A lesson learned about demos and buying sample libraries.

[MChilds]

http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/frown.gif

I bought the Quantum Leap Brass set about a month ago, and what a disappointment!. I have all the well-known libraries, and have found that I simply can\'t use almost anything in this QLB library at all. It seems so haphazard and un-thought out. Just a few examples: there is no simple sustained trombone section, but there are two odd slide effects I can\'t imagine anyone ever being able to use. It has ff samples that just won\'t mix with anything at all, a completely useless \"Bari sax runup in 4ths\" sample but hardly any complementary basic samples to use with it. I could understand (and appreciate) having this sort of odd effect if the library has the basics covered. But not here. It\'s kind of like having the AO effect-y stuff without the basic samples to couch them in. Anyway, a very immature library at a hyped price.

An amusing tip-off: The creator of the library uses such useful pragmatic sample descriptions as \"Awesome...!\" and \"Excellent...!\".

I recognize some of the samples could be useful given just the right occasion, but really precious few, and so many of the samples end up just amounting to dead space on your hard drive. Given the costs involved in buying these libraries, that\'s not a pleasant experience.

I made a big mistake in buying the QLB library mainly on faith. In retrospect, I should have listened to many more demos and done more careful research. I would encourage all of you who are considering a library not to pay very much attention to the hype on this forum (so much of it comes from the sample creators themselves), certainly -don\'t- buy any of these very expensive libraries on faith, and be sure to do your own thoughtful research. If at all possible, find a friend or colleague who has the library you\'re interested in and listen to all the sounds it provides, as well as whatever functionality it includes that may be useful to you.

As for me, I believe it makes eminent sense not to throw money blindly at pre-orders for Gigastrings, or any of these other overhyped and very costly products, with being very sure that what you\'re getting will be useful to you.

[tomhartman]

I bought Quantum Leap and received it yesterday. Though the audio quality was good, and I\'m using it for a spot I\'m doing, I too was dissapointed. I had heard such great things.

The playablilty of the patches on the Roland 5080 is unbelievably bad. For instance, there is a patch of trumpet falls...one short, one long. If you hit the key ever so lightly, you get the quick fall..the one most folks would use most often. Hit the key normally hard, and you get this slow fall I might use once a century. So you hit the key easily, hear the one you want, and then have to play with the levels as you record. What a pain. Why not two separate patches? How on earth was this rationalized? Nick, are you out there?

There are more examples but you get the idea. For 600.00, I wouldn\'t suggest it to anyone. For 300.00 perhaps.

That\'s why even going by raves from folks up here, you can\'t be too sure. You have to try out different libraries, but in reality, you can\'t try any of them. Stores sure don\'t stock them. So it\'s a crapshoot. A very expensive crapshoot. Libraries costing this much should offer a few representative patches for a small fee to serious guys to try out before sinking hard earned cash into them. Gary\'s library will be a fortune, and after thinking about it, I\'m going to pass on investing until a way is figured out to try these things before buying. I wouldn\'t buy a computer, or a guitar, or a software program, or speakers, or a mike, or a converter, or anything else in my studio without using it first. It will be up to the guys selling this stuff to figure out whether it\'s worth it to them to allow this kind of thing. But if not, here are two sales already lost.

I\'m 600.00 down now from this library, and not pleased a bit.

[This message has been edited by tomhartman (edited 08-04-2001).]

[This message has been edited by tomhartman (edited 08-04-2001).]

[IOComposer]

Please be careful with your posts here. These libraries are created by real people with real feelings and a lot of hard work. You throw around these insults so wildly without any concern with who they affect. Nick happens to be a great sample library developer and up till now, there\'s nothing else out there as far as brass goes that\'s even close to QLB. Nick frequents this board a lot and I cringe at him reading these posts because I know what it feels like to have your hard work thrashed (actually, after 10 years as a professional composer, I know it real well http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
Not to discount your claims as they may be valid, however have a scrap of human decency and tact.
-J

[apessino]

>>
That\'s why even going by raves from folks up here, you can\'t be too sure.
<<

That\'s because the \"folks\" contributing to these forums are nowhere near the level of sophistication and musical craftsmanship that the two of you seem to possess.

See, for us the Quantum Leap Brass is one of the BEST libraries out there! Believe it or not, we find it highly usable, and a bargain too! How pathetic are we?

It\'s all a question of levels: what is \"below satisfaction level\' for musicians the likes of you, is \"above excitement level\" for the little people like many of us here.

And we LOVE those new incredible strings coming from Gary and his team. We really do, because we realize that it\'s amazing that we can even approach this level of quality, considering just a few years (months?) back we were stuck trying to emulate an orchestra using 2Mb looped out-of-tune samples from eastern Europe.

Giga changed all of that, and now we get Stradivarii violins recorded at Lincoln Center (small stuff, I know, nothing that would impress you). Gary, Tom, Nick, Dan, Donnie and a few others are putting out products which get us seriously excited about the possibilities, and excited we get, and we come here and share our excitement.

Another thing we do is to try to offer criticism without insulting those whose work we appreciate so much. I can\'t speak for everyone, but at times I feel real gratitude towards these guys, because I know that my ability to express my ideas is greatly enhanced by the work they have done.

Creating sample libraries is: expensive, difficult, time consuming and rarely profitable. Do you honestly believe these guys could have any kind of business selling their products for even less than they are now? How much do they have to put into a library, and how many copies do you think they end up selling?

Most of the people here realize and appreciate the above facts, and act accordingly. Try putting together a few samples yourself, it could be an illuminating experience, and maybe it will change your perspective towards the whole thing.

There is a real sense of epiphany and discovery going on in these forums, and most of the time a genuinely positive vibe. Something the two of you seem to be bent on changing.

We also enjoy keeping a positive dialog and a meaningful conversation with those that try to advance the state of the art in sampled instruments, and we\'d like to keep it that way.

The suggestion that the sample creators are somehow fueling a kind of hype machine in order to lure unsuspecting musicians into buying their overpriced offerings is, well, highly insulting and indicates a mind numbing lack of respect for the community which was built around these forums.

Given the level of your expectations, I would guess you\'ll never be satisfied with the products discussed here. So the question really is: why even bother? Isn\'t there a place somewhere where those that know better like yourselves hang out?

Such place _must_ surely exist, and when you find it and go there, we will miss you terribly.

A-

[qwerbilzak]

Agreed. This is not a useful library.

Regarding your comments about reviewing libraries before purchase, I would suggest the following:

Having had the good fortune to have a successful film career, I am now in the position to be able to have a number of talented composers working for/with me on my projects. When a new library comes out, we are generally given a trial copy and schedule permitting, I have each of them write a short piece of music incorporating as many of the samples on the library as they can. It is a good exercise for them, and I am able by listening to the results to get a very good idea of what the library contains.

Here, on this forum, you all have the good fortune of having each other. Many of you own these libraries, and I would encourage you to do the same exercise and share the results. You must remember that it is natural for the library creator\'s demo to be biased toward the positive elements, but that if those of you who find fault are able to demonstrate it through composition and publication of your work, everyone will benefit.

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IOComposer:
Please be careful with your posts here. These libraries are created by real people with real feelings and a lot of hard work. You throw around these insults so wildly without any concern with who they affect. Nick happens to be a great sample library developer and up till now, there\'s nothing else out there as far as brass goes that\'s even close to QLB. Nick frequents this board a lot and I cringe at him reading these posts because I know what it feels like to have your hard work thrashed (actually, after 10 years as a professional composer, I know it real well http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
Not to discount your claims as they may be valid, however have a scrap of human decency and tact.
-J<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don\'t think it\'s a matter of decency. There\'s no doubt Nick did a tremendous job recording the stuff, but when you are asking people to buy something that costs this much, with no way to try it out, then the cards will fall as they may. There have been many compliments about this library, so Nick is hardly getting trashed.

This is honest feedback from real people that put real dollars down. In my case, it helped me get through a session that would have cost me money to hire guys live. It is not as convincing as those guys would have been, but as you say, better than anything else out there.

Directors spend months and months working on a film too, but in the end they will always be reviews... good and bad. Nothing personal is meant by it.

If my tone was at all insulting, I apologize.

[Simon Ravn]

Not useful???? I beg to differ... While I only use the orchestrally minded patches in the library, I try these patches first when I add brass to my compositions. The 3tp pathces, the 3bones (staccato and sus/mod wheel filtered), the bass bones and the tuba are all very nice brass, and something I don\'t find as good in AO or Miroslav. For the french horns, they\'re still not \'quite there\' for me, but doubling them with the trombones and/or french horns from AO can give some pretty decent results. I\'d give the library 4 stars of 5. Of course I am now much more interested in the upcoming QLB 2: Orchestral. I hope Nick will do 6 or 8 fh ensemble samples in NUMEROUS articulations ranging for fffffffff to pp. Hopefully this will give us \'that\' Hollywood sound!

[tomhartman]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by apessino:
[B]>>
That\'s why even going by raves from folks up here, you can\'t be too sure.
<<

\"That\'s because the \"folks\" contributing to these forums are nowhere near the level of sophistication and musical craftsmanship that the two of you seem to possess.\"

There\'s no need to be condescending. The truth is, I\'ve heard a lot of folks rave about things and I didn\'t think they were that good. I believe my opinion on any sample library is as valid as anyones...I\'ve been arranging and composing....using the real thing...and samples....for many years. So there\'s no need to cop an attitude because some of our opinion\'s differ from yours.

\"See, for us the Quantum Leap Brass is one of the BEST libraries out there! Believe it or not, we find it highly usable, and a bargain too! How pathetic are we?\"

It may very well be one of the best out there. I haven\'t gotten to play with AO or Miroslav, not being independently wealthy. But being the best out there has nothing to do with what I and others have said.


I\"t\'s all a question of levels: what is \"below satisfaction level\' for musicians the likes of you, is \"above excitement level\" for the little people like many of us here.\"

You may be right, although again, you are being condescending.

\"And we LOVE those new incredible strings coming from Gary and his team. We really do, because we realize that it\'s amazing that we can even approach this level of quality, considering just a few years (months?) back we were stuck trying to emulate an orchestra using 2Mb looped out-of-tune samples from eastern Europe.\"

I may love Gary\'s too. I can\'t tell from what I\'ve heard so far.


\"Giga changed all of that, and now we get Stradivarii violins recorded at Lincoln Center (small stuff, I know, nothing that would impress you). Gary, Tom, Nick, Dan, Donnie and a few others are putting out products which get us seriously excited about the possibilities, and excited we get, and we come here and share our excitement.\"

Yep, and I\'m with you. When it\'s exciting.

\"Another thing we do is to try to offer criticism without insulting those whose work we appreciate so much. I can\'t speak for everyone, but at times I feel real gratitude towards these guys, because I know that my ability to express my ideas is greatly enhanced by the work they have done.\"

Absolutely agree with you there.

\"Creating sample libraries is: expensive, difficult, time consuming and rarely profitable. Do you honestly believe these guys could have any kind of business selling their products for even less than they are now? How much do they have to put into a library, and how many copies do you think they end up selling?\"

Have no idea. This was their choice. I know a library that cost 1000.00 and sells 1000 copies equals a million, so who knows. I know it\'s a tough and expensive venture, and somehow, none of these guys get rich.

\"Most of the people here realize and appreciate the above facts, and act accordingly. Try putting together a few samples yourself, it could be an illuminating experience, and maybe it will change your perspective towards the whole thing.\"

Oh I have and I don\'t envy them. But that\'s like saying if I don\'t like a car, I should go build one. A bit simplistic. You\'re basically saying \"if you want to be respected up here, you better agree with us,\" which is pretty silly. We are all looking for the same thing. Some find it more easily than others. Sorry if I offended you.

\"There is a real sense of epiphany and discovery going on in these forums, and most of the time a genuinely positive vibe. Something the two of you seem to be bent on changing.\"

Nonsense. There is a real need for honesty among those of us who do this for a living and need the best of the best, and are expected to pay large amounts for something we can\'t try out. Honest criticism has always been welcomed in democratic arenas...which I hope this board endorses.

\"We also enjoy keeping a positive dialog and a meaningful conversation with those that try to advance the state of the art in sampled instruments, and we\'d like to keep it that way.\"

Are you speaking for the collective masses now? Really, this is very pretentious.

\"The suggestion that the sample creators are somehow fueling a kind of hype machine in order to lure unsuspecting musicians into buying their overpriced offerings is, well, highly insulting and indicates a mind numbing lack of respect for the community which was built around these forums.\"

You\'re making far too much of this. The sample makers are doing the best job they can. That doesn\'t mean they always succeed. It is really as simple as that.

\"Given the level of your expectations, I would guess you\'ll never be satisfied with the products discussed here. So the question really is: why even bother? Isn\'t there a place somewhere where those that know better like yourselves hang out?\"

Gee thanks for the invitation to leave, but I\'ll pass. I suggest you hit the \"Skip\" button if you cannot tolerate opinions that differ from your own.

\"Such place _must_ surely exist, and when you find it and go there, we will miss you terribly.\"

Thanks, but you won\'t have to miss us. We\'ll be here, raving about things that sound great and are useable to us, and reporting honestly on those efforts that are not. Cheers!

[MChilds]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IOComposer:
Please be careful with your posts here. These libraries are created by real people with real feelings and a lot of hard work. You throw around these insults so wildly without any concern with who they affect. Nick happens to be a great sample library developer and up till now, there\'s nothing else out there as far as brass goes that\'s even close to QLB. Nick frequents this board a lot and I cringe at him reading these posts because I know what it feels like to have your hard work thrashed (actually, after 10 years as a professional composer, I know it real well http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif
Not to discount your claims as they may be valid, however have a scrap of human decency and tact.
-J<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I certainly take your point. I\'m not trying to hurt anyone\'s feelings.

However, that people may (or may not) work hard creating these products doesn\'t change the fact that 1) we buyers aren\'t able to see the whole product until it\'s too late to do anything about it; 2) if we don\'t like it, we can\'t return it; and 3) if we don\'t like it, we can\'t even resell it.

This is, in this economy, a very unusual buying situation. You can return or resell nearly everything you buy today. But not these samples. If you buy a bad product as I did, you really have no recourse at all (except to feel better because you warned others not to make the same mistake you did).

If Nick Phoenix is a nice, warm-hearted guy as you say he is, I\'m sure he\'ll gladly refund my money, since I\'m a customer unsatisfied with his product. After all, if Nick bought a product from my company (or any of millions of others) and were unsatisfied, he would get his money back, no questions asked. Almost all retail commerce works this way.

BUT - is there any chance Nick will refund my money for being dissatisfied with his product?

Not a prayer.

And all you sample buyers out there know it.

So these developers have a pretty darn good scam going. They have a product you can\'t see, won\'t refund if you don\'t like, and won\'t even let you sell if you don\'t use it.

And you\'re giving -me- a hard time for warning other people to research carefully before they buy?

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MChilds:


So these developers have a pretty darn good scam going. They have a product you can\'t see, won\'t refund if you don\'t like, and won\'t even let you sell if you don\'t use it.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don\'t think it\'s intentional. Obviously, there are a lot of folks out there that would steal the stuff and then return it. The only answer is either hearing demos that you are convinced represent the kind of thing you are looking for, or the sample makers charging a nominal fee to send a few patches to you to audition. Who knows. But you\'re right...it is a very expensive spin of the wheel.

SIMON: I don\'t think the library is unusable...I\'m sure I\'ll get some great results from it. I think I just got the impression that this would be a set of disks that had more than a few patches here and there that I would find helpful. No, I\'ll just add it to the arsenal (as if I have a choice.... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[IOComposer]

Did you not study the MP3 demos with a fine toothed comb before buying the library? If not, then you have only yourself to blame. The demos give an excellent example of what the library is capable of. If you don\'t like the demos, don\'t buy it. If you like them, give it a whirl. I didn\'t care for the demo, so I didn\'t buy the library.

What I\'m saying is that we need to have a little tact with what we write on these bbs.
The internet lets you say whatever you want without concern with who it may effect, but what you will find is that it DOES have effect. I\'ll never know how many doors I closed for myself before I learned this lesson, but I do know that there are a few. Learning to couch your posts in a politically wise way takes a long time and sometimes adverse consequences to learn. Someday you\'re really going to piss someone off (as I have) and then you\'ll learn. Until then, say what you will.
-J

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IOComposer:
Did you not study the MP3 demos with a fine toothed comb before buying the library? If not, then you have only yourself to blame. The demos give an excellent example of what the library is capable of. If you don\'t like the demos, don\'t buy it. If you like them, give it a whirl. I didn\'t care for the demo, so I didn\'t buy the library.

What I\'m saying is that we need to have a little tact with what we write on these bbs.
The internet lets you say whatever you want without concern with who it may effect, but what you will find is that it DOES have effect. I\'ll never know how many doors I closed for myself before I learned this lesson, but I do know that there are a few. Learning to couch your posts in a politically wise way takes a long time and sometimes adverse consequences to learn. Someday you\'re really going to piss someone off (as I have) and then you\'ll learn. Until then, say what you will.
-J<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I\'m not sure what was tactless, at least in my post J....the only people I\'ve ever really pissed off are people who only welcome you when you agree with them. I don\'t hurl personal insults....certainly not intentionally...I don\'t call people \"stupid\" or \"lame\" or any of that nonsense.

I bought the library because the overwhelming majority of folks up here raved about it, and it wasn\'t like there were 10 brass libraries out there to choose from. When the Gigasampler arrives here in a week or so, I\'ll have a chance to hear the library at it\'s best...it\'s in Roland format right now and maybe some of the playability of the product has suffered in the translation.

Thanks for the input.

[MChilds]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tomhartman:
I don\'t think it\'s intentional. Obviously, there are a lot of folks out there that would steal the stuff and then return it. The only answer is either hearing demos that you are convinced represent the kind of thing you are looking for, or the sample makers charging a nominal fee to send a few patches to you to audition. Who knows. But you\'re right...it is a very expensive spin of the wheel.

SIMON: I don\'t think the library is unusable...I\'m sure I\'ll get some great results from it. I think I just got the impression that this would be a set of disks that had more than a few patches here and there that I would find helpful. No, I\'ll just add it to the arsenal (as if I have a choice.... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You\'re right; \"scam\" implies deceptive intent, and I don\'t think, as a general rule, that\'s what\'s going on.

But the buying process -is- tipped too much in their favor as it is now. They will in fact ultimately encourage piracy among otherwise decent people, who need to write music, but can\'t afford to take $1000 gambles.

I\'m sorry to say that that at least in this case, QLBrass, I must draw the conclusion that there was not a lot of effort or thought put into it. Not that this amounts to an intentional \"scam\"; of course not. I would just hope, given the price of these libraries, and the unbalanced buying situation, that the developer would maintain a higher standard of responsibility to his customers than this library shows.

Further, I must put forward that Nick, in a 200 post topic on drum sample libraries, took great pains to argue the case against changing the buying situation in any way. Composers and developers brought up many inventive and good ideas in that long post, from developers selling individual samples on line, to custom-set CD burns. Nick was a vocal and vehement opponent to any change in the status quo that might help provide some usefulness to the customers, but hurt his ability to sell only complete, expensive, unreturnable CD sets.

So of all the developers out there, Nick Phoenix, given the low quality of his product and the content of his rhetoric, seems a good candidate for suspicion.

Or to put it more clearly, when it comes to customers\' interests, if you check that post, you\'ll find that Nick\'s response was a giant middle finger.




[This message has been edited by MChilds (edited 08-04-2001).]

[Lucas]

Well, you\'re certainly entitled to your opinion but when you insinuate Nick Phoenix is running a scam your credibility begins to wane.

Are you still unable to find the sustained trombone samples? Something doesn\'t add up here.

[Jamieh]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>So of all the developers out there, Nick Phoenix, given the low quality of his product and the content of his rhetoric, seems a good candidate for suspicion.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are nuts. While Quantum Leap Brass is not the end all/be all of brass libraries for all time, it IS a high quality library. In fact, I have listened to almost every brass library out there and I find QLB to be the absolute most useful one. For you to insinuate that Nick is somehow trying to rip us off is pathetic. There are several very useful patches in his library.

Tom, have you played with the filter settings on the instruments? When I first got the QLB library I was incredibly disappointed until I figured out that a lot of the instruments had a configurable filter setting (controllable by the mod wheel) that TOTALLY changes the sound. At default (MOD 0) you get the least-intense version of the sound, so while I was expecting big brass I wasn\'t getting it. Once I discovered I could use the mod wheel to brighten up the brass to full-blown intensity, I found what I was looking for. The tuba and low brass are beyond compare IMO. There are some solo trumpet patches that are good too, though I don\'t think they are as good as the low brass.

I honestly don\'t know how this maps to the Roland version. But check out the instruments that have filters on them and play with the mod wheel--you may find the sounds you were expecting.

[This message has been edited by Jamieh (edited 08-04-2001).]

[Haydn]

Pretty much all software companies will not let you return their software for refund. This goes for almost every Sequencer, Word Processor, Samples or game on the market. It is so easy for people to burn CD\'s and the companies know it. Do not blame sample producers for this but blame the software pirates!

I have been burned by computer based training that costs over a $1,000. I found incorrect information in one particular and typos throughout. Guess what, I could not return it as I had broke the seal on the CD! What did I do at this point? I got the most out of the software and worked around the faults. By the way, I did pass those nasty Microsoft tests!

All sample libraries have some faults but they all have some jewels that will work great at some point in time. I try to learn the patches intimately so I can use it if I need it in the future.

[apessino]

Tom,

I do apologize for my sarcastic tone and condescending attitude. There\'s no excuse for that.

As a matter of fact, while I do disagree with you regarding the QLB, your post was not the one that lit my fumes (so to speak.. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif ) but rather it was MChild\'s initial bunch of unfair statements which really ticked me off.

I should know better than start typing away before regaining my cool.. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Cheers,

A-

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jamieh:


Tom, have you played with the filter settings on the instruments? When I first got the QLB library I was incredibly disappointed until I figured out that a lot of the instruments had a configurable filter setting (controllable by the mod wheel) that TOTALLY changes the sound. At default (MOD 0) you get the least-intense version of the sound, so while I was expecting big brass I wasn\'t getting it. Once I discovered I could use the mod wheel to brighten up the brass to full-blown intensity, I found what I was looking for. The tuba and low brass are beyond compare IMO. There are some solo trumpet patches that are good too, though I don\'t think they are as good as the low brass.

I honestly don\'t know how this maps to the Roland version. But check out the instruments that have filters on them and play with the mod wheel--you may find the sounds you were expecting.

[This message has been edited by Jamieh (edited 08-04-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


That\'s great news...I just got the library last night and was on a deadline so I made the best of it, but didn\'t explore any of that. I bought it in Roland format but will swapping it for the GIGA version in a few days, when my system arrives.

Thanks for the tip!

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by apessino:
Tom,

I do apologize for my sarcastic tone and condescending attitude. There\'s no excuse for that.

As a matter of fact, while I do disagree with you regarding the QLB, your post was not the one that lit my fumes (so to speak.. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif ) but rather it was MChild\'s initial bunch of unfair statements which really ticked me off.

I should know better than start typing away before regaining my cool.. http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

Cheers,

A-<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks so much for this post . Youre a true gentlemen ,and again, I didn\'t mean to insult Nick or anyone else who likes the library. I tend to type too fast...and too soon...often myself.

I don\'t dislike the library. It is probably my own ignorance of it\'s nuances that have caused me to be let down....let me work with it..and the mod wheel stuff that I didn\'t know about...and let me get it on the GIGA which I\'ll get in a few days, and I\'ll report back. Certainly the QUALITY of the samples is first rate, it was the useabliity factor I was having problems with, which is probably a combination of my inexperience with the library, and possibly some mappings due to it being in Roland format. Again, thanks, and let\'s all help each other out up here. Making a living in music is hard enough http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

[Nick Phoenix]

I agree that QLB is incomplete and imperfect. I created it with my own needs in mind and cut corners in some areas to be able to finish it in a reasonable amount of time. Some people have an immediate negative reaction to the lack of strict organization/ keyswitching and the fact that some instruments are more thorough than others. Some are looking for orchestral brass only and are turned off by all the pop brass. Usually, they like the library more after they use it for a while. I find it very useful. There is, by the way, a simple sustained trombone section, and it\'s pretty good. I used the word \"excellent\" to describe the solo trumpet stacatto and I wholeheartedly backup that claim. There\'s something wrong, if you can\'t use that patch effectively.
I think these comments are all constructive, even if I don\'t agree with some of them. The mp3 demo at .com will give you an idea of what can be done with this library. All of the orchestral cues in that demo are actual jobs, not music crafted to show off a library and hide weaknesses.
QLB 2 orchestral will address all the weaknesses of QLB 1. There will also be extensive solo horn (2 gigs and already recorded), an all new french horn section (6 large horns), 3 bass trombones p, mf, ff, ffff, more trumpets etc....... and some SUPRISES!

[This message has been edited by Nick Phoenix (edited 08-04-2001).]

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:
I agree that QLB is incomplete and imperfect. I created it with my own needs in mind and cut corners in some areas to be able to finish it in a reasonable amount of time. Some people have an immediate negative reaction to the lack of strict organization/ keyswitching and the fact that some instruments are more thorough than others. Some are looking for orchestral brass only and are turned off by all the pop brass. Usually, they like the library more after they use it for a while. I find it very useful. There is, by the way, a simple sustained trombone section, and it\'s pretty good. I used the word \"excellent\" to describe the solo trumpet stacatto and I wholeheartedly backup that claim. There\'s something wrong, if you can\'t use that patch effectively.
I think these comments are all constructive, even if I don\'t agree with some of them. The mp3 demo at .com will give you an idea of what can be done with this library. All of the orchestral cues in that demo are actual jobs, not music crafted to show off a library and hide weaknesses.
QLB 2 orchestral will address all the weaknesses of QLB 1. There will also be extensive solo horn (2 gigs and already recorded), an all new french horn section (6 large horns), 3 bass trombones p, mf, ff, ffff, more trumpets etc....... and some SUPRISES!

[This message has been edited by Nick Phoenix (edited 08-04-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Nick, the ultimate in realism would be to sample 4- 6 horns....separately. That means 4 -6 DIFFERENT horn players. Then we could combine them and it would sound exactly like a real section. If there is a patch of 6 horns playing in unison, then when you go to play a 4 note chord, you\'ve got 24 horns playing the chord. Not realistic. I know you could switch over to 4 separate patches of the solo horn, but that would be unrealistic too, because it would all be the same horn on all the parts. Just a thought.

[jubal]

One lesson that can be had from this particular post is that it pays to research before you buy.

I took my time before purchasing QLB by reading reviews, listening to MP3 demos, and most importantly searching through forums such as this one. On the average most thought the quality of the samples where superb. Most of the negative feedback was directed toward the fact that this library wasn\'t exclusively directed toward orchestral composing and that saxaphones where included at all in a brass library.

I took in all the information and purchased the library. I am very pleased with it. I find the pop/jazz brass extremely useful given the right cue, and that is the point of this library. I could have done without the amount of sax samples, but I am sure someone else finds them very usable if they lack a live player. The samples that can be used for orchestral writing are excellent in my opinion, but again not for every piece one needs to write. I am very excited to hear about the upcoming library (QLB 2) for some over the top brass samples.

Lastly, regarding the steep price;it\'s all relative. My guess is that this library sells enough at the current price to make it worth Nick\'s time and effort. That\'s business.

Being a beta tester for Garritan Orchestral Strings has made me appreciate what one goes through to put out a library. I believe with all my heart that this string library is outstanding and comprehensive. Ultimately though one needs to do the research oneself in reading reviews, listening to demos, and interacting with user communities such as this one before making a purchase.

Another last note. Nick, for unison writing it is useful to have a sample of multiple players at the same time. There is definetely a difference in sound when four to six players are playing in unison compared to four to six different samples of players and combining them in a unison part. But hey, if you included both that would be sweet.

- Mike


[This message has been edited by jubal (edited 08-04-2001).]

[Simon Ravn]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tomhartman:

Nick, the ultimate in realism would be to sample 4- 6 horns....separately. That means 4 -6 DIFFERENT horn players. Then we could combine them and it would sound exactly like a real section. If there is a patch of 6 horns playing in unison, then when you go to play a 4 note chord, you\'ve got 24 horns playing the chord. Not realistic. I know you could switch over to 4 separate patches of the solo horn, but that would be unrealistic too, because it would all be the same horn on all the parts. Just a thought.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Arghhhhhh not AGAIN. I thought we HAD been over this!!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif OK 99.9% on this board agrees that having 6 different players playing solo at the same time DOES NOT give an ensemble sound. The same goes for strings: 22 solo violins won\'t do it, 10 cello players won\'t do it. We need sampled ensembles. Good. Fine. Done!

[Thomas_J]

Agreed Simon. So what if you end up writing for 24 horns... The more horns the better imo :=) the Conan The Barbarian score by Basil Poledouris features 24 horns, I don\'t care if my music sounds bigger and bolder http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif In fact I think the beauty of orchestral midi music is that you can \"employ\" as many musicians as you wish in your orchestra. You could have a hall of 1000 musicians if you want... :P I guess I\'m usually at around 200 musicians in orchestral tuttis, and it sounds like a huge orchestra, and that\'s what everybody wants, isn\'t it?

So unless you\'re writing some boring chamber stuff you should opt for ensembles.

I too am tired of this Solo vs. Ensemble chitchat. It is pretty obvious really. Sample developers, take notice: Instead of spending loads of time on a solo library that is close miced and dry, make a dedicated orchestral brass library IN A HALL with DISTANT MICING and ENSEMBLES. You get it yet? Distant micing (and that\'s _more_ than 5 feet away!) in an orchestral hall or a smaller church. Ensembles playing. And NOT playing static sustained notes like those you find in every commercial brass library at the moment (except miroslav). The reason why QLB was less usable in an orchestral context was because of all the static sustains. Let me ask you, how often does a trumpet player play a \"ff\" note for 6-10 seconds without ANY dynamic variety whatsoever? Sure, you can do some tricks with volume expression and filters but it\'s never gonna sound as natural as if you had different note lengths like I\'ve suggested tons of times before (kinda like an update on the miroslav vitous concept). It really isn\'t that much more time-consuming, recording in a hall with ensembles. Actually it is less. And you know what? When I recorded my brass I even saved every little mistake they made. They come in handy when I\'m adding realism to my sequences. I even sampled orchestral hall noise from the musicians. Chair noise and feet scraping, dropping sheets etc. Anyway, that\'s just my preference, but regarding the note lengths (staccato 0.1 sec, 0.3 sec 0.5 sec, portamento 0.7,1.0,1.5,2.0,2.5,3.0,5.0) I think it is a much better way to do it. Really.

As for the actual recording hall you could just waltz into a church with your recording equipment and your musicians, work a couple of late hours and go home with some really great samples. I don\'t care if the samples are recorded with top-notch recording equipment, as long as we\'re not talking shure Sm58\'s http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif What I care for are the performances. They should be expressive, energic and dynamic.

Thomas

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:

Arghhhhhh not AGAIN. I thought we HAD been over this!!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif OK 99.9% on this board agrees that having 6 different players playing solo at the same time DOES NOT give an ensemble sound. The same goes for strings: 22 solo violins won\'t do it, 10 cello players won\'t do it. We need sampled ensembles. Good. Fine. Done!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Simon, are you saying that 6 players playing in a unison line that breaks into a 4 part chord is realistic? When do you hear 24 horns playing a chord?

22 separate violins, if recorded in the same room, would sound convincing. But you would need 22 separate violin samples...not the same solo violin 22 times, which isn\'t going to happen because it\'s unrealistic. It would be a 24 CD set http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

When you have 6 horns in front of you, and you play a unison line, that breaks into a 4 part chord, two of the guys double a note....usually the lead line...and the other parts have one horn per note.....not 6. What am I missing here re realism??

[Simon Ravn]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tomhartman:

Simon, are you saying that 6 players playing in a unison line that breaks into a 4 part chord is realistic? When do you hear 24 horns playing a chord???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No that\'s not what I am saying. I am saying that you WON\'T get the same sound from playing 6 different horns that you get when playing those 6 horns in unison in an ensemble. Yes it would be nice to have 4 and 8 horn ensembles, so when you go divisi you can use 4 horn ensembles instead of 8 for realism.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>When you have 6 horns in front of you, and you play a unison line, that breaks into a 4 part chord, two of the guys double a note....usually the lead line...and the other parts have one horn per note.....not 6. What am I missing here re realism??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you\'re missing what the soundwaves do when they interact with eachother, and how the players adjust to eachothers performance to obtain the sound they want - that is what you DON\'T get from playing 6 solo horns in unison.

[tomhartman]

Originally posted by Thomas_J:
\"Agreed Simon. So what if you end up writing for 24 horns... The more horns the better imo :=) the Conan The Barbarian score by Basil Poledouris features 24 horns, I don\'t care if my music sounds bigger and bolder http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif In fact I think the beauty of orchestral midi music is that you can \"employ\" as many musicians as you wish in your orchestra. You could have a hall of 1000 musicians if you want... :P I guess I\'m usually at around 200 musicians in orchestral tuttis, and it sounds like a huge orchestra, and that\'s what everybody wants, isn\'t it? \"


That\'s fine Thomas, I was talking about realism...not make believe land where you employ 1000 musicans to do a score that\'s trying to sound like one that is done with about 900 less players in the real world. If you want realism, you won\'t hear John Williams using 24 French horns on a chord. If you don\'t care about realism, that\'s another story.

\"So unless you\'re writing some boring chamber stuff you should opt for ensembles.\"

You need ensembles for the unisons, yes.

No one up here has ever heard what I\'m talking about, because it doesn\'t exist...no sample developer has ever done it, because the job would be too big. This is all theoretical, because you would need a separate solo sample for each member of the section you wanted . So 6 horn solo samples...all at different dynamics and all played by 6 different players, all recorded in the same room, same stereo mike placed at a distant from them. Combining these samples would definitely approximate the real thing. No one has done it, so all those who agree up here that it won\'t work, are talking about something they haven\'t heard.


Your stance on close miking is true though, most all the sample developers mike far too close for good orchestral simulations.




[This message has been edited by tomhartman (edited 08-05-2001).]

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
I think you\'re missing what the soundwaves do when they interact with eachother, and how the players adjust to eachothers performance to obtain the sound they want - that is what you DON\'T get from playing 6 solo horns in unison.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don\'t get those little adjustments no, but you would get the proper weight of the sound, and if done correctly, the proper ambience would be maintained. I would rather make those small adjustments in pitch or whatever myself, than to hear a massive change in weight whenever a chord was played. As I said, it has never been done, so I think it\'s premature for anyone to prejudge it....no one has sampled 6 separate solo horns, different horns, different players, for us to try it out with....(and no one is going to http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif)

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:

Arghhhhhh not AGAIN. I thought we HAD been over this!!! http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif OK 99.9% on this board agrees that having 6 different players playing solo at the same time DOES NOT give an ensemble sound. The same goes for strings: 22 solo violins won\'t do it, 10 cello players won\'t do it. We need sampled ensembles. Good. Fine. Done!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Simon, are you saying that 6 players playing in a unison line that breaks into a 4 part chord is realistic? When do you hear 24 horns playing a chord?

22 separate violins, if recorded in the same room, would sound convincing. But you would need 22 separate violin samples...not the same solo violin 22 times, which isn\'t going to happen because it\'s unrealistic. It would be a 24 CD set http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

When you have 6 horns in front of you, and you play a unison line, that breaks into a 4 part chord, two of the guys double a note....usually the lead line...and the other parts have one horn per note.....not 6. What am I missing here re realism??

[Marc Floessel]

Tom,

there is something quite simple you can try: Naturally this works best with chromatically sampled instruments like those found in the Xsample series. Open up one of the solo patches in the GIG editor and copy/paste the main program so that you end up with 3 identical programs. Choose the 2nd program and select the entire keymap range, dragging it one seminote up. Do the same for the 3rd program, only dragging the keymap one seminote down.

As a result you will have 3 \"unique\" solo instruments (the original instrument is not unique of course, but the samples will be) that you can layer in Gigastudio and that will play different samples when the same note is being played. The timbre pitch effect is negligible, since we\'re only pitchshifting one seminote. However you will run into phasing problems as soon as you play nearby notes that use the same sample at the same time. This will not be a problem with pure unisono lines and most chords.

Try this (I will later) and see if 3 unique solo patches give the same timbre as a real ensemble patch.

[Haydn]

Personally I dislike distant miking as it adds a muddy sound to fast passages. This is not realistic when you start playing more and more notes as each note has it\'s own reverb as is not the blend you would get when all notes are played together in the hall. When you throw different libraries together with their own reverbs (rooms they were recorded in) your going to get a strange sound. New libraries such as GOS is recorded at just about the right distance and takes well to reverbs. Not too close and not too far away.

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marc Floessel:
Tom,

there is something quite simple you can try: Naturally this works best with chromatically sampled instruments like those found in the Xsample series. Open up one of the solo patches in the GIG editor and copy/paste the main program so that you end up with 3 identical programs. Choose the 2nd program and select the entire keymap range, dragging it one seminote up. Do the same for the 3rd program, only dragging the keymap one seminote down.

As a result you will have 3 \"unique\" solo instruments (the original instrument is not unique of course, but the samples will be) that you can layer in Gigastudio and that will play different samples when the same note is being played. The timbre pitch effect is negligible, since we\'re only pitchshifting one seminote. However you will run into phasing problems as soon as you play nearby notes that use the same sample at the same time. This will not be a problem with pure unisono lines and most chords.

Try this (I will later) and see if 3 unique solo patches give the same timbre as a real ensemble patch.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There\'s two problems with that.

1 My Giga system won\'t be until Soundchaser ships it in a week http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/wink.gif

2 That still wouldn\'t be the same as sampling 4 DIFFERENT horn players...each with their own, DIFFERENT horn....as in a real orchestra...and their own DIFFERENT sound.

What you suggest certainly is worth checking out...I was only talking about the \"ultimate\" solution, which is very impractical, I realize....

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Haydn:
Personally I dislike distant miking as it adds a muddy sound to fast passages. This is not realistic when you start playing more and more notes as each note has it\'s own reverb as is not the blend you would get when all notes are played together in the hall. When you throw different libraries together with their own reverbs (rooms they were recorded in) your going to get a strange sound. New libraries such as GOS is recorded at just about the right distance and takes well to reverbs. Not too close and not too far away.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, that\'s true, the ambience differences between different sample libraries can be a problem. A little ambience goes a long way, but certainly a harp miked close will never sound like something out of a typical orchestral score, because except for the accent mikes for solo passages, the distant mikes are what is giving that silky sound to the glisses, etc. You can bury a closely miked harp in as much reverb as you want, and it\'s still not the same....

[Marc Floessel]

Tom,

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>2 That still wouldn\'t be the same as sampling 4 DIFFERENT horn players...each with their own, DIFFERENT horn....as in a real orchestra...and their own DIFFERENT sound.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Right. Well, the players are not the problem. No player can play the next note exactly as the last one, so each chromatically sampled note has a slightly different expression. Thus if you play 3 different samples at the same time you have a pretty good approximation of 3 solo players.

As I noted in my earlier post the instrument (the hardware) is where I see the potential problem though, since it will always be exactly the same. I cannot say how much each little dent and millimeter difference influences the sound of every individual instrument. A professional Brass player might be able to answer this for us here.

One thing to note is that the pitch shifting actually works for us here though, since the cloned programs will have a slightly different timbre character (lighter, darker, as-sampled).

In any case I think this is as good a preview approximation as you can get currently.

My own tests showed that it didn\'t work well with the QLB Solo Trumpet and Xsample Trumpet and Trombone but the Xsample French Horn turned into a quite usable Ensemble patch.

[Marc Floessel]

And while I am at it - I absolutely agree with everything Thomas J. pointed out in his BrassLib-HowTo post. Sure - Miroslav, it\'s outdated. We all prefer our new samples to be shiny and without analogue distortion. However the concept behind it hasn\'t lost any of its charm in all these years for me.

Samples with built-in expression, designed for different note lengths and styles can come more close than any 50 velocities zoned MIDI controller fest will ever be able to. With samples like this you can actually access the experience and marksmanship of the musician who plays the instrument - because a lot of it comes with the sample itself.

There is something going for the more \"stable\" samples without built-in expression too of course. You can ideally employ these for every style, regardless of what the sample producer had in mind - the sample won\'t fight you, it can be shaped how ever you see fit. However you will spend this much more time breathing back life and musicality into static recordings.

Thomas, I ask you to once again post your infamous French Horns BrassEx! MP3 as an example for everyone who might doubt that such a sample recording concept is feasible.

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marc Floessel:
And while I am at it - I absolutely agree with everything Thomas J. pointed out in his BrassLib-HowTo post. Sure - Miroslav, it\'s outdated. We all prefer our new samples to be shiny and without analogue distortion. However the concept behind it hasn\'t lost any of its charm in all these years for me.

Samples with built-in expression, designed for different note lengths and styles can come more close than any 50 velocities zoned MIDI controller fest will ever be able to. With samples like this you can actually access the experience and marksmanship of the musician who plays the instrument - because a lot of it comes with the sample itself.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Marc,

I haven\'t used Miroslav...I\'m not sure I\'m understanding your post here...are you saying the Miroslav has the expression \"built in\" the samples? If so, I agree with you....no substitute for that....

I had a terrifyng thought the other day and posted as such...I have a feeling one could use both Gary\'s and Miroslavs.....even the Roland strings I\'ve used for years have given some great results...when the piece is right, anyway. Other times they sound horrid....

[Marc Floessel]

Tom,

a lot of the sustained Miroslav patches feature natural crescendos, vibrato fadeins and just generally the sound of playing a felted \"phrase\" (even if it\'s just one note long).

For further info check out the interview with Miroslav on http://www.ilio.com/miroslav1/review.html (\"http://www.ilio.com/miroslav1/review.html\")

\"The first thing I noticed in these samples is that they never sit still. They\'re always in motion. I find my hand being led across the keys by what I\'m hearing...

Miroslav: Yes, this is an important element of the collection. When I recorded the orchestra, I described musical moments: Play this like Mahler, or Dvorak or Wagner. I wanted every note to express some musical idea.\"

[Adrian H]

Marc,

You\'re correct about the differences in instruments and sounds etc. I am a pro trumpet player and you will often find that players in one orchestra all play on different models, different mouthpieces, some are lacquered, some silver plated, some with bells made from different materials etc.

But even if you had a section where all the players played the same model with the same mouthpiece, each player would still sound different. This is down to many factors including the arch of the roof of the mouth, the tongue position in the mouth, embouchure, even tooth formation.

So ideally to create an ensemble sound from seperate instruments, you need sample recordings of at least 4 different players in order to create that orchestral trumpet section sound, as oppose to 1 sample played 4 times.

[Nick Phoenix]

I am baffled by one thing! I could never get Miraslav trumpets to sound good in anything besides a funeral march. I prefer the Roland brass. Thats one of the reasons I decided to sample brass. I find the QLB solo and ensemble trumpets extremely useable and superior to others, is it just me? The trumpets are my favorite part of the library. Sure there could be (and will be soon) alot more in terms of dynamics.

[Simon Ravn]

Nick we want Hollywood hornsections - massive-sounding and from pp (yes even in sections, for soft melody playing) to ffffff! And trumpets... think John Williams. If you don\'t know what I mean I\'d be happy to send you some examples. Highpitch, razorsharp trumpets up into the very highest playable notes! Those two things are what I hope most for QLB 2 http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Ravn:
Nick we want Hollywood hornsections - massive-sounding and from pp (yes even in sections, for soft melody playing) to ffffff! And trumpets... think John Williams. If you don\'t know what I mean I\'d be happy to send you some examples. Highpitch, razorsharp trumpets up into the very highest playable notes! Those two things are what I hope most for QLB 2 http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes! I want a horn section that sounds like the one in the James Newton Howard demo....that would be nirvana for these ears....

[Thomas_J]

Yes, Simon, razorsharp C and Bb trumpets (perhaps even D for that extra spark). The only way to get that living trumpet sound is however to sample it in loads of different expressions, involving length of notes, attack, decay and of course (if you want it as realistic as can be) you\'d need interval samples (true legato from different positions, sampled). Listen to any film music trumpet part and you\'ll realize that a library consisting of sustains and staccatos simply won\'t suffice if you were to recreate that part. Most of the time they are playing legato. Without legato interval notes you stand no chance. I have done a pretty extensive solo trumpet library employing this technique and while it takes a while to get things right in the sequencer (involving mostly audio tracks for the interval notes) it certainly pays off as far as realism goes.

While this might not make the most playable trumpet library out there, it would certainly make the most realistic one. This seems to be what most people are striving for on this forum, anyway.

Thomas

[Marc Floessel]

Nick,

it\'s true, the Miroslav Trumpets lack in power (you can make it up somewhat by layering all portamento versions with the sustained patch) - that\'s why we\'re looking forward so much to your newest creation.

I think your QLB Trumpets are amazing when it comes to writing bigband/jazzy styles, especially if one is not shy to make heavy use of all the fantastic falls, shakes, flutters, rips, etc patches. Using those patches I was able to literally kick up realism and expression into sky orbit regions I wouldn\'t have deemed possible at all. It was hot, fiery, realistic sounding as heck - pure and utter sample bliss heaven.

Why was is this way? Because with these special patches you supplied us with living samples that carry in them the skills and expression of real top musicians. All the composer has to do is select the patch and it\'s good. Unfortunately they are not geared for orchestral writing.

The normal sustained patches on the other hand are static sounding, without any built-in expression. They are workhorses for sure, but with them alone the sound is seriously scaled back, exposing itself to be, well-done as it may be, MIDI sampler work.

Thus I absolutely agree with Thomas on sampling as many lengths and expressions as you can, each with them built for a purpose.

Also, don\'t let the players out of the hall (it should be one.....) unless you are sure they\'re giving the loudest and most impact-like ffffffffffffff-performance they\'re able to, without their lungs decorating the walls. ;-)

[Marc Floessel]

Adrian,

thanks for the insights. Still, most of us think that even several totally unique solo samples will not give the ensemble sound because of the complex way the soundwaves in a real ensemble influence each other, thus creating the section sound.

As a pro trumpet player maybe you can supply us with your view on current Brass libraries?

[Marc Floessel]

I seem to be in a real posting mood. Anyway, to give further weight to my post I decided to post a bigband remake \"Beyond the Sea\", I redid with QLB and a base MIDI a couple of months ago. You\'ll also be able to hear the very expressive Miroslav Solo Flute. Listen to 0:23 and 0:35 - these are the parts where I kicked in the additional falls and shakes to spice up the climax sound.
http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/bigbandgiga.mp3 (\"http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/bigbandgiga.mp3\")

If there are parts which sound less realistic, more than anything it\'s because of time I didn\'t want to spend on a tech test, and not because of Nick\'s samples.

Just found another testdemo, I\'ll post it too...
http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/newyork.mp3 (\"http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/newyork.mp3\")

Just to repeat my point - those climax shout-it-out performances would have been impossible to do without the special expression patches.

[Adrian H]

Marc,

In response to your question, personally I think that all the brass in sample librarys I\'ve heard - Miroslav, QLB etc sound very thin and are lacking in power. By power, though, I don\'t necessarily mean volume. To me a powerful sound is one that can be played very quietly but still has plenty of tone and can be heard clearly even at the back of the hall. The samples don\'t seem to resonate like the real thing does. I think when recording brass samples (or for that matter any orchestral samples) the player should be sat in his correct orchestral position with mikes positioned as they would be for an orchestral recording, not directly in front of the instrument. If you place the mic directly in front of a trumpet, for example, you will record a bright harsh sound, but move the mike further back and you give the sound a chance to expand and resonate creating a much more true sound.

The next problem that there is with the sample libraries as the fact that there are so many slight variations on articulation that it would be impossible to \'play/programme\' these into a recording via samples. I recently wrote a short fanfare for a show and tried recording using samples as I didn\'t have time to get people together, and it just didn\'t sound realistic because the articulations and slight inflections that a player would instinctively put on each note weren\'t there. In the end I actually multitracked myself playing via the tiny, nasty, cheap mike that comes with most new PC\'s and certainly to my ears sounded a lot better than the sampled version just because of the articulation, inflections and tonal variations that I naturally played.

Overall, though, I think that samples of brass need to capture the full resonance of the sound otherwise they end up sounding thin and in some cases (QLB) harsh or in others (vitous) thin and dull.
Come on - the brass section is supposed to be the powerhouse of the orchestra.

Just my thoughts.

Adrian

[Thomas_J]

Great stuff Marc, goes to show how much more suited the QLB is for everything but Orchestral music. In my opinion that Bigband demo is better than any of the official QLB demos on soundonline.com. Excellent work Marc!

Thomas

[Marc Floessel]

Thanks Thomas. Unfortunately (as I hopefully clearly enough pointed out) it\'s just a Gigastudio Remake of an existing song, so no composing credits to me, just \"producing\" I guess. :-) Still, I am pretty happy with how well QLB works with this style. If we can get samples like this but for an orchestral context, I\'ll be more than happy! Nick, you\'re our only hope... http://www.northernsounds.com/ubb/NonCGI/images/icons/smile.gif

[tomhartman]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=\"1\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Marc Floessel:
I seem to be in a real posting mood. Anyway, to give further weight to my post I decided to post a bigband remake \"Beyond the Sea\", I redid with QLB and a base MIDI a couple of months ago. You\'ll also be able to hear the very expressive Miroslav Solo Flute. Listen to 0:23 and 0:35 - these are the parts where I kicked in the additional falls and shakes to spice up the climax sound.
http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/bigbandgiga.mp3 (\"http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/bigbandgiga.mp3\")
http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/newyork.mp3 (\"http://www.booyaya.de/enyak/newyork.mp3\")

Just to repeat my point - those climax shout-it-out performances would have been impossible to do without the special expression patches.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think, after a few days with Quantum, that it is what most have said, good for pop stuff. Either I\'m blind, or there are no ensemble bones playing sustained p patches...so I\'m back to Roland for those.

Your first mp3 was probably about as good as sampled brass gets...great job.

The second mp3 may show...and I say may because I don\'t know how long you spent on it...that we still have a ways to go before we can hit full brass chords without it getting that organ sound to it.

Anyway, I\'m looking forward to the orchestral brass Nick will do.



[This message has been edited by tomhartman (edited 08-06-2001).]