is only about things that do not interest one that one can give a really unbiased opinion, which is no doubt the reason why an unbiased opinion is always valueless.

Damon

12-18-2003, 03:28 PM

I\'ve got an idea......Why don\'t we end this terrible thread and write some music? graemlins/tounge_images/icons/smile.gif

Hasen

12-18-2003, 04:34 PM

And they all lived happily ever after.

The end. images/icons/smile.gif

Nick Phoenix

12-18-2003, 05:15 PM

I, for one, really like the celeste in GPO.
- Gandalf the Wise

Tarkio Road

12-18-2003, 05:42 PM

I agree with Bruce on every point. But I think most here are actually in agreement. Value depends on the user and his intended use for the product. And there are shades of gray.

I don\'t make music for feature films, but I do make music for network (not Discovery) TV drama and documentary promos (but I also have a day gig!) For this work it doesn\'t matter what the average listener thinks. When I finish a piece it has to be \"approved\" by the producer of the program, a network creative director, and usually an agency creative director. They are savvy (hard to work with) folks who have heard sampled orchestras for years. The number one response I get on the outset of a job is \"we don\'t want the track to sound like some guy at a keyboard.\" If they think orchestral-based trailers sound phony, I\'m out of a nice lucrative part-time gig.

I have some of the bigger libraries, and I agree if you don\'t know the tricks, even they can sound like an accordion. But if you know what your doing, a Proteus 2 (yes I still have one!) could never match the big libraries.

But I have bought GPO. I will enjoy playing with it, and I will probably use it in some final mixes. Not all of it, but some of the really nice instruments.

When I called Gary months ago and told him the libraries I already have (including GOS) he told me it never hurts to have more colors for your compositions. I agree. GPO will add some very nice variety to my final mixes. Would I try to use it by itself and expect approval by the picky-a** approval loops I work with, no. But I think GPO is still worth much more than $250.

Tarkio Road

12-18-2003, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
I don\'t know, apparently Jeremy Soule uses GPO. And I don\'t think he\'s doing so bad. images/icons/smile.gif Jeremy Soule, in his interview on Gary\'s web site, said his studio exclusively uses GOS as the only strings in his compositions. Quite a difference.

If this has changed, please provide a link.

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 07:51 PM

... and he uses a lot of live recordings now too!!

Nick Batzdorf

12-18-2003, 09:38 PM

That\'s hilarious, Bela D! Where did you get it?

It\'s exactly what my daughter does when I\'m lecturing her.

Thomas_J

12-18-2003, 10:15 PM

This reminds me of an incident a couple of years ago when I was very much into freestyle skiing. I didn\'t have money to buy good skis, let alone all those pro jackets, pants, gloves, headbands etc. that seemed to be a prerequisite in the downhill.. but it didn\'t matter at all to me, coz no matter how I looked at it I was still having fun, even if I did have a pair of $50 Dynastar skis.

GPO and EWQLSO Silver are two fabulous entry-level orchestral libraries and if I was starting out I would probably get one of them.

The ability to compose great sounding music does not require great sounding samples, and in the end it is the composition that counts.

For people who are doing this for a living, where people are competing for jobs it is absolutely necessary to have all the tools at your disposal in order to be successful.

Thomas

Scott Cairns

12-18-2003, 10:39 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by robgb:
I don\'t know, apparently Jeremy Soule uses GPO. And I don\'t think he\'s doing so bad.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeremy Soule, in his interview on Gary\'s web site, said his studio exclusively uses GOS as the only strings in his compositions. Quite a difference.

If this has changed, please provide a link. Your forgetting that at the time of the interview GPO didnt even exist, either did EWQLSO or even VSL for that matter.

Joanne Babunovic

12-18-2003, 10:44 PM

Nobody can ever say we aren\'t passionate about our samples. images/icons/shocked.gif

Bruce - I actually wrote down and then practiced saying this phrase....

\"(you fill in the blank) is a remarkable, affordable product, which clearly outperforms its price point\".

Great words and so applicable to how so many products position themselves.

robgb

12-18-2003, 11:03 PM

You\'re probably right.

But ask yourself this. And be honest. How many times have you listened to a song and WONDERED if it was real or sampled? Not even WE know all the time.

Simon Ravn

12-18-2003, 11:47 PM

Originally posted by robgb:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
But I have yet to hear any demos from those libraries that sound so much better than GPO that they justify their high price.
Really? OK that says a lot about your listening abilities. <hr /></blockquote>Yeah, it says I listen without my hearing being clouded by elitist buying anxiety....

Notice I didn\'t suggest they DON\'T sound better. Just not ENOUGH to justify the vast difference in price. <hr /></blockquote>OK so let me ask you this. How much better does, say, EWQLSO Gold ($1000) sound than GPO? How much should it cost? $500, $800? C\'mon I really hope composers can hear the difference in sound and \"quality\" (in lack of a better word) between the very cheap GPO and EWQLSO, VSL, SISS, SAM etc. It\'s obvious that GPO can\'t sound as good as those libraries - that hopefully isn\'t the point of the library either. So why even compare? I can\'t see the comparison between having at your disposal 1) GPO or 2) VSL, SISS, SAM and EWQLSO for example. Which would you choose? Sure, if you\'re on a very limited budget and just getting into MIDI and orchestral samples, GPO is a great \"starter library\" - it might also be a good \"sketch\" library, that is just not the way I am working so it won\'t be very useful for me. I don\'t want to do my work twice. But if you\'re a pro and want to make a living doing MIDI orchestral music, the choice should be obvious. And if you\'re going to do that, you\'re not likely to start from scratch and only have $249 at your disposal anyway. So I really belive these libraries are for totally different users. You\'re not gonna score the next LucasArts game with GPO.

WayneSim

12-19-2003, 05:47 AM

Originally posted by Bruce A. Richardson:
I\'m not the first poster--I have nothing against the sound of GPO. For $250, hell, it sounds like a million bucks. But I have a lot against the false idea that VSL or its equivalents don\'t represent AN EQUAL OR GREATER VALUE.

If you are not experiencing that value, or not comprehending that value, or even not in need of that value--then it doesn\'t exist to you, and that\'s fine. But that is not a blanket truth. I guess that\'s the distinction I\'m hoping to communicate. The best statement IMO of this whole debate!!!

EVERY library has its place. Every library has a purpose. Some libraries have a long lifespan, others dont. Each to there own. Not to mention we all like different music.

Everyone has the right to an opinion. However, I think sometimes people get confused by thinking an opinion is a fact.

.....

One thing I must say, in this forum we are getting a lot of what I call \"noob\" posts. I think we need \"stickys\" (threads at the top) which give info to newcommers. Like the history of samples. Why the pros own MANY libraries...etc...ect... I would like to see a brake down of all the libraries. With all the info and NO hype about any of them. JUST FACTS. Like a buyers guide type thing. I think most of us just post the same comments day in day out. (most days I just read, cause 5 poeople have already posted what i am thinking) images/icons/wink.gif images/icons/wink.gif images/icons/wink.gif

SWL

12-19-2003, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:

The ability to compose great sounding music does not require great sounding samples, and in the end it is the composition that counts.

For people who are doing this for a living, where people are competing for jobs it is absolutely necessary to have all the tools at your disposal in order to be successful.

Thomas Absolutely! As it has been said a zillion times ... it is the skills that matter. For instance, take the recent post \'Autonome\' ?? Where the composer only used SI Mini and Dan Dean Brass (certain a few other moderate ranged samples). He did not need the cream of the crop to make a fantastic demo!!!

As for having more tools, i disagree. I believe it is better to have a core set that you know REALLY WELL. And live with that for a while. Having too much can be a problem, organization problems, etc.

SWL

robgb

12-19-2003, 06:35 AM

Originally posted by Tarkio Road:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by robgb:
I don\'t know, apparently Jeremy Soule uses GPO. And I don\'t think he\'s doing so bad. images/icons/smile.gif Jeremy Soule, in his interview on Gary\'s web site, said his studio exclusively uses GOS as the only strings in his compositions. Quite a difference.

If this has changed, please provide a link. <hr /></blockquote>I\'m sure he STILL uses GOS. Why wouldn\'t he?

I can\'t provide you a link. I only know what I was told, that Soule uses GPO as a sketchpad on his laptop. The point being, of course, that it IS useful to pros -- despite what Simon suggested (that only newbies would have use for it).

Anyway, this thread has just about run its course -- and I\'m off to Honolulu for a couple of weeks... See ya.

Thomas_J

12-19-2003, 08:33 AM

SWL, yes having too many tools to choose from can be daunting, BUT that was not entirely my point. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear. It\'s about little things that producers/directors etc. may ask for. Perhaps they\'ve heard some music with a waterphone, for example, that they really love and want in the cue. Perhaps they want horn rips, or a celesta... etc. Having to tell them \"sorry, but I don\'t have these sounds\" could cost you the gig if someone else do. That was my point images/icons/smile.gif

Thomas

SWL

12-19-2003, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by Thomas_J:
SWL, yes having too many tools to choose from can be daunting, BUT that was not entirely my point. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear. It\'s about little things that producers/directors etc. may ask for. Perhaps they\'ve heard some music with a waterphone, for example, that they really love and want in the cue. Perhaps they want horn rips, or a celesta... etc. Having to tell them \"sorry, but I don\'t have these sounds\" could cost you the gig if someone else do. That was my point images/icons/smile.gif

Thomas Ahhhh, i see what you mean, yes you are right. Variety of any and all instruments is absolutely essential. When a client ask for a specific instrument i ALWYAS say yes. Then i purchase it, and find a way to \'hide\' the cost of the samples in the final bill ;-)

I guess my point is, having 200 different Cello Ensemble Sordina patches simply clutters up my menus. I\'ve had funerals for some old sample sets. And i never look back after hitting the delete key.

Hardy Heern

12-21-2003, 04:01 AM

GPO isn\'t the best yet as Gary had to leave room for GPO Pro, GPO Ultra and
GPO Diamond.....

Frank

\"All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream.\" Edgar Alan Poe

RickD

12-21-2003, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by Kenn159:
Quote
....
I challenge anyone to do an honest blindfold test. ...... Sounds like fun !!!

Rick

JonFairhurst

12-26-2003, 12:57 PM

Even with an arsenal of top libraries, I think a GPO or Silver type library has a beneficial role.

I\'ve found it to be wonderful to load a fairly complete GPO template and start playing around. Pretty soon, I\'ve sketched some nice ideas. Next phase: if you\'re doing counterpoint of any complexity, notate it. For notation only a small soundset is needed, since the sounds are only needed for proofing your work. Next it\'s time to perform the piece. Bring out the big guns, if you have them.

The problem with many of the large libraries is that you can\'t load the full orchestra on a single computer. And it can take forever to load them. With a GPO/Silver type solution they load quickly, you can try things out and the sound is good enough for visualizing (auralizing?) the end result.

Of course, one can buy multiple computers, soundcards and sampler licenses to run the heavy artillery concurrently. Or you can spend a few hundred for a sketchpad, and then work the big library a few instruments at a time - all with one or two computers.

Hardy Heern

12-26-2003, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by Tony M:

In short, for me, I\'m a decent composer but, with all the competition, I need ALL the help I can get. So it looks like I\'m gonna save up and get one of the more expensive libraries. Tony, you will notice posts from several other professionals who post here who also have, what shall we say, a very positive view of their ability. You will spot their posts, from around the world, I\'m certain. No doubt, as a decent composer, it won\'t take you long to save up for a top library. Choose well...I don\'t know why you are even considering or remarking on the low $ end libraries with your training.

I, for one, look forward to hearing the work of a self-proclaimed \'decent\' composer. Perhaps we may even concur with your opinion of yourself! images/icons/smile.gif

You may be well advised to remember that the popularity of any composer is decided, at the end of the day, by their audience....who fund the whole business. It is the ears of the \'classically untrained\' audience who will decide your future once you get past the examinations and competitions.

My Grandfather used to say, \"You can take a monkey around the world but it\'s still a monkey when you\'ve finished\", meaning that even classical training relies on the recipient being made of the right stuff. I mean, whatever happened to all those thousands of composers who have flowed out of the universities and conservatories during the last century.? It\'s like the old joke about what does a guy with a degree in Anthropology say? Do you want fries with that!

Frank

Tony M

12-26-2003, 11:40 PM

This is a really interesting thread, despite some of the heated opinions. As for me, I\'m a total beginner in terms of music technology, however I\'m a clasically trained pianist-composer so I think I know a little bit about how recorded classical music should sound.

I find this thread intersting because I\'m about to buy my first orchestral sample library and have been intrigued by the rave reviews of GPO. I\'ve also read the rave review of Advanced Orchestra by Bruce Richardson. Further, I\'ve listened to the samples of VSL, M. Vitous, etc. Simply stated, if I had the money I\'d definitely buy one of the latter two or to a lesser extent AO. The sound is akin to the BPO, NYPO or other top-tier orchestra. GPO is clearly not intended to compete in that stratosphere. I do think some on this site (with good intentions) are a bit over-zealous in its praise however. On first hearing, any trained ear can hear the difference but that is not a negative point for GPO since again, I don\'t think it was intended to compete on that level.

Someone said it\'s not necessary to have the most expensive samples to work with since the composition itself will shine through. This is not quite true. Hearing a Mozart symphony performed by the local community orchestra will probably not sound the same as performed by BPO/Karajan. Still, it\'s the same work, the same notes. The instrumentalists\' technical level, the recording location and technique, even the instruments themselves are on a totally different level.

In short, for me, I\'m a decent composer but, with all the competition, I need ALL the help I can get. So it looks like I\'m gonna save up and get one of the more expensive libraries.