Do you use Woodwinds Sections? [Archive]

View Full Version : Do you use Woodwinds Sections?

aLfR3dd

03-14-2007, 03:29 PM

Just wondering if you use Woodwinds sections or just load a single wind instrument and use it for both (when it's for solo parts and in un unison with another)! thanks

nikolas

03-14-2007, 03:32 PM

Unless very sloppy I always use solo (usually I have flutes play 2 different voices at some parts, os it would end up a little huge to have sections...)

but for fast unison, sections are not THAT bad...

davecos

03-14-2007, 03:33 PM

Just wondering if you use Woodwinds sections or just load a single wind instrument and use it for both (when it's for solo parts and in un unison with another)! thanks

Just recently I used a combi patch in HALion Symphony Orchestra that sub-divided bassoon, clarinet, oboe and flute along the range of the keyboard. It was kind of fun to play this way as I came up with pointillistic lines. Also, the wind voicing was interesting to do in this manner. Normally I use separate patches though. I wouldn't use layered wind groups though. I don't like that generic sound. I like to do my own arranging of winds when it comes to unison doubling.

aLfR3dd

03-14-2007, 03:51 PM

Just recently I used a combi patch in HALion Symphony Orchestra that sub-divided bassoon, clarinet, oboe and flute along the range of the keyboard. It was kind of fun to play this way as I came up with pointillistic lines. Also, the wind voicing was interesting to do in this manner. Normally I use separate patches though. I wouldn't use layered wind groups though. I don't like that generic sound. I like to do my own arranging of winds when it comes to unison doubling.

very nice idea to have a divided keyboard for the 2 wind instruments!!!*()

Steve_Karl

03-14-2007, 03:53 PM

I always use solo wwinds.

JonFairhurst

03-14-2007, 04:17 PM

Woodwind sections in unison have a different sound than solos. It's not so much louder as smoother.

If you're mocking up Mahler or Holst, you will want some sections - sometimes together, and sometimes divisi. If you use woodwinds as a character instrument, you typically want solos.

With the Westgate sections, I recommend playing in two lines: solo and ensemble together. (If exposed, anyway) The reason is that sampled sections make the note transitions too perfect, so it sounds like one instrument. By layering solo and ensemble with different performances (or, at least, slide the timing a bit) you will then hear multiple players with the ensemble sound.

Whether or not you want a unison sound depends on your style. They're great for big orchestrations, and not necessarily needed otherwise.

nikolas

03-14-2007, 04:48 PM

Prince:

The idea is that if you have 3 flute patches, all 3 flutes are different ones.

mixing solo flutes from the same library you end up with a weird sound that doesn't sound at all like a section. You need to use different articulations all the time, or even better differnet library and mess with it... So unison lines with 2-3 flutes can be kinda tight to accomplish...

What libraries do not have 2nd violins? I know that EW, VLS, Kirk have... (GPO? I really think it does as well)

Tomdini

03-14-2007, 05:29 PM

VSL doesn't have a second violins section, actually.

With the one and only violin section, a bit of EQ and reverb tweaking, combined with a good stereo modeller to crunch the image down, and some accurate panning... you can fake the second violin section sound.

A colleague of mine layers SISS with VSL to create a lusher, bigger-sounding first violin section, then uses the VSL violin section as is for the smaller-sounding second violins. Sounded good to me.

I think most everybody else has a sampled second violin section, though.

-Tom

P.S. On topic - nope, never used a woodwind section, only solo's, though the sectional woodwinds in EWQLSO sound kinda crappy. Guess I could make some sections with GPO if I had to (which would probably sound fine).

Haydn

03-14-2007, 05:54 PM

I could never understand why VSL doesn't have separate 2nd violins with 12 players to match the other sections. It's one of the reasons I haven't purchased their libraries.

I never use woodwind section patches. It's very rare to see 3 of any woodwind instrument play unisons. Many times these instruments will play either chords or in octaves.

Jim

AlexDavis

03-14-2007, 06:13 PM

Hey group,

So here is my argument for the use of ensemble woodwind patches....

I like to combine my solo and ensemble woodwind instruments, so that I can crossfade between them as neededusing the modwheel. Obviously it's best to use a solo patch when building chords, but for unison lines, I usually opt for the section sound. It's a pretty big color difference from solo --> ensemble, and it's usually easier to use the ens. patch rather than messing with separate solo patches. (it is for me at least)

Here is the sound difference in case you're curious:

1 Clarinet vs. 3 Clarinets STACCATO (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/CL-STAC.mp3)
1 Clarinet vs. 3 Clarinets LEGATO (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/CL-LEG.mp3)

There is something especially mellow about the sound of 3 clarinets playing in unison. It has a completely different feel than just a solo.

1 Flute vs. 3 Flutes STACCATO (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/FL-STAC.mp3)
1 Flute vs. 3 Flutes LEGATO (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/FL-LEG.mp3)

Isn't that group of flutes so much more velvety?

Another good reason to have woodwind ens. patches is for thicker, more resonant trills:

1 Clarinet vs. 3 Clarinets TRILL (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/CL-TRILL.mp3)
1 Flute vs. 3 Flutes TRILL (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/FL-TRILL.mp3)

And finally, here is how I use these concepts in the real world:

Ex. 1 (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/StarWars-Spoof.mp3) - I spoof John Williams at least once every episode :-)
Ex. 2 (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/Cute-Example.mp3) - Those groups of flutes and clarinets really give this cue something extra!
Ex. 3 (http://www.alexdavismusic.com/Ex3.mp3) - The Staccato Bassoon section is nice and thick here. Much more effective than solo bassoon.

There is another reason to use an ensemble patch over a solo one: to cover up weak samples. I find that solo patches are much more difficult than ens. patches to render life-like.

OK, I spent way too long preparing that. Time to get back to work!

-Alex

germancomponist

03-14-2007, 06:15 PM

germancomponist

03-14-2007, 08:55 PM

You misunderstood me. I said the libraries SHOULD record all 3 of the different flutes they are using in the 3 flute patch separately and then you have 3 different solo flutes. Just like in GPO you have 2 totally different solo french horns, 2 totally different solo bassoon, 3 totally different solo violins, etc. Though Gary does also take those true solo patches and creates what he calls player instruments which are 3 "solo players" created from one solo instrument. While 3 solo instruments made up of the same player on the same instrument isn't perfect, I still find it much better than a 3 player sample. Specially cause each player is attacking at a slightly different time with a slightly different volume (the phasing problems from using the same sample at the same time is already taken care of by reassigning patches).

My idea of using for example the solo flute from a library that only HAS one solo flute and creating 3 "players" from it by streatching the samples was just a stopgap method, not my preferred one of having the library come with the required instruments. I mean how may orchestra's only have single winds?

Maybe this explains myself better.

Tom

Hi Tom,

for that, I use an old midi trick *()

I copy a track where I have recorded a solo instrument. For the new track I open a new player, for example a Garritan GPO, and than, I detune the player -5 and than transpose this new track to +5 .... . . So, I hear 2 very different sounds, and if I use some equalizer and delay, , it gives a very interesting result *()

Best regards

AlexDavis

03-14-2007, 09:19 PM

Dear Prince,

Are you unconvinced by the examples from my previous post? I understand the concept of recording each player separately, but I'd like to hear the difference in sound... I'd love to hear a sample!

While it seems like a hefty process to go through, I guess it would be worth the effort if it sounded good--

Chris Stone of Audio Impressions is developing a library based on the same concept, but we're yet to hear a demo out of it. I hope to hear one soon!

-Alex

Von Richter

03-14-2007, 11:14 PM

3 solo woodwinds faking a section do not sound any more convincing than 3 solo trumpets faking a section to my ears.

Of course, many orchestrations do not use many unisons in the winds. It's best used for color purposes. It could be easily abused, like any unison.

I know a lot of woodwind players who do not much enjoy playing most Mahler(for example) because he constantly stacks up all the winds in unison in an attempt to create another loud contrapuntal line. Players usually tell me they are "boring" to play. I think that's a bit ridiculous... at least they aren't part of the string section! But I guess the woodwinds are spoiled by getting all the juicy solos. ;-)

Certain unison wind sounds are really juicy. I like the low clarinet a3, especially staccato, really cool sound. Also check out unison clarinet swells. Neat stuff... heck with it, orchestras should just get a whole big section of clarinets like a band. The measley 3 is not enough! But if I had to be picky, I want at least 3 clarinet, 2 bass clarinets, and one contrabass clarinet. Standard instrumentation is just that: standard. And it sucks. MORE CLARINETS DARN IT!

There is also a nice velvety "ring" to flute a3 (look for masterful examples of it's use in certain Tchaikovsky passages)

Whenever wind unisons come up when talking with players, someone inevitably mentions Mahler. But they can be used in entirely different ways and far more tastefully, and really the Mahler unisons are more of a model of what NOT to do than an ideal to emulate. I love Mahler, don't get me wrong, but he's often trying to make strings and winds compete with a huge brass section, and any "color" orchestration goes right out the window in favor of volume. Sure, he's got, say, winds in fours, but all he does is have them all play the same note with all the other winds, ending up with what I call the "mud" timbre.

Steve_Karl

03-15-2007, 02:53 AM

Tomke

03-15-2007, 03:15 AM

I use solo instruments, with the exception unison or zu 2 passages, where I use section samples. Using section samples otherwise means I get this build-up, where it sounds as 9 clarinets or something. That's not theory to me; you can hear it very well.

aLfR3dd

03-15-2007, 01:23 PM

btw guys which do you think sounds better between two solo instruments (in 2 different midi channels) that play the same note or a a2 patch????

jc5

03-15-2007, 01:26 PM

Triple woodwind unison patches are a bizarre thing in my view - who actually writes extensive parts for three identical woodwinds playing in unison? Double woodwinds makes more sense, in most triple wind orchestrations the third is usually a variant instrument anyhow. Simply having different solo instruments to mix together works rather decently and allows for greater freedom. If your different sample sets are of different character, having them all at once even increases the expressive possibilities if all used to their strengths.

AlexDavis

03-15-2007, 02:50 PM

Hey Prince,

I see now that we're talking about two different things-- still I'd love to hear those demos when you get a chance! The technique that you mentioned earlier sounds very interesting.

-A

AlexDavis

03-15-2007, 02:52 PM

Nice examples Alex ... I'm re-thinking my strategy for the next piece already.

Thanks,

I'm glad they helped! I realize what I'm talking about is more of an orchestration issue-- however, I'm still an advocate of woodwind ensemble patches, primarily when I'm writing a unison melody.

-A

Garritan

03-15-2007, 03:14 PM

When you are making ensembles from individual instruments there are some things to keep in mind:

It is important to vary the solo instruments. If you use the same midi file across several solo patches, you'll have identical start times, the same dynamic, same legato, same bends and all be seated in the same chair. It will sound like its marching in goosestep and not sound very good at all. This will just yield a thick or chorused flute and not an ensemble performance.

When ensemble building, variability is key. And remember to breathe. With ensembles, individuals can only start, breathe or bow change at the same time and there's only one way to play it - with individual players they can vary.

The key to good ensemble building is to play each instrument individually, have individual dynamic variation and be panned in the right position. Playing a separate performance for each will give you that variability and yield the best results.

Robert took the flute legato line example and did a quick and dirty mock-up:

http://www.garritan.com/mp3/flute-ensemble.mp3

Here is a tutorial on ensemble building from solo instruments:
http://www.garritan.com/tutorial/StringEnsembleBuildingTutorial.html

Although this tutorial focuses on strings, it gives some pointers on how to make convincing ensembles from individual players.

Gary Garritan

germancomponist

03-15-2007, 03:33 PM

Yes,

what Gary says is the overbest way to sound realistically.

My miditrick with copying tracks and after +transposing the notes and -transposing the player and delaying and equalizing the tracks..., puhhh;) , that gives a good result but many ways different from that what Gary says.

I use my trick most when I have to compose musik for the radiostations, when it have to be finished yesturday:wow: , .....and that is unfortunately nearly always like that. *()

aLfR3dd

03-15-2007, 03:35 PM

When you are making ensembles from individual instruments there are some things to keep in mind:

It is important to vary the solo instruments. If you use the same midi file across several solo patches, you'll have identical start times, the same dynamic, same legato, same bends and all be seated in the same chair. It will sound like its marching in goosestep and not sound very good at all. This will just yield a thick or chorused flute and not an ensemble performance.

When ensemble building, variability is key. And remember to breathe. With ensembles, individuals can only start, breathe or bow change at the same time and there's only one way to play it - with individual players they can vary.

The key to good ensemble building is to play each instrument individually, have individual dynamic variation and be panned in the right position. Playing a separate performance for each will give you that variability and yield the best results.

Robert took your flute legato line and did a quick and dirty mock-up:

http://www.garritan.com/mp3/flute-ensemble.mp3

Here is a tutorial on ensemble building from solo instruments:
http://www.garritan.com/tutorial/StringEnsembleBuildingTutorial.html

Although this tutorial focuses on strings, it gives some pointers on how to make convincing ensembles from individual players.

Gary Garritan

THanks Gary...is this possible for every Woodwinds library ?? it would be great...or someone maybe can explain a method that can be used for every library!

Von Richter

03-15-2007, 03:59 PM

Triple woodwind unison patches are a bizarre thing in my view - who actually writes extensive parts for three identical woodwinds playing in unison?

Mahler, Shostakovich, etc. Maybe not "extensive", but not uncommon.

In my opinion people should be sampling solo, a2, a3 and a4 for all brass and woodwinds, and solo, 1 desk, 3 players (think about the 3 cellos on the intro of Petrouchka... 2 or 10 doesnt work, 3 has a special sound)), div a4, div a3, div a2, and unis for string sections. All of these combinations have distinct timbres in real life. Hard to believe such a basic aspect of orchestration is ignored by almost all sample sets. :wow:

germancomponist

03-15-2007, 06:02 PM

As with anything having to do with music - do what suits the need. For example, I find that I use ensemble patches some of the time and while that not might fit into the "traditional wisdom" (another oximoron?) - it makes for decent sketches and sometimes achieves the effect that building by sections or solo instruments just doesn't get.

Remember - music theory and orchestration are merely statements of what has been done before - a good place to start from - but sometimes you have to break rules - especially when you need "to go where no one has gone before ..."

Sometimes you WANT that monotonistic unison wind! Sometimes you don't. sometimes you want that full chord - sometimes you want the melancholy or bizarre open chord. Sometimes you just "have to" have dissonance. Sometimes you need that alto sax sitting in the winds. Sometimes you need running parallel fifths. Sometimes you need to double the choir. Sometimes you need to morph the English Horn into the string sound instead of having it stand out distinctly. And so on and so forth!

If all composers had stayed the course in their works - then we would all still be writing in Gregorian Chant or Baroque styles.

If your music is to be original then expect to break some rules. All that counts is how it sounds in the end. Do what works. No need to make "science" out of it. (Now - THAT would be REALLY BORING!)

Stephen,

I agree with you: "If your music is to be original then expect to break some rules"... .

But, I think, this is not the topic here in this thread. The people here asked for more realistic sounding that near comes like an real-orchestra.

Best regards

germancomponist

03-15-2007, 07:25 PM

The fact is: if you record your tracks as Gary said, then you get a result of nearly sounding like a real orchestra.

Stephen, I know what you mean... :)

Von Richter

03-15-2007, 09:57 PM

As to the comments about recording each instrument with one, two, three, four, twelve instruments at one time, wouldn't it just be MUCH easier to record each of the instruments solo and then just use as many playing as you need at once.
Tom

Depends on how true to life you want it to sound. I'm not convinced that layering 3 solo trumpet samples sounds anything like what happens when 3 trumpets play a line in unison in real life. Good luck beating the project sam brass (section samples) with a handful of solo instruments... I will believe it when I hear it.

Obviously it doesn't matter for normal harmony doublings where occasionally lines are unison for a note or two. That's an entirely different ball of wax.;)

Nickie Fønshauge

03-16-2007, 05:08 AM

wouldn't it just be MUCH easier to record each of the instruments solo and then just use as many playing as you need at once. This seems to be the direction that new company (AI is it?) is taking where you can specify how the divisi works in your strings. So if a 1st violin line splits into 2 parts, only half of the first violins play each note.
Sure it is theway to go - IF you have enough computers to run it. It is a very CPU intensive approach.

JonFairhurst

03-16-2007, 03:34 PM

As I see it this is how it stands:

* Ensemble patches can have a great ensemble sound, but the note transitions are always together. I like layering multiple instruments to help blur the edges. If the ensemble isn't exposed (say a group of flutes in a large orchestration, rather than a horn fanfare), a patch is fine - and takes less time and energy than multiple solos.

* Solo patches don't work together as an ensemble, unless you have slightly different recordings to work with. If it's the same guy/instrument, it's not varied enough. If it's the same sample, you get phase problems.

* Solo patches do work together if you have recorded different soloists with similar recording techniques. The remaining issue is if they blend naturally. If the samples are fairly dry, and you use slightly different impulses (say, different seats in GigaPulse), then you can get an excellent result. But it is more work than an out-of-the-box ensemble patch.

And don't cut and paste your MIDI to get multiple voices out of solo patches. Play 'em in one at a time.

Tomke

03-16-2007, 04:17 PM

Dan Dean has a wonderful feature on some of his woods and brass: modwheel crossfade switch between solo and ensemble timbre. I made up most of my own samples and patches according that great idea. I don't have to load multiple sample sets for solo and ensemble respectively no more. Makes perfect sense if you're into printing the score out directly after mockup, as I am.

And as for sequencing section "misstakes" to make it more real ... usually you overdo those kinds of things. You have to be very subtle indeed. The mistakes that you can create with MIDI will be pretty far from the subtle 'flaws' that many musicians create. Not having any mistakes at all (strict quantisized / strict in tune), will often sound more pleasing to the ear than 'unnatural' variations to avoid the static effects. Such variations will catch the ears of anyone, much more than the static thing. It just sounds strange. In a full orchestra setting it might work if used sparsely, but otherwise I stay away from it.

JonFairhurst

03-16-2007, 04:54 PM

The mistakes that you can create with MIDI will be pretty far from the subtle 'flaws' that many musicians create. Very true.

For me, perfect timing at the edges is deadly. I really need to hear multiple transition times to hear multiple players.

And, yes, it must be subtle. Good players play "almost" in time with one another.

Personally, I used to like the perfection of quantization, but over time I find it more and more annoying. One of the methods that I use is I play a line in by hand, and I look for the peak timing errors. I might correct them a small amount, but I leave some error. The next step is to make sure that the notes before and after slowly lead into and away from the error.

Real musicians drift in and out of time. A good musician does this smoothly. (So I try to cycle in and out of time.) Poor musicians change their timing abruptly, making some notes sound jarringly early or late.

So, yes, it's absolutely true that the errors must be subtle (unless buried in a mix).

jc5

03-16-2007, 07:21 PM

Mahler, Shostakovich, etc. Maybe not "extensive", but not uncommon.

In my opinion people should be sampling solo, a2, a3 and a4 for all brass and woodwinds, and solo, 1 desk, 3 players (think about the 3 cellos on the intro of Petrouchka... 2 or 10 doesnt work, 3 has a special sound)), div a4, div a3, div a2, and unis for string sections. All of these combinations have distinct timbres in real life. Hard to believe such a basic aspect of orchestration is ignored by almost all sample sets. :wow:

Far from extensive if my memory serves me correctly ;)
Its the same case as with the horns - a Mahler symphony might call for eight horns, but the vast bulk of the symphony's hour plus length will be done with those horns divided a due to get chordal or contrapuntal possibilities. Passages big mega eight horn unisons will be rare or sometimes non existant (ie. always favouring at least a divisi into two 4 horn parts) - there might be a dozen bars out of hundreds that call for this.

I certainly agree about sampling different section sizes - the thing that irks me the most is the almost universal omission of the a due section - only by far the most commonly required and orchestrationally useful number. :D :samurai:

Von Richter

03-16-2007, 08:59 PM

I certainly agree about sampling different section sizes - the thing that irks me the most is the almost universal omission of the a due section - only by far the most commonly required and orchestrationally useful number. :D :samurai:

Onward we go with more devil's advocate from VR!
(With a heaping helping of digression)

... yes at the very least the a2 would be nice to have sampled. I don't personally use a2 in the woodwinds very often (not even incidental brief notes, because I rarely use traditional harmony or voice leading in serious works, and the situation never arises), but I use it all the time in the brass, where the effect is very noticeably different than 3 or more.

What I want is beyond that... I want a selection of DIFFERENT instruments in unison sampled. I am not going to do a convincing chamber brass mockup (except in a very by-the-number traditional style, and maybe slow moody stuff... it falls apart in fanfares) without these. Heck, even sampled octaves between a bone and a trumpet wouldn't go amiss. Sorry but two samples an octave apart does not sound like the two instruments actually playing it. I'll get back to that in a minute...

In big orchestrations, you can hide all the details in verb etc and it may not matter so much. But trying to mockup chamber pieces will really expose the weakness of samples, or even overdubbing of a live player in a studio. Let's look at this closer.

Two people playing at once will make amazingly subtle intonation adjustements to each other, contributing heavily to that special "boingy" ring you get from mutiple brass. I've recorded a decent amount of brass players for songs and I've found that overdubbing the other part in unison or octave never sounds anywhere near as good as having both players do it together. The "beats" between the harmonics inevitably end up different. This is without even taking into account the acoustic effects of having two players in one space. Maybe I am overly sensitive to this but it's plain as day to me and drives me nuts when the brass are not "rubbery" like they are supposed to be.

The argument that layering different solo instruments to get "messiness" between notes is a good idea in moderation but try listening to an actual unison for perspective. What happens to my ears is that the multiple players become ONE player, with very, very little "messiness". Good players become EXTREMELY good at this. Especially if they play with the same personnel in a section for a long time. Say you write a standard blended color, say flute and oboe in unison. It's supposed to (ideally) become one sound, and imperfections just betray the trick. But jeeze, when it works, it sounds really great.

Actually while I am on the subject, this is for me one of the big failings of traditional orchestration... it relies so heavily on difficult-to-hear thick voicings. They are much harder to play in tune than more modern methods. Then you have the typical overlappings and unisons of the voices between the instruments in the stack... I'm not sure the effect is even worth it except in halls with very special acoustics and top pro players. More often in the real world of second tier orchestras, intonation difficulties crop up, while the more modern works in the programme come out with superb intonation. Just my personal observations.

Of course, you guys are talking about REALLY subtle variations, which are definetely good for realism! Heck, so are fake screwups! But we want to simulate good players right? ;) Anyway what we need is to model the actual acoustic interactions between the instruments in live spaces! Wouldn't it be great to have the sound character *truly* change magically to a realistic ensemble sound? How about modelling what PLAYERS do when playing in ensembles? Heck yes, let's model intonation based on the harmonic content while we are at it... forced equal temperement is the fakest part of sampled orchestrations. I've never heard a live ensemble play in strict equal temperment (ok ok, maybe a 5 piano ensemble or something, but even there you have stretch tuning). Players/singers actually make large intonation changes based on the harmony, the melodic direction, heck even the way you write the accidental's has a subconcious effect (as anyone who has ever written extensively for amateur voice ensembles knows all too well)

OK... catch my breath for a second...

At the end of the day, who cares about sample realism, just make good music :D the square waves from the 8-bit NES circa 1986 didn't stop the original Metroid soundtrack by Hip Tanaka from being a masterpiece! ;)

AlexDavis

03-17-2007, 12:26 AM

At the end of the day, who cares about sample realism, just make good music :D the square waves from the 8-bit NES circa 1986 didn't stop the original Metroid soundtrack by Hip Tanaka from being a masterpiece! ;)

Amen, brother. Those were definitely the good 'ol days.

But seriously, lets hear some woodwind samples from those who use ens. patches, and those who combine solo patches. That'd be a lot more effective than simply talking about what works best!

And it would be a great way for me to keep procrastinating over here. :-)

-Alex

Von Richter

03-17-2007, 03:51 AM

At the end of the day, use what works for you! All approaches are legit! I am personally looking for a realistic skinflute ensemble sample. :wow:

AlexDavis

03-17-2007, 10:13 AM

Dear Prince,

I absolutely see the advantages to your approach. Now I'm wondering how VSL solo CL would sound alongside Westgate and GPO... hmmmmm.

What an ensemble that would be!

-Alex